AARoads Forum

Regional Boards => Northeast => Topic started by: Zeffy on September 22, 2014, 12:00:32 AM

Title: New York State Thruway
Post by: Zeffy on September 22, 2014, 12:00:32 AM
Apparently, in my search for a general New York Thruway topic, I came up empty handed. The Thruway is major enough to warrant it's own general topic. So here it is. And if I somehow missed it, well you can merge my post with the other one.

While streetviewing the Thruway, I saw these gaps in the median where I presume law enforcement is permitted to use for U-turns. Am I correct in assuming that the yellow sign is a reference mile marker for emergency services?

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2F3JUqH06.jpg&hash=27e0f5b8d72df810f517b2175f6fd064a8090380)

Second, are these one-off installs of Clearview, or is the Thruway switching to it?

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2F3rQDyke.png&hash=b94d818413bce745a9768c9fcb6a052820b97139)

Third, it seems a lot of signage on the Thruway (at least west of Albany) is ground mounted. Any particular reason for NYSTA's choice on using ground mounts versus overheads?

And finally...I can't say I have seen too many of these on highways (let alone Interstates):

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2Fpwpiell.png&hash=6fcd59914219065c86b3f74fcfd4f3d1577f4208)
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Flyer78 on September 22, 2014, 12:42:07 AM
Law enforcement can use them for speed enforcement as well. Yes, the numbers under it are the reference location, also common on other NY Interstates. (I-690 around Syracuse has them. I forget which county on NY17/I-86 - but it actually uses the NY Reference Marker instead of the lapsed/elapsed distance).

Clearview has been popping up all along the Thruway.

As for the deer warning sign, are you commenting more on the 16 mile advisory, or in general? Quite common in NY, as well as PA.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Duke87 on September 22, 2014, 02:03:03 AM
Quote from: Zeffy on September 22, 2014, 12:00:32 AM
Second, are these one-off installs of Clearview, or is the Thruway switching to it?

Pretty much all new signs installed by NYSTA have been Clearview for at least five years. This isn't anything new.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on September 22, 2014, 12:53:37 PM
Quote from: Flyer78 on September 22, 2014, 12:42:07 AM
Law enforcement can use them for speed enforcement as well. Yes, the numbers under it are the reference location, also common on other NY Interstates. (I-690 around Syracuse has them. I forget which county on NY17/I-86 - but it actually uses the NY Reference Marker instead of the lapsed/elapsed distance).
I-81 is Oswego and Jefferson Counties has its turnouts numbered sequentially.  They start at 1 near Oneida Lake and increase into the 60s near the border.  I-781 does as well (numbered 1 and 2).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Flyer78 on September 22, 2014, 02:15:38 PM
Now that you mention it, Cortland county on I-81 is the same way, sequentially. I think there are even some with suffixes.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Ian on September 22, 2014, 05:46:07 PM
Quote from: vdeane on September 22, 2014, 12:53:37 PM
Quote from: Flyer78 on September 22, 2014, 12:42:07 AM
Law enforcement can use them for speed enforcement as well. Yes, the numbers under it are the reference location, also common on other NY Interstates. (I-690 around Syracuse has them. I forget which county on NY17/I-86 - but it actually uses the NY Reference Marker instead of the lapsed/elapsed distance).
I-81 is Oswego and Jefferson Counties has its turnouts numbered sequentially.  They start at 1 near Oneida Lake and increase into the 60s near the border.  I-781 does as well (numbered 1 and 2).

The Northway (I-87) in Warren (http://goo.gl/maps/1eKv1) and Essex (http://goo.gl/maps/mSrB7) Counties do as well.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on September 22, 2014, 05:54:55 PM
Quote from: Flyer78 on September 22, 2014, 02:15:38 PM
Now that you mention it, Cortland county on I-81 is the same way, sequentially. I think there are even some with suffixes.
Cortland uses letters.  Broome and Onondaga use the same hundredth mile indicators as the Thruway.

It's odd that every area uses something completely different - not even a change at regions, but at counties.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: machias on September 22, 2014, 06:58:27 PM
Quote from: vdeane on September 22, 2014, 12:53:37 PM
Quote from: Flyer78 on September 22, 2014, 12:42:07 AM
Law enforcement can use them for speed enforcement as well. Yes, the numbers under it are the reference location, also common on other NY Interstates. (I-690 around Syracuse has them. I forget which county on NY17/I-86 - but it actually uses the NY Reference Marker instead of the lapsed/elapsed distance).
I-81 is Oswego and Jefferson Counties has its turnouts numbered sequentially.  They start at 1 near Oneida Lake and increase into the 60s near the border.  I-781 does as well (numbered 1 and 2).

Oswego County had them first on I-81 and then I think Jefferson County just continued the sequence.

The Thruway started out with vertical signs mounted on one post in the Syracuse area and then they switched to horizontal.  Some of the sign posts still have a shorter than normal reflective strip to accommodate this.

Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Alps on September 22, 2014, 08:27:01 PM
As far as ground-mounted signs vs. overhead, it's because they're cheaper. You're supposed to have overhead signs with 3 or more lanes of traffic, but you don't need them with 2 lanes. (I believe that's MUTCD, but it might be AASHTO Green Book.)
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: hbelkins on September 22, 2014, 09:14:37 PM
Quote from: vdeane on September 22, 2014, 05:54:55 PM
It's odd that every area uses something completely different - not even a change at regions, but at counties.

Probably what the local law enforcement and emergency services dispatchers prefer in each locality, since they're the personnel who will be using the median crossings.

Quote from: Alps on September 22, 2014, 08:27:01 PM
As far as ground-mounted signs vs. overhead, it's because they're cheaper. You're supposed to have overhead signs with 3 or more lanes of traffic, but you don't need them with 2 lanes. (I believe that's MUTCD, but it might be AASHTO Green Book.)

Kentucky installed ground-mounted signs for Exit 96 on I-64 after it was widened to three lanes. Also for Exit 87. However, the exit between the two (Exit 94) has an overhead.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Flyer78 on September 23, 2014, 12:59:01 AM
Quote from: vdeane on September 22, 2014, 05:54:55 PM
Quote from: Flyer78 on September 22, 2014, 02:15:38 PM
Now that you mention it, Cortland county on I-81 is the same way, sequentially. I think there are even some with suffixes.
Cortland uses letters. 

You are right. I was thinking they were numbered then suffixed with letters, but they are lettered, suffixed with numbers:

I1: https://www.google.com/maps/@42.6336378,-76.1738213,3a,75y,130.84h,68.31t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1seEsQYdEniCtiNi5RyVLkeQ!2e0
I: https://www.google.com/maps/@42.6089034,-76.1712981,3a,75y,99.86h,71.55t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sZYFpC1tUPfR8VySCM7bgGw!2e0
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: shadyjay on September 23, 2014, 05:34:03 PM
Quote from: Alps on September 22, 2014, 08:27:01 PM
As far as ground-mounted signs vs. overhead, it's because they're cheaper. You're supposed to have overhead signs with 3 or more lanes of traffic, but you don't need them with 2 lanes. (I believe that's MUTCD, but it might be AASHTO Green Book.)

New England varies wildly.  MA is converting all of its limited-access highways to "all overhead", be they 2 lanes, 3 lanes, urban, rural, etc.  The reasoning is visibility and not having to trim around ground signs.  NH has several of its signs along I-95 (which is 4 lanes each way) on the ground.  CT, on the other hand, is going the opposite direction as MA, with moving several signs that were overhead down to the ground, and I'm not just talking about bridge-mounted ones either.  Some entire supports are being removed and signs placed at ground level. 
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: empirestate on September 24, 2014, 02:02:54 AM
Quote from: Flyer78 on September 22, 2014, 12:42:07 AM
Law enforcement can use them for speed enforcement as well. Yes, the numbers under it are the reference location, also common on other NY Interstates. (I-690 around Syracuse has them. I forget which county on NY17/I-86 - but it actually uses the NY Reference Marker instead of the lapsed/elapsed distance).

That's Tioga. They use the bottom line of the reference marker plus a sequential letter.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on September 24, 2014, 08:19:48 PM
Quote from: empirestate on September 24, 2014, 02:02:54 AM
Quote from: Flyer78 on September 22, 2014, 12:42:07 AM
Law enforcement can use them for speed enforcement as well. Yes, the numbers under it are the reference location, also common on other NY Interstates. (I-690 around Syracuse has them. I forget which county on NY17/I-86 - but it actually uses the NY Reference Marker instead of the lapsed/elapsed distance).

That's Tioga. They use the bottom line of the reference marker plus a sequential letter.

So does Cattaraugus (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.0976081,-78.5296324,3a,75y,21.74h,81.74t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sQNJBJB8EwTcgBowyslNrCg!2e0). Think Chautauqua is the same way. Pretty standard along that stretch of NY 17. Never seen it elsewhere in the state.

I-390 in Region 6 uses sequential numbers, while Region 4 uses mile markers to the nearest tenth plus a sequential letter. Region 5 does NOT have them outside of NY 17, but I could swear I saw sequential numbers on I-190. I don't go up that way often, so my memory of it very well might be incorrect.

On the topic of overhead signs, most highways outside of inner-ring suburbs have ground-mounted signs unless there is a lane drop at/near the interchange. I-87 really sticks out, as the only interchanges with overhead signs north of I-90 have semi-directional/loop ramps or lane drops, even though the southernmost ~50 miles is 6 lanes. Not even northbound Exit 9, a 2-lane exit, gets a gantry.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: storm2k on September 25, 2014, 02:39:59 AM
Quote from: shadyjay on September 23, 2014, 05:34:03 PM
Quote from: Alps on September 22, 2014, 08:27:01 PM
As far as ground-mounted signs vs. overhead, it's because they're cheaper. You're supposed to have overhead signs with 3 or more lanes of traffic, but you don't need them with 2 lanes. (I believe that's MUTCD, but it might be AASHTO Green Book.)

New England varies wildly.  MA is converting all of its limited-access highways to "all overhead", be they 2 lanes, 3 lanes, urban, rural, etc.  The reasoning is visibility and not having to trim around ground signs.  NH has several of its signs along I-95 (which is 4 lanes each way) on the ground.  CT, on the other hand, is going the opposite direction as MA, with moving several signs that were overhead down to the ground, and I'm not just talking about bridge-mounted ones either.  Some entire supports are being removed and signs placed at ground level. 

Jersey's done that. They took down several overheads on 295 and replaced them with ground mounted signs even though 295 is 3 lanes wide north of 76/42. you can see here (at 52A going NB) (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.0814732,-74.7636965,3a,75y,41.9h,72.4t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sUovHHP1ztxo3yJWTED6JAQ!2e0) that they took down the overhead but left the support masts up!
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: PHLBOS on September 25, 2014, 08:37:58 AM
Quote from: storm2k on September 25, 2014, 02:39:59 AMJersey's done that. They took down several overheads on 295 and replaced them with ground mounted signs even though 295 is 3 lanes wide north of 76/42. you can see here (at 52A going NB) (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.0814732,-74.7636965,3a,75y,41.9h,72.4t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sUovHHP1ztxo3yJWTED6JAQ!2e0) that they took down the overhead but left the support masts up!
That particular case was the result of an I-295 reconstruction project (which involved lane closures & shifted through lanes) that took place several years ago.  IIRC, the current replacement ground-mounted BGS' were (at least initially) planned to be a temporary situation.

It's possible that the overhead portion of the gantry that was removed was originally intened to be reinstalled after the project ended but was damaged in the process.  Note: such is only a guess on my part.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: akotchi on September 25, 2014, 10:57:16 AM
Quote from: PHLBOS on September 25, 2014, 08:37:58 AM
Quote from: storm2k on September 25, 2014, 02:39:59 AMJersey's done that. They took down several overheads on 295 and replaced them with ground mounted signs even though 295 is 3 lanes wide north of 76/42. you can see here (at 52A going NB) (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.0814732,-74.7636965,3a,75y,41.9h,72.4t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sUovHHP1ztxo3yJWTED6JAQ!2e0) that they took down the overhead but left the support masts up!
That particular case was the result of an I-295 reconstruction project (which involved lane closures & shifted through lanes) that took place several years ago.  IIRC, the current replacement ground-mounted BGS' were (at least initially) planned to be a temporary situation.

It's possible that the overhead portion of the gantry that was removed was originally intened to be reinstalled after the project ended but was damaged in the process.  Note: such is only a guess on my part.
Most times this is not because of a construction project in the area.  It is more likely the result of periodic inspection of the structures finding issues with the existing components -- safety precaution to take the span down.  I have seen at various times other locations in the state (I-295 at Exit 65 and I-195 at Exit 3, for two) where smaller "temporary" guide signs were in place while the overhead gantry was down.  Eventually whatever necessary repairs are made and the span gets put back up.  The time varies by location, but could be more related to the extent of repairs.  Sometimes, the small signs do not seem that temporary.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: PHLBOS on September 25, 2014, 12:58:30 PM
Quote from: akotchi on September 25, 2014, 10:57:16 AMMost times this is not because of a construction project in the area.  It is more likely the result of periodic inspection of the structures finding issues with the existing components -- safety precaution to take the span down.  I have seen at various times other locations in the state (I-295 at Exit 65 and I-195 at Exit 3, for two) where smaller "temporary" guide signs were in place while the overhead gantry was down.  Eventually whatever necessary repairs are made and the span gets put back up.  The time varies by location, but could be more related to the extent of repairs.  Sometimes, the small signs do not seem that temporary.
As one who has used that stretch of I-295 for many years when traveling to/from New England; I know that particular overhead gantry (bridge portion) only was taken down when NJDOT was reconstructing a roughly 10-mile stretch of that highway several years ago.  During some of the phases of that project, one side of the road was closed off while the remaining side was reconfigured & restriped (including a temporary Jersey barrier) for 4 total lanes of travel (2 per direction).

While the reasoning you described may be true for those other locations; the timing of such with respect to a concurrent reconstruction project is just too coincidental.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on September 25, 2014, 01:58:56 PM
I had a scary thought today about the lack of a plan to pay for the Tappan Zee Bridge (especially since Cuomo ruled out using the drug bust money for it).  A couple years ago, he proposed merging NYSDOT and NYSTA.  This was rejected due to the various legal hurdles that a merger would face.  But Cuomo's a patient man, and he always gets what he wants in the end.  What if he's trying to bankrupt NYSTA so that the political support for a merger would materialize?  At that point NYSTA and NYSDOT will already share the same building anyways... all that would need to be done is to re-structure the bureaucracy and eliminate redundant jobs.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on September 25, 2014, 03:44:36 PM
Quote from: vdeane on September 25, 2014, 01:58:56 PM
I had a scary thought today about the lack of a plan to pay for the Tappan Zee Bridge (especially since Cuomo ruled out using the drug bust money for it).  A couple years ago, he proposed merging NYSDOT and NYSTA.  This was rejected due to the various legal hurdles that a merger would face.  But Cuomo's a patient man, and he always gets what he wants in the end.  What if he's trying to bankrupt NYSTA so that the political support for a merger would materialize?  At that point NYSTA and NYSDOT will already share the same building anyways... all that would need to be done is to re-structure the bureaucracy and eliminate redundant jobs.

Don't picture him planning it that way, but I'd be for anything that might bring a merger. Would certainly get rid of a lot of redundancy. Merge the 4 Thruway regions into Regions 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 8, get rid of the leadership and redundant positions, and voilà- there's money available to replace bridges and possibly get rid of/ move some tolls that were supposed to disappear eons ago (cough Grand Island cough I-95 cough Ardsley cough).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on September 25, 2014, 05:54:52 PM
The upper leadership would just get reappointed elsewhere or the organization would be restructured to retain them; most of the jobs lost would be lower-level titles like mine.  As someone who works for the state, I don't like anything that reduces the workforce and therefore threatens my job (especially since I just started and would therefore be the first on the chopping block).

I highly doubt a merger would reduce or eliminate tolls.  Plus I like the Thruway ;)
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on September 25, 2014, 07:27:12 PM
Guess what I just found: Plans for the Exit 50A bridge replacement (http://www.thruway.ny.gov/netdata/contractors/documents/d214320_tab14-23b_plans-volume-1-of-1.pdf). A few important points:

Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on September 26, 2014, 01:27:05 PM
Quote from: cl94 on September 25, 2014, 07:27:12 PM
Monotube cantilever gantry for the Exit 50 overhead. Didn't know New York was adopting these things. I certainly haven't seen one here.
You mean like this?
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nysroads.com%2Fimages%2Fgallery%2FNY%2Fi590%2F100_4919-s.JPG&hash=39834cafb14a7f84dbf8ecee8463187c7234e748)
Region 4 has a few.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on September 26, 2014, 01:41:37 PM
No. I mean the curved arm type that Pennsylvania loves
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: route17fan on September 27, 2014, 11:03:15 AM
Quote from: cl94 on September 25, 2014, 07:27:12 PM
  • Monotube cantilever gantry for the Exit 50 overhead. Didn't know New York was adopting these things. I certainly haven't seen one here.

I'm pretty sure this will be a first.

I am a traditionalist and have always liked the triangular gantries (I am 44 and began my roadgeek experience on NY 17 watching the Southern Tier Expressway get built). Admittedly, the "beefy" new box gantries have been taking some getting used to - but a monotube - in NY?? Wow.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on September 27, 2014, 12:06:23 PM
Quote from: route17fan on September 27, 2014, 11:03:15 AM
Quote from: cl94 on September 25, 2014, 07:27:12 PM
  • Monotube cantilever gantry for the Exit 50 overhead. Didn't know New York was adopting these things. I certainly haven't seen one here.

I'm pretty sure this will be a first.

I am a traditionalist and have always liked the triangular gantries (I am 44 and began my roadgeek experience on NY 17 watching the Southern Tier Expressway get built). Admittedly, the "beefy" new box gantries have been taking some getting used to - but a monotube - in NY?? Wow.

Yeah. The plans have connection details and everything. I was pretty shocked to scroll down and see it and the several pages dedicated to its design.

I remember being pretty upset when I saw my first new-style truss gantry. It was on the SB approach to Exit 17 on I-87 in Saratoga County. Replaced a triangular one. Those are slowly disappearing from everywhere. The Buffalo area only has a few left, mostly on the Thruway and NY 198. A couple just got new signs, but I expect at least one to come down during another bridge replacement in West Seneca. NY 198's will likely disappear when it gets reconstructed in a few years.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: route17fan on September 27, 2014, 12:16:24 PM
I know of the gantry of which you speak.  :)
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: roadman65 on September 27, 2014, 12:22:44 PM
Good news if you miss the triangular trusses.  Come down to Florida where those are now the norm here along with single post supports as the old truss style gantry supports are a thing of the past.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Pete from Boston on September 27, 2014, 01:01:30 PM
Quote from: vdeane on September 25, 2014, 01:58:56 PM
I had a scary thought today about the lack of a plan to pay for the Tappan Zee Bridge (especially since Cuomo ruled out using the drug bust money for it).  A couple years ago, he proposed merging NYSDOT and NYSTA.  This was rejected due to the various legal hurdles that a merger would face.  But Cuomo's a patient man, and he always gets what he wants in the end.  What if he's trying to bankrupt NYSTA so that the political support for a merger would materialize?  At that point NYSTA and NYSDOT will already share the same building anyways... all that would need to be done is to re-structure the bureaucracy and eliminate redundant jobs.

Eliminating redundant jobs is the opposite of scary.

Edit:  Later post clarifies your POV.  However, you're a taxpayer too, and the state has fiduciary responsibility to maximize what it does with its taxpayers'–shareholders'–money.  Knowingly maintaining redundant jobs is not responsible government.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: xcellntbuy on September 27, 2014, 01:29:46 PM
Quote from: route17fan on September 27, 2014, 11:03:15 AM
Quote from: cl94 on September 25, 2014, 07:27:12 PM
  • Monotube cantilever gantry for the Exit 50 overhead. Didn't know New York was adopting these things. I certainly haven't seen one here.

I'm pretty sure this will be a first.

I am a traditionalist and have always liked the triangular gantries (I am 44 and began my roadgeek experience on NY 17 watching the Southern Tier Expressway get built). Admittedly, the "beefy" new box gantries have been taking some getting used to - but a monotube - in NY?? Wow.
As a former New Yorker as well, triangular gantries were the universal standard for a very long time.  The new substantially larger "beefy" gantries (I like that phrase) saw some of their first use in Albany when the Interstate 87/90 interchanges with the Thruway, Northway, Western Avenue, Crossgates Mall, Fuller Road, Interstate 90/Northside Arterial were dramatically reconstructed in 1989.  The electric BGS southbound on the Northway for Exit 1W were so heavy (and so expensive at $1 million each) the first "beefy" gantries were designed for the installation.

If you want to see "super beefy," the new gantries on the Florida's Turnpike and Interstate 595 beat out the ones in New York.

I have now moved to middle Georgia and see all these thin-looking traffic light mast arms (replacing wire spans) and minimal overhead gantries and have to readjust my thinking.  Georgia's butterfly gantries are much more substantial.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on September 27, 2014, 01:40:07 PM
Quote from: Pete from Boston on September 27, 2014, 01:01:30 PM
Quote from: vdeane on September 25, 2014, 01:58:56 PM
I had a scary thought today about the lack of a plan to pay for the Tappan Zee Bridge (especially since Cuomo ruled out using the drug bust money for it).  A couple years ago, he proposed merging NYSDOT and NYSTA.  This was rejected due to the various legal hurdles that a merger would face.  But Cuomo's a patient man, and he always gets what he wants in the end.  What if he's trying to bankrupt NYSTA so that the political support for a merger would materialize?  At that point NYSTA and NYSDOT will already share the same building anyways... all that would need to be done is to re-structure the bureaucracy and eliminate redundant jobs.

Eliminating redundant jobs is the opposite of scary.

Edit:  Later post clarifies your POV.  However, you're a taxpayer too, and the state has fiduciary responsibility to maximize what it does with its taxpayers'–shareholders'–money.  Knowingly maintaining redundant jobs is not responsible government.

Agree. As a taxpayer, I think that the redundant agencies in this state need to be merged. Actually, I think every highway transportation "authority" in the state needs to be merged into NYSDOT: NYSTA, NYSBA, TBTA (MTA Bridges and Tunnels), and the transportation portions of NYSDEC and various park authorities. You can should even throw the Port Authority in there by splitting it between NJDOT and NYSDOT to get rid of all the crap it does. Know how much money that would save? Just have to time stuff to coincide with retirements. Not that I think it'll ever happen, but it would certainly help put the state in the black. Will jobs be affected? Somewhat, but not as many low-levels as you would think, because the same level of maintenance has to be provided. What would be affected are the redundant chair positions, which would be eliminated as people retire.

Quote from: xcellntbuy on September 27, 2014, 01:29:46 PM
As a former New Yorker as well, triangular gantries were the universal standard for a very long time.  The new substantially larger "beefy" gantries (I like that phrase) saw some of their first use in Albany when the Interstate 87/90 interchanges with the Thruway, Northway, Western Avenue, Crossgates Mall, Fuller Road, Interstate 90/Northside Arterial were dramatically reconstructed in 1989.  The electric BGS southbound on the Northway for Exit 1W were so heavy (and so expensive at $1 million each) the first "beefy" gantries were designed for the installation.
[/quote]

I always loved that assembly. But $1 MILLION? Why didn't they just install lights like they did on the assembly at the north/east end of the concurrency? That was the first "beefy" assembly I saw that wasn't for a VMS. Certainly is a strange case, because everything else in the area is/was triangular (and button copy) and I figured that one was only because of the weight of the backlit signs. That's why I was surprised when I saw one for two standard BGSes.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: xcellntbuy on September 27, 2014, 07:43:49 PM
Yes, $1 million, and that was in 1989.  Can you imagine what a similar sign would cost now, 25 years later?

Exit 1W on the Northway, southbound is known for its rollovers of big trucks.  The "usual suspects" were pinned on Quebec truck drivers.

The signs were put in place to keep drivers alert to the sharp turns leading to the Thruway's massive Exit 24 toll barrier.  The exit ramp has always been a tight one.  Before the massive reconstruction of all the exit ramps and highways, converting the ramps to flyovers and flyunders, the cloverleaf style Exit 1W had two tight 90-degree curves, hence the rollover issue.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on September 27, 2014, 07:55:01 PM
Quote from: xcellntbuy on September 27, 2014, 07:43:49 PM
Yes, $1 million, and that was in 1989.  Can you imagine what a similar sign would cost now, 25 years later?

Exit 1W on the Northway, southbound is known for its rollovers of big trucks.  The "usual suspects" were pinned on Quebec truck drivers.

The signs were put in place to keep drivers alert to the sharp turns leading to the Thruway's massive Exit 24 toll barrier.  The exit ramp has always been a tight one.  Before the massive reconstruction of all the exit ramps and highways, converting the ramps to flyovers and flyunders, the cloverleaf style Exit 1W had two tight 90-degree curves, hence the rollover issue.

During the 8 years I lived near Albany, there were never fewer than 2 rollovers per month on that ramp. They have LED-highlighted signs and people still take that curve too fast. Because of the toll booth location, it can't even be fixed without putting the ramp through a wildlife preserve or realigning the rest of the interchange to get rid of the loop ramp. Also prone to backups, because the through movement (I-87 south / I-90 west) must squeeze into one lane and exit itself. That right there is justification to restripe for an option lane (which they should have had all along) or build the E-ZPass ramp they've been talking about since electronic tolling was first introduced.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on September 27, 2014, 09:03:08 PM
Quote from: cl94 on September 27, 2014, 01:40:07 PM
Agree. As a taxpayer, I think that the redundant agencies in this state need to be merged. Actually, I think every highway transportation "authority" in the state needs to be merged into NYSDOT: NYSTA, NYSBA, TBTA (MTA Bridges and Tunnels), and the transportation portions of NYSDEC and various park authorities. You can should even throw the Port Authority in there by splitting it between NJDOT and NYSDOT to get rid of all the crap it does. Know how much money that would save? Just have to time stuff to coincide with retirements. Not that I think it'll ever happen, but it would certainly help put the state in the black. Will jobs be affected? Somewhat, but not as many low-levels as you would think, because the same level of maintenance has to be provided. What would be affected are the redundant chair positions, which would be eliminated as people retire.
Past consolidation efforts have resulted in most of the staff reductions coming from line staff, not management.  The example that comes to mind is Region 1's move in with Main Office that happened a few years ago.  Region 1 now has a smaller staff than any other (for example, planning shrunk for 7 to 3, and the HR and IT staff were essentially eliminated).  HR/IT is getting consolidated across the state, and with each increment towards that end, the service gets worse and worse.

There are quite a few retirements coming up, given the state's age distribution, and it's been rumored that the move in with the Thruway is deliberately designed to get some people to retire (the location is much worse than where we are now; there are no services within walking distance, which is already annoying people who like to go shopping, go to the bank, or get takeout on their lunch break; also, the location means that most people will have a significantly longer commute and suddenly find themselves paying Thruway tolls just to get to work).

I highly doubt the MTA bridges would be rolled into NYSDOT.  Then they wouldn't be able to use the tolls to subsidize transit any more.

The state currently is in the black and has been since 2011/2012.  And, honestly, state taxes aren't that bad compared to federal taxes.  Of course, I'm the oddball because I honestly don't care about money beyond the amount that society forces me to, and I don't view tax money as "my" money after it's been paid.

Quote from: cl94 on September 27, 2014, 07:55:01 PM
During the 8 years I lived near Albany, there were never fewer than 2 rollovers per month on that ramp. They have LED-highlighted signs and people still take that curve too fast. Because of the toll booth location, it can't even be fixed without putting the ramp through a wildlife preserve or realigning the rest of the interchange to get rid of the loop ramp. Also prone to backups, because the through movement (I-87 south / I-90 west) must squeeze into one lane and exit itself. That right there is justification to restripe for an option lane (which they should have had all along) or build the E-ZPass ramp they've been talking about since electronic tolling was first introduced.
It would help if the cars would realize that the advisory speeds are for the trucks and that they don't have to slam on their brakes if they're not behind one.  It would also help if people would pay attention to the "Thruway traffic keep right" sign instead of acting surprised and cutting over at the last second.

I don't understand the aversion to option lanes at that junction.  They would help out a lot.

I'm not expecting those E-ZPass ramps to arrive any time soon either.  The best time to do it would have been during the recent widening.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on September 27, 2014, 09:29:31 PM
Quote from: vdeane on September 27, 2014, 09:03:08 PM
I don't understand the aversion to option lanes at that junction.  They would help out a lot.

I don't know why most of NYSDOT is opposed to them in general. Region 4 probably takes the cake Upstate, R1 has one at I-87 Exit 2 and one more at I-787's southern end, 5 has 5 that I can think of, two of which are at the edge of NYSTA maintenance and two more on the Robert Moses State Parkway, Utica, Syracuse, and Binghamton each have a couple, and a couple more on I-86 in Region 6. Much more common downstate, with the City, the Island, and Westchester each having several.

I remember moving to Ohio and seeing that every semi-major interchange has an option lane in addition to an exit-only lane. This is also the standard in suburban Ontario, notably on the QEW near Toronto. Typical New York practice is to add a second dedicated lane or add the lane after the ramp departs.

Speaking of I-87, Exits 6, 7, and 9 could benefit from option lanes. Both could do it with minor restriping.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: ARMOURERERIC on September 27, 2014, 09:52:33 PM
How is the upstate Thruway handling 4 lanes in general.  Besides the TZ bridge, are there even any thoughts on the table about a major overhaul of the mainline ALA the PA Pike?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on September 27, 2014, 10:00:28 PM
Quote from: ARMOURERERIC on September 27, 2014, 09:52:33 PM
How is the upstate Thruway handling 4 lanes in general.  Besides the TZ bridge, are there even any thoughts on the table about a major overhaul of the mainline ALA the PA Pike?

Oh, yes there are. The entire thing was built with an eventual expansion to 6 lanes in mind, so all bridges are wide enough for an extra lane. South of Albany and between Utica and Buffalo could certainly use 6 lanes. The current 4 lanes is a bit tight in those areas. I don't have access to data, but probably LOS D most of the day. Not needed in the Mohawk Valley or west of Exit 57- not enough traffic and the parallel routes are of relatively high quality.

There's a growing push for a widening south of Albany and between I-490 and Buffalo because of the high traffic in those areas.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: froggie on September 27, 2014, 10:44:19 PM
QuoteThe entire thing was built with an eventual expansion to 6 lanes in mind, so all bridges are wide enough for an extra lane.

While it helps with eventual expansion, I thought NYSTA did this primarily so they could maintain 4 traffic lanes on one side when/if they had to do major bridge maintenance/rehab/replacement could be done on the other side.  This was certainly the case with several bridge projects west of Syracuse about 10 years ago.

QuoteI don't have access to data, but probably LOS D most of the day.

Still acceptable to FHWA.  What little recurring congestion I've run into on the Thruway has all been at or south of Kingston, with most of that north of I-287 due to higher weekend traffic volumes on summer or holiday weekends.

Don't get me wrong, another lane would be a nice-to-have, but I don't really see it needed north of Rockland County.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Zeffy on September 27, 2014, 10:50:00 PM
QuoteI don't have access to data, but probably LOS D most of the day.

Excuse my stupidity here, but what exactly is LOS [D]? The only abbreviation for LOS is Line of Sight which I don't think makes sense in this context...

Also, has the Thruway ever considered switching to mile-based exits?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: froggie on September 27, 2014, 10:54:12 PM
LOS = Level of Service.  Quantified, calculated, and methodology via the Highway Capacity Manual.

The calculations give a letter grade (A thru F, just like in school except that "E" is included) for LOS, which for freeway-grade facilities is based on the vehicle density per lane mile.  "F", of course, is "failing" and is equated with oversaturated, below-speed limit flow.  "D" equates to near-saturated, but still flowing at or near the speed limit.  "E" is right on the cusp, where flow is at saturation and any small incident or event (crash, police activity, adding a few more cars to the mix) would trigger a slowdown.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: machias on September 28, 2014, 10:14:07 AM
Quote from: Zeffy on September 27, 2014, 10:50:00 PM


Also, has the Thruway ever considered switching to mile-based exits?

While New York State is eventually going to switch to mile-based exits, I believe that the Thruway Authority will be the very last holdout on the sequential numbering. Not only would the interchanges need to be renumbered, but all of the mileposts would have to be changed as well. They believe there will be too much driver confusion with instances where Batavia is Exit 106 (based on I-90 mileposts) and Saugerties is Exit 110 (based on I-87 mileposts).

About 10 years ago or so they were tossing around the idea of renumbering the interchanges from west to east and then down I-87 so that I-87 would be "backwards" instead of I-90 but I don't know if that would still be the plan.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Roadrunner75 on September 28, 2014, 11:50:03 AM
Quote from: upstatenyroads on September 28, 2014, 10:14:07 AM
While New York State is eventually going to switch to mile-based exits, I believe that the Thruway Authority will be the very last holdout on the sequential numbering. Not only would the interchanges need to be renumbered, but all of the mileposts would have to be changed as well. They believe there will be too much driver confusion with instances where Batavia is Exit 106 (based on I-90 mileposts) and Saugerties is Exit 110 (based on I-87 mileposts).
When the PA Turnpike switched over to mileage based exits, they had to incorporate both the mainline (76/276) as well as the Northeast Extension (476) into that system.  The NE extension exit numbering (which continues the I-476 mileage) now overlaps the mileage of the western end of the mainline numbering (since the NE extension exits don't have a qualifier like NE56 instead of 56).  Before the renumbering, the mainline had exits 1-29 and the extension had 31-38, to avoid the overlap.  Of course there aren't any duplicate numbered exits, but there would in theory be potential for this to happen with a new interchange and they would have to shift the new number accordingly to avoid this.

Drivers seem to have figured this out, so I assume the Thruway could get away with something similar, based on the mileage of the individual interstates.  I think an exit qualifier might be better for each leg but that's probably not gonna happen...


Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: route17fan on September 28, 2014, 01:06:34 PM
Yeah, mileage based for the Thruway I agree is inevitable. For what it's worth, I've enjoyed having I-87 having three Exit 1's.  :D
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: roadman65 on September 28, 2014, 01:17:53 PM
Quote from: Roadrunner75 on September 28, 2014, 11:50:03 AM
Quote from: upstatenyroads on September 28, 2014, 10:14:07 AM
While New York State is eventually going to switch to mile-based exits, I believe that the Thruway Authority will be the very last holdout on the sequential numbering. Not only would the interchanges need to be renumbered, but all of the mileposts would have to be changed as well. They believe there will be too much driver confusion with instances where Batavia is Exit 106 (based on I-90 mileposts) and Saugerties is Exit 110 (based on I-87 mileposts).
When the PA Turnpike switched over to mileage based exits, they had to incorporate both the mainline (76/276) as well as the Northeast Extension (476) into that system.  The NE extension exit numbering (which continues the I-476 mileage) now overlaps the mileage of the western end of the mainline numbering (since the NE extension exits don't have a qualifier like NE56 instead of 56).  Before the renumbering, the mainline had exits 1-29 and the extension had 31-38, to avoid the overlap.  Of course there aren't any duplicate numbered exits, but there would in theory be potential for this to happen with a new interchange and they would have to shift the new number accordingly to avoid this.

Drivers seem to have figured this out, so I assume the Thruway could get away with something similar, based on the mileage of the individual interstates.  I think an exit qualifier might be better for each leg but that's probably not gonna happen...



Look at the KTA in Kansas.  For I-70 it creates an overlap as the numbers where I-70 join the Turnpike has the same set of numbers further west in Kansas on I-70.  No problems that I know of there.

Do not forget about I-87 having two of its three exit numbers with the number "1" real close to each other for centuries and no one ever got confused. 

Having duplicate and overlapping numbers on the I-87 would not be an issue I would think.  I just think that I-87 north of I-90 should continue with the number it left off on the Thruway and that maybe the exit numbers of the Major Deegan should be continued on the Thruway if they choose to keep the current Thruway mile markers.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: machias on September 28, 2014, 03:27:43 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on September 28, 2014, 01:17:53 PM
Quote from: Roadrunner75 on September 28, 2014, 11:50:03 AM
Quote from: upstatenyroads on September 28, 2014, 10:14:07 AM
While New York State is eventually going to switch to mile-based exits, I believe that the Thruway Authority will be the very last holdout on the sequential numbering. Not only would the interchanges need to be renumbered, but all of the mileposts would have to be changed as well. They believe there will be too much driver confusion with instances where Batavia is Exit 106 (based on I-90 mileposts) and Saugerties is Exit 110 (based on I-87 mileposts).
When the PA Turnpike switched over to mileage based exits, they had to incorporate both the mainline (76/276) as well as the Northeast Extension (476) into that system.  The NE extension exit numbering (which continues the I-476 mileage) now overlaps the mileage of the western end of the mainline numbering (since the NE extension exits don't have a qualifier like NE56 instead of 56).  Before the renumbering, the mainline had exits 1-29 and the extension had 31-38, to avoid the overlap.  Of course there aren't any duplicate numbered exits, but there would in theory be potential for this to happen with a new interchange and they would have to shift the new number accordingly to avoid this.

Drivers seem to have figured this out, so I assume the Thruway could get away with something similar, based on the mileage of the individual interstates.  I think an exit qualifier might be better for each leg but that's probably not gonna happen...



Look at the KTA in Kansas.  For I-70 it creates an overlap as the numbers where I-70 join the Turnpike has the same set of numbers further west in Kansas on I-70.  No problems that I know of there.

Do not forget about I-87 having two of its three exit numbers with the number "1" real close to each other for centuries and no one ever got confused. 

Having duplicate and overlapping numbers on the I-87 would not be an issue I would think.  I just think that I-87 north of I-90 should continue with the number it left off on the Thruway and that maybe the exit numbers of the Major Deegan should be continued on the Thruway if they choose to keep the current Thruway mile markers.

I had a conversation with NYSDOT about a year ago about the conversion and their plan is to continue the mileposts and distance based exit numbers from I-87 on the Northway. The issue is that their plan shows the numbers based on mile zero being the beginning of the Thruway and not inclusive of the Major Deegan. When I pointed this out, I think they made the determination to recalculate the mileposts and exit numbers, though there is no formal plan in place to change the numbers at this time. I think it's going to be fairly soon (within the next decade) though.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: roadman65 on September 28, 2014, 03:34:52 PM
However if they do decide to count the whole entire Northway as an individual route with its own mile based numbers, it cannot be worse than Illinois having I-70 east of its split with I-55 using I-270's numbers from where it ends.

Then you have I-19 which has the kilometers based system which is only useful to the Mexican's who come across the border, but nonetheless different system even though using the same principal.

Oh, yeah the I-17 thing not starting with zero cause of a technicality of the way Arizona posts mileage is not traditional we cannot forget.

Hopefully the LIE will become more better now that the Mid Manhattan Expressway is totally dead, they can have all of its numbers starting with zero at the Queens- Midtown Tunnel as one good thing out of this.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on September 28, 2014, 04:13:40 PM
Quote from: upstatenyroads on September 28, 2014, 03:27:43 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on September 28, 2014, 01:17:53 PM
Quote from: Roadrunner75 on September 28, 2014, 11:50:03 AM
Quote from: upstatenyroads on September 28, 2014, 10:14:07 AM
While New York State is eventually going to switch to mile-based exits, I believe that the Thruway Authority will be the very last holdout on the sequential numbering. Not only would the interchanges need to be renumbered, but all of the mileposts would have to be changed as well. They believe there will be too much driver confusion with instances where Batavia is Exit 106 (based on I-90 mileposts) and Saugerties is Exit 110 (based on I-87 mileposts).
When the PA Turnpike switched over to mileage based exits, they had to incorporate both the mainline (76/276) as well as the Northeast Extension (476) into that system.  The NE extension exit numbering (which continues the I-476 mileage) now overlaps the mileage of the western end of the mainline numbering (since the NE extension exits don't have a qualifier like NE56 instead of 56).  Before the renumbering, the mainline had exits 1-29 and the extension had 31-38, to avoid the overlap.  Of course there aren't any duplicate numbered exits, but there would in theory be potential for this to happen with a new interchange and they would have to shift the new number accordingly to avoid this.

Drivers seem to have figured this out, so I assume the Thruway could get away with something similar, based on the mileage of the individual interstates.  I think an exit qualifier might be better for each leg but that's probably not gonna happen...



Look at the KTA in Kansas.  For I-70 it creates an overlap as the numbers where I-70 join the Turnpike has the same set of numbers further west in Kansas on I-70.  No problems that I know of there.

Do not forget about I-87 having two of its three exit numbers with the number "1" real close to each other for centuries and no one ever got confused. 

Having duplicate and overlapping numbers on the I-87 would not be an issue I would think.  I just think that I-87 north of I-90 should continue with the number it left off on the Thruway and that maybe the exit numbers of the Major Deegan should be continued on the Thruway if they choose to keep the current Thruway mile markers.

I had a conversation with NYSDOT about a year ago about the conversion and their plan is to continue the mileposts and distance based exit numbers from I-87 on the Northway. The issue is that their plan shows the numbers based on mile zero being the beginning of the Thruway and not inclusive of the Major Deegan. When I pointed this out, I think they made the determination to recalculate the mileposts and exit numbers, though there is no formal plan in place to change the numbers at this time. I think it's going to be fairly soon (within the next decade) though.

As it should be. A lot of the traffic on the Thruway continuing past NY 17 is bound for the Northway, especially on weekends and holidays. Many of these people aren't necessarily repeat travelers going to the Adirondacks or western Vermont. I know several people who got confused when looking for exits 16 or above. You pass your exit number, but your actual exit is well over a hundred miles away. The Exit 23s, for example, are less than 70 miles apart along I-87, separated by about 70 minutes of projected travel time. You shouldn't be passing the same number twice in that distance if you're two counties apart in the same state.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: roadman65 on September 29, 2014, 03:01:54 AM
How many New Yorkers actually call I-87 by its number while aligned on The Thruway?  To many when they here Exit 23 for I-87 will think of the Northway, which is mostly referred to as I-87 where the Thruway portion is not.  People who travel up to the Adirondacks and Montreal will not confuse the toll road's exits as I-87's own.

As far as many are concerned, I-87 begins in Albany and heads north.  The Thruway and the Deegan are simply just "The Thruway" and "The Major Deegan."
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: amroad17 on September 29, 2014, 05:09:29 AM
I have always believed that the Thruway is its own entity and should just use the current milemarkers for the future conversion to mile-based exits.  IMHO, there really is no need to add the extra expense of changing milemarkers when the only signs that would need to be changed would be the exit tabs, gore signs, and overlays on the blue info signs.  Of course, there would be the expense of new toll tickets with the new numbers--which would happen in my scenario or JP's (upstatenyroads) scenario.

The Berkshire section would have its own numbers (B6, B15, and B23, I believe) and the Niagara section (I-190) would just use its current milemarkers.

As far as the Northway I-87 section is concerned, I am non-committal with either a continuance of the Thruway numbers (148-333) or using the current milemarkers to use for the mile-based exits.  I would not be confused with dealing with three exit 1's along I-87 as I would realize that I-87 is a part of three separate freeways/tollway.

The PA Turnpike was mentioned a few posts back.  I believe the Lehigh Valley/Allentown interchange had to be numbered 56 (even though it is at mile 57) because the Monroeville interchange is Exit 57 and the PA Tpk probably did not want duplicate numbers listed on their toll tickets.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Jim on September 29, 2014, 07:14:09 AM
If the best point against renumbering to have exit numbers and mile markers that follow the the route numbers (as it done nearly everywhere else) is that it is more confusing to motorists than having the current 3 separate numbering schemes for each of I-87 and I-90, then I see this as a very one-sided argument.  Anyone who's been at the I-87/I-90 interchange in Albany during holidays and other times when the traffic isn't just the regulars who know the roads well has probably seen the confusion that results from the current scheme.

I'd go a step further and argue that an exit renumbering is the right opportunity to do some renumberings in NYC, like having I-87 replace the I-278 designation from the Triboro/JFK to its junction with I-95 or even US 1/9 in NJ.  But that's probably a topic for another thread.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on September 29, 2014, 09:04:33 AM
Quote from: Jim on September 29, 2014, 07:14:09 AM
If the best point against renumbering to have exit numbers and mile markers that follow the the route numbers (as it done nearly everywhere else) is that it is more confusing to motorists than having the current 3 separate numbering schemes for each of I-87 and I-90, then I see this as a very one-sided argument.  Anyone who's been at the I-87/I-90 interchange in Albany during holidays and other times when the traffic isn't just the regulars who know the roads well has probably seen the confusion that results from the current scheme.

I'd go a step further and argue that an exit renumbering is the right opportunity to do some renumberings in NYC, like having I-87 replace the I-278 designation from the Triboro/JFK to its junction with I-95 or even US 1/9 in NJ.  But that's probably a topic for another thread.

Thank you. From growing up near Albany, I know how much of a mess the Exit 24 area is because it can be confusing if you aren't in the area often. As the exit numbering for both I-87 and I-90 starts at the toll booths, you get cases such as Exit 1 and both Exit 2s being a mile apart. You don't know how many people bound for Colonie Center get off at Washington Avenue instead of NY 5. Additionally, I always found it odd that both my grandmother and I lived near an Exit 19 on I-87, except I lived 2 hours away.

I-90 has 3 numbering schemes, with Exits 1-3 of two in close proximity and one running backwards of the standard, which is increasing from west to east. Not the best scheme. If I-87 and I-90 mileages are used for exit numbering, there will be 2 duplicates: 11 (current 4 (A), 5 (B) and 60) and 68 (current 17 and 54). One of each number would be on a toll-free segment and the western 11 would be on the small ticket system. Didn't calculate the Berkshire Spur, but those would be in the high 300s.

As for the I-87 extension, I always wondered that myself. Probably couldn't change it now because of how substandard it is.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: PHLBOS on September 29, 2014, 09:36:58 AM
Quote from: Roadrunner75 on September 28, 2014, 11:50:03 AMWhen the PA Turnpike switched over to mileage based exits, they had to incorporate both the mainline (76/276) as well as the Northeast Extension (476) into that system.  The NE extension exit numbering (which continues the I-476 mileage) now overlaps the mileage of the western end of the mainline numbering (since the NE extension exits don't have a qualifier like NE56 instead of 56).  Before the renumbering, the mainline had exits 1-29 and the extension had 31-38, to avoid the overlap.  Of course there aren't any duplicate numbered exits, but there would in theory be potential for this to happen with a new interchange and they would have to shift the new number accordingly to avoid this.

Drivers seem to have figured this out, so I assume the Thruway could get away with something similar, based on the mileage of the individual interstates.  I think an exit qualifier might be better for each leg but that's probably not gonna happen...
No offense, but I believe that PA's exit umber conversion along its Turnpike vs. the situation that exists along NY Thruway is an apples vs. oranges comparison.

While the East-West Turnpike changes route numbers (from I-76 to I-276) at Valley Forge, the orientation of the Turnpike is unchanged and the numbers are still increasing while heading eastbound.  Note: when the I-95 interchange is completed, the Turnpike east of that interchange will receive I-95-based exit numbers; but, again, the numbers will still increase while heading towards NJ.

In comparision, the orientation of the mainline Thruway does indeed change from a north-south to an east-west road roughly where I-87 & 90 change corridors.  Under the current numbering, the exit numbers & mile markers along the I-90 section of the Thruway have been backwards oriented (in the eyes of FHWA) from the get-go.

One option, could be that one of the segments (be it the north-south I-87 or the east-west I-90) of the Thruway contain a lettered prefix in front of the exit number (example: A1).  Such would address the likelihood of a numerical overlap between the two sections and give hint of a change in the highway's orientation.  Whether such an approach will survive the FHWA muster or not is unknown; but such might be the best way to overcome the lengthy backwards mile-marker/exit numbering that exists along the I-90 section today. 

BTW & IIRC, an early version of the mile-marker exit numbering plan along the NE Extension called for assigning the Lansdale Interchange (PA 63) Exit 30 but it was decided that since the existing exit number was only off by 1; it was left alone (at Exit 31).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Roadrunner75 on September 29, 2014, 09:59:37 AM
Quote from: PHLBOS on September 29, 2014, 09:36:58 AM
Quote from: Roadrunner75 on September 28, 2014, 11:50:03 AMWhen the PA Turnpike switched over to mileage based exits, they had to incorporate both the mainline (76/276) as well as the Northeast Extension (476) into that system.  The NE extension exit numbering (which continues the I-476 mileage) now overlaps the mileage of the western end of the mainline numbering (since the NE extension exits don't have a qualifier like NE56 instead of 56).  Before the renumbering, the mainline had exits 1-29 and the extension had 31-38, to avoid the overlap.  Of course there aren't any duplicate numbered exits, but there would in theory be potential for this to happen with a new interchange and they would have to shift the new number accordingly to avoid this.

Drivers seem to have figured this out, so I assume the Thruway could get away with something similar, based on the mileage of the individual interstates.  I think an exit qualifier might be better for each leg but that's probably not gonna happen...
No offense, but I believe that PA's exit umber conversion along its Turnpike vs. the situation that exists along NY Thruway is an apples vs. oranges comparison.

While the East-West Turnpike changes route numbers (from I-76 to I-276) at Valley Forge, the orientation of the Turnpike is unchanged and the numbers are still increasing while heading eastbound.  Note: when the I-95 interchange is completed, the Turnpike east of that interchange will receive I-95-based exit numbers; but, again, the numbers will still increase while heading towards NJ.

In comparision, the orientation of the mainline Thruway does indeed change from a north-south to an east-west road roughly where I-87 & 90 change corridors.  Under the current numbering, the exit numbers & mile markers along the I-90 section of the Thruway have been backwards oriented (in the eyes of FHWA) from the get-go.

One option, could be that one of the segments (be it the north-south I-87 or the east-west I-90) of the Thruway contain a lettered prefix in front of the exit number (example: A1).  Such would address the likelihood of a numerical overlap between the two sections and give hint of a change in the highway's orientation.  Whether such an approach will survive the FHWA muster or not is unknown; but such might be the best way to overcome the lengthy backwards mile-marker/exit numbering that exists along the I-90 section today. 

BTW & IIRC, an early version of the mile-marker exit numbering plan along the NE Extension called for assigning the Lansdale Interchange (PA 63) Exit 30 but it was decided that since the existing exit number was only off by 1; it was left alone (at Exit 31).
I'm more referring to the NE Extension vs. the mainline, since they both act within the same ticket system.  Yes, it's not exactly the same since with the Thruway you are staying on the mainline, but you have the overlapping exits/mileage within the same system, and you are 'turning' onto a different interstate as with 276/476.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: hbelkins on September 29, 2014, 10:39:57 AM
Last year when I was traveling east on the Thruway approaching Albany, my intent was to stay on I-90 eastbound (to complete I-90 in New York) and I knew full well where I wanted to go.

Yet, after I passed through the toll booth where I-90 departs the Thruway, what did I do? I got on I-87 going north!!!

If I got turned around there and took the wrong exit, I can very easily see it happening to someone less road-minded.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Zeffy on September 29, 2014, 10:56:42 AM
Quote from: hbelkins on September 29, 2014, 10:39:57 AM
Yet, after I passed through the toll booth where I-90 departs the Thruway, what did I do? I got on I-87 going north!!!

If I got turned around there and took the wrong exit, I can very easily see it happening to someone less road-minded.

I looked at the GMSV of the split, and it's clearly signed that the 2 left lanes lead to I-90 East, while the right two lanes are signed as I-87 North. Was it a momentary lapse of concentration? The only thing I could think of was that you were in the right-most lanes of the tollbooths and you couldn't get over to the left lanes in time.

Sorry if I sound like an ass, but I'm just curious because I think there would be ample time to read those signs as you exit the tollbooths. Unless I am missing something here...
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on September 29, 2014, 01:17:21 PM
Quote from: Zeffy on September 29, 2014, 10:56:42 AM
Quote from: hbelkins on September 29, 2014, 10:39:57 AM
Yet, after I passed through the toll booth where I-90 departs the Thruway, what did I do? I got on I-87 going north!!!

If I got turned around there and took the wrong exit, I can very easily see it happening to someone less road-minded.

I looked at the GMSV of the split, and it's clearly signed that the 2 left lanes lead to I-90 East, while the right two lanes are signed as I-87 North. Was it a momentary lapse of concentration? The only thing I could think of was that you were in the right-most lanes of the tollbooths and you couldn't get over to the left lanes in time.

Sorry if I sound like an ass, but I'm just curious because I think there would be ample time to read those signs as you exit the tollbooths. Unless I am missing something here...

There isn't ample time if the toll booths are backed up and you're on the right. It's also an immediate departure. The first advance sign is 1/10 mile before the split, just inside NYSDOT territory. Miss the sign and you're gone. That area can get pretty crazy and a driver really has to pay attention to surrounding traffic. It's one of the busiest toll plazas on the Thruway and possibly the busiest upstate. Traffic is rarely as light as street view shows and the lack of signs doesn't help things.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Zeffy on September 29, 2014, 01:29:51 PM
Quote from: cl94 on September 29, 2014, 01:17:21 PM
There isn't ample time if the toll booths are backed up and you're on the right. It's also an immediate departure. The first advance sign is 1/10 mile before the split, just inside NYSDOT territory. Miss the sign and you're gone. That area can get pretty crazy and a driver really has to pay attention to surrounding traffic. It's one of the busiest toll plazas on the Thruway and possibly the busiest upstate. Traffic is rarely as light as street view shows and the lack of signs doesn't help things.

Sounds like the solution would be to add some more signage, preferably before the toll booth so people are at least semi-aligned to where they want to go. I think it's a pretty poor decision for such a fast split while cars are shuffling around trying to get where they want to go.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on September 29, 2014, 02:01:52 PM
Regarding widening, it would be nice, but not really needed.  Traffic moves fine most of the time, though issues can develop between Buffalo and Syracuse and south of Albany on holiday weekends.

Most people in the area consider I-87 and the Northway to be one and the same... even the Northway stub to US 20 that's only a reference route gets called "I-87".  The Thruway is just "the Thruway", and nobody in the NYC area uses numbers other than roadgeeks.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: hbelkins on September 29, 2014, 03:38:52 PM
Yeah. Alignment coming out of the tollbooth played a huge role in it. I realized what I'd done immediately and knew I could take the NY 5 exit to loop back around, which I did.

That, and I think I was expecting the I-87 lanes to be on the left instead of the right.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on September 29, 2014, 05:17:58 PM
Interesting question: if the Thruway were to go AET before NY converts to mile-based, would its mileposts and numbers be eliminated entirely in favor of I-90 and I-87?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on September 29, 2014, 05:32:13 PM
Quote from: vdeane on September 29, 2014, 05:17:58 PM
Interesting question: if the Thruway were to go AET before NY converts to mile-based, would its mileposts and numbers be eliminated entirely in favor of I-90 and I-87?

Likely. In a few years, they'll be one of the very few ticket systems left. Pennsylvania and Massachusetts are going AET soon. Heck, even the Thruway is starting a conversion soon: the new Tappan Zee Bridge will be AET, along with the Exit 16 and Yonkers barriers per a few articles I've seen. The temporary Tappan Zee all-electronic "barriers" started construction earlier this month, supposedly. I wouldn't be shocked if they expand it across the entire system after these locations get it: first the other 3 barrier tolls, then the western part of the state, and finally everywhere else. Grand Island AET might bring it up to LOS E from the F it currently sees much of the day.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Zeffy on September 29, 2014, 05:52:27 PM
Here's a set of signs I devised to help guide motorists into the correct lanes (this would be placed before the tollbooths):

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1300.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fag88%2FZeffyboy%2FSigns%2FNYThruway-Tollbooth-Signage_zps3b413d2d.png&hash=74094a17204c7025f096c4ae143c24c0c40e67f7)

The lane markers are designed like the numbers on top of the tollbooths themselves for continuity.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: roadman on September 29, 2014, 06:54:09 PM
Nice job Zeffy.  The only possible issue here is having "Albany" and "Albany Int'l Airport" on adjacent signs, which might potentially confuse people who only glance at signs (most drivers out there?).  Drop the "Albany" from the I-87 north sign (and consider adding an airport symbol as well), and you seem to have a winner here.

Looking at GSV, one other thing that might help would be pavement route shield markings in the approach apron to the toll plaza.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Zeffy on September 29, 2014, 07:12:44 PM
Quote from: roadman on September 29, 2014, 06:54:09 PM
Nice job Zeffy.  The only possible issue here is having "Albany" and "Albany Int'l Airport" on adjacent signs, which might potentially confuse people who only glance at signs (most drivers out there?).  Drop the "Albany" from the I-87 north sign (and consider adding an airport symbol as well), and you seem to have a winner here.

Thanks!  :)  One thing I wanted to change was the usage of Albany on the I-90 sign, because at this point you pretty much are in Albany. I didn't know how much traffic would utilize I-90 or take surface streets (via exit 1N or others along I-90) to get to points in Albany. My second choice for control cities were Springfield - Boston, intended for people traveling to Massachusetts. In the end I just ended up replicating the signs after the tollbooths and adding the USE LANE elements to the bottom.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Jim on September 29, 2014, 07:48:41 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on September 29, 2014, 10:39:57 AM
Last year when I was traveling east on the Thruway approaching Albany, my intent was to stay on I-90 eastbound (to complete I-90 in New York) and I knew full well where I wanted to go.

Yet, after I passed through the toll booth where I-90 departs the Thruway, what did I do? I got on I-87 going north!!!

If I got turned around there and took the wrong exit, I can very easily see it happening to someone less road-minded.

Much better what you did than what I see way too often: someone either stopping in the triangle area at the split with no idea which way they meant to go (I'm pretty sure you're beyond the signs by then), or cutting across multiple lanes of traffic in a panic move, or backing down part of a ramp after realizing their mistake.   I know these things can happen almost anywhere, but it happens way too much coming out of the Exit 24 tolls.

I've only once seen someone wind up on the wrong side of the barrier and trying to enter the westbound lanes of I-90 going eastbound.  Fortunately that person realized their mistake quickly enough to avoid a high-speed head on collision and veered onto the shoulder.  Have to say, seeing it happen and knowing what could have happened got my heart racing almost as much as if I narrowly avoided being in my own collision.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on September 29, 2014, 07:50:32 PM
Quote from: Zeffy on September 29, 2014, 07:12:44 PM
Quote from: roadman on September 29, 2014, 06:54:09 PM
Nice job Zeffy.  The only possible issue here is having "Albany" and "Albany Int'l Airport" on adjacent signs, which might potentially confuse people who only glance at signs (most drivers out there?).  Drop the "Albany" from the I-87 north sign (and consider adding an airport symbol as well), and you seem to have a winner here.

Thanks!  :)  One thing I wanted to change was the usage of Albany on the I-90 sign, because at this point you pretty much are in Albany. I didn't know how much traffic would utilize I-90 or take surface streets (via exit 1N or others along I-90) to get to points in Albany. My second choice for control cities were Springfield - Boston, intended for people traveling to Massachusetts. In the end I just ended up replicating the signs after the tollbooths and adding the USE LANE elements to the bottom.

Nice work, but I'd emphasize the US 20 signs a little less. Very minor movement compared to the other two, almost to the point where any traffic bound for it is negligible.

General comments:

As Jim said, stuff like that is way too common at that interchange. As in it probably happens several times per day due to the lack of advance signage. By the time you see the sign, if you're in the wrong lane, it's too late.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Duke87 on September 29, 2014, 10:50:27 PM
Quote from: vdeane on September 29, 2014, 05:17:58 PM
Interesting question: if the Thruway were to go AET before NY converts to mile-based, would its mileposts and numbers be eliminated entirely in favor of I-90 and I-87?

I highly doubt it, unless NYSTA is absorbed into NYSDOT. Last I heard the Thruway was of the strong opinion that their own mainline took precedence over the interstates that happen to use it. If they had any interest in fixing the exit numbers they could have already done so decades ago.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on September 30, 2014, 02:17:16 AM
So "Clearview" is what the signage is termed. I first noticed this clean signage going up around the Cheektowaga area back in June. It's very neat in my opinion.

And the ground mounted signs... For some reason crossing back into my home state and seeing pylon signs in states like Ohio make me feel as though the TA just doesn't have the money for the extra metal. It would look much better though if they did use pylon mounts. I wonder if they should widen the 90 to 3 lanes going to the 490.

Also, I'm going through the Cleveland Dr bridge document and I notice on page 22 there are 8 lanes all across the page. Is this really the case in that they are expanding the Thruway in that area? In addition, there are really crappy concrete Jersey barriers past the I-190, but before that they are in top notch condition. I wonder if there are plans to extend them.

Edit: Just realized there are already eight lanes there...
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on September 30, 2014, 02:56:28 AM
Forgive my second post but I like the idea of the monotube cantilevers. It adds a more Ohioish feel to the Thruway even if it is just a small section.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on September 30, 2014, 01:31:12 PM
Quote from: cl94 on September 29, 2014, 05:32:13 PM
Likely. In a few years, they'll be one of the very few ticket systems left. Pennsylvania and Massachusetts are going AET soon. Heck, even the Thruway is starting a conversion soon: the new Tappan Zee Bridge will be AET, along with the Exit 16 and Yonkers barriers per a few articles I've seen. The temporary Tappan Zee all-electronic "barriers" started construction earlier this month, supposedly. I wouldn't be shocked if they expand it across the entire system after these locations get it: first the other 3 barrier tolls, then the western part of the state, and finally everywhere else. Grand Island AET might bring it up to LOS E from the F it currently sees much of the day.
Last I heard, the 2016 conversion will be at Tappan Zee, Yonkers, Harriman, and New Rochelle.  I'm not sure why Spring Valley is not included.  I could see Spring Valley, Tonawanda, and Niagara being converted soon thereafter if there aren't a ton of issues.  If all that's successful, the ticket system would probably be soon after in a single conversion.

Quote from: Zeffy on September 29, 2014, 05:52:27 PM
Here's a set of signs I devised to help guide motorists into the correct lanes (this would be placed before the tollbooths):

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1300.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fag88%2FZeffyboy%2FSigns%2FNYThruway-Tollbooth-Signage_zps3b413d2d.png&hash=74094a17204c7025f096c4ae143c24c0c40e67f7)

The lane markers are designed like the numbers on top of the tollbooths themselves for continuity.
I'd use 1 and 2 for Crossgates/US 20, 2-5 for I-87, and 5-9 for I-90.

Quote from: Duke87 on September 29, 2014, 10:50:27 PM
Quote from: vdeane on September 29, 2014, 05:17:58 PM
Interesting question: if the Thruway were to go AET before NY converts to mile-based, would its mileposts and numbers be eliminated entirely in favor of I-90 and I-87?

I highly doubt it, unless NYSTA is absorbed into NYSDOT. Last I heard the Thruway was of the strong opinion that their own mainline took precedence over the interstates that happen to use it. If they had any interest in fixing the exit numbers they could have already done so decades ago.
Well, if NYSTA went AET, there would be no more ticket system any more, and therefore a lot less reason for the separate numbering system.

Quote from: Buffaboy on September 30, 2014, 02:56:28 AM
Forgive my second post but I like the idea of the monotube cantilevers. It adds a more Ohioish feel to the Thruway even if it is just a small section.
But the Thruway should have a Thruwayish feel to it, not an Ohioish feel...
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on September 30, 2014, 07:47:01 PM
Spring Valley likely isn't on the list because it has highway-speed E-ZPass. Why eliminate the congestion there (none) when you can get rid of the 4 busiest barrier tolls on the system at places prone to backups? Also more of a cost savings when jobs get eliminated. We're talking millions of dollars that don't have to go toward salaries.

When they do any changes to the ticket system, the precedent is to do it west of Buffalo first, then move it elsewhere because it's easier to implement on a shorter (67 miles vs. 380 miles) section of highway. Could they do it all at once? Certainly. But it would be a more immediate savings if they got rid of as much as possible as early as possible. Since each ticket section has to change at once, it makes more sense to do the short one first.

If/when it does all change to AET, there won't be a reason why NYSTA couldn't add intermediate exits to relieve congestion. I could picture them between 16 and 17 (Cornwall), 23 and 24 (NY 85, direct ramps to Northway/US 20), 31 and 32 (west of Utica, NY 49), 46 and 47 (NY 36), 48A and 49 (Akron/Newstead and central Clarence/Lancaster), and 56 and 57 (US 20/62).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: roadman65 on September 30, 2014, 07:52:07 PM
You might add an exit between 15A and 16 at former Route 210 for Tuxedo and Southfields.  The stretch from Sloatsburg to Harriman could use one being its not ticketed at that point, but managed for over 35 years to stay a typical closed system rural exit set up. 

How about a direct ramp to US 6 Eastbound for West Point, Bear Mountain, and Peekskill?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on September 30, 2014, 10:06:59 PM
There are actually mono tubes by the BNIA: (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fgyazo.com%2Fa5b1ba49ff9b86f83f4064ee95bcdc8b.png&hash=3f39c5c002cd3c2c3fe42c4aca101bb073bbfb5a)
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on September 30, 2014, 11:03:08 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on September 30, 2014, 10:06:59 PM
There are actually mono tubes by the BNIA:
*image*

Difference is that those are on airport property, not technically a public highway even though it is run by a state agency. The difference here is that we're seeing something on a regular road. Not entirely the first in the state, but the first known one (unless someone can say otherwise) on a road maintained by NYSDOT/NYSTA/X County/Y City/etc. That's part of the reason why it's such a big deal. Airport signage is notoriously in violation of the MUTCD (heck, those look like original Thruway signage) and not representative of an area's signage practices. Seeing it on the Thruway is a completely different story that may be an indicator of what is to come.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: amroad17 on October 01, 2014, 05:17:15 AM
Quote from: Jim on September 29, 2014, 07:14:09 AM
If the best point against renumbering to have exit numbers and mile markers that follow the the route numbers (as it done nearly everywhere else) is that it is more confusing to motorists than having the current 3 separate numbering schemes for each of I-87 and I-90, then I see this as a very one-sided argument.  Anyone who's been at the I-87/I-90 interchange in Albany during holidays and other times when the traffic isn't just the regulars who know the roads well has probably seen the confusion that results from the current scheme.

I'd go a step further and argue that an exit renumbering is the right opportunity to do some renumberings in NYC, like having I-87 replace the I-278 designation from the Triboro/JFK to its junction with I-95 or even US 1/9 in NJ.  But that's probably a topic for another thread.
I agree with you about I-87.  It should replace I-278 from its current terminus.  Until I-278 reaches Staten Island, the freeway follows more of a north/south orientation than east/west.  Perfect for a number such as 87.

During my earlier post, I forgot to mention how "free" I-90's exits could be renumbered.  Like with I-87, I really have no preference as to having the exits begin with "1" or "349" as long as they are mile-based.  However, with the first few exits in close proximity, I would number them in sequence (1N-S, 2, 3 or 349N-S, 350, 351) until the mileposts synch up again.  I do not mind lettered suffixes until they start getting to F, G, H, or even I (Chicago? Kansas City? Even Cincinnati with an Exit 1G on I-75?).   IIRC, the first six or seven exits on "free" I-90 are within the first four miles from the Thruway to Albany.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: machias on October 01, 2014, 12:21:31 PM
Quote from: amroad17 on October 01, 2014, 05:17:15 AM


During my earlier post, I forgot to mention how "free" I-90's exits could be renumbered.  Like with I-87, I really have no preference as to having the exits begin with "1" or "349" as long as they are mile-based.  However, with the first few exits in close proximity, I would number them in sequence (1N-S, 2, 3 or 349N-S, 350, 351) until the mileposts synch up again.  I do not mind lettered suffixes until they start getting to F, G, H, or even I (Chicago? Kansas City? Even Cincinnati with an Exit 1G on I-75?).   IIRC, the first six or seven exits on "free" I-90 are within the first four miles from the Thruway to Albany.

One of the things that has made NYSDOT hesitant about renumbering to distance based interchange numbers is the creation of lots of lettered suffixes in the five boroughs and on Long Island. I have always been a proponent of what you just described, for example on I-87 coming out of New York: number the interchanges sequentially until the sequential numbers overtake the mileposts, then convert to distance based. This would work perfectly on the I-87 portion of the Thruway.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on October 01, 2014, 01:21:41 PM
Quote from: cl94 on September 30, 2014, 07:47:01 PM
Spring Valley likely isn't on the list because it has highway-speed E-ZPass. Why eliminate the congestion there (none) when you can get rid of the 4 busiest barrier tolls on the system at places prone to backups? Also more of a cost savings when jobs get eliminated. We're talking millions of dollars that don't have to go toward salaries.

When they do any changes to the ticket system, the precedent is to do it west of Buffalo first, then move it elsewhere because it's easier to implement on a shorter (67 miles vs. 380 miles) section of highway. Could they do it all at once? Certainly. But it would be a more immediate savings if they got rid of as much as possible as early as possible. Since each ticket section has to change at once, it makes more sense to do the short one first.

If/when it does all change to AET, there won't be a reason why NYSTA couldn't add intermediate exits to relieve congestion. I could picture them between 16 and 17 (Cornwall), 23 and 24 (NY 85, direct ramps to Northway/US 20), 31 and 32 (west of Utica, NY 49), 46 and 47 (NY 36), 48A and 49 (Akron/Newstead and central Clarence/Lancaster), and 56 and 57 (US 20/62).
Spring Valley still has manned cash booths though.  Since passenger cars are exempt from that toll, and trucks probably have E-ZPass, that means it's just tourists with boats and RVs.  Why not close the cash booths when the surrounding booths go AET?  Nothing says they can only convert four barriers to AET.  I still want to see how the Harriman to I-87 NB movement is handled with AET.

There have been plans to add interchanges even without AET.  The Thruway has long had proposals for interchanges at NY 88 and Union St (between exits 46 and 47).  I don't know what happened to the NY 88 idea, but the Union St one was defeated by Chili residents (never mind that they would be the primary benefactors and they currently don't have good access to the Thruway; my aunt an uncle have more direct access to the Thruway now, even though they live two and a half hours away, than they ever did in Chili despite being close to it; they were sad to see that proposal die).

There is a proposed interchange near Tuxedo that would have connected to NY 17A and Orange CR 106 (part of the proposed casino), but it was vetoed by the Palisades Interstate Park Commission, which controls CR 106.

Quote from: amroad17 on October 01, 2014, 05:17:15 AM
Quote from: Jim on September 29, 2014, 07:14:09 AM
If the best point against renumbering to have exit numbers and mile markers that follow the the route numbers (as it done nearly everywhere else) is that it is more confusing to motorists than having the current 3 separate numbering schemes for each of I-87 and I-90, then I see this as a very one-sided argument.  Anyone who's been at the I-87/I-90 interchange in Albany during holidays and other times when the traffic isn't just the regulars who know the roads well has probably seen the confusion that results from the current scheme.

I'd go a step further and argue that an exit renumbering is the right opportunity to do some renumberings in NYC, like having I-87 replace the I-278 designation from the Triboro/JFK to its junction with I-95 or even US 1/9 in NJ.  But that's probably a topic for another thread.
I agree with you about I-87.  It should replace I-278 from its current terminus.  Until I-278 reaches Staten Island, the freeway follows more of a north/south orientation than east/west.  Perfect for a number such as 87.

During my earlier post, I forgot to mention how "free" I-90's exits could be renumbered.  Like with I-87, I really have no preference as to having the exits begin with "1" or "349" as long as they are mile-based.  However, with the first few exits in close proximity, I would number them in sequence (1N-S, 2, 3 or 349N-S, 350, 351) until the mileposts synch up again.  I do not mind lettered suffixes until they start getting to F, G, H, or even I (Chicago? Kansas City? Even Cincinnati with an Exit 1G on I-75?).   IIRC, the first six or seven exits on "free" I-90 are within the first four miles from the Thruway to Albany.
If free 90 were converted to distance based using the existing mileage, the numbers would probably be 1A/B, 1C, 2A, 2B, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10... (from 1N/S, 2, 3, 4, 5, 5A, 6, 6A, 7, 8, 9...).  I don't see what the anxiety about a few letters.  We have them now and nobody complains when they're the result of adding an interchange, even though that defeats the purpose of having any system at all beyond "random".
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on October 01, 2014, 02:50:37 PM
That's how I feel about stuff in New York City. There are a zillion letters already and adjacent exits in opposite directions have different numbers. If you combined stuff and renumbered many of those roads, there would be few more suffixes than currently exist. The "A" exits take away the "befefit" of a sequential system, especially when there are a lot of them.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Pete from Boston on October 01, 2014, 04:51:06 PM

Quote from: vdeane on September 29, 2014, 02:01:52 PM
Regarding widening, it would be nice, but not really needed.  Traffic moves fine most of the time, though issues can develop between Buffalo and Syracuse and south of Albany on holiday weekends.

Most people in the area consider I-87 and the Northway to be one and the same... even the Northway stub to US 20 that's only a reference route gets called "I-87".  The Thruway is just "the Thruway", and nobody in the NYC area uses numbers other than roadgeeks.

Usually true, though "287" seems to be spoken much more than the ungainly "Cross Westchester Expressway," and in the parts of the NYC area not in New York, it becomes increasingly less the rule.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on October 01, 2014, 09:43:52 PM
Quote from: Pete from Boston on October 01, 2014, 04:51:06 PM

Quote from: vdeane on September 29, 2014, 02:01:52 PM
Regarding widening, it would be nice, but not really needed.  Traffic moves fine most of the time, though issues can develop between Buffalo and Syracuse and south of Albany on holiday weekends.

Most people in the area consider I-87 and the Northway to be one and the same... even the Northway stub to US 20 that's only a reference route gets called "I-87".  The Thruway is just "the Thruway", and nobody in the NYC area uses numbers other than roadgeeks.

Usually true, though "287" seems to be spoken much more than the ungainly "Cross Westchester Expressway," and in the parts of the NYC area not in New York, it becomes increasingly less the rule.

I'll add I-684, NJ 495, NJ 3, everything else in Jersey save the Turnpike and Garden State, and several of the the NY 1xxs on Long Island. Many know that I-495 is the LIE, NY 27 is Sunrise (Montauk) Highway/Linden Boulevard, etc. even if they aren't referred to as such. NY 24 (the western one) and 25 are a little less known, probably because they tend to be in built-up areas with pretty familiar names and not much signage. Once you get into Westchester, Rockland, and Orange, it's all numbers unless it's a parkway.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Duke87 on October 01, 2014, 11:34:23 PM
Quote from: vdeane on October 01, 2014, 01:21:41 PM
There is a proposed interchange near Tuxedo that would have connected to NY 17A and Orange CR 106 (part of the proposed casino), but it was vetoed by the Palisades Interstate Park Commission, which controls CR 106.

Not to mention that the people in southern Orange county like the fact that their area is somewhat inaccessible from the city and do not want the extra suburban development that a new exit off the Thruway would bring.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: roadman65 on October 02, 2014, 01:36:55 PM
What development?  The area is protected by Harriman State Park.  Having an exit at CR 106 would take some traffic off of NY 17 through Southfields and Tuxedo and lower counts later on in Sloatsburg and Woodbury on the other end.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Pete from Boston on October 02, 2014, 02:36:14 PM

Quote from: roadman65 on October 02, 2014, 01:36:55 PM
What development?  The area is protected by Harriman State Park.  Having an exit at CR 106 would take some traffic off of NY 17 through Southfields and Tuxedo and lower counts later on in Sloatsburg and Woodbury on the other end.

My theory is that the obvious target of this exit wouldn't be Tuxedo, 106 traffic, or even necessarily 17 traffic (which has two good nearby access points to the Thruway), but rather that to/from 17A, which is the most direct route from Greenwood Lake, Florida, Warwick, the whole Black Dirts area, and even places like Vernon, NJ (Action Park!).  The closest area to 17 along 17A (Sterling Forest) is now part of the PIP and thus protected, but I think you'd find pretty immediate pressure to develop whatever isn't. 

I know a lot of people from closer in who moved up that way because it's an affordable area to get a little space and quiet at a reasonable proximity to the city, and I could see why there might be pushback to something that might threaten that.  All just a guess, of course.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on October 02, 2014, 03:45:03 PM
Quote from: cl94 on September 30, 2014, 07:47:01 PM
Spring Valley likely isn't on the list because it has highway-speed E-ZPass. Why eliminate the congestion there (none) when you can get rid of the 4 busiest barrier tolls on the system at places prone to backups? Also more of a cost savings when jobs get eliminated. We're talking millions of dollars that don't have to go toward salaries.

When they do any changes to the ticket system, the precedent is to do it west of Buffalo first, then move it elsewhere because it's easier to implement on a shorter (67 miles vs. 380 miles) section of highway. Could they do it all at once? Certainly. But it would be a more immediate savings if they got rid of as much as possible as early as possible. Since each ticket section has to change at once, it makes more sense to do the short one first.

If/when it does all change to AET, there won't be a reason why NYSTA couldn't add intermediate exits to relieve congestion. I could picture them between 16 and 17 (Cornwall), 23 and 24 (NY 85, direct ramps to Northway/US 20), 31 and 32 (west of Utica, NY 49), 46 and 47 (NY 36), 48A and 49 (Akron/Newstead and central Clarence/Lancaster), and 56 and 57 (US 20/62).

The exit ideas are good. Having driven down US 20 between 56 and 57 my whole life, I know there isn't ample room for toll booths but there certainly is for AET.

In Utica, it is possible that the NY 840 expressway could be extended to the 90 and create an exit there.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: machias on October 02, 2014, 04:05:31 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on October 02, 2014, 03:45:03 PM

In Utica, it is possible that the NY 840 expressway could be extended to the 90 and create an exit there.

I spoke with the Thruway Authority a few years ago about an interchange at CR 840 between Westmoreland and Utica and they were very much against that idea, citing that it would be better to upgrade the roads between 840 and the Westmoreland interchange instead.

An E-ZPass only exit for NY 49 in the Town of Marcy is on the HOCTS (Herkimer Oneida Counties Transportation Study) long range plan, but is currently in the "unfunded" category. Local politicians have been pushing for it a little bit (along with the upgrade of NY 49 to NY 790 and eventually I-790, so it may happen someday.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: roadman65 on October 02, 2014, 04:25:02 PM
Quote from: Pete from Boston on October 02, 2014, 02:36:14 PM

Quote from: roadman65 on October 02, 2014, 01:36:55 PM
What development?  The area is protected by Harriman State Park.  Having an exit at CR 106 would take some traffic off of NY 17 through Southfields and Tuxedo and lower counts later on in Sloatsburg and Woodbury on the other end.

My theory is that the obvious target of this exit wouldn't be Tuxedo, 106 traffic, or even necessarily 17 traffic (which has two good nearby access points to the Thruway), but rather that to/from 17A, which is the most direct route from Greenwood Lake, Florida, Warwick, the whole Black Dirts area, and even places like Vernon, NJ (Action Park!).  The closest area to 17 along 17A (Sterling Forest) is now part of the PIP and thus protected, but I think you'd find pretty immediate pressure to develop whatever isn't. 

I know a lot of people from closer in who moved up that way because it's an affordable area to get a little space and quiet at a reasonable proximity to the city, and I could see why there might be pushback to something that might threaten that.  All just a guess, of course.
Interesting theory you have.  Just like in Delaware you have limited interchanges on DE 1.  No direct connection to DE 6 and DE 300, also that chose to put two interchanges on both sides of town rather than in the middle.  That is to prevent outskirt sprawl and keep the City of Smyrna the way it always was and also to keep the intown businesses alive as an interchange with DE 6 would indeed take that away.

Too bad DelDOT built a partial interchange with DE 8 further south as that may open up a new door for outskirt sprawl for Dover.

Also I-78 in NJ did well by not putting interchanges with CR 519 and Carpentersville Road near Phillipsburg and letting Exit 3 in Greenwhich be Phillipsburg's only interchange.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on October 02, 2014, 05:15:56 PM
Quote from: upstatenyroads on October 02, 2014, 04:05:31 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on October 02, 2014, 03:45:03 PM

In Utica, it is possible that the NY 840 expressway could be extended to the 90 and create an exit there.

I spoke with the Thruway Authority a few years ago about an interchange at CR 840 between Westmoreland and Utica and they were very much against that idea, citing that it would be better to upgrade the roads between 840 and the Westmoreland interchange instead.

An E-ZPass only exit for NY 49 in the Town of Marcy is on the HOCTS (Herkimer Oneida Counties Transportation Study) long range plan, but is currently in the "unfunded" category. Local politicians have been pushing for it a little bit (along with the upgrade of NY 49 to NY 790 and eventually I-790, so it may happen someday.

Man that's too bad. In my opinion it would improve the continuity of the highway, but there are always reasons to everything.

The Utica area and NYSTA do not have large pots of money either.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on October 02, 2014, 08:30:43 PM
Quote from: Pete from Boston on October 02, 2014, 02:36:14 PM

Quote from: roadman65 on October 02, 2014, 01:36:55 PM
What development?  The area is protected by Harriman State Park.  Having an exit at CR 106 would take some traffic off of NY 17 through Southfields and Tuxedo and lower counts later on in Sloatsburg and Woodbury on the other end.

My theory is that the obvious target of this exit wouldn't be Tuxedo, 106 traffic, or even necessarily 17 traffic (which has two good nearby access points to the Thruway), but rather that to/from 17A, which is the most direct route from Greenwood Lake, Florida, Warwick, the whole Black Dirts area, and even places like Vernon, NJ (Action Park!).  The closest area to 17 along 17A (Sterling Forest) is now part of the PIP and thus protected, but I think you'd find pretty immediate pressure to develop whatever isn't. 

I know a lot of people from closer in who moved up that way because it's an affordable area to get a little space and quiet at a reasonable proximity to the city, and I could see why there might be pushback to something that might threaten that.  All just a guess, of course.

The only warrant I can see for an interchange in that location is reducing traffic on the short stretch south of Sloatsburg. I don't think the Renaissance "Faire" that lasts a month and a half is enough to warrant an exit if NY 17 has the capacity to handle the extra traffic. I bet Sloatsburg and Harriman don't want to lose the traffic, either. Due to the terrain, an interchange there certainly wouldn't be cheap - there's a river on one side and a mountain on the other.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Duke87 on October 02, 2014, 08:59:36 PM
Quote from: Pete from Boston on October 02, 2014, 02:36:14 PM

Quote from: roadman65 on October 02, 2014, 01:36:55 PM
What development?  The area is protected by Harriman State Park.  Having an exit at CR 106 would take some traffic off of NY 17 through Southfields and Tuxedo and lower counts later on in Sloatsburg and Woodbury on the other end.

My theory is that the obvious target of this exit wouldn't be Tuxedo, 106 traffic, or even necessarily 17 traffic (which has two good nearby access points to the Thruway), but rather that to/from 17A, which is the most direct route from Greenwood Lake, Florida, Warwick, the whole Black Dirts area, and even places like Vernon, NJ (Action Park!).  The closest area to 17 along 17A (Sterling Forest) is now part of the PIP and thus protected, but I think you'd find pretty immediate pressure to develop whatever isn't. 

I know a lot of people from closer in who moved up that way because it's an affordable area to get a little space and quiet at a reasonable proximity to the city, and I could see why there might be pushback to something that might threaten that.  All just a guess, of course.

Bingo. I know a couple people in Warwick, and the comment has been made by quite a few guests of theirs that there isn't a good direct route to where they live. Their response is that they like it that way and would strongly oppose any attempt to change it.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: NJRoadfan on October 02, 2014, 10:20:34 PM
Warwick, NY and West Milford, NJ are effectively cut off by the Ramapo Mountains. There is no "easy" way to get there outside of Skyline Drive (curvy and slow), cutting through Wanaque on CR-511 (slower), or taking Eagle Valley Rd. and Sloatsburg road from NY-17 (out of the way). NJ-23 is too far south for many of those points as well.

Any interchange in the area would support this not so popular casino project right in the middle of preserved land.

http://www.nj.com/politics/index.ssf/2014/09/ny_casino_proposal_just_over_nj_border_an_environmental_gamble_opponents_say.html
http://www.northjersey.com/news/n-j-senate-asks-new-york-to-reject-sterling-forest-casino-bid-1.1093931
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on October 06, 2014, 04:32:12 PM
Improvements at Williamsville Toll Plaza in Amherst: http://www.thruway.ny.gov/netdata/contractors/documents/d214355_tab14-43_plans-volume-1-of-1.pdf

Adding a new WB toll lane (to be numbered 12X) to reduce backups, creating a 20 mph E-ZPass lane for EB traffic, realigning the EB side to accommodate an extended EB auxillary lane from Exit 50 to the plaza, widening the WB approaches, and installing a constant slope median barrier within the project limits. Until AET comes in and changes everything, this will be a good (and relatively inexpensive) low-cost partial solution to the delays experienced at this barrier. Not the move that area politicians want, but it should have a positive impact.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on October 06, 2014, 05:21:49 PM
I remember when they were going to demolish the barrier and build a new ORT barrier in Pembroke.  Doubt we'll see it with the AET conversions downstate though.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on October 06, 2014, 05:37:49 PM
Quote from: vdeane on October 06, 2014, 05:21:49 PM
I remember when they were going to demolish the barrier and build a new ORT barrier in Pembroke.  Doubt we'll see it with the AET conversions downstate though.

Yeah, that died a couple years back. Not only would it have been very expensive, but the stretch between Clarence and Batavia is all wetlands that would have to be replaced. Wouldn't shock me if the bigwigs looked at the AET projects that have been successfully implemented across North America and figured that the Thruway would change over in the relatively near future (as they're already starting to do).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on October 07, 2014, 02:34:24 AM
Quote from: cl94 on October 06, 2014, 05:37:49 PM
Quote from: vdeane on October 06, 2014, 05:21:49 PM
I remember when they were going to demolish the barrier and build a new ORT barrier in Pembroke.  Doubt we'll see it with the AET conversions downstate though.

Yeah, that died a couple years back. Not only would it have been very expensive, but the stretch between Clarence and Batavia is all wetlands that would have to be replaced. Wouldn't shock me if the bigwigs looked at the AET projects that have been successfully implemented across North America and figured that the Thruway would change over in the relatively near future (as they're already starting to do).

I think the Thruway Authority feels they get a bigger cut if they keep the toll booths where they are, so they leech off of commuters from Exit 49/48.

I feel similar about Exit 57. Many motorists use that exit and pay higher tolls every day than they need too.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on October 07, 2014, 01:38:23 PM
Quote from: cl94 on October 06, 2014, 05:37:49 PM
Quote from: vdeane on October 06, 2014, 05:21:49 PM
I remember when they were going to demolish the barrier and build a new ORT barrier in Pembroke.  Doubt we'll see it with the AET conversions downstate though.

Yeah, that died a couple years back. Not only would it have been very expensive, but the stretch between Clarence and Batavia is all wetlands that would have to be replaced. Wouldn't shock me if the bigwigs looked at the AET projects that have been successfully implemented across North America and figured that the Thruway would change over in the relatively near future (as they're already starting to do).
Someone needs to tell the person who maintains their website (http://www.thruway.ny.gov/projectsandstudies/projects/williamsville/index.html).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on October 23, 2014, 06:48:43 PM
Have you seen the windmills going up on the Thruway? I saw them when I was driving down to Eden Angola. Here's a the article if you want to read it: http://wivb.com/2014/10/23/thruway-authority-taps-blustery-winds/
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Zeffy on November 18, 2014, 10:23:32 AM
I'm sure glad I don't live in New York...

QuoteA state of emergency was declared in the Buffalo suburbs of Orchard Park and West Seneca, and a travel ban was issued in the town of Elma, just east of the city of Buffalo Tuesday morning. A 13-mile section of the New York State Thruway (Interstate 90) was closed from the east side of Buffalo southward. To avoid traffic backups, a 37-mile stretch of the Niagara Thruway (Interstate 190) southbound from Niagara Falls to the Interstate-90 interchange was also shutdown Tuesday morning.

From http://www.weather.com/news/weather-winter/lake-effect-snow-significant-lake-erie-lake-ontario-20141115
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on November 18, 2014, 11:40:39 AM
Thruway closed from Exit 46 to PA line per WGRZ. I-190 closed south of I-290. 4 feet has fallen in places, expect over 6.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Zeffy on November 18, 2014, 11:47:48 AM
Quote from: cl94 on November 18, 2014, 11:40:39 AM
Thruway closed from Exit 46 to PA line per WGRZ. I-190 closed south of I-290. 4 feet has fallen in places, expect over 6.

You live in the Buffalo area, right? I'm sure your commute is absolutely hell right now. Also, it looks like the Aurora Expressway / NY 400 is closed between NY 16 and NY 277. It's pretty crazy looking at the Buffalo area on Google Maps with the traffic reports enabled.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on November 18, 2014, 12:46:26 PM
Quote from: Zeffy on November 18, 2014, 11:47:48 AM
Quote from: cl94 on November 18, 2014, 11:40:39 AM
Thruway closed from Exit 46 to PA line per WGRZ. I-190 closed south of I-290. 4 feet has fallen in places, expect over 6.

You live in the Buffalo area, right? I'm sure your commute is absolutely hell right now. Also, it looks like the Aurora Expressway / NY 400 is closed between NY 16 and NY 277. It's pretty crazy looking at the Buffalo area on Google Maps with the traffic reports enabled.

I'm at UB. We got an inch yesterday and nothing since then. My parents live 15 miles southeast of here, if that. They have close to 5 feet already and it's still falling. They might have 8 feet by the weekend. Where I am right now, I can see the storm a couple of miles in the distance. White wall blocking everything. But that's the nature of lake effect snow.

I posted the list of major closures on the New York page. ALL of NY 400 closed, US 219 closed north of NY 242 in Ellicottville (most of its length north of I-86), NY 5 closed south of downtown, I-290 closed east of Exit 6.

To give you an idea of how close I am, I'm at I-990 Exit 1. Travel is banned entirely south of NY 33. It's sunny here. Cold, but the only clouds in the sky are to the south.

Here's a link showing all road closures in the area: http://www.wgrz.com/story/news/traffic/2014/11/18/travel-bans-and-advisories/19211015/
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on November 18, 2014, 01:01:07 PM
I was looking at the traffic cameras on the 511 site this morning.  It's freaky how some areas are completely clear/dry and others are covered with snow.  The Thruway closure between Rochester and Buffalo looks more like an excuse to not plow than anything else; Rochester-Buffalo looks like it would be fine with some salt/plowing, but 59-61 was really bad even when it was still open early this morning.

Watertown seems to be getting hammered as well, but no cameras there.  In general, the snow decreases the further east you go.  Albany doesn't even have snow on the ground in places that aren't shaded.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: empirestate on November 18, 2014, 01:04:18 PM
Quote from: vdeane on November 18, 2014, 01:01:07 PM
I was looking at the traffic cameras on the 511 site this morning.  It's freaky how some areas are completely clear/dry and others are covered with snow.  The Thruway closure between Rochester and Buffalo looks more like an excuse to not plow than anything else; Rochester-Buffalo looks like it would be fine with some salt/plowing, but 59-61 was really bad even when it was still open early this morning.

Well, that and probably an effort to see that detoured traffic is shunted onto viable alternate routes. No point having all the trucks get off just short of Buffalo and sit around getting snowed on.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on November 18, 2014, 01:34:29 PM
Quote from: empirestate on November 18, 2014, 01:04:18 PM
Quote from: vdeane on November 18, 2014, 01:01:07 PM
I was looking at the traffic cameras on the 511 site this morning.  It's freaky how some areas are completely clear/dry and others are covered with snow.  The Thruway closure between Rochester and Buffalo looks more like an excuse to not plow than anything else; Rochester-Buffalo looks like it would be fine with some salt/plowing, but 59-61 was really bad even when it was still open early this morning.

Well, that and probably an effort to see that detoured traffic is shunted onto viable alternate routes. No point having all the trucks get off just short of Buffalo and sit around getting snowed on.

Snow band has been getting the entire thing west of Rochester intermittently. That and there's a travel ban in every town the Thruway passes through between PA and 47. If the wind shifts slightly, the entire thing could be buried. They're doing everything possible to avoid a repeat of 2010 and the bad PR that came with it.

While it may seem a bit overboard, my parents live in the area getting hit and they're getting 4-5" an hour. Plows can't keep up with that. Heck, they live on US 20 and NYSDOT can't keep up because it's falling too fast and drifting. Might not look like much, but this is a lot, even for Buffalo, especially since some of the places hardest hit are typically clear of lake effect.

As of now, you can't get between Rochester and Erie via I-90 and even if it was open, I wouldn't try. US 20 and NY 5 are effectively closed as well. Hell, I-390 is even getting hit. You have to use I-86 to avoid it.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on November 18, 2014, 01:46:22 PM
Quote from: cl94 on November 18, 2014, 01:34:29 PM
They're doing everything possible to avoid a repeat of 2010 and the bad PR that came with it.
Yeah, the state has been VERY trigger happy with closures.  I remember some times last winter where the entirety of I-84 was closed simply if there was even a chance of snow within the next 24 hours.  It was as if NYSDOT was protesting the fact that the Thruway handed the road back.

Granted, growing up in Rochester and going to college at Clarkson (which never closes, even if they were getting as much snow as Buffalo gets now, or if an ice storm has put every millimeter of pavement under two inches of very slick ice), thereby driving up I-81 every winter, I probably have much more of a tolerance for winter conditions than most.  I remember one trip up to Clarkson where I passed over a dozen multi-car pileups on I-81; no surprise that the road was closed shortly after I drove it.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: empirestate on November 18, 2014, 02:39:05 PM
The weather radars at the moment are showing very classic lake effect snow patterns, streaming off the eastern extremities of Lakes Erie and Ontario. This is why Rochester routinely loses the snowfall derby to either Buffalo or Syracuse, as the latter two cities are located in prime snowfall areas, whereas Rochester is relatively sheltered at the midpoint of Ontario's southern shore. The highest accumulations tend to be pretty much where they're happening now, in Buffalo's Southtowns and the Tug Hill region, just east and slightly south of the ends of the lakes.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on November 18, 2014, 02:57:05 PM
Quote from: vdeane on November 18, 2014, 01:46:22 PM
Quote from: cl94 on November 18, 2014, 01:34:29 PM
They're doing everything possible to avoid a repeat of 2010 and the bad PR that came with it.
Yeah, the state has been VERY trigger happy with closures.  I remember some times last winter where the entirety of I-84 was closed simply if there was even a chance of snow within the next 24 hours.  It was as if NYSDOT was protesting the fact that the Thruway handed the road back.

Granted, growing up in Rochester and going to college at Clarkson (which never closes, even if they were getting as much snow as Buffalo gets now, or if an ice storm has put every millimeter of pavement under two inches of very slick ice), thereby driving up I-81 every winter, I probably have much more of a tolerance for winter conditions than most.  I remember one trip up to Clarkson where I passed over a dozen multi-car pileups on I-81; no surprise that the road was closed shortly after I drove it.

That's how we feel about UB. Might not be snowing here, but half of the staff and commuters can't make it in because the line is a couple miles southeast. We closed last year for half a day, which was huge. Most of the area schools ran out of snow days because it was one of the worst winters on record and UB was determined to keep things running.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: KEVIN_224 on November 18, 2014, 03:34:47 PM
Hmmm...the Buffalo Bills are home Sunday at 1 PM with the New York Jets. Having never been west of Cooperstown, I must ask this question: Does the Thruway get relatively close to Orchard Park or the stadium?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on November 18, 2014, 04:32:02 PM
Quote from: KEVIN_224 on November 18, 2014, 03:34:47 PM
Hmmm...the Buffalo Bills are home Sunday at 1 PM with the New York Jets. Having never been west of Cooperstown, I must ask this question: Does the Thruway get relatively close to Orchard Park or the stadium?

Stadium is between US 219 and the Thruway a couple miles south of their intersection. They probably have at least 4-5 feet right now. They're getting pounded, but they'll have everything clear by Saturday. That's pretty certain. Don't know about the side streets, so the stands might be empty, but I bet it'll be on (at least I hope it is, as I have tickets).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: KEVIN_224 on November 18, 2014, 04:50:14 PM
Thank you for the update! I hope your parents are coping with the conditions as best as they can!  :-(

Despite the loss, I'll bet the Miami Dolphins (my favorite team) are glad that their visit to Orchard Park came in week 2, back in September!  :-o

Getting back to roads...was I-86 in the Southern Tier closed, too?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on November 18, 2014, 05:08:58 PM
I-86 pretty much missed it and it remains open. Two hours ago, the bad area had close to 5'. NWS issued a statement around 2 that said "you will become trapped" if you drive into the snow band.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: WNYroadgeek on November 18, 2014, 05:14:46 PM
To my knowledge, I-86 was never closed. Ditto I-390. Traffic bound for Rochester and points east from Erie were diverted onto I-86.

And on a related note, Google Maps' traffic overlay indicates that the Thruway is still closed between I-390 and the PA line.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: KEVIN_224 on November 18, 2014, 05:17:19 PM
http://www.geofffox.com/MT/archives/2014/11/18/buffalo-and-the-worlds-weirdest-weather.php

Former weather man Geoff Fox posted this entry on his blog today. He lived in Buffalo for about 4 years early on in his radio career, before working at ABC and then FOX television here in Hartford/New Haven.

Sometimes I forget how huge a state New York state is compared to Connecticut. In this state, we "only" have the first 58 miles of I-91 from New Haven to Enfield at the Massachusetts border and almost 98 miles of I-84 from Danbury at the NY border to Union at the MA border. I think I-95 from Greenwich at the NY border to North Stonington at the Rhode Island border is 110 miles, but not sure.

Another fun question now. Maybe it's related. Maybe it's not...do any tolls get waived on the open sections of the Thruway during times like these? (We don't have tolls in Connecticut, with our last one abolished in 1989.)
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: KEVIN_224 on November 18, 2014, 08:59:55 PM
The New York State Police posted this picture to their Facebook page a while ago. WOW!  :-o

It only said it was the Thruway, south of Buffalo.  :wow:

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FgJi2A61.jpg&hash=250e5bd81f97e3d533cfe507c960750e2eb5397e)

Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on November 18, 2014, 09:03:50 PM
Lackawanna toll barrier. They're still getting slammed. It'll likely move a little further north overnight, getting the rest of the Buffalo area, then it'll reset over the area currently getting hit tomorrow night for another 2-3 feet.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: The Nature Boy on November 18, 2014, 10:38:44 PM
Quote from: KEVIN_224 on November 18, 2014, 08:59:55 PM
The New York State Police posted this picture to their Facebook page a while ago. WOW!  :-o

It only said it was the Thruway, south of Buffalo.  :wow:

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FgJi2A61.jpg&hash=250e5bd81f97e3d533cfe507c960750e2eb5397e)

Reports have it getting up to 60 by Monday. Looks like Buffalo will get to experience winter and mud season in the same week.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: MikeSantNY78 on November 19, 2014, 12:48:20 PM
Quote from: KEVIN_224 on November 18, 2014, 08:59:55 PM
The New York State Police posted this picture to their Facebook page a while ago. WOW!  :-o

It only said it was the Thruway, south of Buffalo.  :wow:

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FgJi2A61.jpg&hash=250e5bd81f97e3d533cfe507c960750e2eb5397e)

Yep - right by the Lackawanna toll plaza; that's US 219 passing over the 90 here. 
Never seen such a monumental storm in my life, other than Christmas week 2001 (80 inches in 7 days), and the infamous Blizzard of '77 (not so much the snow, but the wind making visibility scarce at best).  Spent a total of four hours over the last two days plowing this crap, and the snowthrower has to go in for repair (gear trigger stuck).  Hoping we can call and get it picked up...
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: empirestate on November 19, 2014, 01:11:25 PM
And this isn't even one of The Weather Channel's named storms...
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on November 19, 2014, 01:15:10 PM
Quote from: empirestate on November 19, 2014, 01:11:25 PM
And this isn't even one of The Weather Channel's named storms...
Looks like we'll have to make a name.  I propose Elsa.  The one over Watertown can be called Ingrid (go watch Once Upon a Time if you don't get why).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on November 19, 2014, 01:31:26 PM
Quote from: vdeane on November 19, 2014, 01:15:10 PM
Quote from: empirestate on November 19, 2014, 01:11:25 PM
And this isn't even one of The Weather Channel's named storms...
Looks like we'll have to make a name.  I propose Elsa.  The one over Watertown can be called Ingrid (go watch Once Upon a Time if you don't get why).

Already named. "Knife". Pretty dumb name, but I didn't expect much more from politicians.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: WNYroadgeek on November 19, 2014, 02:06:55 PM
Now they're saying the Thruway won't re-open until at least Friday. Wow.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on November 19, 2014, 02:34:50 PM
How can it open if they're going to be getting another 2+ feet? They haven't even cleared what fell yesterday. It's crazy. Yet, UB is still open, even though every road leading here is closed.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: route17fan on November 19, 2014, 04:00:55 PM
Just curious - does the University staff/faculty live on campus or no?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on November 19, 2014, 04:08:21 PM
Quote from: route17fan on November 19, 2014, 04:00:55 PM
Just curious - does the University staff/faculty live on campus or no?

Heck no. A little under 1/4 lives within a couple miles, but many live within the areas most affected. I have professors who live an hour away and commute in. It got to the point where bus service was stopped, half of the food places are closed because they don't have the workers while those that remain open are short-staffed, travel bans are causing eateries in academic buildings to run out of food, and everything involving people from outside the University except the football game was cancelled.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: The Nature Boy on November 19, 2014, 04:36:13 PM
Are there fears of flooding when all of this melts? This seems like it could get bad.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: route17fan on November 19, 2014, 04:39:39 PM
Quote from: MikeSantNY78 on November 19, 2014, 12:48:20 PM
Quote from: KEVIN_224 on November 18, 2014, 08:59:55 PM
The New York State Police posted this picture to their Facebook page a while ago. WOW!  :-o

It only said it was the Thruway, south of Buffalo.  :wow:

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FgJi2A61.jpg&hash=250e5bd81f97e3d533cfe507c960750e2eb5397e)

It makes me glad I am not a bridge pier - can you imagine the weight of 6 feet of snow on a bridge??
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Zeffy on November 19, 2014, 04:42:35 PM
I can safely say that in my 16 years of living in New Jersey, I have never seen that much snow. Boy, what a mess. I can't imagine what traffic will be like with the Thruway still closed (that is, if the snow doesn't make it so people can't even leave their houses).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: TheStranger on November 19, 2014, 04:47:14 PM
A Buffalo News piece on some of the folks who have been stuck on the closed Thruway for over a day:

http://www.buffalonews.com/city-region/stuck-35-hours-on-thruway-he-just-feels-abandoned-20141119
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on November 19, 2014, 04:48:26 PM
Quote from: The Nature Boy on November 19, 2014, 04:36:13 PM
Are there fears of flooding when all of this melts? This seems like it could get bad.

Yes. A little before Christmas last year, there was a large meltdown and much of the area was flooded. Of course, Christmas was very cold, so it all froze over and made Clarence and West Seneca into giant ice rinks. Difference was that we had much less snow then. It's not supposed to be in the 60s anymore, so hopefully, it won't melt as fast as originally expected. I doubt that everything will have a chance to melt, even with 2 days of rain expected, just because it'll get cold overnight and there's too much, so ice will be a big issue.
NYSDOT has brought in a few blowers from the North Country to get stuff clear and there are an additional ~150 plows and ~350 crews.

Quote from: Zeffy on November 19, 2014, 04:42:35 PM
I can safely say that in my 16 years of living in New Jersey, I have never seen that much snow. Boy, what a mess. I can't imagine what traffic will be like with the Thruway still closed (that is, if the snow doesn't make it so people can't even leave their houses).

People in the affected area couldn't leave their houses even if there wasn't a driving ban. It's crazy up here. NYSTA just got to everyone who was stranded and half of the abandoned cars are still on the Thruway. NY 5 and US 20 are closed (idiot truckers were using it during the storm and got stuck, blocking everything up). Only ways into Buffalo are through Ontario or NY 104/18.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Pete from Boston on November 19, 2014, 05:05:35 PM

Quote from: cl94 on November 19, 2014, 01:31:26 PM
Quote from: vdeane on November 19, 2014, 01:15:10 PM
Quote from: empirestate on November 19, 2014, 01:11:25 PM
And this isn't even one of The Weather Channel's named storms...
Looks like we'll have to make a name.  I propose Elsa.  The one over Watertown can be called Ingrid (go watch Once Upon a Time if you don't get why).

Already named. "Knife". Pretty dumb name, but I didn't expect much more from politicians.

Politicians don't name winter storms, The Weather Channel does.

Naming winter storms is asinine. 
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: route17fan on November 19, 2014, 05:10:04 PM


Politicians don't name winter storms, The Weather Channel does.

Naming winter storms is asinine.
[/quote]

Amen!  :clap: I can't stand them for doing that!
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on November 19, 2014, 05:47:25 PM
Quote from: Pete from Boston on November 19, 2014, 05:05:35 PM

Quote from: cl94 on November 19, 2014, 01:31:26 PM
Quote from: vdeane on November 19, 2014, 01:15:10 PM
Quote from: empirestate on November 19, 2014, 01:11:25 PM
And this isn't even one of The Weather Channel's named storms...
Looks like we'll have to make a name.  I propose Elsa.  The one over Watertown can be called Ingrid (go watch Once Upon a Time if you don't get why).

Already named. "Knife". Pretty dumb name, but I didn't expect much more from politicians.

Politicians don't name winter storms, The Weather Channel does.

Naming winter storms is asinine.

Except the politicians did name it. FEMA won't provide assistance unless it's named.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Pete from Boston on November 19, 2014, 06:02:36 PM

Quote from: cl94 on November 19, 2014, 05:47:25 PM
Quote from: Pete from Boston on November 19, 2014, 05:05:35 PM

Quote from: cl94 on November 19, 2014, 01:31:26 PM
Quote from: vdeane on November 19, 2014, 01:15:10 PM
Quote from: empirestate on November 19, 2014, 01:11:25 PM
And this isn't even one of The Weather Channel's named storms...
Looks like we'll have to make a name.  I propose Elsa.  The one over Watertown can be called Ingrid (go watch Once Upon a Time if you don't get why).

Already named. "Knife". Pretty dumb name, but I didn't expect much more from politicians.

Politicians don't name winter storms, The Weather Channel does.

Naming winter storms is asinine.

Except the politicians did name it. FEMA won't provide assistance unless it's named.

I thought FEMA was embarrassed into competence after Katrina. 

Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: roadman on November 19, 2014, 06:10:28 PM
Quote from: cl94 on November 19, 2014, 05:47:25 PM
Except the politicians did name it. FEMA won't provide assistance unless it's named.

Do you have an actual citation for that?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on November 19, 2014, 06:11:07 PM
Quote from: Pete from Boston on November 19, 2014, 06:02:36 PM

Quote from: cl94 on November 19, 2014, 05:47:25 PM
Quote from: Pete from Boston on November 19, 2014, 05:05:35 PM

Quote from: cl94 on November 19, 2014, 01:31:26 PM
Quote from: vdeane on November 19, 2014, 01:15:10 PM
Quote from: empirestate on November 19, 2014, 01:11:25 PM
And this isn't even one of The Weather Channel's named storms...
Looks like we'll have to make a name.  I propose Elsa.  The one over Watertown can be called Ingrid (go watch Once Upon a Time if you don't get why).

Already named. "Knife". Pretty dumb name, but I didn't expect much more from politicians.

Politicians don't name winter storms, The Weather Channel does.

Naming winter storms is asinine.

Except the politicians did name it. FEMA won't provide assistance unless it's named.

I thought FEMA was embarrassed into competence after Katrina.

Lolololol. They hate giving New York money for anything. For all we know, that requirement only exists for us.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Pete from Boston on November 19, 2014, 06:30:27 PM
Quote from: cl94 on November 19, 2014, 05:47:25 PM
Quote from: Pete from Boston on November 19, 2014, 05:05:35 PM
Naming winter storms is asinine.

True.

QuoteExcept the politicians did name it.

True.

QuoteFEMA won't provide assistance unless it's named.

False. (http://buffalonews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?avis=BN&date=20141119&category=CITYANDREGION&lopenr=141118867&Ref=AR&template=mobileArticleXML&profile=1055)

QuoteMeanwhile, Erie County Executive Mark Poloncarz said county leaders are looking at the possibility of applying for federal disaster aid to help dig out. They have named the storm that's killed at least six people "knife"  because it cut "in the heart of Erie County."

Although Poloncarz said the storm needed to be named to qualify for funding from the Federal Emergency Management Agency, officials with that agency say that's not the case.

"FEMA does not require names for winter storms,"  said Susan Buchanan, a spokesperson for the National Weather Service. "They follow the protocol of the National Weather Service, and we do not name winter storms."

The Weather Channel independently often names winter storms, Buchanan said.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Dougtone on November 19, 2014, 06:31:26 PM
Quote from: cl94 on November 18, 2014, 04:32:02 PM
Quote from: KEVIN_224 on November 18, 2014, 03:34:47 PM
Hmmm...the Buffalo Bills are home Sunday at 1 PM with the New York Jets. Having never been west of Cooperstown, I must ask this question: Does the Thruway get relatively close to Orchard Park or the stadium?

Stadium is between US 219 and the Thruway a couple miles south of their intersection. They probably have at least 4-5 feet right now. They're getting pounded, but they'll have everything clear by Saturday. That's pretty certain. Don't know about the side streets, so the stands might be empty, but I bet it'll be on (at least I hope it is, as I have tickets).

Of course, now the Bills are trying to find interested people to shovel snow in time for the game, 500 people to be exact.
http://tinyurl.com/mu27lbt (http://tinyurl.com/mu27lbt)
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on November 19, 2014, 06:46:34 PM
Quote from: Pete from Boston on November 19, 2014, 06:30:27 PM

QuoteFEMA won't provide assistance unless it's named.

False. (http://buffalonews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?avis=BN&date=20141119&category=CITYANDREGION&lopenr=141118867&Ref=AR&template=mobileArticleXML&profile=1055)

QuoteMeanwhile, Erie County Executive Mark Poloncarz said county leaders are looking at the possibility of applying for federal disaster aid to help dig out. They have named the storm that's killed at least six people "knife"  because it cut "in the heart of Erie County."

Although Poloncarz said the storm needed to be named to qualify for funding from the Federal Emergency Management Agency, officials with that agency say that's not the case.

"FEMA does not require names for winter storms,"  said Susan Buchanan, a spokesperson for the National Weather Service. "They follow the protocol of the National Weather Service, and we do not name winter storms."

I was just going by the news conference. Doesn't shock me that he got something wrong.

Quote from: Dougtone on November 19, 2014, 06:31:26 PM
Quote from: cl94 on November 18, 2014, 04:32:02 PM
Quote from: KEVIN_224 on November 18, 2014, 03:34:47 PM
Hmmm...the Buffalo Bills are home Sunday at 1 PM with the New York Jets. Having never been west of Cooperstown, I must ask this question: Does the Thruway get relatively close to Orchard Park or the stadium?

Stadium is between US 219 and the Thruway a couple miles south of their intersection. They probably have at least 4-5 feet right now. They're getting pounded, but they'll have everything clear by Saturday. That's pretty certain. Don't know about the side streets, so the stands might be empty, but I bet it'll be on (at least I hope it is, as I have tickets).

Of course, now the Bills are trying to find interested people to shovel snow in time for the game, 500 people to be exact.
http://tinyurl.com/mu27lbt (http://tinyurl.com/mu27lbt)

500 is a recommended minimum. They won't turn people away. $10 an hour and free tickets to the game. I'd head down, even though I already have tickets, if there weren't widespread driving bans.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: The Nature Boy on November 20, 2014, 09:55:48 AM
Could the game be postponed or would that create other scheduling difficulties?

I feel like the team should have a plan B for if they can't get this cleaned up.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: KEVIN_224 on November 20, 2014, 11:11:13 AM
One place that's out for Sunday is MetLife Stadium, since the Giants host Dallas at 8:30 PM Eastern. AHL and college hockey are already being played this weekend at the Carrier Dome in Syracuse.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Zeffy on November 20, 2014, 11:13:54 AM
Quote from: The Nature Boy on November 20, 2014, 09:55:48 AM
Could the game be postponed or would that create other scheduling difficulties?

I feel like the team should have a plan B for if they can't get this cleaned up.

NY Gov. Cuomo thinks it's impractical to play the game based on the conditions present in the Buffalo area. I mean, can't say he's totally wrong, since more snow is going to fall and many major highways remain closed, but...
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: The Nature Boy on November 20, 2014, 11:40:34 AM
Quote from: Zeffy on November 20, 2014, 11:13:54 AM
Quote from: The Nature Boy on November 20, 2014, 09:55:48 AM
Could the game be postponed or would that create other scheduling difficulties?

I feel like the team should have a plan B for if they can't get this cleaned up.

NY Gov. Cuomo thinks it's impractical to play the game based on the conditions present in the Buffalo area. I mean, can't say he's totally wrong, since more snow is going to fall and many major highways remain closed, but...

What's going on in Toronto on Sunday? That wouldn't be a terrible alternative.

On a more selfish note, I am currently hanging out in Chicago. I was thinking of driving to the Northeast this weekend before heading south. I assume that the NY Thruway is a no-go for travel for at least the next week, right?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on November 20, 2014, 12:53:57 PM
Quote from: The Nature Boy on November 20, 2014, 11:40:34 AM
Quote from: Zeffy on November 20, 2014, 11:13:54 AM
Quote from: The Nature Boy on November 20, 2014, 09:55:48 AM
Could the game be postponed or would that create other scheduling difficulties?

I feel like the team should have a plan B for if they can't get this cleaned up.

NY Gov. Cuomo thinks it's impractical to play the game based on the conditions present in the Buffalo area. I mean, can't say he's totally wrong, since more snow is going to fall and many major highways remain closed, but...

What's going on in Toronto on Sunday? That wouldn't be a terrible alternative.

On a more selfish note, I am currently hanging out in Chicago. I was thinking of driving to the Northeast this weekend before heading south. I assume that the NY Thruway is a no-go for travel for at least the next week, right?

They'd lose home field advantage and even Canadians don't want games up there. The issue isn't that the stadium is full of snow. It's that nobody can leave their house because of 7-10 foot drifts, few streets have been plowed, and there's a driving ban. All of the players are stuck at home. Nobody could get to the game unless they used helicopters and even then they haven't had a chance to practice all week.

Thruway is closed indefinitely and several towns it passes through have indefinite driving bans. You can't go anywhere near Buffalo unless you plan to go through Canada. State of emergency, 8 people have died, and the snow is still falling. My parents have gotten close to 7 feet of actual snowfall as of this morning and they'll likely get another foot. To give you an idea, they might be able to get out on Saturday and even that's a big "if".

At this point, it's all in the NFL's hands. Only they can make a decision regarding whether or not the game will be played. If it can't be played Sunday, it'll be moved a couple days back.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Zeffy on November 20, 2014, 12:57:14 PM
Quote from: The Nature Boy on November 20, 2014, 11:40:34 AM
On a more selfish note, I am currently hanging out in Chicago. I was thinking of driving to the Northeast this weekend before heading south. I assume that the NY Thruway is a no-go for travel for at least the next week, right?

I would think the Thruway should at least partially re-open during the weekend depending on the weather today and tomorrow. That being said, you might want to take I-86 or even utilize I-80 if you are trying to head northeast. Any particular places you are going to visit?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: The Nature Boy on November 20, 2014, 01:10:35 PM
Quote from: Zeffy on November 20, 2014, 12:57:14 PM
Quote from: The Nature Boy on November 20, 2014, 11:40:34 AM
On a more selfish note, I am currently hanging out in Chicago. I was thinking of driving to the Northeast this weekend before heading south. I assume that the NY Thruway is a no-go for travel for at least the next week, right?

I would think the Thruway should at least partially re-open during the weekend depending on the weather today and tomorrow. That being said, you might want to take I-86 or even utilize I-80 if you are trying to head northeast. Any particular places you are going to visit?

Boston so I eventually need to connect to the Mass Pike. I'm considering a couple of routes:

I-90 to I-86 to I-88 to the Thruway in Albany.

Taking I-80 into Pennsylvania to I-81, then jumping onto I-84 and connecting with the Mass Pike in Central MA. 
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on November 20, 2014, 01:37:53 PM
Quote from: cl94 on November 19, 2014, 04:08:21 PM
Quote from: route17fan on November 19, 2014, 04:00:55 PM
Just curious - does the University staff/faculty live on campus or no?

Heck no. A little under 1/4 lives within a couple miles, but many live within the areas most affected. I have professors who live an hour away and commute in. It got to the point where bus service was stopped, half of the food places are closed because they don't have the workers while those that remain open are short-staffed, travel bans are causing eateries in academic buildings to run out of food, and everything involving people from outside the University except the football game was cancelled.
Come to think of it, are there any plans in place to make sure people don't starve?  I'm sure many homes are running out of food if UB is!

Quote from: The Nature Boy on November 20, 2014, 01:10:35 PM
Quote from: Zeffy on November 20, 2014, 12:57:14 PM
Quote from: The Nature Boy on November 20, 2014, 11:40:34 AM
On a more selfish note, I am currently hanging out in Chicago. I was thinking of driving to the Northeast this weekend before heading south. I assume that the NY Thruway is a no-go for travel for at least the next week, right?

I would think the Thruway should at least partially re-open during the weekend depending on the weather today and tomorrow. That being said, you might want to take I-86 or even utilize I-80 if you are trying to head northeast. Any particular places you are going to visit?

Boston so I eventually need to connect to the Mass Pike. I'm considering a couple of routes:

I-90 to I-86 to I-88 to the Thruway in Albany.

Taking I-80 into Pennsylvania to I-81, then jumping onto I-84 and connecting with the Mass Pike in Central MA. 
The Thruway is just fine east of I-390.  The heavy snowfall is pretty concentrated.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: The Nature Boy on November 20, 2014, 02:00:22 PM
Quote from: vdeane on November 20, 2014, 01:37:53 PM
Quote from: cl94 on November 19, 2014, 04:08:21 PM
Quote from: route17fan on November 19, 2014, 04:00:55 PM
Just curious - does the University staff/faculty live on campus or no?

Heck no. A little under 1/4 lives within a couple miles, but many live within the areas most affected. I have professors who live an hour away and commute in. It got to the point where bus service was stopped, half of the food places are closed because they don't have the workers while those that remain open are short-staffed, travel bans are causing eateries in academic buildings to run out of food, and everything involving people from outside the University except the football game was cancelled.
Come to think of it, are there any plans in place to make sure people don't starve?  I'm sure many homes are running out of food if UB is!

Quote from: The Nature Boy on November 20, 2014, 01:10:35 PM
Quote from: Zeffy on November 20, 2014, 12:57:14 PM
Quote from: The Nature Boy on November 20, 2014, 11:40:34 AM
On a more selfish note, I am currently hanging out in Chicago. I was thinking of driving to the Northeast this weekend before heading south. I assume that the NY Thruway is a no-go for travel for at least the next week, right?

I would think the Thruway should at least partially re-open during the weekend depending on the weather today and tomorrow. That being said, you might want to take I-86 or even utilize I-80 if you are trying to head northeast. Any particular places you are going to visit?

Boston so I eventually need to connect to the Mass Pike. I'm considering a couple of routes:

I-90 to I-86 to I-88 to the Thruway in Albany.

Taking I-80 into Pennsylvania to I-81, then jumping onto I-84 and connecting with the Mass Pike in Central MA. 
The Thruway is just fine east of I-390.  The heavy snowfall is pretty concentrated.

Would you recommend just taking the Southern Tier Expressway then?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: 02 Park Ave on November 20, 2014, 02:09:10 PM
The way this is being handled is becoming a black-eye for the NFL.  Here we have a serious emergency situation and all the Bills can do is talk about trying to play a football game in the middle of it!

Regarding Toronto, the CFL Eastern final game is being played in Hamilton on Sunday.  So Toronto may be available but an NFL invasion that day would be bad form.

Cleveland is away but how can the Bills players even get there?

If the game is never played it wouldn't affect the top of the table standings anyway.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: The Nature Boy on November 20, 2014, 02:19:06 PM
The big logistical question here is:

If the NFL decides to move the game, who goes to the game? If the Bills play in Toronto, they still have to sell tickets to someone. And what of the people who already bought tickets?

It's a messy situation all around. The best solution is to postpone the game on Sunday but even that opens up logistical questions.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: ARMOURERERIC on November 20, 2014, 02:20:39 PM
Nittany Stadium?  I think it's bigger.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: thenetwork on November 20, 2014, 02:26:17 PM
I had just heard that there are now plans to postpone the game to Monday Night and to move it to a neutral stadium (Detroit, Pittsburgh and FedEx Field in DC were mentioned).

I wonder if Browns fans would now want to go to Buffalo to shovel snow in the stadium for free tix to next week's Browns/Buffalo game and get some extra $$ for beer, since there probably won't be any home game this week?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on November 20, 2014, 02:26:57 PM
Quote from: vdeane on November 20, 2014, 01:37:53 PM
Quote from: cl94 on November 19, 2014, 04:08:21 PM
Quote from: route17fan on November 19, 2014, 04:00:55 PM
Just curious - does the University staff/faculty live on campus or no?

Heck no. A little under 1/4 lives within a couple miles, but many live within the areas most affected. I have professors who live an hour away and commute in. It got to the point where bus service was stopped, half of the food places are closed because they don't have the workers while those that remain open are short-staffed, travel bans are causing eateries in academic buildings to run out of food, and everything involving people from outside the University except the football game was cancelled.
Come to think of it, are there any plans in place to make sure people don't starve?  I'm sure many homes are running out of food if UB is!

None that I know of. UB actually closed today. Rumor is that Cuomo put pressure on them to do so. My apartment has enough to last me another week, but there's no way to get shipments in. SUNY requires local suppliers and all of them are in areas affected. I've heard that stores in the area are running low even though there's little snow up here (Tops distribution facility is buried under 6+ feet and in a travel ban, while Wegmans can't get stuff here because major roads are closed). Milk, eggs, bread, chips, dip, and beer are in short supply. Main milk facility in the region is in West Seneca under 7 feet. Even though many of us aren't dealing with the snow, we're all dealing with the effects, as most of Buffalo's industry is buried.

Quote from: Zeffy on November 20, 2014, 12:57:14 PM
I would think the Thruway should at least partially re-open during the weekend depending on the weather today and tomorrow.

Might open east of Buffalo, but southwest of here will be shit on until the warmup on Saturday. They still haven't gotten half of the vehicles free, it's still falling hard, and NY 5 and US 20 are blocked by stuck trucks trying to avoid the Thruway. To give you an idea, they haven't even set an end date for the driving bans because most highways aren't clear. My parents are on US 20 east of Buffalo. That barely has 2 lanes cleared. Thruway in Cheektowaga and West Seneca had ~1.5 in each direction this morning, but the snow moved back north.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: The Nature Boy on November 20, 2014, 02:36:42 PM
Isn't there going to be a flooding threat when all of this clears out?

Lake effect snow melts are a mystery to me but that HAS to be a threat.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on November 20, 2014, 02:55:05 PM
Quote from: The Nature Boy on November 20, 2014, 02:36:42 PM
Isn't there going to be a flooding threat when all of this clears out?

Lake effect snow melts are a mystery to me but that HAS to be a threat.

Yeah. 10 inches of snow is an inch of water. 7 feet of snow is 8.4 inches of water. Multiply that by the several hundred acres covered. That all has to drain. I expect water levels to rise by several feet. Much of West Seneca, Clarence, and south Buffalo will be underwater next week.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: The Nature Boy on November 20, 2014, 03:23:33 PM
http://nesn.com/2014/11/report-jets-bills-likely-to-be-played-in-either-detroit-or-pittsburgh/ (http://nesn.com/2014/11/report-jets-bills-likely-to-be-played-in-either-detroit-or-pittsburgh/)

Looks like either Detroit or Pittsburgh are getting the game.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on November 20, 2014, 03:42:37 PM
Quote from: The Nature Boy on November 20, 2014, 03:23:33 PM
http://nesn.com/2014/11/report-jets-bills-likely-to-be-played-in-either-detroit-or-pittsburgh/ (http://nesn.com/2014/11/report-jets-bills-likely-to-be-played-in-either-detroit-or-pittsburgh/)

Looks like either Detroit or Pittsburgh are getting the game.

As I already have tickets, I'm going either way. I'd prefer Detroit as it's easier to get there if the Thruway isn't yet open, but I'd get to either city.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Zeffy on November 20, 2014, 03:56:35 PM
Quote from: cl94 on November 20, 2014, 03:42:37 PM
As I already have tickets, I'm going either way. I'd prefer Detroit as it's easier to get there if the Thruway isn't yet open, but I'd get to either city.

You might be in luck, because according to various tweets, Pittsburgh is out as well.

Quote from: cl94 on November 20, 2014, 02:55:05 PM
Yeah. 10 inches of snow is an inch of water. 7 feet of snow is 8.4 inches of water. Multiply that by the several hundred acres covered. That all has to drain. I expect water levels to rise by several feet. Much of West Seneca, Clarence, and south Buffalo will be underwater next week.

Um, wow. Buffalo is getting it rough this week. I bet several highways will close again (assuming they reopen) once the snow melts and floods the roadways.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on November 20, 2014, 04:23:55 PM
Quote from: Zeffy on November 20, 2014, 03:56:35 PM
Quote from: cl94 on November 20, 2014, 03:42:37 PM
As I already have tickets, I'm going either way. I'd prefer Detroit as it's easier to get there if the Thruway isn't yet open, but I'd get to either city.

You might be in luck, because according to various tweets, Pittsburgh is out as well.

Quote from: cl94 on November 20, 2014, 02:55:05 PM
Yeah. 10 inches of snow is an inch of water. 7 feet of snow is 8.4 inches of water. Multiply that by the several hundred acres covered. That all has to drain. I expect water levels to rise by several feet. Much of West Seneca, Clarence, and south Buffalo will be underwater next week.

Um, wow. Buffalo is getting it rough this week. I bet several highways will close again (assuming they reopen) once the snow melts and floods the roadways.

Most of the major roads are on high ground. What'll be submerged are some of the residential areas. NY 240 and 277 might will see some problems in West Seneca, US 62 might be closed near the Buffalo River, and NY 78 will almost certainly be closed in Depew (those underpasses flood several times a year from rain).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on November 20, 2014, 05:15:23 PM
Quote from: The Nature Boy on November 20, 2014, 02:00:22 PM
Would you recommend just taking the Southern Tier Expressway then?
If you're coming from the west.  Your location says North Carolina, which suggests the Catskills rather than Buffalo.  I-87 is totally fine.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: empirestate on November 20, 2014, 06:41:42 PM
Wow, I'd say we're long overdue for a topic split, but then we always seem to circle around back to the Thruway at the last second.  ;-)

And yes, flooding is now a serious concern, as temps are predicted to rise through the weekend and into next week, with some rain thrown in to boot.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on November 20, 2014, 06:47:05 PM
Quote from: empirestate on November 20, 2014, 06:41:42 PM
Wow, I'd say we're long overdue for a topic split, but then we always seem to circle around back to the Thruway at the last second.  ;-)

I tried to throw everything non-Thruway in the New York thread, but others didn't feel the same
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: The Nature Boy on November 20, 2014, 06:49:14 PM
Quote from: vdeane on November 20, 2014, 05:15:23 PM
Quote from: The Nature Boy on November 20, 2014, 02:00:22 PM
Would you recommend just taking the Southern Tier Expressway then?
If you're coming from the west.  Your location says North Carolina, which suggests the Catskills rather than Buffalo.  I-87 is totally fine.

I'll be coming from the west so I'll need to figure out a way around the road closures/hazardous conditions. I'm in school, I just haven't updated my location.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: empirestate on November 20, 2014, 06:56:36 PM
Quote from: The Nature Boy on November 20, 2014, 06:49:14 PM
Quote from: vdeane on November 20, 2014, 05:15:23 PM
Quote from: The Nature Boy on November 20, 2014, 02:00:22 PM
Would you recommend just taking the Southern Tier Expressway then?
If you're coming from the west.  Your location says North Carolina, which suggests the Catskills rather than Buffalo.  I-87 is totally fine.

I'll be coming from the west so I'll need to figure out a way around the road closures/hazardous conditions. I'm in school, I just haven't updated my location.

You should be fine on the Southern Tier; it is a nicer drive overall than I-80/I-84. You'll pass through snow, but it branches off well southwest of the crippled area.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: The Nature Boy on November 20, 2014, 07:03:51 PM
Quote from: empirestate on November 20, 2014, 06:56:36 PM
Quote from: The Nature Boy on November 20, 2014, 06:49:14 PM
Quote from: vdeane on November 20, 2014, 05:15:23 PM
Quote from: The Nature Boy on November 20, 2014, 02:00:22 PM
Would you recommend just taking the Southern Tier Expressway then?
If you're coming from the west.  Your location says North Carolina, which suggests the Catskills rather than Buffalo.  I-87 is totally fine.

I'll be coming from the west so I'll need to figure out a way around the road closures/hazardous conditions. I'm in school, I just haven't updated my location.

You should be fine on the Southern Tier; it is a nicer drive overall than I-80/I-84. You'll pass through snow, but it branches off well southwest of the crippled area.

Thanks. I've taken that drive before. It's absolutely beautiful (and much more scenic) than the Thruway.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: 02 Park Ave on November 20, 2014, 08:35:07 PM
Are there any plans forthcoming for a more direct connexion between the Thruway and the Mid-Hudson Bridge?

There are already almost direct connexions between the Thruway and both the Kingston-Rhinecliff and Rip Van Winkle Bridges.  I would think that there would be more traffic going over to Poughkeepsie.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on November 20, 2014, 08:56:51 PM
Quote from: 02 Park Ave on November 20, 2014, 08:35:07 PM
Are there any plans forthcoming for a more direct connexion between the Thruway and the Mid-Hudson Bridge?

There are already almost direct connexions between the Thruway and both the Kingston-Rhinecliff and Rip Van Winkle Bridges.  I would think that there would be more traffic going over to Poughkeepsie.

No, but the connection is pretty direct as it is. Most vehicles to Poughkeepsie use the Taconic or US 9. Mid-Hudson Bridge has an AADT just under 40,000 as it is and, due to it being 3 narrow lanes, it can't handle much more traffic. Unless another bridge is built (not anytime soon), there's no reason to entice more people to use the bridge.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: WNYroadgeek on November 20, 2014, 10:07:25 PM
Quote from: cl94 on November 20, 2014, 02:55:05 PM
Quote from: The Nature Boy on November 20, 2014, 02:36:42 PM
Isn't there going to be a flooding threat when all of this clears out?

Lake effect snow melts are a mystery to me but that HAS to be a threat.

Yeah. 10 inches of snow is an inch of water. 7 feet of snow is 8.4 inches of water. Multiply that by the several hundred acres covered. That all has to drain. I expect water levels to rise by several feet. Much of West Seneca, Clarence, and south Buffalo will be underwater next week.

Eh, Clarence shouldn't have any problems. Didn't get nearly as much snow as West Seneca and the rest of the southern suburbs did.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on November 20, 2014, 11:17:47 PM
Quote from: WNYroadgeek on November 20, 2014, 10:07:25 PM
Quote from: cl94 on November 20, 2014, 02:55:05 PM
Quote from: The Nature Boy on November 20, 2014, 02:36:42 PM
Isn't there going to be a flooding threat when all of this clears out?

Lake effect snow melts are a mystery to me but that HAS to be a threat.

Yeah. 10 inches of snow is an inch of water. 7 feet of snow is 8.4 inches of water. Multiply that by the several hundred acres covered. That all has to drain. I expect water levels to rise by several feet. Much of West Seneca, Clarence, and south Buffalo will be underwater next week.

Eh, Clarence shouldn't have any problems. Didn't get nearly as much snow as West Seneca and the rest of the southern suburbs did.

Problem isn't the stuff in Clarence, but Tonawanda Creek. Upstream got hit and it all has to go somewhere. We all know how often that thing floods.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cpzilliacus on November 21, 2014, 12:38:11 AM
N.Y. Times: Agency Cites Improper Loan Approval for New Tappan Zee Bridge (http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/21/nyregion/agency-cites-improper-loan-approval-for-new-tappan-zee-bridge.html)

QuoteNew York State officials proceeded in almost furtive fashion – without sufficiently informing the public or holding enough open meetings – in approving a $511 million loan from federal clean-water funds for the construction of a new Tappan Zee Bridge, an investigation by an independent state budget office reported on Thursday.

QuoteThe federal Environmental Protection Agency ultimately rejected most of the loan request because it was going to be used for basic construction rather than cleaning water or helping the environment. Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo's administration regarded the loan as a crucial source of money for a project shepherded by the New York State Thruway Authority that is expected to cost $3.9 billion.

QuoteBut the report by the State Authorities Budget Office, a watchdog over public authorities and public benefit corporations created in 2009, found that the board of the Environmental Facilities Corporation did not exercise sufficient scrutiny of the loan.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on November 21, 2014, 12:54:28 AM
I've been in Utica and have missed this amazing weather even. Not an inch of snow here. I hope when I go back soon I can witness what I missed. The highest I've seen is 4 ft really, and I've lived in the southtowns forever.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on November 21, 2014, 12:55:49 PM
Thruway reopening at 3 PM, along with I-190, I-290, and US 219. NY 400 remains closed.

Exits 51-60 will be closed until further notice. I assume Exits 53 (I-190) and 55 (SB only, US 219) will be open, but cannot confirm.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on November 21, 2014, 01:00:55 PM
I looked at the traffic cameras on the Thruway earlier today.  Most of it looks pretty clear, so I wonder when they'll open it.  If they were willing to open in sections instead of all at once, it looks like I-390 to NY 33 could be opened now.  It would certainly help people to not starve.

Quote from: cl94 on November 21, 2014, 12:55:49 PM
Exits 51-60 will be closed until further notice. I assume Exits 53 (I-190) and 55 (SB only, US 219) will be open, but cannot confirm.
Seems pretty clear on that stretch.  When I was looking at the cameras, it appeared that more work was needed to clear snow around exit 52, Ripley, and a few random spots on the Erie ticket section.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on November 21, 2014, 01:09:43 PM
Quote from: vdeane on November 21, 2014, 01:00:55 PM
I looked at the traffic cameras on the Thruway earlier today.  Most of it looks pretty clear, so I wonder when they'll open it.  If they were willing to open in sections instead of all at once, it looks like I-390 to NY 33 could be opened now.  It would certainly help people to not starve.

Quote from: cl94 on November 21, 2014, 12:55:49 PM
Exits 51-60 will be closed until further notice. I assume Exits 53 (I-190) and 55 (SB only, US 219) will be open, but cannot confirm.
Seems pretty clear on that stretch.  When I was looking at the cameras, it appeared that more work was needed to clear snow around exit 52, Ripley, and a few random spots on the Erie ticket section.

It's still snowing near the state line, so that's expected. Driving bans being lifted might actually allow Tops and Wegmans to restock their stores. It's pretty tense over here. I know on campus, one of the dining halls has little more than cereal because they couldn't restock and all 810 people in that complex had to stay in the building for 3 meals/day.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Jim on November 21, 2014, 01:55:29 PM
The way I heard the governor's statement, the Thruway from 51 to 61 will be open for through traffic and the onramps will be open, but no one will be allowed to exit in that stretch.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: roadman on November 21, 2014, 02:11:21 PM
Quote from: Jim on November 21, 2014, 01:55:29 PM
The way I heard the governor's statement, the Thruway from 51 to 61 will be open for through traffic and the onramps will be open, but no one will be allowed to exit in that stretch.
Correct.  From the Thruway web page:

QuoteNEW YORK STATE THRUWAY (I-90) TO REOPEN AT 3 PM FRIDAY - The New York State Thruway Authority has announced that the New York Thruway (I-90) in western New York from exits 46 - 61 including all service areas will reopen at 3 p.m. today.


The following restrictions will apply:
-Thruway (I-90) between exit 50A (Cleveland Drive) and exit 61 (Ripley — Pennsylvania state line) will be limited to essential travel only, including travel needed to exit the region, deliver necessary supplies, and remove snow. In this section, motorists will be allowed to enter the Thruway but will not be able to exit, with the exception of exit 53 (I-190), exit 54 (State Route 400) and exit 55 (US Route 219).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on November 21, 2014, 05:28:19 PM
Thruway is open. East of I-290 is as usual. West of there, only exits 51, 53, 54, and 55 are open. One can get on at every entrance, but all other exits are restricted to commercial and emergency vehicles. I-190 is open, but exits 1-5 remain closed, as they are in the snowed-on area. US 219 is open. Traffic is high, recommended that non-essential traffic remain away.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: WNYroadgeek on November 21, 2014, 05:55:44 PM
NYSTA has now fully opened all exits EXCEPT 56 (NY 179/Blasdell/Orchard Park), 57 (NY 75/Hamburg), 57A (Eden/Angola), and 58 (NY 5/US 20/Silver Creek/Irving) offramps due to local travel bans: https://twitter.com/NYSThruway8790/status/535918679364730881
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Dougtone on November 22, 2014, 06:04:07 AM
Tandem truck restrictions now lifted between Exits 46-61 as well.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Dougtone on November 22, 2014, 11:24:35 AM
Now showing that Thruway Exit 58 has been reopened.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: MikeSantNY78 on November 22, 2014, 11:33:29 AM
Quote from: cl94 on November 20, 2014, 04:23:55 PM
Quote from: Zeffy on November 20, 2014, 03:56:35 PM
Quote from: cl94 on November 20, 2014, 03:42:37 PM
As I already have tickets, I'm going either way. I'd prefer Detroit as it's easier to get there if the Thruway isn't yet open, but I'd get to either city.

You might be in luck, because according to various tweets, Pittsburgh is out as well.

Quote from: cl94 on November 20, 2014, 02:55:05 PM
Yeah. 10 inches of snow is an inch of water. 7 feet of snow is 8.4 inches of water. Multiply that by the several hundred acres covered. That all has to drain. I expect water levels to rise by several feet. Much of West Seneca, Clarence, and south Buffalo will be underwater next week.

Um, wow. Buffalo is getting it rough this week. I bet several highways will close again (assuming they reopen) once the snow melts and floods the roadways.

Most of the major roads are on high ground. What'll be submerged are some of the residential areas. NY 240 and 277 might will see some problems in West Seneca, US 62 might be closed near the Buffalo River, and NY 78 will almost certainly be closed in Depew (those underpasses flood several times a year from rain).
Living near there, I can tell you that the 78 stretch between Walden and Gould/Terrace (w/all those railroad trestles) can play havoc with traffic. Maybe if the floods do enough damage, it'll be the impetus to widen that piece of road, put up new train structures, and fix it up right...
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on November 22, 2014, 01:56:34 PM
Quote from: MikeSantNY78 on November 22, 2014, 11:33:29 AM
Quote from: cl94 on November 20, 2014, 04:23:55 PM
Quote from: Zeffy on November 20, 2014, 03:56:35 PM
Quote from: cl94 on November 20, 2014, 03:42:37 PM
As I already have tickets, I'm going either way. I'd prefer Detroit as it's easier to get there if the Thruway isn't yet open, but I'd get to either city.

You might be in luck, because according to various tweets, Pittsburgh is out as well.

Quote from: cl94 on November 20, 2014, 02:55:05 PM
Yeah. 10 inches of snow is an inch of water. 7 feet of snow is 8.4 inches of water. Multiply that by the several hundred acres covered. That all has to drain. I expect water levels to rise by several feet. Much of West Seneca, Clarence, and south Buffalo will be underwater next week.

Um, wow. Buffalo is getting it rough this week. I bet several highways will close again (assuming they reopen) once the snow melts and floods the roadways.

Most of the major roads are on high ground. What'll be submerged are some of the residential areas. NY 240 and 277 might will see some problems in West Seneca, US 62 might be closed near the Buffalo River, and NY 78 will almost certainly be closed in Depew (those underpasses flood several times a year from rain).
Living near there, I can tell you that the 78 stretch between Walden and Gould/Terrace (w/all those railroad trestles) can play havoc with traffic. Maybe if the floods do enough damage, it'll be the impetus to widen that piece of road, put up new train structures, and fix it up right...

I saw somewhere that there are plans to reconstruct the area, but I don't remember where. Issue is that people don't know how to drive without shoulders. Still 10 ft lanes.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: WNYroadgeek on November 22, 2014, 04:05:17 PM
All exits on I-90 EXCEPT 57A are now fully reopened (the travel bans for areas around exits 56, 57, and 58 have been lifted). I-190 exits 1-5 also remain closed.

EDIT: Exit 57A is now fully reopened.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: machias on November 30, 2014, 12:41:56 AM
I just noticed that the westbound sign for Exit 32 (Westmoreland) at the exit ramp is now externally lit with a bright ground mounted lamp that is solar powered. The solar panel is quite large. This is the first time I've ever seen the Thruway Authority do this; has anyone noticed any other signs lit in this manner?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on November 30, 2014, 01:26:24 AM
Quote from: upstatenyroads on November 30, 2014, 12:41:56 AM
I just noticed that the westbound sign for Exit 32 (Westmoreland) at the exit ramp is now externally lit with a bright ground mounted lamp that is solar powered. The solar panel is quite large. This is the first time I've ever seen the Thruway Authority do this; has anyone noticed any other signs lit in this manner?

Nope, but Exits 48 and 48A got above-gore sign lighting recently. Don't think they're solar.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: empirestate on November 30, 2014, 06:44:05 PM
On my trip home yesterday, I was surprised to find that construction is nearing completion on an access area for the Port Byron Erie Canal locks that have always been visible from the eastbound Thruway. Now, there will be a direct-access parking area from the eastbound side, and it's pretty well along. There are a few signs peeking out from behind their covers for this new "Port Byron Old Erie Canal Heritage Park".
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on November 30, 2014, 08:11:04 PM
Quote from: empirestate on November 30, 2014, 06:44:05 PM
On my trip home yesterday, I was surprised to find that construction is nearing completion on an access area for the Port Byron Erie Canal locks that have always been visible from the eastbound Thruway. Now, there will be a direct-access parking area from the eastbound side, and it's pretty well along. There are a few signs peeking out from behind their covers for this new "Port Byron Old Erie Canal Heritage Park".

Will this one be a rest area (with restrooms) like the one being built further east?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: empirestate on November 30, 2014, 09:38:08 PM
Quote from: cl94 on November 30, 2014, 08:11:04 PM
Quote from: empirestate on November 30, 2014, 06:44:05 PM
On my trip home yesterday, I was surprised to find that construction is nearing completion on an access area for the Port Byron Erie Canal locks that have always been visible from the eastbound Thruway. Now, there will be a direct-access parking area from the eastbound side, and it's pretty well along. There are a few signs peeking out from behind their covers for this new "Port Byron Old Erie Canal Heritage Park".

Will this one be a rest area (with restrooms) like the one being built further east?

Not in the parking area, I don't think. But future phases call for the refurbishment of historic canal buildings at the site, which I assume would have facilities.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Roadgeek Adam on December 01, 2014, 11:40:35 PM
Quote from: empirestate on November 30, 2014, 09:38:08 PM
Quote from: cl94 on November 30, 2014, 08:11:04 PM
Quote from: empirestate on November 30, 2014, 06:44:05 PM
On my trip home yesterday, I was surprised to find that construction is nearing completion on an access area for the Port Byron Erie Canal locks that have always been visible from the eastbound Thruway. Now, there will be a direct-access parking area from the eastbound side, and it's pretty well along. There are a few signs peeking out from behind their covers for this new "Port Byron Old Erie Canal Heritage Park".

Will this one be a rest area (with restrooms) like the one being built further east?

Not in the parking area, I don't think. But future phases call for the refurbishment of historic canal buildings at the site, which I assume would have facilities.

A firm I know is working on this project (the inside) and does has restrooms under a proposal.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: empirestate on December 01, 2014, 11:49:13 PM
Quote from: Roadgeek Adam on December 01, 2014, 11:40:35 PM
Quote from: empirestate on November 30, 2014, 09:38:08 PM
Quote from: cl94 on November 30, 2014, 08:11:04 PM
Quote from: empirestate on November 30, 2014, 06:44:05 PM
On my trip home yesterday, I was surprised to find that construction is nearing completion on an access area for the Port Byron Erie Canal locks that have always been visible from the eastbound Thruway. Now, there will be a direct-access parking area from the eastbound side, and it's pretty well along. There are a few signs peeking out from behind their covers for this new "Port Byron Old Erie Canal Heritage Park".

Will this one be a rest area (with restrooms) like the one being built further east?

Not in the parking area, I don't think. But future phases call for the refurbishment of historic canal buildings at the site, which I assume would have facilities.

My father's firm is working on this project and does has restrooms under a proposal.

Your father's firm does has restrooms? ;-)

Seriously though, I didn't notice any structures at the site, but I didn't get the closest look. Do you mean that there are restrooms at the site, or just that there's a proposal for them?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Roadgeek Adam on December 02, 2014, 12:32:00 AM
Proposal.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: empirestate on December 02, 2014, 11:01:49 AM
Quote from: Roadgeek Adam on December 02, 2014, 12:32:00 AM
Proposal.

Got it; that must be part of the proposed future visitors' center:
http://www.thruway.ny.gov/news/pressrel/2014/05/2014-05-28-erie-canal-hertiage-park.html (http://www.thruway.ny.gov/news/pressrel/2014/05/2014-05-28-erie-canal-hertiage-park.html)
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: 02 Park Ave on December 05, 2014, 09:47:43 AM
Is E-85 available at any service area on the Thruway?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on December 05, 2014, 11:41:11 AM
Quote from: 02 Park Ave on December 05, 2014, 09:47:43 AM
Is E-85 available at any service area on the Thruway?

Sloatsburg, New Baltimore (NB only), and Clarence, per the gas price list (http://www.thruway.ny.gov/travelers/travelplazas/gasprices/index.html).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on December 19, 2014, 10:05:47 PM
What's going on with the Thruway budget? Buffalo media outlets keep bombarding the public with the story.

And this Canal business, why would that be funded through the NYSTA? Barges still travel down it? I'm pretty sure right now the TA could use that extra $100M...
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on December 19, 2014, 10:36:13 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on December 19, 2014, 10:05:47 PM
What's going on with the Thruway budget? Buffalo media outlets keep bombarding the public with the story.

And this Canal business, why would that be funded through the NYSTA? Barges still travel down it? I'm pretty sure right now the TA
could use that extra $100M...

From my own analysis and non-Buffalo media, the issue is that nothing was said about the growing deficit or how the bridge would be paid for. $36 million unaccounted for and nothing about how it will be funded. Of course, the trucking lobby is against higher truck tolls (which really should be raised, as trucks cause the vast majority of wear on highways), so the state is pressuring NYSTA to keep tolls down.

As for the Buffalo media's piss-poor coverage, the short answer is that people in Buffalo don't understand that Thruway tolls pay for the entire system, not just the stuff around Buffalo. They expected (and were ready to whine about) a toll increase to pay for Tappan Zee, not understanding that everyone else will foot the bill when I-90 and the Grand Island Bridges get rebuilt (both of which are on the long-term plans).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on December 19, 2014, 10:47:13 PM

Quote from: cl94 on December 19, 2014, 10:36:13 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on December 19, 2014, 10:05:47 PM
What's going on with the Thruway budget? Buffalo media outlets keep bombarding the public with the story.

And this Canal business, why would that be funded through the NYSTA? Barges still travel down it? I'm pretty sure right now the TA
could use that extra $100M...

From my own analysis and non-Buffalo media, the issue is that nothing was said about the growing deficit or how the bridge would be paid for. $36 million unaccounted for and nothing about how it will be funded. Of course, the trucking lobby is against higher truck tolls (which really should be raised, as trucks cause the vast majority of wear on highways), so the state is pressuring NYSTA to keep tolls down.

As for the Buffalo media's piss-poor coverage, the short answer is that people in Buffalo don't understand that Thruway tolls pay for the entire system, not just the stuff around Buffalo. They expected (and were ready to whine about) a toll increase to pay for Tappan Zee, not understanding that everyone else will foot the bill when I-90 and the Grand Island Bridges get rebuilt (both of which are on the long-term plans).

Yes, it's a shame there can't be better accounting involved with this. I think something similar happened with the NFTA and even the Canalside business, yikes!

It's also a shame people don't realize we are a populous state that can pay for this type of stuff, and yes when the projects you mentioned are put on the table I can't think people downstate will complain about rolls and I don't know why. I'm inclined to say because of population, but I think things are just handled better down there.


iPhone
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on December 20, 2014, 09:18:19 AM
Probably because people downstate are used to high tolls.  The Thruway has been the cheapest northeast toll road for a long time now, so you could say we're spoiled compared to downstate and other states.  It's also worth noting that people downstate would think of the Thruway as the entire system, while update the name "Thruway" is synonymous with the ticket system.  Statements such as "the Thruway ends at exit 50 and then you pick up I-90" do occur.  Also, the impression of tolls was not that they would be used to maintain the road, but that they would only be used to pay off the bonds for its initial construction; early Thruway segments were actually constructed by NYSDOT and it was supposed to be a free road until Dewey decided that would take too long to build.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Pete from Boston on December 20, 2014, 04:21:24 PM
People upstate think of 87 south of Harriman as not the Thruway?  How odd that anyone thinks about it at all. 
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on December 20, 2014, 04:45:08 PM
Quote from: Pete from Boston on December 20, 2014, 04:21:24 PM
People upstate think of 87 south of Harriman as not the Thruway?  How odd that anyone thinks about it at all.

Depends on where you are upstate. A lot of people in Buffalo think that I-90 is the Thruway across the country. Not uncommon to hear "take the Thruway to Boston/Erie/Cleveland/Chicago/Seattle" or some variant (and yes, I've heard all of those). These people don't associate the Thruway with anything else, including any part of I-87. Others further east think of it as the ticket system Similarly, some downstate think that it ends in Buffalo (which, unlike the previous case, was true at one point in the 50s) and continues as I-90 alone, while others are so familiar with the several tolled roads of the Thruway system that every toll road in the state is the Thruway (correct, if you're not including bridges/tunnels).

I agree that upstate is spoiled by cheap tolls. Grand Island bridges are $1 (people complained like the world was ending when they got that high) and the Harriman-Ripley segment costs only $21.50 cash, a mere 4.63 cents per mile for 464.7 miles. Compare that to the Pennsylvania Turnpike, where the longest distance (Ohio-Clarks Summit) costs $51.95 (~20 miles shorter for approximately 11.7 cents/mile) and the mainline is $43.90 for 356.68 miles at 12.3 cents/mile. Yeah, there are alternates to the Thruway, but they could probably charge 50-75% more and still see increased revenue because the truckers and long-distance travelers would still use the road.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Pete from Boston on December 20, 2014, 06:13:51 PM
$43.90 would cause my E-ZPass to melt. 
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on December 20, 2014, 07:14:08 PM
E-ZPass is only $31.38 for the mainline, but it's still a lot compared to New York
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: hbelkins on December 20, 2014, 09:26:51 PM
Quote from: cl94 on December 20, 2014, 04:45:08 PM
I agree that upstate is spoiled by cheap tolls. Grand Island bridges are $1 (people complained like the world was ending when they got that high) and the Harriman-Ripley segment costs only $21.50 cash, a mere 4.63 cents per mile for 464.7 miles. Compare that to the Pennsylvania Turnpike, where the longest distance (Ohio-Clarks Summit) costs $51.95 (~20 miles shorter for approximately 11.7 cents/mile) and the mainline is $43.90 for 356.68 miles at 12.3 cents/mile. Yeah, there are alternates to the Thruway, but they could probably charge 50-75% more and still see increased revenue because the truckers and long-distance travelers would still use the road.

Even with the full interstate not finished yet, I-86/NY 17 is a much better alternative. And who is going to use the PA Turnpike system from the Ohio state line to Clarks Summit, unless you're trying to clinch roads?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on December 20, 2014, 09:45:46 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on December 20, 2014, 09:26:51 PM
Quote from: cl94 on December 20, 2014, 04:45:08 PM
I agree that upstate is spoiled by cheap tolls. Grand Island bridges are $1 (people complained like the world was ending when they got that high) and the Harriman-Ripley segment costs only $21.50 cash, a mere 4.63 cents per mile for 464.7 miles. Compare that to the Pennsylvania Turnpike, where the longest distance (Ohio-Clarks Summit) costs $51.95 (~20 miles shorter for approximately 11.7 cents/mile) and the mainline is $43.90 for 356.68 miles at 12.3 cents/mile. Yeah, there are alternates to the Thruway, but they could probably charge 50-75% more and still see increased revenue because the truckers and long-distance travelers would still use the road.

Even with the full interstate not finished yet, I-86/NY 17 is a much better alternative. And who is going to use the PA Turnpike system from the Ohio state line to Clarks Summit, unless you're trying to clinch roads?

Nobody would. Just as how nobody would use the entire length of the Thruway. Just makes calculations a little more reliable.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on December 21, 2014, 08:34:48 PM
Basically, nobody travels the entire Thruway, so people upstate only really know the mainline ticket system.  I didn't know that barrier tolls even existed outside of bridges until I started looking at roadgeek websites.  If you're from Buffalo and Rochester heading to downstate, you take 17.  Actually, that's not true - you probably take Amtrak, because NYC and its suburbs are, in your mind, nothing but 24/7/365 gridlocked carmageddon.  Most Thruway travelers take small sections.  When I was little, I'd see 45-44 most often, 45-36 came in second, 47-50 was once in a blue moon.  I've been on the Erie section exactly once - a clinching trip that I still don't know how I got my parents to agree to.  East of I-81 was rare.  Before I started attending non-NY roadmeets in 2011, the only times I saw it were a family trip to Boston (B3), a school field trip to Cape Cod (ditto), and a school trip to West Point (17).  Now that I've moved to Albany, I see a lot more of the Thruway than I ever did before, with 24-43/45 being a relatively frequent drive.

I had a much longer post that covered different points, but Chrome ate it when I bumped the network cable.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: machias on December 21, 2014, 09:14:57 PM
Quote from: vdeane on December 21, 2014, 08:34:48 PM
Basically, nobody travels the entire Thruway, so people upstate only really know the mainline ticket system.  I didn't know that barrier tolls even existed outside of bridges until I started looking at roadgeek websites.  If you're from Buffalo and Rochester heading to downstate, you take 17.  Actually, that's not true - you probably take Amtrak, because NYC and its suburbs are, in your mind, nothing but 24/7/365 gridlocked carmageddon.  Most Thruway travelers take small sections.  When I was little, I'd see 45-44 most often, 45-36 came in second, 47-50 was once in a blue moon.  I've been on the Erie section exactly once - a clinching trip that I still don't know how I got my parents to agree to.  East of I-81 was rare.  Before I started attending non-NY roadmeets in 2011, the only times I saw it were a family trip to Boston (B3), a school field trip to Cape Cod (ditto), and a school trip to West Point (17).  Now that I've moved to Albany, I see a lot more of the Thruway than I ever did before, with 24-43/45 being a relatively frequent drive.

I had a much longer post that covered different points, but Chrome ate it when I bumped the network cable.

When I was a young lad and at college at SUNY Fredonia back in the mid 80s, several fellow students in my dorm were from Long Island and remarked on how long the Thruway was. I asked them why in the world they were traveling the length of the Thruway to get from Long Island to Fredonia (Thruway exit 59) and they basically didn't know. I guided several of them to Jamestown and then over NY 17 and they were quite thankful.

While I agree with Valerie that upstate folks tend not to drive the entire length of the Thruway, I have a hunch that, at least based on my experience, that downstate folks don't know anything but the Thruway for getting upstate. Back when NYS license plates identified the county of origin, it was easier to see who was driving long distances on the Thruway.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: ARMOURERERIC on December 22, 2014, 12:04:15 AM
I dated someone from SUNY Fredonia they went there 1977-81
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on December 22, 2014, 12:10:13 AM
Eh, everyone I know from downstate at UB takes NY 17 or I-80. Now that everyone has GPS, the peoole with GPS use 80 (as that's how they get routed) instead of following the Thruway and those in the know take NY 17 (as they did before GPS). Before technology, the Thruway was the easiest way, but everyone just trust their phone or other device to route them the fastest way.

I will note that women traveling alone are much more likely to take the Thruway as it is better patrolled, while no man I know will waste the money on tolls.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: mtantillo on December 22, 2014, 03:25:51 PM
I-80 to I-380 to I-81 is typically faster than Thruway to NY 17, but many people choose Thruway to NY 17 just because it seems odd to drive from NYC to Upstate NY via such long distances in other states.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on December 22, 2014, 03:30:29 PM
Quote from: mtantillo on December 22, 2014, 03:25:51 PM
I-80 to I-380 to I-81 is typically faster than Thruway to NY 17, but many people choose Thruway to NY 17 just because it seems odd to drive from NYC to Upstate NY via such long distances in other states.

With the traffic on I-80, it's usually no slower to take NY 17. Heck, the toll money you'd save by taking Tappan Zee or Bear Mountain would make up for any extra gas you'd use.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: hbelkins on December 22, 2014, 09:42:37 PM
Quote from: mtantillo on December 22, 2014, 03:25:51 PM
I-80 to I-380 to I-81 is typically faster than Thruway to NY 17, but many people choose Thruway to NY 17 just because it seems odd to drive from NYC to Upstate NY via such long distances in other states.

I think I've mentioned this before, but my colleague from the two western Kentucky highway districts (Paducah and Madisonville) lives near Marion, Ky. If he's going to Frankfort, it's shorter for him to take I-64, I-164 I-69, US 41 and US 60 than it is to take the Western Kentucky Parkway. That, of course, involves a trip through southern Indiana. That route may be shorter, but it's not always faster because if he hits Louisville traffic, that can slow him down considerably.

He gets some funny looks from the bean counters if he goes through Indiana. They cannot comprehend that it might possibly shorter to get from one Kentucky point to another by going out of the state.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cpzilliacus on January 04, 2015, 11:55:36 PM
New York Post: Thruway Authority executives forced out amid agency investigation (http://nypost.com/2015/01/01/thruway-authority-executives-forced-out-amid-agency-investigation/)

QuoteTwo top executives at the New York State Thruway Authority submitted their resignations Wednesday – ahead of a scathing investigative report on the agency's operations, sources said.

QuoteExecutive Director Tom Madison and his chief of staff, John Bryan, have been forced out, sources told The Post.

QuoteThe report by state Inspector General Catherine Leavy Scott is said to be damaging.

QuoteGov. Andrew Cuomo appointed Madison, a former state transportation commissioner, as the authority's executive director in August 2011.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: The Nature Boy on January 05, 2015, 12:16:37 AM
I somehow have managed to clinch the New York Thruway through a series of trips.

I clinched the I-90 portion (and obviously the Berkshire Extension) in my various trips from the Midwest to Boston

I clinched the I-87 portion driving from New York City to Vermont via Albany.

I clinched the Niagara Thruway (is that correct?) when I crossed into Niagara Falls, ON in route to Detroit from Boston.

I clinched the New England Thruway along I-95 from traveling from NC to Boston.

I used to hate damn Thruway but I've grown to have a weird love of it.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on January 05, 2015, 12:19:43 AM
Quote from: The Nature Boy on January 05, 2015, 12:16:37 AM
I somehow have managed to clinch the New York Thruway through a series of trips.

I clinched the I-90 portion (and obviously the Berkshire Extension) in my various trips from the Midwest to Boston

I clinched the I-87 portion driving from New York City to Vermont via Albany.

I clinched the Niagara Thruway (is that correct?) when I crossed into Niagara Falls, ON in route to Detroit from Boston.

I clinched the New England Thruway along I-95 from traveling from NC to Boston.

I used to hate damn Thruway but I've grown to have a weird love of it.

Did you get I-287? It's effectively become a toll-free section of the Thruway that's going nowhere anytime soon.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on January 05, 2015, 12:36:47 AM
Quote from: The Nature Boy on January 05, 2015, 12:16:37 AM
I somehow have managed to clinch the New York Thruway through a series of trips.

I clinched the I-90 portion (and obviously the Berkshire Extension) in my various trips from the Midwest to Boston

I clinched the I-87 portion driving from New York City to Vermont via Albany.

I clinched the Niagara Thruway (is that correct?) when I crossed into Niagara Falls, ON in route to Detroit from Boston.

I clinched the New England Thruway along I-95 from traveling from NC to Boston.

I used to hate damn Thruway but I've grown to have a weird love of it.

I clinched I-87 when my parents didn't know about I-86 or I-86 about 10-15 years ago.

Then we've traveled on the Erie portion many times going to down south via Erie, Cleveland or Chicago. Would be much easier to head south of the 219 could be expedited, hence my avatar.

The rest of the 90 I've clinched going to W. Ma.

Then I've been on the Niagara Thriway countless times. What's your opinions on the toll removal that happened about a decade ago to them?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: empirestate on January 05, 2015, 01:29:09 AM
Quote from: cl94 on January 05, 2015, 12:19:43 AM
Quote from: The Nature Boy on January 05, 2015, 12:16:37 AM
I somehow have managed to clinch the New York Thruway through a series of trips.

I clinched the I-90 portion (and obviously the Berkshire Extension) in my various trips from the Midwest to Boston

I clinched the I-87 portion driving from New York City to Vermont via Albany.

I clinched the Niagara Thruway (is that correct?) when I crossed into Niagara Falls, ON in route to Detroit from Boston.

I clinched the New England Thruway along I-95 from traveling from NC to Boston.

I used to hate damn Thruway but I've grown to have a weird love of it.

Did you get I-287? It's effectively become a toll-free section of the Thruway that's going nowhere anytime soon.

And don't forget the Garden State Parkway connection!
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: The Nature Boy on January 05, 2015, 06:09:02 AM
Quote from: Buffaboy on January 05, 2015, 12:36:47 AM
Quote from: The Nature Boy on January 05, 2015, 12:16:37 AM
I somehow have managed to clinch the New York Thruway through a series of trips.

I clinched the I-90 portion (and obviously the Berkshire Extension) in my various trips from the Midwest to Boston

I clinched the I-87 portion driving from New York City to Vermont via Albany.

I clinched the Niagara Thruway (is that correct?) when I crossed into Niagara Falls, ON in route to Detroit from Boston.

I clinched the New England Thruway along I-95 from traveling from NC to Boston.

I used to hate damn Thruway but I've grown to have a weird love of it.

I clinched I-87 when my parents didn't know about I-86 or I-86 about 10-15 years ago.

Then we've traveled on the Erie portion many times going to down south via Erie, Cleveland or Chicago. Would be much easier to head south of the 219 could be expedited, hence my avatar.

The rest of the 90 I've clinched going to W. Ma.

Then I've been on the Niagara Thriway countless times. What's your opinions on the toll removal that happened about a decade ago to them?

I've only been on it within the last couple of years so I have no opinion either way. I thought I remembered paying a toll but then again I'm probably just remembering the toll to cross into Canada.

And dammit, I need to go back and drive I-287 to get a full clinch of the Thruway. This is going to nag me until I get back up there.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: route17fan on January 05, 2015, 10:39:50 AM
I found it interesting that going from Albany NY to Erie PA is a difference of only 10 miles (I-90 vs taking I-88 to I-86/NY 17) :)
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on January 05, 2015, 01:08:50 PM
Quote from: The Nature Boy on January 05, 2015, 06:09:02 AM
Quote from: Buffaboy on January 05, 2015, 12:36:47 AM
Quote from: The Nature Boy on January 05, 2015, 12:16:37 AM
I somehow have managed to clinch the New York Thruway through a series of trips.

I clinched the I-90 portion (and obviously the Berkshire Extension) in my various trips from the Midwest to Boston

I clinched the I-87 portion driving from New York City to Vermont via Albany.

I clinched the Niagara Thruway (is that correct?) when I crossed into Niagara Falls, ON in route to Detroit from Boston.

I clinched the New England Thruway along I-95 from traveling from NC to Boston.

I used to hate damn Thruway but I've grown to have a weird love of it.

I clinched I-87 when my parents didn't know about I-86 or I-86 about 10-15 years ago.

Then we've traveled on the Erie portion many times going to down south via Erie, Cleveland or Chicago. Would be much easier to head south of the 219 could be expedited, hence my avatar.

The rest of the 90 I've clinched going to W. Ma.

Then I've been on the Niagara Thriway countless times. What's your opinions on the toll removal that happened about a decade ago to them?

I've only been on it within the last couple of years so I have no opinion either way. I thought I remembered paying a toll but then again I'm probably just remembering the toll to cross into Canada.

And dammit, I need to go back and drive I-287 to get a full clinch of the Thruway. This is going to nag me until I get back up there.
I-190 still has tolls at the Grand Island bridges.  The ones approaching downtown Buffalo were removed a few years ago.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Pete from Boston on January 05, 2015, 01:42:08 PM
Is 84 still a non-Thruway-but-Thruway-maintained road?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on January 05, 2015, 01:51:14 PM
Quote from: Pete from Boston on January 05, 2015, 01:42:08 PM
Is 84 still a non-Thruway-but-Thruway-maintained road?

No. Back to NYSDOT, but last I checked, it lacks reference markers.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cu2010 on January 05, 2015, 01:58:51 PM
I-84 has reference markers in Dutchess County now.

Oddly enough, they say "I-84" on them, not the NYSDOT-standard "84I".
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: PHLBOS on January 05, 2015, 02:01:04 PM
Quote from: Pete from Boston on January 05, 2015, 01:42:08 PM
Is 84 still a non-Thruway-but-Thruway-maintained road?
Not anymore.  The now-blank (where the Thruway logo was) mile markers (http://goo.gl/maps/kgvrQ) along I-84 are an indication of such.  Note: this MM was MILE 69 prior to its faded/salted washout.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on January 05, 2015, 03:17:42 PM
Quote from: cu2010 on January 05, 2015, 01:58:51 PM
I-84 has reference markers in Dutchess County now.

Oddly enough, they say "I-84" on them, not the NYSDOT-standard "84I".

Region 5 does this in a few places, notably on I-290, where they're either "I290" or plain "290"
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: machias on January 05, 2015, 08:29:03 PM
Quote from: cu2010 on January 05, 2015, 01:58:51 PM
I-84 has reference markers in Dutchess County now.

Oddly enough, they say "I-84" on them, not the NYSDOT-standard "84I".

I think I-84 in New York State is the red-headed step cousin whether it's maintained by the Thruway or NYSDOT. The guide signs are erratically designed (mostly Thruway foolishness), the aforementioned I-84 reference markers in Dutchess County match nothing that is in any manual or documentation within NYSDOT and the basic condition of the row is substandard at best. I drove through there on New Year's Day and I can't believe that there are so many signs faded beyond comprehension along that road. It's like nobody wants it.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on January 05, 2015, 10:07:06 PM
Quote from: upstatenyroads on January 05, 2015, 08:29:03 PM
Quote from: cu2010 on January 05, 2015, 01:58:51 PM
I-84 has reference markers in Dutchess County now.

Oddly enough, they say "I-84" on them, not the NYSDOT-standard "84I".

I think I-84 in New York State is the red-headed step cousin whether it's maintained by the Thruway or NYSDOT. The guide signs are erratically designed (mostly Thruway foolishness), the aforementioned I-84 reference markers in Dutchess County match nothing that is in any manual or documentation within NYSDOT and the basic condition of the row is substandard at best. I drove through there on New Year's Day and I can't believe that there are so many signs faded beyond comprehension along that road. It's like nobody wants it.

Problem is that we're just getting to the time when NYSDOT sign contracts for the highway could first be acted on. From what I can tell, they plan everything 5-10 years ahead of time. Partial maintenance was transferred 8 years ago and NYSDOT got full control in 2010. Signs probably would have been replaced faster if Orange County politicians didn't block the full transition in 2007, as NYSDOT didn't really do any "everyday" work until NYSTA was able to leave.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: 02 Park Ave on January 09, 2015, 09:23:41 AM
The Thruway is closed west of Rochester is closed due to "lake-effect" snowfall.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on January 09, 2015, 02:43:52 PM
Thruway has reopened east of Exit 53. West of there could get another 1-3 feet of snow in the next day and a half. All other area expressways, excluding west of Exit 53, the NY 400 ramps to the Thruway, and all of US 219's limited-access section have reopened as well, with travel advisories lifted north of Orchard Park/Hamburg.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: route17fan on January 10, 2015, 01:36:25 AM
WOW! For the season so far, Buffalo would potentially have over 10 feet of snow?!?! Incredible!
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on January 10, 2015, 08:07:50 PM
Quote from: route17fan on January 10, 2015, 01:36:25 AM
WOW! For the season so far, Buffalo would potentially have over 10 feet of snow?!?! Incredible!

Except they measure it at the airport. I flew out of there this morning and skies were clear. Snow was about 3 miles south, November storm was a mile south.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: MikeSantNY78 on January 10, 2015, 08:43:10 PM
Quote from: cl94 on January 10, 2015, 08:07:50 PM
Quote from: route17fan on January 10, 2015, 01:36:25 AM
WOW! For the season so far, Buffalo would potentially have over 10 feet of snow?!?! Incredible!

Except they measure it at the airport. I flew out of there this morning and skies were clear. Snow was about 3 miles south, November storm was a mile south.
Break line (of the November storm) seemed to be between Rehm Rd. and PleasantView Rd., on the north side of Depew, leading to Hillview Elementary on the north end.  North of Rehm, there was practically nothing - a foot at best. South of that (where I live), we got pummeled...
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: route17fan on January 11, 2015, 01:15:40 PM
Oh that's right - I forgot the snow was more south.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on March 21, 2015, 04:24:29 AM
Wgrz (http://www.wgrz.com/story/news/local/cheektowaga/2015/03/19/cleveland-drive-overpass-replacement-project-starts-monday/25057261/) reports that Thruway project construction in the Buffalo area (Cleveland Dr bridge, G.I. Bridge, EZPass lane) is imminent. Also mentioned is the realignment of the Cleveland Drive WB ramp and the addition of an auxiliary lane from the 290 to the 33. Putting 2+2 together I think that means the DOT wants to make the 90 a 5 lane highway. What do you think?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: xcellntbuy on March 21, 2015, 08:49:49 AM
Certainly does look like a widening and it is undoubtedly needed.

The Thruway needs expansion in many areas of the State.  Areas I have always been familiar with and in great need for 6 lanes run from Albany at Exit 23 south to Exit 16 at the Woodbury toll barrier and 8 lanes from Exit 16 all the way to the New York city line,  flyovers for Exit B1 for a cleaner connection for Interstate 90 would be another plus.

The cost?  Billions.  Does New York have the money?  No.  There is some very expensive landowners that would undoubtedly have to be compensated.  It would also take many years.  The arduous debates over a new Tappan Zee Bridge and the socialist mentality of what is the most dysfunctional state government in the Union serve as an enormous drag on New York's economy and decision-making.

Tolls would have to increase dramatically or would have to be reimposed in areas (Exit 15, Spring Valley and Ardsley barriers) long since removed from the old barrier and ticket system when I was much younger.  Nonetheless, the rise of electronic tolling options could allow greater ease to collect tolls from more points on the system, which I believe New York has not taken advantage of doing.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on March 22, 2015, 08:00:45 PM
Tolls are still collected both directions at the Yonkers barrier.  Not sure what you mean by Ardsley barrier.  There's much less toll-free travel allowed between the Yonkers barrier and the Tappan Zee than it would appear at first glance.  The Ardsley exit is a half diamond feeding into the Yonkers barrier, and the Saw Mill, I-287, and US 9 interchanges are right on top of the Tappan Zee.  The entire toll gap could be closed by making the Tappan Zee barrier two-way and adding ramp tolls to/from the south on the Saw Mill and to/from the north at US 9.  Closing the Nyack toll gap would be more work and probably not a good idea.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: xcellntbuy on March 22, 2015, 09:47:34 PM
Quote from: vdeane on March 22, 2015, 08:00:45 PM
Tolls are still collected both directions at the Yonkers barrier.  Not sure what you mean by Ardsley barrier.  There's much less toll-free travel allowed between the Yonkers barrier and the Tappan Zee than it would appear at first glance.  The Ardsley exit is a half diamond feeding into the Yonkers barrier, and the Saw Mill, I-287, and US 9 interchanges are right on top of the Tappan Zee.  The entire toll gap could be closed by making the Tappan Zee barrier two-way and adding ramp tolls to/from the south on the Saw Mill and to/from the north at US 9.  Closing the Nyack toll gap would be more work and probably not a good idea.
You are correct, Yonkers barrier.  Its been a very long time since I have been on the Thruway between Exit 8 and the Yonkers-New York City line.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on March 22, 2015, 10:04:52 PM
The Exit 15 barrier was removed when the end of the ticket system was moved to Exit 16. Spring Valley tolls for cars were eliminated in 1997, likely because the other river crossings do not charge for WB travel.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: NJRoadfan on March 23, 2015, 05:24:09 PM
The Spring Valley barrier is far enough west that it really doesn't qualify as a river crossing.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on March 23, 2015, 11:42:27 PM
Quote from: xcellntbuy on March 21, 2015, 08:49:49 AM
Certainly does look like a widening and it is undoubtedly needed.

The Thruway needs expansion in many areas of the State.  Areas I have always been familiar with and in great need for 6 lanes run from Albany at Exit 23 south to Exit 16 at the Woodbury toll barrier and 8 lanes from Exit 16 all the way to the New York city line,  flyovers for Exit B1 for a cleaner connection for Interstate 90 would be another plus.

The cost?  Billions.  Does New York have the money?  No.  There is some very expensive landowners that would undoubtedly have to be compensated.  It would also take many years.  The arduous debates over a new Tappan Zee Bridge and the socialist mentality of what is the most dysfunctional state government in the Union serve as an enormous drag on New York's economy and decision-making.

Tolls would have to increase dramatically or would have to be reimposed in areas (Exit 15, Spring Valley and Ardsley barriers) long since removed from the old barrier and ticket system when I was much younger.  Nonetheless, the rise of electronic tolling options could allow greater ease to collect tolls from more points on the system, which I believe New York has not taken advantage of doing.

I agree, I feel AET hasn't been taken advantage of by many states as of now. That should change though.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Zeffy on March 23, 2015, 11:52:08 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on March 23, 2015, 11:42:27 PM
I agree, I feel AET hasn't been taken advantage of by many states as of now. That should change though.

I might be entirely wrong on this, but I thought Florida's tolled highways (except Florida's Turnpike?) use AET. Maryland has the Intercounty Connector / MD 200 which uses it as well. The problem is how do you convert roadways that relied on toll booths from their trumpets into normal interchanges? It costs a lot of money to do so. I cannot imagine how much money it would take the NYSTA to convert the Thruway into AET.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on March 24, 2015, 12:10:29 AM
Quote from: Zeffy on March 23, 2015, 11:52:08 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on March 23, 2015, 11:42:27 PM
I agree, I feel AET hasn't been taken advantage of by many states as of now. That should change though.

I might be entirely wrong on this, but I thought Florida's tolled highways (except Florida's Turnpike?) use AET. Maryland has the Intercounty Connector / MD 200 which uses it as well. The problem is how do you convert roadways that relied on toll booths from their trumpets into normal interchanges? It costs a lot of money to do so. I cannot imagine how much money it would take the NYSTA to convert the Thruway into AET.

Hence why they're doing the barrier tolls first. Most of the trumpets can stay as trumpets, even with AET, because they're fine as they are and/or there's a lot of development right up to the ROW. Heck, the only exits I'd say "rebuild soon" to are 21, 24, 29, 31, 34A-39 (excluding 35), 46, and 49. Half are freeway-freeway and all but two of the rest are in a relatively dense suburban area. 23 should be moved 1/3 mile south to connect to the current NY 23 and 29 is on the list because geometry sucks, but that could be fixed by realigning the ramps through a dirt lot directly to NY 5S or building a diamond/partial cloverleaf 3/4 mile west.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: froggie on March 24, 2015, 08:10:14 AM
Quote23 should be moved 1/3 mile south to connect to the current NY 23

Topography would likely prevent this, given the close proximity of Catskill Creek and the resulting steep drop-off on the south side of 23.  The steep hill on the east side of the Thruway and north side of 23 also prevents a direct connection.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: 1995hoo on March 24, 2015, 08:39:05 AM
Quote from: Zeffy on March 23, 2015, 11:52:08 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on March 23, 2015, 11:42:27 PM
I agree, I feel AET hasn't been taken advantage of by many states as of now. That should change though.

I might be entirely wrong on this, but I thought Florida's tolled highways (except Florida's Turnpike?) use AET. Maryland has the Intercounty Connector / MD 200 which uses it as well. The problem is how do you convert roadways that relied on toll booths from their trumpets into normal interchanges? It costs a lot of money to do so. I cannot imagine how much money it would take the NYSTA to convert the Thruway into AET.

You put off the interchange reconfiguration indefinitely because it's not really needed just for the sake of electronic tolling. The interchange will work as a trumpet. Perhaps other designs might be more efficient, but the trumpet will still work.

Regarding Florida, broadly speaking, the cashless roads are concentrated in the Miami area with a few exceptions (such as the elevated express roadway on the Selmon Expressway in the Tampa area). I think Texas has a few cashless toll roads as well–Route 130 is cashless, if I'm not mistaken.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on March 24, 2015, 03:50:59 PM
Quote from: cl94 on March 24, 2015, 12:10:29 AM
Quote from: Zeffy on March 23, 2015, 11:52:08 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on March 23, 2015, 11:42:27 PM
I agree, I feel AET hasn't been taken advantage of by many states as of now. That should change though.

I might be entirely wrong on this, but I thought Florida's tolled highways (except Florida's Turnpike?) use AET. Maryland has the Intercounty Connector / MD 200 which uses it as well. The problem is how do you convert roadways that relied on toll booths from their trumpets into normal interchanges? It costs a lot of money to do so. I cannot imagine how much money it would take the NYSTA to convert the Thruway into AET.

Hence why they're doing the barrier tolls first. Most of the trumpets can stay as trumpets, even with AET, because they're fine as they are and/or there's a lot of development right up to the ROW. Heck, the only exits I'd say "rebuild soon" to are 21, 24, 29, 31, 34A-39 (excluding 35), 46, and 49. Half are freeway-freeway and all but two of the rest are in a relatively dense suburban area. 23 should be moved 1/3 mile south to connect to the current NY 23 and 29 is on the list because geometry sucks, but that could be fixed by realigning the ramps through a dirt lot directly to NY 5S or building a diamond/partial cloverleaf 3/4 mile west.

You bring up an excellent point regarding Exit 31. What other exit on the Thruway, or any other Interstate for that matter, brings you to a side street to get on an auxilliary Interstate? In addition I think for the width of the city of Utica, there aren't enough Thruway access points like in the other Thruway cities.

If this was a post in the Fantasy forum, what I would do is keep the trumpet but make I-790 into a Y-split with it being parallel to I-90 and connect it to NY 5s by crossing southeast over the Mohawk River, Erie Canal and Sewage Plant Road. Then:


I got bored and made diagrams. Red represents deleted ramps, blue represents current ramps, orange represents new or reconfigured construction, and green represents Bleecker St, Culver Ave., Dwyer Ave. and Pitcher St.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FhIrbRi3.jpg&hash=59e587365ca020f7bb270e70cb3fdd51040dcc0b)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2F3kgp4K0.jpg&hash=258bb031a7f2452b802147ddf5922c1c5bdd0404)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FbkkDWxb.jpg&hash=5498b8daa8884500469e02b57a7e5a656fb62732)

Believe it or not, the same split that NY 49 has a couple miles west of these pictures is similar to the one I envisioned.

Just an idea.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: odditude on March 24, 2015, 05:29:10 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on March 24, 2015, 03:50:59 PM
You bring up an excellent point regarding Exit 31. What other exit on the Thruway, or any other Interstate for that matter, brings you to a side street to get on an auxilliary Interstate?
I-95 to I-676 WB comes to mind. A few of the connections between I-95 and I-76 use surface roads as well (I can't remember which ones exactly off the top of my head).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: 02 Park Ave on March 24, 2015, 05:33:18 PM
Regarding Exit 23, an elevated roadway, built above the Thruway itself, could be used to make a direct connexion with Route 23.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on March 24, 2015, 05:37:31 PM
Quote from: odditude on March 24, 2015, 05:29:10 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on March 24, 2015, 03:50:59 PM
You bring up an excellent point regarding Exit 31. What other exit on the Thruway, or any other Interstate for that matter, brings you to a side street to get on an auxilliary Interstate?
I-95 to I-676 WB comes to mind. A few of the connections between I-95 and I-76 use surface roads as well (I can't remember which ones exactly off the top of my head).

Well I really meant a child auxiliary Interstate, but yes the Philly ones are interesting surface st. connections
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: 1995hoo on March 24, 2015, 05:54:10 PM
Quote from: odditude on March 24, 2015, 05:29:10 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on March 24, 2015, 03:50:59 PM
You bring up an excellent point regarding Exit 31. What other exit on the Thruway, or any other Interstate for that matter, brings you to a side street to get on an auxilliary Interstate?
I-95 to I-676 WB comes to mind. A few of the connections between I-95 and I-76 use surface roads as well (I can't remember which ones exactly off the top of my head).

I seem to recall for a long time you had to use a street with a traffic light to go from I-76 to I-176, though it's been corrected.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Alps on March 24, 2015, 10:09:05 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on March 24, 2015, 05:37:31 PM
Quote from: odditude on March 24, 2015, 05:29:10 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on March 24, 2015, 03:50:59 PM
You bring up an excellent point regarding Exit 31. What other exit on the Thruway, or any other Interstate for that matter, brings you to a side street to get on an auxilliary Interstate?
I-95 to I-676 WB comes to mind. A few of the connections between I-95 and I-76 use surface roads as well (I can't remember which ones exactly off the top of my head).

Well I really meant a child auxiliary Interstate, but yes the Philly ones are interesting surface st. connections
Plenty of times if you're going the "wrong" direction. I-95 SB to I-395 NB (and the reverse) in CT is one that I imagine has some associated demand. I-295 SB to I-95 NB in RI probably has somewhat less demand. I-80/I-280 in NJ is another of so many examples.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: empirestate on March 24, 2015, 10:10:45 PM
Quote from: 02 Park Ave on March 24, 2015, 05:33:18 PM
Regarding Exit 23, an elevated roadway, built above the Thruway itself, could be used to make a direct connexion with Route 23.

Would have to be a really long one! :-P
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on March 24, 2015, 10:42:57 PM
Quote from: empirestate on March 24, 2015, 10:10:45 PM
Quote from: 02 Park Ave on March 24, 2015, 05:33:18 PM
Regarding Exit 23, an elevated roadway, built above the Thruway itself, could be used to make a direct connexion with Route 23.

Would have to be a really long one! :-P

I'm hoping they meant Exit 21. Honestly, Exit 21 is the only one I mentioned that might not need a rebuild just due to expense. The terrain certainly isn't forgiving. You'd basically have to replace the trumpet with a modified diamond similar to I-88's Exit 25 to avoid building through Home Depot. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think that exit gets much in the way of traffic bound for NY 23.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: 02 Park Ave on March 24, 2015, 10:55:27 PM
Please excuse my typo.  I was referring to Exit 21!
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: machias on March 25, 2015, 12:18:29 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on March 24, 2015, 03:50:59 PM


You bring up an excellent point regarding Exit 31. What other exit on the Thruway, or any other Interstate for that matter, brings you to a side street to get on an auxilliary Interstate? In addition I think for the width of the city of Utica, there aren't enough Thruway access points like in the other Thruway cities.

If this was a post in the Fantasy forum, what I would do is keep the trumpet but make I-790 into a Y-split with it being parallel to I-90 and connect it to NY 5s by crossing southeast over the Mohawk River, Erie Canal and Sewage Plant Road. Then:


  • from 31 EB, make a flyover ramp to I-790 WB after the toll barrier at the bridge over Genesee St. Then add a u-turn on that same ramp to I-790 EB ramp to NY 5s
  • from 31 WB, it would follow the same path
  • Since there isn't enough room for an I-790/NY 5s WB interchange with I-90, an access road can be constructed to Bleeker St., 1-2 miles east of current Exit 31 that intersects NY 5s and I-90 (a new exit 31a/whatever mile post it would be), and crosses Mohawk River/Erie Canal.

Just an idea.

Thruway Exit 31 was reconfigured to the current setup in 1988-89. Prior to that, Interstate 790 had a direct connection in both directions to the Thruway, the problem is that the section from NY 5/8/12 to the Thruway was a two-lane roadway. There was a third phase to the project that never materialized, which would have connected the east end of the expressway that straddles the Thruway with either NY 5 or NY 5S (sources conflict) near Dyke Rd.

With revitalization efforts of Downtown Utica, there has been talk of making the downtown area more pedestrian friendly, including making it walkable to the North Utica/Harbor Point area. I made the same suggestion you have about connecting NY 5S at Culver Ave to the stub end of Interstate 790 at Leland Ave., which would help get through traffic out of downtown, making that area feel more intimate and getting through traffic onto I-790 and related roadways.

I also suggested to the Thruway Authority that an E-ZPass only interchange be built at CR 840/Judd Rd., but they said that'd never happen. There is a politician pushing for an E-ZPass only interchange with NY 49 right before it stops straddling the Thruway, and I believe that's mentioned on the HOCTS long-range wish list, but the idea lacks adequate funding. Part of converting NY 49 to Rome to Interstate 790 would probably help with that idea.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on March 25, 2015, 12:59:47 PM
Quote from: upstatenyroads on March 25, 2015, 12:18:29 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on March 24, 2015, 03:50:59 PM


You bring up an excellent point regarding Exit 31. What other exit on the Thruway, or any other Interstate for that matter, brings you to a side street to get on an auxilliary Interstate? In addition I think for the width of the city of Utica, there aren't enough Thruway access points like in the other Thruway cities.

If this was a post in the Fantasy forum, what I would do is keep the trumpet but make I-790 into a Y-split with it being parallel to I-90 and connect it to NY 5s by crossing southeast over the Mohawk River, Erie Canal and Sewage Plant Road. Then:


  • from 31 EB, make a flyover ramp to I-790 WB after the toll barrier at the bridge over Genesee St. Then add a u-turn on that same ramp to I-790 EB ramp to NY 5s
  • from 31 WB, it would follow the same path
  • Since there isn't enough room for an I-790/NY 5s WB interchange with I-90, an access road can be constructed to Bleeker St., 1-2 miles east of current Exit 31 that intersects NY 5s and I-90 (a new exit 31a/whatever mile post it would be), and crosses Mohawk River/Erie Canal.

Just an idea.

Thruway Exit 31 was reconfigured to the current setup in 1988-89. Prior to that, Interstate 790 had a direct connection in both directions to the Thruway, the problem is that the section from NY 5/8/12 to the Thruway was a two-lane roadway. There was a third phase to the project that never materialized, which would have connected the east end of the expressway that straddles the Thruway with either NY 5 or NY 5S (sources conflict) near Dyke Rd.

With revitalization efforts of Downtown Utica, there has been talk of making the downtown area more pedestrian friendly, including making it walkable to the North Utica/Harbor Point area. I made the same suggestion you have about connecting NY 5S at Culver Ave to the stub end of Interstate 790 at Leland Ave., which would help get through traffic out of downtown, making that area feel more intimate and getting through traffic onto I-790 and related roadways.

I also suggested to the Thruway Authority that an E-ZPass only interchange be built at CR 840/Judd Rd., but they said that'd never happen. There is a politician pushing for an E-ZPass only interchange with NY 49 right before it stops straddling the Thruway, and I believe that's mentioned on the HOCTS long-range wish list, but the idea lacks adequate funding. Part of converting NY 49 to Rome to Interstate 790 would probably help with that idea.

I heard the Judd Rd argument from here as well. I don't understand the ambivalence about it when the spacing seems appropriate for such an exit.

Never thought about the impact of such an idea acting as a beltway and tying the city together; if they allocate more $$$ in the budget to infrastructure (they won't) such an idea wouldn't be a fantasy


iPhone
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on March 25, 2015, 01:04:14 PM
Judd Rd is 3 miles from the next exit west. It's under 5 minutes from NY 840 to Exit 32. I'd take NY 49 and/or NY 69 over Judd Rd.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: machias on March 25, 2015, 08:30:23 PM
Quote from: cl94 on March 25, 2015, 01:04:14 PM
Judd Rd is 3 miles from the next exit west. It's under 5 minutes from NY 840 to Exit 32. I'd take NY 49 and/or NY 69 over Judd Rd.

Normally I'd agree with you but while the roads between NY/CR 840 and Exit 32 are county maintained roads, they were never really designed to handle the traffic that they handle now. Unfortunately CR 840 feels like it goes nowhere. I know that there's been mentions of somehow connecting CR 840 to NY 49, but I don't know how they would do that.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on March 25, 2015, 09:41:36 PM
Improving CR 32 seems like the obvious choice.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on March 25, 2015, 09:53:03 PM
Yeah, it's not like much would have to be done to really improve the current network. Realign two intersections to favor movements between NY 840 and the Thruway and you're good.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on March 25, 2015, 11:52:55 PM
Quote from: vdeane on March 25, 2015, 09:41:36 PM
Improving CR 32 seems like the obvious choice.

That would seem to be best, but why is the aux Interstate disconnected?

Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Duke87 on March 26, 2015, 12:42:45 AM
Quote from: cl94 on March 24, 2015, 10:42:57 PM
Quote from: empirestate on March 24, 2015, 10:10:45 PM
Quote from: 02 Park Ave on March 24, 2015, 05:33:18 PM
Regarding Exit 23, an elevated roadway, built above the Thruway itself, could be used to make a direct connexion with Route 23.

Would have to be a really long one! :-P

I'm hoping they meant Exit 21. Honestly, Exit 21 is the only one I mentioned that might not need a rebuild just due to expense. The terrain certainly isn't forgiving. You'd basically have to replace the trumpet with a modified diamond similar to I-88's Exit 25 to avoid building through Home Depot. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think that exit gets much in the way of traffic bound for NY 23.

Indeed. Getting from NY 23 to the Thruway, despite not being a "direct" connection, is pretty painless. I've never felt inconvenienced any time I've done it. Getting off of the Thruway requires passing through one traffic signal. Getting to the Thruway requires passing through one stop sign. Traffic counts doing this are low enough that a four-lane toll plaza more than suffices. Meh.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: machias on March 26, 2015, 12:16:46 PM
Quote from: vdeane on March 25, 2015, 09:41:36 PM
Improving CR 32 seems like the obvious choice.

Yeah, I agree that would be a good approach, but part of CR 32 goes through a gorge between Judd Rd and Oriskany, that could pose an issue.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Jim on March 27, 2015, 01:08:53 PM
So there's exactly one Albany-area traffic reporter (Carrie Lee?), who does traffic for the Clear Channel stations here, who always uses the term "Duanesburg Interchange Toll Bar" for the toll barrier at the east end of I-88 at its junction with Thruway Exit 25A.  I know it shouldn't bother me so much, but I've never heard anyone else use the term.  To the best of my memory, nowhere on the Thruway is "Duanesburg" listed on any Exit 25A signage, and the term "toll bar" isn't one in common usage in this area.  A Google search for the term shows it used only in a series of reports from a sigalert.org (until Google indexes this post, I suppose), which appears to be another Clear Channel product.  I'm guessing Ms. Lee is based somewhere else and is reading these without any idea that no one calls it that.  I've heard the location more commonly referred to as "the 25A tolls".
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: NE2 on March 27, 2015, 01:34:58 PM
"Toll Bar" is probably cut off because the full name is too long for the field.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: 1995hoo on March 27, 2015, 06:21:43 PM
I've heard a number of traffic reporters, typically the ones on XM Radio, who simply read whatever the display says without thinking about what they're saying. It leads to weird results when the people who put in the information leave out articles and the like under the assumption the reporters will know to add them. Bad assumption. It leads to stuff like "I-395 is backed up from Capital Beltway to Occoquan River" (both should have "the"), but then you also get reporters who insert articles when they should not (example: there is a town in Virginia named Triangle, but some XM reporters apparently assume that word refers to an actual triangle and will say "I-95 is slow past the Triangle"–no, "the Triangle" is an area in North Carolina). Evidently you have to type in exactly what you want read and train them to read exactly that with no thought, which is kind of pathetic.

It sounds like this is something similar: as NE2 suggests, they abbreviated something,maybe for space reasons, but didn't use a period after the abbreviation. Some people seem to find that confusing for whatever reason. I wonder what this reporter would do if it said "Toll Plz" (for "plaza").
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: 02 Park Ave on March 27, 2015, 07:12:57 PM
Shouldn't there be a "The" preceding "I-395" also?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cpzilliacus on March 27, 2015, 07:30:33 PM
Quote from: 02 Park Ave on March 27, 2015, 07:12:57 PM
Shouldn't there be a "The" preceding "I-395" also?

Not ever in the Washington, D.C. media market.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cpzilliacus on March 27, 2015, 07:31:40 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on March 27, 2015, 06:21:43 PM
I've heard a number of traffic reporters, typically the ones on XM Radio, who simply read whatever the display says without thinking about what they're saying. It leads to weird results when the people who put in the information leave out articles and the like under the assumption the reporters will know to add them. Bad assumption. It leads to stuff like "I-395 is backed up from Capital Beltway to Occoquan River" (both should have "the"), but then you also get reporters who insert articles when they should not (example: there is a town in Virginia named Triangle, but some XM reporters apparently assume that word refers to an actual triangle and will say "I-95 is slow past the Triangle"–no, "the Triangle" is an area in North Carolina). Evidently you have to type in exactly what you want read and train them to read exactly that with no thought, which is kind of pathetic.

I am a reasonably satisfied customer of theirs, but not for traffic reports for reasons you state above - their traffic content is annoying, often out-of-date and not helpful. 

Even a rookie traffic anchor on WTOP (or, for that matter, WCBS in New York, WBZ in New England or KNX in Los Angeles) is better.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on March 27, 2015, 07:42:39 PM
Quote from: cpzilliacus on March 27, 2015, 07:30:33 PM
Quote from: 02 Park Ave on March 27, 2015, 07:12:57 PM
Shouldn't there be a "The" preceding "I-395" also?

Not ever in the Washington, D.C. media market.

Damn straight. I hate how everyone in Buffalo puts "the" in front of everything.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on March 28, 2015, 04:37:13 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on March 27, 2015, 06:21:43 PM
It sounds like this is something similar: as NE2 suggests, they abbreviated something,maybe for space reasons, but didn't use a period after the abbreviation.
NYSTA called the toll booths "toll barriers", so they could have just as easily chopped off the end in their database (perhaps a character limitation) instead of abbreviating it.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: machias on March 29, 2015, 10:19:50 AM
Quote from: Jim on March 27, 2015, 01:08:53 PM
So there's exactly one Albany-area traffic reporter (Carrie Lee?), who does traffic for the Clear Channel stations here, who always uses the term "Duanesburg Interchange Toll Bar" for the toll barrier at the east end of I-88 at its junction with Thruway Exit 25A.  I know it shouldn't bother me so much, but I've never heard anyone else use the term.  To the best of my memory, nowhere on the Thruway is "Duanesburg" listed on any Exit 25A signage, and the term "toll bar" isn't one in common usage in this area.  A Google search for the term shows it used only in a series of reports from a sigalert.org (until Google indexes this post, I suppose), which appears to be another Clear Channel product.  I'm guessing Ms. Lee is based somewhere else and is reading these without any idea that no one calls it that.  I've heard the location more commonly referred to as "the 25A tolls".


I wonder if Exit 25A is called Duanesburg somewhere in the Thruway database because they already have Schenectady East and Schenectady West.  It's like Exit 39 is called State Fair Interchange even though it's a few miles away from the State Fairgrounds.

And I agree with Valerie, Toll Bar is probably an abbreviated Toll Barrier.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on March 29, 2015, 10:40:53 AM
Quote from: upstatenyroads on March 29, 2015, 10:19:50 AM
Quote from: Jim on March 27, 2015, 01:08:53 PM
So there's exactly one Albany-area traffic reporter (Carrie Lee?), who does traffic for the Clear Channel stations here, who always uses the term "Duanesburg Interchange Toll Bar" for the toll barrier at the east end of I-88 at its junction with Thruway Exit 25A.  I know it shouldn't bother me so much, but I've never heard anyone else use the term.  To the best of my memory, nowhere on the Thruway is "Duanesburg" listed on any Exit 25A signage, and the term "toll bar" isn't one in common usage in this area.  A Google search for the term shows it used only in a series of reports from a sigalert.org (until Google indexes this post, I suppose), which appears to be another Clear Channel product.  I'm guessing Ms. Lee is based somewhere else and is reading these without any idea that no one calls it that.  I've heard the location more commonly referred to as "the 25A tolls".


I wonder if Exit 25A is called Duanesburg somewhere in the Thruway database because they already have Schenectady East and Schenectady West.  It's like Exit 39 is called State Fair Interchange even though it's a few miles away from the State Fairgrounds.

And I agree with Valerie, Toll Bar is probably an abbreviated Toll Barrier.

It is somewhere, but it isn't common. I did a quick Google search and got this: http://www.homefacts.com/environmentalhazards/New-York/Schenectady-County/Duanesburg/Tanks-Nys-Thruway-Authority-Nytank42994.html
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: 1995hoo on March 29, 2015, 03:08:45 PM
Quote from: 02 Park Ave on March 27, 2015, 07:12:57 PM
Shouldn't there be a "The" preceding "I-395" also?

Why would there be? Why would there be any reason to put an article there? You don't normally say "the Interstate 395" unless it's in the context of something like "the Interstate 395 construction project continues near Landmark."




Quote from: cpzilliacus on March 27, 2015, 07:31:40 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on March 27, 2015, 06:21:43 PM
(Comments about XM traffic reporters omitted)

I am a reasonably satisfied customer of theirs, but not for traffic reports for reasons you state above - their traffic content is annoying, often out-of-date and not helpful. 

Even a rookie traffic anchor on WTOP (or, for that matter, WCBS in New York, WBZ in New England or KNX in Los Angeles) is better.

I've had XM service since 2004 and I am also satisfied, but I seldom listen to the traffic reports except when I'm in another city. If I'm driving near, say, Orlando, I'll tune in the XM traffic report rather than searching around for an FM report when I don't know which FM station I need. Also, when I'm in a different city it's the one time I find the XM reporters' sometimes odd wording to be helpful–they're less likely to use solely local jargon like road names out-of-area drivers may not know. (Of course, this is part of what can make it annoying to locals!) If I were driving in Chicago, for example, I wouldn't know any of the little names they use instead of Interstate numbers.

When I first got XM in 2004, each city had its own traffic channel on a recorded loop. That was useful if I missed the FM report because with FM, I'd have to wait ten minutes for the next report. Those ten minutes were crucial because I'd have to commit to a route by then, so the XM reports' continuous loop was useful. Nowadays, the XM channels are shared: DC and Baltimore being on the same channel makes a lot of sense, but the third city on that channel is Atlanta and that makes no sense at all. So you have a ten-minute wait now. I just opt for FM instead.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: NJRoadfan on March 29, 2015, 04:45:44 PM
Don't know if its the case now, but back in 2005, Sirius was using Shadow Traffic for their reports (then a part of Westwood One). I would hear the very same traffic reporters on Sirius that I did on the local FM stations. NY and Philly shared a station, so it worked well for driving in NJ since it basically covered the whole state.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cpzilliacus on March 29, 2015, 06:25:26 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on March 29, 2015, 03:08:45 PM
I've had XM service since 2004 and I am also satisfied, but I seldom listen to the traffic reports except when I'm in another city. If I'm driving near, say, Orlando, I'll tune in the XM traffic report rather than searching around for an FM report when I don't know which FM station I need. Also, when I'm in a different city it's the one time I find the XM reporters' sometimes odd wording to be helpful–they're less likely to use solely local jargon like road names out-of-area drivers may not know. (Of course, this is part of what can make it annoying to locals!) If I were driving in Chicago, for example, I wouldn't know any of the little names they use instead of Interstate numbers.

I just use the Inrix app on my Android tablet for out-of-town, unless I am in a city with a CBS all-news radio station (those tend to have good traffic reports, even though the traffic reports are often provided by a third party traffic reporting firm).

Quote from: 1995hoo on March 29, 2015, 03:08:45 PM
When I first got XM in 2004, each city had its own traffic channel on a recorded loop. That was useful if I missed the FM report because with FM, I'd have to wait ten minutes for the next report. Those ten minutes were crucial because I'd have to commit to a route by then, so the XM reports' continuous loop was useful. Nowadays, the XM channels are shared: DC and Baltimore being on the same channel makes a lot of sense, but the third city on that channel is Atlanta and that makes no sense at all. So you have a ten-minute wait now. I just opt for FM instead.

Baltimore and Washington together are fine, given how close together they are.  But Atlanta on the same channel makes no sense at all.

I could even see New York, Philadelphia, Baltimore and Washington together on the same channel. 
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: empirestate on March 30, 2015, 01:50:46 AM
Quote from: upstatenyroads on March 29, 2015, 10:19:50 AM
I wonder if Exit 25A is called Duanesburg somewhere in the Thruway database because they already have Schenectady East and Schenectady West.  It's like Exit 39 is called State Fair Interchange even though it's a few miles away from the State Fairgrounds.

I'm still hoping to find a full list of what NYSTA considers to be the formal interchange names.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: xcellntbuy on March 30, 2015, 10:04:27 AM
I think the closest thing to formal interchange names would be what was printed on the old full-size tickets.  I would not be surprised that one of our members has an old ticket from the days when the controlled system began in Spring Valley in their collection of road memorabilia.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on March 30, 2015, 10:08:14 AM
Quote from: empirestate on March 30, 2015, 01:50:46 AM
Quote from: upstatenyroads on March 29, 2015, 10:19:50 AM
I wonder if Exit 25A is called Duanesburg somewhere in the Thruway database because they already have Schenectady East and Schenectady West.  It's like Exit 39 is called State Fair Interchange even though it's a few miles away from the State Fairgrounds.

I'm still hoping to find a full list of what NYSTA considers to be the formal interchange names.
Yeah, that would be pretty cool.

Quote from: xcellntbuy on March 30, 2015, 10:04:27 AM
I think the closest thing to formal interchange names would be what was printed on the old full-size tickets.  I would not be surprised that one of our members has an old ticket from the days when the controlled system began in Spring Valley in their collection of road memorabilia.
This one from the 90s is the one that seems to be easy to find online: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/07/New_York_Thruway_Toll_Ticket.jpg
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on March 30, 2015, 11:15:43 AM
Quote from: xcellntbuy on March 30, 2015, 10:04:27 AM
I think the closest thing to formal interchange names would be what was printed on the old full-size tickets.  I would not be surprised that one of our members has an old ticket from the days when the controlled system began in Spring Valley in their collection of road memorabilia.

You'd have to go really far back for that one. Ticket system was moved north decades ago.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: route17fan on March 30, 2015, 02:17:10 PM
There is a vintage NY Thruway ticket at the Guilderland Service Area inside at the "History Happened Here" display. It is from Harriman - exit 16 - and very early.

:nod: yes, some of us "accidentally lost" their tickets  ;-)
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: empirestate on March 30, 2015, 03:07:40 PM
Quote from: xcellntbuy on March 30, 2015, 10:04:27 AM
I think the closest thing to formal interchange names would be what was printed on the old full-size tickets.  I would not be surprised that one of our members has an old ticket from the days when the controlled system began in Spring Valley in their collection of road memorabilia.

Yeah, unfortunately that is the closest I've seen. But it doesn't show names like "State Fair" and "Duanesburg", nor even more pedestrian ones like "Schenectady East" and "Schenectady West". It's the source of those names that I'd like to see.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: xcellntbuy on March 30, 2015, 03:45:49 PM
Quote from: cl94 on March 30, 2015, 11:15:43 AM
Quote from: xcellntbuy on March 30, 2015, 10:04:27 AM
I think the closest thing to formal interchange names would be what was printed on the old full-size tickets.  I would not be surprised that one of our members has an old ticket from the days when the controlled system began in Spring Valley in their collection of road memorabilia.

You'd have to go really far back for that one. Ticket system was moved north decades ago.
Yes indeed.  When I was little, the signs were blue.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: 02 Park Ave on March 30, 2015, 05:38:23 PM
Once the Thruway was completed, the ticket system always started at Harriman.  There was an across the road cash toll booth at Spring Valley.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on March 30, 2015, 05:48:18 PM
Quote from: 02 Park Ave on March 30, 2015, 05:38:23 PM
Once the Thruway was completed, the ticket system always started at Harriman.  There was an across the road cash toll booth at Spring Valley.

Nope. Woodbury barrier wasn't built until 1974.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: machias on March 30, 2015, 06:39:30 PM
From the official Thruway timeline documents distributed at the New York State Fair in 2002. Interestingly, Interchange 25A is not named. 

November 25, 1963   With completion of the 16-mile northern end of the Taconic State Parkway, the Thruway opened its Taconic Interchange B2 on the Berkshire Section, a direct link between the two highways.
October 29, 1971   Coxsackie Interchange 21B was opened at Milepost 124.5. The $2,400,000 interchange was financed with State funds.
May 25, 1973   Collamer Interchange 34A, built by the State at Milepost 276.6 in Syracuse, opened.
May 28, 1982   Interchange 25A, which connects I-88 with the Thruway near Schenectady, opened.
November 1, 1987   A new State Fair Interchange 39 opened in Syracuse. The new interchange is located at milepost 289.53, approximately 1 mile west of the old Interchange 39.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Sam on March 30, 2015, 08:31:02 PM

Quote from: empirestate on March 30, 2015, 03:07:40 PM

Yeah, unfortunately that is the closest I've seen. But it doesn't show names like "State Fair" and "Duanesburg", nor even more pedestrian ones like "Schenectady East" and "Schenectady West". It's the source of those names that I'd like to see.

I don't know where (or if) you could  find a document with those names, but ... I've gathered an informal list of my own from listening to the Thruway radio system over the years.  These are the names the dispatchers and radio units use to identify the interchanges. I'm sure they're based on some official names.


New Rochelle Barrier
Yonkers Barrier
Tarrytown Barrier
Spring Valley Barrier
Woodbury Barrier
16-Harriman
17-Newburgh
18-New Paltz
19-Kingston
20-Saugerties East, Saugerties West
21-Catskill
21B-Coxsackie
B1-Post Road
B2-Taconic
Canaan Barrier
22-Selkirk
23-Boulevard
24-Washington Ave.
25-Schenectady
25A-Duanesburg
26-Rotterdam
27-Amsterdam
28-Fultonville
29-Canajoharie
29A-Little Falls
30-Herkimer
31-Utica
32-Westmoreland
33-Verona
34-Canastota
34A-Collamer
35-Thompson Road
36-Mattydale
37-Electronics
38-Liverpool
39-State Fair
40-Weedsport
41-Waterloo
42-Geneva
43-Manchester
44-Canandaigua
45-Victor
46-Henrietta
47-Le Roy
48-Batavia
48A-Pembroke
49-Depew
Williamsville Barrier
City Line Barrier
Black Rock Barrier
South Bridge
North Bridge
Lackawanna Barrier
56-Blasdell
57-Hamburg
57A-Eden
58-Silver Creek
59-Dunkirk
60-Westfield
Ripley Barrier
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Sam on March 30, 2015, 08:35:05 PM
Somewhere I once found a list of the official names of each segment of the Thruway system. In addition to the Niagara and Berkshire sections, there is a Mohawk Trail, Iroquois Path, etc. I'd love to be able to find that again.

"From a point on the mainline intersecting United States Highway Number 20 at or in the vicinity of Westmere to a point on the mainline intersecting United States Highway Number 11..." :)
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: mrsman on March 30, 2015, 11:36:14 PM
Quote from: cpzilliacus on March 29, 2015, 06:25:26 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on March 29, 2015, 03:08:45 PM
I've had XM service since 2004 and I am also satisfied, but I seldom listen to the traffic reports except when I'm in another city. If I'm driving near, say, Orlando, I'll tune in the XM traffic report rather than searching around for an FM report when I don't know which FM station I need. Also, when I'm in a different city it's the one time I find the XM reporters' sometimes odd wording to be helpful–they're less likely to use solely local jargon like road names out-of-area drivers may not know. (Of course, this is part of what can make it annoying to locals!) If I were driving in Chicago, for example, I wouldn't know any of the little names they use instead of Interstate numbers.

I just use the Inrix app on my Android tablet for out-of-town, unless I am in a city with a CBS all-news radio station (those tend to have good traffic reports, even though the traffic reports are often provided by a third party traffic reporting firm).

Quote from: 1995hoo on March 29, 2015, 03:08:45 PM
When I first got XM in 2004, each city had its own traffic channel on a recorded loop. That was useful if I missed the FM report because with FM, I'd have to wait ten minutes for the next report. Those ten minutes were crucial because I'd have to commit to a route by then, so the XM reports' continuous loop was useful. Nowadays, the XM channels are shared: DC and Baltimore being on the same channel makes a lot of sense, but the third city on that channel is Atlanta and that makes no sense at all. So you have a ten-minute wait now. I just opt for FM instead.

Baltimore and Washington together are fine, given how close together they are.  But Atlanta on the same channel makes no sense at all.

I could even see New York, Philadelphia, Baltimore and Washington together on the same channel.

I don't pay for this service, but I remember having this on a recent rental car.  A quick check of their website:

132 Boston/Philly/Pittsburgh
133 NYC
134 DC/Balt/Atl
135 Chicago/Detroit
136 Miami/Orlando/St Pete
137 DFW/Houston/Phoenix
138 St Louis/Minneapolis
139 SF/Seattle
140 LA/San Diego

What I remember was that they grouped 3 cities together on each channel, but allowed LA and NYC to be on its own channel.  Based on the current list, they are still following that model to some degree.  NYC all by itself.  Chicago and LA with one other city.  And then group the rest.  Also, they decided not to open more channels to traffic, so like it or not there may be some odd groupings.

Atlanta had to go somewhere.  One option could have been grouping Boston with NYC.  Pittsburgh with Chicago and Detroit.  Philly with Baltimore and DC.  That would leave one channel open to put Atlanta with some new markets in the South (Raleigh, Nashville, Memphis ???).  Maybe as they expand their offerings.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: thenetwork on March 31, 2015, 11:09:14 AM
132 Boston/Philly/Pittsburgh
133 NYC

Put Boston and NYC on the same channel as the Northeast Channel, and include major traffic/weather issues from points in-between when warranted.


134 DC/Balt/Atl

Switch out Philadelphia with Atlanta and call it the Mid-Atlantic Corridor channel.  Atlanta would either be on it's own channel or paired up with other "isolated" Southern cities (New Orleans, Charlotte??)

135 Chicago/Detroit
136 Miami/Orlando/St Pete

No Problems with these channels, they make sense.

137 DFW/Houston/Phoenix
Switch out San Antonio for Phoenix and put Phoenix on it's own channel with Las Vegas.


138 St Louis/Minneapolis

St. Louis/KC/I-70 corridor would make a better stand alone channel.  Perhaps you could add Indianapolis.


139 SF/Seattle

Spin off Seattle onto a new channel pairing with Portland.  Rename the SFO Channel as the Bay Area Channel, including San Jose, Sacramento & Oakland.


140 LA/San Diego

Another perfect channel.   You could arguably put Vegas on this channel too for the I-15 corridor, but SoCal is a big enough monster on it's own already.


As for the remaining cities:

Minneapolis
-- this is such an isolated major city with no real good large city neighbor, unless you add Milwaukee (which should really be part of the CHI/DET Channel) or maybe even Denver (another isolated major city which merits a satellite traffic channel).


Pittsburgh
-- Sports fans may not like it, but put Pittsburgh on a channel with Cleveland, Buffalo and/or Columbus (all are large enough cities to warrant satellite traffic reports).

Not sure if a Nashville/Memphis channel is warranted, but would make for a logical pairing.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on March 31, 2015, 11:29:39 AM
Actually, if satellite radio covers Canada, put Buffalo with Toronto and Hamilton and include border times. People in Buffalo don't like to admit it, but it's basically one giant metro area.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Alex on March 31, 2015, 11:36:19 AM
Quote from: route17fan on March 30, 2015, 02:17:10 PM
There is a vintage NY Thruway ticket at the Guilderland Service Area inside at the "History Happened Here" display. It is from Harriman - exit 16 - and very early.

:nod: yes, some of us "accidentally lost" their tickets  ;-)

We videotaped our ticket on my first ride on the Thruway leading north from Newburgh (October 18, 1993):

(//www.aaroads.com/forum_images/northeast/ny_thruway_toll_ticket_01.jpg) (//www.aaroads.com/forum_images/northeast/ny_thruway_toll_ticket_01.jpg)

(//www.aaroads.com/forum_images/northeast/ny_thruway_toll_ticket_02.jpg) (//www.aaroads.com/forum_images/northeast/ny_thruway_toll_ticket_02.jpg)
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: machias on March 31, 2015, 12:22:39 PM
Quote from: Sam on March 30, 2015, 08:31:02 PM

Quote from: empirestate on March 30, 2015, 03:07:40 PM

Yeah, unfortunately that is the closest I've seen. But it doesn't show names like "State Fair" and "Duanesburg", nor even more pedestrian ones like "Schenectady East" and "Schenectady West". It's the source of those names that I'd like to see.

I don't know where (or if) you could  find a document with those names, but ... I've gathered an informal list of my own from listening to the Thruway radio system over the years.  These are the names the dispatchers and radio units use to identify the interchanges. I'm sure they're based on some official names.


New Rochelle Barrier
Yonkers Barrier
Tarrytown Barrier
Spring Valley Barrier
Woodbury Barrier
16-Harriman
17-Newburgh
18-New Paltz
19-Kingston
20-Saugerties East, Saugerties West
21-Catskill
21B-Coxsackie
B1-Post Road
B2-Taconic
Canaan Barrier
22-Selkirk
23-Boulevard
24-Washington Ave.
25-Schenectady
25A-Duanesburg
26-Rotterdam
27-Amsterdam
28-Fultonville
29-Canajoharie
29A-Little Falls
30-Herkimer
31-Utica
32-Westmoreland
33-Verona
34-Canastota
34A-Collamer
35-Thompson Road
36-Mattydale
37-Electronics
38-Liverpool
39-State Fair
40-Weedsport
41-Waterloo
42-Geneva
43-Manchester
44-Canandaigua
45-Victor
46-Henrietta
47-Le Roy
48-Batavia
48A-Pembroke
49-Depew
Williamsville Barrier
City Line Barrier
Black Rock Barrier
South Bridge
North Bridge
Lackawanna Barrier
56-Blasdell
57-Hamburg
57A-Eden
58-Silver Creek
59-Dunkirk
60-Westfield
Ripley Barrier


Those names you have listed are the ones that I've heard quite a few Thruway employees use over the years.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on March 31, 2015, 08:36:38 PM
Quote from: cl94 on March 31, 2015, 11:29:39 AM
Actually, if satellite radio covers Canada, put Buffalo with Toronto and Hamilton and include border times. People in Buffalo don't like to admit it, but it's basically one giant metro area.

They call it the "Golden Horseshoe..."

Too bad crossing the border couldn't be like going through EZPass.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on March 31, 2015, 08:51:16 PM
Get Nexus and cross at the Peace Bridge.  They're so used to locals crossing that way that they only ask one question (to check for goods coming in).  It's like the tail end of the car chase in the James Bond movie "The Living Daylights".

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2QZuOQZ1HC4
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on March 31, 2015, 10:07:35 PM
I only cross at the Peace Bridge unless it's backed up, I'm coming back from Toronto late at night (take 405), or I'm doing something in Niagara Falls (take 420/Rainbow). I don't have Nexus, but I typically get nothing more than "anything to declare?" and "where you going?" at any crossing going in and the US people ask where I live. If you've got New York or Ontario plates, they typically don't give you much of a problem at the Buffalo crossings.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: PurdueBill on April 01, 2015, 12:58:25 AM
I'll contribute pics of my ticket from May 1998 iIrc--just before I got my Mass Pike FastLane tag.  It slid under the seat and I was paying $10.05 anyway so no biggie.  I'd rather have the ticket for memorabilia anyway.

(https://scontent-ord.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xfp1/v/t1.0-9/314468_10100810795496258_1204997624_n.jpg?oh=0db7317cb3a033e4c88368727aab812f&oe=559C8685)
(https://fbcdn-sphotos-f-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xfa1/v/t1.0-9/298945_10100810797177888_1555614324_n.jpg?oh=cdca2470106fdfd3fe829b41f017e66b&oe=55AA9904&__gda__=1436533259_762f53fb010247c37240857955000eb2)
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: WNYroadgeek on April 03, 2015, 03:13:24 PM
Exit 57A (Eden/Angola) to be temporarily closed starting Tuesday:

QuoteThe Thruway Authority announced today a multi-phase, $3 million pavement rehabilitation project that will temporarily close the on and off ramps of I-90 exit 57A (Eden-Angola) beginning Tuesday, April 7.

The project, to be completed by Oakgrove Construction, will include:


  • Re-paving of the east and westbound on and off ramps
  • Re-paving of the roadway in the immediate vicinity of the toll plaza
  • Rehabilitation of the exit overpass structure
  • Guide rail replacement
  • Shoulder excavation
  • Drainage system improvements

The initial phase of the work will close the westbound off and on ramps and the exit overpass structure from April 7 through April 28.

The eastbound exit ramp will be closed from April 28 through May 6.

Work in the immediate vicinity of the toll plaza will be completed between May 7 and May 22.

The eastbound on ramp will be closed May 26 through June 8.

The final phase of the project includes a rehabilitation of the exit overpass beginning June 9 through mid-September. The overpass will be reduced to one lane during the work and temporary traffic lights will be installed on both sides of the overpass to facilitate traffic.

Motorists should follow the posted detours throughout the duration of the project.

http://www.thruway.ny.gov/news/pressrel/2015/04/2015-04-07-temp-closures.html
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on April 03, 2015, 06:50:36 PM
Quote from: WNYroadgeek on April 03, 2015, 03:13:24 PM
Exit 57A (Eden/Angola) to be temporarily closed starting Tuesday:

QuoteThe Thruway Authority announced today a multi-phase, $3 million pavement rehabilitation project that will temporarily close the on and off ramps of I-90 exit 57A (Eden-Angola) beginning Tuesday, April 7.

The project, to be completed by Oakgrove Construction, will include:


  • Re-paving of the east and westbound on and off ramps
  • Re-paving of the roadway in the immediate vicinity of the toll plaza
  • Rehabilitation of the exit overpass structure
  • Guide rail replacement
  • Shoulder excavation
  • Drainage system improvements

The initial phase of the work will close the westbound off and on ramps and the exit overpass structure from April 7 through April 28.

The eastbound exit ramp will be closed from April 28 through May 6.

Work in the immediate vicinity of the toll plaza will be completed between May 7 and May 22.

The eastbound on ramp will be closed May 26 through June 8.

The final phase of the project includes a rehabilitation of the exit overpass beginning June 9 through mid-September. The overpass will be reduced to one lane during the work and temporary traffic lights will be installed on both sides of the overpass to facilitate traffic.

Motorists should follow the posted detours throughout the duration of the project.

http://www.thruway.ny.gov/news/pressrel/2015/04/2015-04-07-temp-closures.html

Good. Those ramps haven't been touched since the exit was built.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: The Nature Boy on April 06, 2015, 06:59:56 PM
My favorite border crossing story was from the Lewiston crossing. I ended up discussing college football with the Canadian border agent. No idea how it came up but it was a fun discussion.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: amroad17 on April 11, 2015, 11:24:52 PM
My grandparents had a 1971 Rand McNally that did list the interchange names of the Thruway in a box on the New York state map.  IIRC, Interchange 35 was named Carrier Circle, 39 was Syracuse-West (although I would have preferred State Fair), and 45 was either Rochester-East or Victor.  Of course, 25A and 34A were not listed.  I am not sure when 29A opened.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on April 12, 2015, 12:14:19 AM
Quote from: amroad17 on April 11, 2015, 11:24:52 PM
My grandparents had a 1971 Rand McNally that did list the interchange names of the Thruway in a box on the New York state map.  IIRC, Interchange 35 was named Carrier Circle, 39 was Syracuse-West (although I would have preferred State Fair), and 45 was either Rochester-East or Victor.  Of course, 25A and 34A were not listed.  I am not sure when 29A opened.

29A and 34A opened in 1973
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: machias on April 12, 2015, 04:14:50 PM
Quote from: cl94 on April 12, 2015, 12:14:19 AM
Quote from: amroad17 on April 11, 2015, 11:24:52 PM
My grandparents had a 1971 Rand McNally that did list the interchange names of the Thruway in a box on the New York state map.  IIRC, Interchange 35 was named Carrier Circle, 39 was Syracuse-West (although I would have preferred State Fair), and 45 was either Rochester-East or Victor.  Of course, 25A and 34A were not listed.  I am not sure when 29A opened.

29A and 34A opened in 1973

I wish I had gotten a photo of the original 1 mile sign for Exit 34A, because it was a unique format, even for the Thruway.

(481)
Syracuse
Chittenango
EXIT 34A
1 MILE


The "tabbed" version wasn't put up until 1986 or so when the section of 481 between I-90 and Northern Blvd. was opened.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: jemacedo9 on April 12, 2015, 06:16:14 PM
Does anyone know the history behind this overpass design?  This is the NY 64 overpass just west of Exit 45 near Rochester.  https://goo.gl/maps/FQ5hT (https://goo.gl/maps/FQ5hT)
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Sam on April 12, 2015, 07:52:55 PM
The West Bloomfield Rd. overpass next to it was the same design. It was replaced a few years ago with a standard type design.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on April 12, 2015, 09:34:09 PM
Quote from: Sam on April 12, 2015, 07:52:55 PM
The West Bloomfield Rd. overpass next to it was the same design. It was replaced a few years ago with a standard type design.

I'd say more than a few years. Replacement was built in 1989 per the state database. I always thought that bridge was relatively new. Evidently it's original and holding out better than most bridges its age (or newer, for that matter).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on April 27, 2015, 07:29:50 PM
The North Grand Island Bridge had a pretty large incident today. The SB span is being redecked overnight with both directions on the NB span, but the contractor failed to have the bridge open by 6 AM (the scheduled time). Didn't reopen until after 6 PM. Traffic from the north was backed up to NY 182 and traffic from the south was back to the South bridge. Fine is $1,000/minute, capped at $125,000/day. Supposedly took 30-45 minutes to get through the mess (normally takes under 10).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: PurdueBill on April 28, 2015, 10:18:50 AM
Quote from: cl94 on April 27, 2015, 07:29:50 PM
The North Grand Island Bridge had a pretty large incident today. The SB span is being redecked overnight with both directions on the NB span, but the contractor failed to have the bridge open by 6 AM (the scheduled time). Didn't reopen until after 6 PM. Traffic from the north was backed up to NY 182 and traffic from the south was back to the South bridge. Fine is $1,000/minute, capped at $125,000/day. Supposedly took 30-45 minutes to get through the mess (normally takes under 10).

Odd that the fine for 12 hours late is the same as for 3 hours late, which is only $5000 more than the fine for 2 hours late.  Once you get to 2 hours and 5 minutes behind, you might as well use the rest of the day!  Why not ramp it up?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on April 28, 2015, 01:12:13 PM
Quote from: PurdueBill on April 28, 2015, 10:18:50 AM
Quote from: cl94 on April 27, 2015, 07:29:50 PM
The North Grand Island Bridge had a pretty large incident today. The SB span is being redecked overnight with both directions on the NB span, but the contractor failed to have the bridge open by 6 AM (the scheduled time). Didn't reopen until after 6 PM. Traffic from the north was backed up to NY 182 and traffic from the south was back to the South bridge. Fine is $1,000/minute, capped at $125,000/day. Supposedly took 30-45 minutes to get through the mess (normally takes under 10).

Odd that the fine for 12 hours late is the same as for 3 hours late, which is only $5000 more than the fine for 2 hours late.  Once you get to 2 hours and 5 minutes behind, you might as well use the rest of the day!  Why not ramp it up?

My thought exactly. Thing was closed all flipping day and the surface roads between I-290 and Niagara Falls were clogged and, after 8:05, there was no incentive to reopen it.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: machias on April 28, 2015, 09:10:33 PM
I drove on the Thruway EB on Sunday and noticed that the Erie Canal Heritage Park just beyond the Port Byron Service Area is now open.

(https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/314912/2015-04-26%2017.56.39.jpg)
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Pete from Boston on April 28, 2015, 11:01:26 PM
Quote from: cl94 on April 28, 2015, 01:12:13 PM
Quote from: PurdueBill on April 28, 2015, 10:18:50 AM
Quote from: cl94 on April 27, 2015, 07:29:50 PM
The North Grand Island Bridge had a pretty large incident today. The SB span is being redecked overnight with both directions on the NB span, but the contractor failed to have the bridge open by 6 AM (the scheduled time). Didn't reopen until after 6 PM. Traffic from the north was backed up to NY 182 and traffic from the south was back to the South bridge. Fine is $1,000/minute, capped at $125,000/day. Supposedly took 30-45 minutes to get through the mess (normally takes under 10).

Odd that the fine for 12 hours late is the same as for 3 hours late, which is only $5000 more than the fine for 2 hours late.  Once you get to 2 hours and 5 minutes behind, you might as well use the rest of the day!  Why not ramp it up?

My thought exactly. Thing was closed all flipping day and the surface roads between I-290 and Niagara Falls were clogged and, after 8:05, there was no incentive to reopen it.

Presumably because if something goes really wrong, the best approach to fixing it is not to bankrupt the contractor.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on April 28, 2015, 11:03:35 PM
Quote from: upstatenyroads on April 28, 2015, 09:10:33 PM
I drove on the Thruway EB on Sunday and noticed that the Erie Canal Heritage Park just beyond the Port Byron Service Area is now open.

(https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/314912/2015-04-26%2017.56.39.jpg)

So many things wrong with that assembly. Surprised it doesn't have a "text stop" sign.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on April 29, 2015, 06:52:24 PM
Quote from: cl94 on April 28, 2015, 11:03:35 PM
Quote from: upstatenyroads on April 28, 2015, 09:10:33 PM
I drove on the Thruway EB on Sunday and noticed that the Erie Canal Heritage Park just beyond the Port Byron Service Area is now open.

(https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/314912/2015-04-26%2017.56.39.jpg)

So many things wrong with that assembly. Surprised it doesn't have a "text stop" sign.

If its nice i suppose I can stop off next week coming home. I wish I could drive home all the time instead of taking stupid Amtrak.

Also, thanks Alps for that link on your website directing me to those historical satellite images. It was pretty crazy seeing my entire town as bunch of trees back in the 50s. I mean, I've used Google Earth historical imagery to go back to the 80s, but I haven't seen imagery for areas outside of Buffalo as much as I have today.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cpzilliacus on May 05, 2015, 01:58:35 PM
Has anyone ever heard of any plans by the New York State Thruway Authority to even study the idea of widening the I-87 part of the Thruway so it is six lanes total (three each way) all the way from Harriman (Thruway Exit 16) to Albany (Exit 23)?

IMO, seems to be needed to handle the weekend traffic.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: The Nature Boy on May 05, 2015, 02:01:42 PM
The fact that anyone thought that a road running from New York City to Albany should NOT be three lanes the whole way just speaks to how laughably incompetent some public officials can be.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Jim on May 05, 2015, 03:32:05 PM
You have to keep in mind how long ago the road was built.  2 lanes each way was likely sufficient for the time.  The fact that it hasn't been expanded by now is another story.  It does seem long overdue.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: empirestate on May 05, 2015, 03:38:55 PM
Quote from: Jim on May 05, 2015, 03:32:05 PM
You have to keep in mind how long ago the road was built.  2 lanes each way was likely sufficient for the time.  The fact that it hasn't been expanded by now is another story.  It does seem long overdue.

You do also have the Taconic across the river for non-commercial traffic. For selfish reasons, I do wish it went a little farther, up to Bennington perhaps. Anything to get from NYC to VT/NH without going through CT would be pretty nice. :-)
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cpzilliacus on May 05, 2015, 03:56:34 PM
Quote from: Jim on May 05, 2015, 03:32:05 PM
You have to keep in mind how long ago the road was built.  2 lanes each way was likely sufficient for the time.  The fact that it hasn't been expanded by now is another story.  It does seem long overdue.

In defense of the Thruway, the I-87 section is otherwise still a well-engineered and well-maintained freeway-class road, better than more than a few "free" Interstates that I have driven in other states (such as Pennsylvania).

But a widening to six lanes would seem to be in order (I have only once (recently) driven the I-90 part of the Thruway, and only between Albany and Syracuse, and that seemed a lot less busy).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on May 05, 2015, 04:20:27 PM
Quote from: empirestate on May 05, 2015, 03:38:55 PM
Quote from: Jim on May 05, 2015, 03:32:05 PM
You have to keep in mind how long ago the road was built.  2 lanes each way was likely sufficient for the time.  The fact that it hasn't been expanded by now is another story.  It does seem long overdue.

You do also have the Taconic across the river for non-commercial traffic. For selfish reasons, I do wish it went a little farther, up to Bennington perhaps. Anything to get from NYC to VT/NH without going through CT would be pretty nice. :-)

If anything, at least it should have gone the last few miles to US 20 so I could avoid the toll. Much harder to shunpike with the current road network.

On the topic of widening the Thruway, it would be nice, but look at the 4-lane sections near Buffalo with much higher amounts of weekday traffic (especially Exits 49-50 and 55-57). Those need to be 6 (and the free section needs to be 8+), but that's not happening anytime soon. It really isn't that expensive to widen to 6 lanes, as every bridge can already carry 3 lanes per direction and always has been able to carry that amount of lanes (because the thing was designed to be widened), but this is New York we're talking about.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: The Nature Boy on May 05, 2015, 05:13:30 PM
Quote from: cpzilliacus on May 05, 2015, 03:56:34 PM
Quote from: Jim on May 05, 2015, 03:32:05 PM
You have to keep in mind how long ago the road was built.  2 lanes each way was likely sufficient for the time.  The fact that it hasn't been expanded by now is another story.  It does seem long overdue.

In defense of the Thruway, the I-87 section is otherwise still a well-engineered and well-maintained freeway-class road, better than more than a few "free" Interstates that I have driven in other states (such as Pennsylvania).

But a widening to six lanes would seem to be in order (I have only once (recently) driven the I-90 part of the Thruway, and only between Albany and Syracuse, and that seemed a lot less busy).

For as completely uninteresting as I find much of the I-90 section of the Thruway, it is a magnificently engineered highway. I will give them that.

Also, I once drove back to New Hampshire from NYC via I-87 to Albany and then NY Route 7 into Vermont. I got stuck in traffic at the Tappan Zee.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cpzilliacus on May 05, 2015, 07:20:04 PM
Quote from: The Nature Boy on May 05, 2015, 05:13:30 PM
For as completely uninteresting as I find much of the I-90 section of the Thruway, it is a magnificently engineered highway. I will give them that.

At least between Albany and Syracuse, I found the scenery to be rather nice.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: The Nature Boy on May 05, 2015, 07:32:14 PM
Quote from: cpzilliacus on May 05, 2015, 07:20:04 PM
Quote from: The Nature Boy on May 05, 2015, 05:13:30 PM
For as completely uninteresting as I find much of the I-90 section of the Thruway, it is a magnificently engineered highway. I will give them that.

At least between Albany and Syracuse, I found the scenery to be rather nice.

The Southern Tier Expressway is the more scenic of the main east-west highways across upstate New York. The scenery is certainly nice. Once you pass Syracuse though, it starts to go downhill a bit (at least in my opinion). I was always a huge fan of the Southern Tier Expressway though and would recommend it to anyone who wants a really scenic drive across upstate New York and is just passing through. If you're going to points east, you can connect to I-90 in Albany and continue your trek.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: roadman65 on May 05, 2015, 07:33:31 PM
Quote from: empirestate on May 05, 2015, 03:38:55 PM
Quote from: Jim on May 05, 2015, 03:32:05 PM
You have to keep in mind how long ago the road was built.  2 lanes each way was likely sufficient for the time.  The fact that it hasn't been expanded by now is another story.  It does seem long overdue.

You do also have the Taconic across the river for non-commercial traffic. For selfish reasons, I do wish it went a little farther, up to Bennington perhaps. Anything to get from NYC to VT/NH without going through CT would be pretty nice. :-)
Take the Taconic to I-90.  Just go east for one exit and then up NY 22.   It is really nice that way.  True NY 22 is not freeway, but it is a good road despite being two lanes.  You can use that up to NY 7 and then east into VT (and NH).  Or use NY 43 to MA 43 to MA 2 East.  MA 2 is a nice ride through the Berkshires.  Once you get to Greenfield you have I-91 to take you into VT or NH.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on May 05, 2015, 07:46:00 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on May 05, 2015, 07:33:31 PM
Quote from: empirestate on May 05, 2015, 03:38:55 PM
Quote from: Jim on May 05, 2015, 03:32:05 PM
You have to keep in mind how long ago the road was built.  2 lanes each way was likely sufficient for the time.  The fact that it hasn't been expanded by now is another story.  It does seem long overdue.

You do also have the Taconic across the river for non-commercial traffic. For selfish reasons, I do wish it went a little farther, up to Bennington perhaps. Anything to get from NYC to VT/NH without going through CT would be pretty nice. :-)
Take the Taconic to I-90.  Just go east for one exit and then up NY 22.   It is really nice that way.  True NY 22 is not freeway, but it is a good road despite being two lanes.  You can use that up to NY 7 and then east into VT (and NH).  Or use NY 43 to MA 43 to MA 2 East.  MA 2 is a nice ride through the Berkshires.  Once you get to Greenfield you have I-91 to take you into VT or NH.

But that requires paying a toll and that's the issue here. Taconic was supposed to go further north (in some original plans, to Saratoga) and, while there are still clearings visible, the NT looked quite different 40+ years ago.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Duke87 on May 05, 2015, 08:31:55 PM
Quote from: cl94 on May 05, 2015, 04:20:27 PM
Quote from: empirestate on May 05, 2015, 03:38:55 PM
You do also have the Taconic across the river for non-commercial traffic. For selfish reasons, I do wish it went a little farther, up to Bennington perhaps. Anything to get from NYC to VT/NH without going through CT would be pretty nice. :-)

If anything, at least it should have gone the last few miles to US 20 so I could avoid the toll. Much harder to shunpike with the current road network.

Maybe I'm just not a hardcore shunpiker, but even if this connection existed I don't see how it would be worth using in order to save 38 cents.


As for six laning the road from exits 16 to 23... well, that's nearly 100 miles (97, precisely). If we extrapolate out what the widening between exits 23 and 24 cost ($115 million for 6 miles), we're talking nearly $2 billion. Some states would be ambitious enough to undertake such a thing but New York is not one of them.

Meanwhile, while that part of the Thruway does get rather crowded and sloggish a lot of the time, in the greater scheme of things it's not that bad. There are no particular bottlenecks creating stop and go queues, it's just general volume. New York has plenty of roads with far worse problems that ought to be higher prioriries. The Hutch, for example is much more desperately in need of six laning than the Thruway is (albeit probably less politically feasible because NIMBYs).


Also, it still amazes me how on weekends everyone piles on the Thruway while the Taconic remains a total ghost town until you get down to the Poughkeepsie area. How is it that people seemingly don't know it exists?

Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: The Nature Boy on May 05, 2015, 08:38:08 PM
Simple. The Thruway is more well known to tourists and the control city on I-87 is Albany (or New York City if you're coming FROM Albany). People just tend to take the road that appears most obvious.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on May 05, 2015, 08:50:43 PM
Also the lack of services. With the gas stations closed, there's no services close to the road north of NY 115. If you're going to Albany, that's a 55 mile gap without anything that can be easily found. No rest areas, either. The lower speed limit does deter some, yet travel speeds on the Taconic are often higher than those on the Thruway.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Jim on May 05, 2015, 08:51:58 PM
Quote from: The Nature Boy on May 05, 2015, 08:38:08 PM
Simple. The Thruway is more well known to tourists and the control city on I-87 is Albany (or New York City if you're coming FROM Albany). People just tend to take the road that appears most obvious.

At least for me, there's more to it than that.  I really enjoy the Taconic, and used it a lot when I was living in western Mass.  However, if there's weather or it's around dusk, it just doesn't feel safe to me.  The nasty accidents I saw and the sheer number deer I've seen on the Taconic, those made all the more dangerous by the trees being right up near the (nonexistent) shoulders of the road, made me choose the Thruway on a good number of trips.

Now, I live west of Albany and I'm often going south not to go to NYC but to get into NJ for points south, so the Taconic isn't as attractive an option anyway.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: The Nature Boy on May 05, 2015, 09:00:09 PM
Come to think of it, I don't think I've ever actually taken the Taconic. I'll need to take it the next time I'm in the Northeast.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: empirestate on May 05, 2015, 09:08:46 PM
Quote from: cl94 on May 05, 2015, 08:50:43 PM
Also the lack of services. With the gas stations closed, there's no services close to the road north of NY 115. If you're going to Albany, that's a 55 mile gap without anything that can be easily found. No rest areas, either. The lower speed limit does deter some, yet travel speeds on the Taconic are often higher than those on the Thruway.
Quote from: roadman65 on May 05, 2015, 07:33:31 PM
Quote from: empirestate on May 05, 2015, 03:38:55 PM
You do also have the Taconic across the river for non-commercial traffic. For selfish reasons, I do wish it went a little farther, up to Bennington perhaps. Anything to get from NYC to VT/NH without going through CT would be pretty nice. :-)
Take the Taconic to I-90.  Just go east for one exit and then up NY 22.   It is really nice that way.  True NY 22 is not freeway, but it is a good road despite being two lanes.  You can use that up to NY 7 and then east into VT (and NH).  Or use NY 43 to MA 43 to MA 2 East.  MA 2 is a nice ride through the Berkshires.  Once you get to Greenfield you have I-91 to take you into VT or NH.

Well yeah, I know how to get there on the current roads. I go over to NY 22 via NY 295 and then cut across Vermont. But I mean, I'd like a way that isn't an hour longer than CT 15 to I-91 (and variants thereof).

Quote from: cl94 on May 05, 2015, 08:50:43 PM
Also the lack of services. With the gas stations closed, there's no services close to the road north of NY 115.

Sure there is: https://goo.gl/maps/IwkQT  :D
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on May 05, 2015, 09:31:03 PM
Quote from: empirestate on May 05, 2015, 09:08:46 PM
Quote from: cl94 on May 05, 2015, 08:50:43 PM
Also the lack of services. With the gas stations closed, there's no services close to the road north of NY 115. If you're going to Albany, that's a 55 mile gap without anything that can be easily found. No rest areas, either. The lower speed limit does deter some, yet travel speeds on the Taconic are often higher than those on the Thruway.
Quote from: roadman65 on May 05, 2015, 07:33:31 PM
Quote from: empirestate on May 05, 2015, 03:38:55 PM
You do also have the Taconic across the river for non-commercial traffic. For selfish reasons, I do wish it went a little farther, up to Bennington perhaps. Anything to get from NYC to VT/NH without going through CT would be pretty nice. :-)
Take the Taconic to I-90.  Just go east for one exit and then up NY 22.   It is really nice that way.  True NY 22 is not freeway, but it is a good road despite being two lanes.  You can use that up to NY 7 and then east into VT (and NH).  Or use NY 43 to MA 43 to MA 2 East.  MA 2 is a nice ride through the Berkshires.  Once you get to Greenfield you have I-91 to take you into VT or NH.

Well yeah, I know how to get there on the current roads. I go over to NY 22 via NY 295 and then cut across Vermont. But I mean, I'd like a way that isn't an hour longer than CT 15 to I-91 (and variants thereof).

Quote from: cl94 on May 05, 2015, 08:50:43 PM
Also the lack of services. With the gas stations closed, there's no services close to the road north of NY 115.

Sure there is: https://goo.gl/maps/IwkQT  :D

Okay, I missed ONE gas station
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on May 05, 2015, 09:34:58 PM
Quote from: cpzilliacus on May 05, 2015, 03:56:34 PM
I have only once (recently) driven the I-90 part of the Thruway, and only between Albany and Syracuse, and that seemed a lot less busy
It certainly is.  The section between exits 27 and 32 is the third least traveled section of Thruway, after the Berkshire spur and Erie sections.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: The Nature Boy on May 05, 2015, 09:40:26 PM
I remember once being in route from Albany to New Hampshire late at night and almost running out of gas in Vermont. I had forgotten to get gas in Albany before I left and I figured that there would be at least ONE open gas station in the whole state of Vermont.

I was almost wrong.

My gas light came on almost halfway across the state. I ended up finding one right off of I-91. I'd never been so happy to see a gas station on my life. If you ever end up driving through Vermont at night, make sure you have plenty of gas.

The Taconic Parkway could never beat that in terms of "O CRAP I AM RUNNING OUT OF GAS" fear.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: froggie on May 05, 2015, 10:00:10 PM
Quoteand I figured that there would be at least ONE open gas station in the whole state of Vermont.

There are plenty.  But they're all along 89, 91, or in Rutland.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: The Nature Boy on May 05, 2015, 10:11:23 PM
Quote from: froggie on May 05, 2015, 10:00:10 PM
Quoteand I figured that there would be at least ONE open gas station in the whole state of Vermont.

There are plenty.  But they're all along 89, 91, or in Rutland.

I took the NY 7 to US 7 to VT 11 to I-91 route so I passed south of Rutland. If I had been thinking, I would have adjusted my route to hit Rutland once I noticed my tank was low. It was a rookie mistake that I shouldn't have made, especially considering I had been living in the area for four years at that point.

I acknowledge my hyperbole by saying the whole state though. The Green Mountain National Forest area is a terrible place to pass through while low on fuel.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: empirestate on May 06, 2015, 12:19:56 AM
Quote from: cl94 on May 05, 2015, 09:31:03 PM
Quote from: empirestate on May 05, 2015, 09:08:46 PM
Sure there is: https://goo.gl/maps/IwkQT  :D

Okay, I missed ONE gas station

And a very nice diner! What more could you want? :-)
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on May 06, 2015, 03:04:52 AM
Quote from: cl94 on May 05, 2015, 04:20:27 PM
Quote from: empirestate on May 05, 2015, 03:38:55 PM
Quote from: Jim on May 05, 2015, 03:32:05 PM
You have to keep in mind how long ago the road was built.  2 lanes each way was likely sufficient for the time.  The fact that it hasn't been expanded by now is another story.  It does seem long overdue.

You do also have the Taconic across the river for non-commercial traffic. For selfish reasons, I do wish it went a little farther, up to Bennington perhaps. Anything to get from NYC to VT/NH without going through CT would be pretty nice. :-)

If anything, at least it should have gone the last few miles to US 20 so I could avoid the toll. Much harder to shunpike with the current road network.

On the topic of widening the Thruway, it would be nice, but look at the 4-lane sections near Buffalo with much higher amounts of weekday traffic (especially Exits 49-50 and 55-57). Those need to be 6 (and the free section needs to be 8+), but that's not happening anytime soon. It really isn't that expensive to widen to 6 lanes, as every bridge can already carry 3 lanes per direction and always has been able to carry that amount of lanes (because the thing was designed to be widened), but this is New York we're talking about.

I always thought 90 from Buffalo to ROC should be 6 lanes.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: froggie on May 06, 2015, 08:30:16 AM
QuoteI took the NY 7 to US 7 to VT 11 to I-91 route so I passed south of Rutland. If I had been thinking, I would have adjusted my route to hit Rutland once I noticed my tank was low. It was a rookie mistake that I shouldn't have made, especially considering I had been living in the area for four years at that point.

My usual route before I retired.

That said, I believe there's at least one station in Manchester where the pumps are on 24/7 as long as you pay with a credit/debit card.  Would've required you to go into the village though.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: empirestate on May 06, 2015, 10:46:00 AM
Quote from: Buffaboy on May 06, 2015, 03:04:52 AM
I always thought 90 from Buffalo to ROC should be 6 lanes.

Surprisingly, there isn't often a huge volume of traffic between the two cities; while there may be times that 6 lanes would be helpful, that doesn't seem to be the prevailing pattern.

Interestingly, however, they did see fit to build six lanes between Exit 44 (Canandaigua) and Exit 45 (Rochester east), and in fact there are eight lanes between Exit 45 and the Seneca service plaza. The extra fourth lane going WB arises as essentially an exit/entrance auxiliary lane, whereas the one going EB functions as a climbing lane, but both are long enough to be considered full-fledged through lanes in their own right.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on May 06, 2015, 08:42:40 PM
Quote from: empirestate on May 06, 2015, 10:46:00 AM
Quote from: Buffaboy on May 06, 2015, 03:04:52 AM
I always thought 90 from Buffalo to ROC should be 6 lanes.

Surprisingly, there isn't often a huge volume of traffic between the two cities; while there may be times that 6 lanes would be helpful, that doesn't seem to be the prevailing pattern.

Interestingly, however, they did see fit to build six lanes between Exit 44 (Canandaigua) and Exit 45 (Rochester east), and in fact there are eight lanes between Exit 45 and the Seneca service plaza. The extra fourth lane going WB arises as essentially an exit/entrance auxiliary lane, whereas the one going EB functions as a climbing lane, but both are long enough to be considered full-fledged through lanes in their own right.

I noticed that as well. One thing that won't change anytime soon is the need for 2+ lanes east of Rochester and south of Exit 57.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on May 06, 2015, 10:12:04 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on May 06, 2015, 08:42:40 PM
Quote from: empirestate on May 06, 2015, 10:46:00 AM
Quote from: Buffaboy on May 06, 2015, 03:04:52 AM
I always thought 90 from Buffalo to ROC should be 6 lanes.

Surprisingly, there isn't often a huge volume of traffic between the two cities; while there may be times that 6 lanes would be helpful, that doesn't seem to be the prevailing pattern.

Interestingly, however, they did see fit to build six lanes between Exit 44 (Canandaigua) and Exit 45 (Rochester east), and in fact there are eight lanes between Exit 45 and the Seneca service plaza. The extra fourth lane going WB arises as essentially an exit/entrance auxiliary lane, whereas the one going EB functions as a climbing lane, but both are long enough to be considered full-fledged through lanes in their own right.

I noticed that as well. One thing that won't change anytime soon is the need for 2+ lanes east of Rochester and south of Exit 57.

If you mean that it isn't needed. Traffic counts west of Silver Creek (and especially Dunkirk) are the lowest on the system if you exclude the non-Interstate portion of the Berkshire Spur.

6 between Buffalo and Rochester isn't needed. If they ever build an exit at/around Gunnville Rd or Ransom Rd on the eastern edge of Erie County as has been suggested for quite some time, you'd need 6 west of that exit, else the entire Rotterdam-NY 78 segment is fine at 4 lanes. Enough people shunpike for the medium-distance trips to make traffic manageable.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cpzilliacus on May 06, 2015, 10:45:28 PM
Quote from: Duke87 on May 05, 2015, 08:31:55 PM
As for six laning the road from exits 16 to 23... well, that's nearly 100 miles (97, precisely). If we extrapolate out what the widening between exits 23 and 24 cost ($115 million for 6 miles), we're talking nearly $2 billion. Some states would be ambitious enough to undertake such a thing but New York is not one of them.

Though the Thruway does not need to depend on motor fuel tax revenue to fund such a widening, which (at least in theory) should make it easier to fund, perhaps in stages.

Quote from: Duke87 on May 05, 2015, 08:31:55 PM
Meanwhile, while that part of the Thruway does get rather crowded and sloggish a lot of the time, in the greater scheme of things it's not that bad. There are no particular bottlenecks creating stop and go queues, it's just general volume. New York has plenty of roads with far worse problems that ought to be higher prioriries. The Hutch, for example is much more desperately in need of six laning than the Thruway is (albeit probably less politically feasible because NIMBYs).

I assume that any widening of any parkway or freeway-class road (usually called an expressway in New York) south of Rockland County/Westchester County will be instantly opposed by an assortment of activists.  Though the Thruway does have the Tappan Zee replacement project going.

Quote from: Duke87 on May 05, 2015, 08:31:55 PM
Also, it still amazes me how on weekends everyone piles on the Thruway while the Taconic remains a total ghost town until you get down to the Poughkeepsie area. How is it that people seemingly don't know it exists?

As I understand it, I am not supposed to drive my pickup truck on the Taconic State Parkway, since it is not a passenger car.

I have been on the Taconic before, and it is a nice road.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: NJRoadfan on May 06, 2015, 10:51:39 PM
Unless your pickup has commercial plates, you won't have a problem.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on May 06, 2015, 11:01:09 PM
Quote from: NJRoadfan on May 06, 2015, 10:51:39 PM
Unless your pickup has commercial plates, you won't have a problem.

Agree. Pickups are fine unless it has a company logo or commercial plates.

Tappan Zee is mainly being replaced because it's going to fall in the river if it isn't.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cpzilliacus on May 06, 2015, 11:56:07 PM
Quote from: NJRoadfan on May 06, 2015, 10:51:39 PM
Unless your pickup has commercial plates, you won't have a problem.

It has "truck" plate series that Maryland no longer issues (at least for now, all vehicles under 26,000 pounds GVW get the same series of plates).

But no commercial markings or a USDOT number.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: ARMOURERERIC on May 07, 2015, 01:05:29 AM
Funny, I can remember back int he mid 1980's that there was alot of commuter traffic between 290 and 490 LeRoy
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Duke87 on May 07, 2015, 01:15:50 AM
Quote from: cpzilliacus on May 06, 2015, 10:45:28 PM
I assume that any widening of any parkway or freeway-class road (usually called an expressway in New York) south of Rockland County/Westchester County will be instantly opposed by an assortment of activists.  Though the Thruway does have the Tappan Zee replacement project going.

Not necessarily. The Westchester portion of the Taconic gradually six-laned, with the most recent section from NY 35 to the Putnam line having been finished only about 10 years ago. Reconstruction of the Thruway between the bridge and I-287 involved widening the road from six lanes to eight in the 1990s. Stretching back a bit further, some Long Island parkways were widened in the 1980s, and the Sprain Brook Parkway wasn't finished at all until 1982 (and still has its original pavement on the newest segment - wonders of concrete).

You are right, though, that there are political difficulties. With regards to the Hutch itself, note how the section from exit 26 to just south of exit 23 has a wider footprint will full shoulders and some bridges that are wide enough to accommodate six lanes. This is not an accident - this section of the road underwent a massive modernization project back in the 1980s and the original scope of the project involved a widening to six lanes, presumably with the intent of doing the same to other sections later. But then the communities adjacent to this section of the road flipped out at the idea of it being widened, and the state capitulated and finished the project without adding any lanes.

The problem wasn't any sort of activists, it was just plain old NIMBYs - the state was able to widen the Taconic because the communities along it more or less supported it, welcoming the wider, safer, less congested road. The Hutch meanwhile passes through some old money communities where you have a high concentration of influential people. People who will automatically oppose any significant alterations to anything nearby because it might negatively impact their property values. More noise, more pollution, more plebians darkening their perfect community with their filthy five figure salaries, etc. etc.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Dougtone on May 07, 2015, 06:25:02 AM
Quote from: cpzilliacus on May 05, 2015, 01:58:35 PM
Has anyone ever heard of any plans by the New York State Thruway Authority to even study the idea of widening the I-87 part of the Thruway so it is six lanes total (three each way) all the way from Harriman (Thruway Exit 16) to Albany (Exit 23)?

IMO, seems to be needed to handle the weekend traffic.

Definitely. Long backups on Fridays going northbound and Sundays going southbound seem to be the norm on the Thruway, more so between Exit 16 (Harriman) and Exit 19 (Kingston), but delays can be found further north than Kingston as well at times.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Pete from Boston on May 07, 2015, 07:54:28 AM

Quote from: cpzilliacus on May 06, 2015, 11:56:07 PM
Quote from: NJRoadfan on May 06, 2015, 10:51:39 PM
Unless your pickup has commercial plates, you won't have a problem.

It has "truck" plate series that Maryland no longer issues (at least for now, all vehicles under 26,000 pounds GVW get the same series of plates).

But no commercial markings or a USDOT number.

This got talked about a bit on MTR in the early 2000s because, if I recall correctly, New York had a change of view on trucks on parkways, and began to allow light trucks with passenger registrations.  I didn't have a truck at the time so I didn't pay close attention, but nowadays I drive wherever since the sticker in my truck window says "passenger non-commercial."
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: PHLBOS on May 07, 2015, 09:08:10 AM
Quote from: Pete from Boston on May 07, 2015, 07:54:28 AM

Quote from: cpzilliacus on May 06, 2015, 11:56:07 PM
Quote from: NJRoadfan on May 06, 2015, 10:51:39 PM
Unless your pickup has commercial plates, you won't have a problem.

It has "truck" plate series that Maryland no longer issues (at least for now, all vehicles under 26,000 pounds GVW get the same series of plates).

But no commercial markings or a USDOT number.

This got talked about a bit on MTR in the early 2000s because, if I recall correctly, New York had a change of view on trucks on parkways, and began to allow light trucks with passenger registrations.  I didn't have a truck at the time so I didn't pay close attention, but nowadays I drive wherever since the sticker in my truck window says "passenger non-commercial."
If memory serves, Massachusetts used to require that all pickup trucks and cargo vans (Ford Econolines for example) receive commercial plates regardless of usage as well.  The RMV changed that rule/policy sometime during the 90s.  I know that because when my brother bought his then-new '97 Ford Ranger pick-up; it had a standard-issue MA plate vs. the commerical plates.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: empirestate on May 07, 2015, 10:19:16 AM
Quote from: Pete from Boston on May 07, 2015, 07:54:28 AM

Quote from: cpzilliacus on May 06, 2015, 11:56:07 PM
Quote from: NJRoadfan on May 06, 2015, 10:51:39 PM
Unless your pickup has commercial plates, you won't have a problem.

It has "truck" plate series that Maryland no longer issues (at least for now, all vehicles under 26,000 pounds GVW get the same series of plates).

But no commercial markings or a USDOT number.

This got talked about a bit on MTR in the early 2000s because, if I recall correctly, New York had a change of view on trucks on parkways, and began to allow light trucks with passenger registrations.  I didn't have a truck at the time so I didn't pay close attention, but nowadays I drive wherever since the sticker in my truck window says "passenger non-commercial."

That's right, certain pick-ups can be registered as passenger vehicles:
http://dmv.ny.gov/registration/register-pick-truck-passenger-class-vehicle

Also, you can take seats out of a car to make it a commercial vehicle, or add seats to a cargo van to make it a passenger vehicle. You can register a conversion van as passenger but it has to remain converted:
http://dmv.ny.gov/vehicle-registration/vehicle-modifications-and-registration-class
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on May 07, 2015, 10:37:31 AM
Quote from: ARMOURERERIC on May 07, 2015, 01:05:29 AM
Funny, I can remember back int he mid 1980's that there was a lot of commuter traffic between 290 and 490 LeRoy

I-490 has remarkably low traffic counts west of the immediate Rochester suburbs. AADT is well under 20,000 for the stretch. Go on it today and it's pretty empty.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: NJRoadfan on May 07, 2015, 06:26:55 PM
Quote from: empirestate on May 07, 2015, 10:19:16 AM
Also, you can take seats out of a car to make it a commercial vehicle, or add seats to a cargo van to make it a passenger vehicle. You can register a conversion van as passenger but it has to remain converted:
http://dmv.ny.gov/vehicle-registration/vehicle-modifications-and-registration-class

NJ allows any vehicle to be registered as commercial, including plain old sedans. Under NY law, those vehicles wouldn't be allowed on parkways. Using height and weight restrictions makes more sense then restricting by vehicle-use or registration class, much less grey areas. The restrictions north of Exit 105 on the Garden State Parkway are clearly defined as vehicles 10,000 lbs or more (6 tires or 3-or-more-axles). It excludes trucks without excluding passenger cars pulling trailers, or those handful of SUVs that tip the weight limit scale (think Ford Excursion).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: empirestate on May 07, 2015, 06:42:13 PM
Quote from: NJRoadfan on May 07, 2015, 06:26:55 PM
NJ allows any vehicle to be registered as commercial, including plain old sedans. Under NY law, those vehicles wouldn't be allowed on parkways. Using height and weight restrictions makes more sense then restricting by vehicle-use or registration class, much less grey areas. The restrictions north of Exit 105 on the Garden State Parkway are clearly defined as vehicles 10,000 lbs or more (6 tires or 3-or-more-axles). It excludes trucks without excluding passenger cars pulling trailers, or those handful of SUVs that tip the weight limit scale (think Ford Excursion).

Height and weight does seem to make more sense, except that the original theory behind the NY parkway restrictions has to do with the commercial purpose[/url] of the vehicle, not necessarily its physical characteristics. Not that that makes a whole lot of sense today; for example, taxis are allowed on the parkways, and not only are those used for a commercial purpose, the vehicles themselves are a commercial enterprise. And it's probably not appropriate to commute to and from work using the parkways, because that definitely hinders their recreational purpose.

School buses, on the other hand, aren't allowed on the parkways, which is ironic because they are passenger vehicles with an arguably non-commercial function. But you do see a lot of them on the parkways anyway, along with plenty of small commercial vehicles, because it's downstate New York, where people pretty much just do whatever. (It's also likely that certain school buses have been permitted by NYSDOT to use parts of the parkways, as some public buses have also.)
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Sam on May 07, 2015, 08:16:17 PM
Quote from: empirestate on May 07, 2015, 06:42:13 PM
commercial purpose of the vehicle, not necessarily its physical characteristics.

One reason I heard for the change  allowing passenger registrations on pickup trucks was that so many had become "family cars" with no business ties at all. Families were paying more to register a compact pickup than a heavier full-size car, and still being excluded from the LOSP on their weekend camping trips to Hamlin Beach, etc.

I think the Thruway charged by axle, so pickups and cars paid the same toll regardless of reg type, but I think you couldn't get a commuter permit on a pickup because of the commercial reg, even if it was your personal "car".
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Sam on May 07, 2015, 09:13:19 PM

Quote from: Sam on March 30, 2015, 08:35:05 PM
Somewhere I once found a list of the official names of each segment of the Thruway system. In addition to the Niagara and Berkshire sections, there is a Mohawk Trail, Iroquois Path, etc. I'd love to be able to find that again.

Found it! Starts on page 5.

http://www.thruway.ny.gov/about/compliance/thruwaystatutes.pdf
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on May 07, 2015, 09:38:02 PM
The Ontario section should be called "the boring section".
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Duke87 on May 07, 2015, 11:14:39 PM
Quote from: Sam on May 07, 2015, 08:16:17 PM
I think the Thruway charged by axle, so pickups and cars paid the same toll regardless of reg type, but I think you couldn't get a commuter permit on a pickup because of the commercial reg, even if it was your personal "car".

The Thruway still charges by axle. At least, a Uhaul van pays the same cash toll as a car at the New Rochelle toll plaza. This has been confirmed empirically.

MTA meanwhile charges double the car toll to cross one of their bridges in the same vehicle. And you have to pay the highly inflated cash rate since you can't use your EZpass tag in there (different vehicle class).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Alps on May 07, 2015, 11:39:43 PM
Quote from: Duke87 on May 07, 2015, 11:14:39 PM
MTA meanwhile charges double the car toll to cross one of their bridges in the same vehicle. And you have to pay the highly inflated cash rate since you can't use your EZpass tag in there (different vehicle class).
Who would know?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Duke87 on May 08, 2015, 10:39:19 AM
Quote from: Alps on May 07, 2015, 11:39:43 PM
Quote from: Duke87 on May 07, 2015, 11:14:39 PM
MTA meanwhile charges double the car toll to cross one of their bridges in the same vehicle. And you have to pay the highly inflated cash rate since you can't use your EZpass tag in there (different vehicle class).
Who would know?

Any one of the several cops walking around at every MTA toll plaza? I wasn't going to risk getting a ticket over $10 in toll money.

That said it looks like you can request a van tag on your existing account. In fact you can request a tag for any type of vehicle that doesn't require a CDL to drive without creating a separate account for it. Okay, good to know for next time.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on May 09, 2015, 12:41:02 AM
Went on the Thruway yesterday from exit 31 to 55, first time in a while. Here are some thoughts:

Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: yanksfan6129 on May 09, 2015, 10:40:19 AM
Quote from: Buffaboy on May 09, 2015, 12:41:02 AM
Went on the Thruway yesterday from exit 31 to 55, first time in a while. Here are some thoughts:



  • West of Syracuse, for about 10-15 miles it's a concrete roadbed. Why is that?


That section of Thruway was reconstructed around 2010 or 2011, if my memory serves.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on May 09, 2015, 11:30:21 AM
Quote from: yanksfan6129 on May 09, 2015, 10:40:19 AM
Quote from: Buffaboy on May 09, 2015, 12:41:02 AM
Went on the Thruway yesterday from exit 31 to 55, first time in a while. Here are some thoughts:



  • West of Syracuse, for about 10-15 miles it's a concrete roadbed. Why is that?


That section of Thruway was reconstructed around 2010 or 2011, if my memory serves.

Correct
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on May 09, 2015, 02:10:08 PM
Quote from: cl94 on May 09, 2015, 11:30:21 AM
Quote from: yanksfan6129 on May 09, 2015, 10:40:19 AM
Quote from: Buffaboy on May 09, 2015, 12:41:02 AM
Went on the Thruway yesterday from exit 31 to 55, first time in a while. Here are some thoughts:



  • West of Syracuse, for about 10-15 miles it's a concrete roadbed. Why is that?


That section of Thruway was reconstructed around 2010 or 2011, if my memory serves.

Correct

Do you think the monotube cantilevers will be the preferred type of gantry for the NYTA?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on May 09, 2015, 02:49:23 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on May 09, 2015, 02:10:08 PM
Quote from: cl94 on May 09, 2015, 11:30:21 AM
Quote from: yanksfan6129 on May 09, 2015, 10:40:19 AM
Quote from: Buffaboy on May 09, 2015, 12:41:02 AM
Went on the Thruway yesterday from exit 31 to 55, first time in a while. Here are some thoughts:



  • West of Syracuse, for about 10-15 miles it's a concrete roadbed. Why is that?


That section of Thruway was reconstructed around 2010 or 2011, if my memory serves.

Correct

Do you think the monotube cantilevers will be the preferred type of gantry for the NYTA?

Exit 50 is likely a test case, as I have not seen any more in plans at this time. It might be a one-and-done, might not. When I start my summer job, I might learn more about what's going on with that.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: route17fan on May 09, 2015, 09:56:20 PM
Quote from: yanksfan6129 on May 09, 2015, 10:40:19 AM
Quote from: Buffaboy on May 09, 2015, 12:41:02 AM
Went on the Thruway yesterday from exit 31 to 55, first time in a while. Here are some thoughts:



  • West of Syracuse, for about 10-15 miles it's a concrete roadbed. Why is that?

To quote many a New York roadgeek - I think the short answer to that is because it's consistently inconsistent.

Another example of that is NY 17/I-86 near Newtown Battlefield is new concrete as well. Another thread to be sure, but another example of random new surfacing.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on May 09, 2015, 10:00:47 PM
Quote from: route17fan on May 09, 2015, 09:56:20 PM
Quote from: yanksfan6129 on May 09, 2015, 10:40:19 AM
Quote from: Buffaboy on May 09, 2015, 12:41:02 AM
Went on the Thruway yesterday from exit 31 to 55, first time in a while. Here are some thoughts:



  • West of Syracuse, for about 10-15 miles it's a concrete roadbed. Why is that?

To quote many a New York roadgeek - I think the short answer to that is because it's consistently inconsistent.

Another example of that is NY 17/I-86 near Newtown Battlefield is new concrete as well. Another thread to be sure, but another example of random new surfacing.

That's concrete because the entire thing was realigned 4-5 years ago when they removed the at-grade intersections.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: route17fan on May 09, 2015, 10:03:56 PM
understood - I was just pointing out that it was new (and very very smooth) concrete just like the thruway section.  :bigass:
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: route17fan on May 09, 2015, 10:52:22 PM
Quote from: yanksfan6129 on May 09, 2015, 10:40:19 AM
Quote from: Buffaboy on May 09, 2015, 12:41:02 AM
Went on the Thruway yesterday from exit 31 to 55, first time in a while. Here are some thoughts:



  • West of Syracuse, for about 10-15 miles it's a concrete roadbed. Why is that?


I guess, now that I think about it, is that a better example is that section between Rochester (45) and is it 43 (?) that also happens to be concrete...just because. :)   it also keeps it on topic.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on May 10, 2015, 12:32:53 AM
Quote from: route17fan on May 09, 2015, 10:52:22 PM
Quote from: yanksfan6129 on May 09, 2015, 10:40:19 AM
Quote from: Buffaboy on May 09, 2015, 12:41:02 AM
Went on the Thruway yesterday from exit 31 to 55, first time in a while. Here are some thoughts:



  • West of Syracuse, for about 10-15 miles it's a concrete roadbed. Why is that?


I guess, now that I think about it, is that a better example is that section between Rochester (45) and is it 43 (?) that also happens to be concrete...just because. :)   it also keeps it on topic.

A really good example of that is a ~75 ft rough concrete section on the SB side of I-190/Niagara Spur between Exit 1 and I-90. Why it wasn't overlain with asphalt like the surrounding 1/2 mile or so remains a mystery to me. Reversing it, there's a ~0.9 mile asphalt section of I-190 in the middle of a 14 mile stretch of concrete surface just north of downtown Buffalo.

Then you have the reconstructed section of the mainline SW of Hamburg. The northern/eastern half of the EB side in this area is concrete with asphalt shoulders, while the rest of the project area, including the entire WB side, is asphalt.

At this point, I'm convinced NYSTA just picks surfacing material out of a hat, because there's no consistency, even within the same project.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: route17fan on May 10, 2015, 01:47:19 AM
Excellent point - I forgot about 190   :nod:
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: froggie on May 10, 2015, 09:12:45 AM
I think a few people were missing /quote tags.  Hard to tell who wrote what...
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on May 10, 2015, 07:22:04 PM
Quote from: cl94 on May 10, 2015, 12:32:53 AM
A really good example of that is a ~75 ft rough concrete section on the SB side of I-190/Niagara Spur between Exit 1 and I-90. Why it wasn't overlain with asphalt like the surrounding 1/2 mile or so remains a mystery to me. Reversing it, there's a ~0.9 mile asphalt section of I-190 in the middle of a 14 mile stretch of concrete surface just north of downtown Buffalo.
I assume that's because those sections are located at the former Buffalo and Black Rock barriers.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on May 10, 2015, 08:24:22 PM
Quote from: vdeane on May 10, 2015, 07:22:04 PM
Quote from: cl94 on May 10, 2015, 12:32:53 AM
A really good example of that is a ~75 ft rough concrete section on the SB side of I-190/Niagara Spur between Exit 1 and I-90. Why it wasn't overlain with asphalt like the surrounding 1/2 mile or so remains a mystery to me. Reversing it, there's a ~0.9 mile asphalt section of I-190 in the middle of a 14 mile stretch of concrete surface just north of downtown Buffalo.
I assume that's because those sections are located at the former Buffalo and Black Rock barriers.

Nope. The odd concrete section is under a bridge on the side opposite the barrier and the odd asphalt section is around Exit 8. Buffalo barrier was overlain and the Black Rock barrier got a new concrete roadbed.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on May 11, 2015, 12:48:14 AM
Quote from: cl94 on May 10, 2015, 12:32:53 AM
Quote from: route17fan on May 09, 2015, 10:52:22 PM
Quote from: yanksfan6129 on May 09, 2015, 10:40:19 AM
Quote from: Buffaboy on May 09, 2015, 12:41:02 AM
Went on the Thruway yesterday from exit 31 to 55, first time in a while. Here are some thoughts:



  • West of Syracuse, for about 10-15 miles it's a concrete roadbed. Why is that?


I guess, now that I think about it, is that a better example is that section between Rochester (45) and is it 43 (?) that also happens to be concrete...just because. :)   it also keeps it on topic.

A really good example of that is a ~75 ft rough concrete section on the SB side of I-190/Niagara Spur between Exit 1 and I-90. Why it wasn't overlain with asphalt like the surrounding 1/2 mile or so remains a mystery to me. Reversing it, there's a ~0.9 mile asphalt section of I-190 in the middle of a 14 mile stretch of concrete surface just north of downtown Buffalo.

Then you have the reconstructed section of the mainline SW of Hamburg. The northern/eastern half of the EB side in this area is concrete with asphalt shoulders, while the rest of the project area, including the entire WB side, is asphalt.

At this point, I'm convinced NYSTA just picks surfacing material out of a hat, because there's no consistency, even within the same project.

There is concrete right outside of Hamburg? I'm guessing it goes to 57b. Must've been added within the past couple of years, because I remember the reconstruction was going on but I thought it was just going to be asphalt.

It really is "consistently inconsistent."
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on May 11, 2015, 08:26:18 PM
The limits of a specific paving job and the type of project (simple resurfacing, major rehabilitation, full depth reconstruction) is determined largely by the surface crack rating and funding, as is the type of pavement to be selected.  After many decades of projects being done, it certainly can appear random, especially since projects spanning entire corridors are becoming more and more rare as NYSDOT and NYSTA are currently in "preservation mode".
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on May 25, 2015, 06:22:06 PM
Just visited the canal park in Port Byron today...
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fnysroads.com%2Fimages%2Fgallery%2FNY%2Fi90%2F101_2303-s.JPG&hash=71b08edce6159b607e2ae8b929b2914fdde123cf)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fnysroads.com%2Fimages%2Fgallery%2FNY%2Fi90%2F101_2304-s.JPG&hash=ad232d2f8f4ae1cb7b5a18ecc4c8729632005a8c)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fnysroads.com%2Fimages%2Fgallery%2FNY%2Fi90%2F101_2305-s.JPG&hash=f984c2ddecbe0c7c037bf0f69da1cb118406c12b)

More pics/full size on the bottom of my I-90 page: http://nysroads.com/photos.php?route=i90&state=NY
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on May 25, 2015, 07:40:53 PM
Alright, I've got the monotube shot:

(https://c1.staticflickr.com/9/8848/17905288915_bdcac1fd75_z.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/thehzR)

As you can see, the Cleveland Drive overpass is gone (the assembly is immediately before where the overpass was/will be). Clearview, Interstate shield is Series C FHWA (thankfully...NYSTA has Clearview numerals a few exits down). Ramp splits away at the sign, so the sign is in error by not having upward-slanting arrows to the right and no mention is made of this being the last free exit, the latter of which was on the sign it replaced. Sorry for the bad picture, but I was driving and it was raining when I took it.

It might look like something straight out of Pennsylvania but, unfortunately, this is a good 70 miles from the PA border.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on May 26, 2015, 12:12:42 AM
Great picture, I saw it I think the day it went up actually; I was coming home from school a few weeks ago, but it was blocked by oncoming traffic and construction equipment preparing to tear down the bridge.

Also vdeane, can you actually drive through the heritage canal lock? That would be insane and definitely a must see when I go back.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: froggie on May 26, 2015, 07:51:27 AM
Can't drive through it, but you can walk or bike.  It's a bike path.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on May 26, 2015, 08:15:00 PM
Yep, just a walking/bike path.  The inside one is a loop; the outside ones just dead end.  They haven't even paved the part connecting the lock to the parking lot yet.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: yanksfan6129 on May 26, 2015, 08:21:42 PM
When did that monotube go up? I didn't notice it the last time I passed through that area.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on May 26, 2015, 08:41:42 PM
Quote from: yanksfan6129 on May 26, 2015, 08:21:42 PM
When did that monotube go up? I didn't notice it the last time I passed through that area.

Couple weeks ago
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on July 07, 2015, 12:12:40 AM
So I was daydreaming about when/where AET would be coming on the Thruway and did a Google search, and at last check it looks like it's only going downstate. I dug a little deeper and found this page (http://www.nysroads.com/fic-thwy-aet.php) by vdeane that makes the exit 31 interchange look a lot simpler and cost-effective than the one I created in post 242 (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=13527.msg2052802#msg2052802). Of course it's just an abstract idea but it is cohesive nonetheless.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: MASTERNC on July 11, 2015, 07:47:03 PM
I traveled on the western section of the Thruway last week and noticed the speed limit had been decreased in the past 12 months from 65 MPH to 55 MPH in the section that traverses the Seneca Nation.  Also, the road was fairly rough (with permanent signs warning of such conditions).

Does anyone know if this was due to a dispute with the Senecas regarding road repairs or if the Senecas implemented the speed limit change (since they claim sovereignty in that stretch)?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on July 11, 2015, 07:52:13 PM
Quote from: MASTERNC on July 11, 2015, 07:47:03 PM
I traveled on the western section of the Thruway last week and noticed the speed limit had been decreased in the past 12 months from 65 MPH to 55 MPH in the section that traverses the Seneca Nation.  Also, the road was fairly rough (with permanent signs warning of such conditions).

Does anyone know if this was due to a dispute with the Senecas regarding road repairs or if the Senecas implemented the speed limit change (since they claim sovereignty in that stretch)?

Construction. A lot of the area is being redone this year. Conditions are due to the dispute over the casinos that started a long time ago.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: MASTERNC on July 11, 2015, 10:55:08 PM
Quote from: cl94 on July 11, 2015, 07:52:13 PM
Quote from: MASTERNC on July 11, 2015, 07:47:03 PM
I traveled on the western section of the Thruway last week and noticed the speed limit had been decreased in the past 12 months from 65 MPH to 55 MPH in the section that traverses the Seneca Nation.  Also, the road was fairly rough (with permanent signs warning of such conditions).

Does anyone know if this was due to a dispute with the Senecas regarding road repairs or if the Senecas implemented the speed limit change (since they claim sovereignty in that stretch)?

Construction. A lot of the area is being redone this year. Conditions are due to the dispute over the casinos that started a long time ago.

Maybe not this year.  I don't recall mileposts, but if this is correct, those signs (and speed reduction) will remain for the next few years.

QuoteEast of Silver Creek (MP 451.5) to Silver Creek (Exit 58, MP 455.2): Pavement Rehabilitation

    Location: ML - MP: 451.5 to 455.2
    Estimated Letting Year: 2017
    Approved Construction Amount: $26,000,000.00
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on July 11, 2015, 11:01:16 PM
Quote from: MASTERNC on July 11, 2015, 10:55:08 PM
Quote from: cl94 on July 11, 2015, 07:52:13 PM
Quote from: MASTERNC on July 11, 2015, 07:47:03 PM
I traveled on the western section of the Thruway last week and noticed the speed limit had been decreased in the past 12 months from 65 MPH to 55 MPH in the section that traverses the Seneca Nation.  Also, the road was fairly rough (with permanent signs warning of such conditions).

Does anyone know if this was due to a dispute with the Senecas regarding road repairs or if the Senecas implemented the speed limit change (since they claim sovereignty in that stretch)?

Construction. A lot of the area is being redone this year. Conditions are due to the dispute over the casinos that started a long time ago.

Maybe not this year.  I don't recall mileposts, but if this is correct, those signs (and speed reduction) will remain for the next few years.

QuoteEast of Silver Creek (MP 451.5) to Silver Creek (Exit 58, MP 455.2): Pavement Rehabilitation

    Location: ML - MP: 451.5 to 455.2
    Estimated Letting Year: 2017
    Approved Construction Amount: $26,000,000.00

Construction is going on right now with bridge replacements. Don't know how long stuff will be going on over there.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on July 11, 2015, 11:08:49 PM
Quote from: cl94 on July 11, 2015, 11:01:16 PM
Quote from: MASTERNC on July 11, 2015, 10:55:08 PM
Quote from: cl94 on July 11, 2015, 07:52:13 PM
Quote from: MASTERNC on July 11, 2015, 07:47:03 PM
I traveled on the western section of the Thruway last week and noticed the speed limit had been decreased in the past 12 months from 65 MPH to 55 MPH in the section that traverses the Seneca Nation.  Also, the road was fairly rough (with permanent signs warning of such conditions).

Does anyone know if this was due to a dispute with the Senecas regarding road repairs or if the Senecas implemented the speed limit change (since they claim sovereignty in that stretch)?

Construction. A lot of the area is being redone this year. Conditions are due to the dispute over the casinos that started a long time ago.

Maybe not this year.  I don't recall mileposts, but if this is correct, those signs (and speed reduction) will remain for the next few years.

QuoteEast of Silver Creek (MP 451.5) to Silver Creek (Exit 58, MP 455.2): Pavement Rehabilitation

    Location: ML - MP: 451.5 to 455.2
    Estimated Letting Year: 2017
    Approved Construction Amount: $26,000,000.00

Construction is going on right now with bridge replacements. Don't know how long stuff will be going on over there.

One bridge is wrapping up (4 Mile Level Road?), another is just getting started (Milestrip Road maybe?).

Bridges on the Thruway in the area outside the reservation are being completely redone (traffic down to a couple of lanes).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on July 11, 2015, 11:10:58 PM
It'll be a couple straight years of projects. I know they're also doing work at the Cattaraugus Creek bridge at some point. Area certainly needs it.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on July 11, 2015, 11:13:55 PM

Quote from: cl94 on July 11, 2015, 11:10:58 PM
It'll be a couple straight years of projects. I know they're also doing work at the Cattaraugus Creek bridge at some point. Area certainly needs it.

I don't know if it's structurally deficient, but the decking is definitely worn as well as its guardrails.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on July 11, 2015, 11:37:03 PM
In my experience, Seneca Nation - State relations are a bigger deal on I-86 (stay out of the right lane EB if they haven't fixed it yet) and along US 219.   In general, I'd say those relations haven't been the best in recent years, either.

Then again, there was that time in 1992 where they dropped burning tire barricades onto the Thruway...
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on July 12, 2015, 12:33:19 AM
Quote from: Rothman on July 11, 2015, 11:37:03 PM
In my experience, Seneca Nation - State relations are a bigger deal on I-86 (stay out of the right lane EB if they haven't fixed it yet) and along US 219.   In general, I'd say those relations haven't been the best in recent years, either.

Then again, there was that time in 1992 where they dropped burning tire barricades onto the Thruway...

They supposedly fixed I-86. Was closed all last summer for reconstruction.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: route17fan on July 12, 2015, 12:37:04 AM
Quote from: Rothman on July 11, 2015, 11:37:03 PM
In my experience, Seneca Nation - State relations are a bigger deal on I-86 (stay out of the right lane EB if they haven't fixed it yet) and along US 219.   In general, I'd say those relations haven't been the best in recent years, either.

Then again, there was that time in 1992 where they dropped burning tire barricades onto the Thruway...

I remember that! It made it to CNN at the time and my family and I were going back and forth to Olean on - back then NY 17 - and you're right, that section near Seneca Junction will make your teeth rattle.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on July 12, 2015, 12:51:35 AM
I read that in 2009 the Seneca Nation considered installing toll booths on the Thruway in the reservation. That would have been a bureaucratic nightmare.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on July 12, 2015, 08:45:27 AM
Quote from: cl94 on July 12, 2015, 12:33:19 AM
Quote from: Rothman on July 11, 2015, 11:37:03 PM
In my experience, Seneca Nation - State relations are a bigger deal on I-86 (stay out of the right lane EB if they haven't fixed it yet) and along US 219.   In general, I'd say those relations haven't been the best in recent years, either.

Then again, there was that time in 1992 where they dropped burning tire barricades onto the Thruway...

They supposedly fixed I-86. Was closed all last summer for reconstruction.

This wasn't the project that went right up to the western boundary, right?  If it was actually done through the SNI land, that's great and quite long overdue (as I think everyone involved -- NYSDOT and SNI -- would admit).  I remember the back-and-forth with SNI and supposedly everyone just saying, "Let's just get this done now since it's so horrible" at some point, but I wasn't sure if the project actually got authorized (and, obviously, I haven't been out there for over a year or so).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on July 12, 2015, 12:36:48 PM
Quote from: Rothman on July 12, 2015, 08:45:27 AM
Quote from: cl94 on July 12, 2015, 12:33:19 AM
Quote from: Rothman on July 11, 2015, 11:37:03 PM
In my experience, Seneca Nation - State relations are a bigger deal on I-86 (stay out of the right lane EB if they haven't fixed it yet) and along US 219.   In general, I'd say those relations haven't been the best in recent years, either.

Then again, there was that time in 1992 where they dropped burning tire barricades onto the Thruway...

They supposedly fixed I-86. Was closed all last summer for reconstruction.

This wasn't the project that went right up to the western boundary, right?  If it was actually done through the SNI land, that's great and quite long overdue (as I think everyone involved -- NYSDOT and SNI -- would admit).  I remember the back-and-forth with SNI and supposedly everyone just saying, "Let's just get this done now since it's so horrible" at some point, but I wasn't sure if the project actually got authorized (and, obviously, I haven't been out there for over a year or so).

I know the section on Seneca land was closed for several months last year. I'm assuming that it was fixed. I'll try and get down there at some point to see.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on July 12, 2015, 04:23:34 PM
I recall reading several news articles about how I-86 between exits 21 and 23 was closed for reconstruction last year.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Sam on July 15, 2015, 12:34:44 PM
A couple of random Thruway-related observations from the past few weeks (no pics as I was driving):

Lighting has been added to a few BGSes and gore signs. At Batavia and Pembroke there are arms mounted to the tops of the signs. East of Syracuse there are work lights on wooden posts with solar panels nearby.

Lighted ramps leading to and from the canal locks near Fonda are under construction. Another heritage area, perhaps?

There are TOLL auxiliary signs on the route sign assemblies on NY 77. Those are the first of those I've seen anywhere.  (https://goo.gl/maps/J5Rvf, https://goo.gl/maps/ijXjd)

Also on the mainline at Pembroke are the comically boldface *DO* *NOT* STOP IN LANE signs. I'm sure those are for Darien Lake concert traffic, but they are so adamant it makes me chuckle. (https://goo.gl/maps/NaMrK)

Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on July 15, 2015, 12:38:13 PM
Lighted BGSes? That's odd.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: machias on July 15, 2015, 12:45:06 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on July 15, 2015, 12:38:13 PM
Lighted BGSes? That's odd.

Yeah, there are solar panels provided the juice for the lights that have been put up over the past year or so. The Thruway Authority did the same thing for one of the WB panels for Exit 32. I don't know if this is a way around reflectivity requirements or what's going on. I don't recall the lit panels being that old. I'm hoping they don't get replaced because then we'll be stuck with Clearview and if the new signs in Buffalo are any indication, they'll be less readable than the older lit up signs at night.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on July 15, 2015, 12:53:17 PM

Quote from: upstatenyroads on July 15, 2015, 12:45:06 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on July 15, 2015, 12:38:13 PM
Lighted BGSes? That's odd.

Yeah, there are solar panels provided the juice for the lights that have been put up over the past year or so. The Thruway Authority did the same thing for one of the WB panels for Exit 32. I don't know if this is a way around reflectivity requirements or what's going on. I don't recall the lit panels being that old. I'm hoping they don't get replaced because then we'll be stuck with Clearview and if the new signs in Buffalo are any indication, they'll be less readable than the older lit up signs at night.

Do you think they will come to the Ontario section, or is this just one of those trial things?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on July 15, 2015, 03:12:31 PM
The lights have been in place west of Buffalo in several locations for over a year. I know this has been mentioned several times before. "Toll" assemblies on NY 77 went up no later than 2013, probably earlier.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on July 15, 2015, 03:23:53 PM
Quote from: Sam on July 15, 2015, 12:34:44 PM
There are TOLL auxiliary signs on the route sign assemblies on NY 77. Those are the first of those I've seen anywhere.  (https://goo.gl/maps/J5Rvf, https://goo.gl/maps/ijXjd)
Not the only ones around.  I've seen them on Fuller Rd at I-90 (pictured) and at the NY 31F/I-490 interchange.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fnysroads.com%2Fimages%2Fgallery%2FNY%2Fcr11-156%2F101_0757-s.JPG&hash=ff6f4cf22a8639b231e50d862494713570b8c567)
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: froggie on July 15, 2015, 07:53:43 PM
What's the construction in the background?  Some SUNY expansion?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on July 15, 2015, 08:14:31 PM
Quote from: froggie on July 15, 2015, 07:53:43 PM
What's the construction in the background?  Some SUNY expansion?

That's SUNY Poly's Albany campus. If you study nanoscale engineering (only about 100-300 students), you'd go there. Everyone else attends the other campus.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: thenetwork on July 15, 2015, 09:12:05 PM
Quote from: cl94 on July 15, 2015, 03:12:31 PM
The lights have been in place west of Buffalo in several locations for over a year. I know this has been mentioned several times before. "Toll" assemblies on NY 77 went up no later than 2013, probably earlier.

White-on-Black TOLL banners???  That is....odd. 
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: WNYroadgeek on July 16, 2015, 12:15:35 AM
Quote from: Sam on July 15, 2015, 12:34:44 PM
There are TOLL auxiliary signs on the route sign assemblies on NY 77. Those are the first of those I've seen anywhere.  (https://goo.gl/maps/J5Rvf, https://goo.gl/maps/ijXjd)

There's also some (properly rendered in white on blue) along US 20 in Pavilion (namely at its' intersections with NY 19 and NY 63).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on July 24, 2015, 06:28:28 PM
Another round of new advances for Exit 9 is up along I-190. All FHWA. I stress that this is an NYSDOT project, but it certainly makes one wonder if NYSTA is preparing to drop Clearview.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on July 24, 2015, 06:38:52 PM

Quote from: cl94 on July 24, 2015, 06:28:28 PM
Another round of new advances for Exit 9 is up along I-190. All FHWA. I stress that this is an NYSDOT project, but it certainly makes one wonder if NYSTA is preparing to drop Clearview.

Why would they want to drop it? It's becoming the standard.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on July 24, 2015, 08:32:57 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on July 24, 2015, 06:38:52 PM

Quote from: cl94 on July 24, 2015, 06:28:28 PM
Another round of new advances for Exit 9 is up along I-190. All FHWA. I stress that this is an NYSDOT project, but it certainly makes one wonder if NYSTA is preparing to drop Clearview.

Why would they want to drop it? It's becoming the standard.

Because sources tell us that the FHWA is getting ready to rescind interim approval. I talked to a couple people from FHWA at TRB about it and they're preparing to pull the plug. The font is either equivalent to or worse than FHWA fonts depending on application and many states/agencies are blatantly violating some of the regulations.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: hbelkins on July 24, 2015, 09:03:33 PM
Quote from: cl94 on July 24, 2015, 08:32:57 PMmany states/agencies are blatantly violating some of the regulations.

The fact that there are regulations about the use of fonts on signs... Oh wait, don't get me started.  :banghead:
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Zeffy on July 24, 2015, 09:04:04 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on July 24, 2015, 06:38:52 PM
Because sources tell us that the FHWA is getting ready to rescind interim approval. I talked to a couple people from FHWA at TRB about it and they're preparing to pull the plug. The font is either equivalent to or worse than FHWA fonts depending on application and many states/agencies are blatantly violating some of the regulations.

My county, which was one of two counties in New Jersey to use Clearview for their street sign blades and signs, seems to have backpedaled on that. I've seen many new FHWA street blades in Somerset County which makes me think that they are dropping it as well. NJDOT has already said that the Clearview on I-295 and I-195 was an experiment, which ultimately failed.

If you use it like PennDOT / PTC does now (which is only used in the destination legend and nothing else), then Clearview is great. However, if you use it like MDSHA, NYSTA, or a number of state signing agencies, then you are impacting the legibility of the sign. Series EEM will become the new standard for destination legends as EM's main feature was a thicker stroke width to accommodate button copy reflectors. We don't use button copy (sadly) anymore, but the letterforms of Series E with the spacing of Series EM has proven to be just as legibile if not more than Clearview in a number of applications.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on July 25, 2015, 03:25:26 PM
All of the newer FHWA signs on the Thruway are all NYSDOT-style instead of NYSTA-style, so I'm guessing that they were made from the NYSDOT sign shop or a contractor rather than NYSTA's sign shop.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Flyer78 on July 25, 2015, 08:27:51 PM
Quote from: cl94 on July 15, 2015, 03:12:31 PM
The lights have been in place west of Buffalo in several locations for over a year. I know this has been mentioned several times before. "Toll" assemblies on NY 77 went up no later than 2013, probably earlier.

Noticed ground mounted lights westbound for the 481 exit, as well as Exit 39 for 690. In both cases, it looked like the eastbound compliment was lit as well.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on July 31, 2015, 05:50:57 PM
I-90 closing overnight in Cheektowaga at Exit 50A now through Wednesday night (http://www.thruway.ny.gov/news/pressrel/2015/07/2015-07-31-overnight-closures.html). Detour for through traffic is via NY 33 and NY 78, detour for I-290 traffic is NY 277. Steel is going up. Only full closure is Sunday night, others are directional. Weather dependent, of course.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Zeffy on August 13, 2015, 08:50:39 PM
I thought the Thruway Authority was better than this. Did NYSTA tone the Clearview down since these were put up? I've found a number of signs that feature negative contrast Clearview around the Nyack area.

https://www.google.com/maps/@41.096891,-74.0464077,3a,41y,274.54h,90.92t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s6n9SkrWxu2t9Wq-PlSvwvg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

https://www.google.com/maps/@41.0980071,-74.0392494,3a,15y,266.04h,94.6t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sWO-5PJ8zcsYVMALjmyCCjw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on August 13, 2015, 08:53:54 PM

Quote from: Zeffy on August 13, 2015, 08:50:39 PM
I thought the Thruway Authority was better than this. Did NYSTA tone the Clearview down since these were put up? I've found a number of signs that feature negative contrast Clearview around the Nyack area.

https://www.google.com/maps/@41.096891,-74.0464077,3a,41y,274.54h,90.92t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s6n9SkrWxu2t9Wq-PlSvwvg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

https://www.google.com/maps/@41.0980071,-74.0392494,3a,15y,266.04h,94.6t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sWO-5PJ8zcsYVMALjmyCCjw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

I feel like I can't tell the difference between this and the Clearview I see around WNY.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Zeffy on August 13, 2015, 08:56:13 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on August 13, 2015, 08:53:54 PM
I feel like I can't tell the difference between this and the Clearview I see around WNY.

From what I've seen, the Clearview in the Western half of New York looks to be everything but negative contrast use. Here, it's pretty much everywhere, though I haven't seen one in the shield numerals yet (and hope I don't). I thought NYSTA used it like PennDOT and TXDOT used to use it - everywhere but negative contrast situations.

EDIT: I spoke too soon. Look at what I found (ON A NEW JERSEY MARKER NO-LESS):
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.1196899,-74.1270413,3a,44.9y,290.05h,99.24t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sD6TwcXiMOYtMuCxL6xdB7g!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on August 13, 2015, 10:56:23 PM
Quote from: Zeffy on August 13, 2015, 08:56:13 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on August 13, 2015, 08:53:54 PM
I feel like I can't tell the difference between this and the Clearview I see around WNY.

From what I've seen, the Clearview in the Western half of New York looks to be everything but negative contrast use. Here, it's pretty much everywhere, though I haven't seen one in the shield numerals yet (and hope I don't). I thought NYSTA used it like PennDOT and TXDOT used to use it - everywhere but negative contrast situations.

EDIT: I spoke too soon. Look at what I found (ON A NEW JERSEY MARKER NO-LESS):
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.1196899,-74.1270413,3a,44.9y,290.05h,99.24t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sD6TwcXiMOYtMuCxL6xdB7g!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

NYSTA uses it for everything. Negative contrast is everywhere and the Exit 55 advances have it in the shields.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: PurdueBill on August 16, 2015, 08:21:19 PM
Quote from: cl94 on August 13, 2015, 10:56:23 PM
NYSTA uses it for everything. Negative contrast is everywhere and the Exit 55 advances have it in the shields.

That will be the undoing of Clearview...agencies using it in all sorts of unapproved applications.  I'm happy with Massachusetts and Indiana, two states I have association with, for not jumping on the bandwagon, and sad that Delaware, which I also have association with, went from having some of the better looking signs around to some of the worst in part due to botched Clearview.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: hbelkins on August 16, 2015, 10:03:11 PM
Quote from: PurdueBill on August 16, 2015, 08:21:19 PMagencies using it in all sorts of unapproved applications.

The idea that the feds can approve what fonts states use on signs, and how those fonts are used, still frosts my flakes.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: froggie on August 17, 2015, 08:51:58 PM
Anyone got the milk for HB's flakes?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: empirestate on August 17, 2015, 09:54:47 PM

Quote from: hbelkins on August 16, 2015, 10:03:11 PM
Quote from: PurdueBill on August 16, 2015, 08:21:19 PMagencies using it in all sorts of unapproved applications.

The idea that the feds can approve what fonts states use on signs, and how those fonts are used, still frosts my flakes.

So, you like the idea? That sounds like favorable imagery.


iPhone
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: machias on August 18, 2015, 12:16:53 PM
Quote from: cl94 on August 13, 2015, 10:56:23 PM
Quote from: Zeffy on August 13, 2015, 08:56:13 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on August 13, 2015, 08:53:54 PM
I feel like I can't tell the difference between this and the Clearview I see around WNY.

From what I've seen, the Clearview in the Western half of New York looks to be everything but negative contrast use. Here, it's pretty much everywhere, though I haven't seen one in the shield numerals yet (and hope I don't). I thought NYSTA used it like PennDOT and TXDOT used to use it - everywhere but negative contrast situations.

EDIT: I spoke too soon. Look at what I found (ON A NEW JERSEY MARKER NO-LESS):
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.1196899,-74.1270413,3a,44.9y,290.05h,99.24t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sD6TwcXiMOYtMuCxL6xdB7g!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

NYSTA uses it for everything. Negative contrast is everywhere and the Exit 55 advances have it in the shields.

I frequently send emails and letters to the Thruway Authority complaining about their abuse of Clearview. I even print out the guidelines from the FHWA site and send along a brochure, complete with Thruway references where they're doing it wrong. 

They've never responded.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: PHLBOS on August 18, 2015, 01:37:16 PM
Quote from: Zeffy on August 13, 2015, 08:56:13 PMEDIT: I spoke too soon. Look at what I found (ON A NEW JERSEY MARKER NO-LESS):
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.1196899,-74.1270413,3a,44.9y,290.05h,99.24t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sD6TwcXiMOYtMuCxL6xdB7g!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
Obviously, only the NJ 17 shield on that BGS is new.  The original NJ 17 shield must've either fallen off or became faded beyond recognition.

Quote from: upstatenyroads on August 18, 2015, 12:16:53 PMI frequently send emails and letters to the Thruway Authority complaining about their abuse of Clearview. I even print out the guidelines from the FHWA site and send along a brochure, complete with Thruway references where they're doing it wrong. 

They've never responded.
Even worse, the Thruway Authority doesn't even use reflectorized lettering & numerals for their newer BGS' w/Clearview (at least along the I-87/287 segment) thereby making them almost impossible to read at night from a distance.  Such litterally defeats the whole reason for using the Clearview font.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on August 18, 2015, 01:56:50 PM

Quote from: upstatenyroads on August 18, 2015, 12:16:53 PM
Quote from: cl94 on August 13, 2015, 10:56:23 PM
Quote from: Zeffy on August 13, 2015, 08:56:13 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on August 13, 2015, 08:53:54 PM
I feel like I can't tell the difference between this and the Clearview I see around WNY.

From what I've seen, the Clearview in the Western half of New York looks to be everything but negative contrast use. Here, it's pretty much everywhere, though I haven't seen one in the shield numerals yet (and hope I don't). I thought NYSTA used it like PennDOT and TXDOT used to use it - everywhere but negative contrast situations.

EDIT: I spoke too soon. Look at what I found (ON A NEW JERSEY MARKER NO-LESS):
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.1196899,-74.1270413,3a,44.9y,290.05h,99.24t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sD6TwcXiMOYtMuCxL6xdB7g!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

NYSTA uses it for everything. Negative contrast is everywhere and the Exit 55 advances have it in the shields.

I frequently send emails and letters to the Thruway Authority complaining about their abuse of Clearview. I even print out the guidelines from the FHWA site and send along a brochure, complete with Thruway references where they're doing it wrong. 

They've never responded.

Interesting how we as taxpayers fund these agencies and cannot correspond with any of them over concerns. I mean really, there can't be 20,000 people writing to the NYSTA a year over this.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on August 18, 2015, 06:28:34 PM
I'm pretty sure NYSTA is funded entirely through toll dollars... some of which go to NYSDOT and the canal, on top of Thruway needs.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on August 18, 2015, 06:50:00 PM
Quote from: vdeane on August 18, 2015, 06:28:34 PM
I'm pretty sure NYSTA is funded entirely through toll dollars... some of which go to NYSDOT and the canal, on top of Thruway needs.

Correct. That's why the trucker's union is suing NYSTA. Personally, I think that the canal should be NYSDOT and taxpayer-supported (if not NYSTA as well), but they don't ask my opinion.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on August 18, 2015, 06:57:53 PM
Sorry for my ignorance, I thought NYSTA was taxpayer funded.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on August 18, 2015, 07:22:45 PM
Quote from: cl94 on August 18, 2015, 06:50:00 PM
Quote from: vdeane on August 18, 2015, 06:28:34 PM
I'm pretty sure NYSTA is funded entirely through toll dollars... some of which go to NYSDOT and the canal, on top of Thruway needs.

Correct. That's why the trucker's union is suing NYSTA. Personally, I think that the canal should be NYSDOT and taxpayer-supported (if not NYSTA as well), but they don't ask my opinion.

I think it's funny that they're suing NYSTA when the PTC is a much worse offender.

Given the canal's recreational purpose, it would probably be best off with the Office of Parks and Recreation.  It's worth noting, though, that NYSDOT had the canal prior to the Thruway taking over.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on August 18, 2015, 07:51:12 PM
Quote from: vdeane on August 18, 2015, 07:22:45 PM
Quote from: cl94 on August 18, 2015, 06:50:00 PM
Quote from: vdeane on August 18, 2015, 06:28:34 PM
I'm pretty sure NYSTA is funded entirely through toll dollars... some of which go to NYSDOT and the canal, on top of Thruway needs.

Correct. That's why the trucker's union is suing NYSTA. Personally, I think that the canal should be NYSDOT and taxpayer-supported (if not NYSTA as well), but they don't ask my opinion.

I think it's funny that they're suing NYSTA when the PTC is a much worse offender.

Given the canal's recreational purpose, it would probably be best off with the Office of Parks and Recreation.  It's worth noting, though, that NYSDOT had the canal prior to the Thruway taking over.

PTC funds at least go to maintaining highways. The canals thing is a different story entirely- toll dollars going to maintain recreational waterways. Certainly needs to be maintained, but not at the expense of much-needed Thruway funds, especially now that every bridge needs a replacement.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cpzilliacus on August 19, 2015, 09:28:54 AM
Quote from: cl94 on August 18, 2015, 07:51:12 PM
Quote from: vdeane on August 18, 2015, 07:22:45 PM
Quote from: cl94 on August 18, 2015, 06:50:00 PM
Quote from: vdeane on August 18, 2015, 06:28:34 PM
I'm pretty sure NYSTA is funded entirely through toll dollars... some of which go to NYSDOT and the canal, on top of Thruway needs.

Correct. That's why the trucker's union is suing NYSTA. Personally, I think that the canal should be NYSDOT and taxpayer-supported (if not NYSTA as well), but they don't ask my opinion.

I think it's funny that they're suing NYSTA when the PTC is a much worse offender.

Given the canal's recreational purpose, it would probably be best off with the Office of Parks and Recreation.  It's worth noting, though, that NYSDOT had the canal prior to the Thruway taking over.

PTC funds at least go to maintaining highways.

Not since Act 44 (2007) and then Act 89 (2013) were passed by the Pennsylvania legislature.

Details here (https://www.paturnpike.com/business/act44_plan.aspx).

Relevant part, with emphasis added:

QuoteAct 89 substantially altered the Commission's funding obligations to PennDOT. While the Commission's payment obligation remains at $450 million annually through Fiscal Year 2022, none of the payments are dedicated to highways and bridges. Instead, all $450 million is allocated to support transit capital, operating, multi-modal and other non-highway programs.

Quote from: cl94 on August 18, 2015, 07:51:12 PM
The canals thing is a different story entirely- toll dollars going to maintain recreational waterways. Certainly needs to be maintained, but not at the expense of much-needed Thruway funds, especially now that every bridge needs a replacement.

I respectfully disagree.  The canals have more in common with the Thruway (at least the main canal runs roughly parallel to the I-90 part) than paying SEPTA and Port Authority of Allegheny County employees, which have absolutely nothing to do with the Pennsylvania Turnpike.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on August 20, 2015, 03:26:42 PM
Quote from: vdeane on August 18, 2015, 07:22:45 PM
Quote from: cl94 on August 18, 2015, 06:50:00 PM
Quote from: vdeane on August 18, 2015, 06:28:34 PM
I'm pretty sure NYSTA is funded entirely through toll dollars... some of which go to NYSDOT and the canal, on top of Thruway needs.

Correct. That's why the trucker's union is suing NYSTA. Personally, I think that the canal should be NYSDOT and taxpayer-supported (if not NYSTA as well), but they don't ask my opinion.

I think it's funny that they're suing NYSTA when the PTC is a much worse offender.

Given the canal's recreational purpose, it would probably be best off with the Office of Parks and Recreation.  It's worth noting, though, that NYSDOT had the canal prior to the Thruway taking over.

NYSDOT's Policy Bureau some years back (say, eight or so) was actually touting the growth of freight use of the canal. 

I think they were laughed out of the room.   :sombrero:
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cpzilliacus on August 20, 2015, 06:45:35 PM
Quote from: Rothman on August 20, 2015, 03:26:42 PM
NYSDOT's Policy Bureau some years back (say, eight or so) was actually touting the growth of freight use of the canal. 

I think they were laughed out of the room.   :sombrero:

I have not seen freight on that canal myself (but I am seldom in that part of the world), and the last time I was near it was in Utica before the "canal season" started.

My impression is that it could be useful for some sorts of freight, but that is in theory only. 
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on August 20, 2015, 07:02:49 PM
Quote from: cpzilliacus on August 20, 2015, 06:45:35 PM
Quote from: Rothman on August 20, 2015, 03:26:42 PM
NYSDOT's Policy Bureau some years back (say, eight or so) was actually touting the growth of freight use of the canal. 

I think they were laughed out of the room.   :sombrero:

I have not seen freight on that canal myself (but I am seldom in that part of the world), and the last time I was near it was in Utica before the "canal season" started.

My impression is that it could be useful for some sorts of freight, but that is in theory only.

There's the occasional barge that goes to North Tonawanda from Lake Erie that passes through the Black Rock lock. International RR Bridge swing span is also open quite often. As most small craft bypass the lock entirely by going down the main channel, it implies that there's at least some moderately-sized stuff passing through the westernmost few miles.

Remember that the canal system also includes the Champlain Canal and the canals linking Lake Ontario to the Finger Lakes. There's a decent amount of barge traffic up the Champlain Canal to Fort Edward, especially with the dredging going on (which all of the locals hate because the water is worse now than it was when everything was at the bottom).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on August 20, 2015, 11:25:46 PM
I read somewhere that it's actually called the Barge Canal in Utica and that it was (or is) at times more useful than the Thruway because of the freight sizes it can handle.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on August 20, 2015, 11:26:44 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on August 20, 2015, 11:25:46 PM
I read somewhere that it's actually called the Barge Canal in Utica and that it was (or is) at times more useful than the Thruway because of the freight sizes it can handle.

The entire thing is the New York State Barge Canal, as is the entire canal system.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on August 20, 2015, 11:43:18 PM
I should have added that they were using percentages to exaggerate small actual numbers (i.e., We've had 100% growth in freight traffic! = We had 10 barges last year and 20 this year!).

I work with a guy who used to work on the canal.  There were fun things about it, such as boat captains leaving you a six pack when you operate the lock, but also not so fun things about it, like working alongside violent ex-cons on parole. :D
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cpzilliacus on August 21, 2015, 06:11:30 PM
Quote from: Rothman on August 20, 2015, 11:43:18 PM
I should have added that they were using percentages to exaggerate small actual numbers (i.e., We've had 100% growth in freight traffic! = We had 10 barges last year and 20 this year!).

Transit agencies like to engage in similar exaggeration.

Quote from: Rothman on August 20, 2015, 11:43:18 PM
I work with a guy who used to work on the canal.  There were fun things about it, such as boat captains leaving you a six pack when you operate the lock, but also not so fun things about it, like working alongside violent ex-cons on parole.

I thought it was only public transit agencies that hired ex-cons into nice well-paid transportation jobs?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: MrDisco99 on November 02, 2015, 11:40:23 AM
Briefly jumped on the Thruway while on a road trip through the northeast last month (exit 23 through the Berkshire connector to the MassPike).  I noticed the tickets shrunk to the same size that everyone else uses, as opposed to the big tickets they handed out when I clinched the mainline a few years ago.  Tolls seemed to be the same though.

I wonder if the Thruway will be the last holdouts on running a closed ticketed system and human toll collectors.  Indiana, Pennsylvania, and Massachusetts have at least taken baby steps into the modern age.  Wonder what it would take for NY to stop being so stubborn.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on November 02, 2015, 12:00:15 PM
Quote from: MrDisco99 on November 02, 2015, 11:40:23 AM
Briefly jumped on the Thruway while on a road trip through the northeast last month (exit 23 through the Berkshire connector to the MassPike).  I noticed the tickets shrunk to the same size that everyone else uses, as opposed to the big tickets they handed out when I clinched the mainline a few years ago.  Tolls seemed to be the same though.

I wonder if the Thruway will be the last holdouts on running a closed ticketed system and human toll collectors.  Indiana, Pennsylvania, and Massachusetts have at least taken baby steps into the modern age.  Wonder what it would take for NY to stop being so stubborn.

It'll always be a closed system, but they're starting the AET transition within the next few months at Tappan Zee. Barriers are being converted first.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on November 02, 2015, 01:02:32 PM
Quote from: MrDisco99 on November 02, 2015, 11:40:23 AM
Briefly jumped on the Thruway while on a road trip through the northeast last month (exit 23 through the Berkshire connector to the MassPike).  I noticed the tickets shrunk to the same size that everyone else uses, as opposed to the big tickets they handed out when I clinched the mainline a few years ago.  Tolls seemed to be the same though.
That occurred a couple years back when the Thruway replaced the ticket dispensers (the old ones were printing faded tickets).  The new tickets use one standard ticket for all vehicle classes (using the class 2L rates) rather than printing customized toll schedules for every vehicle class.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: MrDisco99 on November 02, 2015, 01:55:06 PM
Quote from: vdeane on November 02, 2015, 01:02:32 PM
Quote from: MrDisco99 on November 02, 2015, 11:40:23 AM
Briefly jumped on the Thruway while on a road trip through the northeast last month (exit 23 through the Berkshire connector to the MassPike).  I noticed the tickets shrunk to the same size that everyone else uses, as opposed to the big tickets they handed out when I clinched the mainline a few years ago.  Tolls seemed to be the same though.
That occurred a couple years back when the Thruway replaced the ticket dispensers (the old ones were printing faded tickets).  The new tickets use one standard ticket for all vehicle classes (using the class 2L rates) rather than printing customized toll schedules for every vehicle class.

Haha yes they were faded.  I have the very streaky exit 15 ticket from when I drove the mainline in 2012 and you can barely read it.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on November 03, 2015, 07:02:00 PM
How were you guys able to keep the tickets, when you're supposed to give them to the collector?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on November 03, 2015, 07:50:02 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on November 03, 2015, 07:02:00 PM
How were you guys able to keep the tickets, when you're supposed to give them to the collector?

Quote from: MrDisco99 on November 02, 2015, 01:55:06 PM
I have the very streaky exit 15 ticket from when I drove the mainline in 2012 and you can barely read it.

I'm assuming he drove it all at once. If you go the entire length, you get charged the maximum toll, which is what you'd be charged if you don't have a ticket.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Pete from Boston on November 03, 2015, 08:13:54 PM
This was one of the perks of the infamous Mass Pike wave-through in heavy traffic–you got a free souvenir ticket!
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: MrDisco99 on November 03, 2015, 09:27:03 PM
Yeah if you tell the attendant you lost your ticket, you pay the maximum toll from the furthest endpoint.  If that's where you came from anyway, then it doesn't cost you anything to do it.  This way I've collected tickets from just about every ticketed toll road I've driven... FL, OH, PA, NJ, NY (both sections), and MA.

The only exception was the one in Indiana which has an automated payment system and no human in the booth.  Rather than call for help and wait, I decided to just insert my ticket and keep going.

Interestingly, if you keep your ticket on the Thruway they make you fill out some form with some of your personal info including your license plate number.  I'm guessing this is so they can keep track of people doing this kind of thing to fraud the system.  Only the NY Thruway had me do this.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on November 03, 2015, 10:28:32 PM
Quote from: MrDisco99 on November 03, 2015, 09:27:03 PM
Yeah if you tell the attendant you lost your ticket, you pay the maximum toll from the furthest endpoint.  If that's where you came from anyway, then it doesn't cost you anything to do it.  This way I've collected tickets from just about every ticketed toll road I've driven... FL, OH, PA, NJ, NY (both sections), and MA.

The only exception was the one in Indiana which has an automated payment system and no human in the booth.  Rather than call for help and wait, I decided to just insert my ticket and keep going.

Interestingly, if you keep your ticket on the Thruway they make you fill out some form with some of your personal info including your license plate number.  I'm guessing this is so they can keep track of people doing this kind of thing to fraud the system.  Only the NY Thruway had me do this.

Runs your plate through the system. Knowing the weird way New York thinks, the thought may be that that criminals trying to make a getaway would "lose" their ticket to avoid being tracked. For example, if there's an amber alert and they thought someone got on the Thruway, they radio it out to everyone and pay attention to entrance point/car type. If someone conveniently loses a ticket in this situation, making them put down their info in the system and if they refuse, they can send the cops out for that.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: thenetwork on November 03, 2015, 11:53:47 PM
Back in the 80s and into the 90s along the Ohio Turnpike, some of the Toll Plazas had an entrance booth for "Passenger Cars Only", and thus the only tickets dispensed (from an automatic dispenser) were for the Class 1 cars.

Some of the dispensers would stick a ticket out before the next car would come through to reduce the wait/stop time for cars.  I had figured out that if you took the first ticket and waited a few extra seconds, another ticket would stick out.  I drove a stick shift at the time, so I would purposely "stall" the car and by the time I got the car started again, I could grab a second ticket and scram.

Another you could collect an OH Tpk ticket was to drive around the back side of the Service Plaza right before the main exit.  If the delivery gate between the turnpike service plaza and the local employee parking lot was open, then drive out the local road.   This happened once when the car of a college carpool I was a passenger in crapped out right before the Service Plaza.  Tow truck came by and picked us up and took us right through the open gate (a simple, long, chain link swing gate) and to the local garage where I had to call my parents for the rest of the ride home.

Nowadays, they use automatic gate arms, cameras and intercom systems for vehicles to pass on and off the Turnpike side of the Service Plaza. And the Passenger Car Only ticket dispensing lanes are probably long gone as well.

The extra tickets I collected were only for preservation purposes only, and not used to pay a lesser toll. 
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on November 04, 2015, 08:04:09 AM
Quote from: thenetwork on November 03, 2015, 11:53:47 PM
Back in the 80s and into the 90s along the Ohio Turnpike, some of the Toll Plazas had an entrance booth for "Passenger Cars Only", and thus the only tickets dispensed (from an automatic dispenser) were for the Class 1 cars.

Some of the dispensers would stick a ticket out before the next car would come through to reduce the wait/stop time for cars.  I had figured out that if you took the first ticket and waited a few extra seconds, another ticket would stick out.  I drove a stick shift at the time, so I would purposely "stall" the car and by the time I got the car started again, I could grab a second ticket and scram.

Another you could collect an OH Tpk ticket was to drive around the back side of the Service Plaza right before the main exit.  If the delivery gate between the turnpike service plaza and the local employee parking lot was open, then drive out the local road.   This happened once when the car of a college carpool I was a passenger in crapped out right before the Service Plaza.  Tow truck came by and picked us up and took us right through the open gate (a simple, long, chain link swing gate) and to the local garage where I had to call my parents for the rest of the ride home.

Nowadays, they use automatic gate arms, cameras and intercom systems for vehicles to pass on and off the Turnpike side of the Service Plaza. And the Passenger Car Only ticket dispensing lanes are probably long gone as well.

The extra tickets I collected were only for preservation purposes only, and not used to pay a lesser toll.

Car lanes are gone, especially now that E-ZPass is there
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on November 04, 2015, 12:43:54 PM
There's a passenger car only lane getting on the Thruway at exit 24 (lane 3).  No idea if it once only had class 2L tickets or why it's there now.

Quote from: thenetwork on November 03, 2015, 11:53:47 PM
Another you could collect an OH Tpk ticket was to drive around the back side of the Service Plaza right before the main exit.  If the delivery gate between the turnpike service plaza and the local employee parking lot was open, then drive out the local road.   This happened once when the car of a college carpool I was a passenger in crapped out right before the Service Plaza.  Tow truck came by and picked us up and took us right through the open gate (a simple, long, chain link swing gate) and to the local garage where I had to call my parents for the rest of the ride home.
Sounds like it was also a way to avoid paying.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on November 04, 2015, 01:35:18 PM
Quote from: vdeane on November 04, 2015, 12:43:54 PM
There's a passenger car only lane getting on the Thruway at exit 24 (lane 3).  No idea if it once only had class 2L tickets or why it's there now.

Being as it's the only machine I know of on the system and the machines that formerly existed only spat out 2L tickets, I'm assuming it once had 2L tickets. As for why it's still there, who knows. Most of the car lanes and ticket machines went the way of the dodo when E-ZPass was introduced.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Alps on November 04, 2015, 07:04:20 PM
Quote from: MrDisco99 on November 03, 2015, 09:27:03 PM
Yeah if you tell the attendant you lost your ticket, you pay the maximum toll from the furthest endpoint.  If that's where you came from anyway, then it doesn't cost you anything to do it.  This way I've collected tickets from just about every ticketed toll road I've driven... FL, OH, PA, NJ, NY (both sections), and MA.

The only exception was the one in Indiana which has an automated payment system and no human in the booth.  Rather than call for help and wait, I decided to just insert my ticket and keep going.

Interestingly, if you keep your ticket on the Thruway they make you fill out some form with some of your personal info including your license plate number.  I'm guessing this is so they can keep track of people doing this kind of thing to fraud the system.  Only the NY Thruway had me do this.

You don't really have to fill out anything personal. I scrawled it.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: route17fan on November 05, 2015, 10:23:05 AM
Speaking of the toll tickets, what does "breakdown ticket" mean? I understand the words, just not the context. Does that mean the machine dispensing the tickets broke down? (which is my interpretation)
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: roadman on November 05, 2015, 01:00:59 PM
Quote from: route17fan on November 05, 2015, 10:23:05 AM
Speaking of the toll tickets, what does "breakdown ticket" mean? I understand the words, just not the context. Does that mean the machine dispensing the tickets broke down? (which is my interpretation)
As I recall, at one point the Thruway had a regulation which established a maximum time frame that a person could be within the System upon receiving a toll ticket.  If you exceeded that time, you were then assessed an additional fee or fine.  I believe a 'breakdown ticket' was used to waive this additional fee or fine in situations where, due to mechanical problems, you ended up exceeding that time limit.  It would have been issued by the State Police upon responding to your vehicle.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: SectorZ on November 05, 2015, 04:16:36 PM
Quote from: roadman on November 05, 2015, 01:00:59 PM
Quote from: route17fan on November 05, 2015, 10:23:05 AM
Speaking of the toll tickets, what does "breakdown ticket" mean? I understand the words, just not the context. Does that mean the machine dispensing the tickets broke down? (which is my interpretation)
As I recall, at one point the Thruway had a regulation which established a maximum time frame that a person could be within the System upon receiving a toll ticket.  If you exceeded that time, you were then assessed an additional fee or fine.  I believe a 'breakdown ticket' was used to waive this additional fee or fine in situations where, due to mechanical problems, you ended up exceeding that time limit.  It would have been issued by the State Police upon responding to your vehicle.

Nothing like rubbing in the fact that you were stuck due to a breakdown, but let's charge you more for the privilege of being stuck. I'm surprised they actually made a waiver for it.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: thenetwork on November 05, 2015, 06:44:31 PM
Quote from: roadman on November 05, 2015, 01:00:59 PM
As I recall, at one point the Thruway had a regulation which established a maximum time frame that a person could be within the System upon receiving a toll ticket.  If you exceeded that time, you were then assessed an additional fee or fine.  I believe a 'breakdown ticket' was used to waive this additional fee or fine in situations where, due to mechanical problems, you ended up exceeding that time limit.  It would have been issued by the State Police upon responding to your vehicle.

What about in situations such as last year when hundreds of vehicles were stranded on the Thruway south & west of Buffalo due to 7 feet of snow?   Is that situation addressed in a regulation?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on November 05, 2015, 06:47:38 PM
Quote from: thenetwork on November 05, 2015, 06:44:31 PM
Quote from: roadman on November 05, 2015, 01:00:59 PM
As I recall, at one point the Thruway had a regulation which established a maximum time frame that a person could be within the System upon receiving a toll ticket.  If you exceeded that time, you were then assessed an additional fee or fine.  I believe a 'breakdown ticket' was used to waive this additional fee or fine in situations where, due to mechanical problems, you ended up exceeding that time limit.  It would have been issued by the State Police upon responding to your vehicle.

What about in situations such as last year when hundreds of vehicles were stranded on the Thruway south & west of Buffalo due to 7 feet of snow?   Is that situation addressed in a regulation?

You mean the storm where Cuomo blamed everyone stuck in it for entering the Thruway, even though it was open at the time each vehicle entered?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: thenetwork on November 05, 2015, 06:50:22 PM
Quote from: cl94 on November 05, 2015, 06:47:38 PM
Quote from: thenetwork on November 05, 2015, 06:44:31 PM
Quote from: roadman on November 05, 2015, 01:00:59 PM
As I recall, at one point the Thruway had a regulation which established a maximum time frame that a person could be within the System upon receiving a toll ticket.  If you exceeded that time, you were then assessed an additional fee or fine.  I believe a 'breakdown ticket' was used to waive this additional fee or fine in situations where, due to mechanical problems, you ended up exceeding that time limit.  It would have been issued by the State Police upon responding to your vehicle.

What about in situations such as last year when hundreds of vehicles were stranded on the Thruway south & west of Buffalo due to 7 feet of snow?   Is that situation addressed in a regulation?

You mean the storm where Cuomo blamed everyone stuck in it for entering the Thruway, even though it was open at the time each vehicle entered?

Yep.  That's the one where they issued the breakdown tickets to all the NYSTA snowplows that couldn't plow the Thruway anymore. :)
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: SignBridge on November 05, 2015, 10:23:43 PM
If you read Roadman's post above, he says the breakdown ticket was used to waive the extra toll for being on the system too long.

I know on the Thruway and some other toll roads, when a trooper calls a tow truck for a disabled car, they issue a ticket certifying that the tow was called at a certain time, etc. and it explains the Toll Road's towing policies and procedures. Someone showed me such a Thruway ticket many years ago. The Thruway Authority treats its users as paying customers or "patrons" in their parlance.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: machias on November 12, 2015, 12:29:31 PM
The NYS Thruway Authority has been installing signs along NYSDOT routes in the Syracuse and Utica area marking "emergency detours". These signs are smaller, but identical in design to the Emergency Detour signs used in conjunction with the Utica North-South Arterial Project and, unfortunately, they are in all caps Clearview (the NYSTA just doesn't get the proper use of Clearview). Many of the signs are installed on single posts, which probably won't survive a typical Central New York winter very well.

"Emergency Detour B" takes motorists from Thruway Exit 33 to Thruway Exit 31 via the NY 365/49/5/I-790 corridor in the Utica-Rome area. (I contacted NYSDOT as this is another reason we should just have NY 790).

"Emergency Detour C" takes motorists from Thruway Exit 34A to Thruway Exit 39 via I-481 and I-690.

While I am not a fan of the Thruway closing during snowstorms, since it essentially just dumps traffic onto local roads and makes NYSDOT and/or local municipalities deal with the issue, I like the idea of signed emergency detours. However, I am becoming concerned about motorist information overload with the growing number of signs turning up at every single interchange along these detour routes, especially in the Utica-Rome area where they sign every park, tennis court, airport, state police barracks, scenic route and information stop on small, separate signs at every freeway interchange (in clear violation of MUTCD Chapter 2H).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on November 12, 2015, 02:03:45 PM
Quote from: upstatenyroads on November 12, 2015, 12:29:31 PM
The NYS Thruway Authority has been installing signs along NYSDOT routes in the Syracuse and Utica area marking "emergency detours". These signs are smaller, but identical in design to the Emergency Detour signs used in conjunction with the Utica North-South Arterial Project and, unfortunately, they are in all caps Clearview (the NYSTA just doesn't get the proper use of Clearview). Many of the signs are installed on single posts, which probably won't survive a typical Central New York winter very well.

"Emergency Detour B" takes motorists from Thruway Exit 33 to Thruway Exit 31 via the NY 365/49/5/I-790 corridor in the Utica-Rome area. (I contacted NYSDOT as this is another reason we should just have NY 790).

"Emergency Detour C" takes motorists from Thruway Exit 34A to Thruway Exit 39 via I-481 and I-690.

While I am not a fan of the Thruway closing during snowstorms, since it essentially just dumps traffic onto local roads and makes NYSDOT and/or local municipalities deal with the issue, I like the idea of signed emergency detours. However, I am becoming concerned about motorist information overload with the growing number of signs turning up at every single interchange along these detour routes, especially in the Utica-Rome area where they sign every park, tennis court, airport, state police barracks, scenic route and information stop on small, separate signs at every freeway interchange (in clear violation of MUTCD Chapter 2H).

They installed some around Buffalo last year along US 62 and I-290 for issues at the Grand Island Bridges. A is northbound and B is southbound.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: WNYroadgeek on November 13, 2015, 01:15:05 PM
The Cleveland Drive (Exit 50A) overpass project is now complete:

QuoteGovernor Cuomo announced the completion of a major Thruway Authority construction project in Cheektowaga. The $11.3 million Cleveland Drive Overpass project includes several renovations that will alleviate congestion and improve traffic flow along one of the busiest stretches of the New York State Thruway (I-90). View a photograph here.

"This new construction will decrease traffic and congestion on one of the busiest parts of the Thruway and improve the experience for the thousands of Western New York residents who depend on this vital part of the region's transportation system,"  Governor Cuomo said. "The completion of this project, which was finished on time and on-budget, is one more example of this administration's commitment to investing and improving infrastructure across New York State."  

In addition to replacing the overpass, work included the realignment of the Cleveland Drive on-ramp to I-90 westbound and a lane extension from I-290 eastbound to NY Route 33 in efforts to alleviate further traffic concerns. The design of the new overpass also creates wider roadway shoulders by not requiring a center pier support.

https://www.governor.ny.gov/news/governor-cuomo-announces-completion-113-million-thruway-infrastructure-project-western-new-york
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on November 13, 2015, 01:32:24 PM
Quote from: WNYroadgeek on November 13, 2015, 01:15:05 PM
The Cleveland Drive (Exit 50A) overpass project is now complete:

QuoteGovernor Cuomo announced the completion of a major Thruway Authority construction project in Cheektowaga. The $11.3 million Cleveland Drive Overpass project includes several renovations that will alleviate congestion and improve traffic flow along one of the busiest stretches of the New York State Thruway (I-90). View a photograph here.

"This new construction will decrease traffic and congestion on one of the busiest parts of the Thruway and improve the experience for the thousands of Western New York residents who depend on this vital part of the region’s transportation system,” Governor Cuomo said. "The completion of this project, which was finished on time and on-budget, is one more example of this administration’s commitment to investing and improving infrastructure across New York State.”

In addition to replacing the overpass, work included the realignment of the Cleveland Drive on-ramp to I-90 westbound and a lane extension from I-290 eastbound to NY Route 33 in efforts to alleviate further traffic concerns. The design of the new overpass also creates wider roadway shoulders by not requiring a center pier support.

https://www.governor.ny.gov/news/governor-cuomo-announces-completion-113-million-thruway-infrastructure-project-western-new-york

You beat me to it! I had it in my clipboard too...

(https://www.governor.ny.gov/sites/governor.ny.gov/files/thumbnails/image/NYSTAClevelandDriveOverpassOpen.jpg)

I see they have backplates there. A nice touch (though I know it is standard).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: machias on November 13, 2015, 01:41:51 PM
I confirmed today that the Thruway Authority is reevaluating the use of Clearview and specifying FHWA Highway Gothic in future signing projects. The decreased legibility of the overhead signs in Buffalo was a contributing factor.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: SignBridge on November 13, 2015, 07:39:31 PM
Nice that they came to their senses.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on November 13, 2015, 09:58:20 PM
Quote from: upstatenyroads on November 13, 2015, 01:41:51 PM
I confirmed today that the Thruway Authority is reevaluating the use of Clearview and specifying FHWA Highway Gothic in future signing projects. The decreased legibility of the overhead signs in Buffalo was a contributing factor.

About flipping time. The Buffalo signs are a bunch of crap.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: PHLBOS on November 14, 2015, 12:29:33 PM
Quote from: upstatenyroads on November 13, 2015, 01:41:51 PM
I confirmed today that the Thruway Authority is reevaluating the use of Clearview and specifying FHWA Highway Gothic in future signing projects. The decreased legibility of the overhead signs in Buffalo was a contributing factor.
I have to wonder if those signs in Buffalo had the same issues as the Thruway Clearview signs had further south (along the I-87/287 duo-plex); the lettering was not reflectorized and such resulted in being impossible to read at night.  Of course, that's more of a reflectivity issue than a Clearview vs. FHWA Highway Gothic scenario.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on November 14, 2015, 03:20:23 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on November 14, 2015, 12:29:33 PM
Quote from: upstatenyroads on November 13, 2015, 01:41:51 PM
I confirmed today that the Thruway Authority is reevaluating the use of Clearview and specifying FHWA Highway Gothic in future signing projects. The decreased legibility of the overhead signs in Buffalo was a contributing factor.
I have to wonder if those signs in Buffalo had the same issues as the Thruway Clearview signs had further south (along the I-87/287 duo-plex); the lettering was not reflectorized and such resulted in being impossible to read at night.  Of course, that's more of a reflectivity issue than a Clearview vs. FHWA Highway Gothic scenario.

They probably are, but the Buffalo signs also had the issue of using Clearview for negative contrast. Heck, on some of the signs, even the shields were Clearview.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: SignBridge on November 14, 2015, 07:52:52 PM
I'm surprised that a toll-road agency that runs such an excellent radio network (frequencies 453.425 and 453.525 on your scanners) would be so ignorant when it comes to signing. But I guess different people are in charge of each.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on November 14, 2015, 09:02:38 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on November 14, 2015, 07:52:52 PM
I'm surprised that a toll-road agency that runs such an excellent radio network (frequencies 453.425 and 453.525 on your scanners) would be so ignorant when it comes to signing. But I guess different people are in charge of each.

NYSTA is usually really good about signage. That is what made it odd. There was a year or two that had bad signage.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Zeffy on November 14, 2015, 09:19:46 PM
Quote from: cl94 on November 14, 2015, 03:20:23 PM
They probably are, but the Buffalo signs also had the issue of using Clearview for negative contrast. Heck, on some of the signs, even the shields were Clearview.

I've seen some advance street name warning signs in Bucks County, PA use negative contrast Clearview, and at night (which now hits when I get out of work), I can barely read them without squinting. I don't know what about it makes it impossible to read, but it's not just an appearance thing - I can barely read any form of negative contrast Clearview when at night unless I try really hard or I am right on top of the sign.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on November 14, 2015, 10:22:50 PM
I suspect the non-reflective lettering is the key to why the Thruway signs weren't visible at night, not the clearview.  So, in the end, the roadgeeks will be happy, but the signs will still be unreadable at night.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: PHLBOS on November 16, 2015, 12:34:01 PM
Quote from: vdeane on November 14, 2015, 10:22:50 PM
I suspect the non-reflective lettering is the key to why the Thruway signs weren't visible at night, not the clearview.  So, in the end, the roadgeeks will be happy, but the signs will still be unreadable at night.
The funny thing is that the older (25+ year old) signs actually used reflectorized lettering and the majority of them are still in decent shape as well as readable.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: SignBridge on November 16, 2015, 07:26:19 PM
Amazing how a well designed and built, good quality installation will last a long time.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: roadman65 on November 16, 2015, 07:36:20 PM
Correct me if I am wrong, but I distinctly remember them erecting all overhead signs in Rockland County back in circa 1988-89 to replace ground signs at the time.  I remember that was the last of the "ROUTE 59- Spring Valley" sign going NB with "Nanuet" on another plate below it as that also was the last of the mohicans for old Thruway signage.  I kind of liked the new ones going all shield and leaving out the text, even though history is now gone both simultaneously.

Anyway, are these the signs being referred to as being 25 years old?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on November 16, 2015, 07:55:37 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on November 16, 2015, 12:34:01 PM
Quote from: vdeane on November 14, 2015, 10:22:50 PM
I suspect the non-reflective lettering is the key to why the Thruway signs weren't visible at night, not the clearview.  So, in the end, the roadgeeks will be happy, but the signs will still be unreadable at night.
The funny thing is that the older (25+ year old) signs actually used reflectorized lettering and the majority of them are still in decent shape as well as readable.

Not the ones in Buffalo. The unreadable Clearview signs replaced signs that were unreadable at night. The reflectivity was mediocre at best. Not in great shape, either (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.847069,-78.7916245,3a,18.8y,30.08h,101.6t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sk83RV4pgUpfXCyzn0FEAFA!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo0.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3Dk83RV4pgUpfXCyzn0FEAFA%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D86.641068%26pitch%3D0!7i13312!8i6656).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: SignBridge on November 16, 2015, 08:16:25 PM
That Exit-54 photo in cl94's above post is typical of Thruway signing. They use the wrong size arrow for the sign format. When the arrow is to the side of the legend the long-stem arrow should be used. The short-stem arrow is intended for signs where the arrow is placed below the legend, where vertical space is limited. When it comes to signing, the Thruway Authority just doesn't "get it"! They should take lessons from NYSDOT who mostly gets it right.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on November 16, 2015, 10:03:30 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on November 16, 2015, 08:16:25 PM
That Exit-54 photo in cl94's above post is typical of Thruway signing. They use the wrong size arrow for the sign format. When the arrow is to the side of the legend the long-stem arrow should be used. The short-stem arrow is intended for signs where the arrow is placed below the legend, where vertical space is limited. When it comes to signing, the Thruway Authority just doesn't "get it"! They should take lessons from NYSDOT who mostly gets it right.

On the same sign bridge (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.8476378,-78.7915072,3a,15y,215.26h,99.94t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1svsl1QW2YZsSEnmWembcheg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656). This one might make you blind.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cu2010 on November 16, 2015, 10:40:00 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on November 16, 2015, 08:16:25 PM
They should take lessons from NYSDOT who mostly gets it right.

NYSDOT gets it wrong a lot these days, too!
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: SignBridge on November 16, 2015, 10:50:48 PM
NYSDOT makes their mistakes too, but they do better signing than the Thruway Authority.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on November 17, 2015, 06:58:43 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on November 16, 2015, 10:50:48 PM
NYSDOT makes their mistakes too, but they do better signing than the Thruway Authority.

They do. I don't like how NYSTA (AFAIK) doesn't have county or town border signs. I'd rather see those before I see mile-based exits, but I'm sure it's not even being planned. I like to know when I cross borders.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: ixnay on November 17, 2015, 07:44:14 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on November 17, 2015, 06:58:43 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on November 16, 2015, 10:50:48 PM
NYSDOT makes their mistakes too, but they do better signing than the Thruway Authority.

They do. I don't like how NYSTA (AFAIK) doesn't have county or town border signs. I'd rather see those before I see mile-based exits, but I'm sure it's not even being planned. I like to know when I cross borders.

Neither does the NJTA that I've noticed (at least for the Turnpike, which I've been on a lot more times than the GSP).

ixnay
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: machias on November 17, 2015, 09:24:57 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on November 17, 2015, 06:58:43 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on November 16, 2015, 10:50:48 PM
NYSDOT makes their mistakes too, but they do better signing than the Thruway Authority.

They do. I don't like how NYSTA (AFAIK) doesn't have county or town border signs. I'd rather see those before I see mile-based exits, but I'm sure it's not even being planned. I like to know when I cross borders.

I had a huge argument over email with NYSTA about county line signs on the Thruway about a decade ago. I stressed the importance of county line signs as a navigational aid for motorists. They said that motorists don't really concern themselves with what county they're in, I countered that since the National Weather Service issues weather alerts based on county they should include county line signs.  They offered to send me a map.  Their rationale was that if they signed county lines, they'd have to sign every town and village border as well.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: The Nature Boy on November 17, 2015, 09:28:44 PM
Quote from: upstatenyroads on November 17, 2015, 09:24:57 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on November 17, 2015, 06:58:43 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on November 16, 2015, 10:50:48 PM
NYSDOT makes their mistakes too, but they do better signing than the Thruway Authority.

They do. I don't like how NYSTA (AFAIK) doesn't have county or town border signs. I'd rather see those before I see mile-based exits, but I'm sure it's not even being planned. I like to know when I cross borders.

I had a huge argument over email with NYSTA about county line signs on the Thruway about a decade ago. I stressed the importance of county line signs as a navigational aid for motorists. They said that motorists don't really concern themselves with what county they're in, I countered that since the National Weather Service issues weather alerts based on county they should include county line signs.  They offered to send me a map.  Their rationale was that if they signed county lines, they'd have to sign every town and village border as well.

And yet amazing there are states of comparable size that do just fine signing counties.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: empirestate on November 17, 2015, 10:15:39 PM
Quote from: The Nature Boy on November 17, 2015, 09:28:44 PM
Quote from: upstatenyroads on November 17, 2015, 09:24:57 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on November 17, 2015, 06:58:43 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on November 16, 2015, 10:50:48 PM
NYSDOT makes their mistakes too, but they do better signing than the Thruway Authority.

They do. I don't like how NYSTA (AFAIK) doesn't have county or town border signs. I'd rather see those before I see mile-based exits, but I'm sure it's not even being planned. I like to know when I cross borders.

I had a huge argument over email with NYSTA about county line signs on the Thruway about a decade ago. I stressed the importance of county line signs as a navigational aid for motorists. They said that motorists don't really concern themselves with what county they're in, I countered that since the National Weather Service issues weather alerts based on county they should include county line signs.  They offered to send me a map.  Their rationale was that if they signed county lines, they'd have to sign every town and village border as well.

And yet amazing there are states of comparable size that do just fine signing counties.

And the MassPike does sign every town line, on a toll road that takes up a commensurate proportion of that state's area.

That being said, I made the discovery a couple years ago that NYSTA does indeed sign one particular county line in the two places the system crosses it: on both I-87 and I-95 at the Bronx/Westchester County line. (That's also the New York City line, but despite their rationale cited above, signing this boundary by the lesser-known county names didn't seem to compel them to sign the city as well!)
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on November 17, 2015, 11:11:49 PM
Quote from: empirestate on November 17, 2015, 10:15:39 PM
Quote from: The Nature Boy on November 17, 2015, 09:28:44 PM
Quote from: upstatenyroads on November 17, 2015, 09:24:57 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on November 17, 2015, 06:58:43 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on November 16, 2015, 10:50:48 PM
NYSDOT makes their mistakes too, but they do better signing than the Thruway Authority.

They do. I don't like how NYSTA (AFAIK) doesn't have county or town border signs. I'd rather see those before I see mile-based exits, but I'm sure it's not even being planned. I like to know when I cross borders.

I had a huge argument over email with NYSTA about county line signs on the Thruway about a decade ago. I stressed the importance of county line signs as a navigational aid for motorists. They said that motorists don't really concern themselves with what county they're in, I countered that since the National Weather Service issues weather alerts based on county they should include county line signs.  They offered to send me a map.  Their rationale was that if they signed county lines, they'd have to sign every town and village border as well.

And yet amazing there are states of comparable size that do just fine signing counties.

And the MassPike does sign every town line, on a toll road that takes up a commensurate proportion of that state's area.

That being said, I made the discovery a couple years ago that NYSTA does indeed sign one particular county line in the two places the system crosses it: on both I-87 and I-95 at the Bronx/Westchester County line. (That's also the New York City line, but despite their rationale cited above, signing this boundary by the lesser-known county names didn't seem to compel them to sign the city as well!)

They sign the occasional city line as well. The Buffalo and Niagara Falls city lines are signed on I-190 where maintained by NYSTA. Niagara Falls one is just south of the North Grand Island Bridge and it is button copy.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: roadman on November 18, 2015, 09:58:24 AM
Quote from: empirestate on November 17, 2015, 10:15:39 PM
Quote from: The Nature Boy on November 17, 2015, 09:28:44 PM
And yet amazing there are states of comparable size that do just fine signing counties.
And the MassPike does sign every town line, on a toll road that takes up a commensurate proportion of that state's area.

Speaking of such, the new city/town line signs to be installed on the MassPike West Stockbridge to Auburn and Auburn to Boston projects will include county lines where applicable.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: route17fan on November 18, 2015, 10:04:30 AM
http://www.thruway.ny.gov/netdata/contractors/documents/d214390_taa15-34b_plans-volume-1-of-1.pdf

D214390 will replace a really old overpass over I-87 just north of exit 19 (NY 28 Kingston) - it's the Sawkill Rd overpass and a really old overpass!

GSV link:  https://www.google.com/maps/place/Kingston,+NY/@41.9529318,-74.0197875,3a,75y,56.93h,84.8t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sWpxUi6lmwRamoiwFenrICw!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo1.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DWpxUi6lmwRamoiwFenrICw%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D45.092804%26pitch%3D0!7i13312!8i6656!4m2!3m1!1s0x89dd0f012dc98127:0x41d7895a5832c913!6m1!1e1
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: xcellntbuy on November 18, 2015, 01:14:51 PM
Quote from: route17fan on November 18, 2015, 10:04:30 AM
http://www.thruway.ny.gov/netdata/contractors/documents/d214390_taa15-34b_plans-volume-1-of-1.pdf

D214390 will replace a really old overpass over I-87 just north of exit 19 (NY 28 Kingston) - it's the Sawkill Rd overpass and a really old overpass!

GSV link:  https://www.google.com/maps/place/Kingston,+NY/@41.9529318,-74.0197875,3a,75y,56.93h,84.8t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sWpxUi6lmwRamoiwFenrICw!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo1.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DWpxUi6lmwRamoiwFenrICw%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D45.092804%26pitch%3D0!7i13312!8i6656!4m2!3m1!1s0x89dd0f012dc98127:0x41d7895a5832c913!6m1!1e1

I used to drive under that overpass 20 years ago and it NEEDED to be painted then!  It's an old one, probably from around 1960, as old I am.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: SignBridge on November 18, 2015, 09:08:24 PM
The original Thruway overpasses date back to the Thruway's opening circa 1954.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Pete from Boston on November 18, 2015, 09:31:53 PM

Quote from: roadman on November 18, 2015, 09:58:24 AM
Quote from: empirestate on November 17, 2015, 10:15:39 PM
Quote from: The Nature Boy on November 17, 2015, 09:28:44 PM
And yet amazing there are states of comparable size that do just fine signing counties.
And the MassPike does sign every town line, on a toll road that takes up a commensurate proportion of that state's area.

Speaking of such, the new city/town line signs to be installed on the MassPike West Stockbridge to Auburn and Auburn to Boston projects will include county lines where applicable.

This was standard practice going way back by MassHighway and its predecessors.  I recall the probably-original markers on 495 in the 1970s and 80s as it jumped frequently from county to county, but can't recall if town-line markers within a county also listed the county.  Somehow I have since stopped paying those signs any attention.

I suppose this will bring the Mass Pike in line with the general statewide practice.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: roadman on November 19, 2015, 01:24:35 PM
Quote from: Pete from Boston on November 18, 2015, 09:31:53 PM

Quote from: roadman on November 18, 2015, 09:58:24 AM
Quote from: empirestate on November 17, 2015, 10:15:39 PM
Quote from: The Nature Boy on November 17, 2015, 09:28:44 PM
And yet amazing there are states of comparable size that do just fine signing counties.
And the MassPike does sign every town line, on a toll road that takes up a commensurate proportion of that state's area.

Speaking of such, the new city/town line signs to be installed on the MassPike West Stockbridge to Auburn and Auburn to Boston projects will include county lines where applicable.

This was standard practice going way back by MassHighway and its predecessors.  I recall the probably-original markers on 495 in the 1970s and 80s as it jumped frequently from county to county, but can't recall if town-line markers within a county also listed the county.  Somehow I have since stopped paying those signs any attention.

I suppose this will bring the Mass Pike in line with the general statewide practice.

MassDOW/MassHighway/MassDOT standard town line markers include the county name only at county lines, and not at each city/town line within the county.  And, although including the county name at county lines was originally the standard, it had been inconsistently applied on signs through the years.

As for the signs on the Turnpike, Mass. Turnpike Authority standards did not call for including the county name on town line signs at county borders, which is why the information did not appear on signs installed under the MTA's mid-1990s sign updating projects.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on November 21, 2015, 12:31:06 PM
QuoteTraffic on Main Street in Williamsville isn't getting any better, so village officials are dusting off old proposals for a new Youngs Road Thruway interchange to relieve stifling congestion. They want an interchange that links the Thruway to the village as well as Buffalo Niagara International Airport.

And in the process, they lambaste Amherst Town officials for failing to build the infrastructure to accommodate "unbridled development growth."

While the village has neither the authority nor the money to sponsor such a major project, Mayor Brian J. Kulpa says it's time to "start the conversation"  with an eye toward reducing traffic problems on major thoroughfares like Main Street.

http://www.buffalonews.com/city-region/williamsville/williamsville-seeks-new-thruway-interchange-to-relieve-main-st-congestion-20151121

This is an idea that I think is stupid. For one, the physical toll barrier hasn't been moved eastward yet. By the time it does AET will be here and it'll have been replaced by a gantry.

Second, it's so close to the Transit Road exit that it doesn't make much sense positionally speaking. I would argue that it makes more sense for a Wehrle Dr interchange and maybe even Ransom Road interchange than a Youngs Rd. one.

The area got it wrong when they didn't build that beltway 40 years ago.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: WNYroadgeek on November 21, 2015, 11:12:11 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on November 21, 2015, 12:31:06 PMI would argue that it makes more sense for a Wehrle Dr interchange and maybe even Ransom Road interchange than a Youngs Rd. one.

The problem with that is there's absolutely nowhere on Wehrle to put an interchange. At least there's some land to work with at the Youngs overpass.

But yeah, probably won't see anything come of this proposal unless NYSTA ever goes through with their plan to remove the Williamsville Toll Barrier and build a new one in Newstead.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on November 21, 2015, 11:41:42 PM
Quote from: WNYroadgeek on November 21, 2015, 11:12:11 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on November 21, 2015, 12:31:06 PMI would argue that it makes more sense for a Wehrle Dr interchange and maybe even Ransom Road interchange than a Youngs Rd. one.

The problem with that is there's absolutely nowhere on Wehrle to put an interchange. At least there's some land to work with at the Youngs overpass.

But yeah, probably won't see anything come of this proposal unless NYSTA ever goes through with their plan to remove the Williamsville Toll Barrier and build a new one in Newstead.

It took me awhile to realize this. Unless they used eminent domain then it just wouldn't happen.

I saw a comment on the Buffalo News by an Artvoice editor who went after the Newstead town officials because they oppose toll barriers there. NYSTA needs to get AET going within 10 years.

If they do move booths beforehand though, I'd say they should move the Lackawanna one back to around Rogers Road.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on November 22, 2015, 02:15:14 PM
Did someone ever tell Newstead that the moved barrier wouldn't be anything like Williamsville because the vast majority of Thruway traffic uses E-ZPass and that those users wouldn't even need to slow down?  I was wondering why the project died, seeing as it first appeared on the Thruway's site 15 years ago.  Honestly, they should have just built it anyways.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on November 22, 2015, 02:18:02 PM
Quote from: vdeane on November 22, 2015, 02:15:14 PM
Did someone ever tell Newstead that the moved barrier wouldn't be anything like Williamsville because the vast majority of Thruway traffic uses E-ZPass and that those users wouldn't even need to slow down?  I was wondering why the project died, seeing as it first appeared on the Thruway's site 15 years ago.  Honestly, they should have just built it anyways.

Environmental issues. Stretch between Exits 48A and 49 is mostly wetlands.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: jasonsk287 on November 22, 2015, 09:03:51 PM
Quote from: upstatenyroads on November 17, 2015, 09:24:57 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on November 17, 2015, 06:58:43 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on November 16, 2015, 10:50:48 PM
NYSDOT makes their mistakes too, but they do better signing than the Thruway Authority.

They do. I don't like how NYSTA (AFAIK) doesn't have county or town border signs. I'd rather see those before I see mile-based exits, but I'm sure it's not even being planned. I like to know when I cross borders.

I had a huge argument over email with NYSTA about county line signs on the Thruway about a decade ago. I stressed the importance of county line signs as a navigational aid for motorists. They said that motorists don't really concern themselves with what county they're in, I countered that since the National Weather Service issues weather alerts based on county they should include county line signs.  They offered to send me a map.  Their rationale was that if they signed county lines, they'd have to sign every town and village border as well.

The PA Turnpike uses PA's small blue and white signs to sign county lines. PennDOT signs, generally, each township and county border on their state roads, but on the Turnpike it's just counties. So, as you know, there's proof that their rationale is flawed.

I've always felt, as I've driven I-87 from LI to Albany many times, that county lines are absolutely necessary. NYSDOT does it, so why can't the Thruway?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: roadman65 on November 22, 2015, 09:34:09 PM
New Jersey is even more flawed as NJDOT signs town borders only, but no county lines.  However, the Garden State Parkway signs only county lines on blue pentagon signs, no town limits.  The NJ Turnpike signs no crossings between counties and communities.  I do not know about the ACE as I have yet to clinch it west of the airport.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: odditude on November 23, 2015, 08:41:11 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on November 22, 2015, 09:34:09 PM
NJDOT signs town borders only, but no county lines.
given there's no unincorporated land in NJ, there's no real need to sign this info - even if it might be nice to see.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on November 23, 2015, 09:23:03 AM
Quote from: odditude on November 23, 2015, 08:41:11 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on November 22, 2015, 09:34:09 PM
NJDOT signs town borders only, but no county lines.
given there's no unincorporated land in NJ, there's no real need to sign this info - even if it might be nice to see.

Town lines are great for location. New York doesn't really have unincorporated land, either, and town line signs do wonders for wayfinding. Especially with sequential exit numbers, it's often a lot easier for the typical motorist to judge distance by town/county lines than by milemarkers.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: machias on November 23, 2015, 09:33:26 AM
Quote from: cl94 on November 23, 2015, 09:23:03 AM
Quote from: odditude on November 23, 2015, 08:41:11 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on November 22, 2015, 09:34:09 PM
NJDOT signs town borders only, but no county lines.
given there's no unincorporated land in NJ, there's no real need to sign this info - even if it might be nice to see.

Town lines are great for location. New York doesn't really have unincorporated land, either, and town line signs do wonders for wayfinding. Especially with sequential exit numbers, it's often a lot easier for the typical motorist to judge distance by town/county lines than by milemarkers.

The National Weather Service sends out weather alerts by county (or parts of counties, "Northern Oneida", etc.).  For an agency that is still getting lambasted for the snowstorm in Buffalo last year, and posting "Emergency Detour" signs all over creation, you'd think the Thruway Authority could put up 40 signs (I roughly counted that the Thruway passes through 20 counties) marking county lines. The Thruway carries a lot of traffic from motorists not familiar with the area. They've put up that many signs indicating how many times you pass in and out of the Erie Canal and Hudson River Heritage Areas, and they don't provide any tangible navigational assistance at all.

40 signs. There's that many "Emergency Detour" signs between Utica and Verona.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: KEVIN_224 on November 23, 2015, 10:16:06 AM
Likewise, Connecticut doesn't mark county lines on roads either. Municipal boundaries are signed. Village boundaries are only shown on local streets. The name of the village is in a cursive script with the outline of the state surrounding it.

Maine mentions county lines on I-295 and I-95/Maine Turnpike.

Are county lines mentioned on I-84 in New York? I don't recall any the last time I was there.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on November 23, 2015, 11:01:55 AM
Quote from: KEVIN_224 on November 23, 2015, 10:16:06 AM
Likewise, Connecticut doesn't mark county lines on roads either. Municipal boundaries are signed. Village boundaries are only shown on local streets. The name of the village is in a cursive script with the outline of the state surrounding it.

Maine mentions county lines on I-295 and I-95/Maine Turnpike.

Are county lines mentioned on I-84 in New York? I don't recall any the last time I was there.

Yes (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.5132513,-73.6837969,3a,75y,168.43h,78.68t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sws-rhQqlRoLbSMvF1NN-Mg!2e0!5s20141001T000000!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1) and no. Newburgh-Beacon Bridge has no county line signs, but that's also maintained by NYSBA. Some of their crossings have signs, some don't. Bear Mountain doesn't have signs, either.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: route17fan on November 23, 2015, 12:16:29 PM
Quote from: cl94 on November 23, 2015, 11:01:55 AM
Quote from: KEVIN_224 on November 23, 2015, 10:16:06 AM
Likewise, Connecticut doesn't mark county lines on roads either. Municipal boundaries are signed. Village boundaries are only shown on local streets. The name of the village is in a cursive script with the outline of the state surrounding it.

Maine mentions county lines on I-295 and I-95/Maine Turnpike.

Are county lines mentioned on I-84 in New York? I don't recall any the last time I was there.

Yes (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.5132513,-73.6837969,3a,75y,168.43h,78.68t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sws-rhQqlRoLbSMvF1NN-Mg!2e0!5s20141001T000000!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1) and no. Newburgh-Beacon Bridge has no county line signs, but that's also maintained by NYSBA. Some of their crossings have signs, some don't. Bear Mountain doesn't have signs, either.

Putnam-Dutchess County line on I-84 comes to mind - there may be others, but that one is one I remember.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on November 23, 2015, 01:59:18 PM
Also keep in mind that I-84 was maintained by NYSTA for a couple decades, and the Thruway DEFINITELY exerted its influence on I-84's signage.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: odditude on November 23, 2015, 02:16:19 PM
Quote from: cl94 on November 23, 2015, 09:23:03 AM
Quote from: odditude on November 23, 2015, 08:41:11 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on November 22, 2015, 09:34:09 PM
NJDOT signs town borders only, but no county lines.
given there's no unincorporated land in NJ, there's no real need to sign this info - even if it might be nice to see.

Town lines are great for location. New York doesn't really have unincorporated land, either, and town line signs do wonders for wayfinding. Especially with sequential exit numbers, it's often a lot easier for the typical motorist to judge distance by town/county lines than by milemarkers.
to clarify, i was saying that county line info isn't that important in NJ - no argument on the utility of town line signage.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: machias on November 23, 2015, 02:39:46 PM
Quote from: vdeane on November 23, 2015, 01:59:18 PM
Also keep in mind that I-84 was maintained by NYSTA for a couple decades, and the Thruway DEFINITELY exerted its influence on I-84's signage.

Yeah, the new panels they installed right before I-84 went back to NYSDOT are very clear evidence that I-84 was the bastard step child while under NYSTA jurisdiction. Those signs are awful, which is shame because the NYSDOT signs before them were actually quite well done and among the very last of NYSDOT button copy use.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Alps on November 23, 2015, 06:49:56 PM
Quote from: odditude on November 23, 2015, 08:41:11 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on November 22, 2015, 09:34:09 PM
NJDOT signs town borders only, but no county lines.
given there's no unincorporated land in NJ, there's no real need to sign this info - even if it might be nice to see.
It's also false, but roadman65 saying something false is like rain falling from the sky.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Alps on November 23, 2015, 06:51:49 PM
Quote from: jasonsk287 on November 22, 2015, 09:03:51 PM
Quote from: upstatenyroads on November 17, 2015, 09:24:57 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on November 17, 2015, 06:58:43 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on November 16, 2015, 10:50:48 PM
NYSDOT makes their mistakes too, but they do better signing than the Thruway Authority.

They do. I don't like how NYSTA (AFAIK) doesn't have county or town border signs. I'd rather see those before I see mile-based exits, but I'm sure it's not even being planned. I like to know when I cross borders.

I had a huge argument over email with NYSTA about county line signs on the Thruway about a decade ago. I stressed the importance of county line signs as a navigational aid for motorists. They said that motorists don't really concern themselves with what county they're in, I countered that since the National Weather Service issues weather alerts based on county they should include county line signs.  They offered to send me a map.  Their rationale was that if they signed county lines, they'd have to sign every town and village border as well.

The PA Turnpike uses PA's small blue and white signs to sign county lines. PennDOT signs, generally, each township and county border on their state roads, but on the Turnpike it's just counties. So, as you know, there's proof that their rationale is flawed.

I've always felt, as I've driven I-87 from LI to Albany many times, that county lines are absolutely necessary. NYSDOT does it, so why can't the Thruway?
I don't find it necessary. I care about what exit I'm going to and what town I'm heading toward. I don't navigate by counties and I'm not sure who does. It's more of a "that's nice" or political bone thrown to the counties. On freeways, I also don't care what town I'm in if there's no exit to it. If there is an exit, it'll show up on the guide sign, so once again I don't find town line signs necessary. Helpful, maybe, maybe not. This goes out the window on surface highways where I need to know what town I'm entering.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: froggie on November 23, 2015, 09:06:11 PM
Quote from: AlpsThis goes out the window on surface highways where I need to know what town I'm entering.

What makes surface highways different from freeways/tollways?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: odditude on November 23, 2015, 09:35:27 PM
Quote from: froggie on November 23, 2015, 09:06:11 PM
Quote from: AlpsThis goes out the window on surface highways where I need to know what town I'm entering.

What makes surface highways different from freeways/tollways?
likely that there's no egress from a limited-access highway in every town, therefore only the actual locations of exits matter.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Alps on November 24, 2015, 12:04:18 AM
Quote from: odditude on November 23, 2015, 09:35:27 PM
Quote from: froggie on November 23, 2015, 09:06:11 PM
Quote from: AlpsThis goes out the window on surface highways where I need to know what town I'm entering.

What makes surface highways different from freeways/tollways?
likely that there's no egress from a limited-access highway in every town, therefore only the actual locations of exits matter.
And no big guide signs for each exit.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: NJ on November 25, 2015, 06:05:44 PM
What's the earliest point where Montreal is seen on overhead sign as well as bilingual signs on the Thruway?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on November 25, 2015, 07:03:35 PM
Quote from: NJ on November 25, 2015, 06:05:44 PM
What's the earliest point where Montreal is seen on overhead sign as well as bilingual signs on the Thruway?

Montreal is a control city at Exit 24. No bilingual signs on the Thruway.

Bilingual signs start at the Essex-Clinton county line on the Northway. A-15 is first mentioned on an assembly at Northway Exit 22 in Lake George.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Pete from Boston on November 25, 2015, 07:06:51 PM

Quote from: NJ on November 25, 2015, 06:05:44 PM
What's the earliest point where Montreal is seen on overhead sign as well as bilingual signs on the Thruway?

Not what you asked, but it used to be on a mileage sign in Spring Valley.  I felt very exotic when I used to drive past that sign very near home.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Beeper1 on November 25, 2015, 07:21:52 PM
There is a supplemental BGS for Montreal on the Berkshire Spur WB just before it meets mainline I-87.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: SignBridge on November 25, 2015, 08:20:35 PM
Many years ago there was a sign in French northbound for Exit-24. It said Province de Quebec, Prochaine Sortie. (Apologies if my spelling is slightly off) No idea if it's still posted that way.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: route17fan on November 25, 2015, 09:17:51 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on November 25, 2015, 08:20:35 PM
Many years ago there was a sign in French northbound for Exit-24. It said Province de Quebec, Prochaine Sortie. (Apologies if my spelling is slightly off) No idea if it's still posted that way.

Not currently, though I have seen a picture of that sign on the Thruway on the internet and is presumably in a book.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: NJ on November 25, 2015, 09:51:22 PM
Where is exit 24?

I thought the Thruway had bilingual signs near the border.

Quote from: cl94 on November 25, 2015, 07:03:35 PM
Quote from: NJ on November 25, 2015, 06:05:44 PM
What's the earliest point where Montreal is seen on overhead sign as well as bilingual signs on the Thruway?

Montreal is a control city at Exit 24. No bilingual signs on the Thruway.

Bilingual signs start at the Essex-Clinton county line on the Northway. A-15 is first mentioned on an assembly at Northway Exit 22 in Lake George.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: NJ on November 25, 2015, 09:52:18 PM
It's still there.. Everytime I drive to Woodbury Commons Outlet I see the sign

Quote from: Pete from Boston on November 25, 2015, 07:06:51 PM

Quote from: NJ on November 25, 2015, 06:05:44 PM
What's the earliest point where Montreal is seen on overhead sign as well as bilingual signs on the Thruway?

Not what you asked, but it used to be on a mileage sign in Spring Valley.  I felt very exotic when I used to drive past that sign very near home.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on November 25, 2015, 10:09:00 PM
Quote from: route17fan on November 25, 2015, 09:17:51 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on November 25, 2015, 08:20:35 PM
Many years ago there was a sign in French northbound for Exit-24. It said Province de Quebec, Prochaine Sortie. (Apologies if my spelling is slightly off) No idea if it's still posted that way.

Not currently, though I have seen a picture of that sign on the Thruway on the internet and is presumably in a book.

Not in my lifetime. Very good chance it wasn't replaced when the last of the signs became MUTCD-compliant.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on November 25, 2015, 11:19:44 PM
There's also the English and French "limited cell phone service" signs on the Northway just past Pottersville.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fnysroads.com%2Fimages%2Fgallery%2FNY%2Fi87%2F101_1900-s.JPG&hash=a8d0d92107b91fa49281339d803886d00ae8c354)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fnysroads.com%2Fimages%2Fgallery%2FNY%2Fi87%2F101_1901-s.JPG&hash=3c150fee2c3e7e7273d224950ada9f4e2e1133b5)

Quote from: NJ on November 25, 2015, 09:51:22 PM
Where is exit 24?

I thought the Thruway had bilingual signs near the border.
It's the junction of I-90 and I-87 in Albany, nowhere near the border.  No French signage there now.  The Thruway doesn't get anywhere remotely close to Quebec; the closest it gets to Canada period is Buffalo.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: NJ on November 26, 2015, 08:04:40 AM
Quote from: vdeane on November 25, 2015, 11:19:44 PM
There's also the English and French "limited cell phone service" signs on the Northway just past Pottersville.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fnysroads.com%2Fimages%2Fgallery%2FNY%2Fi87%2F101_1900-s.JPG&hash=a8d0d92107b91fa49281339d803886d00ae8c354)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fnysroads.com%2Fimages%2Fgallery%2FNY%2Fi87%2F101_1901-s.JPG&hash=3c150fee2c3e7e7273d224950ada9f4e2e1133b5)

Quote from: NJ on November 25, 2015, 09:51:22 PM
Where is exit 24?

I thought the Thruway had bilingual signs near the border.
It's the junction of I-90 and I-87 in Albany, nowhere near the border.  No French signage there now.  The Thruway doesn't get anywhere remotely close to Quebec; the closest it gets to Canada period is Buffalo.

Isn't NY Thruway and I-87 same thing?!
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: machias on November 26, 2015, 08:34:46 AM
There was a "prochaine sortie" sign at exit 24 back when the Thruway had the "mishmash" guide panels -- mid to late 80s if memory serves correctly.

The guide panels back then were incredibly inconsistent with materials used. The destinations would be button copy but 1 MILE would be retroreflective tape. Some signs were the opposite. The border would be button copy but nothing else on the sign would be, etc. These signs were black on the back and roughly the same age as the signs with the cutoff d as an a. The "Province du Quebec - prochaine sortie" sign was not in button copy and the prochaine sortie was in all capital Series E.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Duke87 on November 26, 2015, 08:35:01 AM
Quote from: NJ on November 26, 2015, 08:04:40 AM
Quote from: vdeane on November 25, 2015, 11:19:44 PM
The Thruway doesn't get anywhere remotely close to Quebec; the closest it gets to Canada period is Buffalo.

Isn't NY Thruway and I-87 same thing?!

Only as far as exit 24. Beyond there the Thruway turns west and is I-90 for the rest (the majority) of its length. I-87 from Albany to Canada is a free NYSDOT maintained road known as the Adirondack Northway or "the Northway" for short.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: machias on November 26, 2015, 10:26:33 AM
Quote from: Duke87 on November 26, 2015, 08:35:01 AM
Quote from: NJ on November 26, 2015, 08:04:40 AM
Quote from: vdeane on November 25, 2015, 11:19:44 PM
The Thruway doesn't get anywhere remotely close to Quebec; the closest it gets to Canada period is Buffalo.

Isn't NY Thruway and I-87 same thing?!

Only as far as exit 24. Beyond there the Thruway turns west and is I-90 for the rest (the majority) of its length. I-87 from Albany to Canada is a free NYSDOT maintained road known as the Adirondack Northway or "the Northway" for short.

And prior to the Thruway, I-87 is the Major Deegan Expressway. That's why there's three sets of interchange numbers along I-87: Exit 1-14 for the Major Deegan, 1-24 for the Thruway and 1-43 for the Northway.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: NJ on November 26, 2015, 11:39:24 AM
Regardless of the name of the highway, it's still I-87 throughout to Montreal
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on November 26, 2015, 08:12:46 PM
Technically it's only I-87 to the border and then becomes A-15 ;).

The Thruway isn't just a name that happens to be on part of the road.  It's its own system that I-87 just happens to overlap with for 148 miles.  The Thruway was there first.  In fact, many people along the Thruway don't even know I-90 and I-87 exist on it - it's just "the Thruway".  To someone from the Albany area, I-87 is ONLY the Northway, and I-90 is only the free section; we really do say things like "take I-87 until it ends, then take the exit for the Thruway" (and the road is pretty much signed that way).

I-90 has three sets of numbers as well: 61-24, 1-12, B1-B3.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on November 26, 2015, 08:38:53 PM
Quote from: vdeane on November 26, 2015, 08:12:46 PM
Technically it's only I-87 to the border and then becomes A-15 ;).

The Thruway isn't just a name that happens to be on part of the road.  It's its own system that I-87 just happens to overlap with for 148 miles.  The Thruway was there first.  In fact, many people along the Thruway don't even know I-90 and I-87 exist on it - it's just "the Thruway".  To someone from the Albany area, I-87 is ONLY the Northway, and I-90 is only the free section; we really do say things like "take I-87 until it ends, then take the exit for the Thruway" (and the road is pretty much signed that way).

I-90 has three sets of numbers as well: 61-24, 1-12, B1-B3.

People in Albany know about I-90 being continuous because the free section is colloquially "free 90". Don't know how it is now, but traffic reports used "free 90". Few refer to I-87 by number. There is the Northway and there is the Thruway. I-87 is one of the very few 2DIs, if not the only one, that has no sections that are commonly referred to by number. Outside of heavily-populated areas, surface roads are referred to by number. I-88 only has a number, as do the 3DIs.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: SignBridge on November 26, 2015, 10:12:06 PM
Vdeane makes a good point about the Thruway and other states' signature toll roads having existed before the Interstate Hwy. System was created and how the incorporating or overlapping of the Interstates onto those roads has created some confusion.

Some historic trivia. Most of the NY Thruway opened in 1954, though the Buffalo section I believe was opened later, in 1957 and the New England Section circa 1959. The Interstate System was legislated into existence in 1956 under President Eisenhower who envisioned a national highway system similar to the German Autobahns.   

With regard to the three different sets of exit numbers on I-87, can you imagine how screwed up it will all get if NYSDOT and NYSTA ever renumber the exits using the federally mandated mileage based system in the MUTCD? We've previously discussed that elsewhere on these boards and it will be a mess if they ever do it. 
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on November 26, 2015, 11:27:16 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on November 26, 2015, 10:12:06 PM
With regard to the three different sets of exit numbers on I-87, can you imagine how screwed up it will all get if NYSDOT and NYSTA ever renumber the exits using the federally mandated mileage based system in the MUTCD? We've previously discussed that elsewhere on these boards and it will be a mess if they ever do it.

It won't really affect much because the Thruway plans to adopt AET. Even if there were still tickets, no number on a single ticket would be duplicated. We went over that as well because a few of us ran the numbers. Helps that the first 80 miles of I-90 and south of Exit 16 aren't on the main ticket system. The Albany exits on I-90 would be well over 300.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: shadyjay on November 27, 2015, 12:41:40 PM
My Non-AET solution: 

Make the Thruway through Albany toll-free.  Build two new plazas, one near Selkirk and one near Schenectady, both with 2 high speed EZ-Pass lanes.  Separate tickets for the Schenectady-Buffalo and Selkirk-Downstate section.  Then you won't have to worry about the exit numbers conflicting on the tickets.  At the same time, you can build the direct Thruway NB->I-87NB ramps (and vice versa) passing beneath US 20/Western Ave, open to any vehicle.  Eliminates the Exit 24 toll plaza and (most of the) delays there.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: machias on November 27, 2015, 01:26:30 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on November 26, 2015, 10:12:06 PM
 

With regard to the three different sets of exit numbers on I-87, can you imagine how screwed up it will all get if NYSDOT and NYSTA ever renumber the exits using the federally mandated mileage based system in the MUTCD? We've previously discussed that elsewhere on these boards and it will be a mess if they ever do it. 

I don't think it would be a mess at all. The Thruway is eventually going to switch and their plan is to sign the Thruway as one single entity, with Exit 1 in Ripley and Exit 496 at Hall Place.  Not an ideal situation by any means, but it's not awful. The Northway would start around Exit 158.  The free portion of I-90 would be well into the 300s.

If the Thruway Authority numbered according to the interstate the Thruway is following, the numbers still wouldn't be that confusing.  As mentioned earlier, there would be no duplication of numbers between I-90 and I-87 and the similar numbers would be on opposite sides of the state (for example Batavia on I-90 would be Exit 106, Saugerties on I-87 would be Exit 110), minimizing confusion to motorists. In addition, making the interstate route numbering more prominent would assist with minimizing confusion.  It would be a shift in thinking, interstate numbers instead of "The Thruway", which would probably be a blow to the ego of the Thruway Authority, but it doesn't make this approach wrong.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: roadman65 on November 27, 2015, 07:37:03 PM
Quote from: vdeane on November 26, 2015, 08:12:46 PM
Technically it's only I-87 to the border and then becomes A-15 ;).

The Thruway isn't just a name that happens to be on part of the road.  It's its own system that I-87 just happens to overlap with for 148 miles.  The Thruway was there first.  In fact, many people along the Thruway don't even know I-90 and I-87 exist on it - it's just "the Thruway".  To someone from the Albany area, I-87 is ONLY the Northway, and I-90 is only the free section; we really do say things like "take I-87 until it ends, then take the exit for the Thruway" (and the road is pretty much signed that way).

I-90 has three sets of numbers as well: 61-24, 1-12, B1-B3.
I have heard someone in Glens Falls refer to it by number.  I used to think the Northway was called to it by name too until I heard a local say otherwise.

Yes between the NYS Thruway and Major Deegan, I would hear someone say if they were going NB, take the Major Deegan into the Thruway instead of saying I-87 or Route 87 north only.

Then again here if FL we have many who live in Tampa going to Miami say "Take I-75 southbound to Alligator Alley" instead of just saying "Take I-75 South."  In New Jersey my uncle lived in Linden, but worked in Secaucus, and took Route 1 & 9 North to Tonnelle Avenue to County Road to get to work.  Tonnelle Avenue, as most of us know, is part of Routes 1 & 9, but to non road geeks they call em as they see em, and most think Route 1 & 9 continues into NYC via The Holland Tunnel just like Route 3 is the route inside the Lincoln Tunnel because  NJ 495 is a continuous freeway  with NJ 3 at its east end.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Duke87 on November 27, 2015, 07:53:23 PM
Quote from: upstatenyroads on November 27, 2015, 01:26:30 PM
I don't think it would be a mess at all. The Thruway is eventually going to switch and their plan is to sign the Thruway as one single entity, with Exit 1 in Ripley and Exit 496 at Hall Place.  Not an ideal situation by any means, but it's not awful.

It's better than what currently exists only because it's mile based. Less distance is backwards, but now the backwards part will include the most highly traveled part. And I-87 and I-90 will still have three sets of exit numbers each.

There is no practical reason why the Thruway could not number exits using 87 and 90's mileposts, but they won't because it would require too much interagency cooperation for New York.


Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: roadman65 on November 27, 2015, 08:01:49 PM
Why can't the Deegan and Northway have the same set?  Just skip over those numbers that the NYSTA does not want to use.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: The Nature Boy on November 27, 2015, 08:16:07 PM
Quote from: Duke87 on November 27, 2015, 07:53:23 PM
Quote from: upstatenyroads on November 27, 2015, 01:26:30 PM
I don't think it would be a mess at all. The Thruway is eventually going to switch and their plan is to sign the Thruway as one single entity, with Exit 1 in Ripley and Exit 496 at Hall Place.  Not an ideal situation by any means, but it's not awful.

It's better than what currently exists only because it's mile based. Less distance is backwards, but now the backwards part will include the most highly traveled part. And I-87 and I-90 will still have three sets of exit numbers each.

There is no practical reason why the Thruway could not number exits using 87 and 90's mileposts, but they won't because it would require too much interagency cooperation for New York.

Using 87 and 90's mile posts would also make sense for navigational reasons. If I'm entering NY from PA on the Thruway, I'm likely not taking it all the way to NYC. If I'm a long distance traveler, I'm taking 90 to MA line or jumping off on NY 7 to go to Vermont. It might helpful to know how far I have until the MA state line, less helpful to know how far until NYC.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: roadman65 on November 27, 2015, 08:23:52 PM
That brings up a question, does anyone other than us here, who look to clinch highways for the sake of clinching, do use all 495 miles of the Thruway in one sitting? 

I would have to agree with Nature Boy on that. Due to its awkward routing and the fact you have Route 17 (soon to be all I-86) which cuts your travel time big time.  Even my dad going to Niagara Falls never took the Thruway from the NYC area.  He cut through New Jersey and NE PA and took NY 17 from Binghamton westward to cut over later.  This was even before I-390 was completed!

Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on November 27, 2015, 09:32:56 PM
IMO if you're going to redo all the mileposts on the Thruway, you might as well give I-90 and I-87 their own numbers.  Especially if the Thruway ever goes AET on the ticket system.  Doing otherwise just feels messy to me.

From what I know of the plan, I-87 on the Northway would continue the numbers based on I-87's total mileage from I-278.  Free 90 would continue the mileage from the PA line.  No idea what the situation would be on the Berkshire Spur, but I-90 and I-87 would each have at most two sets of numbers instead of three.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: shadyjay on November 27, 2015, 10:38:08 PM
Quote from: vdeane on November 27, 2015, 09:32:56 PMNo idea what the situation would be on the Berkshire Spur, but I-90 and I-87 would each have at most two sets of numbers instead of three.

Just continue the mile-based numbering from Ripley right to Mass... Thruway, free 90, and Berkshire Spur would be one continuous exit numbering sequence.  No exits exist on the Berkshire Spur west of free 90, except the Thruway jct.  Only major change would be signing the through route WB (Berkshire Spur to I-87) as the exit number, instead of 90WB exiting from itself getting the number.  Or to eliminate confusion, remove the exit number altogether. 

Or, truncate the toll/ticket portion to a point between I-87 and I-90, perhaps with an AET gantry.  Then to get the lost revenue, convert the existing plaza near Exit B3 to a barrier toll. 
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on November 27, 2015, 11:24:20 PM
The person in Glens Falls who used the number must be a transplant. Everyone there is name only. I'd know because that's where I grew up. The Northway, NY 9L, and US 9 within Glens Falls and Lake George are only referred to by name.

As to whether people do the entire length at once, no. But there are a heck of a lot of people who will use it between New York and Buffalo for the regular patrols and frequent services. That's 420ish/496 miles. Women traveling alone and seniors prefer the security and reliable services, even if it takes longer and costs a lot more.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: dgolub on November 28, 2015, 09:38:30 AM
Quote from: vdeane on November 27, 2015, 09:32:56 PM
From what I know of the plan, I-87 on the Northway would continue the numbers based on I-87's total mileage from I-278.  Free 90 would continue the mileage from the PA line.  No idea what the situation would be on the Berkshire Spur, but I-90 and I-87 would each have at most two sets of numbers instead of three.

It could continue the exit numbering scheme from free I-90.  Heading west, it would be considered a numbered exit to stay on the Berkshire Spur across the Castleton-on-Hudson Bridge.  Coming across the bridge heading east, it would be a split at the end for I-90 east or west, with no exit number either way.

Alternatively, they could reroute I-90 along the full length of the Berkshire Spur, multiplexed it with I-87 at what's now exits 21A-24, and redesignate free I-90 as I-487 or I-687 or something like that.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: machias on November 28, 2015, 10:49:00 AM
Quote from: dgolub on November 28, 2015, 09:38:30 AM


Alternatively, they could reroute I-90 along the full length of the Berkshire Spur, multiplexed it with I-87 at what's now exits 21A-24, and redesignate free I-90 as I-487 or I-687 or something like that.

That's what they should have done in the first place, but I have a feeling someone in Albany had an ego that demanded a two-digit interstate.  I-90 was moved off the Berkshire Spur to the existing routing in the early 1970s. I can't believe anyone thought that was a good idea and I'm surprised the Thruway went along with it, because it lends to toll money being diverted from the Thruway (when motorists stay on I-90).

I don't ever see free 90 becoming I-487 because that would make too much sense for the New York State political arena (which is involved in many things they shouldn't be, like route numbers).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on November 28, 2015, 12:02:23 PM
Quote from: upstatenyroads on November 28, 2015, 10:49:00 AM
I can't believe anyone thought that was a good idea and I'm surprised the Thruway went along with it, because it lends to toll money being diverted from the Thruway (when motorists stay on I-90).

Perhaps on its face it's head-scratching, but you'd be surprised with how well the Thruway keeps people on the Bershire Spur.  The signage is well-done to that effect.  They have large signs leading people to I-87 and major destinations, whereas the exit for I-90 has it going to Hudson and Albany. 

The signage is so effective that even my road-savvy father was even wondering how he never ended up on the free section of I-90 when he went through there back in the 1980s a couple of times.   He figured it out, of course, but if time is a factor, it's really not worth the trouble to get off the Thruway, go through Albany, and back on it (especially around rush hour).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: AMLNet49 on November 28, 2015, 12:30:44 PM
Isn't the object to avoid multiplexed interstates where possible? Especially in the northeast where multiplexes are rare and thus confusing (the only one is 87/287, but for all practical purposes there might as well just be two seperate 287s. There's also the very short 87/90 in Albany but I'm not sure most people realize it's a multiplex because it's so short). Having the 2DI on an independent route I think is a good thing, plus it gives through traffic drivers on I-90 a bit of toll relief.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: roadman65 on November 28, 2015, 12:50:29 PM
Quote from: cl94 on November 27, 2015, 11:24:20 PM
The person in Glens Falls who used the number must be a transplant. Everyone there is name only. I'd know because that's where I grew up. The Northway, NY 9L, and US 9 within Glens Falls and Lake George are only referred to by name.

As to whether people do the entire length at once, no. But there are a heck of a lot of people who will use it between New York and Buffalo for the regular patrols and frequent services. That's 420ish/496 miles. Women traveling alone and seniors prefer the security and reliable services, even if it takes longer and costs a lot more.
I thought so as well.  Or, he might of been trying to make it easy on us as we were asking him directions at the time.

I thought that he might of said that so we could find it as the entrance ramps do not say "Northway."  Its like the Beachline here in Florida.  Ramp signs say FL 528, but locals use it by name, however if giving out directions, of course, I will say "Highway 528" to them because the ramps are signed for that.  To tell them to look for the Beachline would confuse them so much, due to the lack of signs there even though Tallahassee went through a lot of work to get the name changed in response to tourist group lobbyists thinking that the Space Coast would get more revenue if the name got changed from "Beeline" to "Beachline."
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on November 28, 2015, 03:08:06 PM
The signage instructing through traffic to remain on the Thruway is numerous, even though the time savings is negligible outside of rush hours. The Berkshire Spur west of Exit B1 may be the least-traveled section of the Thruway system, but NYSTA gets $1.65 for every car that doesn't take Free 90. I tell people to time their travel so they hit Albany around lunchtime so they can eat/refuel at the cheaper establishments along Free 90, but most don't think that way.

I-90 was moved off because the FHWA and AASHTO try to limit the amount of time a federally-designated route spends on a toll road.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: NJ on November 28, 2015, 03:11:25 PM
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/38/I-90_-_Thruway_split_w_of_Albany_NY.jpg/800px-I-90_-_Thruway_split_w_of_Albany_NY.jpg)

Beautiful signage very clear, nice fonts and design.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: roadman65 on November 28, 2015, 07:05:03 PM
It says Boston to stay on the Thruway, but coming into this interchange from the north on I-87 it says to use free I-90 to Boston.

Also the Mass Pike Shield is nice off to the side of the Thruway shield.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: noelbotevera on November 28, 2015, 07:33:24 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on November 28, 2015, 07:05:03 PM
It says Boston to stay on the Thruway, but coming into this interchange from the north on I-87 it says to use free I-90 to Boston.

Also the Mass Pike Shield is nice off to the side of the Thruway shield.
The free I-90 is the cheaper way. Some people don't know about this and take the more expensive route by staying on I-87.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: dgolub on November 28, 2015, 08:33:57 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on November 28, 2015, 07:05:03 PM
It says Boston to stay on the Thruway, but coming into this interchange from the north on I-87 it says to use free I-90 to Boston.

After you've already passed exit 21A telling you to get off there for the Berkshire Connector to Boston.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: The Nature Boy on November 28, 2015, 08:34:37 PM
Quote from: noelbotevera on November 28, 2015, 07:33:24 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on November 28, 2015, 07:05:03 PM
It says Boston to stay on the Thruway, but coming into this interchange from the north on I-87 it says to use free I-90 to Boston.

Also the Mass Pike Shield is nice off to the side of the Thruway shield.
The free I-90 is the cheaper way. Some people don't know about this and take the more expensive route by staying on I-87.

I notice that states will always direct traffic onto the toll road, even when the free way is the best way.

See: Portland as a control city on I-95 at the I-295/95 junction in West Gardiner, Maine. Even though I-295 goes through downtown Portland.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on November 28, 2015, 08:38:04 PM
Quote from: The Nature Boy on November 28, 2015, 08:34:37 PM
Quote from: noelbotevera on November 28, 2015, 07:33:24 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on November 28, 2015, 07:05:03 PM
It says Boston to stay on the Thruway, but coming into this interchange from the north on I-87 it says to use free I-90 to Boston.

Also the Mass Pike Shield is nice off to the side of the Thruway shield.
The free I-90 is the cheaper way. Some people don't know about this and take the more expensive route by staying on I-87.

I notice that states will always direct traffic onto the toll road, even when the free way is the best way.

See: Portland as a control city on I-95 at the I-295/95 junction in West Gardiner, Maine. Even though I-295 goes through downtown Portland.

No, it's called toll authorities encouraging traffic to use their highways. In most of these cases, the toll authority placed the signage.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: The Nature Boy on November 28, 2015, 08:40:35 PM
Quote from: cl94 on November 28, 2015, 08:38:04 PM
Quote from: The Nature Boy on November 28, 2015, 08:34:37 PM
Quote from: noelbotevera on November 28, 2015, 07:33:24 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on November 28, 2015, 07:05:03 PM
It says Boston to stay on the Thruway, but coming into this interchange from the north on I-87 it says to use free I-90 to Boston.

Also the Mass Pike Shield is nice off to the side of the Thruway shield.
The free I-90 is the cheaper way. Some people don't know about this and take the more expensive route by staying on I-87.

I notice that states will always direct traffic onto the toll road, even when the free way is the best way.

See: Portland as a control city on I-95 at the I-295/95 junction in West Gardiner, Maine. Even though I-295 goes through downtown Portland.

No, it's called toll authorities encouraging traffic to use their highways. In most of these cases, the toll authority placed the signage.

Which I find problematic because the purpose of road signs is to navigate you to your destination, not to generate revenue for the people who put them there.

I understand the motivation.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: roadman65 on November 28, 2015, 09:03:58 PM
The KTA originally did not have "Kansas City" for I-35 north at Emporia  on the Kansas Turnpike until circa 2000.  I bet that must be a blow to their profits when they added "Kansas City" to the guide sign where I-35 leaves the Turnpike.

It still says "Kansas City" on the pull through signs though, but I am sure not many want to pay the toll and use the free I-35 to KC instead.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: machias on November 28, 2015, 10:09:00 PM
Quote from: dgolub on November 28, 2015, 08:33:57 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on November 28, 2015, 07:05:03 PM
It says Boston to stay on the Thruway, but coming into this interchange from the north on I-87 it says to use free I-90 to Boston.

After you've already passed exit 21A telling you to get off there for the Berkshire Connector to Boston.

I'm pretty sure the original poster is referring to the Boston designation for I-90 EAST from I-87 SB before the 87/90 interchange.

I always found it interesting that as you drive by the Exit 24 ramp on the connector between I-90 EB and I-87 SB, you pass under signs that say "Boston" and then look to the left and can see "90 EAST Albany Boston" as overheads on I-90. 
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Pete from Boston on November 29, 2015, 03:08:43 PM

Quote from: roadman65 on November 27, 2015, 07:37:03 PM
Quote from: vdeane on November 26, 2015, 08:12:46 PM
Technically it's only I-87 to the border and then becomes A-15 ;).

The Thruway isn't just a name that happens to be on part of the road.  It's its own system that I-87 just happens to overlap with for 148 miles.  The Thruway was there first.  In fact, many people along the Thruway don't even know I-90 and I-87 exist on it - it's just "the Thruway".  To someone from the Albany area, I-87 is ONLY the Northway, and I-90 is only the free section; we really do say things like "take I-87 until it ends, then take the exit for the Thruway" (and the road is pretty much signed that way).

I-90 has three sets of numbers as well: 61-24, 1-12, B1-B3.
I have heard someone in Glens Falls refer to it by number.  I used to think the Northway was called to it by name too until I heard a local say otherwise.

Yes between the NYS Thruway and Major Deegan, I would hear someone say if they were going NB, take the Major Deegan into the Thruway instead of saying I-87 or Route 87 north only.

Then again here if FL we have many who live in Tampa going to Miami say "Take I-75 southbound to Alligator Alley" instead of just saying "Take I-75 South."  In New Jersey my uncle lived in Linden, but worked in Secaucus, and took Route 1 & 9 North to Tonnelle Avenue to County Road to get to work.  Tonnelle Avenue, as most of us know, is part of Routes 1 & 9, but to non road geeks they call em as they see em, and most think Route 1 & 9 continues into NYC via The Holland Tunnel just like Route 3 is the route inside the Lincoln Tunnel because  NJ 495 is a continuous freeway  with NJ 3 at its east end.

It's like 128 in Mass.  Most of Tonnelle is part of 1-9, but most of 1-9 is not Tonnelle.  "Tonnelle Ave." refers to a specific part of the road.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: roadman65 on November 29, 2015, 03:44:55 PM
Its also like St. George Avenue being part of NJ 27, and NJ 35.  It amazing, though, how many think that NJ 27 ends in Rahway at the place it becomes St. George Avenue.  Then you have a friend of mine from High School who thinks that NJ 35 goes all the way up St. George where NJ 27 is assigned to it.

Of course, Elizabeth has to be the oddball out, as they call it Rahway Avenue, which I am sure a lot of people think its still St. George Avenue at that point.  Just like in Kissimmee, FL everyone thinks that Main Street is Orange Blossom Trail because it is connected to it.

In fact Old Dixie Highway in Orange County, FL was erroneously referred to as "Orange Avenue" for decades before both Orange and Osceola Counties renamed Old Dixie Highway to Orange Avenue to please the people who are ignorant which is most of the non road geeks when it comes to roads.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on November 29, 2015, 11:16:33 PM
Interesting conversation (but I am late to it and don't feel like joining in, because the whole Albany mess is like Breezewood in a way and it always hurts my head).

This is my favorite video of the Thruway:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UtEv8yozV7Y

Also, when did they pave asphalt over the concrete (if that's what they did, because a car was driving on just concrete at the end), and why/where?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on November 30, 2015, 02:03:25 PM
Often that's done to extend the life of the pavement.  Overlaying the concrete with asphalt is like resurfacing.  I'd guess that a majority of freeway miles in NY (possibly even overall state route miles) are overlays.  Often time overlays have been widened too for wider travel lanes and shoulders, especially on surface streets.  Having a concrete roadbed that's barely a lane wide (dating back to the 1900s in many cases) with the rest being widened out with asphalt is not uncommon.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on November 30, 2015, 02:58:27 PM
Quote from: vdeane on November 30, 2015, 02:03:25 PM
Often that's done to extend the life of the pavement.  Overlaying the concrete with asphalt is like resurfacing.  I'd guess that a majority of freeway miles in NY (possibly even overall state route miles) are overlays.  Often time overlays have been widened too for wider travel lanes and shoulders, especially on surface streets.  Having a concrete roadbed that's barely a lane wide (dating back to the 1900s in many cases) with the rest being widened out with asphalt is not uncommon.

Correct (https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/policyinformation/statistics/2011/hm51.cfm). A significant majority of freeway mileage in New York consists of overlays, as does a majority of major arterial mileage. I can't readily find data to prove it, but judging by crack patterns and the NYSDOT highway inventory, the vast majority of state highway mileage is overlays, as is mileage of some major county routes. An overlay is a relatively cheap way to resurface the road, as the foundation is typically sound. Combined with mill-and-fill operations, the base concrete can often last several decades. A lot of New York's state highway mileage consists of overlays over concrete placed well before the Interstate system was begun.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on November 30, 2015, 05:24:05 PM
So this is just normal road construction I take it.

Does that mean that this (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.750778,-78.8553914,3a,75y,159.51h,66.13t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sCX0x4XRRO9myFfE-NnAJdg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) will be resurfaced in the coming years as well?

Also where are these "composite" roads?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: ixnay on November 30, 2015, 08:19:00 PM
Nice video, Buffaboy, and nice jazz tune to go along with it.

ixnay
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on November 30, 2015, 08:22:03 PM
In FHWA terminology, composite, as defined at the bottom of my link, is the technical term for an overlay.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Alps on November 30, 2015, 09:30:45 PM
Quote from: cl94 on November 30, 2015, 08:22:03 PM
In FHWA terminology, composite, as defined at the bottom of my link, is the technical term for an overlay.
I've seen "flexible" used for asphalt in some contexts. Really wish they could just use the actual name of the substance.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: SignBridge on November 30, 2015, 10:23:05 PM
The term "flexible" pavement refers to asphalt paving. Concrete is known as "rigid" pavement.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on November 30, 2015, 11:06:42 PM
Quote from: Alps on November 30, 2015, 09:30:45 PM
Quote from: cl94 on November 30, 2015, 08:22:03 PM
In FHWA terminology, composite, as defined at the bottom of my link, is the technical term for an overlay.
I've seen "flexible" used for asphalt in some contexts. Really wish they could just use the actual name of the substance.

There are types of flexible pavement that are not "standard" asphalt concrete. "Flexible" is used when they lump chipseal and stuff that isn't asphalt concrete into the same category as asphalt.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: noelbotevera on December 01, 2015, 01:42:36 AM
Quote from: cl94 on November 30, 2015, 11:06:42 PM
Quote from: Alps on November 30, 2015, 09:30:45 PM
Quote from: cl94 on November 30, 2015, 08:22:03 PM
In FHWA terminology, composite, as defined at the bottom of my link, is the technical term for an overlay.
I've seen "flexible" used for asphalt in some contexts. Really wish they could just use the actual name of the substance.

There are types of flexible pavement that are not "standard" asphalt concrete. "Flexible" is used when they lump chipseal and stuff that isn't asphalt concrete into the same category as asphalt.
So all they do is just shovel dirt, lay grass over it, whine to the FHWA saying it's flexible, then they say ok? Wow, looks like paving is way easier now.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: odditude on December 01, 2015, 09:39:56 AM
Quote from: noelbotevera on December 01, 2015, 01:42:36 AM
So all they do is just shovel dirt, lay grass over it, whine to the FHWA saying it's flexible, then they say ok? Wow, looks like paving is way easier now.
...where did that idea come from?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: roadman65 on December 01, 2015, 09:47:58 AM
...have no clue.  At least he is not that dzlabe character who was the talk of the town last week.  However, we have to expect this here.  Some of us come from different walks and some think differently than others especially when our community is made up of a lot of those who fit the developmentally challenged category.

I am not saying that he is, but expect the unexpected here like you have to driving the roads.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on December 01, 2015, 09:54:41 AM
Quote from: odditude on December 01, 2015, 09:39:56 AM
Quote from: noelbotevera on December 01, 2015, 01:42:36 AM
So all they do is just shovel dirt, lay grass over it, whine to the FHWA saying it's flexible, then they say ok? Wow, looks like paving is way easier now.
...where did that idea come from?

No. An unpaved or gravel road is not flexible pavement. A flexible pavement has to have a binding coat.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: odditude on December 01, 2015, 12:37:50 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on December 01, 2015, 09:47:58 AM
especially when our community is made up of a lot of those who fit the developmentally challenged category.
...and where did that come from?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on December 01, 2015, 01:55:33 PM
Quote from: odditude on December 01, 2015, 12:37:50 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on December 01, 2015, 09:47:58 AM
especially when our community is made up of a lot of those who fit the developmentally challenged category.
...and where did that come from?

The person who made the statement I think he's referring to is 11. Give him a break.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on December 01, 2015, 02:31:37 PM
Quote from: vdeane on November 30, 2015, 02:03:25 PM
Often that's done to extend the life of the pavement.  Overlaying the concrete with asphalt is like resurfacing. 

Like what they've done to NY 85 so far.  I've been wondering if the asphalt will kink where those old rotten concrete joints were.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on December 01, 2015, 03:03:50 PM
Quote from: Rothman on December 01, 2015, 02:31:37 PM
Quote from: vdeane on November 30, 2015, 02:03:25 PM
Often that's done to extend the life of the pavement.  Overlaying the concrete with asphalt is like resurfacing. 

Like what they've done to NY 85 so far.  I've been wondering if the asphalt will kink where those old rotten concrete joints were.

It will unless they rebuilt the bad joints. Always does.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on December 01, 2015, 03:30:13 PM
Quote from: cl94 on December 01, 2015, 03:03:50 PM
Quote from: Rothman on December 01, 2015, 02:31:37 PM
Quote from: vdeane on November 30, 2015, 02:03:25 PM
Often that's done to extend the life of the pavement.  Overlaying the concrete with asphalt is like resurfacing. 

Like what they've done to NY 85 so far.  I've been wondering if the asphalt will kink where those old rotten concrete joints were.

It will unless they rebuilt the bad joints. Always does.

Yay.  I thought the original plan was to replace the concrete, which made a heckuva lot more sense to me than the overlay they've done...

...but I'm getting off the thread's topic.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on December 01, 2015, 05:56:56 PM
I believe NY 85 got a crack and seat treatment (basically, a giant hammer breaks up the pavement and then a very heavy truck drives over it to set it back in place) to make the concrete behave more like asphalt, which should prevent that.  Ditto for Washington Avenue Extension (which I KNOW got a crack and seat because I was there).  Not sure why the complete reconstruction option for the southern part of NY 85 was abandoned, but rehabilitation of that section was one of the alternatives.

I-88, alas, did not get a crack and seat.  The rutting is already visible and the pavement is only a year old on the WB side.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on December 01, 2015, 06:27:12 PM
NY 85 did get a crack and seat. There won't be as much in the way of reflective cracking, but it'll show through in a few years because the joints are still there. Just hope it isn't like the overlays Region 5 did over the past couple years that started showing after a couple months.

I don't know why Region 1 didn't just do a partial- or full-depth when they had their entire stretch of I-88 contraflowed in 2003 to address major bridge issues. Pavement condition was poor back then and it took them over 10 years to do an overlay.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: empirestate on December 01, 2015, 08:07:45 PM
Crack. And seat. </butthead>


iPhone
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Jim on December 03, 2015, 02:16:09 PM
Thought I had my own picture, but I don't see one so this will have to suffice:

https://goo.gl/maps/39p12StgGDL2

This sign, WB just beyond 25A in Rotterdam, was there this morning on my way to Albany, but gone and loaded onto trucks on my way home this afternoon.  I mean not just the signs but I believe the whole thing.  It looked like the crews were working on affixing new signs to the overpass just beyond and were painting some new arrows in the left lane.  I won't be back through that stretch in daylight until Monday to see the ultimate results.  They definitely need the "lane ends" signage, but the I-90 Buffalo green sign always seemed pretty useless.  Yes, you're on I-90 West toward Buffalo but there's nothing you can do about it until you get to Exit 26...

It has always shocked me how many people seem to be taken completely by surprise when their lane ends there.

The lane drop there is very unfortunate, as it occurs on a fairly significant uphill segment that often causes side-by-side trucks to slow traffic to well below the limit.  A third "no trucks" lane until the top of the upgrade would really help.  I assume it's hard/expensive to do so because of the next overpass a little way up carrying Putnam Rd.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on December 03, 2015, 06:30:05 PM
Something about this toll plaza strikes me as odd...but I can't put my finger on it.

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.906288,-74.5668675,3a,75y,74.2h,77.5t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s4MflXyWrcXiUaOCrp8KUdA!2e0!5s20140901T000000!7i13312!8i6656
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: amroad17 on December 03, 2015, 07:49:09 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on December 03, 2015, 06:30:05 PM
Something about this toll plaza strikes me as odd...but I can't put my finger on it.

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.906288,-74.5668675,3a,75y,74.2h,77.5t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s4MflXyWrcXiUaOCrp8KUdA!2e0!5s20140901T000000!7i13312!8i6656
The space at that plaza probably is needed for the double- and triple-trailer trucks that roam the Thruway.  Or, the Thruway Authority decided to use the former parking lot of some store as a toll plaza.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on December 03, 2015, 08:02:08 PM
Quote from: amroad17 on December 03, 2015, 07:49:09 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on December 03, 2015, 06:30:05 PM
Something about this toll plaza strikes me as odd...but I can't put my finger on it.

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.906288,-74.5668675,3a,75y,74.2h,77.5t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s4MflXyWrcXiUaOCrp8KUdA!2e0!5s20140901T000000!7i13312!8i6656
The space at that plaza probably is needed for the double- and triple-trailer trucks that roam the Thruway.  Or, the Thruway Authority decided to use the former parking lot of some store as a toll plaza.

Tandem parking. It's so odd because of the former Beech-Nut factory right there. Now that the factory has closed, I wonder if it will be rebuilt into something more conventional.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on December 03, 2015, 09:54:30 PM
Quote from: cl94 on December 03, 2015, 08:02:08 PM
Quote from: amroad17 on December 03, 2015, 07:49:09 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on December 03, 2015, 06:30:05 PM
Something about this toll plaza strikes me as odd...but I can't put my finger on it.

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.906288,-74.5668675,3a,75y,74.2h,77.5t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s4MflXyWrcXiUaOCrp8KUdA!2e0!5s20140901T000000!7i13312!8i6656
The space at that plaza probably is needed for the double- and triple-trailer trucks that roam the Thruway.  Or, the Thruway Authority decided to use the former parking lot of some store as a toll plaza.

Tandem parking. It's so odd because of the former Beech-Nut factory right there. Now that the factory has closed, I wonder if it will be rebuilt into something more conventional.

Something else I noticed was that the booth itself looks like it's original, but I don't really know.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Jim on December 03, 2015, 10:02:11 PM
About the Exit 29 toll booths referenced here, the view is completely different now.  The portion of the old Beech Nut plant adjacent to the ramp has been demolished, but many large piles of rubble remain on the site.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on December 03, 2015, 10:14:08 PM
Quote from: Jim on December 03, 2015, 10:02:11 PM
About the Exit 29 toll booths referenced here, the view is completely different now.  The portion of the old Beech Nut plant adjacent to the ramp has been demolished, but many large piles of rubble remain on the site.

That's recent. I don't remember the plant being gone when I was through there a couple months ago, but I may not have been paying attention.

Booth is definitely original. If a set of toll booth only has 3 lanes, it's original.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on December 11, 2015, 10:51:37 AM
Why did they put a "rough road" sign here? I drove through here over the summer, I could've sworn I never saw this.

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.5826701,-79.063615,3a,18y,266.18h,87.38t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1stiyk-J4y_XF07hjUaWRr8Q!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on December 11, 2015, 11:50:28 AM
Quote from: Buffaboy on December 11, 2015, 10:51:37 AM
Why did they put a "rough road" sign here? I drove through here over the summer, I could've sworn I never saw this.

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.5826701,-79.063615,3a,18y,266.18h,87.38t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1stiyk-J4y_XF07hjUaWRr8Q!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

Spring or summer. Seneca Nation isn't allowing NYSTA to reconstruct the highway over a treaty dispute. That's why the limit was lowered to 55.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: seicer on December 11, 2015, 12:17:02 PM
And the same reason why reconstruction of I-86 (NY 17, when it was built in 1995) was held up for so long - and why it took so long to complete, in the southern tier. Even building the road took quite a few years because of extensive holdups.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on December 11, 2015, 01:53:34 PM
Is there a reason why the state didn't get an agreement allowing them to maintain the road when they got the agreement allowing them to build the road?  The two would seem to go together to me.

Quote from: cl94 on December 11, 2015, 11:50:28 AM
Quote from: Buffaboy on December 11, 2015, 10:51:37 AM
Why did they put a "rough road" sign here? I drove through here over the summer, I could've sworn I never saw this.

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.5826701,-79.063615,3a,18y,266.18h,87.38t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1stiyk-J4y_XF07hjUaWRr8Q!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

Spring or summer. Seneca Nation isn't allowing NYSTA to reconstruct the highway over a treaty dispute. That's why the limit was lowered to 55.
Is it a "real" 55 zone or a work zone?  Street view appears to indicate the latter near the overpass project... couldn't find evidence of any other 55 zones in the area.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on December 11, 2015, 03:33:09 PM
Quote from: vdeane on December 11, 2015, 01:53:34 PM
Is there a reason why the state didn't get an agreement allowing them to maintain the road when they got the agreement allowing them to build the road?  The two would seem to go together to me.

Quote from: cl94 on December 11, 2015, 11:50:28 AM
Quote from: Buffaboy on December 11, 2015, 10:51:37 AM
Why did they put a "rough road" sign here? I drove through here over the summer, I could've sworn I never saw this.

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.5826701,-79.063615,3a,18y,266.18h,87.38t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1stiyk-J4y_XF07hjUaWRr8Q!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

Spring or summer. Seneca Nation isn't allowing NYSTA to reconstruct the highway over a treaty dispute. That's why the limit was lowered to 55.
Is it a "real" 55 zone or a work zone?  Street view appears to indicate the latter near the overpass project... couldn't find evidence of any other 55 zones in the area.

It's real. Confirmed by NYSTA today. A NYSTA rep gave a presentation in one of my classes this morning. Both those and the rough road signs are on Z-bars. They have no timeline as to when it'll get fixed because of a dispute over the terms of the easement. SNI claims the easement has expired and refuses to do much negotiation until Cuomo backs off on the casino revenue.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on December 11, 2015, 03:49:42 PM
Are the limits exact with the reservation?  If it's permanent I should update my exit list.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on December 11, 2015, 04:44:47 PM
Quote from: vdeane on December 11, 2015, 03:49:42 PM
Are the limits exact with the reservation?  If it's permanent I should update my exit list.

Goes down 0.2 miles outside the reservation on each side. Increases back to 65 just past Exit 58 WB and where the reconstructed section begins EB. Again, it is semi-permanent per NYSTA until the treaty stuff gets resolved and/or the state can work something out with the Senecas.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on December 11, 2015, 08:39:28 PM
I wonder what SNI toll booths would look like/how they would work if they had implemented them a few years ago.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on December 11, 2015, 08:51:23 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on December 11, 2015, 08:39:28 PM
I wonder what SNI toll booths would look like/how they would work if they had implemented them a few years ago.

As it currently works, New York pays a small amount per vehicle passing through the reservation. Thanks to ticket counts and E-ZPass data, it is relatively easy to determine the number. SNI doesn't have a beef against the people using the highway. The issues are with the state government that is violating federal treaties by trying to collect taxes on SNI land. Per Public Law 83-280 as stated by the Bureau of Indian Affairs, states cannot impose taxes on reservation land.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on December 12, 2015, 12:39:33 AM
The incident where the Senecas dropped burning tires onto the Thruway back in 1992 has scarred relations between NY and SNI ever since.

Also, the USACE treatment of the villages that were connected by the Red House Bridge didn't help matters, either!

Blunder after blunder...
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: jwolfer on December 12, 2015, 01:13:41 AM
Quote from: cl94 on November 28, 2015, 08:38:04 PM
Quote from: The Nature Boy on November 28, 2015, 08:34:37 PM
Quote from: noelbotevera on November 28, 2015, 07:33:24 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on November 28, 2015, 07:05:03 PM
It says Boston to stay on the Thruway, but coming into this interchange from the north on I-87 it says to use free I-90 to Boston.

Also the Mass Pike Shield is nice off to the side of the Thruway shield.
The free I-90 is the cheaper way. Some people don't know about this and take the more expensive route by staying on I-87.

I notice that states will always direct traffic onto the toll road, even when the free way is the best way.

See: Portland as a control city on I-95 at the I-295/95 junction in West Gardiner, Maine. Even though I-295 goes through downtown Portland.

No, it's called toll authorities encouraging traffic to use their highways. In most of these cases, the toll authority placed the signage.
The toll authority is the state
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on December 12, 2015, 11:49:48 AM
Quote from: jwolfer on December 12, 2015, 01:13:41 AM
Quote from: cl94 on November 28, 2015, 08:38:04 PM
Quote from: The Nature Boy on November 28, 2015, 08:34:37 PM
Quote from: noelbotevera on November 28, 2015, 07:33:24 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on November 28, 2015, 07:05:03 PM
It says Boston to stay on the Thruway, but coming into this interchange from the north on I-87 it says to use free I-90 to Boston.

Also the Mass Pike Shield is nice off to the side of the Thruway shield.
The free I-90 is the cheaper way. Some people don't know about this and take the more expensive route by staying on I-87.

I notice that states will always direct traffic onto the toll road, even when the free way is the best way.

See: Portland as a control city on I-95 at the I-295/95 junction in West Gardiner, Maine. Even though I-295 goes through downtown Portland.

No, it's called toll authorities encouraging traffic to use their highways. In most of these cases, the toll authority placed the signage.
The toll authority is the state

As has been stated over and over again in these forums: No, it is not.  Public authorities (including NYSTA) may be created by the state, but they operate totally outside of it (essentially "spun off" from state government).  That lack of accountability (despite some Governor-appointed board members) is one of the reasons why I hate them.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: froggie on December 12, 2015, 11:59:49 AM
One could argue that it's on a state-by-state basis.  Sure, in many states (especially your own) they are public or quasi-public authorities that operate in parallel to (as opposed to underneath) the state.  But that's not the case everywhere.  For example, the three tolled turnpikes in New Hampshire fall under NHDOT (basically "the state" as the term is being discussed here).  Likewise, the Mass Pike falls under MassDOT.  And Maryland's toll facilities fall under a subdivision of MDOT.

There's even a case where toll facilities fall directly under a city as opposed to a state or public authority (2 such facilities, soon to be 3, in Chesapeake, VA).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: The Nature Boy on December 12, 2015, 12:13:27 PM
Quote from: froggie on December 12, 2015, 11:59:49 AM
One could argue that it's on a state-by-state basis.  Sure, in many states (especially your own) they are public or quasi-public authorities that operate in parallel to (as opposed to underneath) the state.  But that's not the case everywhere.  For example, the three tolled turnpikes in New Hampshire fall under NHDOT (basically "the state" as the term is being discussed here).  Likewise, the Mass Pike falls under MassDOT.  And Maryland's toll facilities fall under a subdivision of MDOT.

There's even a case where toll facilities fall directly under a city as opposed to a state or public authority (2 such facilities, soon to be 3, in Chesapeake, VA).


I'll do a mea culpa here and say that Maine's structure is similar to New York's. I had assumed that Maine's toll road structure was similar to NH and MA.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: jwolfer on December 12, 2015, 12:34:50 PM
Quote from: Rothman on December 12, 2015, 11:49:48 AM
Quote from: jwolfer on December 12, 2015, 01:13:41 AM
Quote from: cl94 on November 28, 2015, 08:38:04 PM
Quote from: The Nature Boy on November 28, 2015, 08:34:37 PM
Quote from: noelbotevera on November 28, 2015, 07:33:24 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on November 28, 2015, 07:05:03 PM
It says Boston to stay on the Thruway, but coming into this interchange from the north on I-87 it says to use free I-90 to Boston.

Also the Mass Pike Shield is nice off to the side of the Thruway shield.
The free I-90 is the cheaper way. Some people don't know about this and take the more expensive route by staying on I-87.

I notice that states will always direct traffic onto the toll road, even when the free way is the best way.

See: Portland as a control city on I-95 at the I-295/95 junction in West Gardiner, Maine. Even though I-295 goes through downtown Portland.

No, it's called toll authorities encouraging traffic to use their highways. In most of these cases, the toll authority placed the signage.
The toll authority is the state

As has been stated over and over again in these forums: No, it is not.  Public authorities (including NYSTA) may be created by the state, but they operate totally outside of it (essentially "spun off" from state government).  That lack of accountability (despite some Governor-appointed board members) is one of the reasons why I hate them.
No need for your dickish tone... In my mind created by the state it is "the state".. Just a different division. No different from the myriad of bureaucratic agencies etc.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: seicer on December 12, 2015, 01:34:24 PM
Quote from: Rothman on December 12, 2015, 11:49:48 AM
Quote from: jwolfer on December 12, 2015, 01:13:41 AM
Quote from: cl94 on November 28, 2015, 08:38:04 PM
Quote from: The Nature Boy on November 28, 2015, 08:34:37 PM
Quote from: noelbotevera on November 28, 2015, 07:33:24 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on November 28, 2015, 07:05:03 PM
It says Boston to stay on the Thruway, but coming into this interchange from the north on I-87 it says to use free I-90 to Boston.

Also the Mass Pike Shield is nice off to the side of the Thruway shield.
The free I-90 is the cheaper way. Some people don't know about this and take the more expensive route by staying on I-87.

I notice that states will always direct traffic onto the toll road, even when the free way is the best way.

See: Portland as a control city on I-95 at the I-295/95 junction in West Gardiner, Maine. Even though I-295 goes through downtown Portland.

No, it's called toll authorities encouraging traffic to use their highways. In most of these cases, the toll authority placed the signage.
The toll authority is the state

As has been stated over and over again in these forums: No, it is not.  Public authorities (including NYSTA) may be created by the state, but they operate totally outside of it (essentially "spun off" from state government).  That lack of accountability (despite some Governor-appointed board members) is one of the reasons why I hate them.

This is the first time I've heard this - and as lame visitor who doesn't come here much, I would appreciate a more polite tone.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on December 12, 2015, 04:45:16 PM
Quote from: jwolfer on December 12, 2015, 12:34:50 PM
Quote from: Rothman on December 12, 2015, 11:49:48 AM
Quote from: jwolfer on December 12, 2015, 01:13:41 AM
Quote from: cl94 on November 28, 2015, 08:38:04 PM
Quote from: The Nature Boy on November 28, 2015, 08:34:37 PM
Quote from: noelbotevera on November 28, 2015, 07:33:24 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on November 28, 2015, 07:05:03 PM
It says Boston to stay on the Thruway, but coming into this interchange from the north on I-87 it says to use free I-90 to Boston.

Also the Mass Pike Shield is nice off to the side of the Thruway shield.
The free I-90 is the cheaper way. Some people don't know about this and take the more expensive route by staying on I-87.

I notice that states will always direct traffic onto the toll road, even when the free way is the best way.

See: Portland as a control city on I-95 at the I-295/95 junction in West Gardiner, Maine. Even though I-295 goes through downtown Portland.

No, it's called toll authorities encouraging traffic to use their highways. In most of these cases, the toll authority placed the signage.
The toll authority is the state

As has been stated over and over again in these forums: No, it is not.  Public authorities (including NYSTA) may be created by the state, but they operate totally outside of it (essentially "spun off" from state government).  That lack of accountability (despite some Governor-appointed board members) is one of the reasons why I hate them.
No need for your dickish tone... In my mind created by the state it is "the state".. Just a different division. No different from the myriad of bureaucratic agencies etc.

But that doesn't mean your view is correct. Everyone in New York knows the Thruway Authority is its own entity. As Froggie said, many states have the toll authority as part of the state DOT and many do not. New York doesn't.

Maine is similar to New York in how it is structured, as are Ohio and Illinois.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: AMLNet49 on December 12, 2015, 08:58:23 PM
Quote from: cl94 on December 12, 2015, 04:45:16 PM
Quote from: jwolfer on December 12, 2015, 12:34:50 PM
Quote from: Rothman on December 12, 2015, 11:49:48 AM
Quote from: jwolfer on December 12, 2015, 01:13:41 AM
Quote from: cl94 on November 28, 2015, 08:38:04 PM
Quote from: The Nature Boy on November 28, 2015, 08:34:37 PM
Quote from: noelbotevera on November 28, 2015, 07:33:24 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on November 28, 2015, 07:05:03 PM
It says Boston to stay on the Thruway, but coming into this interchange from the north on I-87 it says to use free I-90 to Boston.

Also the Mass Pike Shield is nice off to the side of the Thruway shield.
The free I-90 is the cheaper way. Some people don't know about this and take the more expensive route by staying on I-87.

I notice that states will always direct traffic onto the toll road, even when the free way is the best way.

See: Portland as a control city on I-95 at the I-295/95 junction in West Gardiner, Maine. Even though I-295 goes through downtown Portland.

No, it's called toll authorities encouraging traffic to use their highways. In most of these cases, the toll authority placed the signage.
The toll authority is the state

As has been stated over and over again in these forums: No, it is not.  Public authorities (including NYSTA) may be created by the state, but they operate totally outside of it (essentially "spun off" from state government).  That lack of accountability (despite some Governor-appointed board members) is one of the reasons why I hate them.
No need for your dickish tone... In my mind created by the state it is "the state".. Just a different division. No different from the myriad of bureaucratic agencies etc.

But that doesn't mean your view is correct. Everyone in New York knows the Thruway Authority is its own entity. As Froggie said, many states have the toll authority as part of the state DOT and many do not. New York doesn't.

Maine is similar to New York in how it is structured, as are Ohio and Illinois.

Indeed. The toll highway authorities are self sustaining, almost like businesses. Tolls collected on the thruway for example don't go anywhere except back into Thruway maintenance.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on December 12, 2015, 09:14:16 PM
Not quite.  The Canal Corp was folded into the Thruway Authority, so some tolls go towards the canals (which are a financial drain).  They also pass along some money to NYSDOT.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: The Nature Boy on December 12, 2015, 09:17:43 PM
To go back to my original point:

I-295 is maintained by the Maine Department of Transportation and the signage for the Falmouth Spur uses "NH - Mass" as the control city even when staying on I-295 is in fact quicker.

That is an example of a state DOT trying to at least direct money towards the Turnpike Authority.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: SignBridge on December 12, 2015, 09:41:50 PM
Does anyone know what the bureaucratic structure was in Connecticut back when they had tolls on the Turnpike/I-95? I was never aware of any separate Authority back then.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Alps on December 13, 2015, 12:45:51 AM
Quote from: The Nature Boy on December 12, 2015, 09:17:43 PM
To go back to my original point:

I-295 is maintained by the Maine Department of Transportation and the signage for the Falmouth Spur uses "NH - Mass" as the control city even when staying on I-295 is in fact quicker.

That is an example of a state DOT trying to at least direct money towards the Turnpike Authority.
Not necessarily, as they would want through traffic to bypass Portland.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Beeper1 on December 13, 2015, 12:54:13 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on December 12, 2015, 09:41:50 PM
Does anyone know what the bureaucratic structure was in Connecticut back when they had tolls on the Turnpike/I-95? I was never aware of any separate Authority back then.

Connecticut never had a separate authority for the old Conn Turnpike.  It was always administered by ConnDOT.   I believe the Merritt Parkway may have originally been under the control of a separate entity when it was first built, but was eventually taken over by ConnDOT by the 1950s.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Pete from Boston on December 13, 2015, 11:11:20 AM

Quote from: jwolfer on December 12, 2015, 12:34:50 PM
Quote from: Rothman on December 12, 2015, 11:49:48 AM
Quote from: jwolfer on December 12, 2015, 01:13:41 AM
Quote from: cl94 on November 28, 2015, 08:38:04 PM
Quote from: The Nature Boy on November 28, 2015, 08:34:37 PM
Quote from: noelbotevera on November 28, 2015, 07:33:24 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on November 28, 2015, 07:05:03 PM
It says Boston to stay on the Thruway, but coming into this interchange from the north on I-87 it says to use free I-90 to Boston.

Also the Mass Pike Shield is nice off to the side of the Thruway shield.
The free I-90 is the cheaper way. Some people don't know about this and take the more expensive route by staying on I-87.

I notice that states will always direct traffic onto the toll road, even when the free way is the best way.

See: Portland as a control city on I-95 at the I-295/95 junction in West Gardiner, Maine. Even though I-295 goes through downtown Portland.

No, it's called toll authorities encouraging traffic to use their highways. In most of these cases, the toll authority placed the signage.
The toll authority is the state

As has been stated over and over again in these forums: No, it is not.  Public authorities (including NYSTA) may be created by the state, but they operate totally outside of it (essentially "spun off" from state government).  That lack of accountability (despite some Governor-appointed board members) is one of the reasons why I hate them.
No need for your dickish tone... In my mind created by the state it is "the state".. Just a different division. No different from the myriad of bureaucratic agencies etc.

Depends on whether you mean "the state," the political subdivision of the United States, or "the state," the conceptual figment that is the government ("l'etat" in "l'etat, c'est moi.")

The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey's power derives from Congress, so it falls under the latter but not the former.  Its directors are chosen by the state governors, but that is the extent of its political or fiscal tie to state government.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: shadyjay on December 13, 2015, 03:49:08 PM
Quote from: The Nature Boy on December 12, 2015, 09:17:43 PM
To go back to my original point:

I-295 is maintained by the Maine Department of Transportation and the signage for the Falmouth Spur uses "NH - Mass" as the control city even when staying on I-295 is in fact quicker.

That is an example of a state DOT trying to at least direct money towards the Turnpike Authority.

That, and probably also since I-95 was the "thru route" (Maine Tpke, Falmouth Spur, I-295 north of spur) before the great renumbering c 2004. 
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on December 14, 2015, 10:01:18 AM
Quote from: jwolfer on December 12, 2015, 12:34:50 PM
Quote from: Rothman on December 12, 2015, 11:49:48 AM
Quote from: jwolfer on December 12, 2015, 01:13:41 AM
Quote from: cl94 on November 28, 2015, 08:38:04 PM
Quote from: The Nature Boy on November 28, 2015, 08:34:37 PM
Quote from: noelbotevera on November 28, 2015, 07:33:24 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on November 28, 2015, 07:05:03 PM
It says Boston to stay on the Thruway, but coming into this interchange from the north on I-87 it says to use free I-90 to Boston.

Also the Mass Pike Shield is nice off to the side of the Thruway shield.
The free I-90 is the cheaper way. Some people don't know about this and take the more expensive route by staying on I-87.

I notice that states will always direct traffic onto the toll road, even when the free way is the best way.

See: Portland as a control city on I-95 at the I-295/95 junction in West Gardiner, Maine. Even though I-295 goes through downtown Portland.

No, it's called toll authorities encouraging traffic to use their highways. In most of these cases, the toll authority placed the signage.
The toll authority is the state

As has been stated over and over again in these forums: No, it is not.  Public authorities (including NYSTA) may be created by the state, but they operate totally outside of it (essentially "spun off" from state government).  That lack of accountability (despite some Governor-appointed board members) is one of the reasons why I hate them.
No need for your dickish tone... In my mind created by the state it is "the state".. Just a different division. No different from the myriad of bureaucratic agencies etc.


It's this mentality that leads the public to be easily misled into blaming the wrong people for bad behavior.

Thanks, Obama.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Duke87 on December 14, 2015, 09:22:10 PM
Quote from: Rothman on December 14, 2015, 10:01:18 AM
Quote from: jwolfer on December 12, 2015, 12:34:50 PM
In my mind created by the state it is "the state".. Just a different division. No different from the myriad of bureaucratic agencies etc.
It's this mentality that leads the public to be easily misled into blaming the wrong people for bad behavior.

Eh. I'll allow it under the principle of "the buck stops here". Just because the state government of New York has seen fit to create semi-autonomous "public benefit corporations" with the intention of shielding themselves from accountability does not mean we ought to let them off the hook as they would like us to do. The state has the authority to consolidate or dissolve these entities at any time if they see fit.

For the purpose of what started this argument, though, you are correct - NYSTA's decision to guide through traffic to stay on the Thruway rather than follow 90 was made by them, not the state government.

Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: roadman65 on December 28, 2015, 11:01:09 PM
I think the whole purpose behind the Boston and Mass Pike to stay on the Thruway was made as many non road geeks following I-90 to Boston know that that staying on 90 off the toll road goes there as well.   It just suggests to them that they could use the Thruway and the Berkshire Section to get there in a means to bypass Downtown Albany.

Remember non road geeks probably know that I-90 goes all the way to Boston and no break in route continuity.  Plus the GPS I am sure will send them on Free I-90 anyway.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on December 29, 2015, 12:08:53 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on December 28, 2015, 11:01:09 PM
I think the whole purpose behind the Boston and Mass Pike to stay on the Thruway was made as many non road geeks following I-90 to Boston know that that staying on 90 off the toll road goes there as well.   It just suggests to them that they could use the Thruway and the Berkshire Section to get there in a means to bypass Downtown Albany.

Remember non road geeks probably know that I-90 goes all the way to Boston and no break in route continuity.  Plus the GPS I am sure will send them on Free I-90 anyway.

Google Maps and Mapquest often route people down to Exit 21A. Saves one minute if driving the speed limit. I'd rather save money and have easy access to cheaper gas/food.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: roadman65 on December 29, 2015, 01:16:22 AM
Quote from: cl94 on December 29, 2015, 12:08:53 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on December 28, 2015, 11:01:09 PM
I think the whole purpose behind the Boston and Mass Pike to stay on the Thruway was made as many non road geeks following I-90 to Boston know that that staying on 90 off the toll road goes there as well.   It just suggests to them that they could use the Thruway and the Berkshire Section to get there in a means to bypass Downtown Albany.

Remember non road geeks probably know that I-90 goes all the way to Boston and no break in route continuity.  Plus the GPS I am sure will send them on Free I-90 anyway.

Google Maps and Mapquest often route people down to Exit 21A. Saves one minute if driving the speed limit. I'd rather save money and have easy access to cheaper gas/food.
Me too. If I went from Syracuse to Boston, I would cut through town on free I-90.  I would only do the unnumbered Berkshire for clinching purposes only.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on December 29, 2015, 08:47:02 AM
Remember that the 45 mph work zone limit is still in effect around the Patroon Island Bridge (Free I-90's speed limit is 55 through Albany until Defreestville).  Also, as surprising as it may seem, Albany does have a rush hour where "Exit 24" (Thruway/Northway/Free I-90) and the I-90/I-787 interchanges do get congested.

Thruway can be faster, with a constant 65 mph speed limit, especially now with the lane that the Thruway "recently" added.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on December 29, 2015, 01:00:40 PM
Heck, Albany's rush hour is arguably WORSE than any other upstate city's rush hour.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on December 29, 2015, 04:38:17 PM
Quote from: vdeane on December 29, 2015, 01:00:40 PM
Heck, Albany's rush hour is arguably WORSE than any other upstate city's rush hour.

I agree completely. The Northway is often stopped approaching the Twin Bridges. Buffalo has virtually no traffic (regardless of what people around here like to say). Rochester is a little worse, but not nearly as bad as Albany.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: SignBridge on January 18, 2016, 08:45:45 PM
I drove north on the Thruway in Rockland County this past week and I was surprised at the signing for Exit-14B/Garden State Pkwy. The signs show a "standard" exit configuration, but it's actually not. The right-lane is an option-lane there is a lane-drop of an auxiliary-lane that starts maybe a half-mile back at the entrance from Route-59. It should have been signed accordingly but it's not. Thruway Authority must be asleep at their drawing boards, so to speak. But then, they've never been really sharp about signing.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on January 18, 2016, 09:14:42 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on January 18, 2016, 08:45:45 PM
I drove north on the Thruway in Rockland County this past week and I was surprised at the signing for Exit-14B/Garden State Pkwy. The signs show a "standard" exit configuration, but it's actually not. The right-lane is an option-lane there is a lane-drop of an auxiliary-lane that starts maybe a half-mile back at the entrance from Route-59. It should have been signed accordingly but it's not. Thruway Authority must be asleep at their drawing boards, so to speak. But then, they've never been really sharp about signing.

I can almost assure you that it will be replaced by an APL at some point. NYSTA option lane signage Upstate has been replaced by APLs when option lanes are installed or signs replaced.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: SignBridge on January 18, 2016, 09:20:52 PM
Should have been done already, when the lane configuration was changed. Bet even NYS DOT Region-10 would have done it........
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on January 18, 2016, 09:29:35 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on January 18, 2016, 09:20:52 PM
Should have been done already, when the lane configuration was changed. Bet even NYS DOT Region-10 would have done it........

It has been an option lane since long before NYSTA started using APLs
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on February 04, 2016, 06:37:08 PM
So much sensationalism in this article, can anyone fill us in? cl94?

QuoteThe Thruway's almost nightly eastbound backups — the joy of radio traffic reporters and the bane of commuters near the "big blue water tower"  — should be headed toward extinction under state plans to add a fourth lane to the superhighway.

Thruway Authority officials plan to add a fourth eastbound lane to the approximately one-mile stretch between the Youngmann Highway and Kensington Expressway. A fourth westbound lane was added to that section last year.

The result will be an "LA type"  stretch — rare for upstate — featuring eight lanes of two-way traffic in what Thruway officials label one of the nation's 50 most congested bottlenecks.

"There's really been a positive impact on the westbound lanes,"  said Maria C. Lehman, the Thruway Authority's interim executive director. "Now this will provide a better approach there where you have all that congestion."

Traffic tie-ups are a frequent affair during rush hour on this stretch of the Thruway as commuters leaving the city head east toward the Williamsville toll barrier. Volume on the Thruway's "free section"  hits about 145,000 vehicles daily, Lehman said, almost twice as much as the Kensington Expressway and equivalent to the Thruway's busiest downstate stretches near the Tappan Zee Bridge.

http://www.buffalonews.com/city-region/traffic/eight-lane-superhighway-expected-to-relieve-blue-water-tower-backups-20160204
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on February 04, 2016, 06:51:11 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on February 04, 2016, 06:37:08 PM
So much sensationalism in this article, can anyone fill us in? cl94?

QuoteThe Thruway's almost nightly eastbound backups — the joy of radio traffic reporters and the bane of commuters near the "big blue water tower"  — should be headed toward extinction under state plans to add a fourth lane to the superhighway.

Thruway Authority officials plan to add a fourth eastbound lane to the approximately one-mile stretch between the Youngmann Highway and Kensington Expressway. A fourth westbound lane was added to that section last year.

The result will be an "LA type"  stretch — rare for upstate — featuring eight lanes of two-way traffic in what Thruway officials label one of the nation's 50 most congested bottlenecks.

"There's really been a positive impact on the westbound lanes,"  said Maria C. Lehman, the Thruway Authority's interim executive director. "Now this will provide a better approach there where you have all that congestion."

Traffic tie-ups are a frequent affair during rush hour on this stretch of the Thruway as commuters leaving the city head east toward the Williamsville toll barrier. Volume on the Thruway's "free section"  hits about 145,000 vehicles daily, Lehman said, almost twice as much as the Kensington Expressway and equivalent to the Thruway's busiest downstate stretches near the Tappan Zee Bridge.

http://www.buffalonews.com/city-region/traffic/eight-lane-superhighway-expected-to-relieve-blue-water-tower-backups-20160204

You mean the 8th lane they just added? I don't know what the hell they're talking about because it already has 8 lanes. Maybe they're referring to how NYSTA wants to extend the auxiliary lane from the EB-EB loop ramp to where the WB ramp merges in?

It also isn't that rare - 8+ lanes between exits is normal in Albany when exits are spaced that closely. Almost all of I-90 between the Thruway and I-787 is 8-9 lanes between exits.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on February 04, 2016, 06:55:15 PM
Quote from: cl94 on February 04, 2016, 06:51:11 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on February 04, 2016, 06:37:08 PM
So much sensationalism in this article, can anyone fill us in? cl94?

QuoteThe Thruway’s almost nightly eastbound backups – the joy of radio traffic reporters and the bane of commuters near the “big blue water tower” – should be headed toward extinction under state plans to add a fourth lane to the superhighway.

Thruway Authority officials plan to add a fourth eastbound lane to the approximately one-mile stretch between the Youngmann Highway and Kensington Expressway. A fourth westbound lane was added to that section last year.

The result will be an “LA type” stretch – rare for upstate – featuring eight lanes of two-way traffic in what Thruway officials label one of the nation’s 50 most congested bottlenecks.

“There’s really been a positive impact on the westbound lanes,” said Maria C. Lehman, the Thruway Authority’s interim executive director. “Now this will provide a better approach there where you have all that congestion.”

Traffic tie-ups are a frequent affair during rush hour on this stretch of the Thruway as commuters leaving the city head east toward the Williamsville toll barrier. Volume on the Thruway’s “free section” hits about 145,000 vehicles daily, Lehman said, almost twice as much as the Kensington Expressway and equivalent to the Thruway’s busiest downstate stretches near the Tappan Zee Bridge.

http://www.buffalonews.com/city-region/traffic/eight-lane-superhighway-expected-to-relieve-blue-water-tower-backups-20160204

You mean the 8th lane they just added? I don't know what the hell they're talking about because it already has 8 lanes. Maybe they're referring to how NYSTA wants to extend the auxiliary lane from the EB-EB loop ramp to where the WB ramp merges in?

It also isn't that rare - 8+ lanes between exits is normal in Albany when exits are spaced that closely. Almost all of I-90 between the Thruway and I-787 is 8-9 lanes between exits.

Yeah this didn't make sense at all...

If I wasn't thinking, I would have thought they were building a beltway or something — this was the headline:

"Eight-lane superhighway expected to relieve blue water tower backups"

Maybe they mean four travel lanes?

Edit: they said they want to build sound barriers up to the Cheektowaga backyards, maybe they are actually doing the widening to 4 travel lanes as well as keeping the exit lanes
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on February 19, 2016, 05:26:46 PM
With all of the bridge work they're doing on the Berkshire Spur, I'd have figured that they had put some sort of median barrier on the Castleton Bridge. Nope. It remains the only place in New York where the speed limit is 65 and the only thing separating you from opposing traffic is a line of construction barrels. Anyone know why the heck NYSTA hasn't put a barrier on that thing yet?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Alps on February 19, 2016, 07:51:53 PM
Quote from: cl94 on February 19, 2016, 05:26:46 PM
With all of the bridge work they're doing on the Berkshire Spur, I'd have figured that they had put some sort of median barrier on the Castleton Bridge. Nope. It remains the only place in New York where the speed limit is 65 and the only thing separating you from opposing traffic is a line of construction barrels. Anyone know why the heck NYSTA hasn't put a barrier on that thing yet?
I don't know, but it could be related to bridge design. A barrier adds a substantial dead load to the bridge. Sometimes the entire deck has to be replaced (orthotropic) to lighten the bridge enough.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on February 19, 2016, 10:04:35 PM
Quote from: Alps on February 19, 2016, 07:51:53 PM
Quote from: cl94 on February 19, 2016, 05:26:46 PM
With all of the bridge work they're doing on the Berkshire Spur, I'd have figured that they had put some sort of median barrier on the Castleton Bridge. Nope. It remains the only place in New York where the speed limit is 65 and the only thing separating you from opposing traffic is a line of construction barrels. Anyone know why the heck NYSTA hasn't put a barrier on that thing yet?
I don't know, but it could be related to bridge design. A barrier adds a substantial dead load to the bridge. Sometimes the entire deck has to be replaced (orthotropic) to lighten the bridge enough.

That's what I was assuming. My point was more of that they have traffic that's virtually undivided going 65 in each direction. A line of plastic bollards and/or a lower speed limit would have made sense, especially in a state that keeps stuff with higher design standards at 55.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Alps on February 20, 2016, 10:32:44 AM
Quote from: cl94 on February 19, 2016, 10:04:35 PM
Quote from: Alps on February 19, 2016, 07:51:53 PM
Quote from: cl94 on February 19, 2016, 05:26:46 PM
With all of the bridge work they're doing on the Berkshire Spur, I'd have figured that they had put some sort of median barrier on the Castleton Bridge. Nope. It remains the only place in New York where the speed limit is 65 and the only thing separating you from opposing traffic is a line of construction barrels. Anyone know why the heck NYSTA hasn't put a barrier on that thing yet?
I don't know, but it could be related to bridge design. A barrier adds a substantial dead load to the bridge. Sometimes the entire deck has to be replaced (orthotropic) to lighten the bridge enough.

That's what I was assuming. My point was more of that they have traffic that's virtually undivided going 65 in each direction. A line of plastic bollards and/or a lower speed limit would have made sense, especially in a state that keeps stuff with higher design standards at 55.
If they have crossover accidents, then sure. If there's really no history to suggest a problem, then despite our perception, drivers are doing okay with it. That's up to the agency to know.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on February 21, 2016, 07:02:53 PM
I noticed they replaced the big BGS on I-90 EB before the 190 with one in Clearview...and they added a truck tipover warning sign.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on February 21, 2016, 08:20:29 PM
Opinion piece Thruway must embrace technology: New York should replace its manned toll plazas with fully electronic collection

QuoteNew York Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo's plans for the New York State Thruway include: freezing tolls through 2020, cutting tolls in half for a million frequent travelers and eliminating tolls altogether for agricultural vehicles. In addition, he has pledged to invest heavily in desperately needed roadway infrastructure improvements. That's welcome news for Thruway travelers and for the state's business and tourism sectors.

We need more, however, much more. The Thruway is decades behind the times. Years ago, Ontario provincial planners began to study the feasibility of providing an alternative route to relieve traffic loads on their busy Highway 401 across the northern perimeter of the exploding Toronto Metropolitan region. Even with 16 lanes at some points, the 401 still slows to a crawl during high-volume periods and resembles a scene from "Mad Max"  in what passes for lighter traffic flows.

Construction began on the 407 in the late 1980s and in June 1997 it became the first fully electronic toll road in the world. As vehicles enter and exit the 407 ETR, they pass under toll bars at highway speed. Gone are the toll plazas with their traffic-choking booths to slow or stop traffic. Those with a 407 ETR transponder (similar to and made by the same manufacturer as the widely used E-ZPass) receive a monthly bill. Those without a transponder have their license plates video-ID'd and are billed at a much higher rate. Provincial licensing authorities enforce payment (pay up or lose your license) as do many cooperating state agencies in America.

Over the years, the 407 ETR has expanded and now spans nearly 70 miles. The electronic toll concept has grown as well. Nearly every toll road in the United States is electronic. New toll roads (yes, they are growing) are universally electronic. Most of the older toll roads have replaced their toll plazas and manned booths with the technology pioneered on the 407 ETR.

Meanwhile, in New York, we have one of the last toll roads with manned toll plazas. It's clear that the Thruway Authority has its head in the sand when it comes to change. There are a host of reasons large and small why New York should join the nearly universal move to electronic toll collection around the world.

Issues like relocating the Williamsville toll plaza will vanish. Vastly more important are the human beings manning those toll booths, exposed to horrific toxins, risking their health, risking or shortening their lives in a job as redundant as the elevator operators that disappeared years ago. In addition to removing these folks from harm's way, an electronic Thruway will reduce overall pollution dramatically, save time, save fuel, save money and reduce costs, eliminating the need to raise tolls in the foreseeable future.

http://www.buffnews.com/opinion/viewpoints/thruway-must-embrace-technology-new-york-should-replace-its-manned-toll-plazas-with-fully-electronic-collection-20160221
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Pete from Boston on February 22, 2016, 08:31:10 AM
One of the last toll roads with manned toll plazas?  Not really...
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on February 22, 2016, 06:57:15 PM
Obviously they aren't paying attention to NYSTA's press releases, because Tappan Zee is supposedly going live in about 2 months. Last I heard, it is still on schedule and they are testing it now. Yonkers, Harriman, and New Rochelle are supposedly going to be up within the next couple years. The other closed system of similar magnitude (Pennsylvania) is just doing its switch as well.

As far as last, nowhere close. Ohio just got E-ZPass, for Christ's sake. We've heard nothing out of Maine, New Hampshire, New Jersey, or Ohio about AET (that I know of)
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on February 22, 2016, 06:59:28 PM
That article is so full of BS it's not even funny.  They keep talking about how the surrounding states are AET and don't have separate toll authorities.  Let's take a look at the surrounding states.  Heck, let's add in the rest of the IAG!

New York: Mostly not AET, various authorities
Vermont: No tolls
New Hampshire: Not AET, NHDOT
Maine: Not AET, Maine Turnpike Authority
Massachusetts: implementing AET, Mass Turnpike Authority prior to merger with MassHighway
Rhode Island: AET, RIDOT
Connecticut: No tolls
New Jersey: Not AET (was investigating), New Jersey Turnpike Authority and Atlantic City Expressway
Pennsylvania: Implementing partial AET, Pennsylvania Turnpike Authority
Ohio: Not AET (not even E-ZPass until recently), Ohio Turnpike Authoirty
Indiana: Not AET, separate authority prior to privatization
Illinois: Not AET, separate authority
Delaware: Not AET (will be some AET with US 301), DOT?
Maryland: Some AET, MDTA
Virginia: Some AET, mix VDOT/TransUrban
North Carolina: AET, DOT?
West Virginia: Not AET, separate authority
Kentucky: Will be AET, DOT?
Ontario: AET, mix MTO and 407 ETR
Québec: Partially AET, public private partnerships

For fun, let's count anything that's mixed or I'm unsure of in the article's favor (I won't even count privatized entities that were never another public authority as being separate authorities), and not include NY:
-AET: 5
-Not fully or not AET: 12
-Separate agency: 8
-DOT/privatized: 9

So, basically, the article is full of shit.  The toll roads are overwhelmingly not AET, and a little over half don't have a separate public authority, and almost all of the latter are newer toll roads, and not part of the old Turnpikes; if we eliminated the Canadian provinces and the southern states with newer toll roads, it wouldn't even be a contest.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: ixnay on February 22, 2016, 08:16:29 PM
Where's Delaware (and for that matter, the Delaware River and Bay Authority [DE/NJ])?

Where's the Delaware River Port Authority, the Burlington County Bridge Commission, and the Delaware River Joint Toll Bridge Commission (all PA/NJ)?

ixnay
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on February 22, 2016, 08:24:25 PM
Depending on how you count the Ontario border bridges, most don't have an electronic toll system of any sort. Hell, most of the bridges in that damn newspaper's backyard just got E-ZPass.

Missed West Virginia, which has no AET (and one tolled Ohio River bridge with nothing).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: froggie on February 22, 2016, 08:52:07 PM
QuoteMaryland: Some AET, separate authority

MdTA, which operates the Maryland toll facilities, falls under MDOT.

QuoteVirginia: Some AET, mix VDOT/TransUrban

Virginia is all over the place, much as ixnay suggested with New Jersey.  Besides VDOT (Coleman Bridge) and TransUrban (95/395 and Beltway HO/T lanes), there are the three toll facilities in Chesapeake which all belong to that city.  Three of the tolled facilities in Richmond are run by a regional agency, while a fourth (Pocohontas Pkwy/VA 895) is owned by a bunch of banks after TransUrban "walked away from it".  The CBBT is a separate agency.  The Dulles Toll Road is run by the airport authority, while the Dulles Greenway is private.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on February 22, 2016, 09:05:16 PM
It wasn't even really an opinion piece, it was really a "fiction" piece.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: ixnay on February 23, 2016, 07:58:38 AM
Quote from: froggie on February 22, 2016, 08:52:07 PM
MdTA, which operates the Maryland toll facilities, falls under MDOT.

Unlike the the PTC and the NJTA, which are separate from their respective states' DOTs.  Otherwise a certain interchange in Bucks County, PA would probably have been fully up and running a long time ago.  Same for I-295 being connected to the NJTP/PaTPK connector.

ixnay
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: PHLBOS on February 23, 2016, 09:51:08 AM
Quote from: ixnay on February 22, 2016, 08:16:29 PM
Where's Delaware (and for that matter, the Delaware River and Bay Authority [DE/NJ])?
I believe all toll facilities in Delaware have E-ZPass but not AETs that I'm aware of.

Quote from: ixnay on February 22, 2016, 08:16:29 PMWhere's the Delaware River Port Authority, the Burlington County Bridge Commission, and the Delaware River Joint Toll Bridge Commission (all PA/NJ)?
E-ZPass, yes; AETs, no.

Quote from: ixnay on February 23, 2016, 07:58:38 AMOtherwise a certain interchange in Bucks County, PA would probably have been fully up and running a long time ago.  Same for I-295 being connected to the NJTP/PaTPK connector.
I don't believe there was ever a plan for an interchange directly linking I-295 to the Turnpike Connector.  Given I-295's close proximity to the Connector's interchange with the mainline NJ Turnpike (which was just recently expanded); such would have taken up too much real estate in the immediate region; especially since the nearby US 130 interchange (unsigned Exit 6A) was (relatively recently) upgraded to a full-blown, dual-trumpet interchange 2 decades ago.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on February 23, 2016, 07:01:30 PM
Delaware and West Virginia slipped my mind there.  Added, though it's only a minor change to the results.  MDTA strikes me as a sub-agency (like NYSDOT's regions), so it would appear to have more in common with the separate authorities than not (ex: still has top brass), but in the spirit of giving the newspaper every advantage possible to make a point, I counted it as DOT.

I wasn't really getting down into the weeds with listing every little bridge authority (the NY list would be very long if I did, for example) and instead focused on the old turnpikes; that said, if all a state had was a bridge (ex: Kentucky) or some other little thing, I counted it.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: MASTERNC on February 23, 2016, 07:55:08 PM
Quote from: vdeane on February 22, 2016, 06:59:28 PM
That article is so full of BS it's not even funny.  They keep talking about how the surrounding states are AET and don't have separate toll authorities.  Let's take a look at the surrounding states.  Heck, let's add in the rest of the IAG!

New York: Mostly not AET, various authorities
Vermont: No tolls
New Hampshire: Not AET, NHDOT
Maine: Not AET, Maine Turnpike Authority
Massachusetts: implementing AET, Mass Turnpike Authority prior to merger with MassHighway
Rhode Island: AET, RIDOT
Connecticut: No tolls
New Jersey: Not AET (was investigating), New Jersey Turnpike Authority and Atlantic City Expressway
Pennsylvania: Implementing partial AET, Pennsylvania Turnpike Authority
Ohio: Not AET (not even E-ZPass until recently), Ohio Turnpike Authoirty
Indiana: Not AET, separate authority prior to privatization
Illinois: Not AET, separate authority
Delaware: Not AET (will be mixed with US 301), DOT?
Maryland: Some AET, MDTA (under MDSHA)
Virginia: Some AET, mix VDOT/TransUrban
North Carolina: AET, DOT?
West Virginia: Not AET, separate authority
Kentucky: Will be AET, DOT?
Ontario: AET, mix MTO and 407 ETR
Québec: Partially AET, public private partnerships


From the signage presented in the plans (see Section 3 on the below website), the new US 301 toll road in Delaware will be AET.  I know the flyover video shows conventional toll booths though.

http://deldot.gov/information/projects/us301/index.shtml#horizontalTab2
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: PHLBOS on February 24, 2016, 09:06:35 AM
Bold emphasis added to below-quote:
Quote from: MASTERNC on February 23, 2016, 07:55:08 PMFrom the signage presented in the plans (see Section 3 on the below website), the new US 301 toll road in Delaware will be AET.
Key words will be.  As mentioned earlier, none of Delaware's existing toll facilities I'm aware of have AETs; although most (the Delaware Memorial Bridge being an exception) do have E-ZPass Express lanes that could be converted to such in the future.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on February 24, 2016, 07:19:52 PM
Plus I know of no plans to convert I-95 or DE 1 to AET.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: mariethefoxy on February 24, 2016, 07:54:49 PM
Route 1 would be quite easy since the high speed lanes are already there, just need to do it for the ramp tolls which have slow speed ezpass lanes.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cpzilliacus on February 25, 2016, 09:42:52 PM
Quote from: vdeane on February 22, 2016, 06:59:28 PM
That article is so full of BS it's not even funny.  They keep talking about how the surrounding states are AET and don't have separate toll authorities.  Let's take a look at the surrounding states.  Heck, let's add in the rest of the IAG!

QuoteDelaware: Not AET (will be mixed with US 301), DOT?

I think U.S. 301 is planned to be all-AET now. Delaware toll roads are run as part of DelDOT (currently just I-95 at the Maryland border and Delaware 1 (Relief Route))

QuotePennsylvania: Implementing partial AET, Pennsylvania Turnpike Authority

The only AET so far is entering the East-West Mainline of the Turnpike from the New Jersey Turnpike, but the PTC has said they are going to transition to cashless across the entire PTC network, and they are in the process of hiring contractor(s) to build the cashless toll collection system.

QuoteMaryland: Some AET, MDTA (under MDSHA)

MDTA uses SHA standards for most things, and they have the same personnel system, but they are entirely independent of SHA (the state considers MDTA to be an "unbudgeted" agency, which means it usually does not get tax dollars). MDTA is run by an independent board, which is chaired by the Secretary of the Maryland Department of Transportation.

MDTA has the ICC (200), which has been all-AET since inception, as have the I-95 Express Toll Lanes north of Baltimore. Conversion to AET is being actively considered (I believe the Francis Scott Key Bridge on the Baltimore Beltway (Md. 695 (signed as I-695)) has been high on the list for a conversion to AET, but members of the General Assembly raised objections for reasons not clear to me.

There are two small privately-owned toll crossings of the Potomac River (White's Ferry and the Oldtown Bridge far upstream), they are cash only.

QuoteVirginia: Some AET, mix VDOT/TransUrban

Virginia has a hodgepodge.  When I say owned by private owners, I believe that means owned by VDOT, but maintained and operated by a private concession company. I think this list is all of them:


QuoteSo, basically, the article is full of shit.  The toll roads are overwhelmingly not AET, and a little under half don't have a separate public authority, and almost all of the latter are newer toll roads, and not part of the old Turnpikes; if we eliminated the Canadian provinces and the southern states with newer toll roads, it wouldn't even be a contest.

The only AET so far among the legacy Eastern Turnpike Complex (all of which takes E-ZPass) is at the east end of the Pennsylvania Turnpike.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on February 25, 2016, 10:00:03 PM
Quote from: cpzilliacus on February 25, 2016, 09:42:52 PM
I think U.S. 301 is planned to be all-AET now. Delaware toll roads are run as part of DelDOT (currently just I-95 at the Maryland border and Delaware 1 (Relief Route))
"Mixed" as in mix of AET and booths, not as in ORT lanes.  I've edited the post to use less ambiguous but more awkward phrasing since everyone seems to be getting confused.  Also corrected Maryland AGAIN (shouldn't have listened to the people claiming MDTA was under MDSHA...).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: froggie on February 26, 2016, 08:40:51 AM
Quote from: cpzilliacusThe Pocahontas Parkway (Va. 895) crossing the James River is also Transurban;

Not anymore.  Transurban walked away from 895 almost 3 years ago.  It's run by some entity called DBi Services now.

QuoteThe South Norfolk Jordan Bridge (Va. 337) over the Elizabeth River is owned by Figg Bridge Developers

It should be noted that this bridge is AET.

QuoteThe Elizabeth River crossings (Midtown Tunnel, U.S. 58 and Downtown Tunnel, I-264) are jointly owned by Skanska and Macquarie.

Still owned by VDOT.  Are operated by the ERC consortium.

Also, two others that you missed:  both the Chesapeake Expressway (VA 168) and the Steel Bridge (US 17) are owned by the city of Chesapeake.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: mrsman on February 26, 2016, 02:31:43 PM
I am very highly in favor of AETs, so long as those without transponders are treated fairly.

In many places, those without transponders are charged an exorbitant penalty for using an all electronic facililty.  This is wrong.  Not everybody is a regular traveler and may not have a local transponder. The fee for driving without a transponder should be no more than double the regular toll rate.

Eventually, we will have a national interoperable toll transponder.  Hopefully those will not charge any monthly fees. 
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on February 26, 2016, 03:38:51 PM
Quote from: mrsman on February 26, 2016, 02:31:43 PM
I am very highly in favor of AETs, so long as those without transponders are treated fairly.

In many places, those without transponders are charged an exorbitant penalty for using an all electronic facililty.  This is wrong.  Not everybody is a regular traveler and may not have a local transponder. The fee for driving without a transponder should be no more than double the regular toll rate.

Eventually, we will have a national interoperable toll transponder.  Hopefully those will not charge any monthly fees.

This. In much of the country, everything accepts E-ZPass, so even if you don't get a local discount, you wouldn't get the service fee. In New York, for example, you don't have much of an excuse for not having a transponder, because the New York service center only charges a fee if you have a Port Authority tag. Some of toll penalties for not having a tag are outrageous. Take 407 in Ontario. There's a $4.05/trip camera surcharge plus $3.75/month (which is equal to the monthly transponder fee). Even with the insane per km tolls, there are possible trips where the camera toll is more triple the regular toll rate. That is ludicrous and it is the reason why I refuse to use the road.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: noelbotevera on February 26, 2016, 04:10:02 PM
Speaking of AET, turns out the new Tappan Zee Bridge will have it. Also, it seems construction is going a little slow. Considering I haven't been on the Tappan Zee since 2009-2010...eh.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cpzilliacus on February 26, 2016, 04:26:36 PM
Quote from: noelbotevera on February 26, 2016, 04:10:02 PM
Speaking of AET, turns out the new Tappan Zee Bridge will have it. Also, it seems construction is going a little slow. Considering I haven't been on the Tappan Zee since 2009-2010...eh.

Have you been over the Tappan Zee Bridge? 

Are you aware how l-o-n-g it is?

Are you aware how much construction progress has been made so far?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: noelbotevera on February 26, 2016, 04:59:39 PM
Quote from: cpzilliacus on February 26, 2016, 04:26:36 PM
Quote from: noelbotevera on February 26, 2016, 04:10:02 PM
Speaking of AET, turns out the new Tappan Zee Bridge will have it. Also, it seems construction is going a little slow. Considering I haven't been on the Tappan Zee since 2009-2010...eh.

Have you been over the Tappan Zee Bridge? 

Are you aware how l-o-n-g it is?

Are you aware how much construction progress has been made so far?
I'm an idiot. Yep, the bridge is a wee over three miles, and they're over halfway done.  Yes, i have been on the bridge before, but again, this was six-seven years ago.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on February 26, 2016, 05:17:58 PM
Quote from: noelbotevera on February 26, 2016, 04:59:39 PM
Quote from: cpzilliacus on February 26, 2016, 04:26:36 PM
Quote from: noelbotevera on February 26, 2016, 04:10:02 PM
Speaking of AET, turns out the new Tappan Zee Bridge will have it. Also, it seems construction is going a little slow. Considering I haven't been on the Tappan Zee since 2009-2010...eh.

Have you been over the Tappan Zee Bridge? 

Are you aware how l-o-n-g it is?

Are you aware how much construction progress has been made so far?
I'm an idiot. Yep, the bridge is a wee over three miles, and they're over halfway done.  Yes, i have been on the bridge before, but again, this was six-seven years ago.

Built over the widest part of the Hudson River. Furthest south it could be without the Port Authority having control. The work is actually going pretty fast compared to a lot of projects in this state. It's on schedule to be complete in 2018, with the first span open next year.

At least they replaced the deck on the old bridge so there aren't any holes. Around the turn of the century, they had quite a few emergency closures to do patches.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on March 01, 2016, 01:03:57 PM
NYSTA is doing a resurfacing project and guardrail replacement between Exits 24 and 25 (link (http://www.thruway.ny.gov/netdata/contractors/documents/d214456_taa16-8_plans-volume-1-of-1.pdf)). Sign replacements are minimal and NYSTA is NOT adding an option lane heading EB, at least not as part of this contract. The 2 mile left exit advance is being replaced with an overhead with the new style "left exit" tab. One of the I-87 SB pull-throughs is being replaced and a location is not immediately evident. It might be the button copy one at Exit 24.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on March 01, 2016, 06:19:42 PM
Quote from: cl94 on March 01, 2016, 01:03:57 PM
NYSTA is doing a resurfacing project and guardrail replacement between Exits 24 and 25 (link (http://www.thruway.ny.gov/netdata/contractors/documents/d214456_taa16-8_plans-volume-1-of-1.pdf)). Sign replacements are minimal and NYSTA is NOT adding an option lane heading EB, at least not as part of this contract. The 2 mile left exit advance is being replaced with an overhead with the new style "left exit" tab. One of the I-87 SB pull-throughs is being replaced and a location is not immediately evident. It might be the button copy one at Exit 24.

Major thing I didn't note: Exits 24 and 25 are getting the wrong way detection systems that were installed at I-190 Exit 9. These involve a series of radar guns and other sensors that will activate VMSes signs if a wrong-way vehicle is detected.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on March 01, 2016, 07:42:21 PM
Just thought of something: while not having an option lane at exit 24 has a detrimental effect on traffic trying to get to the exit, what if that's by design?  I wouldn't put it past the Thruway Authority to put their own system before the efficiency of the whole network, and the current situation does leave two dedicated Thruway lanes in the morning rush.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on March 01, 2016, 08:00:41 PM
Quote from: vdeane on March 01, 2016, 07:42:21 PM
Just thought of something: while not having an option lane at exit 24 has a detrimental effect on traffic trying to get to the exit, what if that's by design?  I wouldn't put it past the Thruway Authority to put their own system before the efficiency of the whole network, and the current situation does leave two dedicated Thruway lanes in the morning rush.

It does, but it also gets slow drivers moving to the left lane back at I-88 thanks to GPS systems that tell people what lane to be in. Granted, I wouldn't put it past NYSTA, either, but they've been putting in option lanes in the Buffalo and New York regions and the positive effects on traffic have been significant.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Flyer78 on March 11, 2016, 03:53:57 PM
Syracuse Post-Standard opinion piece on freezing tolls, and points out some of the bookkeeping required to earn the credit on tolls as proposed by the Governor.

http://www.syracuse.com/opinion/index.ssf/2016/03/gov_cuomo_freeze_thruway_tolls_and_spend_the_rest_on_fixing_upstate_roads_editor.html

Quote
t's not. It's complicated. Drivers of passenger vehicle must purchase the $25 E-Z Pass and pay $50 or more in tolls each year to receive a credit. And they are responsible for entering the toll information on their yearly New York state income tax returns. (That requires some bookkeeping that often escapes people's attention at tax time.)

Also of note in the article is the "File Photo" which features cars at a toll plaza with the old Liberty plates. Of course, it was also apparently pre EZ Pass installation, which sort of goes with the theme of the editorial of discounts for all... but I am not sure I can give them that much credit.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: xcellntbuy on March 11, 2016, 05:37:15 PM
Gimmicks, just like his daddy did from 1983-1995.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on March 11, 2016, 05:37:47 PM
That is a cool photo.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on March 12, 2016, 04:17:44 PM
Quote from: Flyer78 on March 11, 2016, 03:53:57 PM
Syracuse Post-Standard opinion piece on freezing tolls, and points out some of the bookkeeping required to earn the credit on tolls as proposed by the Governor.

http://www.syracuse.com/opinion/index.ssf/2016/03/gov_cuomo_freeze_thruway_tolls_and_spend_the_rest_on_fixing_upstate_roads_editor.html

Quote
t's not. It's complicated. Drivers of passenger vehicle must purchase the $25 E-Z Pass and pay $50 or more in tolls each year to receive a credit. And they are responsible for entering the toll information on their yearly New York state income tax returns. (That requires some bookkeeping that often escapes people's attention at tax time.)

Also of note in the article is the "File Photo" which features cars at a toll plaza with the old Liberty plates. Of course, it was also apparently pre EZ Pass installation, which sort of goes with the theme of the editorial of discounts for all... but I am not sure I can give them that much credit.

That photo is not necessarily pre-E-ZPass.  The liberty plates were in use through 2001.  E-ZPass with along the entire Thruway by February 1997.  Further, the photo has no date and depicts the middle of the plaza; E-ZPass lanes are typically on the sides, so they wouldn't be visible here.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Duke87 on March 12, 2016, 04:45:17 PM
I still think it's ridiculous that NY has a state toll road which is cheaper per mile than any of its peers, and we're talking about finding some way to directly or indirectly reduce the tolls further.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on March 12, 2016, 04:53:45 PM
FYI: The assembly version of the budget doesn't include the toll discount; the senate's version does.  It will be interesting to see how this shakes out.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Flyer78 on March 12, 2016, 09:20:25 PM
Quote from: vdeane on March 12, 2016, 04:17:44 PM
That photo is not necessarily pre-E-ZPass.  The liberty plates were in use through 2001.  E-ZPass with along the entire Thruway by February 1997.  Further, the photo has no date and depicts the middle of the plaza; E-ZPass lanes are typically on the sides, so they wouldn't be visible here.

Entirely possible, the Liberty Plates caught my eye first, but my logic was there does not appear to be antennae nor feedback displays that were installed with E-ZPass -- of course they could be obscured. I guess the antennae could be as well, though in most car-level photos, you can see them hanging down. At its youngest, it is still likely a 15 year old photo...

At least it is the correct toll agency. The paper here in Philly uses a NJ Turnpike picture for anything toll related -- even if it is the DRPA bridges, Pa Turnpike, etc.


Edit, I was bored and tried to search around more to see if the picture had been used before or identify the plaza. (Not on the E-ZPass point, just something better to do than my taxes) http://media.syracuse.com/news/photo/2010/01/2001-03-13-sdc-thruwayjpg-3ef1b84d02584d74_large.jpg ... Based on the file name, that could be from March 13, 2001. Happy Birthday.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on March 13, 2016, 08:39:18 PM
NYSTA has signed a set of emergency detour routes along much of the mainline west of Utica. I know the detours near Utica have already been mentioned, but there is a long-distance signed detour from Exit 51 to Exit 45 or somewhere east of that point. This detour uses a combination of NY 33, NY 77, NY 5, I-490, and possibly other routes. The detour is signed prominently along these roads, while the connection from each exit along the stretch to the detour is signed very clearly beginning at the gore points. "Emergency Detour E" runs west, while "Emergency Detour F" runs east. All of the signs are all-caps Clearview. I think there is a similar detour west of Exit 55. Similar to the color detours in PA, I'm assuming that the NYSTA detours are intended to be used in the event of a full closure.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: WNYroadgeek on March 13, 2016, 10:49:04 PM
Quote from: cl94 on March 13, 2016, 08:39:18 PM
NYSTA has signed a set of emergency detour routes along much of the mainline west of Utica. I know the detours near Utica have already been mentioned, but there is a long-distance signed detour from Exit 51 to Exit 45 or somewhere east of that point. This detour uses a combination of NY 33, NY 77, NY 5, I-490, and possibly other routes. The detour is signed prominently along these roads, while the connection from each exit along the stretch to the detour is signed very clearly beginning at the gore points. "Emergency Detour E" runs west, while "Emergency Detour F" runs east. All of the signs are all-caps Clearview. I think there is a similar detour west of Exit 55. Similar to the color detours in PA, I'm assuming that the NYSTA detours are intended to be used in the event of a full closure.

Here are all of them:

Central NY: https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=898042593643990&id=529852543796332
Western NY: https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=896876750427241&id=529852543796332
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: machias on March 14, 2016, 12:39:00 PM
Quote from: cl94 on March 13, 2016, 08:39:18 PM
NYSTA has signed a set of emergency detour routes along much of the mainline west of Utica. I know the detours near Utica have already been mentioned, but there is a long-distance signed detour from Exit 51 to Exit 45 or somewhere east of that point. This detour uses a combination of NY 33, NY 77, NY 5, I-490, and possibly other routes. The detour is signed prominently along these roads, while the connection from each exit along the stretch to the detour is signed very clearly beginning at the gore points. "Emergency Detour E" runs west, while "Emergency Detour F" runs east. All of the signs are all-caps Clearview. I think there is a similar detour west of Exit 55. Similar to the color detours in PA, I'm assuming that the NYSTA detours are intended to be used in the event of a full closure.

I've noticed one or two of the Emergency detour signs along NY Route 49 have already fallen down. I was surprised that the NYSTA put many of the signs up on a single post, especially along the freeways and expressways.  NYSDOT R2 is really big on using single posts for everything, so the detour signs don't look out of place, just equally unwieldy. 

Do the detour signs elsewhere in the state have the non-reflective letter designator as well? At night you can see "EMERGENCY DETOUR" from much farther away than the non-reflective letter.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on March 14, 2016, 02:58:12 PM
Quote from: upstatenyroads on March 14, 2016, 12:39:00 PM
I've noticed one or two of the Emergency detour signs along NY Route 49 have already fallen down. I was surprised that the NYSTA put many of the signs up on a single post, especially along the freeways and expressways.  NYSDOT R2 is really big on using single posts for everything, so the detour signs don't look out of place, just equally unwieldy. 

Do the detour signs elsewhere in the state have the non-reflective letter designator as well? At night you can see "EMERGENCY DETOUR" from much farther away than the non-reflective letter.

NYSDOT has been cutting back on the dual posts lately. I've seen very few large-sized speed limit signs that require two posts, with many, at least in R5, being replaced by smaller signs that only require one post.

Non-reflective lettering is the case on every sign I have seen.

Quote from: WNYroadgeek on March 13, 2016, 10:49:04 PM
Here are all of them:

Central NY: https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=898042593643990&id=529852543796332
Western NY: https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=896876750427241&id=529852543796332

Missing are the other A and B, which were designated earlier and run along US 62 and I-290 to bypass the Grand Island bridges.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on March 21, 2016, 01:05:25 PM
NYSTA Facebook: Tappan Zee AET goes live April 23 (https://www.facebook.com/529852543796332/photos/a.529862433795343.1073741827.529852543796332/936665456448370/?type=3&theater)
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Alps on March 21, 2016, 06:23:47 PM
Quote from: cl94 on March 21, 2016, 01:05:25 PM
NYSTA Facebook: Tappan Zee AET goes live April 23 (https://www.facebook.com/529852543796332/photos/a.529862433795343.1073741827.529852543796332/936665456448370/?type=3&theater)
Can't find what the relative prices will be for "toll by Internet" vs. E-ZPass.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: dgolub on March 21, 2016, 07:08:43 PM
Anyone know anything about when AET at Yonkers and Harriman is happening?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on March 21, 2016, 07:24:32 PM
Quote from: dgolub on March 21, 2016, 07:08:43 PM
Anyone know anything about when AET at Yonkers and Harriman is happening?

Will the AET efforts be moving north and west from there?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on March 21, 2016, 07:40:46 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on March 21, 2016, 07:24:32 PM
Quote from: dgolub on March 21, 2016, 07:08:43 PM
Anyone know anything about when AET at Yonkers and Harriman is happening?

Will the AET efforts be moving north and west from there?

No clue about Yonkers and Harriman. I expect they'll wait a month or two before doing anything else to work out any issues with Tappan Zee.

As far as moving Upstate, nothing other than Yonkers, Harriman, and New Rochelle has been made public. I expect the first "Upstate" locations to be Grand Island, as they're the only 2 barrier tolls that haven't been announced. The main ticket system will almost certainly be last due to the expense and time required to install all of the equipment and nobody who can say so publicly has any idea about how NYSTA will do the two ticket systems (keep "collection points" at exits, do like MassDOT and put a "barrier" between each exit pair, or some combination of the two). Being as NYSTA is midway through a project that adds an E-ZPass lane to the Williamsville barrier, we're probably talking a good 5-10+ years before anything happens to the main system. They wouldn't have done the project, which involves building a new facilities building for the toll plaza, if they were expecting a conversion anytime soon.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on March 21, 2016, 09:48:30 PM
If NYSTA does plan to do the GI bridge, they better hurry up because I saw a news story a week or two ago suggesting that some want the booths eliminated entirely.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: thenetwork on March 21, 2016, 10:00:22 PM
Quote from: cl94 on March 21, 2016, 07:40:46 PM
The main ticket system will almost certainly be last due to the expense and time required to install all of the equipment and nobody who can say so publicly has any idea about how NYSTA will do the two ticket systems...we're probably talking a good 5-10+ years before anything happens to the main system.

Probably the first section of the ticket system to be converted will likely be the Erie Section from Buffalo to PA since they are independent of the Mainline Section east of Buffalo. 
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Flyer78 on March 22, 2016, 10:37:55 AM
Quote from: thenetwork on March 21, 2016, 10:00:22 PM
Probably the first section of the ticket system to be converted will likely be the Erie Section from Buffalo to PA since they are independent of the Mainline Section east of Buffalo. 

Makes sense, that always seems to be the "beta" test location for the larger ticket-system. They had the mag-stripe on-demand tickets first, then the replacement for those first, as well. I also seem to recall they tested digital (text) signs for E-Zpass before making the decision to select the folding signs.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on March 22, 2016, 11:36:18 AM
Quote from: Flyer78 on March 22, 2016, 10:37:55 AM
Quote from: thenetwork on March 21, 2016, 10:00:22 PM
Probably the first section of the ticket system to be converted will likely be the Erie Section from Buffalo to PA since they are independent of the Mainline Section east of Buffalo. 

Makes sense, that always seems to be the "beta" test location for the larger ticket-system. They had the mag-stripe on-demand tickets first, then the replacement for those first, as well. I also seem to recall they tested digital (text) signs for E-Zpass before making the decision to select the folding signs.

Quote from: cl94 on March 21, 2016, 07:40:46 PM
The main ticket system will almost certainly be last

As already stated. Isn't the test location for everything, though. The automatic ticket dispensers have only seen a lot of use east of Syracuse.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on March 22, 2016, 12:56:35 PM
Of course, it's easy to test things like automatic ticket dispensers at a single booth since those don't require the entire system to use them to work... unlike the toll tickets and AET.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Flyer78 on March 23, 2016, 10:01:53 AM
I had wondered if the dispensers would be making a come-back... was there a version for the mag-stripe era? I assumed the Thruway lacked an auto-vehicle identification system to determine the class, and I know it was simplified in the last decade as well. Prior to that was (still in use, though altered media) sings about Cars Only / Nothing in Tow

Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Jim on March 23, 2016, 12:19:08 PM
Speaking of "Cars Only/Nothing in Tow", the Exit 24 ticket dispenser lane recently added a big white "Cars Only/Nothing in Tow" folding sign atop the toll barrier (like the E-ZPass Only ones) in addition to the electronic sign that's been there as long as I can remember. 
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on March 23, 2016, 03:19:11 PM
Quote from: Flyer78 on March 23, 2016, 10:01:53 AM
I had wondered if the dispensers would be making a come-back... was there a version for the mag-stripe era? I assumed the Thruway lacked an auto-vehicle identification system to determine the class, and I know it was simplified in the last decade as well. Prior to that was (still in use, though altered media) sings about Cars Only / Nothing in Tow

Of course, there are only 4 locations that I know of (Woodbury, Canaan, 24, 25A). Why they never went in near Buffalo, where most light vehicles don't have E-ZPass out of fear of being tracked by the government (seriously) and the percent of tourists is high, is beyond me, as that section sees the highest percentage of ticket users. The mag stripe, I'm assuming, is why the lanes are only for cars with nothing in tow, as the new tickets are for everything.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Flyer78 on March 23, 2016, 07:14:20 PM
One of the original benefits to the mag-stripe tickets were they were printed "on demand" so they could show you the tolls for a vehicle class, as well as adjust prices when tolls increased. While they came into existence before the more frequent increases, I thought it was a good way to handle them, other than say, the PA Turnpike's brief experiment with dropping tolls on their tickets. Yes, E-ZPass solves all that.

Quote from: cl94 on March 23, 2016, 03:19:11 PM
...where most light vehicles don't have E-ZPass out of fear of being tracked by the government (seriously) ...

I can tell you the same fears existed among people in CNY as well, and they exist here in the Philly area. Start talking about DOT cameras and their head explodes. Then they use the loyalty card on their smart phone for any merchant and charge the transaction... E-ZPass is the least of their geo-location concerns :)...
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on March 29, 2016, 06:27:43 PM
O.K., where did this sign exist?

(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4054/4288695313_7b6b8a60c9_z.jpg?zz=1) (https://flic.kr/p/7wYFGD)Interstate 90 - New York (https://flic.kr/p/7wYFGD) by Doug Kerr (https://www.flickr.com/photos/dougtone/), on Flickr
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: xcellntbuy on March 29, 2016, 06:42:26 PM
Looks like the Syracuse area, possibly Exit 34A, a long time ago.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on March 29, 2016, 06:48:59 PM
Quote from: xcellntbuy on March 29, 2016, 06:42:26 PM
Looks like the Syracuse area, possibly Exit 34A, a long time ago.

Judging by the dates on his pictures, looks like 2000-2003. I wonder why they changed the control city.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: machias on March 29, 2016, 11:11:49 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on March 29, 2016, 06:27:43 PM
O.K., where did this sign exist?

(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4054/4288695313_7b6b8a60c9_z.jpg?zz=1) (https://flic.kr/p/7wYFGD)Interstate 90 - New York (https://flic.kr/p/7wYFGD) by Doug Kerr (https://www.flickr.com/photos/dougtone/), on Flickr

It was definitely on the entrance ramp at Collamer (Exit 34A). I was sad when it was replaced with Albany/Buffalo.  I've never been a fan of Albany/Buffalo as the control cities. I guess I'm a cranky old guy but I'd rather see "Utica and East" and "Rochester and West".
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on April 04, 2016, 09:46:54 PM
I was visiting my parents in Buffalo last month and decided to check out the recently-completed South Newstead Road bridge replacement over the Thruway. Interestingly, NYSTA decided to surface the bridge with asphalt instead of the typical concrete.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on April 23, 2016, 07:26:20 PM
If I go 80 on the Thruway mainline will I typically get pulled over?

Everyone does it.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on April 23, 2016, 09:38:28 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on April 23, 2016, 07:26:20 PM
If I go 80 on the Thruway mainline will I typically get pulled over?

Everyone does it.
As far as I remember, NYS has +15 MPH and above as a top tier speeding violation. So 80 maybe a gray area, but I got pulled over for 81 in 65 zone...
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on April 23, 2016, 10:20:11 PM
Quote from: kalvado on April 23, 2016, 09:38:28 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on April 23, 2016, 07:26:20 PM
If I go 80 on the Thruway mainline will I typically get pulled over?

Everyone does it.
As far as I remember, NYS has +15 MPH and above as a top tier speeding violation. So 80 maybe a gray area, but I got pulled over for 81 in 65 zone...

80 is a bit high for regular travel, but 65 also isn't the fastest for a road of its class.

Somebody needs to introduce legislation to bump it up to 70-75.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on April 23, 2016, 10:26:15 PM
There was a bill to raise NY's maximum speed limit to 75 a couple years ago.  It didn't go anywhere.  Heck, Long Island still doesn't have 65!
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on April 24, 2016, 12:13:47 AM
Quote from: vdeane on April 23, 2016, 10:26:15 PM
There was a bill to raise NY's maximum speed limit to 75 a couple years ago.  It didn't go anywhere.  Heck, Long Island still doesn't have 65!

Haven't been to LI yet, but I hear the speed limits are perpetually stuck at 50 and below.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: dgolub on April 24, 2016, 09:15:13 AM
Quote from: Buffaboy on April 24, 2016, 12:13:47 AM
Quote from: vdeane on April 23, 2016, 10:26:15 PM
There was a bill to raise NY's maximum speed limit to 75 a couple years ago.  It didn't go anywhere.  Heck, Long Island still doesn't have 65!

Haven't been to LI yet, but I hear the speed limits are perpetually stuck at 50 and below.

Not true.  The expressways and parkways are all 55 MPH.  There are also a batch of surface roads that are 55 MPH, although some of those that used to have been lowered to 50 MPH.  It used to be that parts of NY 25 and NY 25A in Nassau County were 55 MPH, but they lowered them to 50 MPH.  I'm pretty sure that that leaves no surface roads with a speed limit over 50 MPH in Nassau, but there are still some in Suffolk, including some county routes like CR 97.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: roadman65 on April 24, 2016, 07:55:16 PM
Quote from: vdeane on April 23, 2016, 10:26:15 PM
There was a bill to raise NY's maximum speed limit to 75 a couple years ago.  It didn't go anywhere.  Heck, Long Island still doesn't have 65!
I cannot see why the LIE cannot be 65 mph at least in Suffolk, or even the easternmost section near Riverhead.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: SignBridge on April 24, 2016, 09:16:47 PM
You're right about the eastern L.I.E. Roadman. Originally it was 65mph "out east" before the "double-nickel".  The road was designed for it and NYSDOT should restore it.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Alps on April 24, 2016, 11:09:08 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on April 23, 2016, 07:26:20 PM
If I go 80 on the Thruway mainline will I typically get pulled over?

Everyone does it.
If you do what other people are doing, you will be fine. Don't do 80 when everyone else is doing 70. I just did 77 in a 50 (work zone) in Texas. Everyone else was doing it, and a cop even came and passed us all by (we slowed down to about 59 for a bit).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on April 25, 2016, 01:46:33 AM
Quote from: Alps on April 24, 2016, 11:09:08 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on April 23, 2016, 07:26:20 PM
If I go 80 on the Thruway mainline will I typically get pulled over?

Everyone does it.
If you do what other people are doing, you will be fine. Don't do 80 when everyone else is doing 70. I just did 77 in a 50 (work zone) in Texas. Everyone else was doing it, and a cop even came and passed us all by (we slowed down to about 59 for a bit).

I mean it's not the greatest thing to do, BUT I'm pretty sure cops don't pull over a guy going 78 in a 65 when someone else is also going 80.

I'm usually a vigilant driver and keep my eyes on my mirrors and U-Turns for Ford Crown Victorias and Mustangs.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: dgolub on April 25, 2016, 08:44:33 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on April 24, 2016, 09:16:47 PM
You're right about the eastern L.I.E. Roadman. Originally it was 65mph "out east" before the "double-nickel".  The road was designed for it and NYSDOT should restore it.

Agreed.  There's no good reason not to.  It just contributes to people viewing speed limits as a joke, since most people are doing something like 65 MPH anyway out there.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: PHLBOS on April 25, 2016, 09:04:27 AM
Quote from: Buffaboy on April 25, 2016, 01:46:33 AMI'm usually a vigilant driver and keep my eyes on my mirrors and U-Turns for Ford Crown Victorias and Mustangs.
Are highway patrols still even using Mustangs?  The last official Police-Packaged (as opposed to a retail model in police colors) Mustangs were the 1993 models.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on April 25, 2016, 10:24:15 AM
Quote from: PHLBOS on April 25, 2016, 09:04:27 AM
Quote from: Buffaboy on April 25, 2016, 01:46:33 AMI'm usually a vigilant driver and keep my eyes on my mirrors and U-Turns for Ford Crown Victorias and Mustangs.
Are highway patrols still even using Mustangs?  The last official Police-Packaged (as opposed to a retail model in police colors) Mustangs were the 1993 models.

I don't get pulled over often and try to avoid cops, but I feel like I've seen a couple over the past few years. I could be wrong through.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Snappyjack on April 25, 2016, 10:31:27 AM
The police cars in use right now by the State Police and most other agencies are a mix of the Ford Crown Victoria, Ford Taurus, Dodge Charger, Chevy Caprice, and Chevy Tahoe.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Henry on April 25, 2016, 10:44:47 AM
Quote from: PHLBOS on April 25, 2016, 09:04:27 AM
Quote from: Buffaboy on April 25, 2016, 01:46:33 AMI'm usually a vigilant driver and keep my eyes on my mirrors and U-Turns for Ford Crown Victorias and Mustangs.
Are highway patrols still even using Mustangs?  The last official Police-Packaged (as opposed to a retail model in police colors) Mustangs were the 1993 models.
Yes, they were sold as the Mustang SSP (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Mustang_SSP) from 1982 to 1993. Originally, the CA Highway Patrol used Camaros, but they proved troublesome with their camshaft and engine issues.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: PHLBOS on April 25, 2016, 12:01:53 PM
Quote from: Henry on April 25, 2016, 10:44:47 AM
Quote from: PHLBOS on April 25, 2016, 09:04:27 AM
Quote from: Buffaboy on April 25, 2016, 01:46:33 AMI'm usually a vigilant driver and keep my eyes on my mirrors and U-Turns for Ford Crown Victorias and Mustangs.
Are highway patrols still even using Mustangs?  The last official Police-Packaged (as opposed to a retail model in police colors) Mustangs were the 1993 models.
Yes, they were sold as the Mustang SSP (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Mustang_SSP) from 1982 to 1993. Originally, the CA Highway Patrol used Camaros, but they proved troublesome with their camshaft and engine issues.
The posted Wiki link article is missing some key information regarding why such vehicles were even considered and used as police vehicles (the CAFE-related downsizing that took place back then making big-block engines for large sedans no longer available) and why such vehicles ultimately fell out of favor (engine performance on large sedans improved to an acceptable level (among state police agencies) again).

Patrol vehicles like the Mustang and Camaro packages were, IMHO, basically used by departments as enclosed motorcycles.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on April 25, 2016, 12:56:42 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on April 24, 2016, 09:16:47 PM
You're right about the eastern L.I.E. Roadman. Originally it was 65mph "out east" before the "double-nickel".  The road was designed for it and NYSDOT should restore it.
There was a bill in the legislature to raise the speed limit east of exit 40 to 65 about 15 years ago.  Too bad it never went anywhere.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: dgolub on April 25, 2016, 07:14:49 PM
Quote from: vdeane on April 25, 2016, 12:56:42 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on April 24, 2016, 09:16:47 PM
You're right about the eastern L.I.E. Roadman. Originally it was 65mph "out east" before the "double-nickel".  The road was designed for it and NYSDOT should restore it.
There was a bill in the legislature to raise the speed limit east of exit 40 to 65 about 15 years ago.  Too bad it never went anywhere.

I could see why they might want to keep it at 55 MPH in Nassau, but they could raise it to 65 MPH in Suffolk, especially east of NY 112 where the exits get much more sparse.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on May 13, 2016, 05:24:49 PM
Sound barriers are going up east of Henry St south of Exit 52a. Is this in preparation for a potential widening?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on May 13, 2016, 10:40:39 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on May 13, 2016, 05:24:49 PM
Sound barriers are going up east of Henry St south of Exit 52a. Is this in preparation for a potential widening?

It is in the long-term plans. As of last year, nobody at the MPO knew of anything that would happen in the near future other than a minor rearrangement at Exit 51, and they're the people who typically know that stuff.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on May 24, 2016, 12:39:51 PM
Rest area on the WB side between Exits 28 and 29 opens tomorrow (press release (http://www.thruway.ny.gov/news/pressrel/2016/05/2016-05-24-ma-lock13-rest-area.html)). Might have to swing out there tomorrow afternoon to see for myself.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on May 24, 2016, 01:01:34 PM
Looks like they pulled the press release.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on May 24, 2016, 01:03:37 PM
Quote from: vdeane on May 24, 2016, 01:01:34 PM
Looks like they pulled the press release.

That was fast. They pulled it from Facebook as well.

Tuesday means plans day at NYSTA and today's release is huge. Widening to 9 lanes between Exits 50A and 51 (http://www.thruway.ny.gov/netdata/contractors/documents/d214471_tab16-17_plans-volume-1-of-1.pdf), with the extra lane in the EB direction. This will eliminate the merge at the cloverleaf that causes the only significant traffic issue unrelated to toll booths in the Buffalo area. Also in the contract is diamond grinding on I-190.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on May 25, 2016, 04:04:21 PM
Quote from: cl94 on May 24, 2016, 01:03:37 PM
Quote from: vdeane on May 24, 2016, 01:01:34 PM
Looks like they pulled the press release.

That was fast. They pulled it from Facebook as well.

Tuesday means plans day at NYSTA and today's release is huge. Widening to 9 lanes between Exits 50A and 51 (http://www.thruway.ny.gov/netdata/contractors/documents/d214471_tab16-17_plans-volume-1-of-1.pdf), with the extra lane in the EB direction. This will eliminate the merge at the cloverleaf that causes the only significant traffic issue unrelated to toll booths in the Buffalo area. Also in the contract is diamond grinding on I-190.

Damn that's huge!
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on May 25, 2016, 08:23:49 PM
The new Rest Area west of Exit 28 was open this afternoon. I got a few pictures and will post when I have access to a computer. Within view are some hideous Clearview signs intended for boaters that I will post as well.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on May 28, 2016, 11:53:01 PM
Sorry for the delay in posting pictures. The new rest area opened no later than Wednesday. 1 mile advance signage lists "Lock 13 Living History Rest Area" in all-caps Clearview. Gore signage is the standard "rest area" gore sign. I did not get a picture of either sign located on the Thruway due to traffic.

At the gore and midway down the ramp:
(https://c2.staticflickr.com/8/7444/26711858793_c6dc29216b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/GGrfZx) (https://c3.staticflickr.com/8/7408/27043159930_977fc5bed8.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/HcHgh7)

A couple exterior shots of the building. I did not get any interior shots, but I can tell you that, when entering under the "Taste NY" sign, there is a store area with restrooms in the back.
(https://c6.staticflickr.com/8/7435/27248005021_08415574c3.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/HvP9A2) (https://c5.staticflickr.com/8/7358/27284953316_c7b45c7c95.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/Hz5w2A)

Pictures of the lock, dam, and informational signage:
(https://c2.staticflickr.com/8/7767/27247973561_e6950ae3f5.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/HvNZeB) (https://c7.staticflickr.com/8/7659/27284922526_f56b5dccd2.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/Hz5mSJ) (https://c3.staticflickr.com/8/7225/27220635282_c79099ca62.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/HtoSvY)

And then there's that Clearview I was talking about:
(https://c4.staticflickr.com/8/7163/26711508483_44ab7ca198.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/GGpsRH)

I apologize for the relatively poor image quality. I am not the best photographer and all of these were taken on my phone, the first 2 while driving.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: empirestate on May 29, 2016, 09:57:02 AM
Quote from: cl94 on May 28, 2016, 11:53:01 PM
(https://c7.staticflickr.com/8/7659/27284922526_f56b5dccd2.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/Hz5mSJ)

When we were kids, we called these "bridges to nowhere". Unfortunately there was no easy way at the time to satisfy our curiosity as to what these structures were; this interpretive rest area might have helped.

And I didn't know any of them actually were proper bridges; which two carry roadways?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Jim on May 29, 2016, 10:10:48 AM
Quote from: empirestate on May 29, 2016, 09:57:02 AM
And I didn't know any of them actually were proper bridges; which two carry roadways?

NY 103 crosses over the Mohawk on the Lock 9 "bridge" between Rotterdam Junction and Glenville, and Lock 12 (I think that's the right number) carries a road between Fort Hunter and Tribes Hill.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on May 29, 2016, 12:27:00 PM
Quote from: cl94 on May 28, 2016, 11:53:01 PM
1 mile advance signage lists "Lock 13 Living History Rest Area" in all-caps Clearview. Gore signage is the standard "rest area" gore sign. I did not get a picture of either sign located on the Thruway due to traffic.
Fortunately, I do have pictures of the Thruway signs.  Unfortunately, they probably won't get uploaded until next Saturday with my next site update.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on June 08, 2016, 12:08:46 PM
Quote from: vdeane on May 24, 2016, 01:01:34 PM
Looks like they pulled the press release.

I know why it was so quickly pulled and I suspect you may as well.

*smug*

:D
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on June 08, 2016, 12:14:13 PM
Quote from: Rothman on June 08, 2016, 12:08:46 PM
Quote from: vdeane on May 24, 2016, 01:01:34 PM
Looks like they pulled the press release.

I know why it was so quickly pulled and I suspect you may as well.

*smug*

:D

Oh? Do tell. I know the thing was open on the day.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on June 08, 2016, 12:24:09 PM
Quote from: cl94 on June 08, 2016, 12:14:13 PM
Quote from: Rothman on June 08, 2016, 12:08:46 PM
Quote from: vdeane on May 24, 2016, 01:01:34 PM
Looks like they pulled the press release.

I know why it was so quickly pulled and I suspect you may as well.

*smug*

:D

Oh? Do tell. I know the thing was open on the day.

As HAL 9000 said, "I'm sorry, Dave.  I'm afraid I can't do that."  It'll hit the news sooner or later.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on June 08, 2016, 08:03:25 PM
That reminds me... I took pictures of the advance signs over Memorial Day.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nysroads.com%2Fimages%2Fgallery%2FNY%2Fi90%2F101_4263-s.JPG&hash=6db4b0f619eaebed514a7959daa78a68622c1f8d)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nysroads.com%2Fimages%2Fgallery%2FNY%2Fi90%2F101_4264-s.JPG&hash=17a33a10a0da73c39d0cabfd6435ee272a9a19f8)
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on July 16, 2016, 01:14:32 AM
What's going on with NY-400/I-190 in Buffalo? The backups are pretty bad and I can't seem to figure out what the work is.

You'd think they are building new interchanges.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on July 16, 2016, 01:29:39 AM
Quote from: Buffaboy on July 16, 2016, 01:14:32 AM
What's going on with NY-400/I-190 in Buffalo? The backups are pretty bad and I can't seem to figure out what the work is.

You'd think they are building new interchanges.

400 is a bridge replacement.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on July 18, 2016, 01:29:05 PM
How can the backups at the Williamsville Toll barrier be mitigated?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on July 18, 2016, 01:47:39 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on July 18, 2016, 01:29:05 PM
How can the backups at the Williamsville Toll barrier be mitigated?

All-electronic tolling or people in Buffalo being less paranoid about government surveillance and getting E-ZPass. Dead serious. I've heard way too many people say they're afraid of Big Brother tracking them, as if license plate cameras and cell phones don't already do that.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on July 18, 2016, 02:10:03 PM
I'm not sure if most people even know that licence plate cameras exist.  One would think that people would know about cell phone tracking in the post-Snowden era, but I wouldn't be surprised if many people are still ignorant of that, too.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on July 18, 2016, 02:14:11 PM
Quote from: cl94 on July 18, 2016, 01:47:39 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on July 18, 2016, 01:29:05 PM
How can the backups at the Williamsville Toll barrier be mitigated?

All-electronic tolling or people in Buffalo being less paranoid about government surveillance and getting E-ZPass. Dead serious. I've heard way too many people say they're afraid of Big Brother tracking them, as if license plate cameras and cell phones don't already do that.
ezpass-only lanes operating at full speed, like in Woodbury, could also help.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on July 18, 2016, 02:43:12 PM
Quote from: kalvado on July 18, 2016, 02:14:11 PM
Quote from: cl94 on July 18, 2016, 01:47:39 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on July 18, 2016, 01:29:05 PM
How can the backups at the Williamsville Toll barrier be mitigated?

All-electronic tolling or people in Buffalo being less paranoid about government surveillance and getting E-ZPass. Dead serious. I've heard way too many people say they're afraid of Big Brother tracking them, as if license plate cameras and cell phones don't already do that.
ezpass-only lanes operating at full speed, like in Woodbury, could also help.

That was canned a few years ago. The big issue in the Buffalo area is the low percentage of E-ZPass users. Woodbury is over 75% last I checked, hence why express lanes work. Go through that barrier and almost everyone stays in the express lanes. The Buffalo area is around or under 50%, which is one of the major reasons why NYSTA didn't see a reason to put them in if they'll have AET in 10-15 years anyway. We'd still have the big backup in the cash lanes and, because so many people are paying cash, the backup might extend beyond the split. Niagara Falls getting a lot of visitors from outside the IAG complicates matters further.

Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on July 18, 2016, 02:52:41 PM
Quote from: cl94 on July 18, 2016, 01:47:39 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on July 18, 2016, 01:29:05 PM
How can the backups at the Williamsville Toll barrier be mitigated?

All-electronic tolling or people in Buffalo being less paranoid about government surveillance and getting E-ZPass. Dead serious. I've heard way too many people say they're afraid of Big Brother tracking them, as if license plate cameras and cell phones don't already do that.

I've heard the same arguments and you can just get an RFID bag for free from EZPass

I got one for the first time last week and it's a breeze.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on July 18, 2016, 02:54:29 PM
Quote from: vdeane on July 18, 2016, 02:10:03 PM
One would think that people would know about cell phone tracking in the post-Snowden era, but I wouldn't be surprised if many people are still ignorant of that, too.

After the Erie County Sheriff's Office was caught illegally using Stingray a little while back, people in Buffalo have been quite conscious about it, as it is always in the news.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on July 18, 2016, 05:21:57 PM
The planned ORT lanes would have also moved the barrier to Newstead, where it faced NIMBY opposition.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on July 18, 2016, 09:07:12 PM
Quote from: vdeane on July 18, 2016, 05:21:57 PM
The planned ORT lanes would have also moved the barrier to Newstead, where it faced NIMBY opposition.

The EIS was also quite poor. Most of the stretch between NY 77 and NY 78 is wetlands. Only way they could have gotten local support out that way was if they added a free exit in the eastern part of Lancaster.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on July 19, 2016, 02:51:05 PM
Cross-post from the Tappan Zee thread:

Thruway Closed between Exits 8 and 12 until further notice due to crane collapse

http://www.lohud.com/story/news/local/2016/07/19/crane-collapses-closes-tappan-zee-bridge/87290800/

So much for the brand-new deck on the old bridge. Crane went right through it.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: seicer on July 19, 2016, 03:18:32 PM
Curious as to why a new deck was placed on the old bridge when it's going to be demolished - was it in that bad of condition?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on July 19, 2016, 03:27:11 PM
Yeah, it was. Before they redecked it a couple years ago, they spent 20 years patching holes as they appeared. I remember there being quite a bad period in the late 90s-early 2000s where several holes that went all the way through formed and chunks of concrete were falling onto boats in the river. There's a reason why I didn't cross it for 15 years.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: roadman on July 19, 2016, 04:11:52 PM
So one of the major bridges across the Hudson River is completely closed, with no reliable ETA of when it will be reopened.  Yet, on their website, the Thruway Authority advises
QuoteMotorists may wish to seek alternate routes

Who writes this stuff?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on July 19, 2016, 04:19:48 PM
Quote from: roadman on July 19, 2016, 04:11:52 PM
So one of the major bridges across the Hudson River is completely closed, with no reliable ETA of when it will be reopened.  Yet, on their website, the Thruway Authority advises
QuoteMotorists may wish to seek alternate routes

Who writes this stuff?

Good question. They're diverting most traffic at 287 on either side. Bear Mountain appears to be backed up to the Taconic, I-95 SB is backed up to the New Rochelle tolls, Newburgh-Beacon is congested, Thruway SB backed up to Woodbury, the list goes on and on.

If I had to get down there, I'd cross as far north as possible.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: roadman on July 19, 2016, 04:32:23 PM
Quote from: cl94 on July 19, 2016, 04:19:48 PM
Quote from: roadman on July 19, 2016, 04:11:52 PM
So one of the major bridges across the Hudson River is completely closed, with no reliable ETA of when it will be reopened.  Yet, on their website, the Thruway Authority advises
QuoteMotorists may wish to seek alternate routes

Who writes this stuff?

Good question. They're diverting most traffic at 287 on either side. Bear Mountain appears to be backed up to the Taconic, I-95 SB is backed up to the New Rochelle tolls, Newburgh-Beacon is congested, Thruway SB backed up to Woodbury, the list goes on and on.

If I had to get down there, I'd cross as far north as possible.

Here's the full alert posted on the Thruway Authority's web page.  Talk about an understatement.

QuoteACCIDENT I-87 - NYS THRUWAY IN BOTH DIRECTIONS FROM MILEPOST 13.1 TO 16.2 ON TAPPAN ZEE BRIDGE
Accident, all lanes blocked I-87 - NYS Thruway in both directions from milepost 13.1 to 16.2 on TAPPAN ZEE BRIDGE. All northbound traffic must exit at 8. All southbound traffic must exit at exit 15.
Motorists should plan for extended delays. Motorists may wish to seek alternate routes. During major incidents, the Authority broadcasts information on Highway Advisory Radio (HAR) and activates Dynamic Message Signs (DMS) to alert motorists.

And somebody obviously forgot that it's not exactly easy to cross the Hudson River if you can't use the Tappan Zee Bridge.



Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: RobbieL2415 on July 19, 2016, 05:53:50 PM
Quote from: cl94 on July 19, 2016, 04:19:48 PM
Quote from: roadman on July 19, 2016, 04:11:52 PM
So one of the major bridges across the Hudson River is completely closed, with no reliable ETA of when it will be reopened.  Yet, on their website, the Thruway Authority advises
QuoteMotorists may wish to seek alternate routes

Who writes this stuff?

Good question. They're diverting most traffic at 287 on either side. Bear Mountain appears to be backed up to the Taconic, I-95 SB is backed up to the New Rochelle tolls, Newburgh-Beacon is congested, Thruway SB backed up to Woodbury, the list goes on and on.

If I had to get down there, I'd cross as far north as possible.

Rip Van Winkle Bridge all the way, baby.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: empirestate on July 19, 2016, 06:29:39 PM
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on July 19, 2016, 05:53:50 PM
Quote from: cl94 on July 19, 2016, 04:19:48 PM
If I had to get down there, I'd cross as far north as possible.

Rip Van Winkle Bridge all the way, baby.

Nuts to that; I'd wade across Lake Tear-in-the-Clouds!
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: jeffandnicole on July 19, 2016, 08:32:48 PM
Quote from: cl94 on July 19, 2016, 04:19:48 PM
Quote from: roadman on July 19, 2016, 04:11:52 PM
So one of the major bridges across the Hudson River is completely closed, with no reliable ETA of when it will be reopened.  Yet, on their website, the Thruway Authority advises
QuoteMotorists may wish to seek alternate routes

Who writes this stuff?

Good question. They're diverting most traffic at 287 on either side. Bear Mountain appears to be backed up to the Taconic, I-95 SB is backed up to the New Rochelle tolls, Newburgh-Beacon is congested, Thruway SB backed up to Woodbury, the list goes on and on.

If I had to get down there, I'd cross as far north as possible.

And that, in part, is the answer to Roadman's question.  There is simply no highway that you can divert 100,000 vehicle to.

Thus, seek alternate routes, because a route that works for you won't work for someone else.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: SignBridge on July 19, 2016, 08:45:31 PM
As of 5pm, all northbound lanes were reopened. From the news video I saw earlier in the day I'd say the NYSTA did a commendable of job of clearing the debris and getting at least one direction moving again. I fully expected the entire bridge to be closed until tomorrow.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: roadman on July 20, 2016, 09:27:26 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on July 19, 2016, 08:32:48 PM
Quote from: cl94 on July 19, 2016, 04:19:48 PM
Quote from: roadman on July 19, 2016, 04:11:52 PM
So one of the major bridges across the Hudson River is completely closed, with no reliable ETA of when it will be reopened.  Yet, on their website, the Thruway Authority advises
QuoteMotorists may wish to seek alternate routes

Who writes this stuff?

Good question. They're diverting most traffic at 287 on either side. Bear Mountain appears to be backed up to the Taconic, I-95 SB is backed up to the New Rochelle tolls, Newburgh-Beacon is congested, Thruway SB backed up to Woodbury, the list goes on and on.

If I had to get down there, I'd cross as far north as possible.

And that, in part, is the answer to Roadman's question.  There is simply no highway that you can divert 100,000 vehicle to.

Thus, seek alternate routes, because a route that works for you won't work for someone else.
I agree with advising people to use alternate routes.  Given the circumstances of this situation (total bridge closure for unknown period), I do not agree with phrasing it as "motorists may wish to use alternate routes".  I also do not agree with the "Roadway closed at Exit XX, with no other information"  In other words, "our road is closed, you figure out another way to get across the Hudson."

And no, I'm not expecting the Thruway Authority to post a signed detour to all of the other bridges across the river.  But a little information about other available bridges wouldn't hurt (consider Mom and Pop tourist that are totally unfamiliar with the area).

Lastly, even the tone of the alert seriously downplayed the severity of the situation.  Stating "Accident" instead of "Road Closure" is very misleading, as it implies to the average person "oh, this will be cleared up shortly."
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on July 20, 2016, 10:23:11 AM
Quote from: roadman on July 20, 2016, 09:27:26 AM
I agree with advising people to use alternate routes.  Given the circumstances of this situation (total bridge closure for unknown period), I do not agree with phrasing it as "motorists may wish to use alternate routes".  I also do not agree with the "Roadway closed at Exit XX, with no other information"  In other words, "our road is closed, you figure out another way to get across the Hudson."

And no, I'm not expecting the Thruway Authority to post a signed detour to all of the other bridges across the river.  But a little information about other available bridges wouldn't hurt (consider Mom and Pop tourist that are totally unfamiliar with the area).

Lastly, even the tone of the alert seriously downplayed the severity of the situation.  Stating "Accident" instead of "Road Closure" is very misleading, as it implies to the average person "oh, this will be cleared up shortly."

I would assume they used one of 10 pre-written messages. I believe "seek alternative road" is a generic wording used in emergency with no pre-planned detour. And yes, closed Tapan Zee is a huge mess, you cannot be fully prepared for that.
I assume things would be a bit sorted out if closure went into next day,  but we didn't see anything beyond first response.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: roadman on July 20, 2016, 10:53:56 AM
Quote from: kalvado on July 20, 2016, 10:23:11 AM
Quote from: roadman on July 20, 2016, 09:27:26 AM
I agree with advising people to use alternate routes.  Given the circumstances of this situation (total bridge closure for unknown period), I do not agree with phrasing it as "motorists may wish to use alternate routes".  I also do not agree with the "Roadway closed at Exit XX, with no other information"  In other words, "our road is closed, you figure out another way to get across the Hudson."

And no, I'm not expecting the Thruway Authority to post a signed detour to all of the other bridges across the river.  But a little information about other available bridges wouldn't hurt (consider Mom and Pop tourist that are totally unfamiliar with the area).

Lastly, even the tone of the alert seriously downplayed the severity of the situation.  Stating "Accident" instead of "Road Closure" is very misleading, as it implies to the average person "oh, this will be cleared up shortly."

I would assume they used one of 10 pre-written messages. I believe "seek alternative road" is a generic wording used in emergency with no pre-planned detour. And yes, closed Tapan Zee is a huge mess, you cannot be fully prepared for that.
I assume things would be a bit sorted out if closure went into next day,  but we didn't see anything beyond first response.


Points taken.  I guess my bias against the current PR philosophy of "choose the pre-selected message that most closely fits the situation" (as opposed to providing accurate messages based on the actual situation) is showing.  Then again, back in the day when I was involved in PR, state DOT PR people were actual engineers that were given PR training.  Now they hire former media hacks for the jobs, and try to automate the public announcement systems (i.e., the ten "stock" messages) as much as possible - IMO Boston's MBTA transit system is one of the worst in this regard.

I'm not entirely convinced the current system provides a greater benefit to the public than the old way did.  Especially where "local" news outlets, which used to pick up the slack, are increasingly shying away from providing actual local news.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: jeffandnicole on July 20, 2016, 12:53:23 PM
Using the VMS boards, the best you can do is 27 characters per line for 6 lines; 3 lines on a rotating basis, such as:

TAPPAN ZEE
   BRIDGE
   CLOSED

    SEEK
ALTERNATE
  ROUTES

Maybe they could've said...

   TAPPAN ZEE
BRIDGE CLOSED

USE 87 SOUTH
  TO GWB TO
    80 WEST

But remember...it's rush hour.  The GWB is already at capacity to begin with, with the other highways close to capacity.  Do you just use one route as an alternative?  You can't put too much info on the sign, because people would easily become confused.

And remember also...if mom & pop traveler don't know their way around too much, what are the chances they're even going to know the name of the bridge and where it's located?  Do now do you say I-287 closed at Exit 9?  Do you say Use 87 South to 95 South to 80 West?

You're never going to make 100% of the people understand what you're trying to say...as the saying goes, make it idiot-proof and they'll design a better idiot.  You shoot for the common terminology that the vast majority of the people know and go with it. 
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: roadman on July 20, 2016, 02:50:25 PM
QuoteYou can't put too much info on the sign, because people would easily become confused

Totally agree there are practical and procedural limitations as to what you can and should put on VMS signs.  But my comments were specifically directed at the information provided on the Authority's web page, where one has much greater flexibility to post detailed information about alternate routes and the like.  Also remember that, on a web site, that additional information does not need to be placed in the body of the initial traffic alert.

QuoteYou shoot for the common terminology that the vast majority of the people know and go with it

Correct again.  However, once the full extent of the incident was known, I still maintain there was no legitimate reason to continue to downplay the severity of the disruption on the web page by stating "Accident" instead of "Road Closure".  Not to mention stating "may wish to use alternate routes" instead of "should seek alternate routes" is incorrect, as it conveys a totally different meaning as to the severity of the disruption.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on July 20, 2016, 04:10:32 PM
Quote from: roadman on July 20, 2016, 02:50:25 PM
QuoteYou can't put too much info on the sign, because people would easily become confused

Totally agree there are practical and procedural limitations as to what you can and should put on VMS signs.  But my comments were specifically directed at the information provided on the Authority's web page, where one has much greater flexibility to post detailed information about alternate routes and the like.  Also remember that, on a web site, that additional information does not need to be placed in the body of the initial traffic alert.

QuoteYou shoot for the common terminology that the vast majority of the people know and go with it

Correct again.  However, once the full extent of the incident was known, I still maintain there was no legitimate reason to continue to downplay the severity of the disruption on the web page by stating "Accident" instead of "Road Closure".  Not to mention stating "may wish to use alternate routes" instead of "should seek alternate routes" is incorrect, as it conveys a totally different meaning as to the severity of the disruption.

I agree. Until the press conference with Cuomo, everything from NYSTA, including their website and social media, said "accident" without indicating a long-term closure. Google showed it pretty quick thanks to Waze (patting my own back here, I'm the one who relayed exact closure data to higher-ups to have it posted, and everything posted on here by others regarding closures was relayed to have it shown on the map), but NYSTA could have been a lot better.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: jeffandnicole on July 20, 2016, 06:11:39 PM
It was a 5 or 6 hour closure. Wasn't exactly long term. A flipped over truck or fatal can last several hours as well.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: roadman on July 20, 2016, 06:59:03 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on July 20, 2016, 06:11:39 PM
It was a 5 or 6 hour closure. Wasn't exactly long term. A flipped over truck or fatal can last several hours as well.
With respect, there was a big difference here.  Unlike a rollover or a fatal crash, which are (unfortunately) increasingly common enough that the DOT or toll agency can reliably predict the duration of any given lane or roadway closure to within about half an hour, the potential duration of the Tappan Zee closure was not truly known until after the structural engineers had completed their inspections.  Based on that alone, I maintain my position that NYSTA should have been more proactive in the information they provided to their patrons once the circumstances and extent of the accident were known to them.

I also believe that NYSTA was extremely lucky in that the crane collapsed onto the old bridge where two deck sections met at a pier.  If the crane had fallen in the middle of one of the deck spans, chances are very good that the bridge would still be completely closed to traffic today.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on July 20, 2016, 10:35:28 PM
Here's something I noticed on the Thruway headed east, just past the Lackawanna booths: the Welcome to NY sign. Must've been put up today.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: machias on July 21, 2016, 12:17:45 PM
I dropped a line to the Thruway Authority about marking county borders since I hadn't asked them about it in a couple of years. I based my question around the fact that they're marking watersheds, why can't they mark county borders, especially since the National Weather Service issues watches and warnings based on counties. I received a response today indicating that there were no plans to mark county borders, as they had worked with the NWS and determined that since the NWS is going to change their way of identifying watch/warning areas, there was no reason to mark county lines at this time.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Snappyjack on July 21, 2016, 12:32:06 PM
They make a new excuse every time it seems. I've gotten everything from "they're not needed" to "they're a distraction to drivers". That last one always makes me laugh, considering we need a sign every time we cross into the Erie Canal Heritage Corridor.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on July 21, 2016, 12:59:40 PM
Quote from: Snappyjack on July 21, 2016, 12:32:06 PM
They make a new excuse every time it seems. I've gotten everything from "they're not needed" to "they're a distraction to drivers". That last one always makes me laugh, considering we need a sign every time we cross into the Erie Canal Heritage Corridor.

There might be more of those signs than there would be county line signs. Seriously.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on July 21, 2016, 01:44:45 PM
Tappan Zee update (source) (http://www.thruway.ny.gov/news/pressrel/2016/07/2016-07-21-tz-lane-closures.html):

QuoteThe Thruway Authority today announced that phase one of the deck repair operations on the Tappan Zee Bridge (I-87/I-287) will require the southbound Tappan Zee Bridge to be reduced to one lane beginning tonight, July 21. Three northbound lanes will remain open to traffic during the work. This repair operation is part of the Thruway Authority's rapid response to the damage caused by the crane collapse earlier this week. At the Governor's direction, these expedited overnight repairs will minimize impacts to motorists during peak travel periods.

Beginning at 8 p.m. tonight, southbound traffic at exit 11 (Nyack - South Nyack - US Route 9W) will be reduced to one lane until the completion of the work at approximately 5 a.m. tomorrow morning. At least one southbound lane will remain open at all times during the operation, with the exception of an approximately 20-minute period expected to begin at 9:30 p.m. During that time, State Police will stop and hold all traffic approaching the bridge beginning from exit 10 (Nyack - South Nyack - US Route 9W).

Three northbound lanes will remain open through the entire operation. Following the completion of the overnight repair work, traffic will resume on three northbound and three southbound lanes of the bridge in time for the Friday morning commute. Phase two of the work to repair the far right lane will be announced in the coming days.
Motorists traveling southbound on the New York State Thruway in the vicinity of the Tappan Zee Bridge during the closure times should expect delays and are advised to seek alternate routes.

TL;DR: Don't try and cross tonight
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: jeffandnicole on July 21, 2016, 02:26:25 PM
Quote from: Snappyjack on July 21, 2016, 12:32:06 PM
They make a new excuse every time it seems. I've gotten everything from "they're not needed" to "they're a distraction to drivers". That last one always makes me laugh, considering we need a sign every time we cross into the Erie Canal Heritage Corridor.

Why are they needed?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: empirestate on July 21, 2016, 10:32:19 PM
Quote from: upstatenyroads on July 21, 2016, 12:17:45 PM
I dropped a line to the Thruway Authority about marking county borders since I hadn't asked them about it in a couple of years. I based my question around the fact that they're marking watersheds, why can't they mark county borders, especially since the National Weather Service issues watches and warnings based on counties. I received a response today indicating that there were no plans to mark county borders, as they had worked with the NWS and determined that since the NWS is going to change their way of identifying watch/warning areas, there was no reason to mark county lines at this time.

Did you follow up ther response by asking why, then, they have they gone ahead and signed a few? What's different about Bronx, Westchester and Rockland Counties that makes them sign-worthy (not to mention Ramapo and Suffern)?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: 74/171FAN on July 22, 2016, 06:51:09 AM
Quote from: empirestate on July 21, 2016, 10:32:19 PM
Quote from: upstatenyroads on July 21, 2016, 12:17:45 PM
I dropped a line to the Thruway Authority about marking county borders since I hadn't asked them about it in a couple of years. I based my question around the fact that they're marking watersheds, why can't they mark county borders, especially since the National Weather Service issues watches and warnings based on counties. I received a response today indicating that there were no plans to mark county borders, as they had worked with the NWS and determined that since the NWS is going to change their way of identifying watch/warning areas, there was no reason to mark county lines at this time.

Did you follow up ther response by asking why, then, they have they gone ahead and signed a few? What's different about Bronx, Westchester and Rockland Counties that makes them sign-worthy (not to mention Ramapo and Suffern)?

As someone who has only been on a significant portion of the Thruway on a trip to Schroon Lake back in 2009, if I remember correctly, I basically forgot where I was between I-84 and I-90 near Albany.  (based partly on the lack of county lines, if my parents needed to ask me where I was all I could really say is between Albany and I-287 to make any sense IMO.)
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on July 22, 2016, 10:39:46 AM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on July 22, 2016, 06:51:09 AM
Quote from: empirestate on July 21, 2016, 10:32:19 PM
Quote from: upstatenyroads on July 21, 2016, 12:17:45 PM
I dropped a line to the Thruway Authority about marking county borders since I hadn't asked them about it in a couple of years. I based my question around the fact that they're marking watersheds, why can't they mark county borders, especially since the National Weather Service issues watches and warnings based on counties. I received a response today indicating that there were no plans to mark county borders, as they had worked with the NWS and determined that since the NWS is going to change their way of identifying watch/warning areas, there was no reason to mark county lines at this time.

Did you follow up ther response by asking why, then, they have they gone ahead and signed a few? What's different about Bronx, Westchester and Rockland Counties that makes them sign-worthy (not to mention Ramapo and Suffern)?

As someone who has only been on a significant portion of the Thruway on a trip to Schroon Lake back in 2009, if I remember correctly, I basically forgot where I was between I-84 and I-90 near Albany.  (based partly on the lack of county lines, if my parents needed to ask me where I was all I could really say is between Albany and I-287 to make any sense IMO.)

Why do you think that county names would make more sense than exit numbers or service plazas names? Both exits and plazas are well signed, and can also be used as references.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: roadman on July 22, 2016, 01:00:23 PM
The common rationale given to justify enhanced mileposts, overpass street name signs, and the like is to provide greater orientation for drivers, for both better navigation and more accurate location reporting of incidents and crashes for relaying to emergency responders.  As upstatenyroads noted above, National Weather Service alerts and advisories are identified by the counties they cover.  This is key for people both inside and outside of the specific area.   Anybody who has monitored NOAA weather radio while traveling, especially in rural areas, can attest to the fact that it is easily possible to pick up signals from one or more NOAA stations not covering the area you're driving through at the time.  Having counties identified on the highway can help people determine the applicability of the weather information to their location. 

As for the "distraction" excuse, county lines correlate with city/town boundaries, which are consistently signed on nearly all Interstates and freeways.  The potential distraction by adding county information to these signs at county boundaries (to use a MassDOT example, Entering Andover/Essex County) is negligible.

IMO, these reasons are sufficient justification for identifying county lines with signing on Interstate and freeways.

Quoteas they had worked with the NWS and determined that since the NWS is going to change their way of identifying watch/warning areas, there was no reason to mark county lines at this time

What changes?  While the NWS has been making revisions to how the weather alerts and other information are presented, I have not heard anything (official or otherwise) suggesting that NWS watch/warning areas were no longer going to be identified by county or sub-county (i.e. Northern XX County).  For one thing, the whole SAME system that NOAA and others have been implementing and promoting is entirely county and sub-county based, and would effectively have to be scrapped if they wholesale changed their reporting system.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: empirestate on July 22, 2016, 01:14:37 PM
Quote from: roadman on July 22, 2016, 01:00:23 PM
As for the "distraction" excuse, county lines correlate with city/town boundaries, which are consistently signed.  The potential distraction by adding county information to these signs (to use a MassDOT example, Entering Andover/Essex County) is negligible.

No, the Thruway doesn't sign any city/town/village lines, as a rule. In fact, the only ones I can think of at all are the aforementioned Ramapo and Suffern on I-287, which are signed along with the state and county line at that location. There is a "welcome"-type sign just before the NYC line (and the Bronx County markers of course coincide with the city line, despite not mentioning it), and there are a couple others as you enter the general region of a city. But no other actual markings of municipal limits.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: roadman on July 22, 2016, 01:26:42 PM
Quote from: empirestate on July 22, 2016, 01:14:37 PM
Quote from: roadman on July 22, 2016, 01:00:23 PM
As for the "distraction" excuse, county lines correlate with city/town boundaries, which are consistently signed.  The potential distraction by adding county information to these signs (to use a MassDOT example, Entering Andover/Essex County) is negligible.

No, the Thruway doesn't sign any city/town/village lines, as a rule. In fact, the only ones I can think of at all are the aforementioned Ramapo and Suffern on I-287, which are signed along with the state and county line at that location. There is a "welcome"-type sign just before the NYC line (and the Bronx County markers of course coincide with the city line, despite not mentioning it), and there are a couple others as you enter the general region of a city. But no other actual markings of municipal limits.
Don't drive the Thruway often, but now that I think about it, you are correct.  And the lack of boundary signs only makes the idiotic "watershed", "Erie Canal district", and other politically motivated signs even more unjustified.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: machias on July 22, 2016, 01:30:47 PM
Quote from: empirestate on July 21, 2016, 10:32:19 PM
Quote from: upstatenyroads on July 21, 2016, 12:17:45 PM
I dropped a line to the Thruway Authority about marking county borders since I hadn't asked them about it in a couple of years. I based my question around the fact that they're marking watersheds, why can't they mark county borders, especially since the National Weather Service issues watches and warnings based on counties. I received a response today indicating that there were no plans to mark county borders, as they had worked with the NWS and determined that since the NWS is going to change their way of identifying watch/warning areas, there was no reason to mark county lines at this time.

Did you follow up ther response by asking why, then, they have they gone ahead and signed a few? What's different about Bronx, Westchester and Rockland Counties that makes them sign-worthy (not to mention Ramapo and Suffern)?

I did, but I didn't get a response. IMHO, I believe Westchester, Rockland and those signs were up before the Thruway took over that particular stretch of roadway, or there may have been an enthusiastic contractor in the mix.

They did send me a list of the counties and the milepost location where the Thruway crosses a county line. They have that inventoried down to the hundredth of a mile. Just no signs.

The NWS changes mentioned were changing coverage areas from full political boundaries to a "polygon warning system" which won't necessarily correlate with political boundaries, so there's no reason to sign them.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: roadman on July 22, 2016, 02:43:43 PM
Quote from: upstatenyroads on July 22, 2016, 01:30:47 PM
The NWS changes mentioned were changing coverage areas from full political boundaries to a "polygon warning system" which won't necessarily correlate with political boundaries, so there's no reason to sign them.

Weak argument, IMO.  What NYSTA fails to recognize is that NOAA alerts under the current polygon system still reference sections of counties.  Therefore, having county boundary information on signs is still beneficial - even if the area of an alert doesn't exactly line up with the larger jurisdictional (not political) boundaries.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: jeffandnicole on July 22, 2016, 02:51:24 PM
I've yet to see anyone post why county signs would be beneficial, in such a way where other signs would not be beneficial.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on July 22, 2016, 03:32:36 PM
It's worth noting that NY is a home rule state with powerful counties.  Laws change based on county boundary, such as the age to buy cigarettes or whether fireworks are legal.

And, of course, NOAA.  Polygons are great for websites and the TV.  Not so much for radio.

It's silly that the Thruway has all the useless political signs but doesn't want to sign counties.  It feels weird to cross into another county without a sign.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: empirestate on July 22, 2016, 04:12:52 PM
Quote from: upstatenyroads on July 22, 2016, 01:30:47 PM
Quote from: empirestate on July 21, 2016, 10:32:19 PM
Did you follow up ther response by asking why, then, they have they gone ahead and signed a few? What's different about Bronx, Westchester and Rockland Counties that makes them sign-worthy (not to mention Ramapo and Suffern)?

I did, but I didn't get a response. IMHO, I believe Westchester, Rockland and those signs were up before the Thruway took over that particular stretch of roadway, or there may have been an enthusiastic contractor in the mix.

That may explain Rockland, but it doesn't explain the Bronx/Westchester marking. The Thruway has maintained its mainline and the New England section since the beginning. (There is also a matching state line marker on the Garden State connector, which also has been in the system forever).

Quote from: jeffandnicole on July 22, 2016, 02:51:24 PM
I've yet to see anyone post why county signs would be beneficial, in such a way where other signs would not be beneficial.

I'm pretty sure I've seen that answer posted a few times. But speaking for myself, I'm only interested in whether it's being done, not whether it's beneficial.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on July 22, 2016, 06:35:48 PM
Quote from: empirestate on July 22, 2016, 04:12:52 PM
Quote from: upstatenyroads on July 22, 2016, 01:30:47 PM
Quote from: empirestate on July 21, 2016, 10:32:19 PM
Did you follow up ther response by asking why, then, they have they gone ahead and signed a few? What's different about Bronx, Westchester and Rockland Counties that makes them sign-worthy (not to mention Ramapo and Suffern)?

I did, but I didn't get a response. IMHO, I believe Westchester, Rockland and those signs were up before the Thruway took over that particular stretch of roadway, or there may have been an enthusiastic contractor in the mix.

That may explain Rockland, but it doesn't explain the Bronx/Westchester marking. The Thruway has maintained its mainline and the New England section since the beginning. (There is also a matching state line marker on the Garden State connector, which also has been in the system forever).

Quote from: jeffandnicole on July 22, 2016, 02:51:24 PM
I've yet to see anyone post why county signs would be beneficial, in such a way where other signs would not be beneficial.

I'm pretty sure I've seen that answer posted a few times. But speaking for myself, I'm only interested in whether it's being done, not whether it's beneficial.

At least one sign on I-287 in Rockland is in Clearview. Nobody but NYSTA would have put that up.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: thenetwork on July 22, 2016, 07:30:02 PM
The Thruway IDs damn near every overpass and underpass by name already. So what's another pair of signs every 20-30 miles?  If they didn't tell us every road/route/river was passing over or under the roadway, then I might side with them. 
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on July 22, 2016, 07:32:38 PM
Quote from: thenetwork on July 22, 2016, 07:30:02 PM
The Thruway IDs damn near every overpass and underpass by name already. So what's another pair of signs every 20-30 miles?  If they didn't tell us every road/route/river was passing over or under the roadway, then I might side with them.

Most waterways are not signed. Only the Buffalo River, Genesee River, Niagara River, Mohawk River, canals, and stuff draining into the Hudson River south of Albany.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: 74/171FAN on July 22, 2016, 07:40:28 PM
Quote from: kalvado on July 22, 2016, 10:39:46 AM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on July 22, 2016, 06:51:09 AM
Quote from: empirestate on July 21, 2016, 10:32:19 PM
Quote from: upstatenyroads on July 21, 2016, 12:17:45 PM
I dropped a line to the Thruway Authority about marking county borders since I hadn't asked them about it in a couple of years. I based my question around the fact that they're marking watersheds, why can't they mark county borders, especially since the National Weather Service issues watches and warnings based on counties. I received a response today indicating that there were no plans to mark county borders, as they had worked with the NWS and determined that since the NWS is going to change their way of identifying watch/warning areas, there was no reason to mark county lines at this time.

Did you follow up ther response by asking why, then, they have they gone ahead and signed a few? What's different about Bronx, Westchester and Rockland Counties that makes them sign-worthy (not to mention Ramapo and Suffern)?

As someone who has only been on a significant portion of the Thruway on a trip to Schroon Lake back in 2009, if I remember correctly, I basically forgot where I was between I-84 and I-90 near Albany.  (based partly on the lack of county lines, if my parents needed to ask me where I was all I could really say is between Albany and I-287 to make any sense IMO.)

Why do you think that county names would make more sense than exit numbers or service plazas names? Both exits and plazas are well signed, and can also be used as references.

Quote from: vdeane on July 22, 2016, 03:32:36 PM
It's worth noting that NY is a home rule state with powerful counties.  Laws change based on county boundary, such as the age to buy cigarettes or whether fireworks are legal.

And, of course, NOAA.  Polygons are great for websites and the TV.  Not so much for radio.

It's silly that the Thruway has all the useless political signs but doesn't want to sign counties.  It feels weird to cross into another county without a sign.

Honestly mileage based exit numbers would be more beneficial than both.  (and maybe interchange names similar to the PA Turnpike)  I will admit that I was freaked out by not seeing county lines for 100+ miles.

(Normally this would seem to be a stupid question.)  How long at this point have mile markers been on the Thruway?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: SignBridge on July 22, 2016, 09:32:54 PM
Since it was built in the 1950's.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: machias on July 22, 2016, 09:57:42 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on July 22, 2016, 09:32:54 PM
Since it was built in the 1950's.

The normal style of mile markers you see now are relatively new to the Thruway (since the mid 1980s). Before then there were smaller, border less mile markers. Unfortunately I can't remember if they were green or blue.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: SignBridge on July 22, 2016, 10:06:42 PM
(Chuckle) They were probably blue, as pretty much all signs on the "original" Thruway were that color including regulatory signs, which now are black-on-white.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cpzilliacus on July 22, 2016, 11:03:35 PM
Quote from: vdeane on July 22, 2016, 03:32:36 PM
It's silly that the Thruway has all the useless political signs but doesn't want to sign counties.  It feels weird to cross into another county without a sign.

I don't believe that the New Jersey Turnpike has a single county  line sign posted on the Turnpike either.

Though NJTA does post them on its other toll road, the Garden State Parkway, perhaps because the previous agency that ran the Parkway, NJHA did post them (though the county line signs are not exactly what the MUTCD specifies).

For good reasons cited above about weather, I think county line signs should be mandatory on all freeway-class roads, including the N.Y.S. Thruway and the N.J. Turnpike. 
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on July 22, 2016, 11:16:40 PM
Quote from: cpzilliacus on July 22, 2016, 11:03:35 PM
For good reasons cited above about weather, I think county line signs should be mandatory on all freeway-class roads, including the N.Y.S. Thruway and the N.J. Turnpike.

Tell that to the New England states. Vermont posts them subtly on freeway town line signs, but I don't remember seeing any in Massachusetts or Connecticut (and I know I've crossed county lines in both).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cpzilliacus on July 22, 2016, 11:36:08 PM
Quote from: cl94 on July 22, 2016, 11:16:40 PM
Quote from: cpzilliacus on July 22, 2016, 11:03:35 PM
For good reasons cited above about weather, I think county line signs should be mandatory on all freeway-class roads, including the N.Y.S. Thruway and the N.J. Turnpike.

Tell that to the New England states. Vermont posts them subtly on freeway town line signs, but I don't remember seeing any in Massachusetts or Connecticut (and I know I've crossed county lines in both).

Keeping in mind that at least in Connecticut, the counties have been reduced to historic relics (and I think it may be true in  Massachusetts too), though people still talk about at least some of them (as I believe does NOAA), it would probably be appropriate to post the  town lines and perhaps the county lines for reasons of public safety.

Never been to Alaska, but since they have no counties up there, I do not know if other political subdivisions (including municipal and borough boundaries) are posted or not.

Bottom line - always post state boundaries (state DOTs tend to be very good about that, roads maintained by  county or municipal governments, not always so much), and post the boundaries of political subdivisions of state as used by NOAA.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on July 22, 2016, 11:39:16 PM
Quote from: cpzilliacus on July 22, 2016, 11:36:08 PM
Quote from: cl94 on July 22, 2016, 11:16:40 PM
Quote from: cpzilliacus on July 22, 2016, 11:03:35 PM
For good reasons cited above about weather, I think county line signs should be mandatory on all freeway-class roads, including the N.Y.S. Thruway and the N.J. Turnpike.

Tell that to the New England states. Vermont posts them subtly on freeway town line signs, but I don't remember seeing any in Massachusetts or Connecticut (and I know I've crossed county lines in both).

Keeping in mind that at least in Connecticut, the counties have been reduced to historic relics, though people still talk about at least some of them (as I believe does NOAA), it would probably be appropriate to post the  town lines and perhaps the county lines for reasons of public safety.

Never been to Alaska, but since they have no counties there, I do not know if other political subdivisions (including municipal boundaries) are posted or not.

Massachusetts is the same way in places. I specifically mentioned Connecticut because I heard a weather alert on the radio while driving today and I had no idea if it applied to me because counties aren't posted. Until they push alerts to everyone's phones automatically based on GPS location, the county one is located in is important.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cpzilliacus on July 22, 2016, 11:45:34 PM
Quote from: cl94 on July 22, 2016, 11:39:16 PM
Massachusetts is the same way in places. I specifically mentioned Connecticut because I heard a weather alert on the radio while driving today and I had no idea if it applied to me because counties aren't posted. Until they push alerts to everyone's phones automatically based on GPS location, the county one is located in is important.

Most of my miles logged in Connecticut (going as far back as the 1970's) are on three roads - I-84, I-91 and I-95.  Not sure that I have ever seen a county or municipal boundary sign on any of those.

I have gotten weather alerts pushed to both of my smartphone devices (I have an Android tablet and an older Blackberry), which were useful when a very bad thunderstorm (a supercell with with a fair amount of hail and a potential tornado embedded) rolled though an area of Prince George's County, Maryland (hail is somewhat unusual in Maryland).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Duke87 on July 23, 2016, 12:07:03 AM
Quote from: cpzilliacus on July 22, 2016, 11:45:34 PM
Most of my miles logged in Connecticut (going as far back as the 1970's) are on three roads - I-84, I-91 and I-95.  Not sure that I have ever seen a county or municipal boundary sign on any of those.

Connecticut is usually very good about posting municipal boundaries, and there are definitely plenty of such signs on interstates. They typically look like this (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.0893459,-73.4542654,3a,17y,87.53h,87.72t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s-ZlRiRjsYIhZoIwaOFm5rg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656).

An older format, now mostly phased out due to MUTCD non-compliance, would have explicitly listed the exits (e.g. "exits 14-16" instead of "next 4 exits").

Also, thanks for fitting nicely into the stereotype that no one ever actually visits Connecticut, they just drive through it. :P
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on July 23, 2016, 12:11:44 AM
This conversation makes me realize what a waste that "New York" sign at the Exit 55 plaza is.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on July 23, 2016, 12:31:52 AM
Quote from: Duke87 on July 23, 2016, 12:07:03 AM
Quote from: cpzilliacus on July 22, 2016, 11:45:34 PM
Most of my miles logged in Connecticut (going as far back as the 1970's) are on three roads - I-84, I-91 and I-95.  Not sure that I have ever seen a county or municipal boundary sign on any of those.

Connecticut is usually very good about posting municipal boundaries, and there are definitely plenty of such signs on interstates. They typically look like this (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.0893459,-73.4542654,3a,17y,87.53h,87.72t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s-ZlRiRjsYIhZoIwaOFm5rg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656).

An older format, now mostly phased out due to MUTCD non-compliance, would have explicitly listed the exits (e.g. "exits 14-16" instead of "next 4 exits").

Also, thanks for fitting nicely into the stereotype that no one ever actually visits Connecticut, they just drive through it. :P

Yeah, those are the signs. The Merritt (and only the Merritt) lists the town/city name and nothing else on the sign in its weird font, while surface roads have small green signs on one side of the road that are similar in function to the Massachusetts "book" signs. The Wilbur Cross is signed like a standard expressway.

There are still plenty of signs in the field listing exit numbers, even though they are being phased out.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: mariethefoxy on July 23, 2016, 02:51:43 AM
I rememeber seeing signs acknowledging the county in Massachusetts, they were ususally combined with the town line, such as

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3470593,-71.6230422,3a,15y,102.63h,85.05t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sJNWrCgJQOj75UcRAZ6Bw7g!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1


Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: empirestate on July 23, 2016, 02:58:08 AM
Quote from: cl94 on July 22, 2016, 06:35:48 PM
At least one sign on I-287 in Rockland is in Clearview. Nobody but NYSTA would have put that up.

That's right; all of the Thruway's county line signs that I know of are in Clearview.

Quote from: mariethefoxy on July 23, 2016, 02:51:43 AM
I rememeber seeing signs acknowledging the county in Massachusetts, they were ususally combined with the town line, such as

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3470593,-71.6230422,3a,15y,102.63h,85.05t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sJNWrCgJQOj75UcRAZ6Bw7g!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1

Yes, they're marked on I-91, at least Hampshire and Hampden are southbound. Can't remember if Franklin is northbound, but I think so.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: jeffandnicole on July 23, 2016, 06:08:33 AM
Quote from: vdeane on July 22, 2016, 03:32:36 PM
It's worth noting that NY is a home rule state with powerful counties.  Laws change based on county boundary, such as the age to buy cigarettes or whether fireworks are legal.

And, of course, NOAA.  Polygons are great for websites and the TV.  Not so much for radio.

It's silly that the Thruway has all the useless political signs but doesn't want to sign counties.  It feels weird to cross into another county without a sign.

New Jersey is a very strong homerule state as well, although we go by towns, not by counties.

I can see a little benefit in signing counties, based on "Well, we know we can buy (fill in the blank) in this county".  But that's where that usefulness ends.  If someone is going to travel to purchase cigs or fireworks or whatever, they probably have a specific town in mind.  A county line sign doesn't give the person any useful info as to where they can exit to purchase that stuff.  It may even be possible there's never an exit within the county, especially if the highway happens to fall along a narrow portion of the county.  That's what I'm getting at...people are more likely to know a specific exit or town to get to a specific where they need to go to get something, rather than a vague county line marker that may not have an exit for another 5 or 10 miles.

Quote from: cpzilliacus on July 22, 2016, 11:03:35 PM
I don't believe that the New Jersey Turnpike has a single county  line sign posted on the Turnpike either.

Though NJTA does post them on its other toll road, the Garden State Parkway, perhaps because the previous agency that ran the Parkway, NJHA did post them (though the county line signs are not exactly what the MUTCD specifies).

For good reasons cited above about weather, I think county line signs should be mandatory on all freeway-class roads, including the N.Y.S. Thruway and the N.J. Turnpike. 

Very few NJ Highways mark their lines.  There's a very old marker on 295 at the Gloucester/Salem line, but that's the only one I know of.  And some counties put up their own signs, which aren't highway/MUTCD signs.

But most people aren't even going to know what station to tune into to get a weather alert to begin with.  It's doubtful a weather related injury or death has ever occurred on the NJ Turnpike (or Thruway, or any other non-county marked highway) because someone didn't know what county they were in.

Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: KEVIN_224 on July 23, 2016, 08:26:38 AM
Connecticut doesn't mark county boundaries in the field. The closest we get is the Sikorsky Bridge between Stratford and Milford. Although CT Route 15 continues all the way to I-84/US 6 in East Hartford, the Merritt Parkway designation starts/ends there (since it's the Fairfield/New Haven County line).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: empirestate on July 23, 2016, 11:06:00 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on July 23, 2016, 06:08:33 AM
I can see a little benefit in signing counties, based on "Well, we know we can buy (fill in the blank) in this county".  But that's where that usefulness ends.  If someone is going to travel to purchase cigs or fireworks or whatever, they probably have a specific town in mind.  A county line sign doesn't give the person any useful info as to where they can exit to purchase that stuff.  It may even be possible there's never an exit within the county, especially if the highway happens to fall along a narrow portion of the county.  That's what I'm getting at...people are more likely to know a specific exit or town to get to a specific where they need to go to get something, rather than a vague county line marker that may not have an exit for another 5 or 10 miles.

If I may turn the question around, what's the reason for needing a reason? Aren't we all a bunch of travelers who enjoy observing our geographic situation, learning our position in the world around us? Don't we have natural curiosity, or do we question, when given any piece of information, what the reason is for needing to be told that?

Perhaps this is the rub: in a society which increasingly glorifies ignorance over information, is it not reward enough to be given a little free piece of knowledge, however trivial? to go to bed each night knowing a little something we didn't know when we awoke that morning?

(MODS: Also, is it worth by this point merging the county line signage discussion into the existing thread{s}?)
https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=5362.0 (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=5362.0)
https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=2496.0 (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=2496.0)
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on July 23, 2016, 01:32:20 PM
Quote from: empirestate on July 23, 2016, 11:06:00 AM
If I may turn the question around, what's the reason for needing a reason? Aren't we all a bunch of travelers who enjoy observing our geographic situation, learning our position in the world around us? Don't we have natural curiosity, or do we question, when given any piece of information, what the reason is for needing to be told that?

Perhaps this is the rub: in a society which increasingly glorifies ignorance over information, is it not reward enough to be given a little free piece of knowledge, however trivial? to go to bed each night knowing a little something we didn't know when we awoke that morning?


If we were discussing if I should go out and post a sign or two - maybe.
But we're talking about agency which is tasked, in principle, with spending tolls smartly, with maximum benefit for all drivers.

And I see a lot of "knowledge" being fed trivia style, without a system. County borders on a highway do not add up to a systematic knowledge, I would say.

Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: jeffandnicole on July 23, 2016, 02:15:39 PM
I think we can all agree that there is simply too much signage out there to begin with. It comes down to what should be signed, and how does that benefit the motorist?

Certainly, many reasons have been stated here why the signage could be important. But as one that's always looking at something from another perspective, eventually the questions I ask involves the benefits of such. 

As a motorist on a highway, it's probably most important to know the direction of travel, where one will exit, the speed limit and other laws, and other associated things.  It's hard in my mind to justify a county border as something a motorist needs to know. The Thruway, throughout its existance, probably hasn't received many requests for this signage, and also has decided it wouldn't be relevant to the motorists.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: RobbieL2415 on July 23, 2016, 02:21:40 PM
The NYSTA also likes to sign geographical regions, i.e. "Central Leatherstocking Region", "Capital Region", "Finger Lakes Region".  I've given up scanning GSV for examples because I don't know what MP's their near.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: empirestate on July 23, 2016, 02:44:51 PM
Quote from: kalvado on July 23, 2016, 01:32:20 PM
And I see a lot of "knowledge" being fed trivia style, without a system. County borders on a highway do not add up to a systematic knowledge, I would say.

Can you explain what you mean? It seems like it's at least as "systematic" as what's currently being signed, but I'm not sure I understand the term.

Quote from: jeffandnicole on July 23, 2016, 02:15:39 PM
I think we can all agree that there is simply too much signage out there to begin with. It comes down to what should be signed, and how does that benefit the motorist?

Actually, the problem seems to be that we don't agree on that premise, which would explain why you're having trouble finding acceptable justification for it since not all of us are seeking such justification.

QuoteCertainly, many reasons have been stated here why the signage could be important. But as one that's always looking at something from another perspective, eventually the questions I ask involves the benefits of such. 

As a motorist on a highway, it's probably most important to know the direction of travel, where one will exit, the speed limit and other laws, and other associated things.  It's hard in my mind to justify a county border as something a motorist needs to know. The Thruway, throughout its existance, probably hasn't received many requests for this signage, and also has decided it wouldn't be relevant to the motorists.

See, I'm looking at it not merely as a motorist operating a vehicle on a highway, but as a traveler within the general environment. Counties are part of the structure of that environment, so learning which one I'm in is edifying in and of itself. Seeing no further need to justify that information, I stop looking for justification.



iPhone
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on July 23, 2016, 05:49:07 PM
Quote from: empirestate on July 23, 2016, 02:44:51 PM
Quote from: kalvado on July 23, 2016, 01:32:20 PM
And I see a lot of "knowledge" being fed trivia style, without a system. County borders on a highway do not add up to a systematic knowledge, I would say.

Can you explain what you mean? It seems like it's at least as "systematic" as what's currently being signed, but I'm not sure I understand the term.

As it was already told, a lot of bulls.. is currently being signed on the road. I find watershed information particularly useless.
With that - a simple example of what I mean by "trivia style": once you see "Greene county" (a portion of Thruway between Albany and NYC runs there) on a sign, which bells would that ring to you? What else do you know about Greene county (without looking up wiki, of course) so that knowing actual location of that county benefits you beyond just knowing that there is a Greene county somewhere there?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: SidS1045 on July 23, 2016, 07:36:42 PM
Quote from: cl94 on July 22, 2016, 11:16:40 PM
but I don't remember seeing any in Massachusetts or Connecticut (and I know I've crossed county lines in both).

Every once in a while you see one like this:

(https://sites.google.com/site/samfarleyplates/_/rsrc/1461366003344/town-line-signs/Athol.jpg?height=160&width=200)
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: empirestate on July 23, 2016, 08:00:19 PM
Quote from: kalvado on July 23, 2016, 05:49:07 PM
Quote from: empirestate on July 23, 2016, 02:44:51 PM
Quote from: kalvado on July 23, 2016, 01:32:20 PM
And I see a lot of "knowledge" being fed trivia style, without a system. County borders on a highway do not add up to a systematic knowledge, I would say.

Can you explain what you mean? It seems like it's at least as "systematic" as what's currently being signed, but I'm not sure I understand the term.

As it was already told, a lot of bulls.. is currently being signed on the road. I find watershed information particularly useless.
With that - a simple example of what I mean by "trivia style": once you see "Greene county" (a portion of Thruway between Albany and NYC runs there) on a sign, which bells would that ring to you? What else do you know about Greene county (without looking up wiki, of course) so that knowing actual location of that county benefits you beyond just knowing that there is a Greene county somewhere there?

But a county is a definite, discrete component of a political system (at least in New York, where the topic is applicable). I just don't follow what you mean by saying it's not "systematic knowledge"? Surely it's more so than a watershed boundary?

As for the benefit, just by being within a county you are subject to some extent to its laws and jurisdiction. It's not just a geographical curiosity, it affects day-to-day living. To the motorist that extent may be minimal, but to the traveler it could be substantial.


iPhone
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on July 23, 2016, 08:20:25 PM
Quote from: empirestate on July 23, 2016, 08:00:19 PM
Quote from: kalvado on July 23, 2016, 05:49:07 PM
Quote from: empirestate on July 23, 2016, 02:44:51 PM
Quote from: kalvado on July 23, 2016, 01:32:20 PM
And I see a lot of "knowledge" being fed trivia style, without a system. County borders on a highway do not add up to a systematic knowledge, I would say.

Can you explain what you mean? It seems like it's at least as "systematic" as what's currently being signed, but I'm not sure I understand the term.

As it was already told, a lot of bulls.. is currently being signed on the road. I find watershed information particularly useless.
With that - a simple example of what I mean by "trivia style": once you see "Greene county" (a portion of Thruway between Albany and NYC runs there) on a sign, which bells would that ring to you? What else do you know about Greene county (without looking up wiki, of course) so that knowing actual location of that county benefits you beyond just knowing that there is a Greene county somewhere there?

But a county is a definite, discrete component of a political system (at least in New York, where the topic is applicable). I just don't follow what you mean by saying it's not "systematic knowledge"? Surely it's more so than a watershed boundary?

As for the benefit, just by being within a county you are subject to some extent to its laws and jurisdiction. It's not just a geographical curiosity, it affects day-to-day living. To the motorist that extent may be minimal, but to the traveler it could be substantial.


iPhone

I take it that you don't know anything specific about Greene county? Any Greene county-specific laws that you do keep in mind when driving through the county?
As for watersheds, even they seem more meaningful (although completely unnecessary on a highway) since I know what is lake Erie / lake Ontario, where they are, and lake watershed does ring some bells for me. That is where things add to my general knowledge. In fact, I even have an idea what would be the next basin once you pass  lake Erie watershed along Thruway towards PA.  That is just my own thing, though...
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: empirestate on July 24, 2016, 11:04:33 AM
Quote from: kalvado on July 23, 2016, 08:20:25 PM
I take it that you don't know anything specific about Greene county? Any Greene county-specific laws that you do keep in mind when driving through the county?

Not sure how I gave you the impression that I don't know something specific about Greene County, but your general point goes right along with mine. Indeed, if I didn't already know a piece of information, surely that what be all the more reason to give it to me?

Remember, too, that I haven't accepted the premise that signs on a roadway should pertain only to the task of driving on that roadway. Here's an example of non-driving related information that is nonetheless posted along roads: in the town of Brighton in Monroe County, it's illegal to discharge a firearm (north of a certain line, I believe). Signs posted on the roads inform motorists of this, even though it's not related to motoring or navigation.

QuoteAs for watersheds, even they seem more meaningful (although completely unnecessary on a highway) since I know what is lake Erie / lake Ontario, where they are, and lake watershed does ring some bells for me. That is where things add to my general knowledge. In fact, I even have an idea what would be the next basin once you pass  lake Erie watershed along Thruway towards PA.  That is just my own thing, though...

Yeah, I think that's just the issue here: because you're less interested in counties than watersheds, you're probably searching harder for the justification to mark counties. Myself, I'm interested in both but probably more in counties than watersheds; moreover, I seem to have a greater level of curiosity in general, so I'm appreciative of information for its own sake and don't feel compelled to seek justification for it.

What's interesting to me now is that my general curiosity seems to be fairly anomalous among this group, which is rather different from my earlier days of discussing roads and travel in online communities!



iPhone
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on July 24, 2016, 12:16:58 PM
Quote from: empirestate on July 24, 2016, 11:04:33 AM
Quote from: kalvado on July 23, 2016, 08:20:25 PM
I take it that you don't know anything specific about Greene county? Any Greene county-specific laws that you do keep in mind when driving through the county?

Not sure how I gave you the impression that I don't know something specific about Greene County, but your general point goes right along with mine. Indeed, if I didn't already know a piece of information, surely that what be all the more reason to give it to me?

Remember, too, that I haven't accepted the premise that signs on a roadway should pertain only to the task of driving on that roadway. Here's an example of non-driving related information that is nonetheless posted along roads: in the town of Brighton in Monroe County, it's illegal to discharge a firearm (north of a certain line, I believe). Signs posted on the roads inform motorists of this, even though it's not related to motoring or navigation.

QuoteAs for watersheds, even they seem more meaningful (although completely unnecessary on a highway) since I know what is lake Erie / lake Ontario, where they are, and lake watershed does ring some bells for me. That is where things add to my general knowledge. In fact, I even have an idea what would be the next basin once you pass  lake Erie watershed along Thruway towards PA.  That is just my own thing, though...

Yeah, I think that's just the issue here: because you're less interested in counties than watersheds, you're probably searching harder for the justification to mark counties. Myself, I'm interested in both but probably more in counties than watersheds; moreover, I seem to have a greater level of curiosity in general, so I'm appreciative of information for its own sake and don't feel compelled to seek justification for it.

What's interesting to me now is that my general curiosity seems to be fairly anomalous among this group, which is rather different from my earlier days of discussing roads and travel in online communities!



So I am asking directly: What do you know about Greene county?

And there is a difference between data and information...
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: The Nature Boy on July 24, 2016, 12:38:43 PM
New Hampshire definitely doesn't sign county lines on I-93 or I-89, Maine does, and I can't recall whether or not Vermont does.

As others have pointed out, the NYSTA is hardly alone is not signing counties.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on July 24, 2016, 01:41:04 PM
Quote from: The Nature Boy on July 24, 2016, 12:38:43 PM
New Hampshire definitely doesn't sign county lines on I-93 or I-89, Maine does, and I can't recall whether or not Vermont does.

As others have pointed out, the NYSTA is hardly alone is not signing counties.

Vermont does on Interstates. Massachusetts is sometimes.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: empirestate on July 24, 2016, 01:45:58 PM
Quote from: kalvado on July 24, 2016, 12:16:58 PM
So I am asking directly: What do you know about Greene county?

Thats a pretty expansive topic; it would really help to know where your line of questioning is headed so I can give you a useful answer. What do you want to know about Greene County?



iPhone
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on July 24, 2016, 02:21:24 PM
Quote from: empirestate on July 24, 2016, 01:45:58 PM
Quote from: kalvado on July 24, 2016, 12:16:58 PM
So I am asking directly: What do you know about Greene county?

Thats a pretty expansive topic; it would really help to know where your line of questioning is headed so I can give you a useful answer. What do you want to know about Greene County?



iPhone

Can you give a 2-paragraph summary of what you think is important, and what would blend with a physical location of county line?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: empirestate on July 24, 2016, 02:49:39 PM
Quote from: kalvado on July 24, 2016, 02:21:24 PM
Quote from: empirestate on July 24, 2016, 01:45:58 PM
Quote from: kalvado on July 24, 2016, 12:16:58 PM
So I am asking directly: What do you know about Greene county?

Thats a pretty expansive topic; it would really help to know where your line of questioning is headed so I can give you a useful answer. What do you want to know about Greene County?



iPhone

Can you give a 2-paragraph summary of what you think is important, and what would blend with a physical location of county line?

I mean, sure I could, but I still don't understand how that answers your question about signing county lines?


iPhone
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Duke87 on July 24, 2016, 04:50:38 PM
I can think of several non-roadgeeky reasons why a county line sign may be of use:
- if a particular county's sheriff has a reputation for setting up a lot of speed traps, the location of the line is good to know to avoid falling prey to one
- on that note, if the law in your state says that sheriffs may not issue citations outside of their jurisdictions, knowing the location of the line may assist in challenging one in court.
- while most online mapping services do not, paper atlases often show county lines, so knowing that you have just crossed a particular county line on a particular road may help determine your location.
- Even without a map in hand, county lines serve as landmarks that can help drivers maintain a sense of where they are and how far it is to their destination. If you know you are going to somewhere in Greene County, "are we in Greene County yet?" is something a normal person could reasonably be curious to know.

With regards to the NYS Thruway specifically, this subject tends to come up because NYSDOT is generally quite thorough at signing county lines on all of the roads it maintains. It is therefore anomalous that NYSTA is entirely the opposite, and raises the question as to why two different agencies within the same state would have different policies for this.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on July 24, 2016, 05:33:51 PM
Indeed.  Being used to NYSDOT's signage, I'm used to watching the counties go by when driving long distance.  It helps you feel like you're going somewhere.  On the Thruway, everything blends together, and you feel like you're going nowhere fast.

I'm not sure what the point of watershed signing is.  I admit, I have no interest in them whatsoever.  Nobody who has a Mob-Rule account can claim the same for counties.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on July 24, 2016, 06:03:37 PM
On a different topic, all lanes were open on the Tappan Zee this afternoon. Repairs were completed enough for traffic to use the right lane. Still didn't fix the WB backup and the deck is still torn tonshreds east of the cantilever span, but those will have to wait until the new bridge.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on July 24, 2016, 06:57:19 PM
Quote from: empirestate on July 24, 2016, 02:49:39 PM
Quote from: kalvado on July 24, 2016, 02:21:24 PM
Quote from: empirestate on July 24, 2016, 01:45:58 PM
Quote from: kalvado on July 24, 2016, 12:16:58 PM
So I am asking directly: What do you know about Greene county?

Thats a pretty expansive topic; it would really help to know where your line of questioning is headed so I can give you a useful answer. What do you want to know about Greene County?



iPhone

Can you give a 2-paragraph summary of what you think is important, and what would blend with a physical location of county line?

I mean, sure I could, but I still don't understand how that answers your question about signing county lines?


iPhone

OK, so let me summarize: Greene County: Here Be Dragons

Quote from: Duke87 on July 24, 2016, 04:50:38 PM
I can think of several non-roadgeeky reasons why a county line sign may be of use:
- if a particular county's sheriff has a reputation for setting up a lot of speed traps, the location of the line is good to know to avoid falling prey to one
- on that note, if the law in your state says that sheriffs may not issue citations outside of their jurisdictions, knowing the location of the line may assist in challenging one in court.
Better, but we're specifically talking Thruway. And  Thruway is patrolled by state troopers. I don't think I ever saw local police doing business on Thruway.

Quote from: Duke87 on July 24, 2016, 04:50:38 PM
- Even without a map in hand, county lines serve as landmarks that can help drivers maintain a sense of where they are and how far it is to their destination. If you know you are going to somewhere in Greene County, "are we in Greene County yet?" is something a normal person could reasonably be curious to know.
Quote from: vdeane on July 24, 2016, 05:33:51 PM
Indeed.  Being used to NYSDOT's signage, I'm used to watching the counties go by when driving long distance.  It helps you feel like you're going somewhere.  On the Thruway, everything blends together, and you feel like you're going nowhere fast.

There are well known locations along Thruway which are a much better reference for me. NYC-I-84 - Poughkeepsee -Kingston - spur to Masspike - Albany - Amsterdam - Utica - Rome - Syracuse - Rochester - Buffalo. There are also distance markers to many of them to give an idea of the progress. If you think those are bad markers, I challenge you to compile a similar county list from the top of your head (may be not that difficult for those working for NYSDOT, though). In addition "past exit 21" is good enough marker for me in terms of both location and arrival time - and again, exits are more abundant and better signed.
As a matter of fact, our recent discussion about definition of upstate did reference lots of cities/towns, but I believe just Rockland and Orange counties were mentioned.


Quote from: Duke87 on July 24, 2016, 04:50:38 PM
- while most online mapping services do not, paper atlases often show county lines, so knowing that you have just crossed a particular county line on a particular road may help determine your location.
Paper maps? Do you actually use those at 80 MPH? And rest areas along Thruway all have posted maps with "you are here" mark. I don't think counties are well marked on those maps, though.

SO far, NOAA radio is the best bet for me. But again, in case of actual weather emergency county is too vague of a location. 10 miles can easily make a big difference, while Thruway goes for 30 miles in Greene county.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: empirestate on July 24, 2016, 07:13:30 PM
Quote from: kalvado on July 24, 2016, 06:57:19 PM
OK, so let me summarize: Greene County: Here Be Dragons

I now officially have no idea what your point is here. I'm just going to leave it alone, then, unless you want to re-articulate your question in a straightforward way.


iPhone
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on July 24, 2016, 07:28:51 PM
Quote from: empirestate on July 24, 2016, 07:13:30 PM
Quote from: kalvado on July 24, 2016, 06:57:19 PM
OK, so let me summarize: Greene County: Here Be Dragons

I now officially have no idea what your point is here. I'm just going to leave it alone, then, unless you want to re-articulate your question in a straightforward way.


iPhone

What I say is that there is a pattern (some call it Google-Youtube driven) that people tend to memorize certain things without understanding a damn thing. The best I met so far was a guy who, when tasked with reading 10 pages from the book which contained answer to his question - would come back remembering every single letter from those pages - but unable to answer any questions if there was no explicit phrase in the book to answer that question. You are proud of your curiosity, so I am just probing if you learn things or memorize them.

So, if I need to tell a few words about Thruway:
-highway going across the state, north from NYC to Albany and then west to Buffalo and state border
-connects most populated cities in the state
-designated as I-87 and I-90 mostly, but does not get federal highway funding
-toll road maintained by separate perverted semi-government entity
and a few more bullets

Now, your move.
Greene county:
-....
-....
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: empirestate on July 24, 2016, 08:20:06 PM
OK, I get what your question is now, though I'm still not sure with how it helps satisfy you that the Thruway should mark county lines. I don't understand why there's a "your move" and a "my move"–yes, I could write a couple paragraphs on any number of aspects of New York State, having lived in the state almost continuously for nearly forty years and studied its geography and infrastructure for much of that time. But what does my knowledge of the state have to do with every other motorist and traveler on the Thruway?

But to answer your question without taking the time to write a primer on Greene County, I do gather information to learn rather than simply memorize. The data I've gotten from every map and website I've read enables me to put together a picture of a place, and to predict–often quite accurately–what the character of a road or a place might be even before I've ever visited it. I definitely like to make observations, and to derive conclusions and suppositions based on them. In fact, I'm often surprised that, as you've pointed out, so many don't apply this technique just in the normal course of life.

So, I hope that gives you the input you're looking for from me. Again, I'm curious how this relates to the topic, so, I guess...your move? :-)


iPhone
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: The Nature Boy on July 24, 2016, 08:26:05 PM
On the upside, I had never heard of Greene County before this whole exchange and had driven through it on the Thruway.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Duke87 on July 24, 2016, 08:32:02 PM
Quote from: kalvado on July 24, 2016, 06:57:19 PM
Paper maps? Do you actually use those at 80 MPH?

From the passenger seat, yes.

Quote from: kalvado on July 24, 2016, 07:28:51 PM
What I say is that there is a pattern (some call it Google-Youtube driven) that people tend to memorize certain things without understanding a damn thing. The best I met so far was a guy who, when tasked with reading 10 pages from the book which contained answer to his question - would come back remembering every single letter from those pages - but unable to answer any questions if there was no explicit phrase in the book to answer that question. You are proud of your curiosity, so I am just probing if you learn things or memorize them.

While criticism of people memorizing instead of learning is valid, it is also irrelevant here. What does it matter if a traveler does not know anything of substance about Greene County? It is, if nothing else, a sign that tells you where you are.

Speaking of criticisms of people not using their brains to their full potential, what about people not having any sense of direction or spatial intelligence skills? Travelers need information about where they are in order to develop these things. Knowing what county you are in can contribute to this. "I am in Greene County, I therefore know that Columbia County is east of me so if I want to get there maybe I should start looking for my exit soon".

What county a person is in is only "data" instead of "information" if they don't know how to use it.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on July 24, 2016, 09:05:20 PM
Quote from: empirestate on July 24, 2016, 08:20:06 PM
So, I hope that gives you the input you're looking for from me. Again, I'm curious how this relates to the topic, so, I guess...your move? :-)
As I said, Greene county - Here Be Dragons. 

Quote from: Duke87 on July 24, 2016, 08:32:02 PM
County? It is, if nothing else, a sign that tells you where you are.
[...]
"I am in Greene County, I therefore know that Columbia County is east of me so if I want to get there maybe I should start looking for my exit soon".

What county a person is in is only "data" instead of "information" if they don't know how to use it.


That may work if you're very local and know counties map. Then - my challenge of listing counties along Thruway iis still open.  But then you probably know cities/towns used for exit signs anyway. 
Otherwise - I would give directions as "exit #". Google gives directions in terms of "exit # to SR ##". So county information seem completely redundant in one case and plainly useless in the other case. I don't remember ever getting a destination with a county - typical address in US is This City, State. Only case when a non-local county comes into play is if you have to appear for the ticket in XXX county court.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: empirestate on July 24, 2016, 09:20:34 PM
Quote from: kalvado on July 24, 2016, 09:05:20 PM
Quote from: empirestate on July 24, 2016, 08:20:06 PM
So, I hope that gives you the input you're looking for from me. Again, I'm curious how this relates to the topic, so, I guess...your move? :-)
As I said, Greene county - Here Be Dragons.

OK. You will have to look elsewhere for the answer to your question, I'm afraid.



iPhone
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: jeffandnicole on July 24, 2016, 09:21:00 PM
Regarding this county thing: Empirestate brought this up:

Quote from: empirestate on July 23, 2016, 08:00:19 PM
As for the benefit, just by being within a county you are subject to some extent to its laws and jurisdiction. It's not just a geographical curiosity, it affects day-to-day living. To the motorist that extent may be minimal, but to the traveler it could be substantial.

I was curiously looking for an answer to this.  Unfortunately, Greene County was brought up (as an example), and after several long-winded answers, the question never truly got answered. 

So, let's ask this question again, on a more broad scale:  On the Thruway, does any county have any laws, rules, statutes or anything that would impact how a law enforcement officer would site someone in one county, compared to how that officer would site someone on the Thruway in another county?

The answer should be a Yes or No answer, along with the specific laws that are different for specific counties.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on July 24, 2016, 09:23:59 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on July 24, 2016, 09:21:00 PM
Regarding this county thing: Empirestate brought this up:

Quote from: empirestate on July 23, 2016, 08:00:19 PM
As for the benefit, just by being within a county you are subject to some extent to its laws and jurisdiction. It's not just a geographical curiosity, it affects day-to-day living. To the motorist that extent may be minimal, but to the traveler it could be substantial.

I was curiously looking for an answer to this.  Unfortunately, Greene County was brought up (as an example), and after several long-winded answers, the question never truly got answered. 

So, let's ask this question again, on a more broad scale:  On the Thruway, does any county have any laws, rules, statutes or anything that would impact how a law enforcement officer would site someone in one county, compared to how that officer would site someone on the Thruway in another county?

The answer should be a Yes or No answer, along with the specific laws that are different for specific counties.

While not a direct answer, it is worth noting that only state troopers have jurisdiction on highways that are maintained by NYSTA, so it is unlikely that, if weird county laws did exist, they would be enforced.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on July 24, 2016, 09:40:08 PM
Quote from: cl94 on July 24, 2016, 09:23:59 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on July 24, 2016, 09:21:00 PM
Regarding this county thing: Empirestate brought this up:

Quote from: empirestate on July 23, 2016, 08:00:19 PM
As for the benefit, just by being within a county you are subject to some extent to its laws and jurisdiction. It's not just a geographical curiosity, it affects day-to-day living. To the motorist that extent may be minimal, but to the traveler it could be substantial.

I was curiously looking for an answer to this.  Unfortunately, Greene County was brought up (as an example), and after several long-winded answers, the question never truly got answered. 

So, let's ask this question again, on a more broad scale:  On the Thruway, does any county have any laws, rules, statutes or anything that would impact how a law enforcement officer would site someone in one county, compared to how that officer would site someone on the Thruway in another county?

The answer should be a Yes or No answer, along with the specific laws that are different for specific counties.

While not a direct answer, it is worth noting that only state troopers have jurisdiction on highways that are maintained by NYSTA, so it is unlikely that, if weird county laws did exist, they would be enforced.

I can think of a few county laws applicable to rest areas - such as county sales tax and flagship Albany county law banning sales of products with plastic microbeads (certain types of toothpastes, scrubs etc.). But those apply mostly to businesses and likely enforced by non-LEO people.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: empirestate on July 24, 2016, 10:06:09 PM
Quote from: cl94 on July 24, 2016, 09:23:59 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on July 24, 2016, 09:21:00 PM
Regarding this county thing: Empirestate brought this up:

Quote from: empirestate on July 23, 2016, 08:00:19 PM
As for the benefit, just by being within a county you are subject to some extent to its laws and jurisdiction. It's not just a geographical curiosity, it affects day-to-day living. To the motorist that extent may be minimal, but to the traveler it could be substantial.

I was curiously looking for an answer to this.  Unfortunately, Greene County was brought up (as an example), and after several long-winded answers, the question never truly got answered. 

So, let's ask this question again, on a more broad scale:  On the Thruway, does any county have any laws, rules, statutes or anything that would impact how a law enforcement officer would site someone in one county, compared to how that officer would site someone on the Thruway in another county?

The answer should be a Yes or No answer, along with the specific laws that are different for specific counties.

While not a direct answer, it is worth noting that only state troopers have jurisdiction on highways that are maintained by NYSTA, so it is unlikely that, if weird county laws did exist, they would be enforced.

It's unlikely that counties have particular laws that affect the act of driving per se, since the Vehicle and Traffic law is established by the state. However, one related aspect that is overseen by the counties is the regulation of gas pumps by county bureaus of weights and measures. (It's also worth noting that an infraction issued along the Thruway would still be tried in the jurisdiction where it occurred.)

But what we are all forgetting is that travelers do more than just drive on the Thruway. They also get off, go into the towns, cities and villages, eat at the restaurants, sleep in the hotels, and talk to the local residents. There is an assumed premise that any information furnished by the Thruway should pertain only to the use of it as a motor thoroughfare, to the specific mechanical act of driving or navigating. I don't believe it's correct to apply this premise to the question; so, we needn't argue how the information is pertinent to driving, unless and until we establish that it needs to be pertinent to driving.


iPhone
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: roadman on July 25, 2016, 09:59:38 AM
Quote from: vdeane on July 24, 2016, 05:33:51 PM

I'm not sure what the point of watershed signing is.

Watershed signs are nothing more than a feel-good action by DOTs to appease the environmentalists.  For several years, Massachusetts had several BGS signs identifying watershed boundaries on their Interstates (the theme was "Communities Connected By Water").  As part of the 2004 agreement with FHWA to eliminate non-essential signing, the watershed signs were among the first to be removed.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: 7/8 on July 25, 2016, 11:06:46 AM
Quote from: roadman on July 25, 2016, 09:59:38 AM
Quote from: vdeane on July 24, 2016, 05:33:51 PM

I'm not sure what the point of watershed signing is.

Watershed signs are nothing more than a feel-good action by DOTs to appease the environmentalists.  For several years, Massachusetts had several LGS signs identifying watershed boundaries on their Interstates (the theme was "Communities Connected By Water").  As part of the 2004 agreement with FHWA to eliminate non-essential signing, the watershed signs were among the first to be removed.

I agree that watershed signing on the Thruway and other controlled-access highways definitely isn't necessary. And it's odd they would choose to sign these over counties.

But this watershed sign on Ontario highway 144 has a small parking area and a cool sign dividing the arctic and atlantic ocean watersheds. I took picture a there, since that trip was my first time being in the Arctic Ocean watershed :)
https://www.google.ca/maps/@47.4834943,-81.8455984,3a,60y,341.57h,82.55t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sZlU5UR9JVyZIHw9UJ2avyg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656 (https://www.google.ca/maps/@47.4834943,-81.8455984,3a,60y,341.57h,82.55t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sZlU5UR9JVyZIHw9UJ2avyg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: thenetwork on July 25, 2016, 01:29:57 PM
Quote from: vdeane on July 24, 2016, 05:33:51 PM
I'm not sure what the point of watershed signing is.  I admit, I have no interest in them whatsoever. 

If you pullover to pee in a rainstorm, you'll know whose water supply you will be tainting! :bigass:
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: jeffandnicole on July 25, 2016, 02:21:14 PM
Quote from: thenetwork on July 25, 2016, 01:29:57 PM
Quote from: vdeane on July 24, 2016, 05:33:51 PM
I'm not sure what the point of watershed signing is.  I admit, I have no interest in them whatsoever. 

If you pullover to pee in a rainstorm, you'll know whose water supply you will be tainting! :bigass:

NJ signed them all over as well. Never saw the point in them either.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: empirestate on July 25, 2016, 05:35:50 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on July 25, 2016, 02:21:14 PM
Quote from: thenetwork on July 25, 2016, 01:29:57 PM
Quote from: vdeane on July 24, 2016, 05:33:51 PM
I'm not sure what the point of watershed signing is.  I admit, I have no interest in them whatsoever. 

If you pullover to pee in a rainstorm, you'll know whose water supply you will be tainting! :bigass:

NJ signed them all over as well. Never saw the point in them either.

I can sort of see the significance of posting watersheds, but there are certainly other posted signs for which the justification completely eludes me (for example, signs mentioning that a certain city is an "All-America City"). However, my first reaction when seeing something I don't know the reason for isn't to conclude that there is no reason for it; instead, it makes me curious as to what the reason might be. I suppose that's why I'm far less bothered than other members here by the question of whether county line signs are necessary!
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: machias on August 07, 2016, 10:11:40 AM
It was late last night when I got on the Thruway eastbound at Collamer (I-481) but what in the world are the signs welcoming to the "New York State Experience" doing in the middle of the state? These signs are similar to the signs coming into the state with taste - enjoy - love - etc but in the middle of the state? I also noticed that the toll booths have smaller versions posted on them as you enter the Thruway.

Since when did it become OK for the state to post giant billboards along their highways?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on August 07, 2016, 06:14:09 PM
Quote from: upstatenyroads on August 07, 2016, 10:11:40 AM
It was late last night when I got on the Thruway eastbound at Collamer (I-481) but what in the world are the signs welcoming to the "New York State Experience" doing in the middle of the state? These signs are similar to the signs coming into the state with taste - enjoy - love - etc but in the middle of the state? I also noticed that the toll booths have smaller versions posted on them as you enter the Thruway.

Since when did it become OK for the state to post giant billboards along their highways?

I noticed those on Thursday. R7 installed some along NY 22 near the Plattsburgh Airport as well. Those are the first I have seen on a NYSDOT road that isn't I-84.

On a different topic, NYSTA put up several more advance signs for the rest area just west of Fonda recently. 2 mile and 1/2 mile advance "Taste NY Store" signs were installed. All are in FHWA fonts.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cpzilliacus on August 07, 2016, 06:59:25 PM
Quote from: roadman on July 25, 2016, 09:59:38 AM
Watershed signs are nothing more than a feel-good action by DOTs to appease the environmentalists.  For several years, Massachusetts had several BGS signs identifying watershed boundaries on their Interstates (the theme was "Communities Connected By Water").  As part of the 2004 agreement with FHWA to eliminate non-essential signing, the watershed signs were among the first to be removed.

Major watershed divides should, IMO, be signed. 

Those would include the Continental Divide that separate the Pacific Ocean drainage from the Gulf of Mexico/Atlantic Ocean and Arctic Ocean drainage, and the following.

Eastern  (seems to be signed in places in North Carolina, West Virginia and Maryland), separating Gulf of Mexico drainage from Atlantic Ocean drainage.

Arctic (separating Arctic Ocean drainage from Hudson Bay drainage [not that many roads appear to cross this divide]).

St. Lawrence (separating Gulf of Mexico and Atlantic Ocean drainage from the St. Lawrence River watershed).

Laurentian (separating Hudson Bay drainage from the Gulf of Mexico and St. Lawrence watersheds).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cpzilliacus on August 07, 2016, 07:03:41 PM
Quote from: empirestate on July 24, 2016, 10:06:09 PM
It's unlikely that counties have particular laws that affect the act of driving per se, since the Vehicle and Traffic law is established by the state. However, one related aspect that is overseen by the counties is the regulation of gas pumps by county bureaus of weights and measures.

Though some states (I don't know about New York) have provisions in state law that only apply in certain counties and county-like jurisdictions (such as Maryland and especially Virginia, which  have "independent" cities that are for all intents their own counties).

It may also matter when it comes to issuing a driver a traffic summons or citation, because the jurisdiction in which it was issued presumably governs what county court the matter will be tried in if the person getting the ticket wants to challenge it.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on August 07, 2016, 07:47:32 PM
Quote from: cpzilliacus on August 07, 2016, 07:03:41 PM
Quote from: empirestate on July 24, 2016, 10:06:09 PM
It's unlikely that counties have particular laws that affect the act of driving per se, since the Vehicle and Traffic law is established by the state. However, one related aspect that is overseen by the counties is the regulation of gas pumps by county bureaus of weights and measures.

Though some states (I don't know about New York) have provisions in state law that only apply in certain counties and county-like jurisdictions (such as Maryland and especially Virginia, which  have "independent" cities that are for all intents their own counties).

It may also matter when it comes to issuing a driver a traffic summons or citation, because the jurisdiction in which it was issued presumably governs what county court the matter will be tried in if the person getting the ticket wants to challenge it.

New York is such a state, but the only one with significant laws applying to driving is New York City, all of which are signed at the border. Blanket speed limits do not apply to NYSTA-controlled roads.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Roadgeek Adam on August 07, 2016, 07:56:31 PM
Quote from: cl94 on August 07, 2016, 06:14:09 PM
Quote from: upstatenyroads on August 07, 2016, 10:11:40 AM
It was late last night when I got on the Thruway eastbound at Collamer (I-481) but what in the world are the signs welcoming to the "New York State Experience" doing in the middle of the state? These signs are similar to the signs coming into the state with taste - enjoy - love - etc but in the middle of the state? I also noticed that the toll booths have smaller versions posted on them as you enter the Thruway.

Since when did it become OK for the state to post giant billboards along their highways?

I noticed those on Thursday. R7 installed some along NY 22 near the Plattsburgh Airport as well. Those are the first I have seen on a NYSDOT road that isn't I-84.

On a different topic, NYSTA put up several more advance signs for the rest area just west of Fonda recently. 2 mile and 1/2 mile advance "Taste NY Store" signs were installed. All are in FHWA fonts.

They also are up in Buffalo around Exit 50. All directions.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on August 08, 2016, 12:51:34 PM
There are even ads on TV promoting the new signs.  Seriously.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cpzilliacus on August 11, 2016, 01:06:42 PM
[Could this potentially imperil the diversion of billions of dollars from the Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission to PennDOT for use as transit subsidies?]

Reuters.com: New York's use of tolls to maintain canals unconstitutional: judge (http://www.reuters.com/article/us-new-york-tolls-lawsuit-idUSKCN10L2Q5)

QuoteA federal judge on Wednesday said the New York State Thruway Authority's practice of diverting toll revenue it collects from commercial truckers to maintain upstate canals is unconstitutional.

QuoteChief Judge Colleen McMahon of the federal court in Manhattan agreed with the American Trucking Associations trade group that the authority unlawfully burdens interstate commerce by contributing more than $61 million annually, or roughly 10 percent of toll revenue, to maintain the canals.

QuoteMcMahon called the canals a "jewel in the crown" for New York, which benefits from tourism revenue they generate, but said they offered no benefit to truckers.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on August 11, 2016, 01:19:35 PM
Those truckers are going to be in for a rude awakening next year when the Canals Corporation is transferred to the Power Authority and tolls remain the same; the savings from no longer maintaining the canals will go towards ending the subsidy they've been getting from the NY state budget recently, not towards lowering tolls.

I'm surprised the Thruway didn't try to argue something along the lines of "we use the subsidy money for the canals, not the tolls".

Perhaps the judge should take a look at the MTA crossings.  The canals were maintained by the Thruway Authority, so it wasn't like they were transferring money to another agency, so shouldn't the MTA and PANYNJ diversions both be unconstitutional too?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: jeffandnicole on August 11, 2016, 03:15:24 PM
Quote from: cpzilliacus on August 11, 2016, 01:06:42 PM
[Could this potentially imperil the diversion of billions of dollars from the Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission to PennDOT for use as transit subsidies?]

It would greatly lie on the wording of the various laws and agreements.  I want to say the tolls aren't directly paying for the road improvements.  They are paying the *bonds*, which were offered to investors, which pay for the road improvements.  And the bond agreements with investors would have the specific language necessary to support such funding.

Also, I think in PA the tolls are supporting other road and transit projects.  It'll be a bit harder for the ATA to say that the PTC burdens interstate commerce by using their money on roads, trains and buses that directly support interstate commerce, versus NY State which seemed to argue the canals are a tourist destination.

In NJ, I see quite often NJDOT paying for canal improvements along the highway system.  I don't know much about canals and how they're funded, but how does funding work in NY State?  If they are a completely separate division of state government subject to its own funding mechanism, I could see how transportation and canals have nothing to do with each other in NY.

It would be interesting though if the ATA uses this to fight other states in their toll rates.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on August 11, 2016, 04:25:53 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on August 11, 2016, 03:15:24 PM
Quote from: cpzilliacus on August 11, 2016, 01:06:42 PM
[Could this potentially imperil the diversion of billions of dollars from the Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission to PennDOT for use as transit subsidies?]

It would greatly lie on the wording of the various laws and agreements.  I want to say the tolls aren't directly paying for the road improvements.  They are paying the *bonds*, which were offered to investors, which pay for the road improvements.  And the bond agreements with investors would have the specific language necessary to support such funding.

Also, I think in PA the tolls are supporting other road and transit projects.  It'll be a bit harder for the ATA to say that the PTC burdens interstate commerce by using their money on roads, trains and buses that directly support interstate commerce, versus NY State which seemed to argue the canals are a tourist destination.

In NJ, I see quite often NJDOT paying for canal improvements along the highway system.  I don't know much about canals and how they're funded, but how does funding work in NY State?  If they are a completely separate division of state government subject to its own funding mechanism, I could see how transportation and canals have nothing to do with each other in NY.

It would be interesting though if the ATA uses this to fight other states in their toll rates.

NYS Thruway maybe somewhat special case here. I believe bonds are paid off, and tolls were supposed to disappear when that happened... At least that is a popular urban legend.
And Canal is regulated by a special article in NYS constitution, no more no less. Apparently it was much more useful at some point.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on August 11, 2016, 06:16:55 PM
It's also important to note that the tolls from the downstate crossings fund mass transit that gets many vehicles off the road, as opposed to something that is nowadays used exclusively for rich people recreation.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: empirestate on August 11, 2016, 07:53:26 PM
Quote from: cl94 on August 11, 2016, 06:16:55 PM
It's also important to note that the tolls from the downstate crossings fund mass transit that gets many vehicles off the road, as opposed to something that is nowadays used exclusively for rich people recreation.

? We were never rich, yet used the canals all the time for recreation.


iPhone
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on August 12, 2016, 01:51:35 AM
Quote from: cl94 on August 11, 2016, 06:16:55 PM
It's also important to note that the tolls from the downstate crossings fund mass transit that gets many vehicles off the road, as opposed to something that is nowadays used exclusively for rich people recreation.

If upstate still had a solid manufacturing base, it could function as the BARGE canal.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cpzilliacus on August 12, 2016, 12:37:01 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on August 11, 2016, 03:15:24 PM
Also, I think in PA the tolls are supporting other road and transit projects.  It'll be a bit harder for the ATA to say that the PTC burdens interstate commerce by using their money on roads, trains and buses that directly support interstate commerce, versus NY State which seemed to argue the canals are a tourist destination.

The original Act 44 law (which was drafted with the assumption that PTC would start to collect millions of dollars in tolls from I-80 users, later denied by the USDOT under the W. Bush Administration and again under Obama) was to fund off-Turnpike highway projects and an assortment of transit subsidies.

With the passage of Act 89 in 2013, the Pennsylvania legislature directed that all of the PTC payments to PennDOT be to: 

"support transit capital, operating, multi-modal and other non-highway programs" [words lifted directly from the Pennsylvania Turnpike's Web site here (https://www.paturnpike.com/business/act44_plan.aspx)]
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cpzilliacus on August 12, 2016, 12:38:26 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on August 12, 2016, 01:51:35 AM
If upstate still had a solid manufacturing base, it could function as the BARGE canal.

I once heard (might have been at TRB) that the New York State canal system does carry some freight traffic, though I do not know how much.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on August 12, 2016, 12:52:12 PM
Quote from: cpzilliacus on August 12, 2016, 12:38:26 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on August 12, 2016, 01:51:35 AM
If upstate still had a solid manufacturing base, it could function as the BARGE canal.

I once heard (might have been at TRB) that the New York State canal system does carry some freight traffic, though I do not know how much.
http://www.timesunion.com/business/article/Cargo-barges-traffic-increases-on-New-York-canal-5499703.php
not the latest data, though. Considering this is seasonal, I don't see manufacturers relying on that, though.
GE maybe an exception - I believe they are talking about using canal to barge oversize cargo from Schenectady plant to port of Albany and transfer to ocean-going boats over there. But that is only a small portion of canal..
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on August 12, 2016, 12:59:36 PM
Quote from: kalvado on August 12, 2016, 12:52:12 PM
Quote from: cpzilliacus on August 12, 2016, 12:38:26 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on August 12, 2016, 01:51:35 AM
If upstate still had a solid manufacturing base, it could function as the BARGE canal.

I once heard (might have been at TRB) that the New York State canal system does carry some freight traffic, though I do not know how much.
http://www.timesunion.com/business/article/Cargo-barges-traffic-increases-on-New-York-canal-5499703.php
not the latest data, though. Considering this is seasonal, I don't see manufacturers relying on that, though.
GE maybe an exception - I believe they are talking about using canal to barge oversize cargo from Schenectady plant to port of Albany and transfer to ocean-going boats over there. But that is only a small portion of canal..

The portions used for freight traffic are mainly east of Schenectady, south of Hudson Falls (dredging project), and the Black Rock lock (traffic to/from Tonawanda). Nowhere else is there any real industrial activity along the canal and anything between the endpoints would just use the St. Lawrence Seaway.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: seicer on September 08, 2016, 09:13:44 AM
Nearly all barge traffic is for commodities, not for general freight. You aren't shipping intermodal containers down the Erie as that requires deep water ports and infrastructure that is well beyond the capability of the canal.

Early canals served mills for granaries and light industries, along with passengers, using packet boats and slightly larger boats for humans. Modernization of the Erie allowed for modern day barges and tugs to use the waterway but it was not cost effective. Passengers began abandoning the Erie for adjoining railroads while freight slowly declined due to railroads and then trucks.

The last commercial ship on the Erie ended circa 1994.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: ixnay on September 08, 2016, 08:12:11 PM
Quote from: Sherman Cahal on September 08, 2016, 09:13:44 AM
Nearly all barge traffic is for commodities, not for general freight. You aren't shipping intermodal containers down the Erie as that requires deep water ports and infrastructure that is well beyond the capability of the canal.

Early canals served mills for granaries and light industries, along with passengers, using packet boats and slightly larger boats for humans. Modernization of the Erie allowed for modern day barges and tugs to use the waterway but it was not cost effective. Passengers began abandoning the Erie for adjoining railroads while freight slowly declined due to railroads and then trucks.

The last commercial ship on the Erie ended circa 1994.

http://www.canals.ny.gov/history/history.html

ixnay
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on September 12, 2016, 12:57:23 PM
Per Facebook: Port Byron parking area and visitor center open (http://www.thruway.ny.gov/news/pressrel/2016/09/2016-09-12-port-byron-heritage-park.html)
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: route17fan on September 16, 2016, 10:36:12 PM
Just an observation after visiting the state about a week ago (and if noted previously, my apologies) - lights installed at exit gore signs for exits 57, 49, and 48. I neglected to take pictures because I was not expecting them.  :-D
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on September 17, 2016, 06:28:33 PM
Photo:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nysroads.com%2Fimages%2Fgallery%2FNY%2Fi90%2F101_2632-s.JPG&hash=89f84ae95a903a4274c928f19aca0dcd3b67c6e3)

I think it's interesting that the Thruway is illuminating signs rather than simply replacing them with ones with better reflectivity.  I would think the latter would be less expensive.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on September 17, 2016, 06:32:09 PM
Quote from: vdeane on September 17, 2016, 06:28:33 PM
I think it's interesting that the Thruway is illuminating signs rather than simply replacing them with ones with better reflectivity.  I would think the latter would be less expensive.

I'd take it over their Clearview. 48A went up a couple years ago. Depends on how much the solar array costs.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: SignBridge on September 17, 2016, 09:14:19 PM
Vdeane, it seems like NY Thruway Authority is always behind the curve re: directional signing. Their cousins at NYSDOT are way ahead of them. Here in Region-10 on Long Island most overhead signs have had their lighting removed and new high-reflective sheeting signs have replaced the older ones in the last few years.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: GenExpwy on September 18, 2016, 03:16:41 AM
It seems to me that gore signs get smashed into more often than other freeway signs. Wouldn't adding lights to them just increase the repair bill?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on September 18, 2016, 07:10:29 AM
Quote from: GenExpwy on September 18, 2016, 03:16:41 AM
It seems to me that gore signs get smashed into more often than other freeway signs. Wouldn't adding lights to them just increase the repair bill?
Between higher cost of individual repair and reduced number of accidents due to better visibility... It may very well end up as a break-even or better. Besides, crash costs can also be part of equation.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: seicer on September 19, 2016, 12:09:22 PM
I thought the lighting was only in the Seneca Nation territory? I wasn't aware it had expanded outward.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on September 19, 2016, 12:12:02 PM
Quote from: Sherman Cahal on September 19, 2016, 12:09:22 PM
I thought the lighting was only in the Seneca Nation territory? I wasn't aware it had expanded outward.

There aren't any exits inside Seneca territory. There's an exit immediately to the west and a service area a short distance to the east, but nothing inside. Most exits in the toll section of Buffalo's maintenance territory have had lights for years. 48 and 48A were some of the first to get them.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: seicer on September 19, 2016, 01:34:05 PM
Thanks - that answers that. I never noticed the lights outside of those few western exits, but it doesn't resolve the issue of every sign being improperly constructed. I can't read the mile markers or practically any guide sign at night.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on September 19, 2016, 02:22:47 PM
That light wasn't on 57 a week and a half ago.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: machias on September 19, 2016, 05:51:43 PM
Quote from: Sherman Cahal on September 19, 2016, 01:34:05 PM
Thanks - that answers that. I never noticed the lights outside of those few western exits, but it doesn't resolve the issue of every sign being improperly constructed. I can't read the mile markers or practically any guide sign at night.

I think the guide panel at the beginning of Exit 32's WB ramp was one of the first on the Thruway to get a supplemental light. There are several lights in the Syracuse area as well. Both of these locations have had lights for at least 2-3 years.

I wonder if these are from the contractor trying to get out of a warranty replacement on signs due to failing reflectivity or something.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: roadman on September 19, 2016, 08:00:29 PM
Quote from: upstatenyroads on September 19, 2016, 05:51:43 PM
I think the guide panel at the beginning of Exit 32's WB ramp was one of the first on the Thruway to get a supplemental light. There are several lights in the Syracuse area as well. Both of these locations have had lights for at least 2-3 years.

I wonder if these are from the contractor trying to get out of a warranty replacement on signs due to failing reflectivity or something.

I find it hard to imagine that installing lighting for guide signs would be both more efficient and less expensive than re-sheeting newly installed panels that have been determined to not have acceptable retroreflectivity while a contract is still active, even if the contractor determined (and could reasonably prove) that the failure was due to poorly manufactured sheeting.  I also find it hard to imagine that the Thruway would accept such a resolution to the problem from a contractor, unless the problem arose due to an issue with the Thruway's own contract specifications.  I seem to recall that there an issue with the Thruway calling for sign backgrounds having higher intensity sheeting than the sign legends, which is the exact opposite of FHWA requirements for overhead signs.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on September 19, 2016, 09:20:37 PM
Quote from: roadman on September 19, 2016, 08:00:29 PM
Quote from: upstatenyroads on September 19, 2016, 05:51:43 PM
I think the guide panel at the beginning of Exit 32's WB ramp was one of the first on the Thruway to get a supplemental light. There are several lights in the Syracuse area as well. Both of these locations have had lights for at least 2-3 years.

I wonder if these are from the contractor trying to get out of a warranty replacement on signs due to failing reflectivity or something.

I find it hard to imagine that installing lighting for guide signs would be both more efficient and less expensive than re-sheeting newly installed panels that have been determined to not have acceptable retroreflectivity while a contract is still active, even if the contractor determined (and could reasonably prove) that the failure was due to poorly manufactured sheeting.  I also find it hard to imagine that the Thruway would accept such a resolution to the problem from a contractor, unless the problem arose due to an issue with the Thruway's own contract specifications.  I seem to recall that there an issue with the Thruway calling for sign backgrounds having higher intensity sheeting than the sign legends, which is the exact opposite of FHWA requirements for overhead signs.

The thing is that many (if not all) of the signs they are installing lighting for are pre-Clearview, which likely means they are over 10 years old.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: machias on September 19, 2016, 09:25:10 PM
Quote from: roadman on September 19, 2016, 08:00:29 PM
Quote from: upstatenyroads on September 19, 2016, 05:51:43 PM
I think the guide panel at the beginning of Exit 32's WB ramp was one of the first on the Thruway to get a supplemental light. There are several lights in the Syracuse area as well. Both of these locations have had lights for at least 2-3 years.

I wonder if these are from the contractor trying to get out of a warranty replacement on signs due to failing reflectivity or something.

I find it hard to imagine that installing lighting for guide signs would be both more efficient and less expensive than re-sheeting newly installed panels that have been determined to not have acceptable retroreflectivity while a contract is still active, even if the contractor determined (and could reasonably prove) that the failure was due to poorly manufactured sheeting.  I also find it hard to imagine that the Thruway would accept such a resolution to the problem from a contractor, unless the problem arose due to an issue with the Thruway's own contract specifications.  I seem to recall that there an issue with the Thruway calling for sign backgrounds having higher intensity sheeting than the sign legends, which is the exact opposite of FHWA requirements for overhead signs.

Oh I fully believe that the Thruway Authority is specifying the reflectivity of backgrounds and the legend backwards, many of the Clearview signs (especially along the mainline in Buffalo) and even the latest FHWA signs I've seen installed in the past month or two suffer from this. Clearview exacerbated the issue.

I am surprised at the amount of setup involved with these lights being installed. There's usually a pretty good sized solar panel, the cabling, the control box, etc. All pretty impressive but curious nonetheless.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: roadman on September 20, 2016, 09:07:59 AM
Quote from: cl94 on September 19, 2016, 09:20:37 PM
The thing is that many (if not all) of the signs they are installing lighting for are pre-Clearview, which likely means they are over 10 years old.
If they are over ten years old, they've exceeded the sheeting manufacturer's warranty anyway.  And unless the original sign contractor used Engineer or Super Engineer Grade sheeting for the panels, the signs should still have adequate retroreflectivity for many more years.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: roadman on September 20, 2016, 09:11:22 AM
Quote from: upstatenyroads on September 19, 2016, 09:25:10 PM
I am surprised at the amount of setup involved with these lights being installed. There's usually a pretty good sized solar panel, the cabling, the control box, etc. All pretty impressive but curious nonetheless.

Sounds like the Thruway decided that using commercial power for these lights was either impossible or impractical at the sign locations.  And the "control box" actually houses the backup batteries for the installation.  Still, it's way more expensive than just re-sheeting the signs in question.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: route17fan on September 20, 2016, 02:54:26 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on September 19, 2016, 02:22:47 PM
That light wasn't on 57 a week and a half ago.

Oops! My sincere apologies - I meant 58 at Silver Creek/Irving. Very sorry about that to one and all.  :)
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: machias on September 20, 2016, 10:17:25 PM
Quote from: roadman on September 20, 2016, 09:11:22 AM
Quote from: upstatenyroads on September 19, 2016, 09:25:10 PM
I am surprised at the amount of setup involved with these lights being installed. There's usually a pretty good sized solar panel, the cabling, the control box, etc. All pretty impressive but curious nonetheless.

Sounds like the Thruway decided that using commercial power for these lights was either impossible or impractical at the sign locations.  And the "control box" actually houses the backup batteries for the installation.  Still, it's way more expensive than just re-sheeting the signs in question.

I'm curious as to the criteria required to light these signs.  The 1 mile advance interchange westbound sign for Exit 38 is old enough that the CR 57 marker replaced the original NY Route 57 marker when the route was decommissioned. The CR 57 marker has been replaced yet again (it's the third marker on that sign). The tab is centered. I believe the sign is designed to the same specs as the overhead signs on the mainline in Buffalo before the Clearview replacement. Looking closely at that sign, it is cracked and peeling. Yet, as of the State Fair, the sign is not lit up with a solar light. 
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on September 20, 2016, 10:23:04 PM
Quote from: upstatenyroads on September 20, 2016, 10:17:25 PM
Quote from: roadman on September 20, 2016, 09:11:22 AM
Quote from: upstatenyroads on September 19, 2016, 09:25:10 PM
I am surprised at the amount of setup involved with these lights being installed. There's usually a pretty good sized solar panel, the cabling, the control box, etc. All pretty impressive but curious nonetheless.

Sounds like the Thruway decided that using commercial power for these lights was either impossible or impractical at the sign locations.  And the "control box" actually houses the backup batteries for the installation.  Still, it's way more expensive than just re-sheeting the signs in question.

I'm curious as to the criteria required to light these signs.  The 1 mile advance interchange westbound sign for Exit 38 is old enough that the CR 57 marker replaced the original NY Route 57 marker when the route was decommissioned. The CR 57 marker has been replaced yet again (it's the third marker on that sign). The tab is centered. I believe the sign is designed to the same specs as the overhead signs on the mainline in Buffalo before the Clearview replacement. Looking closely at that sign, it is cracked and peeling. Yet, as of the State Fair, the sign is not lit up with a solar light.
I wouldn't be surprised if accident statistics is used. People complaining about missed exits (think someone out of area, likely not having EZpass, complaining to toll collector) is probably another input.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on September 20, 2016, 10:34:10 PM
Quote from: upstatenyroads on September 20, 2016, 10:17:25 PM
Quote from: roadman on September 20, 2016, 09:11:22 AM
Quote from: upstatenyroads on September 19, 2016, 09:25:10 PM
I am surprised at the amount of setup involved with these lights being installed. There's usually a pretty good sized solar panel, the cabling, the control box, etc. All pretty impressive but curious nonetheless.

Sounds like the Thruway decided that using commercial power for these lights was either impossible or impractical at the sign locations.  And the "control box" actually houses the backup batteries for the installation.  Still, it's way more expensive than just re-sheeting the signs in question.

I'm curious as to the criteria required to light these signs.  The 1 mile advance interchange westbound sign for Exit 38 is old enough that the CR 57 marker replaced the original NY Route 57 marker when the route was decommissioned. The CR 57 marker has been replaced yet again (it's the third marker on that sign). The tab is centered. I believe the sign is designed to the same specs as the overhead signs on the mainline in Buffalo before the Clearview replacement. Looking closely at that sign, it is cracked and peeling. Yet, as of the State Fair, the sign is not lit up with a solar light.

Heck, there are still a bunch of those signs in Buffalo both overhead and ground-mounted and none were lit the last time I was over there.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on October 01, 2016, 11:59:09 PM
Does anyone know how to contact EZpass customer service, and if it became any better over the past decade?
My past experience was extremely negative, but I still naively hope for the best...
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on October 02, 2016, 12:02:47 AM
Quote from: kalvado on October 01, 2016, 11:59:09 PM
Does anyone know how to contact EZpass customer service, and if it became any better over the past decade?
My past experience was extremely negative, but I still naively hope for the best...

Log onto your account on the website and there will be a link under "ask us". Good luck, because I expect you will need it.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on October 02, 2016, 07:47:09 PM
What's wrong with their customer service and why would you need to get in touch with them?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on October 02, 2016, 08:24:19 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on October 02, 2016, 07:47:09 PM
What's wrong with their customer service and why would you need to get in touch with them?
Why: I got quite a bit of an overcharge because of their equipment malfunction. It is not amount which will send me to bankruptcy, but a insult significant enough for me to complain. 
Whats wrong: customer service don't care. Last time I had similar situation about 10 years ago,  it almost looked like customer service folks are rated by amount of money they didn't have to give out or could collect. After all, its not like shunpiking Thruway is a reasonable option, so customer is not going anywhere - why bother?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: route17fan on October 11, 2016, 08:31:29 PM
http://www.thruway.ny.gov/netdata/contractors/documents/d214448_tas16-31_plans-volume-1-of-1.pdf  -  look at page 59, the I-90 shields have "interchange" where "interstate" should be.  I think too small to notice, but do you think there is a possibility of "interchange" shields in the near future? (grins)
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: machias on October 11, 2016, 08:57:54 PM
Quote from: route17fan on October 11, 2016, 08:31:29 PM
http://www.thruway.ny.gov/netdata/contractors/documents/d214448_tas16-31_plans-volume-1-of-1.pdf  -  look at page 59, the I-90 shields have "interchange" where "interstate" should be.  I think too small to notice, but do you think there is a possibility of "interchange" shields in the near future? (grins)

I have to ask how it's even possible to get DOT CAD software (GuidSIGN, SignCAD, whatever) to make interstate shields with the word "Interchange" on them. How is this possible?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: route17fan on October 12, 2016, 07:54:11 AM
Quote from: upstatenyroads on October 11, 2016, 08:57:54 PM
Quote from: route17fan on October 11, 2016, 08:31:29 PM
http://www.thruway.ny.gov/netdata/contractors/documents/d214448_tas16-31_plans-volume-1-of-1.pdf  -  look at page 59, the I-90 shields have "interchange" where "interstate" should be.  I think too small to notice, but do you think there is a possibility of "interchange" shields in the near future? (grins)

I have to ask how it's even possible to get DOT CAD software (GuidSIGN, SignCAD, whatever) to make interstate shields with the word "Interchange" on them. How is this possible?

My thoughts as well.  :confused:
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: PHLBOS on October 12, 2016, 08:46:55 AM
Quote from: upstatenyroads on October 11, 2016, 08:57:54 PMI have to ask how it's even possible to get DOT CAD software (GuidSIGN, SignCAD, whatever) to make interstate shields with the word "Interchange" on them. How is this possible?
If the above is similar to how AutoCAD works and those shields are blocks.  All it takes to change something on that shield would be to use the "Block Editor" command and redefine the block when completed.

Why such a change was made is beyond me.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: machias on October 12, 2016, 05:41:28 PM
Saw a white on brown secondary destination sign on the Thruway for the first time.

Green Lakes State Park
EXIT 34A

All FHWA lettering and it appears the slightly modified Series D all caps lettering is back.

Up until now I can't recall a white on brown sign of this nature
On the Thruway.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on October 12, 2016, 06:06:23 PM
Quote from: upstatenyroads on October 12, 2016, 05:41:28 PM
Saw a white on brown secondary destination sign on the Thruway for the first time.

Green Lakes State Park
EXIT 34A

All FHWA lettering and it appears the slightly modified Series D all caps lettering is back.

Up until now I can't recall a white on brown sign of this nature
On the Thruway.

A white on brown was put up south of Exit 23 for Five Rivers around the same time as the Cuomo signs. Of course, I don't think there are any directional signs after the toll booths until you're on NY 443, so good luck getting there from the Thruway if you don't know where it is.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on October 17, 2016, 11:24:21 AM
I also found a white on brown yesterday at I-90 WB @ Broadway for "Reinstein Woods Nature Preserve."

I have lived in the area for over 20 years and had never heard of this place until yesterday.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: machias on October 17, 2016, 12:41:12 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on October 17, 2016, 11:24:21 AM
I also found a white on brown yesterday at I-90 WB @ Broadway for "Reinstein Woods Nature Preserve."

I have lived in the area for over 20 years and had never heard of this place until yesterday.

Spotted another white on brown sign that seems to be put up in tandem with the adjacent Cuomo signs.

Montezuma Natl
Wildlife Refuge
EXIT 41

What's odd about this sign, and the Green Lakes signs at Exit 34A, is that they come before the advance interchange "1 mile" sign for the same exit.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Alps on October 18, 2016, 12:12:47 PM
Quote from: upstatenyroads on October 17, 2016, 12:41:12 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on October 17, 2016, 11:24:21 AM
I also found a white on brown yesterday at I-90 WB @ Broadway for "Reinstein Woods Nature Preserve."

I have lived in the area for over 20 years and had never heard of this place until yesterday.

Spotted another white on brown sign that seems to be put up in tandem with the adjacent Cuomo signs.

Montezuma Natl
Wildlife Refuge
EXIT 41

What's odd about this sign, and the Green Lakes signs at Exit 34A, is that they come before the advance interchange "1 mile" sign for the same exit.
That's not odd. I frequently see blue service signs before the 1-mile advance.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on October 18, 2016, 01:03:11 PM
It's unusual for NY, but not unheard of.  Many other places do it as a matter of policy (Ontario, Virginia, etc.).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on October 18, 2016, 10:45:43 PM
Prior to the new round of NYSTA signs, it was very uncommon in New York to see blue/brown signs before the first advance. If there were a bunch of attraction signs, the advance would typically be pushed back to 1.5 miles.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on October 21, 2016, 12:22:40 PM
Quote from: kalvado on October 02, 2016, 08:24:19 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on October 02, 2016, 07:47:09 PM
What's wrong with their customer service and why would you need to get in touch with them?
Why: I got quite a bit of an overcharge because of their equipment malfunction. It is not amount which will send me to bankruptcy, but a insult significant enough for me to complain. 
Whats wrong: customer service don't care. Last time I had similar situation about 10 years ago,  it almost looked like customer service folks are rated by amount of money they didn't have to give out or could collect. After all, its not like shunpiking Thruway is a reasonable option, so customer is not going anywhere - why bother?
Just as a follow-up:
my issue was resolved. It took a little bit less than 3 week, but I got the credit for the overcharge. Much better than my previous experience!
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on October 30, 2016, 11:10:33 PM
From what I have noticed this weekend and heard from people, Cuomo signs now exist on the Thruway at the following locations. Unless indicated otherwise, signs are in both directions:

Mainline:

South of 16
North of 17 (NB only)
South of 21B (SB only)
South of 23
Between 25 and 25A
East of 31
West of 31
East of 34A
West of 39
Before 41
Between 44 and 45
West of 47
East of 49

I haven't been west of Buffalo, but I'm assuming they also exist just west of either 56 or 57 and EB at the PA border.

Berkshire Spur:
WB at Exit B3

Niagara Thruway:
SB at Exit 9

A few observations:
- They exist within a few miles of Exit 31 on either side, so you will pass 2 sets within 10 minutes if you don't exit/enter at 31
- Pairs are typically across from each other (or within a couple miles with no exit between), except for the 17/21B and 41 sets and those at borders
- 41 is the only place on the Thruway where signs are approaching one exit in both directions
- If you travel the length of the Thruway, you will pass a pair of signs no less than once an hour
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: route17fan on October 30, 2016, 11:42:09 PM
Quote from: cl94 on October 30, 2016, 11:10:33 PM
From what I have noticed this weekend and heard from people, Cuomo signs now exist on the Thruway at the following locations. Unless indicated otherwise, signs are in both directions:

Mainline:

South of 16
North of 17 (NB only)
South of 21B (SB only)
South of 23
Between 25 and 25A
East of 31
West of 31
East of 34A
West of 39
Before 41
Between 44 and 45
West of 47
East of 49

I haven't been west of Buffalo, but I'm assuming they also exist just west of either 56 or 57 and EB at the PA border.

Berkshire Spur:
WB at Exit B3

Niagara Thruway:
SB at Exit 9

A few observations:
- They exist within a few miles of Exit 31 on either side, so you will pass 2 sets within 10 minutes if you don't exit/enter at 31
- Pairs are typically across from each other (or within a couple miles with no exit between), except for the 17/21B and 41 sets and those at borders
- 41 is the only place on the Thruway where signs are approaching one exit in both directions
- If you travel the length of the Thruway, you will pass a pair of signs no less than once an hour

I have been on the Erie Section of the Thruway and they are indeed just at the state line.  :D
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: machias on October 31, 2016, 07:27:03 AM
The Lock 13 Living History Center on the Thruway westbound between exits 28 and 29 now has an extra set of signs leading up to the rest area.

TASTE NY (huge logo) Market 2 miles
Lock 13 Living History Center 1 mile
TASTE NY Market 1/2 mile
Lock 13 Living History Center (up arrow)
TASTE NY Market (up arrow)

The Taste NY signs are white on blue in standard FHWA lettering. I found it interesting that the word "Market" is in mixed case lettering.  The Taste NY logo on these signs in huge, probably 2 or 2 1/2 times bigger than the Taste NY logo on the Thruway Cuomo signs.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on October 31, 2016, 10:10:10 AM
Those went up a couple months ago. Region 8 installed more signs for the Taconic store around the same time.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on November 02, 2016, 07:26:22 PM
Looks like AET on the Thruway ticket system could come sooner than we thought.
http://www.clarencebee.com/news/2016-10-26/Local_News/Legislature_urges_open_road_tolling_across_the_sta.html
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on November 03, 2016, 08:50:45 AM
Quote from: vdeane on November 02, 2016, 07:26:22 PM
Looks like AET on the Thruway ticket system could come sooner than we thought.
http://www.clarencebee.com/news/2016-10-26/Local_News/Legislature_urges_open_road_tolling_across_the_sta.html
I am not holding my breath. County legislature sent a letter... so what?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on November 03, 2016, 09:28:30 AM
I'll ask a member of the board when I get a chance.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: machias on November 03, 2016, 10:58:24 AM
Quote from: vdeane on November 02, 2016, 07:26:22 PM
Looks like AET on the Thruway ticket system could come sooner than we thought.
http://www.clarencebee.com/news/2016-10-26/Local_News/Legislature_urges_open_road_tolling_across_the_sta.html

While I would love to see the Thruway modernize its facilities, I doubt that there'll be AET across the state in my lifetime. For some reason the toll takers (and ticket givers) have a great deal of clout.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Beeper1 on November 03, 2016, 05:50:41 PM
I think we'll see the downstate fixed-rate toll plazas (Yonkers, New Rochelle, and possibly the fixed rate Harriman tolls)  replaced with AET in the near future. The EZ-Pass usage rates in that area are the highest (over 80%) and with the TZB and the MTA facilities making the switch it would make the most sense.

The Grand Island Bridges would be the next simplest to switch, but the EZ-Pass usage there isn't as high.   
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on November 03, 2016, 09:27:02 PM
I'm surprised Spring Valley isn't in the works.  There's already ORT there, and passenger cars pay no toll, so it would just be a matter of changing the software and plopping down some jersey barriers.  It couldn't be easier!  I can't say I've ever seen more than one cash booth opened there or a line to get to the one open booth, so it's not like many people don't have E-ZPass there.  It would also fit in with the idea of converting everything south of the ticket system to AET.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Beeper1 on November 03, 2016, 11:20:05 PM
I wonder if they will just get rid of the Spring Valley toll altogether when the new TZB opens with 2-way tolls.  Would seem weird to hit up commercial traffic again after they already just paid to cross the bridge.  (No real commercial traffic entering from the Palisades or GSP).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on November 03, 2016, 11:33:18 PM
Quote from: Beeper1 on November 03, 2016, 11:20:05 PM
I wonder if they will just get rid of the Spring Valley toll altogether when the new TZB opens with 2-way tolls.  Would seem weird to hit up commercial traffic again after they already just paid to cross the bridge.  (No real commercial traffic entering from the Palisades or GSP).

Who said TZB was getting 2-way tolls?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Alps on November 04, 2016, 12:48:10 AM
Quote from: cl94 on November 03, 2016, 11:33:18 PM
Quote from: Beeper1 on November 03, 2016, 11:20:05 PM
I wonder if they will just get rid of the Spring Valley toll altogether when the new TZB opens with 2-way tolls.  Would seem weird to hit up commercial traffic again after they already just paid to cross the bridge.  (No real commercial traffic entering from the Palisades or GSP).

Who said TZB was getting 2-way tolls?
It's not going 2-way unless Port Authority bridges go 2-way. Just my opinion.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: PHLBOS on November 04, 2016, 09:42:28 AM
Quote from: Alps on November 04, 2016, 12:48:10 AM
Quote from: cl94 on November 03, 2016, 11:33:18 PM
Quote from: Beeper1 on November 03, 2016, 11:20:05 PM
I wonder if they will just get rid of the Spring Valley toll altogether when the new TZB opens with 2-way tolls.  Would seem weird to hit up commercial traffic again after they already just paid to cross the bridge.  (No real commercial traffic entering from the Palisades or GSP).

Who said TZB was getting 2-way tolls?
It's not going 2-way unless Port Authority bridges go 2-way. Just my opinion.
Agreed. 

If one is citing what recently happened in Massachusetts as a reason for such converting elsewhere; the reasons why the river crossings in Massachusetts recently converted (back) to 2-way tolls (due to AET) were due to only 3 crossings are involved and the two agencies (MassPort & MassDOT) involved coordinated the effort. only one agency (MassDOT) controls those facilities.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: roadman on November 04, 2016, 09:47:48 AM
Quote from: PHLBOS on November 04, 2016, 09:42:28 AM
Quote from: Alps on November 04, 2016, 12:48:10 AM
Quote from: cl94 on November 03, 2016, 11:33:18 PM
Quote from: Beeper1 on November 03, 2016, 11:20:05 PM
I wonder if they will just get rid of the Spring Valley toll altogether when the new TZB opens with 2-way tolls.  Would seem weird to hit up commercial traffic again after they already just paid to cross the bridge.  (No real commercial traffic entering from the Palisades or GSP).

Who said TZB was getting 2-way tolls?
It's not going 2-way unless Port Authority bridges go 2-way. Just my opinion.
Agreed. 

If one is citing what recently happened in Massachusetts as a reason for such converting elsewhere; the reasons why the river crossings in Massachusetts recently converted (back) to 2-way tolls (due to AET) were due to only 3 crossings are involved and the two agencies (MassPort & MassDOT) involved coordinated the effort.
Note that Massport no longer owns the Tobin Bridge, as it was transferred to MassDOT as part of the 2009 consolidation.  As such, no coordination between agencies was needed to implement two-way tolling.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: PHLBOS on November 04, 2016, 09:53:28 AM
Quote from: roadman on November 04, 2016, 09:47:48 AMNote that Massport no longer owns the Tobin Bridge, as it was transferred to MassDOT as part of the 2009 consolidation.  As such, no coordination between agencies was needed to implement two-way tolling.
Thanks for the update.  My previous post has since been corrected to reflect such.  :thumbsup:
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on November 04, 2016, 10:10:15 AM
Not only the PANYNJ crossings, but also the NYSBA ones. Local traffic will likely detour up to Bear Mountain or Newburgh-Beacon if there's a WB toll.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: empirestate on November 04, 2016, 04:32:52 PM
Quote from: cl94 on November 04, 2016, 10:10:15 AM
Not only the PANYNJ crossings, but also the NYSBA ones. Local traffic will likely detour up to Bear Mountain or Newburgh-Beacon if there's a WB toll.

You think? Keep in mind the WB toll would be half what the EB one currently is.


iPhone
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Beeper1 on November 04, 2016, 04:42:18 PM
I thought I had read somewhere that the NYSTA was going to go to 2-way when the new bridge opens, but Googling around I can't find anything.  I must have mis-remembered or had this confused with someplace else. 

Which is good, because it wouldn't make sense to make that change.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on November 04, 2016, 04:49:32 PM
Quote from: empirestate on November 04, 2016, 04:32:52 PM
Quote from: cl94 on November 04, 2016, 10:10:15 AM
Not only the PANYNJ crossings, but also the NYSBA ones. Local traffic will likely detour up to Bear Mountain or Newburgh-Beacon if there's a WB toll.

You think? Keep in mind the WB toll would be half what the EB one currently is.


iPhone

Bear Mountain Bridge is only 10 minutes slower than Tappan Zee as it is and, if one is going to Newburgh or north, Newburgh-Beacon is a wash. People will almost certainly take a free route if the time is comparable.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: PHLBOS on November 04, 2016, 04:54:34 PM
Quote from: Beeper1 on November 04, 2016, 04:42:18 PM
I thought I had read somewhere that the NYSTA was going to go to 2-way when the new bridge opens, but Googling around I can't find anything.  I must have mis-remembered or had this confused with someplace else. 

Which is good, because it wouldn't make sense to make that change.
At present, only Massachusetts has done such with its tolled water crossings in Boston following a full-blown AET conversion; and that was just this past week.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: empirestate on November 04, 2016, 05:55:34 PM
Quote from: cl94 on November 04, 2016, 04:49:32 PM
Quote from: empirestate on November 04, 2016, 04:32:52 PM
Quote from: cl94 on November 04, 2016, 10:10:15 AM
Not only the PANYNJ crossings, but also the NYSBA ones. Local traffic will likely detour up to Bear Mountain or Newburgh-Beacon if there's a WB toll.

You think? Keep in mind the WB toll would be half what the EB one currently is.


iPhone

Bear Mountain Bridge is only 10 minutes slower than Tappan Zee as it is and, if one is going to Newburgh or north, Newburgh-Beacon is a wash. People will almost certainly take a free route if the time is comparable.

Wait, from where? The BMB adds 35 miles and 40-45 minutes to a Thruway trip over the TZB. For points between the bridges, where the times are more comparable, I'd bet most locals already opt for the BMB, toll or no toll. I just can't imagine, for people already electing to use the Tappan Zee at $4.75 in one direction, that they'd switch to the Bear Mountain if it were a matter of paying $2.38 in each direction.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on November 04, 2016, 06:05:25 PM
From the Sprain to Exit 16. Google Maps puts it at a 10 minute difference with no traffic and, from personal experience, the difference is usually less than that.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: empirestate on November 05, 2016, 12:16:38 AM
Quote from: cl94 on November 04, 2016, 06:05:25 PM
From the Sprain to Exit 16. Google Maps puts it at a 10 minute difference with no traffic and, from personal experience, the difference is usually less than that.

Oh, you're talking long-haul. I was looking at a trip from Tarrytown to Nyack. Yeah, like I said, a lot of locals (and I know 'cos I'm one of them) would already choose the BMB over the TZB in a case like that. And it's really not to do with the toll; I just plain don't like driving the bridge or the Rockland stretch of the Thruway to begin with.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Alps on November 05, 2016, 04:03:00 PM
Quote from: cl94 on November 04, 2016, 10:10:15 AM
Not only the PANYNJ crossings, but also the NYSBA ones. Local traffic will likely detour up to Bear Mountain or Newburgh-Beacon if there's a WB toll.
Not likely. Yes, eastbound is much heavier at that crossing than westbound, but that's still relative. It all still fits easily in a single lane. It's too far out of the way for most.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: MikeCL on November 06, 2016, 12:50:13 AM
I know you guys posted about it already but like a month ago (lol I forgot to post here) So happy then FINALLY repainted the lines after exiting the New Rochelle toll booth it was always a mess of drivers not knowing what lane they were in.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: empirestate on November 06, 2016, 08:58:34 AM
Quote from: MikeCL on November 06, 2016, 12:50:13 AM
I know you guys posted about it already but like a month ago (lol I forgot to post here) So happy then FINALLY repainted the lines after exiting the New Rochelle toll booth it was always a mess of drivers not knowing what lane they were in.

And you think a little paint will change that? ;-)
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: MikeCL on November 06, 2016, 10:26:22 PM
Quote from: empirestate on November 06, 2016, 08:58:34 AM
Quote from: MikeCL on November 06, 2016, 12:50:13 AM
I know you guys posted about it already but like a month ago (lol I forgot to post here) So happy then FINALLY repainted the lines after exiting the New Rochelle toll booth it was always a mess of drivers not knowing what lane they were in.

And you think a little paint will change that? ;-)
lol not hardly
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on November 11, 2016, 11:13:23 PM
A few days ago, the Thruway revealed that they will begin engaging in the deplorable practice of transponder discrimination.  Non-NY tags will no longer be receiving the 5% discount.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: SidS1045 on November 12, 2016, 12:42:32 PM
Quote from: vdeane on November 11, 2016, 11:13:23 PM
A few days ago, the Thruway revealed that they will begin engaging in the deplorable practice of transponder discrimination.  Non-NY tags will no longer be receiving the 5% discount.

Retaliation for MassDOT doing the same thing on the new AET system?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on November 12, 2016, 01:52:24 PM
Quote from: SidS1045 on November 12, 2016, 12:42:32 PM
Quote from: vdeane on November 11, 2016, 11:13:23 PM
A few days ago, the Thruway revealed that they will begin engaging in the deplorable practice of transponder discrimination.  Non-NY tags will no longer be receiving the 5% discount.

Retaliation for MassDOT doing the same thing on the new AET system?
yes - except there are only that many people driving around Buffalo with MA tag.
I suspect a new trend of collecting a bit more tolls without increasing rates.
WOuld be interesting to find out the cost of interagency toll collection, though..
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on November 12, 2016, 03:55:04 PM
Quote from: SidS1045 on November 12, 2016, 12:42:32 PM
Quote from: vdeane on November 11, 2016, 11:13:23 PM
A few days ago, the Thruway revealed that they will begin engaging in the deplorable practice of transponder discrimination.  Non-NY tags will no longer be receiving the 5% discount.

Retaliation for MassDOT doing the same thing on the new AET system?
The articles reporting it certainly have been saying "take that, MA", but I agree with kalvado - I expect this is simply a way to raise more money without raising tolls.  While the Thruway will have fewer expenses with the Canal Corporation moving to the Power Authority, it is also losing the subsidies it had been getting from the state (and will once again be self-sufficient).  Additionally, Cuomo promised to keep tolls flat through 2020, so a toll increase is even more politically problematic than it ordinarily would be.

This will also have less of an impact on motorists with transponders from other states that it does elsewhere.  The Thruway's E-ZPass discount is only 5%, relatively low compared to other agencies.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on November 12, 2016, 07:08:51 PM
A lot of people in neighboring states have NY tags for the Thruway or MTA crossings already, so I don't picture the out of state percentage being too high.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: RobbieL2415 on November 12, 2016, 08:45:56 PM
I have the MTA transponder.  Mainly just because I get better deals on the MTA Manhattan crossings.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: storm2k on November 13, 2016, 08:45:11 PM
Quote from: vdeane on November 11, 2016, 11:13:23 PM
A few days ago, the Thruway revealed that they will begin engaging in the deplorable practice of transponder discrimination.  Non-NY tags will no longer be receiving the 5% discount.

Still better than NJ which killed discounts for EVERYONE on the Parkway and Turnpike.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: roadman on November 14, 2016, 09:38:18 AM
Quote from: SidS1045 on November 12, 2016, 12:42:32 PM
Quote from: vdeane on November 11, 2016, 11:13:23 PM
A few days ago, the Thruway revealed that they will begin engaging in the deplorable practice of transponder discrimination.  Non-NY tags will no longer be receiving the 5% discount.

Retaliation for MassDOT doing the same thing on the new AET system?
Prior to AET, out of state E-ZPass users in Massachusetts never got a discount, and were charged the regular cash rate.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on November 14, 2016, 10:06:30 AM
Quote from: roadman on November 14, 2016, 09:38:18 AM
Quote from: SidS1045 on November 12, 2016, 12:42:32 PM
Quote from: vdeane on November 11, 2016, 11:13:23 PM
A few days ago, the Thruway revealed that they will begin engaging in the deplorable practice of transponder discrimination.  Non-NY tags will no longer be receiving the 5% discount.

Retaliation for MassDOT doing the same thing on the new AET system?
Prior to AET, out of state E-ZPass users in Massachusetts never got a discount, and were charged the regular cash rate.

I've been saying this repeatedly on that thread, but nobody seems to believe me. The difference now is that the OOS E-ZPass rate is the same as it was before the transition.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on November 14, 2016, 01:23:30 PM
Quote from: storm2k on November 13, 2016, 08:45:11 PM
Quote from: vdeane on November 11, 2016, 11:13:23 PM
A few days ago, the Thruway revealed that they will begin engaging in the deplorable practice of transponder discrimination.  Non-NY tags will no longer be receiving the 5% discount.

Still better than NJ which killed discounts for EVERYONE on the Parkway and Turnpike.
Don't they have an off-peak discount for NJ tagholders?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on November 14, 2016, 02:47:02 PM
Quote from: vdeane on November 14, 2016, 01:23:30 PM
Quote from: storm2k on November 13, 2016, 08:45:11 PM
Quote from: vdeane on November 11, 2016, 11:13:23 PM
A few days ago, the Thruway revealed that they will begin engaging in the deplorable practice of transponder discrimination.  Non-NY tags will no longer be receiving the 5% discount.

Still better than NJ which killed discounts for EVERYONE on the Parkway and Turnpike.
Don't they have an off-peak discount for NJ tagholders?

Yes, they do, except off-peak is defined as weekday nights and between rush hours.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Brandon on November 14, 2016, 04:13:11 PM
Quote from: vdeane on November 11, 2016, 11:13:23 PM
A few days ago, the Thruway revealed that they will begin engaging in the deplorable practice of transponder discrimination.  Non-NY tags will no longer be receiving the 5% discount.

That's not much of a discount anyway.  Now, if NY tags had to pay full price when in Illinois...
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on November 14, 2016, 06:31:12 PM
Quote from: Brandon on November 14, 2016, 04:13:11 PM
Quote from: vdeane on November 11, 2016, 11:13:23 PM
A few days ago, the Thruway revealed that they will begin engaging in the deplorable practice of transponder discrimination.  Non-NY tags will no longer be receiving the 5% discount.

That's not much of a discount anyway.  Now, if NY tags had to pay full price when in Illinois...

Pennsylvania. Drop the mic.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: MASTERNC on November 14, 2016, 07:52:59 PM
Quote from: cl94 on November 14, 2016, 06:31:12 PM
Quote from: Brandon on November 14, 2016, 04:13:11 PM
Quote from: vdeane on November 11, 2016, 11:13:23 PM
A few days ago, the Thruway revealed that they will begin engaging in the deplorable practice of transponder discrimination.  Non-NY tags will no longer be receiving the 5% discount.

That's not much of a discount anyway.  Now, if NY tags had to pay full price when in Illinois...

Pennsylvania. Drop the mic.

That would be extremely punitive.  They'd have to come up with a third fare schedule like MA.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on November 15, 2016, 02:02:49 PM
Exit 23 is being reconstructed next year and retractable delineators are being installed to provide physical separation between the travel directions. A 20 MPH lane does NOT appear to be included in the reconstruction (to my dismay).

Plans: http://www.thruway.ny.gov/netdata/contractors/documents/d214520_taa16-39_plans-volume-1-of-1.pdf
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on November 15, 2016, 05:39:58 PM
Looks like they also aren't signing the exit number for exit 1 from the overhead sign still.  Can't they just sign it "Exit 1/US 9W/Albany" like NYSDOT does?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Snappyjack on November 15, 2016, 08:41:18 PM
A personal gripe of mine, I thought that the sign on 787 towards the Thruway should say 9W/Southern Blvd or something to that affect. Technically speaking, you are still in Albany at that point. It always seemed redundant to me.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on November 15, 2016, 11:25:44 PM
Quote from: Snappyjack on November 15, 2016, 08:41:18 PM
A personal gripe of mine, I thought that the sign on 787 towards the Thruway should say 9W/Southern Blvd or something to that affect. Technically speaking, you are still in Albany at that point. It always seemed redundant to me.

Hm.  Also makes me wonder if more people head south towards Glenmont rather than north into Albany via Delaware.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: machias on November 16, 2016, 08:58:00 AM
The Old Erie Canal Heritage Park on the Thruway is closed again. Anyone know why they keep closing it? All signs are covered and the ramps are barricaded. Didn't they just open it up again to great fanfare?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on November 16, 2016, 01:00:30 PM
That park is operated by a heritage society and is only open Thurs-Sun during tourist season.  I'm not sure when they plan to reopen next year, but the season ended October 30 this year.  The prior closure was to construct the museum building and renovate the historic buildings behind the lock (previously, a temporary path connected the parking lot to the lock; now, everyone must go through the building to get to the lock, and the path has been extended to some historic buildings, one of which can be toured).  Contrary to the road signs, restrooms are available, but the Thruway probably doesn't want people to rely on them given the limited hours of the park.

Access is also available from NY 31, and I suspect that's where most of the visitors come from based on the traffic when I checked it out a couple weeks ago.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on November 16, 2016, 01:05:14 PM
Quote from: vdeane on November 16, 2016, 01:00:30 PM
That park is operated by a heritage society and is only open Thurs-Sun during tourist season.  I'm not sure when they plan to reopen next year, but the season ended October 30 this year.  The prior closure was to construct the museum building and renovate the historic buildings behind the lock (previously, a temporary path connected the parking lot to the lock; now, everyone must go through the building to get to the lock, and the path has been extended to some historic buildings, one of which can be toured).  Contrary to the road signs, restrooms are available, but the Thruway probably doesn't want people to rely on them given the limited hours of the park.

Access is also available from NY 31, and I suspect that's where most of the visitors come from based on the traffic when I checked it out a couple weeks ago.
What I didn't understand, is why they really need more than singe contingency restroom, given that they are right past a service plaza.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on November 16, 2016, 01:37:56 PM
Probably for employees, people who came from NY 31 (and therefore aren't Thruway traffic), building codes, etc.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: machias on November 16, 2016, 04:04:21 PM
Quote from: vdeane on November 16, 2016, 01:00:30 PM
That park is operated by a heritage society and is only open Thurs-Sun during tourist season.  I'm not sure when they plan to reopen next year, but the season ended October 30 this year.  The prior closure was to construct the museum building and renovate the historic buildings behind the lock (previously, a temporary path connected the parking lot to the lock; now, everyone must go through the building to get to the lock, and the path has been extended to some historic buildings, one of which can be toured).  Contrary to the road signs, restrooms are available, but the Thruway probably doesn't want people to rely on them given the limited hours of the park.

Access is also available from NY 31, and I suspect that's where most of the visitors come from based on the traffic when I checked it out a couple weeks ago.

It can't be a plain old Parking Area off season?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on November 16, 2016, 05:37:30 PM
That's a good question.  There may have been concerns with people jumping the fence or something, but I suspect the Thruway maintenance forces just don't want to deal with it.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on December 02, 2016, 01:50:29 PM
Thruway at I-290 and NY-33, what's going on there? Tons of construction vehicles, dirt being moved, looks like...a widening to 5 thru lanes in each direction? Who knows.

Anyone know the contract #?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on December 02, 2016, 02:19:11 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on December 02, 2016, 01:50:29 PM
Thruway at I-290 and NY-33, what's going on there? Tons of construction vehicles, dirt being moved, looks like...a widening to 5 thru lanes in each direction? Who knows.

Anyone know the contract #?

They're adding an acceleration lane from WB NY 33 to EB I-90 and building noise walls. Lane from EB NY 33 will become exit-only for I-290. That's it.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on December 02, 2016, 02:45:24 PM
Quote from: cl94 on December 02, 2016, 02:19:11 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on December 02, 2016, 01:50:29 PM
Thruway at I-290 and NY-33, what's going on there? Tons of construction vehicles, dirt being moved, looks like...a widening to 5 thru lanes in each direction? Who knows.

Anyone know the contract #?

They're adding an acceleration lane from WB NY 33 to EB I-90 and building noise walls. Lane from EB NY 33 will become exit-only for I-290. That's it.

I figured it was something superficial
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: 02 Park Ave on February 13, 2017, 10:13:18 PM
At what milepost on the Thruway is the Rockland/Orange county line?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on February 13, 2017, 11:18:44 PM
Quote from: 02 Park Ave on February 13, 2017, 10:13:18 PM
At what milepost on the Thruway is the Rockland/Orange county line?

About 35.2
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: 02 Park Ave on February 14, 2017, 10:08:33 AM
cl94, thanks.  I wish the Thruway would put up county line signs.  They're putting up enough of the other signs.  Some practical signs would help the motorist.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on February 14, 2017, 10:59:20 AM
Quote from: 02 Park Ave on February 14, 2017, 10:08:33 AM
cl94, thanks.  I wish the Thruway would put up county line signs.  They're putting up enough of the other signs.  Some practical signs would help the motorist.

It's a rough estimate from Google Maps. As far as highly-visible landmarks, it's about 1 mile north of Seven Lakes Drive.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: SignBridge on February 14, 2017, 08:12:29 PM
According to my Thruway brochure, the county line runs right through the Sloatsburg Service Plaza which is at MP-33.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on February 14, 2017, 08:19:34 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on February 14, 2017, 08:12:29 PM
According to my Thruway brochure, the county line runs right through the Sloatsburg Service Plaza which is at MP-33.

Which is incorrect. USGS maps and the state GIS system place the C/L about 1 mile north of Seven Lakes Drive.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on March 09, 2017, 09:44:25 PM
From the new rest area files: they've already closed the new WB rest area near Canajoharie for rehab.

http://cbs6albany.com/news/you-paid-for-it/ypfi-taste-of-new-york-rest-area-rehab
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on May 07, 2017, 04:15:12 PM
Found a new FHWA font sign over Easter:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fnysroads.com%2Fimages%2Fgallery%2FNY%2Fi90%2F101_7213-s.JPG&hash=9c9fbdbbaff4eaa191fc03d5d7a139af915342c3)
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: route17fan on May 07, 2017, 05:15:35 PM
Quote from: vdeane on May 07, 2017, 04:15:12 PM
Found a new FHWA font sign over Easter:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fnysroads.com%2Fimages%2Fgallery%2FNY%2Fi90%2F101_7213-s.JPG&hash=9c9fbdbbaff4eaa191fc03d5d7a139af915342c3)

Yay!! It's not clearview!!
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: seicer on May 08, 2017, 12:36:56 PM
Is it reflective? And what is up with the exit tab off-center? I saw some new installs elsewhere (not on the NYT) where it was suspended and right-aligned. Is it a district only gig?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on May 08, 2017, 01:18:11 PM
NY usually aligns the tab to end before the rounded corner on the sign, but many newer installs are hit and miss.  As far as whether it's reflected, I've never seen it at night, but the color of the letters isn't giving me a great feeling.  They appear to be the same shade of gray as the Clearview signs were (though I've never seen it on a sunny day, either...).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on May 08, 2017, 01:32:47 PM
Quote from: vdeane on May 08, 2017, 01:18:11 PM
NY usually aligns the tab to end before the rounded corner on the sign, but many newer installs are hit and miss.  As far as whether it's reflected, I've never seen it at night, but the color of the letters isn't giving me a great feeling.  They appear to be the same shade of gray as the Clearview signs were (though I've never seen it on a sunny day, either...).

Can confirm it is the same bad sheeting.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: seicer on May 08, 2017, 03:02:41 PM
Isn't that some sort of FHWA violation? Or accessibility violation at a minimum? It's not even legible at night, much less the older-than-dirt signage along I-86 that's practically invisible at night.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: amroad17 on May 08, 2017, 03:15:35 PM
Also notice the NY 332 shield is not in Series F?  :nod:
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: machias on May 08, 2017, 05:41:39 PM
Quote from: amroad17 on May 08, 2017, 03:15:35 PM
Also notice the NY 332 shield is not in Series F?  :nod:

That's the new design as of the adoption of the 2009 MUTCD. New York standardized the appearance of the NYS Route Marker on guide panels so they are a much closer resemblance to what you find along roadways. They also standardized the route marker so that they are much closer in appearance, regardless of who installed it. Before then, state route markers could vary quite a bit in appearance depending on who or what company manufactured the sign.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: GenExpwy on May 09, 2017, 03:00:03 AM
Quote from: cl94 on May 08, 2017, 01:32:47 PM
Quote from: vdeane on May 08, 2017, 01:18:11 PM
NY usually aligns the tab to end before the rounded corner on the sign, but many newer installs are hit and miss.  As far as whether it's reflected, I've never seen it at night, but the color of the letters isn't giving me a great feeling.  They appear to be the same shade of gray as the Clearview signs were (though I've never seen it on a sunny day, either...).

Can confirm it is the same bad sheeting.

Does the Thruway make its BGS in-house, or buy them from a contractor?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: amroad17 on May 09, 2017, 09:12:28 PM
Quote from: upstatenyroads on May 08, 2017, 05:41:39 PM
Quote from: amroad17 on May 08, 2017, 03:15:35 PM
Also notice the NY 332 shield is not in Series F?  :nod:

That's the new design as of the adoption of the 2009 MUTCD. New York standardized the appearance of the NYS Route Marker on guide panels so they are a much closer resemblance to what you find along roadways. They also standardized the route marker so that they are much closer in appearance, regardless of who installed it. Before then, state route markers could vary quite a bit in appearance depending on who or what company manufactured the sign.
That is great to hear!
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: empirestate on May 10, 2017, 08:43:51 PM
Quote from: cpzilliacus on August 12, 2016, 12:38:26 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on August 12, 2016, 01:51:35 AM
If upstate still had a solid manufacturing base, it could function as the BARGE canal.

I once heard (might have been at TRB) that the New York State canal system does carry some freight traffic, though I do not know how much.

Apropos to this otherwise-mummified side thread:
http://www.democratandchronicle.com/story/news/2017/05/02/new-genesee-beer-tanks-coming-via-erie-canal/101229898/
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on May 11, 2017, 02:04:18 PM
Quote from: empirestate on May 10, 2017, 08:43:51 PM
Quote from: cpzilliacus on August 12, 2016, 12:38:26 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on August 12, 2016, 01:51:35 AM
If upstate still had a solid manufacturing base, it could function as the BARGE canal.

I once heard (might have been at TRB) that the New York State canal system does carry some freight traffic, though I do not know how much.

Apropos to this otherwise-mummified side thread:
http://www.democratandchronicle.com/story/news/2017/05/02/new-genesee-beer-tanks-coming-via-erie-canal/101229898/

Well that's quite interesting.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on May 11, 2017, 06:14:43 PM
Yeah, the Erie Canal will be seeing quite a bit of additional traffic in the coming years. GE will be using it to ship turbines from the Schenectady plant to the Port of Albany. Things are too big for standard trucks or railcars and it's a lot easier to just use a barge.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on May 11, 2017, 11:37:22 PM
Quote from: webny99 on May 11, 2017, 11:10:16 PM
Not sure if this has been discussed in this thread, but what are your thoughts on 6-laning the thruway, or at least portions of it?
It seems to be getting more and more impossible to travel at a consistent speed on weekends, and don't even mention holiday weekends  :banghead:
At least from Buffalo to I490 would be nice, but can't speak for downstate...

Nothing at this time that I know of. Issue is funding. Tappan Zee and a few upcoming major bridge projects (that have been needed for 15-20+ years) are taking everything and Cuomo won't let NYSTA raise tolls to generate funds. Widening is in the long-range plans, but that'll require stable funding and the failing bridges to be fixed.

And as far as out here, the Thruway could use an extra lane in each direction south/east of Exit 25. Backups are disturbingly common in Ulster County.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on May 12, 2017, 07:39:36 AM
Quote from: webny99 on May 11, 2017, 11:10:16 PM
Not sure if this has been discussed in this thread, but what are your thoughts on 6-laning the thruway, or at least portions of it?
It seems to be getting more and more impossible to travel at a consistent speed on weekends, and don't even mention holiday weekends  :banghead:
At least from Buffalo to I490 would be nice, but can't speak for downstate...
Well, 23 to 24 was widened a few years ago. was a long and expensive project - I believe old highway was removed down to dirt and rebuilt from there.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: seicer on May 12, 2017, 09:26:51 AM
Quote from: cl94 on May 11, 2017, 11:37:22 PM
Quote from: webny99 on May 11, 2017, 11:10:16 PM
Not sure if this has been discussed in this thread, but what are your thoughts on 6-laning the thruway, or at least portions of it?
It seems to be getting more and more impossible to travel at a consistent speed on weekends, and don't even mention holiday weekends  :banghead:
At least from Buffalo to I490 would be nice, but can't speak for downstate...

Nothing at this time that I know of. Issue is funding. Tappan Zee and a few upcoming major bridge projects (that have been needed for 15-20+ years) are taking everything and Cuomo won't let NYSTA raise tolls to generate funds. Widening is in the long-range plans, but that'll require stable funding and the failing bridges to be fixed.

And as far as out here, the Thruway could use an extra lane in each direction south/east of Exit 25. Backups are disturbingly common in Ulster County.

I had the (un)fortunate pleasure of driving the Thruway from Exit 42 west to Buffalo and it was just jam-packed with traffic. I could rarely get above 70 MPH as trucks frequently clogged the left lane, going no more than 60 to 65 MPH, causing very extensive queueing. The Rochester area provided a bit of relief when it became six lanes but still.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: froggie on May 12, 2017, 11:09:27 AM
QuoteI could rarely get above 70 MPH

By the book, you're not supposed to.

Most of the weekend issues I've noted on the Thruway are south of Kingston.  But you don't typically spend tens or hundreds of millions of dollars just for an occasional weekend problem....it's just not cost effective.  That said, that segment is amongst a few where I could potentially see widening at some point in the future, after NYSTA gets their finances back in order as cl94 alluded to.

I may do a more detailed analysis at some point (like I did for I-95 SC/NC/VA), but a quick look at traffic and truck volumes suggests these locations as future Thruway widening candidates:

- Exit 50 (I-290) to Exit 49
- Exit 44 to Exit 43
- Exit 23 (I-787) to Exit 21A (Berkshire Spur)
- Exit 19 (NY 28) to Exit 16 (Harriman)

Based strictly on traffic volumes, top priority should go to these segments, in order:  1)  50 to 49; 2) Harriman to Newburgh; 3) Berkshire Spur to I-787.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: seicer on May 12, 2017, 11:27:21 AM
This was a weekday. And if you think the 85th percentile is 65 MPH or less... then you lie in the bed of those revenue cops. There is no rationale why it can't be 75 MPH.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: froggie on May 12, 2017, 12:26:27 PM
Well aware of what 85th percentile is.  I also know that it isn't the end-all-be-all that some of you think it is.  Furthermore, my earlier comment was in reference to the fact that you legally shouldn't be going more than 65 MPH.  What we all think the limit should be (and yes, I'd agree with something above 65) is moot in a legal sense.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: seicer on May 12, 2017, 12:38:05 PM
Thanks, mom!

I'll be sure to stop doing all of the other illicit activities in my life, too.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Duke87 on May 12, 2017, 08:47:36 PM
With regards to widening, the segment from exits 11-14A might even be a higher candidate. It's six lanes currently, but could stand to be eight.

16-19 can be a bit crowded, but for the most part it remains at free flow speeds except sometimes on weekends. 11-14A has daily congestion during evening rush hour. And once the new Tappan Zee opens, that section will become the new choke point.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on May 12, 2017, 08:52:48 PM
Quote from: Duke87 on May 12, 2017, 08:47:36 PM
16-19 can be a bit crowded, but for the most part it remains at free flow speeds except sometimes on weekends.

Disagree. There's a major slowdown somewhere in Ulster County a few times a week. I've yet to figure out a pattern here, but I'm always getting stuck in something, usually near New Paltz. I'm fine with crowded, I'm not fine with traffic moving 50-55 if I could be doing the same speed for free.

11-14A definitely needs to be widened regardless. That's a nightmare.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cpzilliacus on June 13, 2017, 03:22:37 PM
Quote from: froggie on May 12, 2017, 11:09:27 AM
I may do a more detailed analysis at some point (like I did for I-95 SC/NC/VA), but a quick look at traffic and truck volumes suggests these locations as future Thruway widening candidates:

- Exit 50 (I-290) to Exit 49
- Exit 44 to Exit 43
- Exit 23 (I-787) to Exit 21A (Berkshire Spur)
- Exit 19 (NY 28) to Exit 16 (Harriman)

Based strictly on traffic volumes, top priority should go to these segments, in order:  1)  50 to 49; 2) Harriman to Newburgh; 3) Berkshire Spur to I-787.

I don't know what percentage of Thruway traffic is "turnpike doubles" (a tractor pulling two 48' (not 53') trailers), but while their drivers do tend to stay in the right lane, they also impact traffic perhaps more than "normal" tractor-trailer combinations.

Harriman to Newburgh seems to have a lot of recurring congestion, in part because the six-lane non-ticket system becomes the four-lane ticket system at Harriman, and queues southbound can be rather long in part because of cash toll collection (this may cease to be a problem if NYSTA decides to go all-AET in the future). 

But if the Thruway is going to keep collecting cash, then there's a need to make that barrier-separated lane for E-ZPass patrons much longer.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: RobbieL2415 on June 13, 2017, 04:28:45 PM
Quote from: cpzilliacus on June 13, 2017, 03:22:37 PM
Quote from: froggie on May 12, 2017, 11:09:27 AM
I may do a more detailed analysis at some point (like I did for I-95 SC/NC/VA), but a quick look at traffic and truck volumes suggests these locations as future Thruway widening candidates:

- Exit 50 (I-290) to Exit 49
- Exit 44 to Exit 43
- Exit 23 (I-787) to Exit 21A (Berkshire Spur)
- Exit 19 (NY 28) to Exit 16 (Harriman)

Based strictly on traffic volumes, top priority should go to these segments, in order:  1)  50 to 49; 2) Harriman to Newburgh; 3) Berkshire Spur to I-787.

I don't know what percentage of Thruway traffic is "turnpike doubles" (a tractor pulling two 48' (not 53') trailers), but while their drivers do tend to stay in the right lane, they also impact traffic perhaps more than "normal" tractor-trailer combinations.

Harriman to Newburgh seems to have a lot of recurring congestion, in part because the six-lane non-ticket system becomes the four-lane ticket system at Harriman, and queues southbound can be rather long in part because of cash toll collection (this may cease to be a problem if NYSTA decides to go all-AET in the future). 

But if the Thruway is going to keep collecting cash, then there's a need to make that barrier-separated lane for E-ZPass patrons much longer.
Or, if you're coming from east of the Hudson, use the Taconic and the Berkshire extension, the "back way", if you will.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on June 13, 2017, 07:42:30 PM
I read an article a few weeks ago that said the Thruway was having discussions about eventually converting everything, ticket system included, to AET, but there's nothing concrete except next year's conversion of the Harriman barrier.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on June 15, 2017, 01:11:58 PM
Newer, wider and taller gantries are being installed between NY-33 and I-290. The signs and hardware are located against the base of the I-290 to I-90W ramp.

Meanwhile the sound barrier is going up. That whole little stretch looks like the NJ Turnpike in the northern part of that state. I'd like to see that setup from Lackawanna to Williamsville.

With respect to widening, it's been like 15 years since the Thruway was widened from Exit 54 and Exit 53. I'd have to imagine they're planjing to do it between both toll barriers at some point in the future.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Flyer78 on June 16, 2017, 09:35:21 AM
http://www.syracuse.com/news/index.ssf/2017/06/effort_to_make_thruway_free_for_syracuse_commuters_gains_traction_with_ny_state.html#incart_river_home

Quote
DeFrancisco's bill creates a commuter pass for drivers traveling on exits between 34A and 39 on the New York State Thruway. The price of that pass would be only as much as the administrative costs to issue it. The Thruway Authority could, however, charge a higher fee if it demonstrates "significant" loss of revenue.

A review of publicly available data showed the bill could cost the Thruway Authority as much as $1.2 million per year -- a small fraction of the $658 million it collected in tolls in 2014, the most recent year for which data is available.

This is a slight variation on an idea I've heard most of my life (approaching 40 years). I guess this setup would let longer-distance travelers continue to pay a toll, and would seem to be a variation of the Thruway's Annual Permit plan.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on June 16, 2017, 11:45:51 AM
Quote from: Flyer78 on June 16, 2017, 09:35:21 AM
http://www.syracuse.com/news/index.ssf/2017/06/effort_to_make_thruway_free_for_syracuse_commuters_gains_traction_with_ny_state.html#incart_river_home

Quote
DeFrancisco's bill creates a commuter pass for drivers traveling on exits between 34A and 39 on the New York State Thruway. The price of that pass would be only as much as the administrative costs to issue it. The Thruway Authority could, however, charge a higher fee if it demonstrates "significant" loss of revenue.

A review of publicly available data showed the bill could cost the Thruway Authority as much as $1.2 million per year -- a small fraction of the $658 million it collected in tolls in 2014, the most recent year for which data is available.

This is a slight variation on an idea I've heard most of my life (approaching 40 years). I guess this setup would let longer-distance travelers continue to pay a toll, and would seem to be a variation of the Thruway's Annual Permit plan.
I don't know Syracuse specifics, but my impression was that wait at toll booth - at least slowing down - is a bigger issue than cost of commuter pass. Especially at highway to highway interchanges , and there are 3 within the area if i remember correctly..

Next step would be Thruway asking for a share of federal/NYSDOT dollars to compensate for the free rides, since those are supposed to be paid by gas tax anyway...
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on June 20, 2017, 01:22:21 AM
We know the South Grand Island bridges need to be replaced sometime in the future. Will they maintain the same 93-foot clearance that exists today, or will it likely be something closer to the surface?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: okc1 on June 20, 2017, 09:26:51 AM
Quote from: Buffaboy on June 20, 2017, 01:22:21 AM
We know the South Grand Island bridges need to be replaced sometime in the future. Will they maintain the same 93-foot clearance that exists today, or will it likely be something closer to the surface?
What clearance is under the Peace Bridge?  Shouldn't have to be more than that.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Alps on June 20, 2017, 07:16:30 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on June 20, 2017, 01:22:21 AM
We know the South Grand Island bridges need to be replaced sometime in the future. Will they maintain the same 93-foot clearance that exists today, or will it likely be something closer to the surface?
I wouldn't be surprised if those bridges can be maintained for another 50 years. They're not used THAT heavily, especially by large trucks, and there is an increasing trend of maintaining over replacing in the Northeast. (Goethals and Tappan Zee are used heavily, Bayonne is not, for example.)
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on June 20, 2017, 09:10:39 PM
Quote from: Alps on June 20, 2017, 07:16:30 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on June 20, 2017, 01:22:21 AM
We know the South Grand Island bridges need to be replaced sometime in the future. Will they maintain the same 93-foot clearance that exists today, or will it likely be something closer to the surface?
I wouldn't be surprised if those bridges can be maintained for another 50 years. They're not used THAT heavily, especially by large trucks, and there is an increasing trend of maintaining over replacing in the Northeast. (Goethals and Tappan Zee are used heavily, Bayonne is not, for example.)

I have heard rumblings that NYSTA wants to replace those. They're on the MPO's medium-range plan.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on June 20, 2017, 10:04:07 PM
Wasn't there a major rehab on a couple of the Grand Island Bridges, say, seven years ago or so?  I thought they did a band-aid so the replacement could be delayed.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on June 20, 2017, 10:28:55 PM
Quote from: Rothman on June 20, 2017, 10:04:07 PM
Wasn't there a major rehab on a couple of the Grand Island Bridges, say, seven years ago or so?  I thought they did a band-aid so the replacement could be delayed.

They've been redecking them for a few years. People in the know I have spoken with said that they'd still like to have a replacement within 15-20 years.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on June 21, 2017, 09:43:23 PM
What is it with the Thruway and redecking bridges immediately before replacing them?  It's as if they intentionally waste money.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on June 21, 2017, 10:26:00 PM
Quote from: vdeane on June 21, 2017, 09:43:23 PM
What is it with the Thruway and redecking bridges immediately before replacing them?  It's as if they intentionally waste money.

Prolong life until they can get funding. Let's just say that the Grand Island Bridge decks have/had some critical issues and they won't be able to replace them for another 10+ years.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on June 22, 2017, 01:01:12 AM
At the very least, the existing bridges could use wider shoulders.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: seicer on June 22, 2017, 06:53:51 AM
...how?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on June 22, 2017, 12:58:35 PM
Quote from: cl94 on June 21, 2017, 10:26:00 PM
Quote from: vdeane on June 21, 2017, 09:43:23 PM
What is it with the Thruway and redecking bridges immediately before replacing them?  It's as if they intentionally waste money.

Prolong life until they can get funding. Let's just say that the Grand Island Bridge decks have/had some critical issues and they won't be able to replace them for another 10+ years.
I would think that would still affect when they do the reconstruction, if the substructure could still be serviced for a few years, to maximize the investment in the deck.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: empirestate on July 07, 2017, 12:31:29 AM
OMG y'all, there is the cutest little mini I-90 reassurance marker posted on the Berkshire Spur, just east of Exit B2! Here's the Street View, but please tell me somebody's got a better photo of this?

https://goo.gl/maps/idGs8shsem12

And another thing: also on the Berkshire Spur, I noticed something I'd never seen before. Every so often, mounted on a delineator post below the reflector itself, there will be a thin, vertical green plate with some text on it. The text is also oriented vertically and is furthermore quite small, so I can't make out what it says. The placement is seemingly at random, though it does seem to happen mainly in locations where there's also a guide rail. Does anybody know what these are?

Again, here's a Street View (but alas, not at good enough resolution to make anything out): https://goo.gl/maps/P3UwTYe7L7U2
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: storm2k on July 07, 2017, 12:42:07 AM
Quote from: empirestate on July 07, 2017, 12:31:29 AM
OMG y'all, there is the cutest little mini I-90 reassurance marker posted on the Berkshire Spur, just east of Exit B2! Here's the Street View, but please tell me somebody's got a better photo of this?

https://goo.gl/maps/idGs8shsem12

And another thing: also on the Berkshire Spur, I noticed something I'd never seen before. Every so often, mounted on a delineator post below the reflector itself, there will be a thin, vertical green plate with some text on it. The text is also oriented vertically and is furthermore quite small, so I can't make out what it says. The placement is seemingly at random, though it does seem to happen mainly in locations where there's also a guide rail. Does anybody know what these are?

Again, here's a Street View (but alas, not at good enough resolution to make anything out): https://goo.gl/maps/P3UwTYe7L7U2

Reminds me of the random 95 shields at random points of the NJ Turnpike.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: ixnay on July 07, 2017, 06:05:30 AM
Quote from: storm2k on July 07, 2017, 12:42:07 AM
Quote from: empirestate on July 07, 2017, 12:31:29 AM
OMG y'all, there is the cutest little mini I-90 reassurance marker posted on the Berkshire Spur, just east of Exit B2! Here's the Street View, but please tell me somebody's got a better photo of this?

https://goo.gl/maps/idGs8shsem12

And another thing: also on the Berkshire Spur, I noticed something I'd never seen before. Every so often, mounted on a delineator post below the reflector itself, there will be a thin, vertical green plate with some text on it. The text is also oriented vertically and is furthermore quite small, so I can't make out what it says. The placement is seemingly at random, though it does seem to happen mainly in locations where there's also a guide rail. Does anybody know what these are?

Again, here's a Street View (but alas, not at good enough resolution to make anything out): https://goo.gl/maps/P3UwTYe7L7U2

Reminds me of the random 95 shields at random points of the NJ Turnpike.

Not to mention a tiny I-95 reassurance sign that stood about 40 years ago just north of the Kerlin St. exit in Chester, PA.

ixnay
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: machias on July 07, 2017, 05:46:40 PM
Quote from: empirestate on July 07, 2017, 12:31:29 AM
OMG y'all, there is the cutest little mini I-90 reassurance marker posted on the Berkshire Spur, just east of Exit B2! Here's the Street View, but please tell me somebody's got a better photo of this?

https://goo.gl/maps/idGs8shsem12

And another thing: also on the Berkshire Spur, I noticed something I'd never seen before. Every so often, mounted on a delineator post below the reflector itself, there will be a thin, vertical green plate with some text on it. The text is also oriented vertically and is furthermore quite small, so I can't make out what it says. The placement is seemingly at random, though it does seem to happen mainly in locations where there's also a guide rail. Does anybody know what these are?

Again, here's a Street View (but alas, not at good enough resolution to make anything out): https://goo.gl/maps/P3UwTYe7L7U2

I'm pretty sure the green inventory marker is marking a culvert.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on July 07, 2017, 06:18:23 PM
Yeah, that's what it look like.  NYSDOT uses those green culvert makers too.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: empirestate on July 07, 2017, 10:20:58 PM
Quote from: vdeane on July 07, 2017, 06:18:23 PM
Yeah, that's what it look like.  NYSDOT uses those green culvert makers too.

What's the text say?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on July 07, 2017, 10:23:45 PM
Quote from: empirestate on July 07, 2017, 10:20:58 PM
Quote from: vdeane on July 07, 2017, 06:18:23 PM
Yeah, that's what it look like.  NYSDOT uses those green culvert makers too.

What's the text say?

C followed by a long number. Just an identifier.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: empirestate on July 13, 2017, 12:29:23 PM
Quote from: cl94 on July 07, 2017, 10:23:45 PM
Quote from: empirestate on July 07, 2017, 10:20:58 PM
Quote from: vdeane on July 07, 2017, 06:18:23 PM
Yeah, that's what it look like.  NYSDOT uses those green culvert makers too.

What's the text say?

C followed by a long number. Just an identifier.

Well that explains why they're so hard to make out. :-) So basically equivalent to the BIN plates you find on bridges, I guess.


iPhone
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: machias on July 19, 2017, 08:32:49 PM
Drove through Buffalo on I-90 last night and can verify that the new FHWA overhead signs for Exits 50, 50 A and 51 N-S are using the same weird non-reflective tape that the Clearview signs were using. Still hard to read but the letters don't get as washed out as the Clearview letters did. The lettering looks almost grey.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on July 19, 2017, 09:10:21 PM
Quote from: empirestate on July 13, 2017, 12:29:23 PM
Quote from: cl94 on July 07, 2017, 10:23:45 PM
Quote from: empirestate on July 07, 2017, 10:20:58 PM
Quote from: vdeane on July 07, 2017, 06:18:23 PM
Yeah, that's what it look like.  NYSDOT uses those green culvert makers too.

What's the text say?

C followed by a long number. Just an identifier.

Well that explains why they're so hard to make out. :-) So basically equivalent to the BIN plates you find on bridges, I guess.


iPhone

Yes. As far as the NYSDOT ones, the first digit is always the region. Second appears to be the county code in most cases I can read while driving (but not consistent).

Quote from: upstatenyroads on July 19, 2017, 08:32:49 PM
Drove through Buffalo on I-90 last night and can verify that the new FHWA overhead signs for Exits 50, 50 A and 51 N-S are using the same weird non-reflective tape that the Clearview signs were using. Still hard to read but the letters don't get as washed out as the Clearview letters did. The lettering looks almost grey.

Yep. From what I heard, someone ordered the wrong type of sheeting and they're using it all up before ordering more because funding.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on July 20, 2017, 11:21:03 AM
Quote from: upstatenyroads on July 19, 2017, 08:32:49 PM
Drove through Buffalo on I-90 last night and can verify that the new FHWA overhead signs for Exits 50, 50 A and 51 N-S are using the same weird non-reflective tape that the Clearview signs were using. Still hard to read but the letters don't get as washed out as the Clearview letters did. The lettering looks almost grey.

I drove through in the afternoon. I gotta say, the sound barrier that was put up made that stretch if I-90 look somewhat like the New Jersey Turnpike, minus the widening.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on August 22, 2017, 10:04:40 AM
Cuomo announces cashless tolls coming to the Grand Island Bridges.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on August 22, 2017, 01:25:52 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on August 22, 2017, 10:04:40 AM
Cuomo announces cashless tolls coming to the Grand Island Bridges.
Especially interesting that Buffalo was mentioned as low on EZpass area before, hence AET problematic for all of Thruway. DO we expect western dash of Thruway to be next AET announcement?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on August 22, 2017, 08:27:38 PM
I'm surprised we haven't seen anything on the Yonkers, Spring Valley, and New Rochelle barriers yet.  I would have thought they would have gone first before Tonawanda and Niagara (the official barrier names for the Grand Island bridges), given that downstate is already getting used to AET.  Especially Spring Valley, which I would think would just be a software change.

The Erie ticket system wouldn't be hard to convert either.  The mainline - THAT will be interesting!
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on August 22, 2017, 09:09:29 PM
NYSTA is throwing a bone to Buffalo because there has been a ton of rumbling about "why are we paying for Tappan Zee?" Seriously. Doesn't matter that the rest of the state has paid for the relatively-large amount of work in the Buffalo area recently.

(Personal opinion emphasized)
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on August 22, 2017, 09:22:37 PM
Quote from: cl94 on August 22, 2017, 09:09:29 PM
NYSTA is throwing a bone to Buffalo because there has been a ton of rumbling about "why are we paying for Tappan Zee?" Seriously. Doesn't matter that the rest of the state has paid for the relatively-large amount of work in the Buffalo area recently.

(Personal opinion emphasized)
what is being a bone here? AET can be a nuisance - at least initially - and likely to repay for itself in cash pretty quick...
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Brandon on August 22, 2017, 09:38:36 PM
Quote from: vdeane on August 22, 2017, 08:27:38 PM
I'm surprised we haven't seen anything on the Yonkers, Spring Valley, and New Rochelle barriers yet.  I would have thought they would have gone first before Tonawanda and Niagara (the official barrier names for the Grand Island bridges), given that downstate is already getting used to AET.  Especially Spring Valley, which I would think would just be a software change.

The Erie ticket system wouldn't be hard to convert either.  The mainline - THAT will be interesting!

I'll be more impressed when they're finally forced to follow proper exit numbering with I-90 and I-87.  Distance-based exit numbering.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on August 22, 2017, 09:51:58 PM
Quote from: Brandon on August 22, 2017, 09:38:36 PM
Quote from: vdeane on August 22, 2017, 08:27:38 PM
I'm surprised we haven't seen anything on the Yonkers, Spring Valley, and New Rochelle barriers yet.  I would have thought they would have gone first before Tonawanda and Niagara (the official barrier names for the Grand Island bridges), given that downstate is already getting used to AET.  Especially Spring Valley, which I would think would just be a software change.

The Erie ticket system wouldn't be hard to convert either.  The mainline - THAT will be interesting!

I'll be more impressed when they're finally forced to follow proper exit numbering with I-90 and I-87.  Distance-based exit numbering.

:-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D

Please, NYSTA was one of the last American agencies to adopt green guide signs and they still haven't introduced high-speed tolling on a large scale. What makes you think they'll renumber the exits without being forced? I fully expect the Thruway to be the last sequentially-numbered road in America.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: thenetwork on August 22, 2017, 09:54:05 PM
I'll throw this out for curiosity:  If the Thruway powers that be go AET on the Grand Island Bridges (and perhaps the Erie Section), would they consider returning to inbound tolls through downtown Buffalo on I-190, seeing that the only thing they would need to do is to is install overhead gantries?  Or is there an agreement that once they took off the inbound tolls, it was guaranteed to be permanent?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on August 22, 2017, 09:59:10 PM
Quote from: thenetwork on August 22, 2017, 09:54:05 PM
I'll throw this out for curiosity:  If the Thruway powers that be go AET on the Grand Island Bridges (and perhaps the Erie Section), would they consider returning to inbound tolls through downtown Buffalo on I-190, seeing that the only thing they would need to do is to is install overhead gantries?  Or is there an agreement that once they took off the inbound tolls, it was guaranteed to be permanent?

I don't know if there's anything on paper saying it has to be permanent, but anyone who votes to reinstate tolls will be gone immediately. While NYSTA definitely needs the money, politics will prevent it and I don't know if tolls can even be reinstated as NYSDOT made major improvements to Exit 9, which is adjacent to a former barrier.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on August 23, 2017, 07:41:38 AM
Quote from: Brandon on August 22, 2017, 09:38:36 PM
Quote from: vdeane on August 22, 2017, 08:27:38 PM
I'm surprised we haven't seen anything on the Yonkers, Spring Valley, and New Rochelle barriers yet.  I would have thought they would have gone first before Tonawanda and Niagara (the official barrier names for the Grand Island bridges), given that downstate is already getting used to AET.  Especially Spring Valley, which I would think would just be a software change.

The Erie ticket system wouldn't be hard to convert either.  The mainline - THAT will be interesting!

I'll be more impressed when they're finally forced to follow proper exit numbering with I-90 and I-87.  Distance-based exit numbering.
They are holding on so that they can go directly to km based numbers as would be required some day...
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Brandon on August 23, 2017, 07:44:55 AM
Quote from: kalvado on August 23, 2017, 07:41:38 AM
Quote from: Brandon on August 22, 2017, 09:38:36 PM
Quote from: vdeane on August 22, 2017, 08:27:38 PM
I'm surprised we haven't seen anything on the Yonkers, Spring Valley, and New Rochelle barriers yet.  I would have thought they would have gone first before Tonawanda and Niagara (the official barrier names for the Grand Island bridges), given that downstate is already getting used to AET.  Especially Spring Valley, which I would think would just be a software change.

The Erie ticket system wouldn't be hard to convert either.  The mainline - THAT will be interesting!

I'll be more impressed when they're finally forced to follow proper exit numbering with I-90 and I-87.  Distance-based exit numbering.

They are holding on so that they can go directly to km based numbers as would be required some day...

There's no law, and nothing in the MUTCD that says they cannot have km-based numbers right now.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on August 23, 2017, 10:09:02 AM
Quote from: thenetwork on August 22, 2017, 09:54:05 PM
I'll throw this out for curiosity:  If the Thruway powers that be go AET on the Grand Island Bridges (and perhaps the Erie Section), would they consider returning to inbound tolls through downtown Buffalo on I-190, seeing that the only thing they would need to do is to is install overhead gantries?  Or is there an agreement that once they took off the inbound tolls, it was guaranteed to be permanent?

Personally, I wouldn't care if they put them back as I use it a lot. That stretch of road could use extra maintenance. If they made it 25¢ or something, would it really be a big deal? I don't know, but as cl94 said politics would prevent that from happening.

I agree that this is throwing a bone, because when you think about it, WNY/Erie Section doesn't need AET. All of those backups at the Williamsville barrier are the result of people not using EZPass as they should. If you look at the Yonkers barrier, they have 4 dedicated EZPass lanes because they know just about everyone that goes through them or commutes uses it. Part of the reason (I think) why that's not actually a thing here is that people are generally entering from the Exit 48/Transit Road a few miles away.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: roadman on August 23, 2017, 11:15:39 AM
Quote from: Brandon on August 23, 2017, 07:44:55 AM
There's no law, and nothing in the MUTCD that says they cannot have km-based numbers right now.

We'll see kilometer posts once Congress agrees to abolish the penny.  In other words, it'll never happen.  Especially since the government has tried twice before to force the metric system on the public, and has failed both times.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Brandon on August 23, 2017, 11:20:31 AM
Quote from: roadman on August 23, 2017, 11:15:39 AM
Quote from: Brandon on August 23, 2017, 07:44:55 AM
There's no law, and nothing in the MUTCD that says they cannot have km-based numbers right now.

We'll see kilometer posts once Congress agrees to abolish the penny.  In other words, it'll never happen.  Especially since the government has tried twice before to force the metric system on the public, and has failed both times.

I'd say that signing highways is up to the states themselves.  A perfect example is how I-19 was signed for many years.  The NYS Thruway could sign everything in SI tomorrow if they so chose.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on August 23, 2017, 11:38:27 AM
Quote from: roadman on August 23, 2017, 11:15:39 AM
We'll see kilometer posts once Congress agrees to abolish the penny.  In other words, it'll never happen.
Here is how this should be done: Trump has to propose a law which would keep penny forever. Once everyone is furious over such an idea, abolishing penny would become natural next step.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on August 23, 2017, 11:39:46 AM
Quote from: Brandon on August 23, 2017, 11:20:31 AM
Quote from: roadman on August 23, 2017, 11:15:39 AM
Quote from: Brandon on August 23, 2017, 07:44:55 AM
There's no law, and nothing in the MUTCD that says they cannot have km-based numbers right now.

We'll see kilometer posts once Congress agrees to abolish the penny.  In other words, it'll never happen.  Especially since the government has tried twice before to force the metric system on the public, and has failed both times.

I'd say that signing highways is up to the states themselves.  A perfect example is how I-19 was signed for many years.  The NYS Thruway could sign everything in SI tomorrow if they so chose.
And they choose to keep it sequential. Any problems with that?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Brandon on August 23, 2017, 11:49:21 AM
Quote from: kalvado on August 23, 2017, 11:38:27 AM
Quote from: roadman on August 23, 2017, 11:15:39 AM
We'll see kilometer posts once Congress agrees to abolish the penny.  In other words, it'll never happen.

Here is how this should be done: Trump has to propose a law which would keep penny forever. Once everyone is furious over such an idea, abolishing penny would become natural next step.

Good luck getting the Illinois delegation to go along with abolishing the penny.  That's a bipartisan issue for them.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: SignBridge on August 23, 2017, 08:32:55 PM
I agree with Roadman. I don't think we will ever see a complete conversion to metric in the USA. It would just be too big of a change for a lot of people. But, on the other hand I'm often wrong about stuff like this (LOL) and many professions already use metric measurements. That includes car manufacturers and the pharmaceutical/medical profession to name a few.........
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cpzilliacus on August 24, 2017, 12:17:16 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on August 23, 2017, 08:32:55 PM
I agree with Roadman. I don't think we will ever see a complete conversion to metric in the USA. It would just be too big of a change for a lot of people. But, on the other hand I'm often wrong about stuff like this (LOL) and many professions already use metric measurements. That includes car manufacturers and the pharmaceutical/medical profession to name a few.........

Metric is the rule at the medical doctors that see me.  And all or very nearly all medications that require a prescription are in metric units now.   No more fluid ounces and no more grains.

Hard liquor sold in the U.S. is in metric bottles now (750 ml being about the same as a "fifth" of a gallon).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: dgolub on August 24, 2017, 08:47:48 AM
Quote from: cpzilliacus on August 24, 2017, 12:17:16 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on August 23, 2017, 08:32:55 PM
I agree with Roadman. I don't think we will ever see a complete conversion to metric in the USA. It would just be too big of a change for a lot of people. But, on the other hand I'm often wrong about stuff like this (LOL) and many professions already use metric measurements. That includes car manufacturers and the pharmaceutical/medical profession to name a few.........

Metric is the rule at the medical doctors that see me.  And all or very nearly all medications that require a prescription are in metric units now.   No more fluid ounces and no more grains.

Hard liquor sold in the U.S. is in metric bottles now (750 ml being about the same as a "fifth" of a gallon).

Yeah, but those aren't things where the average person has to have an intuitive feel for them.  The dose of a medication is at most a number to memorize.  (And far too many people just take whatever they're handed by the pharmacist without even concerning themselves with whether or not it's the correct dose, which is a whole separate issue...)  I can things like that continuing to go metric.  I don't see us switching to kilometer or especially degrees Celsius any time soon.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: froggie on August 24, 2017, 10:12:27 PM
Quote from: dgolubI don't see us switching to kilometer or especially degrees Celsius any time soon.

We already have with the latter.  You'll never see it on TV or in the broadcast world, but professional meteorology and official weather observations** are done in Celsius instead of Fahrenheit.  Several meteorological calculation formulas, both academic and operational, are actually in Kelvin (same scale as Celsius but with zero equal to "absolute zero").


** For example, here's the latest (as of this post) weather observation from JFK:

KJFK 250151Z 35007KT 10SM SCT090 23/09 A2996 RMK AO2 SLP147 T02280094

Temperature is reported in both the 23/09 group and the T-group at the end.  As you can see, these temperatures are definitely not in Fahrenheit.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Alps on August 24, 2017, 10:39:54 PM
Quote from: froggie on August 24, 2017, 10:12:27 PM
Quote from: dgolubI don't see us switching to kilometer or especially degrees Celsius any time soon.

We already have with the latter.  You'll never see it on TV or in the broadcast world, but professional meteorology and official weather observations** are done in Celsius instead of Fahrenheit.  Several meteorological calculation formulas, both academic and operational, are actually in Kelvin (same scale as Celsius but with zero equal to "absolute zero").


** For example, here's the latest (as of this post) weather observation from JFK:

KJFK 250151Z 35007KT 10SM SCT090 23/09 A2996 RMK AO2 SLP147 T02280094

Temperature is reported in both the 23/09 group and the T-group at the end.  As you can see, these temperatures are definitely not in Fahrenheit.

I can't see anything at all. Maybe you would do well to explain it to us. Is the temperature 22.8, rounding up to 23?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on August 26, 2017, 09:13:55 PM
Well I've been living under a rock. I had no idea downstate toll barriers are all AET now! I thought that was just a Tappan Zee Bridge thing.

I wish NYSTA were more uniform with their AET approach instead of taking piecemeal measures to convert the system. I get that those downstate barriers get more traffic, but they can't leave upstate behind anymore.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on August 26, 2017, 09:31:09 PM
Quote from: Alps on August 24, 2017, 10:39:54 PM
Quote from: froggie on August 24, 2017, 10:12:27 PM
Quote from: dgolubI don't see us switching to kilometer or especially degrees Celsius any time soon.

We already have with the latter.  You'll never see it on TV or in the broadcast world, but professional meteorology and official weather observations** are done in Celsius instead of Fahrenheit.  Several meteorological calculation formulas, both academic and operational, are actually in Kelvin (same scale as Celsius but with zero equal to "absolute zero").


** For example, here's the latest (as of this post) weather observation from JFK:

KJFK 250151Z 35007KT 10SM SCT090 23/09 A2996 RMK AO2 SLP147 T02280094

Temperature is reported in both the 23/09 group and the T-group at the end.  As you can see, these temperatures are definitely not in Fahrenheit.

I can't see anything at all. Maybe you would do well to explain it to us. Is the temperature 22.8, rounding up to 23?
This is METAR (Meteorological Aerodrome Report) format. I believe it was adopted when each extra byte of data was a precious thing, and information is compressed as much as possible. You can use one of many online METAR decoders - for example http://heras-gilsanz.com/manuel/METAR-Decoder.html

Line up there parses into
Location: KJFK
Day of month: 25
Time: 01:51 UTC
Wind:  True direction = 350 degrees, Speed: 7 knots
Visibility: 10 Statute Miles
Clouds: Scattered , at 9000 feet above aerodrome level
Temperature: 23 degrees Celsius
Dewpoint: 09 degrees Celsius

QNH: 29.96 inHg


I find it quite funny that this example is actually a mixture of all possible unit. Wind speed is in knots (nautical miles per hour), while visibility is in statue miles. Altimeter setting is in in Hg, but SLP (sea level pressure) is in hPa - all within same line.
There are provisions for different units in format, e.g. in Hg or hPa for pressure, (kilo)meters or statue miles for visibility.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: froggie on August 26, 2017, 09:34:30 PM
Quote from: AlpsI can't see anything at all. Maybe you would do well to explain it to us. Is the temperature 22.8, rounding up to 23?

Kalvado covered observation format in general.  To answer this question specifically, the answer is yes.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: SignBridge on August 26, 2017, 09:52:44 PM
Why are we arguing about weather report formats on the NY Thruway forum?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Alps on August 26, 2017, 09:54:04 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on August 26, 2017, 09:13:55 PM
Well I've been living under a rock. I had no idea downstate toll barriers are all AET now! I thought that was just a Tappan Zee Bridge thing.

I wish NYSTA were more uniform with their AET approach instead of taking piecemeal measures to convert the system. I get that those downstate barriers get more traffic, but they can't leave upstate behind anymore.
Not quite. The Tap is AET. They're working on two other barrier tolls. The entire ticketed system is going to follow, but they want to get it right first by having test cases at the few locations outside the system. The other AET bridges are all MTA.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on August 26, 2017, 10:12:55 PM
Quote from: Alps on August 26, 2017, 09:54:04 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on August 26, 2017, 09:13:55 PM
Well I've been living under a rock. I had no idea downstate toll barriers are all AET now! I thought that was just a Tappan Zee Bridge thing.

I wish NYSTA were more uniform with their AET approach instead of taking piecemeal measures to convert the system. I get that those downstate barriers get more traffic, but they can't leave upstate behind anymore.
Not quite. The Tap is AET. They're working on two other barrier tolls. The entire ticketed system is going to follow, but they want to get it right first by having test cases at the few locations outside the system. The other AET bridges are all MTA.
How much testing is actually needed here, and what exactly is being tested? It's not that AET is something new, there are AET installations in NYC (MTA) and on MassPike. I assume Thruway is going to have basically same set of equipment installed in basically same way. Of course, mainline Thruway is a huge install which would take a lot of money - but not something fundamentally new for AET.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on August 26, 2017, 10:17:42 PM
Quote from: Alps on August 26, 2017, 09:54:04 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on August 26, 2017, 09:13:55 PM
Well I've been living under a rock. I had no idea downstate toll barriers are all AET now! I thought that was just a Tappan Zee Bridge thing.

I wish NYSTA were more uniform with their AET approach instead of taking piecemeal measures to convert the system. I get that those downstate barriers get more traffic, but they can't leave upstate behind anymore.
Not quite. The Tap is AET. They're working on two other barrier tolls. The entire ticketed system is going to follow, but they want to get it right first by having test cases at the few locations outside the system. The other AET bridges are all MTA.

All of the barrier tolls will come before any of the ticket system. Grand Island is coming after Yonkers and New Rochelle get up and running.

Quote from: kalvado on August 26, 2017, 10:12:55 PM
How much testing is actually needed here, and what exactly is being tested? It's not that AET is something new, there are AET installations in NYC (MTA) and on MassPike. I assume Thruway is going to have basically same set of equipment installed in basically same way. Of course, mainline Thruway is a huge install which would take a lot of money - but not something fundamentally new for AET.

The main ticket system would be the largest converted to AET to date if done now. And I don't think NYSTA has even determined how it's being done (barrier tolls like MA or keeping a virtual ticket system).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Alps on August 26, 2017, 10:26:37 PM
Quote from: cl94 on August 26, 2017, 10:17:42 PM
Quote from: Alps on August 26, 2017, 09:54:04 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on August 26, 2017, 09:13:55 PM
Well I've been living under a rock. I had no idea downstate toll barriers are all AET now! I thought that was just a Tappan Zee Bridge thing.

I wish NYSTA were more uniform with their AET approach instead of taking piecemeal measures to convert the system. I get that those downstate barriers get more traffic, but they can't leave upstate behind anymore.
Not quite. The Tap is AET. They're working on two other barrier tolls. The entire ticketed system is going to follow, but they want to get it right first by having test cases at the few locations outside the system. The other AET bridges are all MTA.

Quote from: kalvado on August 26, 2017, 10:12:55 PM
How much testing is actually needed here, and what exactly is being tested? It's not that AET is something new, there are AET installations in NYC (MTA) and on MassPike. I assume Thruway is going to have basically same set of equipment installed in basically same way. Of course, mainline Thruway is a huge install which would take a lot of money - but not something fundamentally new for AET.

The main ticket system would be the largest converted to AET to date if done now. And I don't think NYSTA has even determined how it's being done (barrier tolls like MA or keeping a virtual ticket system).
It's a matter of their internal procedures. Each agency is going to face its own challenges in converting its structure to AET. Challenges such as accounting for lost revenue (missed plate reads), going after photo tolls who don't pay, interstate agreements (which only used to matter for non-EZPass cars in the EZPass lanes), their own internal structure for dealing with new methods of tolling and the AET processors, external structure for dealing with the public, potential changes to fare structure... So yeah, they're going to want to test it small scale first, see what they've got right and what they need to adjust, before they roll it out to everyone.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on August 26, 2017, 10:27:03 PM
Quote from: cl94 on August 26, 2017, 10:17:42 PM
Quote from: kalvado on August 26, 2017, 10:12:55 PM
How much testing is actually needed here, and what exactly is being tested? It's not that AET is something new, there are AET installations in NYC (MTA) and on MassPike. I assume Thruway is going to have basically same set of equipment installed in basically same way. Of course, mainline Thruway is a huge install which would take a lot of money - but not something fundamentally new for AET.

The main ticket system would be the largest converted to AET to date if done now. And I don't think NYSTA has even determined how it's being done (barrier tolls like MA or keeping a virtual ticket system).
Small scale individual barrier tests aren't going to help with project scaling. As for billing method... I-88 is going to be a headache. But again, that is something agency need to decide, tests are not going to help much. If they want to collect read fail statistics.. Again, I suspect that can be obtained from other agencies or equipment vendor.
I can see why they don't want to invest into entire system with almost 100 billing locations while dealing with... khm... Cuomo The First bridge. But that has nothing to do with testing.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: SignBridge on August 26, 2017, 10:40:02 PM
I think Alps summed it up pretty well. Each agency will have to work out the glitches in their own way. Makes sense to do it one step at a time, and not rush into it large scale and then be overwhelmed by all the resulting glitches. Especially as there is no major urgency in getting this done.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on August 26, 2017, 10:43:24 PM
Quote from: kalvado on August 26, 2017, 10:27:03 PM
Quote from: cl94 on August 26, 2017, 10:17:42 PM
Quote from: kalvado on August 26, 2017, 10:12:55 PM
How much testing is actually needed here, and what exactly is being tested? It's not that AET is something new, there are AET installations in NYC (MTA) and on MassPike. I assume Thruway is going to have basically same set of equipment installed in basically same way. Of course, mainline Thruway is a huge install which would take a lot of money - but not something fundamentally new for AET.

The main ticket system would be the largest converted to AET to date if done now. And I don't think NYSTA has even determined how it's being done (barrier tolls like MA or keeping a virtual ticket system).
Small scale individual barrier tests aren't going to help with project scaling. As for billing method... I-88 is going to be a headache. But again, that is something agency need to decide, tests are not going to help much. If they want to collect read fail statistics.. Again, I suspect that can be obtained from other agencies or equipment vendor.
I can see why they don't want to invest into entire system with almost 100 billing locations while dealing with... khm... Cuomo The First bridge. But that has nothing to do with testing.
Stick a gantry inside exit 25A and make 24-25 free (or put gantries on the ramps to/from the east).

Keep in mind that products like this aren't like buying a Windows PC.  It's not just "buy mass produced AET system from WalMart, unbox, configure a few settings with a wizard, place by side of road".  It's more like "hire consultant, buy hardware, have consultant customize software specifically for your specifications, test to make sure it works, deploy across system".

Quote from: cl94 on August 26, 2017, 10:17:42 PM
Quote from: Alps on August 26, 2017, 09:54:04 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on August 26, 2017, 09:13:55 PM
Well I've been living under a rock. I had no idea downstate toll barriers are all AET now! I thought that was just a Tappan Zee Bridge thing.

I wish NYSTA were more uniform with their AET approach instead of taking piecemeal measures to convert the system. I get that those downstate barriers get more traffic, but they can't leave upstate behind anymore.
Not quite. The Tap is AET. They're working on two other barrier tolls. The entire ticketed system is going to follow, but they want to get it right first by having test cases at the few locations outside the system. The other AET bridges are all MTA.

All of the barrier tolls will come before any of the ticket system. Grand Island is coming after Yonkers and New Rochelle get up and running.

Quote from: kalvado on August 26, 2017, 10:12:55 PM
How much testing is actually needed here, and what exactly is being tested? It's not that AET is something new, there are AET installations in NYC (MTA) and on MassPike. I assume Thruway is going to have basically same set of equipment installed in basically same way. Of course, mainline Thruway is a huge install which would take a lot of money - but not something fundamentally new for AET.

The main ticket system would be the largest converted to AET to date if done now. And I don't think NYSTA has even determined how it's being done (barrier tolls like MA or keeping a virtual ticket system).
I think one of the barriers is Harriman, which is converting to AET as part of the exit 131 project.  I would suspect Yonkers is the other, since it was mentioned before New Rochelle as a candidate for conversion.

From what I've read here, the MassPike already bills as a virtual ticket system even though the hardware is set up as barriers.  I would consider that to be a virtual ticket system, and a system similar to 407's to still be a "true" ticket system, even if there is no physical ticket.  I suppose it's a question of what's considered more important - what citizens see when they're billed, or how the far schedule is programmed into the backend (since true ticket systems have individual fare schedules for each exit, it's possible to have two separate totals for the same trip depending on whether you get off and back on again at an intermediate exit or just drive straight through, which is impossible in a barrier system).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on August 26, 2017, 10:50:09 PM
No urgency and they want to do it at a speed where tolltakers are eliminated through retirement instead of massive layoffs or reassignments. Do it slowly and people can be moved to nearby barriers or office jobs because people aren't hired to replace those that retired and, by the time it's fully AET, there are few enough tolltakers that people can be thrown in offices or service areas. Do it all at once and you have a couple hundred people without a job.

MassPike is billed as a ticket system, but set up as a barrier system. No word as to whether NYSTA will place gantries at exits or between them (or a combination thereof). I fully expect 23-26 and 34A-39 to become free once AET goes into operation because politics, plus 49/56 added to the Buffalo free zone. But we still have quite a bit of time until the main ticket system gets converted and NYSTA is still performing interim toll plaza upgrades.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on August 27, 2017, 07:47:34 PM
There was a bill to make 34A-39 free, but only for Syracuse area residents who purchase a commuter plan.  49-50 would have been added to the free zone if the Williamsville ORT/barrier move project happened.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on August 27, 2017, 08:37:54 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on August 26, 2017, 10:40:02 PM
I think Alps summed it up pretty well. Each agency will have to work out the glitches in their own way. Makes sense to do it one step at a time, and not rush into it large scale and then be overwhelmed by all the resulting glitches. Especially as there is no major urgency in getting this done.
A good point about billing practices. However - once one barrier is in full effect - those procedures should be worked out reasonably quickly I would think.
And as it was already mentioned, mainline Thruway has an entirely different set on problems from billing algorithms to HR issues with hundreds of toll collectors. And barriers are not really providing help with resolving those issues.
All I am really trying to do here is to make sense out of one single word...
Quote from: Alps on August 26, 2017, 09:54:04 PM
Not quite. The Tap is AET. They're working on two other barrier tolls. The entire ticketed system is going to follow, but they want to get it right first by having test cases at the few locations outside the system.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on August 27, 2017, 08:52:56 PM
No, they're still test cases because each state and region has its own issues. A big issue NYSTA has (that will be put to the test once the Grand Island barriers go up) is the large number of users from around the country and the world in the Buffalo area. Can they enforce bills sent to Canadian users? And what about people in rental cars; how will the state tourism industry react to the massive AET fees the rental companies charge?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on August 28, 2017, 11:36:30 AM
Quote from: cl94 on August 27, 2017, 08:52:56 PM
No, they're still test cases because each state and region has its own issues. A big issue NYSTA has (that will be put to the test once the Grand Island barriers go up) is the large number of users from around the country and the world in the Buffalo area. Can they enforce bills sent to Canadian users? And what about people in rental cars; how will the state tourism industry react to the massive AET fees the rental companies charge?
On one hand this negates earlier "throw them a bone" comment; on the other hand, Florida can tell how tolls affect tourist flow. And I assume even MA turnpike has enough of ON and QC registered vehicles to talk about Canada billing. I expect even Tappan Zee has enough Canadian plates for any test...
Other license plates... I wouldn't worry too much, but consulting with TX authorities regarding Mexican plates may be a better idea.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on August 28, 2017, 03:14:58 PM
Quote from: cl94 on August 27, 2017, 08:52:56 PM
No, they're still test cases because each state and region has its own issues. A big issue NYSTA has (that will be put to the test once the Grand Island barriers go up) is the large number of users from around the country and the world in the Buffalo area. Can they enforce bills sent to Canadian users? And what about people in rental cars; how will the state tourism industry react to the massive AET fees the rental companies charge?

I wonder why they aren't keeping some of the booths while converting the rest of the lanes to AET, as is the case in Spring Valley.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: RobbieL2415 on September 04, 2017, 06:09:51 PM
KM MPs and distances for exits should be OK. The Federal government did legally standardize the Metric system in the 70s I believe.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: seicer on September 05, 2017, 09:27:32 AM
The Boston Globe has some information about those out of country plates (https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2016/11/05/rental-cars-and-international-plates-frequently-asked-questions-about-all-electronic-tolling/JkTK4MTM0WwsnELnFvRTYI/story.html).

"No, says Jacquelyn Goddard, spokeswoman for the state's transportation department. The state will be tracking Canadian license plates, and the bill will arrive in the mail.

Of course, people from out of state or out of country can also get an E-ZPass Massachusetts transponder for their cars. There's no residency requirement, so anyone can get the corresponding discounts."
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on September 05, 2017, 02:22:31 PM
Quote from: cl94 on August 27, 2017, 08:52:56 PM
No, they're still test cases because each state and region has its own issues. A big issue NYSTA has (that will be put to the test once the Grand Island barriers go up) is the large number of users from around the country and the world in the Buffalo area. Can they enforce bills sent to Canadian users? And what about people in rental cars; how will the state tourism industry react to the massive AET fees the rental companies charge?
And whatever that worth - https://www.tollsbymailny.com , official toll collection web site for NYS, has no option for plate from countries other than US and Canada. Looks like Canada somehow agreed with US toll billing practices, and for NYS you can safely disregard Mexico as a source of traffic...
I wonder if those by-plate billing systems are going to merge at some point. Definitely easier than full tag compatibility...
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: SectorZ on September 05, 2017, 04:57:46 PM
Quote from: seicer on September 05, 2017, 09:27:32 AM
The Boston Globe has some information about those out of country plates (https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2016/11/05/rental-cars-and-international-plates-frequently-asked-questions-about-all-electronic-tolling/JkTK4MTM0WwsnELnFvRTYI/story.html).

"No, says Jacquelyn Goddard, spokeswoman for the state's transportation department. The state will be tracking Canadian license plates, and the bill will arrive in the mail.

Of course, people from out of state or out of country can also get an E-ZPass Massachusetts transponder for their cars. There's no residency requirement, so anyone can get the corresponding discounts."

It's a little disturbing when countries can't cooperate on so many important things, but sharing who a car is registered to for the purpose of collecting $3 they can.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on September 05, 2017, 05:14:12 PM
Quote from: SectorZ on September 05, 2017, 04:57:46 PM
Quote from: seicer on September 05, 2017, 09:27:32 AM
The Boston Globe has some information about those out of country plates (https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2016/11/05/rental-cars-and-international-plates-frequently-asked-questions-about-all-electronic-tolling/JkTK4MTM0WwsnELnFvRTYI/story.html).

"No, says Jacquelyn Goddard, spokeswoman for the state's transportation department. The state will be tracking Canadian license plates, and the bill will arrive in the mail.

Of course, people from out of state or out of country can also get an E-ZPass Massachusetts transponder for their cars. There's no residency requirement, so anyone can get the corresponding discounts."

It's a little disturbing when countries can't cooperate on so many important things, but sharing who a car is registered to for the purpose of collecting $3 they can.
a. it is US and Canada only, quite good neighbors.
b. probably state-level reciprocity is involved. as far as I remember, NYS would know about a ticket in ON or QC, but not in FL or CA. Can be NY and MA negotiating with Canadian provinces,as federal government has not much to do with toll roads.
c. I wouldn't be surprised (or better say "I hope"), if some proxy entry exists across the border, and actual personal information not shared. 
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: machias on September 05, 2017, 11:26:56 PM
Quote from: ParrDa on September 05, 2017, 08:13:08 PM
Did anyone else have the amazing privilege of traveling on the thruway over labor day weekend?  :spin:

Drove it on Friday from MP 496 to MP 148 and it was amateur hour the entire way. Driving home we opted for I-88 to I-86 and picked up I-90 near Erie, Pa. This was a much better experience.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: seicer on September 06, 2017, 08:04:08 AM
I opted for the Thruway coming from the Mass Pike to I-88 in the middle of the night Monday. No traffic, no cops, no problem (for once).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: 02 Park Ave on September 06, 2017, 08:33:31 AM
I drove up to Newburgh from South Jersey on Sunday.  Hit heavy drizzle right at the state line leaving Mahwah.  Only traffic problem for me on the Thruway was a New Yorker doing 60 in the left lane.  It took a while to get around him.  Traffic going south from Newburgh to Harriman was very heavy.  This was around 1:30 pm.

Returning on Monday, I took 9W and the PIP to northbound Thruway to GSP.  No problems but saw that the southbound Thruway was just about at a standstill.  This was around 4:30 pm.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on September 06, 2017, 01:07:21 PM
I drove from I-87 to I-490 Saturday and had no problems.  Relatively light traffic, hardly even had to turn off the cruise control during the trip.  Came back Monday and traffic was heavy but it wasn't as bad as last year (I may have left an hour earlier, though).

Overall I'm getting tired on having to make that 225 mile long trip (each way) several times per year.  Oddly enough, the part from Syracuse to Albany, despite being more scenic and less traffic, is the part that annoys me.  Probably because it's the part that tells me I live so far away from home.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on September 06, 2017, 02:11:30 PM
I did 24-49 Friday afternoon and it was hell. Bumper to bumper traffic west of Herkimer made me think I was on I-81 in Virginia.

I took US 6/11 and I-88 back east on Monday to avoid the mess (would have taken I-86/88, but wanted new miles and a chance to check out a few rail viaducts). Do 6 was much better than it usually is.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Jim on September 06, 2017, 05:47:41 PM
Quote from: ParrDa on September 06, 2017, 05:44:08 PM
What's wrong with I81 in Virginia? Both times I've been on it there was no major traffic issues :confused:

It wasn't my comment (this time) but I'll answer with my experiences.  There are usually a ton of trucks and with all the hills, they go 85 down one hill then 45 up the next and take both lanes to do it.  That and the I-81 corridor seems much more prone to hazardous weather than many other places (fog, snow squalls, to name some I've encountered).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on September 06, 2017, 05:57:10 PM
Quote from: Jim on September 06, 2017, 05:47:41 PM
Quote from: ParrDa on September 06, 2017, 05:44:08 PM
What's wrong with I81 in Virginia? Both times I've been on it there was no major traffic issues :confused:

It wasn't my comment (this time) but I'll answer with my experiences.  There are usually a ton of trucks and with all the hills, they go 85 down one hill then 45 up the next and take both lanes to do it.  That and the I-81 corridor seems much more prone to hazardous weather than many other places (fog, snow squalls, to name some I've encountered).

Basically, yes. I-81 is a frequent subject of complaints on this forum for that reason.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Snappyjack on September 07, 2017, 09:47:35 PM
I was on the Thruway from 24 to PA on Friday between 12:30-5:30 and had no problems until I got into rush hour traffic in Buffalo...slowed right down past 290 all the way to just past 190, then slow again around 219. Past there, smooth sailing.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: roadman on September 08, 2017, 07:12:43 AM
Quote from: ParrDa on September 05, 2017, 08:13:08 PM
Did anyone else have the amazing privilege of traveling on the thruway over labor day weekend?  :spin:
Drove it on late Sunday morning between the Saw Mill River Parkway and the I-87/I-287 split in Suffern.  Traffic was heavy but not terribly slow - save for a couple of large pickup trucks with even larger camper trailers that were hogging the left lane.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: PHLBOS on September 08, 2017, 08:33:45 AM
Quote from: ParrDa on September 05, 2017, 08:13:08 PM
Did anyone else have the amazing privilege of traveling on the thruway over labor day weekend?
I did... twice.  Friday from the GSP to the I-87/287 split in Tarrytown and Sunday the opposite (& rode the new bridge span for the 2nd time since it opened).  I encountered no real traffic issues nor slowdowns.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: SignBridge on September 08, 2017, 08:25:57 PM
I didn't drive it but I listened to the Thruway Authority's New York Division radio frequency all weekend. That's everything south of New Paltz. They were very busy with disabled vehicles, accidents, a couple of State Police pursuits and at least one wrong-way driver. The Thruway's dispatchers earned their pay this week for sure.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: route17fan on October 24, 2017, 07:13:28 PM
Here are plans to convert the Harriman toll plaza to AET: D214537 http://www.thruway.ny.gov/business/contractors/documents/index.shtml
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on October 24, 2017, 08:02:03 PM
Highlights from the conversion:

- EB-NB traffic no longer gets tolled twice. I assume they'll be tacking the $1.25 onto the ticket picked up at the mainline barrier
- 2-lane plaza being constructed for SB-WB traffic east of the current plaza
- Provisions are explicitly provided for future conversion of the ticket system to AET. However, with NYSTA constructing a new plaza, such a conversion is likely still a while away.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Alps on October 25, 2017, 12:22:51 AM
Also worth noting with the conversion of 16 that the NY 17/32 interchange is also going into Design-Build at the same time. A whole lot of construction going on for a whole different functionality when it's all done.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: storm2k on October 25, 2017, 10:39:01 AM
Quote from: route17fan on October 24, 2017, 07:13:28 PM
Here are plans to convert the Harriman toll plaza to AET: D214537 http://www.thruway.ny.gov/business/contractors/documents/index.shtml


It's actually 214587. I couldn't find the other number on there and it threw me off for a second.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on October 25, 2017, 11:06:47 AM
Quote from: Alps on October 25, 2017, 12:22:51 AM
Also worth noting with the conversion of 16 that the NY 17/32 interchange is also going into Design-Build at the same time. A whole lot of construction going on for a whole different functionality when it's all done.

They're finally moving forward with that? About flipping time. Only been talking about it for 20 years. They still using the same design from a while back that was posted on the NYSDOT website forever?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: storm2k on October 25, 2017, 02:03:39 PM
Interesting to me that the Thruway Authority is keeping this sign (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.3148504,-74.1300506,3a,27.4y,309.34h,94.67t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sCNtjpqdlwpnGNCzLlv7fAA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656), which is like the poster child for information overload.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: SignBridge on October 25, 2017, 04:56:44 PM
You got that right storm2k!
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on October 25, 2017, 05:14:18 PM
Not only are they keeping it, they're replacing in kind. Problem is that Exit 131 really needs a couple auxiliary signs that there isn't room for. That sign SHOULD say something like the following:

EAST  SOUTH
US 6   NY 17   NY 32
Bear Mtn
Harriman
Central Valley

West Point and Woodbury Outlets would be on a supplemental, 3 control cities because each route goes in a different direction. Problem is that they'd have to fit multiple auxiliary signs in 1/4 mile.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on October 25, 2017, 09:01:34 PM
With the toll barrier removed, I would think there would be room for a supplemental sign.  Though I'd put Bear Mountain on the supplemental sign (as parks usually are).  And actually use an exit tab.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on October 25, 2017, 09:07:43 PM
Quote from: vdeane on October 25, 2017, 09:01:34 PM
Though I'd put Bear Mountain on the supplemental sign (as parks usually are).

Bear Mountain is the control city for US 6 (and Palisades Parkway, US 9W, and US 202, for that matter), so better to keep things consistent. Also refers to the bridge.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on October 25, 2017, 09:25:10 PM
Since US 6 does not actually intersect exit 131 (it's "TO US 6 East"), I think we can let it slide.  Though in any case, signs with three control cities aren't unheard of.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: jp the roadgeek on October 25, 2017, 10:14:29 PM
Quote from: cl94 on October 25, 2017, 09:07:43 PM
Quote from: vdeane on October 25, 2017, 09:01:34 PM
Though I'd put Bear Mountain on the supplemental sign (as parks usually are).

Bear Mountain is the control city for US 6 (and Palisades Parkway, US 9W, and US 202, for that matter), so better to keep things consistent. Also refers to the bridge.

For Exit 131 WB, my idea was to split it into Exit 131 B-A (Future Exit 380 B-A). Sign would look like this:


                    SOUTH     NORTH                EAST
                       17            32        TO          6


                              Harriman
                              Woodbury

       ---------------------------------------------------
                       Premium Outlets Blvd.   


Bear Mountain SP, West Point, and Central Valley would be on supplemental signage.

For Exit 130 (Future Exit 380A), I would use West Point and Peekskill for control cities on US 6 East as more people are familiar with those places (Bear Mountain SP on supplemental signage).  I know US 6 doesn't go directly to West Point (NY 293 does), but a lot of traffic exiting there is bound for West Point.  EB Exit 131 (Future Exit 380B) would just be NY 17  South/NY 32 North/Harriman-Woodbury with supplemental signage for Central Valley and the outlet center.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: storm2k on October 26, 2017, 04:28:41 PM
Here's my thought. Why not put the whole US 6 EB thing on a supplemental sign, since it doesn't actually intersect here?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: route17fan on October 26, 2017, 07:18:35 PM
Quote from: storm2k on October 25, 2017, 10:39:01 AM
Quote from: route17fan on October 24, 2017, 07:13:28 PM
Here are plans to convert the Harriman toll plaza to AET: D214537 http://www.thruway.ny.gov/business/contractors/documents/index.shtml


It's actually 214587. I couldn't find the other number on there and it threw me off for a second.

My bad. Sorry for my typo
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: roadman65 on October 27, 2017, 09:16:07 PM
It really should be for NY 17 SB and NY 32 NB and their control cities respectively.   US 6 for West Point and Bear Mtn.  should be supplemental in this case.  The outlets should be supplemental for sure as its not even a point or municipality.

That sign is worse than what GA once had for a guide sign in Adele, GA on I-75 or the former NJ Turnpike sign at Exit 8A with four control cities on both counts.

Obviously a NYSTA installation hence Middletown over Binghamton on the pull through.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: storm2k on October 31, 2017, 01:10:21 PM
Quote from: webny99 on October 31, 2017, 12:25:22 AM
Has anyone here ever traveled the thruway between Rochester and Buffalo on the Sunday of a Bill's game?

I did this past Sunday, and I have never seen anything like it in my life. The thruway is slow on a good weekend, but this was exceptional. We slowed to a crawl at the end of the ramp from I-290 and crept through the toll barrier (fortunately, we have EZPass). It took a whopping 60 minutes to get from the toll booth to the Pembroke service area, a distance of around 25 miles. The sheer volume was, for lack of better terms, beyond comprehension. And I'm not into football, and this is a separate topic, but the Pembroke Service Area was a zoo as well. That was the first time I have encountered a line at a Thruway restroom. Those things have like forty toilets! How is that even possible?

I was overall, very impressed with our bad timing coming back from a weekend in Ontario  :D

I've seen the lines for restrooms at some of the NJ Turnpike rest areas on super busy travel days, like around Thanksgiving and Christmas. Number of people > Number of toilets = line.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on November 13, 2017, 04:44:07 PM
Why aren't there billboards on I-90 Ontario Section (Exits 55-50)? Is it a Thruway policy?

Not that I would like to see any, but it seems like I-190, I-290 and NY-400 have billboards every mile.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Sam on November 13, 2017, 05:27:01 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on November 13, 2017, 04:44:07 PM
Why aren't there billboards on I-90 Ontario Section (Exits 55-50)? Is it a Thruway policy?

Yes.

"The erection or maintenance of any advertising device, located within 660 feet of the nearest edge of the right-of-way of the Thruway is prohibited pursuant to section 361-a of the Public Authorities Law."

Part 105 starts on page 27:
http://www.thruway.ny.gov/about/rulesregs/thruwayregs.pdf
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: machias on November 13, 2017, 06:42:59 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on November 13, 2017, 04:44:07 PM
Why aren't there billboards on I-90 Ontario Section (Exits 55-50)? Is it a Thruway policy?

Not that I would like to see any, but it seems like I-190, I-290 and NY-400 have billboards every mile.

The only place you'll find billboards close to the Thruway is along the portion that goes through the Seneca Nation and that development is fairly recent.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on November 13, 2017, 07:34:53 PM
Quote from: Sam on November 13, 2017, 05:27:01 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on November 13, 2017, 04:44:07 PM
Why aren't there billboards on I-90 Ontario Section (Exits 55-50)? Is it a Thruway policy?

Yes.

"The erection or maintenance of any advertising device, located within 660 feet of the nearest edge of the right-of-way of the Thruway is prohibited pursuant to section 361-a of the Public Authorities Law."

Part 105 starts on page 27:
http://www.thruway.ny.gov/about/rulesregs/thruwayregs.pdf
Slightly off the stated topic, but Albany section of I-90 and I-787 have a few of those...I wonder why..
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.6865218,-73.7930058,3a,75y,240.6h,87.78t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sbHq6XsZc9CM5hfoCLP-hog!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
If you move around a little bit, there will be something like 6 of those.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Snappyjack on November 13, 2017, 10:35:09 PM
Quote from: kalvado on November 13, 2017, 07:34:53 PM

Slightly off the stated topic, but Albany section of I-90 and I-787 have a few of those...I wonder why..
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.6865218,-73.7930058,3a,75y,240.6h,87.78t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sbHq6XsZc9CM5hfoCLP-hog!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
If you move around a little bit, there will be something like 6 of those.


It is because 787 and free 90 are not under NYSTA jurisdiction. Oddly enough, you do also find them on I-190, which is part of the Thruway. Not sure why they don't seem to care about that. Plus, the whole Seneca Nation thing is a whole other can of worms.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Sam on November 14, 2017, 05:40:26 AM
Quote from: Snappyjack on November 13, 2017, 10:35:09 PM
Oddly enough, you do also find them on I-190, which is part of the Thruway. Not sure why they don't seem to care about that.
I never noticed them through the Buffalo area (which isn't to say they aren't there) but I do recall them in Niagara County. I-190 is not part of the Thruway system north of Grand Island.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on November 14, 2017, 06:22:42 AM
Quote from: Snappyjack on November 13, 2017, 10:35:09 PM
Quote from: kalvado on November 13, 2017, 07:34:53 PM

Slightly off the stated topic, but Albany section of I-90 and I-787 have a few of those...I wonder why..
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.6865218,-73.7930058,3a,75y,240.6h,87.78t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sbHq6XsZc9CM5hfoCLP-hog!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
If you move around a little bit, there will be something like 6 of those.


It is because 787 and free 90 are not under NYSTA jurisdiction. Oddly enough, you do also find them on I-190, which is part of the Thruway. Not sure why they don't seem to care about that. Plus, the whole Seneca Nation thing is a whole other can of worms.
Actually I was a bit confused over entire issue.
Looks like I had some quite wrong ideas about billboard regulations in general, and my mental adblock didn't let me notice them around....
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Snappyjack on November 14, 2017, 11:01:04 AM
https://goo.gl/maps/ZtDXYtEa38w
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Sam on November 14, 2017, 04:40:31 PM
Quote from: Snappyjack on November 14, 2017, 11:01:04 AM
https://goo.gl/maps/ZtDXYtEa38w

Well, how about that? I guess I need to read the fine print!  :pan: There's an exemption for certain parts of Buffalo in 105.3 (a) (11).

Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Flyer78 on January 04, 2018, 11:25:16 AM
Quote
ALBANY, N.Y. -- Gov. Andrew Cuomo plans to eliminate toll booths from the New York State Thruway by 2020.

Under the proposal, drivers wouldn't have to stop at a single toll booth from New York City to Buffalo along the 496-mile "superhighway."

Cuomo made the announcement as part of Cuomo's 2018 "State of the State" address Wednesday.

He said the switch to "cashless tolls" would reduce congestion and improve travel times.

http://www.syracuse.com/politics/index.ssf/2018/01/gov_proposes_eliminating_toll_booths_from_new_york_state_thruway_by_2020.html#incart_river_home

So what is the over/under on this being complete before the PA Turnpike, which has been in the process of "studying" for a while now?

Article also contains a blurb about updating the service plazas.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Brandon on January 04, 2018, 11:31:25 AM
Quote from: Flyer78 on January 04, 2018, 11:25:16 AM
Quote
ALBANY, N.Y. -- Gov. Andrew Cuomo plans to eliminate toll booths from the New York State Thruway by 2020.

Under the proposal, drivers wouldn't have to stop at a single toll booth from New York City to Buffalo along the 496-mile "superhighway."

Cuomo made the announcement as part of Cuomo's 2018 "State of the State" address Wednesday.

He said the switch to "cashless tolls" would reduce congestion and improve travel times.

http://www.syracuse.com/politics/index.ssf/2018/01/gov_proposes_eliminating_toll_booths_from_new_york_state_thruway_by_2020.html#incart_river_home

So what is the over/under on this being complete before the PA Turnpike, which has been in the process of "studying" for a while now?

Article also contains a blurb about updating the service plazas.

That's only about 15 years behind what we did in Illinois.  ORT is very nice, and makes for a very easy trip along a tollway.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on January 04, 2018, 12:37:52 PM
Quote from: Brandon on January 04, 2018, 11:31:25 AM

That's only about 15 years behind what we did in Illinois.  ORT is very nice, and makes for a very easy trip along a tollway.
I still believe that ORT needs to come with an option of settling transaction on a spot, preferably with multiple payment methods - including cash. So both IL and FL - places where I experienced ORT - didn't quite managed the task.
I am pretty sure whatever Thruway can do under the guidance of Cuomo II,  would be worse than those two attempts.
Since I have EZpass tags in both cars, Thruway toll doesn't matter that much for me - but I know how things (don't) work for out of area drivers
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Brandon on January 04, 2018, 12:55:24 PM
Quote from: kalvado on January 04, 2018, 12:37:52 PM
Quote from: Brandon on January 04, 2018, 11:31:25 AM

That's only about 15 years behind what we did in Illinois.  ORT is very nice, and makes for a very easy trip along a tollway.
I still believe that ORT needs to come with an option of settling transaction on a spot, preferably with multiple payment methods - including cash. So both IL and FL - places where I experienced ORT - didn't quite managed the task.
I am pretty sure whatever Thruway can do under the guidance of Cuomo II,  would be worse than those two attempts.
Since I have EZpass tags in both cars, Thruway toll doesn't matter that much for me - but I know how things (don't) work for out of area drivers

In Illinois, it's pay online within 7 days.  It's merely the cash rate (2x the I-Pass/EZ Pass rate), and it's posted after every toll plaza.  If you're going to a mainline toll plaza (except the Elgin-O'Hare), then use the cash lanes to pay on-the-spot.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on January 04, 2018, 01:02:10 PM
Quote from: Brandon on January 04, 2018, 12:55:24 PM
Quote from: kalvado on January 04, 2018, 12:37:52 PM
Quote from: Brandon on January 04, 2018, 11:31:25 AM

That's only about 15 years behind what we did in Illinois.  ORT is very nice, and makes for a very easy trip along a tollway.
I still believe that ORT needs to come with an option of settling transaction on a spot, preferably with multiple payment methods - including cash. So both IL and FL - places where I experienced ORT - didn't quite managed the task.
I am pretty sure whatever Thruway can do under the guidance of Cuomo II,  would be worse than those two attempts.
Since I have EZpass tags in both cars, Thruway toll doesn't matter that much for me - but I know how things (don't) work for out of area drivers

In Illinois, it's pay online within 7 days.  It's merely the cash rate (2x the I-Pass/EZ Pass rate), and it's posted after every toll plaza.  If you're going to a mainline toll plaza (except the Elgin-O'Hare), then use the cash lanes to pay on-the-spot.
Correct me if I am wrong, but you have to remember each toll collection point to pay exact toll.
IL approach is much better than FL, but may also get a few tweaks with cash payment being accepted at rest areas (oasis) and a bit more friendly way of determining the toll.

My personal experience is limited, though, since I was driving a rental car with CA plates and NY EZpass in IL. Lucky me, there were no problems...
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Brandon on January 04, 2018, 01:07:30 PM
Quote from: kalvado on January 04, 2018, 01:02:10 PM
Quote from: Brandon on January 04, 2018, 12:55:24 PM
Quote from: kalvado on January 04, 2018, 12:37:52 PM
Quote from: Brandon on January 04, 2018, 11:31:25 AM

That's only about 15 years behind what we did in Illinois.  ORT is very nice, and makes for a very easy trip along a tollway.
I still believe that ORT needs to come with an option of settling transaction on a spot, preferably with multiple payment methods - including cash. So both IL and FL - places where I experienced ORT - didn't quite managed the task.
I am pretty sure whatever Thruway can do under the guidance of Cuomo II,  would be worse than those two attempts.
Since I have EZpass tags in both cars, Thruway toll doesn't matter that much for me - but I know how things (don't) work for out of area drivers

In Illinois, it's pay online within 7 days.  It's merely the cash rate (2x the I-Pass/EZ Pass rate), and it's posted after every toll plaza.  If you're going to a mainline toll plaza (except the Elgin-O'Hare), then use the cash lanes to pay on-the-spot.
Correct me if I am wrong, but you have to remember each toll collection point to pay exact toll.
IL approach is much better than FL, but may also get a few tweaks with cash payment being accepted at rest areas (oasis) and a bit more friendly way of determining the toll.

My personal experience is limited, though, since I was driving a rental car with CA plates and NY EZpass in IL. Lucky me, there were no problems...

Yes, but remembering where you entered and exited is much easier.  https://www.getipass.com/trip-calculator  That calculator shows you every plaza you went through on your trip as well as the toll for each.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: empirestate on January 04, 2018, 01:16:39 PM
Quote from: Brandon on January 04, 2018, 11:31:25 AM
That's only about 15 years behind what we did in Illinois.  ORT is very nice, and makes for a very easy trip along a tollway.

Not that most trips along the Thruway aren't already very easy...
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on January 04, 2018, 01:18:01 PM
Quote from: Brandon on January 04, 2018, 01:07:30 PM


Yes, but remembering where you entered and exited is much easier.  https://www.getipass.com/trip-calculator  That calculator shows you every plaza you went through on your trip as well as the toll for each.
I believe that wasn't the feature when I checked it last time. But this is close to being done the way I want it to be. Adding cash-accepting kiosks on the rest area and designing entire thing a bit  better are not show stoppers.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on January 04, 2018, 01:19:04 PM
Quote from: empirestate on January 04, 2018, 01:16:39 PM
Quote from: Brandon on January 04, 2018, 11:31:25 AM
That's only about 15 years behind what we did in Illinois.  ORT is very nice, and makes for a very easy trip along a tollway.

Not that most trips along the Thruway aren't already very easy...
Except if you're stuck in backup at exit 50 toll barrier on Memorial day weekend...
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: route17fan on January 04, 2018, 01:42:50 PM
Speaking of open road tolling, more toll barriers to come down on I-190 for the Grand Island bridges per D214649.

Link: http://www.thruway.ny.gov/netdata/contractors/documents/d214649_tan18-8_plans-volume-1of-1.pdf
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: empirestate on January 04, 2018, 04:00:08 PM
Quote from: kalvado on January 04, 2018, 01:19:04 PM
Quote from: empirestate on January 04, 2018, 01:16:39 PM
Quote from: Brandon on January 04, 2018, 11:31:25 AM
That's only about 15 years behind what we did in Illinois.  ORT is very nice, and makes for a very easy trip along a tollway.

Not that most trips along the Thruway aren't already very easy...
Except if you're stuck in backup at exit 50 toll barrier on Memorial day weekend...

Right. Most trips on the Thruway aren't that, and so converting to ORT won't be a factor in making most trips substantially easier. In other times and places, such as Williamsville on Memorial Day, it would.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on January 04, 2018, 05:26:50 PM
Quote from: empirestate on January 04, 2018, 04:00:08 PM
Quote from: kalvado on January 04, 2018, 01:19:04 PM
Quote from: empirestate on January 04, 2018, 01:16:39 PM
Quote from: Brandon on January 04, 2018, 11:31:25 AM
That's only about 15 years behind what we did in Illinois.  ORT is very nice, and makes for a very easy trip along a tollway.

Not that most trips along the Thruway aren't already very easy...
Except if you're stuck in backup at exit 50 toll barrier on Memorial day weekend...

Right. Most trips on the Thruway aren't that, and so converting to ORT won't be a factor in making most trips substantially easier. In other times and places, such as Williamsville on Memorial Day, it would.

Exit 50 backs up almost every day, especially during tourist season. I used to live 5 minutes from it. It was not uncommon for the backup to extend nearly to Exit 49. That area will be MUCH better once ORT is in place. Won't have the people getting off at 49 to avoid the backup (and worsening the NY 33/78 mess), either. Exits 23 and 24 are also very prone to daily backups.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Duke87 on January 04, 2018, 05:56:55 PM
Quote from: cl94 on January 04, 2018, 05:26:50 PM
Exit 50 backs up almost every day, especially during tourist season. I used to live 5 minutes from it. It was not uncommon for the backup to extend nearly to Exit 49. That area will be MUCH better once ORT is in place. Won't have the people getting off at 49 to avoid the backup (and worsening the NY 33/78 mess), either.

Isn't a large part of the issue though that E-Zpass adoption rates in WNY are fairly low?

NYSTA is going to have to really push people to get E-Zpass if they don't want to be processing tons of bill-by-mail transactions out there.

Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on January 04, 2018, 06:05:51 PM
Quote from: Duke87 on January 04, 2018, 05:56:55 PM
Quote from: cl94 on January 04, 2018, 05:26:50 PM
Exit 50 backs up almost every day, especially during tourist season. I used to live 5 minutes from it. It was not uncommon for the backup to extend nearly to Exit 49. That area will be MUCH better once ORT is in place. Won't have the people getting off at 49 to avoid the backup (and worsening the NY 33/78 mess), either.

Isn't a large part of the issue though that E-Zpass adoption rates in WNY are fairly low?

NYSTA is going to have to really push people to get E-Zpass if they don't want to be processing tons of bill-by-mail transactions out there.

I remember finding statistics, and "low" is not low per se, it is lower than for example in Albany - only something like 60% of transactions were EZpass around Buffalo. There will be more bills in the mail than in Albany, but not a factor of 10 more.  And all-electronic itself is a good way to push people towards EZpass...
Since many people believe westernmost stretch is the first all-electronic area, things may well even out by the time mainline is AET
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on January 04, 2018, 06:06:35 PM
Quote from: Duke87 on January 04, 2018, 05:56:55 PM
Quote from: cl94 on January 04, 2018, 05:26:50 PM
Exit 50 backs up almost every day, especially during tourist season. I used to live 5 minutes from it. It was not uncommon for the backup to extend nearly to Exit 49. That area will be MUCH better once ORT is in place. Won't have the people getting off at 49 to avoid the backup (and worsening the NY 33/78 mess), either.

Isn't a large part of the issue though that E-Zpass adoption rates in WNY are fairly low?

NYSTA is going to have to really push people to get E-Zpass if they don't want to be processing tons of bill-by-mail transactions out there.

It is. Large contingent is afraid of government surveillance. Of course, NYSTA will get a trial run now that Grand Island is going AET. Wonder how long it'll be until a politician from out there tries to make rental car "toll processing fees" illegal. Those two bridges have the lowest E-ZPass usage rate in the state (other than the Canada bridges).

Quote from: kalvado on January 04, 2018, 06:05:51 PM
Quote from: Duke87 on January 04, 2018, 05:56:55 PM
Quote from: cl94 on January 04, 2018, 05:26:50 PM
Exit 50 backs up almost every day, especially during tourist season. I used to live 5 minutes from it. It was not uncommon for the backup to extend nearly to Exit 49. That area will be MUCH better once ORT is in place. Won't have the people getting off at 49 to avoid the backup (and worsening the NY 33/78 mess), either.

Isn't a large part of the issue though that E-Zpass adoption rates in WNY are fairly low?

NYSTA is going to have to really push people to get E-Zpass if they don't want to be processing tons of bill-by-mail transactions out there.

I remember finding statistics, and "low" is not low per se, it is lower than for example in Albany - only something like 60% of transactions were EZpass around Buffalo. There will be more bills in the mail than in Albany, but not a factor of 10 more.  And all-electronic itself is a good way to push people towards EZpass...
Since many people believe westernmost stretch is the first all-electronic area, things may well even out by the time mainline is AET

Some of the plazas are under 50%. I know Grand Island is in the 40s, if not lower.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Brandon on January 04, 2018, 08:07:36 PM
Quote from: Duke87 on January 04, 2018, 05:56:55 PM
Quote from: cl94 on January 04, 2018, 05:26:50 PM
Exit 50 backs up almost every day, especially during tourist season. I used to live 5 minutes from it. It was not uncommon for the backup to extend nearly to Exit 49. That area will be MUCH better once ORT is in place. Won't have the people getting off at 49 to avoid the backup (and worsening the NY 33/78 mess), either.

Isn't a large part of the issue though that E-Zpass adoption rates in WNY are fairly low?

NYSTA is going to have to really push people to get E-Zpass if they don't want to be processing tons of bill-by-mail transactions out there.

NYSTA could follow ISTHA's lead here and offer a significant discount for using EZ Pass over cash or pay-by-mail.  As an example, ISTHA's tolls for I-Pass (EZ Pass) are half the cash rate.  That's helped them get over 87% of tollway users to adopt electronic toll collection.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on January 04, 2018, 08:18:27 PM
Quote from: Brandon on January 04, 2018, 08:07:36 PM
Quote from: Duke87 on January 04, 2018, 05:56:55 PM
Quote from: cl94 on January 04, 2018, 05:26:50 PM
Exit 50 backs up almost every day, especially during tourist season. I used to live 5 minutes from it. It was not uncommon for the backup to extend nearly to Exit 49. That area will be MUCH better once ORT is in place. Won't have the people getting off at 49 to avoid the backup (and worsening the NY 33/78 mess), either.

Isn't a large part of the issue though that E-Zpass adoption rates in WNY are fairly low?

NYSTA is going to have to really push people to get E-Zpass if they don't want to be processing tons of bill-by-mail transactions out there.

NYSTA could follow ISTHA's lead here and offer a significant discount for using EZ Pass over cash or pay-by-mail.  As an example, ISTHA's tolls for I-Pass (EZ Pass) are half the cash rate.  That's helped them get over 87% of tollway users to adopt electronic toll collection.

I've been saying that for years and, frankly, NYSTA would love to do that. MassDOT did a similar thing when they went to open road tolling. In-state E-ZPass went way down and pay-by-mail is well more than the former cash rate. Problem is the toll freeze that has been in effect for 10 years. They'd have to double the cash rate and keep E-ZPass the same at this point, and good luck with that because politics. Of course, that toll freeze is why most of the other necessary improvements haven't occurred (and why tolls here are still mid-2000s prices), but raising Thruway tolls is political suicide.

As far as why it's political suicide, some idiot Western New York politicians convinced everyone that all the toll revenue is going to fund downstate improvements. Oh, yeah, gotta love New York politics.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on January 04, 2018, 08:54:16 PM
Quote from: cl94 on January 04, 2018, 06:06:35 PM
It is. Large contingent is afraid of government surveillance. Of course, NYSTA will get a trial run now that Grand Island is going AET. Wonder how long it'll be until a politician from out there tries to make rental car "toll processing fees" illegal. Those two bridges have the lowest E-ZPass usage rate in the state (other than the Canada bridges).
To be fair, Cuomo's push for AET is motivated more by anti-terrorism surveillance than driver convenience or cost.  That's event he part of his speech where he talked about AET (he also wants to convince the Port Authority to go AET).

Quote from: cl94 on January 04, 2018, 08:18:27 PM
As far as why it's political suicide, some idiot Western New York politicians convinced everyone that all the toll revenue is going to fund downstate improvements. Oh, yeah, gotta love New York politics.
Doesn't help that everyone still remembers news articles claiming the tolls would be removed in the 90s and are mad that never happened.  And why didn't that happen?  Because the Thruway took over I-84 and I-287, so it's not entirely unjustified.  And I recall reading a proposal to raise tolls system-wide to pay for the Tappan Zee.

Quote from: cl94 on January 04, 2018, 05:26:50 PM
Exits 23 and 24 are also very prone to daily backups.
I wonder about those exits.  Those weave areas are going to be rather short when traffic doesn't have to slow down for toll booths.  Particularly exit 23, where I suspect a large part of the backup is the result of the short ramp to US 9W.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: empirestate on January 05, 2018, 11:15:18 AM
Quote from: cl94 on January 04, 2018, 05:26:50 PM
Quote from: empirestate on January 04, 2018, 04:00:08 PM
Quote from: kalvado on January 04, 2018, 01:19:04 PM
Quote from: empirestate on January 04, 2018, 01:16:39 PM
Quote from: Brandon on January 04, 2018, 11:31:25 AM
That's only about 15 years behind what we did in Illinois.  ORT is very nice, and makes for a very easy trip along a tollway.

Not that most trips along the Thruway aren't already very easy...
Except if you're stuck in backup at exit 50 toll barrier on Memorial day weekend...

Right. Most trips on the Thruway aren't that, and so converting to ORT won't be a factor in making most trips substantially easier. In other times and places, such as Williamsville on Memorial Day, it would.

Exit 50 backs up almost every day, especially during tourist season. I used to live 5 minutes from it. It was not uncommon for the backup to extend nearly to Exit 49. That area will be MUCH better once ORT is in place. Won't have the people getting off at 49 to avoid the backup (and worsening the NY 33/78 mess), either. Exits 23 and 24 are also very prone to daily backups.

Right. Other exits, such as 29, 32, 57A, B2, yada yada yada, are not prone to backups. Those trips are already easy.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Duke87 on January 05, 2018, 09:13:10 PM
Quote from: vdeane on January 04, 2018, 08:54:16 PM
To be fair, Cuomo's push for AET is motivated more by anti-terrorism surveillance than driver convenience or cost.  That's event he part of his speech where he talked about AET (he also wants to convince the Port Authority to go AET).

That'll go over REAL well with the folks in Buffalo who won't get E-Zpass because they're paranoid about being tracked. Wait until someone tells them there's gonna be facial recognition software scanning everyone who drives through one of the Thruway tolls.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on January 05, 2018, 11:18:28 PM
How the hell did I miss this discussion?

People don't use EZPass in the Buffalo area because the need isn't there unless you live past the toll barriers and need to commute through them every day. If another toll road existed in the area, or I-190 still has barrier tolls in the city, then maybe more people would use it.

I agree about the surveillance thing as well.

I wonder, if they actually do this AET thing will there be interchange reconfiguration such as the concept ones vdeane made?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on January 05, 2018, 11:20:57 PM
Quote from: Duke87 on January 05, 2018, 09:13:10 PM
Quote from: vdeane on January 04, 2018, 08:54:16 PM
To be fair, Cuomo's push for AET is motivated more by anti-terrorism surveillance than driver convenience or cost.  That's event he part of his speech where he talked about AET (he also wants to convince the Port Authority to go AET).

That'll go over REAL well with the folks in Buffalo who won't get E-Zpass because they're paranoid about being tracked. Wait until someone tells them there's gonna be facial recognition software scanning everyone who drives through one of the Thruway tolls.

They already take pictures at the EZ Pass Lanes I think. And Walmart has facial recognition too, but they make it creepy by showing the faces in yellow boxes on a monitor near the checkout.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on January 06, 2018, 07:22:53 AM
Quote from: Buffaboy on January 05, 2018, 11:18:28 PM
How the hell did I miss this discussion?

People don't use EZPass in the Buffalo area because the need isn't there unless you live past the toll barriers and need to commute through them every day. If another toll road existed in the area, or I-190 still has barrier tolls in the city, then maybe more people would use it.

I agree about the surveillance thing as well.

I wonder, if they actually do this AET thing will there be interchange reconfiguration such as the concept ones vdeane made?

I have EZpass for past 15 years, despite using it not that often. Saving 10 minutes once, on a holiday weekend trip, justifies carrying that thing for me.
As for ramp reconfigurations.. Withing next 20 years, maybe? Same for extra exits...
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on January 16, 2018, 09:38:00 PM
Should note the 5% toll savings of EzPass can add up after a while too.

I'm genuinely excited for the conversion. It has been way too long in coming. Now if we could get more lanes, more exits and higher speed limits  :coffee:
The only drawback is that I will no longer be able to pay cash. I liked that only because I could inconspicuously add a thruway segment to my commute here and there with no one ever knowing  :spin:
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Brandon on January 17, 2018, 12:35:22 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 16, 2018, 09:38:00 PM
Should note the 5% toll savings of EzPass can add up after a while too.

Only 5%?  That's a pretty lame discount.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on January 17, 2018, 12:42:36 PM
Quote from: Brandon on January 17, 2018, 12:35:22 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 16, 2018, 09:38:00 PM
Should note the 5% toll savings of EzPass can add up after a while too.

Only 5%?  That's a pretty lame discount.

I think NYSTA has the smallest discount. Of course, that's because they aren't allowed to raise cash tolls and all rates are from 2007.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: storm2k on January 17, 2018, 01:21:33 PM
Quote from: Brandon on January 17, 2018, 12:35:22 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 16, 2018, 09:38:00 PM
Should note the 5% toll savings of EzPass can add up after a while too.

Only 5%?  That's a pretty lame discount.

Feh, at least they have one. NJ Turnpike Authority hasn't had one in more than a decade because they needed the extra revenue to pay off Christie Whitman's innovative "solution" for paying for EZ-Pass implementation in NJ.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on January 17, 2018, 11:25:04 PM
Quote from: Brandon on January 17, 2018, 12:35:22 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 16, 2018, 09:38:00 PM
Should note the 5% toll savings of EzPass can add up after a while too.

Only 5%?  That's a pretty lame discount.

I never thought it was low, but then again, I have no idea what great savings other toll authorities around the country have to offer. 
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: JREwing78 on January 18, 2018, 12:14:47 AM
Quote from: webny99 on January 17, 2018, 11:25:04 PM
Quote from: Brandon on January 17, 2018, 12:35:22 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 16, 2018, 09:38:00 PM
Should note the 5% toll savings of EzPass can add up after a while too.

Only 5%?  That's a pretty lame discount.

I never thought it was low, but then again, I have no idea what great savings other toll authorities around the country have to offer. 

The Illinois tollways give you a 50% discount for using EZ-Pass (rebranded I-Pass in Illinois).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: SignBridge on January 18, 2018, 08:53:40 PM
Really, 50%? That's quite a surprise.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: jemacedo9 on January 18, 2018, 10:39:29 PM
http://www.thruway.ny.gov/news/pressrel/2018/01/2018-01-17-toll-amnesty-pgm.html (http://www.thruway.ny.gov/news/pressrel/2018/01/2018-01-17-toll-amnesty-pgm.html)

Press release for the launch of a cashless tolling amnesty program, with new toll signage noted within the press release...
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: thenetwork on January 18, 2018, 11:11:00 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on January 18, 2018, 08:53:40 PM
Really, 50%? That's quite a surprise.

More like "double the normal tolls if you pay cash".  :meh:
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on January 19, 2018, 10:08:07 AM
Quote from: thenetwork on January 18, 2018, 11:11:00 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on January 18, 2018, 08:53:40 PM
Really, 50%? That's quite a surprise.

More like "double the normal tolls if you pay cash".  :meh:

See, here in upstate NY we tend not to think of it that way, not only because of our skimpy discount, but because there are still plenty of people that pay cash. I cannot for the life of me figure out why anyone would not get EZPass. It's not even the dollar savings so much as the convenience and the time savings.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Brandon on January 19, 2018, 11:21:18 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on January 18, 2018, 08:53:40 PM
Really, 50%? That's quite a surprise.

Yes, 50%: https://www.illinoistollway.com/tolling-information

And here's how easy ISTHA makes it to get: https://www.illinoistollway.com/tolling-information/about-ipass

Because of this, over 87% of tollway users use the electronic toll collection system.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on January 19, 2018, 11:56:51 AM
Quote from: webny99 on January 19, 2018, 10:08:07 AM
Quote from: thenetwork on January 18, 2018, 11:11:00 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on January 18, 2018, 08:53:40 PM
Really, 50%? That's quite a surprise.

More like "double the normal tolls if you pay cash".  :meh:

See, here in upstate NY we tend not to think of it that way, not only because of our skimpy discount, but because there are still plenty of people that pay cash. I cannot for the life of me figure out why anyone would not get EZPass. It's not even the dollar savings so much as the convenience and the time savings.
I am befuddled by this as well, especially as you see the lines back up in the cash lanes at rush hour around here.  It is beyond me as to why commuters would not have E-ZPass. 

The only reason I can come up with is paranoia about privacy or some other kind of irrationality...of course, E-ZPass played a role in the conviction in the local Porco case, so who knows?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on January 19, 2018, 12:00:21 PM
Quote from: Rothman on January 19, 2018, 11:56:51 AM
Quote from: webny99 on January 19, 2018, 10:08:07 AM
Quote from: thenetwork on January 18, 2018, 11:11:00 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on January 18, 2018, 08:53:40 PM
Really, 50%? That's quite a surprise.

More like "double the normal tolls if you pay cash".  :meh:

See, here in upstate NY we tend not to think of it that way, not only because of our skimpy discount, but because there are still plenty of people that pay cash. I cannot for the life of me figure out why anyone would not get EZPass. It's not even the dollar savings so much as the convenience and the time savings.
I am befuddled by this as well, especially as you see the lines back up in the cash lanes at rush hour around here.  It is beyond me as to why commuters would not have E-ZPass. 

The only reason I can come up with is paranoia about privacy or some other kind of irrationality...of course, E-ZPass played a role in the conviction in the local Porco case, so who knows?
I think privacy does play into it, especially in Western NY. That seems like a very old-fashioned, Rust Belt mindset to me. People should have realized by now that the benefits far, far outweigh the drawbacks.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on January 19, 2018, 01:11:27 PM
Plus with licence plate readers being all the rage these days, there's no privacy even without E-ZPass.

In my case, getting E-ZPass wasn't motivated by the discount at all, and only a little bit by the time savings.  The main reason was so I wouldn't have to fumble with cash and a ticket when driving myself between home and college.  I'm not sure how people manage to get their change ready before getting to the booth without a passenger to do it for them.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on January 19, 2018, 01:49:31 PM
Quote from: vdeane on January 19, 2018, 01:11:27 PM
In my case, getting E-ZPass wasn't motivated by the discount at all, and only a little bit by the time savings.  The main reason was so I wouldn't have to fumble with cash and a ticket when driving myself between home and college.  I'm not sure how people manage to get their change ready before getting to the booth without a passenger to do it for them.
I've never paid cash on any trip of significant distance. But, should the need arise, I would probably ensure I knew the toll amount before I even left, and have it counted out and set in a cupholder or the likes where I could grab it at the time. Doing that every day would get more than a little annoying, though.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: PHLBOS on January 19, 2018, 01:55:38 PM
Quote from: vdeane on January 19, 2018, 01:11:27 PMI'm not sure how people manage to get their change ready before getting to the booth without a passenger to do it for them.
After-market coin-holders for cars (https://www.google.com/search?q=coin+holder+for+car&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiqpJei2eTYAhUDIcAKHZn2ASgQ_AUICygC&biw=1328&bih=861)
Plus
Quote from: webny99 on January 19, 2018, 01:49:31 PMI would probably ensure I knew the toll amount before I even left
and stock said-coin holder with the needed amount.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on January 19, 2018, 01:56:28 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 19, 2018, 01:49:31 PM
Quote from: vdeane on January 19, 2018, 01:11:27 PM
In my case, getting E-ZPass wasn't motivated by the discount at all, and only a little bit by the time savings.  The main reason was so I wouldn't have to fumble with cash and a ticket when driving myself between home and college.  I'm not sure how people manage to get their change ready before getting to the booth without a passenger to do it for them.
I've never paid cash on any trip of significant distance. But, should the need arise, I would probably ensure I knew the toll amount before I even left, and have it counted out and set in a cupholder or the likes where I could grab it at the time. Doing that every day would get more than a little annoying, though.
I didn't pay cash toll for many years - but I still have a medicine bottle full of quarters handy in a car. For tolls (nope), parking meters (still happens) , maybe payphones(if I can find any)...
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: SignBridge on January 19, 2018, 09:37:54 PM
Back in the pre-toll pass era, if you travelled thru toll facilities a lot, you developed some sort of routine for keeping the bills or change handy. I used to start with a five, ten or twenty dollar bill (depending on the number of tolls I was expecting) in my shirt pocket for easy access.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: CapeCodder on January 19, 2018, 10:08:51 PM
Something that has bothered me for years: What purpose does the Berkshire Connector serve other than to carry I-90? 90 should be free from Albany to the MA line. I would just decommission the remaining sector between 87 and 90. Sorry to seem ignorant.

As to the cash thing, I rarely took toll roads enough to warrant the EZpass. I did however keep cash in the console.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on January 19, 2018, 10:40:38 PM
Quote from: CapeCodder on January 19, 2018, 10:08:51 PM
Something that has bothered me for years: What purpose does the Berkshire Connector serve other than to carry I-90? 90 should be free from Albany to the MA line. I would just decommission the remaining sector between 87 and 90. Sorry to seem ignorant.

As to the cash thing, I rarely took toll roads enough to warrant the EZpass. I did however keep cash in the console.

Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on January 20, 2018, 12:32:39 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on January 19, 2018, 09:37:54 PM
Back in the pre-toll pass era...
I cannot even comprehend such an era.

Quote from: CapeCodder on January 19, 2018, 10:08:51 PM
Something that has bothered me for years: What purpose does the Berkshire Connector serve other than to carry I-90? 90 should be free from Albany to the MA line. I would just decommission the remaining sector between 87 and 90. Sorry to seem ignorant.
Borderline fictional territory here... maybe I-90 should follow the Berkshire Spur all the way to I-87  :pan:

Besides, the Berkshire Spur makes things more consistent for long distance travelers, as they can stay on the thruway system right through the Albany area. That, and what cl94 said.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: qguy on January 20, 2018, 09:23:20 AM
Quote from: webny99 on January 20, 2018, 12:32:39 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on January 19, 2018, 09:37:54 PM
Back in the pre-toll pass era...
I cannot even comprehend such an era.

[In an old man voice] You young-ins! Why, back in MY day, ya had to fumble with bills or change every time you drove. Both ways! And ya LIKED it!
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on January 20, 2018, 09:34:45 AM
as for Berkshire connector... I always wondered why there is no exit on east side of Hudson. Yes, there is significant grade mismatch between 9-whatever-the-letter and thruway, but that should be resolvable. Or exit B1/12 are too close?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: empirestate on January 20, 2018, 10:29:48 AM
Quote from: kalvado on January 20, 2018, 09:34:45 AM
as for Berkshire connector... I always wondered why there is no exit on east side of Hudson. Yes, there is significant grade mismatch between 9-whatever-the-letter and thruway, but that should be resolvable. Or exit B1/12 are too close?

Yes, by ticket system standards. Remember, the idea of the Thruway is not to have an exit at every possible crossing highway, but rather to keep them widely spaced.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on January 20, 2018, 10:44:58 AM
Quote from: empirestate on January 20, 2018, 10:29:48 AM
Quote from: kalvado on January 20, 2018, 09:34:45 AM
as for Berkshire connector... I always wondered why there is no exit on east side of Hudson. Yes, there is significant grade mismatch between 9-whatever-the-letter and thruway, but that should be resolvable. Or exit B1/12 are too close?

Yes, by ticket system standards. Remember, the idea of the Thruway is not to have an exit at every possible crossing highway, but rather to keep them widely spaced.
Yes, but we're talking about a bridge over relatively big river - which is a significant asset, more than a stretch of a highway.
Nearest bridges are 10 miles north in Albany or 20 miles south in Catskill. Limiting local traffic doesn't look reasonable.
And even if bridge is short mileage-wise, it got a reasonable toll associated with it, if I remember correctly it is more expensive than Albany to Schenectady dash..
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: empirestate on January 20, 2018, 11:03:01 AM
Quote from: kalvado on January 20, 2018, 10:44:58 AM
Quote from: empirestate on January 20, 2018, 10:29:48 AM
Quote from: kalvado on January 20, 2018, 09:34:45 AM
as for Berkshire connector... I always wondered why there is no exit on east side of Hudson. Yes, there is significant grade mismatch between 9-whatever-the-letter and thruway, but that should be resolvable. Or exit B1/12 are too close?

Yes, by ticket system standards. Remember, the idea of the Thruway is not to have an exit at every possible crossing highway, but rather to keep them widely spaced.
Yes, but we're talking about a bridge over relatively big river - which is a significant asset, more than a stretch of a highway.
Nearest bridges are 10 miles north in Albany or 20 miles south in Catskill. Limiting local traffic doesn't look reasonable.
And even if bridge is short mileage-wise, it got a reasonable toll associated with it, if I remember correctly it is more expensive than Albany to Schenectady dash..

I think the issue is that your observation that "there is no exit on east side of Hudson" isn't shared universally. There is an exit east of the Hudson–it's at US 9, the major highway up and down that side of the river. (Later, this became the interchange with I-90, but US 9 is still connected.) That is the exit serving local traffic.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on January 20, 2018, 11:25:40 AM
Quote from: empirestate on January 20, 2018, 11:03:01 AM

I think the issue is that your observation that "there is no exit on east side of Hudson" isn't shared universally. There is an exit east of the Hudson–it's at US 9, the major highway up and down that side of the river. (Later, this became the interchange with I-90, but US 9 is still connected.) That is the exit serving local traffic.
Yes, that was my second thought

Quote from: kalvado on January 20, 2018, 09:34:45 AM
Or exit B1/12 are too close?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: empirestate on January 20, 2018, 01:24:49 PM
Quote from: kalvado on January 20, 2018, 11:25:40 AM
Quote from: empirestate on January 20, 2018, 11:03:01 AM

I think the issue is that your observation that "there is no exit on east side of Hudson" isn't shared universally. There is an exit east of the Hudson–it's at US 9, the major highway up and down that side of the river. (Later, this became the interchange with I-90, but US 9 is still connected.) That is the exit serving local traffic.
Yes, that was my second thought

Quote from: kalvado on January 20, 2018, 09:34:45 AM
Or exit B1/12 are too close?

Right, so that's all there is to it then, I think. There's no exit closer to the Hudson than B1, because B1 is the exit that adequately serves local traffic (as adequately as any other part of the toll system, at least).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on January 20, 2018, 06:03:03 PM
While the four miles of driving after crossing the Hudson is unusual, and the drive to get there from the Thruway even more full of back roads than usual, it's not really any bigger than the other towns the Thruway passes by without an interchange.

Regarding the Berkshire Spur, it's also worth noting that it was constructed not to toll I-90, but rather to connect the Thruway mainline with the Massachusetts Turnpike.  I-90 came later.  As for rerouting I-90, debatable if it's fictional or not, since it has actually been proposed to do just that at least once.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on January 20, 2018, 06:07:33 PM
Quote from: vdeaneAs for rerouting I-90, debatable if it's fictional or not, since it has actually been proposed to do just that at least once.
It has? What would current free 90 have been numbered? (I personally am very much in favor of freeing up I-390 for use there.)
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on January 20, 2018, 06:12:17 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 20, 2018, 06:07:33 PM
Quote from: vdeaneAs for rerouting I-90, debatable if it's fictional or not, since it has actually been proposed to do just that at least once.
It has? What would current free 90 have been numbered? (I personally am very much in favor of freeing up I-390 for use there.)

I-88. There would have been a concurrency from 25A to 24.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on January 20, 2018, 06:22:10 PM
Quote from: cl94 on January 20, 2018, 06:12:17 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 20, 2018, 06:07:33 PM
Quote from: vdeaneAs for rerouting I-90, debatable if it's fictional or not, since it has actually been proposed to do just that at least once.
It has? What would current free 90 have been numbered? (I personally am very much in favor of freeing up I-390 for use there.)

I-88. There would have been a concurrency from 25A to 24.
Got it. I still think I-390 is better though  :pan:
Was I-88 also supposed to, at one time, be extended into Vermont, or am I getting mixed up with a true fictional proposal?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on January 20, 2018, 06:52:13 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 20, 2018, 06:22:10 PM
Got it. I still think I-390 is better though  :pan:
Was I-88 also supposed to, at one time, be extended into Vermont, or am I getting mixed up with a true fictional proposal?

That is real. Would have roughly paralleled NY 7 to I-87, then would have used the NY 7 expressway. During the planning stages, the NY 7 expressway was I-88 and Alternate NY 7. From the east end of the Collar City Bridge, it would have paralleled NY 7 and VT/NH 9. The US 7 / VT 279 interchange may or may not have been constructed with I-88 in mind. I don't know how much of it was really planned east of Bennington. The lack of a toll when traveling between Exit 25A and Exits 24, 25, or 26 is due to I-88 being canceled through eastern Schenectady County.

The NYSDOT logs had I-88 ending at the east end of the Collar City Bridge in Troy until some point in the 80s. Bridge still is part of the Interstate system as unsigned I-787.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: froggie on January 20, 2018, 07:43:32 PM
QuoteI don't know how much of it was really planned east of Bennington.

None.

QuoteBridge still is part of the Interstate system as unsigned I-787.

Half-unsigned.  Westbound (sic "southbound") is signed.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Roadsguy on January 20, 2018, 07:49:15 PM
Quote from: cl94 on January 20, 2018, 06:52:13 PM
Bridge still is part of the Interstate system as unsigned I-787.

Though it's only unsigned northbound. Westbound on the bridge after the on-ramp has a South I-787/West NY 7 (https://goo.gl/maps/qcGyHApQrn42) reassurance sign assembly, so it really is signed in one direction technically, unless NYSDOT actually has a specific internal designation for unsigned routes and doesn't just simply not sign them.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: seicer on January 20, 2018, 08:21:43 PM
It has reference markers for 787 going eastbound on the bridge (northbound 787) - and the last sign is at the eastern terminus of the bridge when it becomes a surface street.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on January 20, 2018, 10:39:56 PM
I even heard I-1090 for replacing free I-90 suggested by a NYSDOT Office Director about 8 years ago or so.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: GenExpwy on January 21, 2018, 01:19:49 AM
As for rerouting I-90, one problem is that the Castleton bridge does not meet Interstate standards. There is no real barrier down the middle, just the yellow lines and some sort of steel grating (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.5097009,-73.7744129,3a,60y,108.63h,76.89t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1swEWkyFdyyvnd0a6oKMXfXw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en-US).

It seems like I once read somewhere, that putting in a proper Jersey Barrier would require some substantial engineering work, and would cost a lot of money. Anybody know more about that?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: empirestate on January 21, 2018, 07:55:24 AM
Quote from: Rothman on January 20, 2018, 10:39:56 PM
I even heard I-1090 for replacing free I-90 suggested by a NYSDOT Office Director about 8 years ago or so.

Finally, my suggestion is getting some official traction. :-D
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Roadsguy on January 21, 2018, 08:03:47 AM
Do those movable barriers found on some bridges like the Walt Whitman and Ben Franklin bridges in Philly not meet Interstate standard? They just sit on the road surface, right? Couldn't they just put one of those over the bridge?

Also 4di's should really be considered more for states that are running out of 3di's. Ideally they should mass-renumber all 3dis to feature no repeats, using 4di's when necessary, but that'd cost a ton for little benefit.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Alps on January 21, 2018, 08:17:37 AM
Quote from: GenExpwy on January 21, 2018, 01:19:49 AM
As for rerouting I-90, one problem is that the Castleton bridge does not meet Interstate standards. There is no real barrier down the middle, just the yellow lines and some sort of steel grating (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.5097009,-73.7744129,3a,60y,108.63h,76.89t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1swEWkyFdyyvnd0a6oKMXfXw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en-US).

It seems like I once read somewhere, that putting in a proper Jersey Barrier would require some substantial engineering work, and would cost a lot of money. Anybody know more about that?
A concrete barrier is a significant structural dead load. In order to add it to a bridge that wasn't designed for it, usually the weight has to be removed elsewhere. One example is the Mackinac Bridge where one lane of pavement in each direction was replaced with a steel grid. In the Castleton case there is already a steel grid in the center. This would have to be replaced with a substantial concrete deck for transmitting the forces of a barrier (when struck) to the bridge structure and ultimately the ground. One or both lanes in each direction would have to be converted to steel grid to compensate. It may be cheaper to add structural components than replace the deck in that manner, or it may be impossible to do either without essentially replacing the bridge. A structural engineer would have to review the plans and assess current condition.
Quote from: Rothman on January 20, 2018, 10:39:56 PM
I even heard I-1090 for replacing free I-90 suggested by a NYSDOT Office Director about 8 years ago or so.
Instead of going to that extreme why not use an x87?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on January 21, 2018, 08:57:00 AM
Quote from: Alps on January 21, 2018, 08:17:37 AM
In the Castleton case there is already a steel grid in the center. This would have to be replaced with a substantial concrete deck for transmitting the forces of a barrier (when struck) to the bridge structure and ultimately the ground. One or both lanes in each direction would have to be converted to steel grid to compensate. It may be cheaper to add structural components than replace the deck in that manner, or it may be impossible to do either without essentially replacing the bridge. A structural engineer would have to review the plans and assess current condition.
WOuld you think the grid comes from previous round of budget cu...  I mean weight cuts?
The only old photo I can find shows something different along the bridge center, as far as I can tell.
Big photo:
http://friendsofschodackisland.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/Castleton-Bridge-Aerial.png (http://friendsofschodackisland.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/Castleton-Bridge-Aerial.png)
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: seicer on January 21, 2018, 09:02:17 AM
Looks the same to me.

The bridge deck looks nice - unlike the current situation. Are there plans to rehabilitate the deck?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on January 21, 2018, 11:03:42 AM
A contract went out last year to add a permanent barrier. I do not know what it entails, as the plans are confidential for security reasons.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: empirestate on January 21, 2018, 05:01:20 PM
Quote from: Alps on January 21, 2018, 08:17:37 AM
Quote from: Rothman on January 20, 2018, 10:39:56 PM
I even heard I-1090 for replacing free I-90 suggested by a NYSDOT Office Director about 8 years ago or so.
Instead of going to that extreme why not use an x87?

Because that doesn't satisfyingly take advantage of NY's full suite of x90's. :-)
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Beltway on January 21, 2018, 11:12:36 PM
Quote from: Alps on January 21, 2018, 08:17:37 AM
A concrete barrier is a significant structural dead load. In order to add it to a bridge that wasn't designed for it, usually the weight has to be removed elsewhere. One example is the Mackinac Bridge where one lane of pavement in each direction was replaced with a steel grid.

Is that why the Mackinac Bridge still has the original steel pipe parapets and no median barrier?

I thought it was obsolete features that had not been modernized, but if the bridge is not strong enough to handle the load of modern barriers, that is another matter.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: mrsman on January 22, 2018, 07:18:27 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 20, 2018, 06:22:10 PM
Quote from: cl94 on January 20, 2018, 06:12:17 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 20, 2018, 06:07:33 PM
Quote from: vdeaneAs for rerouting I-90, debatable if it's fictional or not, since it has actually been proposed to do just that at least once.
It has? What would current free 90 have been numbered? (I personally am very much in favor of freeing up I-390 for use there.)

I-88. There would have been a concurrency from 25A to 24.
Got it. I still think I-390 is better though  :pan:
Was I-88 also supposed to, at one time, be extended into Vermont, or am I getting mixed up with a true fictional proposal?

IMO this proposal would encourage more traffic to stay off of free 90 as people would follow the numbers from Mass Pike to nythruway on the way from Boston to Buffalo.

Likewise the trend towards AET should encourage more exits that don't require toll booths, especially a direct connection from the Thruway to the northway.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on January 23, 2018, 08:30:07 AM
Quote from: mrsman on January 22, 2018, 07:18:27 PM

IMO this proposal would encourage more traffic to stay off of free 90 as people would follow the numbers from Mass Pike to nythruway on the way from Boston to Buffalo.
Which is already done by signs on Thruway; and probably is a good idea - during daytime anyway. Mileage may be lower on free I-90, but time-wise it may easily be the other way around.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on January 23, 2018, 09:17:54 AM
Quote from: kalvado on January 23, 2018, 08:30:07 AM
Quote from: mrsman on January 22, 2018, 07:18:27 PM

IMO this proposal would encourage more traffic to stay off of free 90 as people would follow the numbers from Mass Pike to nythruway on the way from Boston to Buffalo.
Which is already done by signs on Thruway; and probably is a good idea - during daytime anyway. Mileage may be lower on free I-90, but time-wise it may easily be the other way around.

Time savings, convenience, and signage are all factors that work towards people staying off of free 90. Doing so saves two toll booths, as well. I wouldn't be surprised if as much of 80-90% of non-roadgeek through traffic stays on the thruway.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: roadman on January 23, 2018, 09:28:12 AM
QuoteOne example is the Mackinac Bridge where one lane of pavement in each direction was replaced with a steel grid

Actually, the steel grid deck on the inner lanes of the Mackinac Bridge suspension span dates from when the structure was originally built.  The intent was to minimize possible effects from wind on the bridge deck (memories of the original Tacoma Narrows Bridge failure were still fresh in the minds of the Mackinac designers).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: route17fan on January 31, 2018, 07:37:43 AM
I-95 New England Thruway reconstruction project - D214568 - 3 volumes of plans! TANE 18-7/D214568 - RECONSTRUCTION OF THE NEW ENGLAND THRUWAY (I-95) FROM MP NE 14.1 TO MP NE 15.0, REPLACEMENT TWO BRIDGES, RAMP B OVER I-95 AT MP NE 14.24 AND GRACE CHURCH STREET OVER I-95 AT MP NE 14.46, REHABILITATION OF FOUR BRIDGES, I-95 OVER THE BLIND BROOK AT MP NE 13.34, I-95 OVER PURCHASE STREET AT MP NE 13.48, BOSTON POST ROAD OVER I-95 AT MP NE 13.71 AND I-95 OVER THE BYRAM RIVER AT MP NE 14.93 IN WESTCHESTER COUNTY
Volume 1: http://www.thruway.ny.gov/netdata/contractors/documents/d214568_tane18-7_plans-volume-1-of-3.pdf
Volume 2: http://www.thruway.ny.gov/netdata/contractors/documents/d214568_tane18-7_plans-volume-2-of-3.pdf
Volume 3: http://www.thruway.ny.gov/netdata/contractors/documents/d214568_tane18-7_plans-volume-3-of-3.pdf
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: dgolub on January 31, 2018, 09:12:03 AM
Quote from: route17fan on January 31, 2018, 07:37:43 AM
I-95 New England Thruway reconstruction project - D214568 - 3 volumes of plans! TANE 18-7/D214568 - RECONSTRUCTION OF THE NEW ENGLAND THRUWAY (I-95) FROM MP NE 14.1 TO MP NE 15.0, REPLACEMENT TWO BRIDGES, RAMP B OVER I-95 AT MP NE 14.24 AND GRACE CHURCH STREET OVER I-95 AT MP NE 14.46, REHABILITATION OF FOUR BRIDGES, I-95 OVER THE BLIND BROOK AT MP NE 13.34, I-95 OVER PURCHASE STREET AT MP NE 13.48, BOSTON POST ROAD OVER I-95 AT MP NE 13.71 AND I-95 OVER THE BYRAM RIVER AT MP NE 14.93 IN WESTCHESTER COUNTY
Volume 1: http://www.thruway.ny.gov/netdata/contractors/documents/d214568_tane18-7_plans-volume-1-of-3.pdf
Volume 2: http://www.thruway.ny.gov/netdata/contractors/documents/d214568_tane18-7_plans-volume-2-of-3.pdf
Volume 3: http://www.thruway.ny.gov/netdata/contractors/documents/d214568_tane18-7_plans-volume-3-of-3.pdf

Any word on when work is supposed to start?  I'm planning to take a trip to New Haven to visit a friend who lives up there, probably some time over the next month or so.  It would be great to get some good before photos prior to the commencement of the project.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on January 31, 2018, 08:33:34 PM
Volume 1, Page 175: interesting that it still says Tappan Zee.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: PHLBOS on February 01, 2018, 09:06:11 AM
Quote from: vdeane on January 31, 2018, 08:33:34 PM
Volume 1, Page 175: interesting that it still says Tappan Zee.
A couple pages beforehand (Vol 1, Page 171); one BGS lists Cross Westchester Expressway with no I-287 shield.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: BamaZeus on February 01, 2018, 11:19:43 AM
It appears to me that NY will take care of the entire Byram bridge into CT (volume 1, pg 34), even though the state line is halfway across the river.  I wonder if CT is contributing anything to the project, or there is some sort of deal where they get it the next time they repave the bottom part of the Turnpike.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: route17fan on February 02, 2018, 10:43:44 PM
Interesting that on one of the sign data sheets, it says "Tappen Zee Br"  :banghead: (page and volume coming shortly)
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Bumppoman on April 01, 2018, 07:19:32 PM
https://www.democratandchronicle.com/story/news/2018/03/30/local-seneca-businessman-really-building-thruway-off-ramp/473904002/

Let's see how the FHWA likes this!
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on April 04, 2018, 02:05:04 AM
That's creative.

What happens if it actually gets built and open?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on April 07, 2018, 07:07:26 PM
Does anyone know what construction work is happening between the Lackawanna toll barrier and Exit 54?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on April 07, 2018, 07:17:56 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on April 07, 2018, 07:07:26 PM
Does anyone know what construction work is happening between the Lackawanna toll barrier and Exit 54?

Bridge replacement. Most of the bridges in that stretch are being replaced or redecked.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: SignBridge on April 07, 2018, 08:20:24 PM
Today there was a demonstration or march of some sort in Tarrytown. They tried to march onto the Tappan Zee Bridge but were blocked by a contingent of State Troopers and Westchester County police. The bridge does not allow pedestrians and the Thruway Authority was not about to shut down traffic on the bridge or the roadway for this purpose.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: empirestate on April 08, 2018, 12:20:44 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on April 07, 2018, 08:20:24 PM
Today there was a demonstration or march of some sort in Tarrytown. They tried to march onto the Tappan Zee Bridge but were blocked by a contingent of State Troopers and Westchester County police. The bridge does not allow pedestrians and the Thruway Authority was not about to shut down traffic on the bridge or the roadway for this purpose.

Well, it wouldn't have made much sense as a protest if they were. :-)
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: dgolub on April 08, 2018, 08:58:31 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on April 07, 2018, 08:20:24 PM
Today there was a demonstration or march of some sort in Tarrytown. They tried to march onto the Tappan Zee Bridge but were blocked by a contingent of State Troopers and Westchester County police. The bridge does not allow pedestrians and the Thruway Authority was not about to shut down traffic on the bridge or the roadway for this purpose.

It probably has something to do with this: https://www.change.org/p/the-ny-state-legislature-return-the-tappan-zee-name-to-those-who-rightfully-deserve-it-the-indians-and-dutch

It seems that she's incredibly serious about putting pressure on them to undo the renaming.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: empirestate on April 08, 2018, 09:12:02 AM
Quote from: dgolub on April 08, 2018, 08:58:31 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on April 07, 2018, 08:20:24 PM
Today there was a demonstration or march of some sort in Tarrytown. They tried to march onto the Tappan Zee Bridge but were blocked by a contingent of State Troopers and Westchester County police. The bridge does not allow pedestrians and the Thruway Authority was not about to shut down traffic on the bridge or the roadway for this purpose.

It probably has something to do with this: https://www.change.org/p/the-ny-state-legislature-return-the-tappan-zee-name-to-those-who-rightfully-deserve-it-the-indians-and-dutch

It seems that she's incredibly serious about putting pressure on them to undo the renaming.

No, it was the Black Women's March:
https://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/local/Police-Stop-Black-Womens-March-From-Crossing-New-Tappan-Zee-479054713.html
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Alps on April 09, 2018, 12:30:41 AM
We can't have nice things, so there will be no further discussion about this topic.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: D-Dey65 on April 10, 2018, 10:55:13 AM
Quote from: dgolub on April 08, 2018, 08:58:31 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on April 07, 2018, 08:20:24 PM
Today there was a demonstration or march of some sort in Tarrytown. They tried to march onto the Tappan Zee Bridge but were blocked by a contingent of State Troopers and Westchester County police. The bridge does not allow pedestrians and the Thruway Authority was not about to shut down traffic on the bridge or the roadway for this purpose.

It probably has something to do with this: https://www.change.org/p/the-ny-state-legislature-return-the-tappan-zee-name-to-those-who-rightfully-deserve-it-the-indians-and-dutch

It seems that she's incredibly serious about putting pressure on them to undo the renaming.
Don't they realize the previous Tappan Zee Bridge was also officially named after a politician (Charles Malcolm Wilson). And wasn't the bridge previously named for Thomas Dewey, along with the rest of the thruway?

Quote from: Alps on April 09, 2018, 12:30:41 AM
We can't have nice things, so there will be no further discussion about this topic.
Sorry Steve, but I had to bring it up.


Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on April 10, 2018, 11:33:42 AM
Quote from: D-Dey65 on April 10, 2018, 10:55:13 AM
Quote from: dgolub on April 08, 2018, 08:58:31 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on April 07, 2018, 08:20:24 PM
Today there was a demonstration or march of some sort in Tarrytown. They tried to march onto the Tappan Zee Bridge but were blocked by a contingent of State Troopers and Westchester County police. The bridge does not allow pedestrians and the Thruway Authority was not about to shut down traffic on the bridge or the roadway for this purpose.

It probably has something to do with this: https://www.change.org/p/the-ny-state-legislature-return-the-tappan-zee-name-to-those-who-rightfully-deserve-it-the-indians-and-dutch

It seems that she's incredibly serious about putting pressure on them to undo the renaming.
Don't they realize the previous Tappan Zee Bridge was also officially named after a politician (Charles Malcolm Wilson). And wasn't the bridge previously named for Thomas Dewey, along with the rest of the thruway?

Quote from: Alps on April 09, 2018, 12:30:41 AM
We can't have nice things, so there will be no further discussion about this topic.
Sorry Steve, but I had to bring it up.
Well, this is a different aspect of political discussion - not the one discouraged as above.
Old bridge was primarily known as Tappan Zee, with small memorial plaque with the Wilson's name, few people really knew that part.
New bridge has a single name - that is of Governor Cuomo I. And the way that name was pushed doesn't sit well with many people. Too much conflict of interest, too juicy ass kissing, too little discussion.
Another reason for rename is political opposition for re-election of Cuomo II later this year, as well as his potential presidential bid in 2020. If you will, this is a way to send a message that not all important decisions in Albany should be taken by 3 men in a room - or once decided by 3 men things may not be accepted by voters. A pretty symbolic one given all the conflict of interest involved.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: PHLBOS on April 10, 2018, 11:55:04 AM
Quote from: D-Dey65 on April 10, 2018, 10:55:13 AMDon't they realize the previous Tappan Zee Bridge was also officially named after a politician (Charles Malcolm Wilson). And wasn't the bridge previously named for Thomas Dewey, along with the rest of the thruway?
The Malcolm Wilson portion of the name was added to the Tappan Zee Bridge's name circa 1994.  Interestingly, the LGS' bearing his name are still present at each approach towards the new bridge (the approaches to the old bridge have since been demolished).

Regarding the (Gov.) Thomas Dewey name; I believe (and someone from New York State can feel free to confirm/correct me on this) such was applied to the entire NY Thruway corridor.  While such includes the Tappan Zee Bridge; the bridge itself wasn't named after Gov. Dewey per say.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: D-Dey65 on April 10, 2018, 12:06:55 PM
Okay, but I thought it had another official and barely used name before Wilson.

And I thought there were drivers so upset with the old bridge they were only happy to do away with the old name.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: PHLBOS on April 10, 2018, 02:33:40 PM
Quote from: D-Dey65 on April 10, 2018, 12:06:55 PMOkay, but I thought it had another official and barely used name before Wilson.
To the best of my knowledge, Tappan Zee has always been the official name of the old bridge, with and without the Gov. Malcolm Wilson prefix since day one.

Quote from: D-Dey65 on April 10, 2018, 12:06:55 PMAnd I thought there were drivers so upset with the old bridge they were only happy to do away with the old name.
Most were upset with the condition of the old bridge; not with the Tappan Zee name.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: empirestate on April 10, 2018, 07:33:53 PM
Quote from: D-Dey65 on April 10, 2018, 12:06:55 PM
And I thought there were drivers so upset with the old bridge they were only happy to do away with the old name.

But the old name isn't done away with at all, save perhaps for a minuscule detail of capitalization: It's the bridge over the Tappan Zee; so, it's still the Tappan Zee bridge, even if it isn't the Tappan Zee Bridge.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on April 10, 2018, 07:48:07 PM
Yeah, that's a lot of the issue.  Since Wilson's name was a prefix to the Tappan Zee name, it was easily ignored.  Since Cuomo's name completely replaces the Tappan Zee name rather than being a new prefix, it is not so easily ignored.  The old name was, in the mind of the public, simply an honorary name, with the perceived official designation being the Tappan Zee.  Thus, the objection is to the removal of the Tappan Zee designation.

Also, most people associate the name with the crossing, not the physical structure.  Engineers and politicians can cry until the cows come home about it not physically being in the same bridge, but to the public, a "new bridge" represents a bridge where none had previously existed, so it will be perceived as a renaming.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: RobbieL2415 on April 10, 2018, 08:47:20 PM
Name it whatever the official State/Thruway bridge number is.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: SignBridge on April 10, 2018, 09:12:57 PM
I think regardless of what official name is used, most people will continue to call it the Tappan Zee Bridge. That's what I'll be doing anyway.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Alps on April 10, 2018, 11:29:18 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on April 10, 2018, 09:12:57 PM
I think regardless of what official name is used, most people will continue to call it the Tappan Zee Bridge. That's what I'll be doing anyway.
Shea Stadium.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: jp the roadgeek on April 11, 2018, 06:38:22 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on April 10, 2018, 09:12:57 PM
I think regardless of what official name is used, most people will continue to call it the Tappan Zee Bridge. That's what I'll be doing anyway.

Just as people still use Triboro Bridge, Interboro Parkway, West Side Highway, and 59th St. Bridge.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: PHLBOS on April 11, 2018, 08:21:51 AM
Quote from: empirestate on April 10, 2018, 07:33:53 PMIt's the bridge over the Tappan Zee; so, it's still the Tappan Zee bridge, even if it isn't the Tappan Zee Bridge.
Wiki Source regarding how the Tappan Zee name came about (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tappan_Zee_Bridge_(1955%E2%80%932017)).

Quote from: Wiki link regarding the 1955-2017 Tappan Zee BridgeThe Tappan Zee is named for an American Indian tribe from the area called "Tappan"; and zee being the Dutch word for "sea".

Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on April 11, 2018, 08:55:17 AM
Quote from: PHLBOS on April 11, 2018, 08:21:51 AM
Quote from: empirestate on April 10, 2018, 07:33:53 PMIt's the bridge over the Tappan Zee; so, it's still the Tappan Zee bridge, even if it isn't the Tappan Zee Bridge.
No, the bridge crosses over the Hudson River.  Wiki Source regarding how the Tappan Zee name came about (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tappan_Zee_Bridge_(1955%E2%80%932017)).

Quote from: Wiki link regarding the 1955-2017 Tappan Zee BridgeThe Tappan Zee is named for an American Indian tribe from the area called "Tappan"; and zee being the Dutch word for "sea".
My impression always was that "tappan zee" is the name for that wide part of Hudson, and looks like wiki agrees with such interpretation:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tappan_Zee
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: dgolub on April 11, 2018, 09:00:35 AM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on April 11, 2018, 06:38:22 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on April 10, 2018, 09:12:57 PM
I think regardless of what official name is used, most people will continue to call it the Tappan Zee Bridge. That's what I'll be doing anyway.

Just as people still use Triboro Bridge, Interboro Parkway, West Side Highway, and 59th St. Bridge.

This.  When I talk about where I'm going, I'll always drive by Shea Stadium on my way to the Triboro.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: empirestate on April 11, 2018, 10:07:26 AM
Quote from: PHLBOS on April 11, 2018, 08:21:51 AM
Quote from: empirestate on April 10, 2018, 07:33:53 PMIt's the bridge over the Tappan Zee; so, it's still the Tappan Zee bridge, even if it isn't the Tappan Zee Bridge.
No, the bridge crosses over the Hudson River.  Wiki Source regarding how the Tappan Zee name came about (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tappan_Zee_Bridge_(1955%E2%80%932017)).

Quote from: Wiki link regarding the 1955-2017 Tappan Zee BridgeThe Tappan Zee is named for an American Indian tribe from the area called "Tappan"; and zee being the Dutch word for "sea".

Whoops, careful–the Tappan Zee is a part of the Hudson River. So by "no", you mean "yes". ;-)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tappan_Zee
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: PHLBOS on April 11, 2018, 10:28:50 AM
Quote from: empirestate on April 11, 2018, 10:07:26 AM
Earlier post has since been modified.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Roadwarriors79 on April 13, 2018, 12:55:28 AM
Are there any sign replacement plans for the Thruway anytime soon? I drove on the I-90 section last summer, and the signs near Buffalo (and west of there) were almost invisible at night. I don't know if the signs being in Clearview had anything to do with that or not.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on April 13, 2018, 12:51:14 PM
It's more due to nonreflective sheeting on the letters, although the public perception was that it was due to the Clearview.

There's a project coming up near exit 55 that's a major rehabilitation/reconstruction that will include sign replacements.  I think it's Lackawanna-Exit 53, but don't quote me on that.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on April 15, 2018, 01:59:31 PM
Quote from: vdeane on April 13, 2018, 12:51:14 PM
It's more due to nonreflective sheeting on the letters, although the public perception was that it was due to the Clearview.

There's a project coming up near exit 55 that's a major rehabilitation/reconstruction that will include sign replacements.  I think it's Lackawanna-Exit 53, but don't quote me on that.

It's already underway, lots of heavy equipment, cranes, temporary jersey barriers and pavement up. New guardrails on EB I-90 as well.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on April 17, 2018, 09:45:20 AM
This is an interesting article about the 2 mile stretch of Thruway running through Cattaraugus Reservation

http://buffalonews.com/2018/04/17/seneca-nation-businessman-mum-on-mysterious-construction-project-along-state-thruway/
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on April 17, 2018, 10:14:53 AM
Quote from: Buffaboy on April 17, 2018, 09:45:20 AM
This is an interesting article about the 2 mile stretch of Thruway running through Cattaraugus Reservation

http://buffalonews.com/2018/04/17/seneca-nation-businessman-mum-on-mysterious-construction-project-along-state-thruway/
Mentioned on a previous page:

Quote from: Bumppoman on April 01, 2018, 07:19:32 PM
https://www.democratandchronicle.com/story/news/2018/03/30/local-seneca-businessman-really-building-thruway-off-ramp/473904002/

Let's see how the FHWA likes this!
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: seicer on April 17, 2018, 10:55:16 AM
I just love how the pavement just sort of... becomes a rutted, pothole, cracked nightmare for those miles in the reservation.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: RobbieL2415 on April 17, 2018, 01:36:46 PM
Quote from: seicer on April 17, 2018, 10:55:16 AM
I just love how the pavement just sort of... becomes a rutted, pothole, cracked nightmare for those miles in the reservation.
LOL. That stretch.  It's becoming one with the scenery.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on April 23, 2018, 08:56:45 AM
I read that NYSTA wants to renovate all rest areas in the system. Does anyone have more info?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on April 23, 2018, 11:16:06 AM
Maybe they'll bring back the stainless steel HoJos.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on April 23, 2018, 12:14:39 PM
Quote from: seicer on April 17, 2018, 10:55:16 AM
I just love how the pavement just sort of... becomes a rutted, pothole, cracked nightmare for those miles in the reservation.

Basically any road in Michigan makes that stretch seem like a picnic...
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: 02 Park Ave on April 23, 2018, 01:08:19 PM
I hope that any rest area restoration includes improving the lighting lntensity for the ground level parking at Slothsburg.  It is so dark down there that it borders on dangerous.

Spelling correction made.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on April 23, 2018, 03:14:11 PM
Slothsberg? :D
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Alps on April 23, 2018, 10:08:27 PM
sloatsburg... D:
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on June 11, 2018, 05:57:24 PM
I drove the thruway yesterday between I-290 and I-390. Every time I drive it, I'm more convinced it needs to be six-laned, as cruise-setting becomes less and less possible. :banghead:

Six lanes from NY 75 in Hamburg right through to NY 365 in Verona would be a dream come true.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Roadwarriors79 on June 12, 2018, 02:36:25 PM
Plans ahead to start converting the toll plazas in the downstate area to cashless tolling:

https://www.governor.ny.gov/news/governor-cuomo-announces-all-new-york-state-thruway-toll-barriers-lower-hudson-valley-will
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on June 12, 2018, 08:35:08 PM
Quote from: webny99 on June 11, 2018, 05:57:24 PM
I drove the thruway yesterday between I-290 and I-390. Every time I drive it, I'm more convinced it needs to be six-laned, as cruise-setting becomes less and less possible. :banghead:

Six lanes from NY 75 in Hamburg right through to NY 365 in Verona would be a dream come true.

I've said the same thing to myself. I feel like 10 years ago this wouldn't have been the case, but it just feels too congested these days.

3 lanes from Abbott Road to I-290 is not enough either.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cu2010 on June 14, 2018, 08:00:41 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on June 12, 2018, 08:35:08 PM
Quote from: webny99 on June 11, 2018, 05:57:24 PM
I drove the thruway yesterday between I-290 and I-390. Every time I drive it, I'm more convinced it needs to be six-laned, as cruise-setting becomes less and less possible. :banghead:

Six lanes from NY 75 in Hamburg right through to NY 365 in Verona would be a dream come true.

I've said the same thing to myself. I feel like 10 years ago this wouldn't have been the case, but it just feels too congested these days.

3 lanes from Abbott Road to I-290 is not enough either.

Thirded, especially on the Hamburg-to-Verona argument. That entire stretch can be miserable at times, especially when the right lane moves at 62mph and the left moves at 82.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: seicer on June 14, 2018, 10:38:53 PM
I guess I'm used to having adaptive cruise control, so it makes driving a lot more pleasant on the congested areas of the Thruway, but I've seen my speeds drop to a more constant 60-65 MPH during the day on many upstate segments. I can keep a good 70-75 MPH cruise south of Albany.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: empirestate on June 15, 2018, 10:47:09 AM
Quote from: cu2010 on June 14, 2018, 08:00:41 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on June 12, 2018, 08:35:08 PM
Quote from: webny99 on June 11, 2018, 05:57:24 PM
I drove the thruway yesterday between I-290 and I-390. Every time I drive it, I'm more convinced it needs to be six-laned, as cruise-setting becomes less and less possible. :banghead:

Six lanes from NY 75 in Hamburg right through to NY 365 in Verona would be a dream come true.

I've said the same thing to myself. I feel like 10 years ago this wouldn't have been the case, but it just feels too congested these days.

3 lanes from Abbott Road to I-290 is not enough either.

Thirded, especially on the Hamburg-to-Verona argument. That entire stretch can be miserable at times, especially when the right lane moves at 62mph and the left moves at 82.

Yes; it would be much better to add a third lane, so that we can have the middle lane at 62, the left lane at 82, and the right lane at 102. :bigass:
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on June 15, 2018, 08:48:28 PM
Quote from: cu2010 on June 14, 2018, 08:00:41 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on June 12, 2018, 08:35:08 PM
Quote from: webny99 on June 11, 2018, 05:57:24 PM
Six lanes from NY 75 in Hamburg right through to NY 365 in Verona would be a dream come true.
I've said the same thing to myself.
Thirded, especially on the Hamburg-to-Verona argument.

Yeah, I figured based on AADT and experience that those are the most logical endpoints. AADT drops below 25,000 beyond Utica, making a widening not really warranted between there and Albany.
West of Hamburg, traffic flows really well most of the time; I can't speak for south of Albany.

QuoteThat entire stretch can be miserable at times, especially when the right lane moves at 62mph and the left moves at 82.

And then someone going 63 mph wants to pass. So then everybody starts lining up behind them in the passing lane, leaving large gaps on the right. Then road rage ensues as people start weaving and cutting in. Yet nobody really makes any headway until the guy two miles down the road finishes his pass; it's like being stuck inside a moving labyrinth.

Oftentimes, this occurs with two trucks, so you can bet on a marginal speed differential and, from both parties, an unpreparedness to change speed.

Quote from: empirestateYes; it would be much better to add a third lane, so that we can have the middle lane at 62, the left lane at 82, and the right lane at 102. :bigass:

In rural areas, and especially with ten or more miles between exits, trucks would still default to the far right lane. I'd like to think most passenger car drivers would have the sanity to do the same. Basically, traffic would flow similar to how it does now, but during peak travel periods or when trucks are passing, a third lane would be available, vastly improving flow.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on June 15, 2018, 09:02:38 PM
Quote from: seicer on June 14, 2018, 10:38:53 PM
I've seen my speeds drop to a more constant 60-65 MPH during the day on many upstate segments. I can keep a good 70-75 MPH cruise south of Albany.

I'd venture that this has less to do with traffic volumes (which are similar), and more to do with adherence to keeping right.

To add to that, traffic tends to move faster in general closer to the east coast. Up here, we have a lot of arrogant pickup drivers (Ram, Silverado, F-150) who pick their cruising speed and refuse to budge from the left lane. You don't get as much of that downstate, and it helps traffic flow when passenger cars can use the left lane for its intended purpose.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: froggie on June 15, 2018, 09:12:18 PM
Quote from: webny99who pick their cruising speed and refuse to budge from the left lane. You don't get as much of that downstate,

In my experience, it's even more prevalent downstate...
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on June 15, 2018, 09:18:44 PM
Quote from: froggie
Quote from: webny99who pick their cruising speed and refuse to budge from the left lane. You don't get as much of that downstate,
In my experience, it's even more prevalent downstate...

Yeah, but you cut out the qualifier about the specific trucks. You are probably correct that passenger cars do less left-lane camping upstate.

I have no hard evidence, of course, but I suspect when this happens downstate, it happens at higher speeds on average; maybe closer to 75 or 80 mph, which is a lot less obtuse than 65 mph.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: froggie on June 16, 2018, 07:49:30 AM
^ I left the "qualifier" out because it doesn't matter...pickups are no better or worse than passenger vehicles or SUVs in this.  The only ones who are halfways decent about lane discipline south of Albany are the big rig truckers.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: 02 Park Ave on June 16, 2018, 09:50:59 AM
Straight trucks seem to be the worst.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on June 16, 2018, 01:23:05 PM
Quote from: froggie on June 16, 2018, 07:49:30 AM
^ I left the "qualifier" out because it doesn't matter...pickups are no better or worse than passenger vehicles or SUVs in this.  The only ones who are halfways decent about lane discipline south of Albany are the big rig truckers.

South of Albany, I'm sure that's true; I have no experience to speak of between Albany and NY 17. I can't disagree with the premise that downstate has more left-lane hogs.

My point was that while there may be less left-lane hogging overall in Western NY/upstate, seven times out of ten it's a pickup truck doing it, and they're doing it at speeds that are much lower than you'd get downstate, simply because traffic overall tends to move slower further away from the east coast.

At least if you're cruising in the left lane at 75 or 80 mph, you're not obstructing flow that much, and are guaranteed to be passing trucks and other traffic at a reasonable speed differential. Which I guess is why seicer can maintain a higher speed downstate than upstate, despite more left-lane hogs.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on June 18, 2018, 10:07:37 AM
Quote from: cu2010 on June 14, 2018, 08:00:41 PM
Thirded, especially on the Hamburg-to-Verona argument. That entire stretch can be miserable at times, especially when the right lane moves at 62mph and the left moves at 82.
I have to ask.. Is 82 too fast or too slow for you?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on June 18, 2018, 03:29:14 PM
Quote from: kalvado on June 18, 2018, 10:07:37 AM
Quote from: cu2010 on June 14, 2018, 08:00:41 PM
Thirded, especially on the Hamburg-to-Verona argument. That entire stretch can be miserable at times, especially when the right lane moves at 62mph and the left moves at 82.
I have to ask.. Is 82 too fast or too slow for you?

I drive an SUV from 2003, I would rather not find out.

In other words it's definitely too fast. I'll go up to 78-79.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: amroad17 on June 19, 2018, 12:59:55 AM
Quote from: 02 Park Ave on June 16, 2018, 09:50:59 AM
Straight trucks seem to be the worst.
Most straight trucks (and some semis) are governed at 62 or 65 mph.  It is very rare a straight truck will top out at 70 mph.
I once drove for a dispatch company out of Cincinnati.  My truck topped out at 65 mph.  It was real fun going out west where the speed limit was 75 (now 80 in some places).  I just camped in the right lane, shook my hand at passing vehicles and said, "You dang whippersnappers are driving too fast!!!".
Anyway, my son drove for TMC out of Des Moines.  Fortunately, he could park his truck at a plant in Silver Grove, KY.  His truck was goverened at 62 mph, because TMC did this to save $$$ on fuel.  He now drives for First Fleet and has a 65 mph truck.
A driver of a governed truck needs to be aware that he is limited on passing ability, yet some have a selfish attitude and will try to do it anyway.  It will not work in hilly terrain as this type of truck will not keep its speed uphill.  I have seen it too many times.  A Swift truck going 63 will try to pass a Werner truck going 62.  Then there will be the proverbial two mile slowdown of traffic behind them because it has taken the Swift driver 5-8 minutes to pass the Werner driver.  A driver needs to pick his spots or just realize that they will be driving in the right lane for miles and/or hours.  I did it for eight years.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Brandon on June 21, 2018, 10:00:13 AM
^^ The governing of any vehicle below the top freeway speed for such vehicle in the country should, IMHO, be banned.  There is no excuse to govern these trucks at 57 or 62 when the speeds they can legally go can be as high as 75, 80, or on one Texas tollway, 85.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: RobbieL2415 on June 21, 2018, 04:29:26 PM
Quote from: Brandon on June 21, 2018, 10:00:13 AM
^^ The governing of any vehicle below the top freeway speed for such vehicle in the country should, IMHO, be banned.  There is no excuse to govern these trucks at 57 or 62 when the speeds they can legally go can be as high as 75, 80, or on one Texas tollway, 85.
Come to CT where school busses are governed to 50!
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: shadyjay on June 27, 2018, 09:29:20 PM
So.... surprised this hasn't been brought up yet:

https://www.governor.ny.gov/news/governor-cuomo-announces-all-new-york-state-thruway-toll-barriers-lower-hudson-valley-will

QuoteGovernor Andrew M. Cuomo today announced cashless tolling will begin on the Thruway Authority's remaining fixed toll barriers in the lower Hudson Valley by the end of 2018.

Haven't seen any plans or heard anything about the plan for the lower Hudson Valley barriers.  Spring Valley should be simple... the gantry is already there.  Guessing gantries would go up at some point near the existing Yonkers and New Rochelle barriers.  Given the wide berth to accomodate the New Rochelle plaza, wonder if they would straighten I-95 South with all the free'd up space.  Is New Rochelle going to stay one-way or become a two-way gantry? 


QuoteAs announced by Governor Cuomo in his 2018 State of the State address, the entire New York State Thruway will be converted cashless by the end of 2020.

Okay, by the end of 2020.  Sure.  So what's the plan here?  Gantries at each existing interchange?  Or do what the MassPike did and install gantries between interchanges over the mainline, permitting free travel between select interchanges?  And this is all going to happen in 2 1/2 years?  Has this gone out to bid yet?  Public meetings about it?  Anything? 

And without the tickets to worry about, could we be looking at a conversion to distance-based exits here?  Yes, new mileposts would be required but if they're going to put up some 50 gantries with tolling equipment and necessary hardware, what's a few hundred mileposts? 
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: NoGoodNamesAvailable on June 27, 2018, 09:55:08 PM
Quote from: shadyjay on June 27, 2018, 09:29:20 PM
And without the tickets to worry about, could we be looking at a conversion to distance-based exits here?  Yes, new mileposts would be required but if they're going to put up some 50 gantries with tolling equipment and necessary hardware, what's a few hundred mileposts?

Doubt it. The thruway is not getting renumbered until:

(1) The FWHA forces them to, or

(2) They resign the whole thing.

If it's the latter, I hope to god they don't try to use up their current NON-REFLECTIVE sheeting stock. All the Clearview and post-Clearview signage on the Thruway is basically unreadable at night.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on June 27, 2018, 10:05:06 PM
Quote from: shadyjay on June 27, 2018, 09:29:20 PM
Okay, by the end of 2020.  Sure.  So what's the plan here?  Gantries at each existing interchange?  Or do what the MassPike did and install gantries between interchanges over the mainline, permitting free travel between select interchanges?  And this is all going to happen in 2 1/2 years?  Has this gone out to bid yet?  Public meetings about it?  Anything? 
we'll worry about that after the reelection of governor

Quote
And without the tickets to worry about, could we be looking at a conversion to distance-based exits here?  Yes, new mileposts would be required but if they're going to put up some 50 gantries with tolling equipment and necessary hardware, what's a few hundred mileposts?
No.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: D-Dey65 on June 27, 2018, 10:12:09 PM
Quote from: shadyjay on June 27, 2018, 09:29:20 PM
So.... surprised this hasn't been brought up yet:

https://www.governor.ny.gov/news/governor-cuomo-announces-all-new-york-state-thruway-toll-barriers-lower-hudson-valley-will

QuoteGovernor Andrew M. Cuomo today announced cashless tolling will begin on the Thruway Authority's remaining fixed toll barriers in the lower Hudson Valley by the end of 2018.

Haven't seen any plans or heard anything about the plan for the lower Hudson Valley barriers.  Spring Valley should be simple... the gantry is already there.  Guessing gantries would go up at some point near the existing Yonkers and New Rochelle barriers.  Given the wide berth to accomodate the New Rochelle plaza, wonder if they would straighten I-95 South with all the free'd up space.  Is New Rochelle going to stay one-way or become a two-way gantry? 

Somebody had better take a picture of the toll plaza and post it in Wikimedia Commons before the Thruway Authority tears it down.


Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on July 01, 2018, 03:30:17 PM
If the Thruway goes to AET, I wonder what happens to the luxury toll booths at I-84.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on July 01, 2018, 05:33:32 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on July 01, 2018, 03:30:17 PM
If the Thruway goes to AET, I wonder what happens to the luxury toll booths at I-84.
Sold as high end suburban condos?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on July 01, 2018, 05:47:14 PM
Quote from: kalvado on July 01, 2018, 05:33:32 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on July 01, 2018, 03:30:17 PM
If the Thruway goes to AET, I wonder what happens to the luxury toll booths at I-84.
Sold as high end suburban condos?

Perhaps. With a scenic view of course.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on July 01, 2018, 06:04:20 PM
I wonder how many interchanges would be worth redesigning. Perhaps some new interchanges would be considered, too.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: MikeCL on July 01, 2018, 06:46:18 PM
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on June 21, 2018, 04:29:26 PM
Quote from: Brandon on June 21, 2018, 10:00:13 AM
^^ The governing of any vehicle below the top freeway speed for such vehicle in the country should, IMHO, be banned.  There is no excuse to govern these trucks at 57 or 62 when the speeds they can legally go can be as high as 75, 80, or on one Texas tollway, 85.
Come to CT where school busses are governed to 50!
I drive for UPS most trucks have governors set ay 70 MPH.. but I've seen some as low as 65 (it sucks big time) and I've seen some at 75.. I remember one Diesel we had the governor was broken
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: ipeters61 on July 01, 2018, 10:38:38 PM
Quote from: MikeCL on July 01, 2018, 06:46:18 PM
I drive for UPS most trucks have governors set ay 70 MPH.. but I've seen some as low as 65 (it sucks big time) and I've seen some at 75.. I remember one Diesel we had the governor was broken
I know the Delaware state vehicles are limited to somewhere between 5-10mph over, so effectively our limit is up to 75mph north of Dover and 65mph south of Dover (70mph within Dover).

However, it's not a hard limit, you're sent an email about it.  I was told that for a while, the GPS didn't recognize the difference between EzPass toll lanes and regular toll lanes, so it would get annoying as you drove through the EzPass lanes on DE-1 (65 MPH when GPS thinks you're supposed to go 5 MPH).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on July 12, 2018, 11:43:02 PM
For the past year or so, every time I go through an E-ZPass lane the display warns that I have a low balance; this happens no matter how much money I have.

Normally I don't keep more than $25 in my account, but I don't see why the reader considers that a low balance?

Because of this I don't even pay attention to my account because I don't have a need to use the Thruway that much. However this problem is particularly insidious because I just looked and saw my account had a -$0.03 balance.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: MikeCL on July 13, 2018, 09:38:18 AM
Quote from: Buffaboy on July 12, 2018, 11:43:02 PM
For the past year or so, every time I go through an E-ZPass lane the display warns that I have a low balance; this happens no matter how much money I have.

Normally I don't keep more than $25 in my account, but I don't see why the reader considers that a low balance?

Because of this I don't even pay attention to my account because I don't have a need to use the Thruway that much. However this problem is particularly insidious because I just looked and saw my account had a -$0.03 balance.
That's how they like to make money off those admin fees.. I still can't see much of a valve in EZ pass.. ok I pass the Toll booth what used to be a $38 replenishing rate jumps up to say $239 the problem is the replenish rate also goes up not staying at $10 or $20 it jumps up to like $30 or $40 I forget
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: PHLBOS on July 13, 2018, 10:08:58 AM
Quote from: Buffaboy on July 12, 2018, 11:43:02 PM
For the past year or so, every time I go through an E-ZPass lane the display warns that I have a low balance; this happens no matter how much money I have.

Normally I don't keep more than $25 in my account, but I don't see why the reader considers that a low balance?

Because of this I don't even pay attention to my account because I don't have a need to use the Thruway that much. However this problem is particularly insidious because I just looked and saw my account had a -$0.03 balance.
Not sure how old your transponder but maybe it's starting to wear out.  Transponders don't last forever. 

When my PA/PTC-issued E-ZPass transponder was mysteriously not registering at various toll booths several years ago; I called the PTC to ask about such and they stated that my transponder was old and overdue for a replacement.  They sent me a new one free of charge but on the condition that I mail back the old one in a timely manner.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on July 13, 2018, 10:10:44 AM
Quote from: PHLBOS on July 13, 2018, 10:08:58 AM
Quote from: Buffaboy on July 12, 2018, 11:43:02 PM
For the past year or so, every time I go through an E-ZPass lane the display warns that I have a low balance; this happens no matter how much money I have.

Normally I don't keep more than $25 in my account, but I don't see why the reader considers that a low balance?

Because of this I don't even pay attention to my account because I don't have a need to use the Thruway that much. However this problem is particularly insidious because I just looked and saw my account had a -$0.03 balance.
Not sure how old your transponder but maybe it's starting to wear out.  Transponders don't last forever. 

When my PA/PTC-issued E-ZPass transponder was mysteriously not registering at various toll booths several years ago; I called the PTC to ask about such and they stated that my transponder was old and overdue for a replacement.  They sent me a new one free of charge but on the condition that I mail back the old one in a timely manner.

Interesting, because my transponder is only about a year old now.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: PHLBOS on July 13, 2018, 10:23:34 AM
Quote from: Buffaboy on July 13, 2018, 10:10:44 AMInteresting, because my transponder is only about a year old now.
That being the case, your transponder might be defective.  In my case, the transponder I was using/had replaced was about 10 years old.  I've been told that the typical service life of a transponder is usually 7 years & subject to usage.

Either way and/or if you haven't already done so, I would contact your provider (NYSTA I'm assuming in your case) & explain to them what's happening; then go from there.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on July 13, 2018, 10:50:00 AM
Quote from: PHLBOS on July 13, 2018, 10:08:58 AM
Quote from: Buffaboy on July 12, 2018, 11:43:02 PM
For the past year or so, every time I go through an E-ZPass lane the display warns that I have a low balance; this happens no matter how much money I have.

Normally I don't keep more than $25 in my account, but I don't see why the reader considers that a low balance?

Because of this I don't even pay attention to my account because I don't have a need to use the Thruway that much. However this problem is particularly insidious because I just looked and saw my account had a -$0.03 balance.
Not sure how old your transponder but maybe it's starting to wear out.  Transponders don't last forever. 

When my PA/PTC-issued E-ZPass transponder was mysteriously not registering at various toll booths several years ago; I called the PTC to ask about such and they stated that my transponder was old and overdue for a replacement.  They sent me a new one free of charge but on the condition that I mail back the old one in a timely manner.
Transporders - at least old ones - have a huge Lithium battery on board, which is supposed to last 10 years. I got a replacement mailed with pre-paid envelope for an old one once it hit 10 year mark without asking. That is for Thruway authority tag.
Interestingly enough, same transponder started to get problems about 2 years before that.  I took it to service center; they measured it on some machine and told that the tag is fine - but I probably mounted it incorrectly. However I didn't get any problems after that test (and no, I didn't change much on my side)
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on July 13, 2018, 11:06:44 AM
Quote from: Buffaboy on July 12, 2018, 11:43:02 PM
Normally I don't keep more than $25 in my account, but I don't see why the reader considers that a low balance?
Because of this I don't even pay attention to my account because I don't have a need to use the Thruway that much. However this problem is particularly insidious because I just looked and saw my account had a -$0.03 balance.

My personal recommendation would be to keep more than $25 in the account (you'd probably avoid the "Balance Low" message) but each to their own.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: ipeters61 on July 13, 2018, 12:14:58 PM
Quote from: MikeCL on July 13, 2018, 09:38:18 AM
Quote from: Buffaboy on July 12, 2018, 11:43:02 PM
For the past year or so, every time I go through an E-ZPass lane the display warns that I have a low balance; this happens no matter how much money I have.

Normally I don't keep more than $25 in my account, but I don't see why the reader considers that a low balance?

Because of this I don't even pay attention to my account because I don't have a need to use the Thruway that much. However this problem is particularly insidious because I just looked and saw my account had a -$0.03 balance.
That's how they like to make money off those admin fees.. I still can't see much of a valve in EZ pass.. ok I pass the Toll booth what used to be a $38 replenishing rate jumps up to say $239 the problem is the replenish rate also goes up not staying at $10 or $20 it jumps up to like $30 or $40 I forget
If you're saying "can't see much of a value in EzPass," there was a time when my grandfather and I were stuck waiting 30 minutes to pay a cash toll at the Throgs Neck Bridge.  EzPass lanes were moving nice and smooth.

Quote from: Buffaboy on July 12, 2018, 11:43:02 PM
For the past year or so, every time I go through an E-ZPass lane the display warns that I have a low balance; this happens no matter how much money I have.

Normally I don't keep more than $25 in my account, but I don't see why the reader considers that a low balance?

Because of this I don't even pay attention to my account because I don't have a need to use the Thruway that much. However this problem is particularly insidious because I just looked and saw my account had a -$0.03 balance.
I remember I drove on the Pennsylvania Turnpike the day they started to disable the stoplights for the EzPass (the one that says "Paid - Go"/"Low Balance"/whatever the other one is) and I was at the first interchange where they were doing it (Exit 242/I-83 Harrisburg West) and was so confused by it.  It took me a minute to see if it went through.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Roadwarriors79 on July 14, 2018, 12:34:31 PM
Quote from: NoGoodNamesAvailable on June 27, 2018, 09:55:08 PM
Quote from: shadyjay on June 27, 2018, 09:29:20 PM
And without the tickets to worry about, could we be looking at a conversion to distance-based exits here?  Yes, new mileposts would be required but if they're going to put up some 50 gantries with tolling equipment and necessary hardware, what's a few hundred mileposts?

Doubt it. The thruway is not getting renumbered until:

(1) The FWHA forces them to, or

(2) They resign the whole thing.

If it's the latter, I hope to god they don't try to use up their current NON-REFLECTIVE sheeting stock. All the Clearview and post-Clearview signage on the Thruway is basically unreadable at night.

Yes to the unreadable at night signs. Could it hurt to have lighting at interchanges as well?

As much as I would love to see new mileposts and exit numbers on the Thruway, I don't think it would happen any time soon. Even if it was the case, I believe that I-90 and I-87 would be the last interstates in NY to get resigned.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: SignBridge on July 14, 2018, 08:25:38 PM
Beats the heck out of me why NYSTA can't get signing done right. Why don't they just follow the same specs that NYSDOT does?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on July 14, 2018, 09:12:28 PM
They don't really deviate any more than any NYSDOT region these days.  They're done with Clearview, and the nonreflective letters aren't a spec - they ordered the wrong stuff for their sign shop and are too cheap to throw it out and get the correct stuff.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on July 14, 2018, 09:43:54 PM
Quote from: vdeane on July 14, 2018, 09:12:28 PM
They don't really deviate any more than any NYSDOT region these days.  They're done with Clearview, and the nonreflective letters aren't a spec - they ordered the wrong stuff for their sign shop and are too cheap to throw it out and get the correct stuff.

No, it's that they don't have the money to get the correct stuff right now. There's a difference.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: SignBridge on July 14, 2018, 10:25:10 PM
Thanks for explaining that vdeane. So did the person who ordered the wrong stuff (and caused all this havoc for thousands of drivers) get fired?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on July 15, 2018, 11:50:08 AM
No idea.  In any case, they've had the non-reflective lettering for about a decade by now.  Sure seems like they ordered an awful lot when they did that... makes me wonder why that type of sheeting is even made, considering that it can't be used on road signs (or at least shouldn't).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: RobbieL2415 on July 15, 2018, 10:40:17 PM
FHWA be like: "Change to mile-based exits or loose federal funding.

NYSTA:"Whatever, man. I'll just raise tolls."
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on July 16, 2018, 03:20:22 AM
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on July 15, 2018, 10:40:17 PM
FHWA be like: "Change to mile-based exits or loose federal funding.

NYSTA:"Whatever, man. I'll just raise tolls."
FHWA: your fine is $100k!
Cuomo: and this is a new design of tourism promoting signs!
NYSTU: and while we are at this, we suggest increasing school aid by 5% next year
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: MikeCL on July 16, 2018, 07:32:12 AM
I have to ask this because I saw this driving.. on  the Deegan are the underpasses not marked for height? I saw a flatbed tow carrying a box truck maybe like 12' I was wondering why the lane was moving so slow.. he must of had inches to spare.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on July 16, 2018, 09:07:13 AM
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on July 15, 2018, 10:40:17 PM
FHWA be like: "Change to mile-based exits or loose federal funding.

NYSTA:"Whatever, man. I'll just raise tolls."
More like:

NYSTA:  Oh no.  How ever will we survive not being able to authorize those pennies?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on July 16, 2018, 09:41:37 AM
They've been wanting to raise tolls for years. They haven't because Cuomo will fire anyone who does.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Brandon on July 16, 2018, 10:32:10 AM
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on July 15, 2018, 10:40:17 PM
FHWA be like: "Change to mile-based exits or loose federal funding.

NYSTA:"Whatever, man. I'll just raise tolls."

And yet, ISTHA, which also gets no federal funding, merely added them to their formerly exit-numberless system.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: NoGoodNamesAvailable on July 16, 2018, 10:11:33 PM
Quote from: MikeCL on July 16, 2018, 07:32:12 AM
I have to ask this because I saw this driving.. on  the Deegan are the underpasses not marked for height? I saw a flatbed tow carrying a box truck maybe like 12' I was wondering why the lane was moving so slow.. he must of had inches to spare.

NY generally doesn't sign legal clearances above 13'—0." Legal (signed) clearance is usually a foot, but sometimes several feet lower than the bridge's actual clearance (unless the sign says ACTUAL CLEARANCE). It's an arcane practice that NY agencies have held onto for no reason other than stubbornness and it's likely responsible for a decent portion of bridge strikes in the state (since people figure out the clearances are fake and figure they're OK through all the bridges).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on July 17, 2018, 12:46:34 PM
Ironically, the reason they're done that way is to reduce such collisions by giving truckers who may not have an exact idea of how tall their truck/load is a foot of leeway.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: froggie on July 17, 2018, 02:20:47 PM
Signing clearances less than the actual clearance also gives leeway for maintenance/road crews who may add a pavement overlay to a given roadway.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on July 19, 2018, 11:38:37 PM
It appears as though the Thruway bridge repairs in West Seneca includes replacement of the old road bed with concrete.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on July 20, 2018, 10:08:39 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on July 14, 2018, 10:25:10 PM
Thanks for explaining that vdeane. So did the person who ordered the wrong stuff (and caused all this havoc for thousands of drivers) get fired?
Thinking about it - that person was probably transferred to DMV and put in charge of license plates fabrication...
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: amroad17 on July 27, 2018, 11:42:34 PM
I have always stated that the NY Thruway should just keep the milemarkers as is.  This will save a lot of money.  Just change the exit numbers to the corresponding milemarker (Exit 39 becomes Exit 290, Exit 40 becomes Exit 304, etc.)  Of course, this will upset those who believe in the "numbers are supposed to increase from west to east" crowd.
However, by doing this, how are "free 90" and I-87 on the Northway to be signed?  Simple, use the current milemarkers. These freeways have been treated as separate entities since they have opened--why change now?  Same for the Berkshire Connector of the Thruway.  Instead of Exits B1, B2, and B3, the exit numbers would be B6, B15, and B23.
What about I-87 on the Major Deegan?  Leave it as is with sequential markers or switch to milepost exit numbers--it does not matter to me, although I do not work for NYSDOT.
Just offering a case.

As far as bridge heights, I thought that bridges were listed as a foot off was because of snow that may accumulate on the road--or is that either an outdated belief or an urban myth?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Alps on July 28, 2018, 12:50:25 AM
Quote from: amroad17 on July 27, 2018, 11:42:34 PM
I have always stated that the NY Thruway should just keep the milemarkers as is.  This will save a lot of money.  Just change the exit numbers to the corresponding milemarker (Exit 39 becomes Exit 290, Exit 40 becomes Exit 304, etc.)  Of course, this will upset those who believe in the "numbers are supposed to increase from west to east" crowd.
However, by doing this, how are "free 90" and I-87 on the Northway to be signed?  Simple, use the current milemarkers. These freeways have been treated as separate entities since they have opened--why change now?  Same for the Berkshire Connector of the Thruway.  Instead of Exits B1, B2, and B3, the exit numbers would be B6, B15, and B23.
What about I-87 on the Major Deegan?  Leave it as is with sequential markers or switch to milepost exit numbers--it does not matter to me, although I do not work for NYSDOT.
Just offering a case.
Your case goes against everything that the requirement embodies. If the PA Turnpike can figure out numbering exits on two different roads, so can NY Thruway.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: jp the roadgeek on July 28, 2018, 04:15:10 AM
Think we've discussed this whole NY Thruway and component highways discussion before.  And the Berkshire exits should have I-90 mileposts, even though it creates an I-93/I-95 Canton, MA type scenario where B1 (new 368) would be to continue on the spur, since the current B1 ramp is part of the I-90 mainline.  EB on the spur, current B1 would either be Exit 6, or just remain unnumbered.  This is a similar dilemma if the NJTP converted: would north of Exit 6 use I-95 mileage, or mainline mileage, and how to deal with the western spur (do the E-W suffixes continue?).  As it is, the exits on the GWB approach need renumbering now that the interchange in Bucks County is almost complete and I-95 gains a few miles over the assumed Somerset mileage currently used.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on July 28, 2018, 01:18:58 PM
As soon as I-83 (or I-99) is extended to Rochester, I-390 will be available for free I-90 in Albany. Then I-90 can follow the Berkshire Connector over the Castleton Bridge and multiplex with I-87, as it should.
This would prevent I-90 from exiting itself, and it would also prevent free I-90 having to get its mileage redone (just new I-390 shields and new exit numbers, with existing mileposts).

[/theoretical]

In the absence of I-390 being available, either an I-X87 will have to be used for free I-90, or it will have to be re-mileposted.
Renumbering will be way less of a problem after AET comes to the Thruway in (supposedly) 2020. Then there will be no reason for mileage to follow the Thruway. The standard, after all, is for mileage to correspond to the route number, starting at the southern or western terminus/state line.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: PHLBOS on July 28, 2018, 02:18:09 PM
Quote from: Alps on July 28, 2018, 12:50:25 AM
Quote from: amroad17 on July 27, 2018, 11:42:34 PM
I have always stated that the NY Thruway should just keep the milemarkers as is.  This will save a lot of money.  Just change the exit numbers to the corresponding milemarker (Exit 39 becomes Exit 290, Exit 40 becomes Exit 304, etc.)  Of course, this will upset those who believe in the "numbers are supposed to increase from west to east" crowd.
However, by doing this, how are "free 90" and I-87 on the Northway to be signed?  Simple, use the current milemarkers. These freeways have been treated as separate entities since they have opened--why change now?  Same for the Berkshire Connector of the Thruway.  Instead of Exits B1, B2, and B3, the exit numbers would be B6, B15, and B23.
What about I-87 on the Major Deegan?  Leave it as is with sequential markers or switch to milepost exit numbers--it does not matter to me, although I do not work for NYSDOT.
Just offering a case.
Your case goes against everything that the requirement embodies. If the PA Turnpike can figure out numbering exits on two different roads, so can NY Thruway.
While true, the numbered interchanges along the east-west Turnpike (regardless of interchange numbering scheme & route number) always increased in the eastbound direction whereas the Thruway does the opposite once it goes west of Albany.  The latter is more of a drastic change per FHWA criteria.

Quote from: webny99 on July 28, 2018, 01:18:58 PMThen I-90 can follow the Berkshire Connector over the Castleton Bridge and multiplex with I-87, as it should.
This (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.510046,-73.7755574,3a,75y,303.46h,78.61t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s-jRMIYRfWj3ag830oGXi0w!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) is the likely reason why the Berkshire Section of the NY Thruway west of where I-90 meets it was not assigned an Interstate number (be it 2di or 3di).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: KEVIN_224 on July 28, 2018, 05:27:43 PM
It looked like there was construction on that bridge last week. I'm not sure if it was to install a real barrier in the median or not.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on July 28, 2018, 07:20:38 PM
Quote from: KEVIN_224 on July 28, 2018, 05:27:43 PM
It looked like there was construction on that bridge last week. I'm not sure if it was to install a real barrier in the median or not.

It was. They're putting a median barrier on that thing.

That being said, there are NO plans, long range or otherwise, to give the unnumbered portion of the Berkshire Spur an Interstate designation. It's unnecessary, especially in the age when most people just follow directions given by their phones. And I can guarantee that the traveler-oriented businesses along I-90 in Rensselaer County that have sprung up in the past 20-30 years will raise hell if I-90 is moved to the Thruway.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on July 28, 2018, 11:47:12 PM
I remember Main Office talking about moving I-90 to the Berkshire Spur and extending I-88 to include free 90 at the Highway Data Services Conference a couple years ago.  No idea of what, if anything, happened since.  In any case, I can't think of a great way to number everything related to I-90/I-87/the Thruway.  As far as I'm concerned, renumber based on the existing mileposts, or dump any semblance of numbering the Thruway as its own thing (which will be possible with AET) and just use I-90 or I-87.  I don't really like the 2003 plan to flip the mileposts on the Thruway, with I-87 using Thruway numbers counting backwards to NYC.

I personally favor the idea of renumbering based on the existing mileposts.  Unless NYSDOT takes over the Thruway, I really don't want it to lose its identity; with AET, its exit numbers and mileposts are all it will have left.  Flipping the mileposts just strikes me as a waste of money.

Plus, right now, the existing mileposts can be correlated roughly with the following:
-0-99: Greater NYC/Hudson Valley
-100-199: Greater Capital District
-200-299: Mohawk Valley/Utica/Syracuse
-300-399: Finger Lakes/Greater Rochester
-400-496: Greater Buffalo/Lake Erie

It would just feel WAY too weird if that were to change.

Regardless, if NY were ever to build direct ramps from the Northway to the Thruway to carry I-87, that will cause issues no matter what, since it will make I-87 1.5 miles shorter.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: AMLNet49 on July 29, 2018, 12:35:58 PM
Quote from: webny99 on July 28, 2018, 01:18:58 PMThen I-90 can follow the Berkshire Connector over the Castleton Bridge and multiplex with I-87, as it should.

Why would we want to create more multiplexes? There are already too many Interstate multiplexes as it is. Every effort should be made to facilitate each Interstate being an independent and unique route. There are plenty of situations where this isn't feasible however Albany NY is not one of them.

If anything I'd like to see the Berkshire Connector (just the part in between I-90 and I-87) as "Berkshire Connector to I-90"  or "Berkshire Connector to I-87"  especially westbound at Exit B1 where it is highly confusing to have I-90 signed as a regular old exit. At the very least they should use overheads or something to make it clear that you have to TOTSO.

As far as the exit numbers go, I would love to see it renumbered to fit each route, with I-90s numbers continuing from Pennsylvania to Massachusetts and I-87's from the Deegan to Canada. I see both mileage based numbers and eventual AET as a huge opportunity to fix something that previously couldn't be amended. But I recognize it's much more likely that the Thuway keeps its own set of exit numbers, especially considering the fact that it has its own oversight agency.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on July 29, 2018, 05:16:26 PM
I-90 and I-87 already overlap where they split off the Thruway at exit 24.  And without rerouting I-90, the Berkshire Spur becomes even more complicated, since it has its own set of mileposts.  It's similar to the New Jersey Turnpike/I-95 as it is now.

Incidentally, it already is signed "To I-90/To I-87", although there's nothing identifying it by name on signage - just on the Thruway website.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: RobbieL2415 on July 29, 2018, 09:04:00 PM
The easiest thing to do with the Northway would be to re-align I-87 onto it.  I'm torn on the exit numbering ideas. Part of me says start them from Yonkers while the other says sign them along their respective interstates.  The Thruway should be treated as a system and not a continuous line.  If you number I-90 straight away from Austerlitz to Ripley it makes more sense for Buffalo/Chicago bound traffic. No more B1, B2 crap.
I-87, same thing only for Montreal.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: SignBridge on July 29, 2018, 09:10:55 PM
I'm starting to understand why California resisted any exit numbering for as many years as they did.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on July 29, 2018, 09:20:59 PM
Except I'm pretty sure California has nothing like a Thruway to throw a monkey wrench into exit numbering.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: machias on July 29, 2018, 09:41:26 PM
Quote from: AMLNet49 on July 29, 2018, 12:35:58 PM
Quote from: webny99 on July 28, 2018, 01:18:58 PMThen I-90 can follow the Berkshire Connector over the Castleton Bridge and multiplex with I-87, as it should.

Why would we want to create more multiplexes? There are already too many Interstate multiplexes as it is. Every effort should be made to facilitate each Interstate being an independent and unique route. There are plenty of situations where this isn't feasible however Albany NY is not one of them.

If anything I'd like to see the Berkshire Connector (just the part in between I-90 and I-87) as "Berkshire Connector to I-90"  or "Berkshire Connector to I-87"  especially westbound at Exit B1 where it is highly confusing to have I-90 signed as a regular old exit. At the very least they should use overheads or something to make it clear that you have to TOTSO.

As far as the exit numbers go, I would love to see it renumbered to fit each route, with I-90s numbers continuing from Pennsylvania to Massachusetts and I-87's from the Deegan to Canada. I see both mileage based numbers and eventual AET as a huge opportunity to fix something that previously couldn't be amended. But I recognize it's much more likely that the Thuway keeps its own set of exit numbers, especially considering the fact that it has its own oversight agency.

Interstate 87 and Interstate 90 should have separate mileposts numbered per MUTCD standards, especially with AET coming into play. And please remember, I-87 should not start with Exit 1 in Yonkers, but rather at the south end of the Major Deegan.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: SignBridge on July 29, 2018, 09:43:11 PM
You're right about that vdeane, but Calif. does have lots of other situations that make exit numbering problematic like TOTSO's, concurrent routes, etc. 
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: empirestate on July 29, 2018, 11:03:31 PM
Quote from: webny99 on July 28, 2018, 01:18:58 PM
As soon as I-83 (or I-99) is extended to Rochester, I-390 will be available for free I-90 in Albany.

It most certainly will not–390 belongs between 290 and 490. Albany is not between 290 and 490. :bigass:
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: WNYroadgeek on July 30, 2018, 12:05:14 AM
Quote from: empirestate on July 29, 2018, 11:03:31 PM
Quote from: webny99 on July 28, 2018, 01:18:58 PM
As soon as I-83 (or I-99) is extended to Rochester, I-390 will be available for free I-90 in Albany.

It most certainly will not–390 belongs between 290 and 490. Albany is not between 290 and 490. :bigass:

I-390 -> I-99
I-990 -> I-390
Free I-90 -> I-990

*mic drop*
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Alps on July 30, 2018, 01:14:17 AM
Quote from: WNYroadgeek on July 30, 2018, 12:05:14 AM
Quote from: empirestate on July 29, 2018, 11:03:31 PM
Quote from: webny99 on July 28, 2018, 01:18:58 PM
As soon as I-83 (or I-99) is extended to Rochester, I-390 will be available for free I-90 in Albany.

It most certainly will not–390 belongs between 290 and 490. Albany is not between 290 and 490. :bigass:

I-390 -> I-99
I-990 -> I-390
Free I-90 -> I-990

*mic drop*
*picks up mic and hands it back*
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: empirestate on July 30, 2018, 11:36:06 AM
Quote from: Alps on July 30, 2018, 01:14:17 AM
Quote from: WNYroadgeek on July 30, 2018, 12:05:14 AM
Quote from: empirestate on July 29, 2018, 11:03:31 PM
Quote from: webny99 on July 28, 2018, 01:18:58 PM
As soon as I-83 (or I-99) is extended to Rochester, I-390 will be available for free I-90 in Albany.

It most certainly will not–390 belongs between 290 and 490. Albany is not between 290 and 490. :bigass:

I-390 -> I-99
I-990 -> I-390
Free I-90 -> I-990

*mic drop*
*picks up mic and hands it back*

Free I-90 needs an even 3di; it's a loop. I-1090. :D
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: ipeters61 on July 30, 2018, 12:02:32 PM
Quote from: empirestate on July 30, 2018, 11:36:06 AM
Quote from: Alps on July 30, 2018, 01:14:17 AM
Quote from: WNYroadgeek on July 30, 2018, 12:05:14 AM
Quote from: empirestate on July 29, 2018, 11:03:31 PM
Quote from: webny99 on July 28, 2018, 01:18:58 PM
As soon as I-83 (or I-99) is extended to Rochester, I-390 will be available for free I-90 in Albany.

It most certainly will not–390 belongs between 290 and 490. Albany is not between 290 and 490. :bigass:

I-390 -> I-99
I-990 -> I-390
Free I-90 -> I-990

*mic drop*
*picks up mic and hands it back*

Free I-90 needs an even 3di; it's a loop. I-1090. :D

How about I-438?  :-P
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on July 30, 2018, 01:15:37 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on July 29, 2018, 09:43:11 PM
You're right about that vdeane, but Calif. does have lots of other situations that make exit numbering problematic like TOTSO's, concurrent routes, etc. 
Most states have those.  For concurrences, just pick one route's numbers to be dominant.  TOTSOs have multiple solutions.  Nothing really unique to California there.  CalTrans just tends to have a bad case of "not invented here" syndrome.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on July 30, 2018, 03:10:34 PM
Quote from: empirestate on July 29, 2018, 11:03:31 PM
Quote from: webny99 on July 28, 2018, 01:18:58 PM
As soon as I-83 (or I-99) is extended to Rochester, I-390 will be available for free I-90 in Albany.
It most certainly will not–390 belongs between 290 and 490. Albany is not between 290 and 490. :bigass:

Ironically, I thought you were the one who didn't care about oddities within a system, including that I-99 is out of the interstate grid.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Roadwarriors79 on July 30, 2018, 05:30:13 PM
Could Free I-90 ever be renumbered to I-x87? Assuming that I-88 or an I-x90 doesn't happen.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on July 30, 2018, 09:09:36 PM
Quote from: webny99 on July 30, 2018, 03:10:34 PM
Quote from: empirestate on July 29, 2018, 11:03:31 PM
Quote from: webny99 on July 28, 2018, 01:18:58 PM
As soon as I-83 (or I-99) is extended to Rochester, I-390 will be available for free I-90 in Albany.
It most certainly will not–390 belongs between 290 and 490. Albany is not between 290 and 490. :bigass:

Ironically, I thought you were the one who didn't care about oddities within a system, including that I-99 is out of the interstate grid.
I think it's more about the idea that I-390 would no longer be a Rochester x90.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Alps on July 31, 2018, 12:41:01 AM
Quote from: Roadwarriors79 on July 30, 2018, 05:30:13 PM
Could Free I-90 ever be renumbered to I-x87? Assuming that I-88 or an I-x90 doesn't happen.
The question is whether the Berkshire Spur will ever be an x87. I don't see I-90 ever moving. I feel like people in Albany would throw a cow even though the change is essentially meaningless (and of course now you're spending money to change all the signs). I-99 over I-390 is a plausible oneday scenario, but unlikely anytime soon (again - the highway isn't changing, so why change the number).
So maybe the real question is whether NY 17 will ever be I-86.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: empirestate on July 31, 2018, 01:50:27 AM
Quote from: webny99 on July 30, 2018, 03:10:34 PM
Quote from: empirestate on July 29, 2018, 11:03:31 PM
Quote from: webny99 on July 28, 2018, 01:18:58 PM
As soon as I-83 (or I-99) is extended to Rochester, I-390 will be available for free I-90 in Albany.
It most certainly will not–390 belongs between 290 and 490. Albany is not between 290 and 490. :bigass:

Ironically, I thought you were the one who didn't care about oddities within a system, including that I-99 is out of the interstate grid.

It's all about context and perspective. While I recognize the anomaly of I-99, my objection to it extends no further than its place in the numbering system, but not to the road itself nor especially to the politics behind its inception, and is furthermore balanced by the fact that it's downright useful.

More to the point, what makes roads and travel interesting to me is, first, the system, and second, the anomalies of the system (without which you may as well stay home and just browse Google Maps to your mathematical satisfaction). One of the anomalies in that system is that New York's x90s, besides being the only complete set in the U.S., are moreover geographically arranged in sequence–save for yet another anomaly, which is I-990. To upset that anomaly-within-an-anomaly would be a greater aesthetic crime, in my view, than the already-existing anomaly that is I-99, or I-238.

Most of all to the point, my indignation at ruining this sequence should be taken with the proper perspective, which is that of us all sitting at home typing into a web forum about it, speculating about a re-designation that has little chance of ever taking place in the real world. Taken in that fictitious context, I feel it's only fair to be as indignant about that as others are obsessive at fictitiously solving the problem.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: froggie on July 31, 2018, 11:26:47 AM
Quote from: vdeaneCalTrans just tends to have a bad case of "not invented here" syndrome.

That's humorous to say, since NYSTA and NYSDOT are much the same way...
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on July 31, 2018, 01:13:48 PM
CalTrans is a class in and of themselves.  They refuse to use exit tabs, for example, and claim that some special spec would need to be invented and then go on and on about wind loads... despite other states with the exact same sign structures having used exit tabs since forever.  They also have this weird insistence on every sign in the state being the same height.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: roadman on August 02, 2018, 10:26:37 AM
Quote from: vdeane on July 31, 2018, 01:13:48 PM
CalTrans is a class in and of themselves.  They refuse to use exit tabs, for example, and claim that some special spec would need to be invented and then go on and on about wind loads... despite other states with the exact same sign structures having used exit tabs since forever.  They also have this weird insistence on every sign in the state being the same height.
Love how Caltrans goes on about wind loading as their "excuse" not to use separate exit tabs, then mount their brand new signs on existing 40 and 50 year old support structures.  As they say - penny wise and pound foolish.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on August 02, 2018, 11:19:30 AM
Quote from: roadman on August 02, 2018, 10:26:37 AM
Quote from: vdeane on July 31, 2018, 01:13:48 PM
CalTrans is a class in and of themselves.  They refuse to use exit tabs, for example, and claim that some special spec would need to be invented and then go on and on about wind loads... despite other states with the exact same sign structures having used exit tabs since forever.  They also have this weird insistence on every sign in the state being the same height.
Love how Caltrans goes on about wind loading as their "excuse" not to use separate exit tabs, then mount their brand new signs on existing 40 and 50 year old support structures.  As they say - penny wise and pound foolish.
50 year old structure could be very well put together when steel price was lower and and extra 1/4" of thickness was not an issue... So it will outlast modern structure designed for 75 MPH wind (aka designed to fail at 76 MPH)
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Brandon on August 02, 2018, 01:08:43 PM
Quote from: vdeane on July 29, 2018, 09:20:59 PM
Except I'm pretty sure California has nothing like a Thruway to throw a monkey wrench into exit numbering.

Yet, Illinois has the Tri-State Tollway and handled it just fine.  Originally, it was one set of mileposts (no exit numbers) starting at I-80/94/IL-394 all the way to US-41 near Wisconsin.  ISTHA reversed the mileposts from US-41 south to the I-94/294 split, and I-94 has its exit numbers following the proper mileposts from Wisconsin.  NYSTA can do the same thing on a larger scale.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: roadman65 on August 02, 2018, 06:26:57 PM
Quote from: Brandon on August 02, 2018, 01:08:43 PM
Quote from: vdeane on July 29, 2018, 09:20:59 PM
Except I'm pretty sure California has nothing like a Thruway to throw a monkey wrench into exit numbering.

Yet, Illinois has the Tri-State Tollway and handled it just fine.  Originally, it was one set of mileposts (no exit numbers) starting at I-80/94/IL-394 all the way to US-41 near Wisconsin.  ISTHA reversed the mileposts from US-41 south to the I-94/294 split, and I-94 has its exit numbers following the proper mileposts from Wisconsin.  NYSTA can do the same thing on a larger scale.
Pennsylvania has the NE Extension and the E-W Turnpike duplicating mile posts as well.  Though the exit numbers were carefully not to duplicate, though the two schemes never caused confusion for PTC either.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: ipeters61 on August 02, 2018, 06:31:59 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on August 02, 2018, 06:26:57 PM
Quote from: Brandon on August 02, 2018, 01:08:43 PM
Quote from: vdeane on July 29, 2018, 09:20:59 PM
Except I'm pretty sure California has nothing like a Thruway to throw a monkey wrench into exit numbering.

Yet, Illinois has the Tri-State Tollway and handled it just fine.  Originally, it was one set of mileposts (no exit numbers) starting at I-80/94/IL-394 all the way to US-41 near Wisconsin.  ISTHA reversed the mileposts from US-41 south to the I-94/294 split, and I-94 has its exit numbers following the proper mileposts from Wisconsin.  NYSTA can do the same thing on a larger scale.
Pennsylvania has the NE Extension and the E-W Turnpike duplicating mile posts as well.  Though the exit numbers were carefully not to duplicate, though the two schemes never caused confusion for PTC either.
For some reason I thought I read somewhere once that internally the Northeast Extension's mile markers are preceded with an "A."  It is possible that I'm thinking of another road though.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on August 02, 2018, 09:27:52 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on August 02, 2018, 06:26:57 PM
Quote from: Brandon on August 02, 2018, 01:08:43 PM
Quote from: vdeane on July 29, 2018, 09:20:59 PM
Except I'm pretty sure California has nothing like a Thruway to throw a monkey wrench into exit numbering.

Yet, Illinois has the Tri-State Tollway and handled it just fine.  Originally, it was one set of mileposts (no exit numbers) starting at I-80/94/IL-394 all the way to US-41 near Wisconsin.  ISTHA reversed the mileposts from US-41 south to the I-94/294 split, and I-94 has its exit numbers following the proper mileposts from Wisconsin.  NYSTA can do the same thing on a larger scale.
Pennsylvania has the NE Extension and the E-W Turnpike duplicating mile posts as well.  Though the exit numbers were carefully not to duplicate, though the two schemes never caused confusion for PTC either.
Plus the NE Extension is physically a different road than the mainline Turnpike, even though they both share a ticket system.

Regarding an Illinois system, that sounds like the 2003 plan.  That would have flipped the mileposts of the Thruway, with all of I-90 using its own numbers, and the Deegan and Northway sharing a numbering system.  The I-87 part of the Thruway would have been numbered backwards continuing from I-90 at existing exit 24.

Personally, I'm not really a fan of that plan.  I'd rather have the routes do strange things on their existing mileages rather than have them do strange things on new mileages.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Beltway on August 02, 2018, 10:04:31 PM
Quote from: ipeters61 on August 02, 2018, 06:31:59 PM
For some reason I thought I read somewhere once that internally the Northeast Extension's mile markers are preceded with an "A."  It is possible that I'm thinking of another road though.

Apparently not --
https://www.google.com/maps/@40.1800366,-75.3098268,3a,37.5y,336h,84.19t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sNQNChHebnm4iN-8BNa5TWA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

Based on the location, that would be I-476 mileposting, which starts at I-95.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on August 02, 2018, 11:03:27 PM
I wish I could find some legible older imagery.  The old pole milemakers would be more indicative of whether they were ever preceded by an A, but the recent MUTCD markers wouldn't show it.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: ipeters61 on August 02, 2018, 11:34:38 PM
Quote from: vdeane on August 02, 2018, 11:03:27 PM
I wish I could find some legible older imagery.  The old pole milemakers would be more indicative of whether they were ever preceded by an A, but the recent MUTCD markers wouldn't show it.
Yeah I might have seen it in some old photos somewhere.  I know the State Museum of PA in Harrisburg had a fair collection of old PA Turnpike photos so I'm tempted to say I saw it there.

EDIT - AHA!  Found it, it was at the State Museum after all:

(https://cdn.pbrd.co/images/Hxp00jc.jpg)
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Roadwarriors79 on August 02, 2018, 11:42:30 PM
If there’s one argument for the Thruway keeping their existing exit numbers, or going mile-based with either I-90 or I-87 having “backwards” numbers, it’s the fact that a few other toll roads still use their own numbering rather than the 2di numbering. I-70 on the Kansas Turnpike, I-80 on the Tri State Tollway (in Illinois), I-76 on the Ohio Turnpike, and I-95 on the New Jersey Turnpike.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: briantroutman on August 03, 2018, 12:22:21 AM
Quote from: ipeters61 on August 02, 2018, 11:34:38 PM
[photo of PTC system status board]

I've only seen a much lower-resolution picture of that board on Jeff Kitsko's site, so thanks for posting it! I believe as of the time he photographed it, the board was on display at PTC headquarters somewhere. So if it's now in the State Museum, I'll have to check it out next time in Harrisburg.

A few specifics about the board that I find interesting:

- It shows a dashed outline depicting the approximate location of the abandoned Rays/Sideling section (though not very accurately. Why this was considered relevant to add to the board, I don't know. Contingency plans to route emergency detours through the old tunnels?

- Another dashed outline shows the approximate location of the old Laurel Hill alignment (again, why?) but it's on the wrong side

- Many long-closed service plazas are listed, including Pleasant Valley, Path Valley, Mechanicsburg, and Denver

- The Peter J. Camiel Service Plaza was originally named Brandywine (I had long wondered)
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Beltway on August 03, 2018, 06:58:57 AM
The PTC system status board is obviously old technology with the use of different colors of incandescent bulbs for status.  It shows I-80 complete and that occurred in 1970.  The tunnel bypasses were completed in 1965 and 1968. 

If the board was taken out of service around or just after 1970, then I suppose those old alignments were still in very good condition to handle traffic if needed for some reason.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Brandon on August 03, 2018, 07:23:03 AM
Quote from: vdeane on August 02, 2018, 09:27:52 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on August 02, 2018, 06:26:57 PM
Quote from: Brandon on August 02, 2018, 01:08:43 PM
Quote from: vdeane on July 29, 2018, 09:20:59 PM
Except I'm pretty sure California has nothing like a Thruway to throw a monkey wrench into exit numbering.

Yet, Illinois has the Tri-State Tollway and handled it just fine.  Originally, it was one set of mileposts (no exit numbers) starting at I-80/94/IL-394 all the way to US-41 near Wisconsin.  ISTHA reversed the mileposts from US-41 south to the I-94/294 split, and I-94 has its exit numbers following the proper mileposts from Wisconsin.  NYSTA can do the same thing on a larger scale.
Pennsylvania has the NE Extension and the E-W Turnpike duplicating mile posts as well.  Though the exit numbers were carefully not to duplicate, though the two schemes never caused confusion for PTC either.
Plus the NE Extension is physically a different road than the mainline Turnpike, even though they both share a ticket system.

Regarding an Illinois system, that sounds like the 2003 plan.  That would have flipped the mileposts of the Thruway, with all of I-90 using its own numbers, and the Deegan and Northway sharing a numbering system.  The I-87 part of the Thruway would have been numbered backwards continuing from I-90 at existing exit 24.

Personally, I'm not really a fan of that plan.  I'd rather have the routes do strange things on their existing mileages rather than have them do strange things on new mileages.

What the Thruway was proposing is what ISTHA did prior to 2015 or so.  I-294 counted up, and I-94 counted down.  Now both count the correct way (toward Deerfield).  Hence, the Tri-State has two of the following exits (with no confusion):

Exit 2
I-94: IL-173, Rosecrans Rd
I-294: IL-1, Halsted St

Exit 8
I-94: IL-132, Grand Av
I-294: IL-83, 147th St

Exit 27
I-94: IL-43, Waukegan Rd
I-294: US-34, Ogden Av

There's no reason the Thruway can't do it too.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: ipeters61 on August 03, 2018, 07:52:06 AM
Quote from: Beltway on August 03, 2018, 06:58:57 AM
The PTC system status board is obviously old technology with the use of different colors of incandescent bulbs for status.  It shows I-80 complete and that occurred in 1970.  The tunnel bypasses were completed in 1965 and 1968. 

If the board was taken out of service around or just after 1970, then I suppose those old alignments were still in very good condition to handle traffic if needed for some reason.
Another thing that dates it is the use of I-81E instead of I-380, which Wikipedia tells me changed in 1973.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Beltway on August 03, 2018, 08:01:57 AM
Quote from: ipeters61 on August 03, 2018, 07:52:06 AM
Quote from: Beltway on August 03, 2018, 06:58:57 AM
The PTC system status board is obviously old technology with the use of different colors of incandescent bulbs for status.  It shows I-80 complete and that occurred in 1970.  The tunnel bypasses were completed in 1965 and 1968. 
If the board was taken out of service around or just after 1970, then I suppose those old alignments were still in very good condition to handle traffic if needed for some reason.
Another thing that dates it is the use of I-81E instead of I-380, which Wikipedia tells me changed in 1973.

I drove thru there in 1972 and 1973 (actually was on a bus) and observed the tunnel bypasses with interest, but I can't recall whether the tie-ins between old and new were still traffic usable then.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: odditude on August 03, 2018, 09:57:58 AM
Quote from: Beltway on August 03, 2018, 06:58:57 AM
The PTC system status board is obviously old technology with the use of different colors of incandescent bulbs for status.
not necessarily - indicator lights like these are still regularly used on all sorts of industrial equipment, even if there is a modern touchscreen HMI to go alongside them. They're easy to maintain and even easier to see at-a-glance.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Beltway on August 03, 2018, 10:28:40 AM
Quote from: odditude on August 03, 2018, 09:57:58 AM
Quote from: Beltway on August 03, 2018, 06:58:57 AM
The PTC system status board is obviously old technology with the use of different colors of incandescent bulbs for status.
not necessarily - indicator lights like these are still regularly used on all sorts of industrial equipment, even if there is a modern touchscreen HMI to go alongside them. They're easy to maintain and even easier to see at-a-glance.

Well, ok, to expound on it, the whole board had the 'look and feel' of something out of the 1950s or 1960s.  Kind of like looking at the cockpit and instruments of an airliner retired in the 1960s, now in a museum.  All old tech and no newer tech.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: ipeters61 on August 03, 2018, 11:30:26 AM
Quote from: Beltway on August 03, 2018, 10:28:40 AM
Quote from: odditude on August 03, 2018, 09:57:58 AM
Quote from: Beltway on August 03, 2018, 06:58:57 AM
The PTC system status board is obviously old technology with the use of different colors of incandescent bulbs for status.
not necessarily - indicator lights like these are still regularly used on all sorts of industrial equipment, even if there is a modern touchscreen HMI to go alongside them. They're easy to maintain and even easier to see at-a-glance.

Well, ok, to expound on it, the whole board had the 'look and feel' of something out of the 1950s or 1960s.  Kind of like looking at the cockpit and instruments of an airliner retired in the 1960s, now in a museum.  All old tech and no newer tech.
Not to continue the off topic issue (I did post this in the PA Turnpike thread earlier this morning), I've toured a C-5 which is still in service and they still use some analog instruments.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: thenetwork on August 03, 2018, 11:51:33 AM
Quote from: Brandon on August 03, 2018, 07:23:03 AM
Quote from: vdeane on August 02, 2018, 09:27:52 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on August 02, 2018, 06:26:57 PM
Quote from: Brandon on August 02, 2018, 01:08:43 PM
Quote from: vdeane on July 29, 2018, 09:20:59 PM
Except I'm pretty sure California has nothing like a Thruway to throw a monkey wrench into exit numbering.

Yet, Illinois has the Tri-State Tollway and handled it just fine.  Originally, it was one set of mileposts (no exit numbers) starting at I-80/94/IL-394 all the way to US-41 near Wisconsin.  ISTHA reversed the mileposts from US-41 south to the I-94/294 split, and I-94 has its exit numbers following the proper mileposts from Wisconsin.  NYSTA can do the same thing on a larger scale.
Pennsylvania has the NE Extension and the E-W Turnpike duplicating mile posts as well.  Though the exit numbers were carefully not to duplicate, though the two schemes never caused confusion for PTC either.
Plus the NE Extension is physically a different road than the mainline Turnpike, even though they both share a ticket system.

Regarding an Illinois system, that sounds like the 2003 plan.  That would have flipped the mileposts of the Thruway, with all of I-90 using its own numbers, and the Deegan and Northway sharing a numbering system.  The I-87 part of the Thruway would have been numbered backwards continuing from I-90 at existing exit 24.

Personally, I'm not really a fan of that plan.  I'd rather have the routes do strange things on their existing mileages rather than have them do strange things on new mileages.

What the Thruway was proposing is what ISTHA did prior to 2015 or so.  I-294 counted up, and I-94 counted down.  Now both count the correct way (toward Deerfield).  Hence, the Tri-State has two of the following exits (with no confusion):

Exit 2
I-94: IL-173, Rosecrans Rd
I-294: IL-1, Halsted St

Exit 8
I-94: IL-132, Grand Av
I-294: IL-83, 147th St

Exit 27
I-94: IL-43, Waukegan Rd
I-294: US-34, Ogden Av

There's no reason the Thruway can't do it too.

On a similar vein, where I-76 and I-77 overlap in Akron Ohio, the multiplex uses the I-76 mile markers for mileage and exit numbers.

So heading north on I-77, a driver meets I-76 at Exit 125.  Once on the multiplex, I-77 sees exits 25-20, with the exit numbers and mile markers going DOWN as it continues north.  At the western I-76/I-77 split, I-77 north returns to it's increasing mileage/exit numbers beginning at Exit 129.

Therefore, if I-90 has to refer to I-87's mileage grid for a few miles around Albany, it shouldn't be a big deal as any "duplicate" exit numbers for I-90 travelers would be on opposite ends of the state and the chance of confusing exit numbers would be less than 2%.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: akotchi on August 03, 2018, 12:14:09 PM

Quote from: ipeters61 on August 02, 2018, 06:31:59 PM
For some reason I thought I read somewhere once that internally the Northeast Extension's mile markers are preceded with an "A."  It is possible that I'm thinking of another road though.

They used to be, before the Mid-County interchange was completed and the Extension was changed to I-476.  I think they were even signed in the field that way, too.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: briantroutman on August 03, 2018, 12:16:51 PM
Since the lpeters reposted the PTC system status board over on the PA Turnpike News thread, I'll post my next comment over there (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=419.msg2346644#msg2346644).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Mr_Northside on August 03, 2018, 02:28:20 PM
Quote from: Beltway on August 02, 2018, 10:04:31 PM
Quote from: ipeters61 on August 02, 2018, 06:31:59 PM
For some reason I thought I read somewhere once that internally the Northeast Extension's mile markers are preceded with an "A."  It is possible that I'm thinking of another road though.
Apparently not --
https://www.google.com/maps/@40.1800366,-75.3098268,3a,37.5y,336h,84.19t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sNQNChHebnm4iN-8BNa5TWA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

Based on the location, that would be I-476 mileposting, which starts at I-95.

They may not be posted like that on the highway, but the PTC must use them "internally".
If you go to their construction projects page on their website, NE Ext projects with mileage names use the A before the number.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: qguy on August 04, 2018, 09:16:09 AM
Quote from: briantroutman on August 03, 2018, 12:22:21 AM
The Peter J. Camiel Service Plaza was originally named Brandywine (I had long wondered)

Should've asked some of us old heads around here could've told ya.  :biggrin:

I believe the formal name is "Peter J. Camiel Service Plaza at Brandywine."
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Beltway on August 04, 2018, 04:15:20 PM
Quote from: qguy on August 04, 2018, 09:16:09 AM
Quote from: briantroutman on August 03, 2018, 12:22:21 AM
The Peter J. Camiel Service Plaza was originally named Brandywine (I had long wondered)
Should've asked some of us old heads around here could've told ya.  :biggrin:
I believe the formal name is "Peter J. Camiel Service Plaza at Brandywine."

There is the Camiel Curve on the Pottstown Expressway.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on August 04, 2018, 04:36:19 PM
Quote from: Beltway on August 04, 2018, 04:15:20 PM
Quote from: qguy on August 04, 2018, 09:16:09 AM
Quote from: briantroutman on August 03, 2018, 12:22:21 AM
The Peter J. Camiel Service Plaza was originally named Brandywine (I had long wondered)
Should've asked some of us old heads around here could've told ya.  :biggrin:
I believe the formal name is "Peter J. Camiel Service Plaza at Brandywine."

There is the Camiel Curve on the Pottstown Expressway.
Should there be Cuomo Stretch in Hale Eddy? 
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: PHLBOS on August 13, 2018, 02:03:48 PM
Quote from: Beltway on August 02, 2018, 10:04:31 PM
Quote from: ipeters61 on August 02, 2018, 06:31:59 PM
For some reason I thought I read somewhere once that internally the Northeast Extension's mile markers are preceded with an "A."  It is possible that I'm thinking of another road though.

Apparently not --
https://www.google.com/maps/@40.1800366,-75.3098268,3a,37.5y,336h,84.19t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sNQNChHebnm4iN-8BNa5TWA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

Based on the location, that would be I-476 mileposting, which starts at I-95.
Prior to the Northeast Extension becoming an extension of I-476 circa 1996; MM 0 was indeed at the I-276 interchange.  While the printed PA Turnpike roadmaps listed the NE Extension's mile markers as Axx; the actual mile markers out in the field did not contain the A prefix.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Flyer78 on August 13, 2018, 06:13:55 PM
To add another memory point, I do recall at least some prefixed mile-markers, placed perhaps during the conversion of guard-rail to the Jersey barriers now in use. Definitely had no A prefix when the centerline mile markers were reset to include  Blue Route mileage (which if I recall correctly occurred as part of the exit number conversion.)

I think the smaller tenth posts/reflectors had an A, either as a suffix or prefix - but these have all been replaced by enhanced mile markers.

Finally, pretty sure the call boxes had the prefix with their locators.

Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: PHLBOS on August 13, 2018, 06:19:56 PM
Quote from: Flyer78 on August 13, 2018, 06:13:55 PMBlue Route mileage (which if I recall correctly occurred as part of the exit number conversion.)
The mileage markers along the NE Extension changed when the road received the I-476 designation circa 1996.  The exit numbers weren't converted until 2000-2001.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Flyer78 on August 13, 2018, 06:22:09 PM
Here is an example of the suffixed tenth mile sign.



https://goo.gl/images/2STSBa
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Flyer78 on August 13, 2018, 06:33:47 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on August 13, 2018, 06:19:56 PM
Quote from: Flyer78 on August 13, 2018, 06:13:55 PMBlue Route mileage (which if I recall correctly occurred as part of the exit number conversion.)
The mileage markers along the NE Extension changed when the road received the I-476 designation circa 1996.  The exit numbers weren't converted until 2000-2001.

This article, from 2000, indicates the change was part of the exit number project:


http://articles.mcall.com/2000-11-02/news/3334595_1_exit-numbers-new-exit-turnpike-commission

Quote

The numbers on the mileage markers will not change, with the exception of those on the Northeast Extension, where they will now reflect the miles from the start of Interstate 476 at Chester, Delaware County, rather than where the Extension used to start at the Mid-County Interchange in Montgomery County.



Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: PHLBOS on August 14, 2018, 10:24:38 AM
Quote from: Flyer78 on August 13, 2018, 06:33:47 PM
Got it.  My previous post has been edited to reflect such.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: qguy on August 14, 2018, 02:31:24 PM
Quote from: Beltway on August 04, 2018, 04:15:20 PM
Quote from: qguy on August 04, 2018, 09:16:09 AM
Quote from: briantroutman on August 03, 2018, 12:22:21 AM
The Peter J. Camiel Service Plaza was originally named Brandywine (I had long wondered)
Should've asked some of us old heads around here could've told ya.  :biggrin:
I believe the formal name is "Peter J. Camiel Service Plaza at Brandywine."
There is the Camiel Curve on the Pottstown Expressway.

The story behind that curve is interesting. US 422 (Pottstown Expwy) in that area was planned for a straighter alignment to the northwest from the Schuylkill River and Trooper Road interchange, but Peter J. Camiel lived in a mansion which was in the middle of the proposed alignment. His would've been one of the displaced residences had the highway been built as planned. Of course, with the amount of influence Camiel wielded, PennDOT designed an alternate alignment that curved way out of the way. PennDOT couldn't move the alignment just slightly because of the nearby St. Gabriel's Hall, a residential drug and alcohol treatment center for teen boys.

Even if the initial alignment were constructed, there would've been a curve in order to avoid the Audubon Center just to the north but it wouldn't have been nearly as pronounced. The adopted alignment partially used a railroad ROW. The Schuylkill River Trail also runs along that railroad ROW.

Years later, I became acquainted with the man who currently resides in Camiel's mansion. He told me that when he purchased the house, he had to have every room either cleaned or repainted because of the layers of brown nicotine buildup on the walls and ceilings. Camiel was a heavy smoker. Although extremely wealthy, the current resident is one of the friendliest people you'd care to meet.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: 02 Park Ave on August 16, 2018, 10:05:18 PM
The Thruway needs an extra lane, in each direction, from the Tappan Zee Bridge to the Northway.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on August 16, 2018, 11:04:02 PM
That's excessive.  Perhaps as far north as the exit north of I-84, though.

Of course, prohibitively expensive, especially due to terrain downstate.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on August 17, 2018, 06:59:09 AM
There is a need for an extra lane on a ramp from Northway to Thruway plaza... But that is prohibitively difficult since that would require NYSDOT to actually do their job!
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on August 17, 2018, 08:10:04 AM
Heh.  Once NYSDOT has enough funding to move beyond their inadequate preservation program, they and NYSTA will get to that.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on August 17, 2018, 08:35:57 AM
Quote from: Rothman on August 17, 2018, 08:10:04 AM
Heh.  Once NYSDOT has enough funding to move beyond their inadequate preservation program, they and NYSTA will get to that.
They did have enough money for that many roundabouts... So it is a matter of priorities.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: froggie on August 17, 2018, 09:23:55 AM
As I recall, some of those roundabouts were funded from Federal grants and local sources.  It's also not all that hard to add a roundabout to a road if you have that road already ripped up for rehab work.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on August 17, 2018, 10:29:51 AM
Quote from: froggie on August 17, 2018, 09:23:55 AM
As I recall, some of those roundabouts were funded from Federal grants and local sources.  It's also not all that hard to add a roundabout to a road if you have that road already ripped up for rehab work.
Since that is a spot of a regular backup, clean air fund is one of apparent funding sources for that location. Problem exists there for at least a decade, probably decadeS - and that is due to design mistake.  I doubt there was no opportunities over past 10-15 years.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on August 17, 2018, 10:46:10 AM
I believe NYSDOT has backed away from making the CMAQ argument for widening congested highways.  If I recall correctly, a widening project on Long Island some years ago used CMAQ and environmentalists are now prepared to object again if NYSDOT tries to pull the same stunt.

Also, I also believe CMAQ can now only be used in non-attainment areas (as of MAP-21 and updated definitions as of then) and NYSDOT Region 1 no longer qualifies (Chautauqua County and areas downstate are all that are left).

(personal opinion emphasized)
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on August 17, 2018, 10:52:39 AM
Quote from: Rothman on August 17, 2018, 10:46:10 AM
I believe NYSDOT has backed away from making the CMAQ argument for widening congested highways.  If I recall correctly, a widening project on Long Island some years ago used CMAQ and environmentalists are now prepared to object again if NYSDOT tries to pull the same stunt.

Also, I also believe CMAQ can now only be used in non-attainment areas (as of MAP-21 and updated definitions as of then) and NYSDOT Region 1 no longer qualifies (Chautauqua County and areas downstate are all that are left).

(personal opinion emphasized)

Yet that was used for Washington-Fuller roundabout, literally 1000 feet away from the ramp in question. Ironically, relocation of state folks into downtown greatly reduced traffic through that spot right about the time project was completed.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on August 17, 2018, 12:09:19 PM
Washington-Fuller was before the change in non-attainment areas.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on August 17, 2018, 12:25:20 PM
Quote from: Rothman on August 17, 2018, 12:09:19 PM
Washington-Fuller was before the change in non-attainment areas.
But after second lane on 87->thruway ramp was closed..
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on August 17, 2018, 01:39:20 PM
Not sure what you're arguing now.

I believe vdeane has discussed the history of the experiment with a second lane on that ramp elsewhere.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on August 17, 2018, 02:51:00 PM
Quote from: Rothman on August 17, 2018, 01:39:20 PM
Not sure what you're arguing now.

I believe vdeane has discussed the history of the experiment with a second lane on that ramp elsewhere.
There was no experiment, there was a design flaw which resulted in trucks loosing control and flipping when going at posted speed limit. Two lanes were reduced to one to slow things down, as well as some warning signs - throughput was naturally reduced due to these improvements. A poor BGS design is an icing on the cake.
My $20 say that when those BGS would be due for replacement, nobody at DOT would think about any changes, and as for ramp.. For past 15 years we're supposed to switch to AET quite soon, and then maybe if that happens someday... 
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on August 18, 2018, 10:45:07 PM
Quote from: Rothman on August 17, 2018, 10:46:10 AM
I believe NYSDOT has backed away from making the CMAQ argument for widening congested highways.  If I recall correctly, a widening project on Long Island some years ago used CMAQ and environmentalists are now prepared to object again if NYSDOT tries to pull the same stunt.

Also, I also believe CMAQ can now only be used in non-attainment areas (as of MAP-21 and updated definitions as of then) and NYSDOT Region 1 no longer qualifies (Chautauqua County and areas downstate are all that are left).

(personal opinion emphasized)

Albany County is one of the ones eligible for CMAQ is the latest TAP/CMAQ solicitation.  NYC/Long Island can't apply for CMAQ, though.
https://www.dot.ny.gov/portal/page/portal/divisions/operating/opdm/local-programs-bureau/tap-cmaq/repository/Appendix-C-CMAQ-Eligibility-Requirements-2018.pdf
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on August 19, 2018, 12:12:14 AM


Quote from: vdeane on August 18, 2018, 10:45:07 PM
Quote from: Rothman on August 17, 2018, 10:46:10 AM
I believe NYSDOT has backed away from making the CMAQ argument for widening congested highways.  If I recall correctly, a widening project on Long Island some years ago used CMAQ and environmentalists are now prepared to object again if NYSDOT tries to pull the same stunt.

Also, I also believe CMAQ can now only be used in non-attainment areas (as of MAP-21 and updated definitions as of then) and NYSDOT Region 1 no longer qualifies (Chautauqua County and areas downstate are all that are left).

(personal opinion emphasized)

Albany County is one of the ones eligible for CMAQ is the latest TAP/CMAQ solicitation.  NYC/Long Island can't apply for CMAQ, though.
https://www.dot.ny.gov/portal/page/portal/divisions/operating/opdm/local-programs-bureau/tap-cmaq/repository/Appendix-C-CMAQ-Eligibility-Requirements-2018.pdf

Can't open that .pdf on my phone, so I will go by what I know already:  The TAP/CMAQ solicitation is separate from NYSDOT's core CMAQ regional planning targets (of which Region 1 gets zilch in CMAQ due to the non-attainment area issue). 

Basically, NYSDOT holds back a paltry amount of CMAQ for distribution for specific projects through the solicitation; I'd have to go back and see how FHWA and NYSDOT arranged for justification for the projects in the solicitation for Albany to be eligible specifically for it.  Wonder if it was a matter of using up the 2.5 whatever percent particulate specific CMAQ, which is even more underused than the core fund.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on August 19, 2018, 08:44:53 PM
That would explain why Region 10/11 CMAQ isn't part of the solicitation.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on August 20, 2018, 10:37:31 PM
Quote from: 02 Park Ave on August 16, 2018, 10:05:18 PM
The Thruway needs an extra lane, in each direction, from the Tappan Zee Bridge to the Northway.

I actually had in mind from Buffalo to Syracuse, with the segment underneath Rochester (Exit 45 to Exit 47) being the only potential exclusion.  :D

ODOT can six-lane 150 miles of I-71 from Cleveland to Columbus... I'm pretty sure asking the same of NYSTA, and on a tolled facility, with no bridge widenings needed, isn't all that unreasonable.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on September 04, 2018, 09:02:39 AM
The thruway (or most of it anyways) needs six lanes

I know I've been fairly persistent in saying it, but every time I drive it (as I did Sunday from Buffalo to Rochester, and Monday from Rochester to Syracuse and back) I am more convinced that additional lanes are the solution to the disaster that exists. Sometimes, problems in navigating the Thruway are just the result of bad drivers and left lane campers, but during the May to September time period, especially on weekends, volumes are just too high to be sustained by four lanes and that's all there is to it.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on September 04, 2018, 01:35:22 PM
Oddly enough, I didn't have any issues with that stretch yesterday.  Traffic was heavy, but moving around 70-75.  Where I DID have problems, though was between exits 28 and 27.  There was some kind of crash involving a truck that blocked the right lane; even though traffic was light in the Mohawk Valley, between the Thruway's incompetence and rubbernecking, it was a parking lot for miles and took me an hour to get through what is normally a couple of minutes.  The advisory radio had the crash about three miles to the west of where it actually was, the VMS sign said "slow" traffic in what has to be the biggest understatement ever, and when they finally cleared it, the emergency vehicles kept a very slow speed, creating a rolling roadblock.  They really need to work out a way to speed up the amount of time it takes to clear crashes; I find it hard to believe that, in this day and age, we really need to keep the road blocked for hours while the police write a report.  Between cameras and computers, I would think it would be possible to take a bunch of pictures, clear the road, and reconvene somewhere out of the way to finish.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: thenetwork on September 04, 2018, 02:49:15 PM
Quote from: vdeane on September 04, 2018, 01:35:22 PM
Oddly enough, I didn't have any issues with that stretch yesterday.  Traffic was heavy, but moving around 70-75.  Where I DID have problems, though was between exits 28 and 27.  There was some kind of crash involving a truck that blocked the right lane; even though traffic was light in the Mohawk Valley, between the Thruway's incompetence and rubbernecking, it was a parking lot for miles and took me an hour to get through what is normally a couple of minutes.  The advisory radio had the crash about three miles to the west of where it actually was, the VMS sign said "slow" traffic in what has to be the biggest understatement ever, and when they finally cleared it, the emergency vehicles kept a very slow speed, creating a rolling roadblock.  They really need to work out a way to speed up the amount of time it takes to clear crashes; I find it hard to believe that, in this day and age, we really need to keep the road blocked for hours while the police write a report.  Between cameras and computers, I would think it would be possible to take a bunch of pictures, clear the road, and reconvene somewhere out of the way to finish.

In Colorado it is standard practice to completely shut down a road if it's related to "police activity", or in the event of a crash or accident a fatality is involved.  In either event, it usually lasts around 2 hours minimum.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: ipeters61 on September 04, 2018, 03:03:21 PM
Quote from: vdeane on September 04, 2018, 01:35:22 PM
They really need to work out a way to speed up the amount of time it takes to clear crashes; I find it hard to believe that, in this day and age, we really need to keep the road blocked for hours while the police write a report.  Between cameras and computers, I would think it would be possible to take a bunch of pictures, clear the road, and reconvene somewhere out of the way to finish.
It's way more complicated than anything that a camera or computer can take care of quickly.  It has the potential to be a crime scene and as a result it takes the police time to clear a crash, not only dealing with getting statements (they are aware that people are trying to go on with their day as quickly as possible, but any statement taken at the scene is better since the crash is fresh in their head), getting people to ambulances, clearing vehicles, checking the roadway for any evidence, etc...it's a very complicated process.

It takes several weeks (https://www.delawareonline.com/story/news/2018/07/26/months-may-pass-before-deadly-route-1-accident-investigation-closes/841142002/) for the investigations of fatal crashes to complete, so the report is far from being written there.  Of course it's an inconvenience but, again, it's far from being anything that you can just handle with cameras and computers.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on September 05, 2018, 08:00:53 AM
Quote from: vdeane on September 04, 2018, 01:35:22 PM
Oddly enough, I didn't have any issues with that stretch yesterday.  Traffic was heavy, but moving around 70-75.

You must have been through earlier. Roughly around 4PM there was an eastbound accident just west of the Warners Service area. Both directions were a parking lot for miles, eastbound roughly back to MP296, and westbound back to I-690. Westbound always has the heavier traffic after holidays as it is, and factor in (a) rubbernecking (b) holiday traffic, and (c) the State Fair, and westbound was as bad as eastbound if not worse, even though the accident was on the other side.

Otherwise, traffic was generally crawling; between I-690 and NY 14 we got up to speed exactly twice - for about a minute each time.

Quote from: ipeters61 on September 04, 2018, 03:03:21 PM
Quote from: vdeane on September 04, 2018, 01:35:22 PM
They really need to work out a way to speed up the amount of time it takes to clear crashes; I find it hard to believe that, in this day and age, we really need to keep the road blocked for hours while the police write a report.  Between cameras and computers, I would think it would be possible to take a bunch of pictures, clear the road, and reconvene somewhere out of the way to finish.
It's way more complicated than anything that a camera or computer can take care of quickly.  It has the potential to be a crime scene and as a result it takes the police time to clear a crash, not only dealing with getting statements (they are aware that people are trying to go on with their day as quickly as possible, but any statement taken at the scene is better since the crash is fresh in their head), getting people to ambulances, clearing vehicles, checking the roadway for any evidence, etc...it's a very complicated process.
It takes several weeks (https://www.delawareonline.com/story/news/2018/07/26/months-may-pass-before-deadly-route-1-accident-investigation-closes/841142002/) for the investigations of fatal crashes to complete, so the report is far from being written there.  Of course it's an inconvenience but, again, it's far from being anything that you can just handle with cameras and computers.

This has merit, but fatal crashes are relatively rare, and I'm pretty sure the accidents vdeane and myself refer to weren't fatal or crime-related. I can't even find a news article about the one I mentioned above.

Besides, the bigger problem is simply that closing a lane on a four lane highway that easily carries 50,000 VPD on a holiday is inevitably going to create a massive backup. If it was six-laned, (a) the accident may not have happened, especially if it was related to road-rage or aggressive driving, (b) two lanes could be maintained through the bottleneck, cutting delays in half, (c) vehicles backing up in three lanes instead of two would reduce the total queue length by about one-third, and (d) traffic would, on the whole, be further from the scene and less likely to rubberneck. All told, an accident goes from an incredible time-wasting disturbance to a minor hiccup in traffic flow, just by widening the road.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on September 05, 2018, 08:06:17 AM
On Monday afternoon and evening, there were no less than 5 accidents on the Thruway between Buffalo and Albany as I returned home from Ohio.  One was due to reckless driving (guy was speeding through the storm and ended up in a ditch).  The rest I saw were due to left lane blockers and tailgaters (rear-end accidents).

Not sure if another lane is needed.  It wasn't that congested, all things considered.  More due to just bad driving.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Beltway on September 05, 2018, 08:19:13 AM
Quote from: Rothman on September 05, 2018, 08:06:17 AM
The rest I saw were due to left lane blockers and tailgaters (rear-end accidents).

Did you witness the accident?  Did you talk to another witness?  Otherwise I don't see how you could determine that.  Not sure if even a police accident investigator could determine that without witnesses.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on September 05, 2018, 08:31:22 AM
Quote from: Rothman on September 05, 2018, 08:06:17 AM
On Monday afternoon and evening, there were no less than 5 accidents on the Thruway between Buffalo and Albany as I returned home from Ohio. One was due to reckless driving (guy was speeding through the storm and ended up in a ditch).
Could have easily been the one I referred to above, if it was near Warners.
QuoteNot sure if another lane is needed.  It wasn't that congested, all things considered.  More due to just bad driving.
The way I see it, it's kind of a "chicken or egg" argument. The need for another lane causes the bad driving. The problem is that there is too much traffic wanting to pass the trucks to be sustained by a single passing lane. This is a recipe for road rage, and leads to left-lane camping, passing on the right, tailgating, and so forth. True, those are terrible driving habits, but drivers would be less likely to do those things if they didn't encounter a rolling roadblock every time a truck - or slower moving car - wanted to pass.

Keep in mind, too, that yourself and vdeane were heading in the non-peak direction on Monday. Between Buffalo and Syracuse it's always busier eastbound before the holiday and westbound afterwards, thanks to the Finger Lakes, and, on Labor Day specifically, the State Fair. East of Syracuse, through the Mohawk Valley, doesn't really need to be widened IMO.


Quote from: Beltway on September 05, 2018, 08:19:13 AM
Quote from: Rothman on September 05, 2018, 08:06:17 AM
The rest I saw were due to left lane blockers and tailgaters (rear-end accidents).
Did you witness the accident?  Did you talk to another witness?  Otherwise I don't see how you could determine that.  Not sure if even a police accident investigator could determine that without witnesses.

Even at a glance, it's pretty easy to determine if an accident was a rear-end job or not. If it was, yes, it was probably a stream of traffic clipping along at 80 mph approaching a rolling roadblock of two trucks going 65 mph, leading to braking, tailgating, and so forth. It happens all too often on that overloaded section of the Thruway.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Beltway on September 05, 2018, 08:36:09 AM
Quote from: webny99 on September 05, 2018, 08:31:22 AM
Quote from: Rothman on September 05, 2018, 08:06:17 AM
Did you witness the accident?  Did you talk to another witness?  Otherwise I don't see how you could determine that.  Not sure if even a police accident investigator could determine that without witnesses.
Even at a glance, it's pretty easy to determine if an accident was a rear-end job or not. If it was, yes, it was probably a stream of traffic clipping along at 80 mph approaching a rolling roadblock of two trucks going 65 mph, leading to braking, tailgating, and so forth. It happens all too often on that overloaded section of the Thruway.

That doesn't follow at all.  While the signs of a rear-end accident are obvious, the usual cause on a rural Interstate is traffic stopping or slowing to a low speed in a rolling backup, and someone not paying attention doesn't brake in time and hits a slow or stopped vehicle.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on September 05, 2018, 08:54:44 AM
Quote from: Beltway on September 05, 2018, 08:36:09 AM
Quote from: webny99 on September 05, 2018, 08:31:22 AM
Quote from: Rothman on September 05, 2018, 08:06:17 AM
Did you witness the accident?  Did you talk to another witness?  Otherwise I don't see how you could determine that.  Not sure if even a police accident investigator could determine that without witnesses.
Even at a glance, it's pretty easy to determine if an accident was a rear-end job or not. If it was, yes, it was probably a stream of traffic clipping along at 80 mph approaching a rolling roadblock of two trucks going 65 mph, leading to braking, tailgating, and so forth. It happens all too often on that overloaded section of the Thruway.
That doesn't follow at all.  While the signs of a rear-end accident are obvious, the usual cause on a rural Interstate is traffic stopping or slowing to a low speed in a rolling backup, and someone not paying attention doesn't brake in time and hits a slow or stopped vehicle.

So it does follow, then, because you just explained the exact thing that I did, in your own words.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Beltway on September 05, 2018, 09:16:43 AM
Quote from: webny99 on September 05, 2018, 08:54:44 AM
Quote from: Beltway on September 05, 2018, 08:36:09 AM
Quote from: webny99 on September 05, 2018, 08:31:22 AM
Quote from: Rothman on September 05, 2018, 08:06:17 AM
Did you witness the accident?  Did you talk to another witness?  Otherwise I don't see how you could determine that.  Not sure if even a police accident investigator could determine that without witnesses.
Even at a glance, it's pretty easy to determine if an accident was a rear-end job or not. If it was, yes, it was probably a stream of traffic clipping along at 80 mph approaching a rolling roadblock of two trucks going 65 mph, leading to braking, tailgating, and so forth. It happens all too often on that overloaded section of the Thruway.
That doesn't follow at all.  While the signs of a rear-end accident are obvious, the usual cause on a rural Interstate is traffic stopping or slowing to a low speed in a rolling backup, and someone not paying attention doesn't brake in time and hits a slow or stopped vehicle.
So it does follow, then, because you just explained the exact thing that I did, in your own words.

No, I disagreed with what you said and said something entirely different.  Rolling backups happen for a variety of reasons, usually because volume has exceeded capacity.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on September 05, 2018, 12:02:05 PM
Quote from: Rothman on September 05, 2018, 08:06:17 AM
On Monday afternoon and evening, there were no less than 5 accidents on the Thruway between Buffalo and Albany as I returned home from Ohio.  One was due to reckless driving (guy was speeding through the storm and ended up in a ditch).  The rest I saw were due to left lane blockers and tailgaters (rear-end accidents).

Not sure if another lane is needed.  It wasn't that congested, all things considered.  More due to just bad driving.
Rough estimate for accident probability is 1 per 165k miles driven total, and 1 per 500 k miles for controlled access highway.
274 miles between Albany and Buffalo, lets round to 250 miles - means 1 crash per 2000 trips.
Assuming road was at half capacity, that is 2000 vph, that is 1 crash per hour. If damaged vehicle stays on a road for 2.5 hours (probably reasonable, especially on longer stretches), you saw 2x normal rate.
If traffic was a bit higher than my estimate, rate is closer to statistical... But yes, crash is not an unexpected event.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on September 05, 2018, 01:33:31 PM
Quote from: webny99 on September 05, 2018, 08:00:53 AM
You must have been through earlier. Roughly around 4PM there was an eastbound accident just west of the Warners Service area.
Yeah, I left around 12:30, so on the early end of typical for me.  I had hoped to be home by 4; I have to do laundry and stuff to do when I get back, plus I like to watch the news.  Instead, I didn't get home until after 5, missed a half an hour of the news, had to watch the rest concurrent with my laundry (which I had hoped would already be in the dryer by then and complete by dinner time; I have to walk to a different building in my apartment complex to do laundry, so it's inconvenient), and eat dinner late because I wanted to finish laundry first.  Not fun.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Roadwarriors79 on September 06, 2018, 08:37:23 PM
So the EB(SB) span of the new Tappan Zee Bridge is opening this weekend. How long until the tolls go up for this bridge? Will tolls go up along the rest of the Thruway?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on September 06, 2018, 09:00:15 PM
Cuomo has tolls frozen through 2020 across the entire system.  After that, who knows.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: MikeCL on September 07, 2018, 12:18:12 AM
Quote from: Roadwarriors79 on September 06, 2018, 08:37:23 PM
So the EB(SB) span of the new Tappan Zee Bridge is opening this weekend. How long until the tolls go up for this bridge? Will tolls go up along the rest of the Thruway?
So the current span traffic will be all going in one direction right?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Roadwarriors79 on September 07, 2018, 12:53:51 AM
Quote from: MikeCL on September 07, 2018, 12:18:12 AM
Quote from: Roadwarriors79 on September 06, 2018, 08:37:23 PM
So the EB(SB) span of the new Tappan Zee Bridge is opening this weekend. How long until the tolls go up for this bridge? Will tolls go up along the rest of the Thruway?
So the current span traffic will be all going in one direction right?

Yes. Current span will be just WB(NB) traffic after this weekend. They will be working on the bike/pedestrian path.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on September 07, 2018, 12:02:15 PM
Quote from: MikeCL on September 07, 2018, 12:18:12 AM
Quote from: Roadwarriors79 on September 06, 2018, 08:37:23 PM
So the EB(SB) span of the new Tappan Zee Bridge is opening this weekend. How long until the tolls go up for this bridge? Will tolls go up along the rest of the Thruway?
So the current span traffic will be all going in one direction right?

Tolls SHOULD have been increasing for years. If they were increasing on pace with similar roads, they'd be 1/3 higher. Thanks to the politically motivated toll freeze, NYSTA can't pay its bills.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on September 07, 2018, 01:12:02 PM
My understanding is that the reason they were having trouble was because of having to fund the Canal Corporation, which they no longer do.  Although replacing the Tappan Zee with no corresponding toll increase anywhere certainly doesn't help.  I don't recall ever hearing how the bridge would be paid for.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on September 07, 2018, 01:22:40 PM
Quote from: vdeane on September 07, 2018, 01:12:02 PM
My understanding is that the reason they were having trouble was because of having to fund the Canal Corporation, which they no longer do.  Although replacing the Tappan Zee with no corresponding toll increase anywhere certainly doesn't help.  I don't recall ever hearing how the bridge would be paid for.
$1B came from the Wall Street settlement.  That's all I heard. :D
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on September 07, 2018, 01:37:29 PM
Quote from: vdeane on September 07, 2018, 01:12:02 PM
My understanding is that the reason they were having trouble was because of having to fund the Canal Corporation, which they no longer do.  Although replacing the Tappan Zee with no corresponding toll increase anywhere certainly doesn't help.  I don't recall ever hearing how the bridge would be paid for.
According to 2017 NYSTA budget book, their revenue (including Tappan Zee tolls) covers about 80% of the spending (excluding new Tappan Zee)
That is without Canal corp spending. ANd they shed 20% of mainline personel over past 10 years. I wonder how many of those are toll takers replaced by EZpass readers. Maintenance budget is flat to somewhat decreasing.. 
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on September 07, 2018, 08:36:10 PM
Question: if American drivers can be billed on ON 407, why can't Canadians be billed on the Thruway?  Why isn't this mutual?  Are plate lookups for tolling really separate from all the other licence/registration states and provinces share with each other?
https://www.wgrz.com/article/news/can-canadians-dodge-new-grand-island-cashless-toll/71-589793396
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Alps on September 08, 2018, 12:36:07 AM
Well, it's not opening after all.
https://www.lohud.com/story/news/local/rockland/2018/09/07/fears-tappan-zee-bridge-could-collapse-boats-barred/1232918002/
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: US71 on September 08, 2018, 03:38:35 PM
Easy on the political commentary
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: RobbieL2415 on September 08, 2018, 09:56:40 PM
Quote from: Alps on September 08, 2018, 12:36:07 AM
Well, it's not opening after all.
https://www.lohud.com/story/news/local/rockland/2018/09/07/fears-tappan-zee-bridge-could-collapse-boats-barred/1232918002/
And whose fault is it for building the two spans so close to the old one?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: ipeters61 on September 08, 2018, 10:03:08 PM
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on September 08, 2018, 09:56:40 PM
Quote from: Alps on September 08, 2018, 12:36:07 AM
Well, it's not opening after all.
https://www.lohud.com/story/news/local/rockland/2018/09/07/fears-tappan-zee-bridge-could-collapse-boats-barred/1232918002/
And whose fault is it for building the two spans so close to the old one?
I thought the (original) bridge was specifically built there because it was as close as possible to NYC without being controlled by PANYNJ (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tappan_Zee_Bridge_(1955%E2%80%932017)).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on September 08, 2018, 10:29:59 PM
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on September 08, 2018, 09:56:40 PM
Quote from: Alps on September 08, 2018, 12:36:07 AM
Well, it's not opening after all.
https://www.lohud.com/story/news/local/rockland/2018/09/07/fears-tappan-zee-bridge-could-collapse-boats-barred/1232918002/
And whose fault is it for building the two spans so close to the old one?
I assume approaches couldn't be moved too much. Riverfront real estate is expensive, real estate near NYC is expensive, and imminent domain takes a lot of money and time...
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: storm2k on September 09, 2018, 12:53:35 AM
Quote from: ipeters61 on September 08, 2018, 10:03:08 PM
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on September 08, 2018, 09:56:40 PM
Quote from: Alps on September 08, 2018, 12:36:07 AM
Well, it's not opening after all.
https://www.lohud.com/story/news/local/rockland/2018/09/07/fears-tappan-zee-bridge-could-collapse-boats-barred/1232918002/
And whose fault is it for building the two spans so close to the old one?
I thought the (original) bridge was specifically built there because it was as close as possible to NYC without being controlled by PANYNJ (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tappan_Zee_Bridge_(1955%E2%80%932017)).

That is correct. I think what they mean is why they put the new bridge in such close proximity to the old one. In fairness, they built the new Goethals Bridge spans right next to the old bridge and that happened without incident.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on September 09, 2018, 12:57:18 AM
Although I believe the PANYNJ turf to be a reason for the placement of the Tappan Zee, I have heard that there were more factors at play as well, such as local communities either opposing it or promoting it and the resultant politicians' involvement.

Just saying we need to be careful not to oversimplify what was a complicated political situation.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: RobbieL2415 on September 09, 2018, 10:43:40 AM
Quote from: Rothman on September 09, 2018, 12:57:18 AM
Although I believe the PANYNJ turf to be a reason for the placement of the Tappan Zee, I have heard that there were more factors at play as well, such as local communities either opposing it or promoting it and the resultant politicians' involvement.

Just saying we need to be careful not to oversimplify what was a complicated political situation.
What was the solution from the opposition? I'm curious.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: 02 Park Ave on September 09, 2018, 11:24:39 AM
I think that the original plan was to route the Thruway through NJ down Route 17 to the NJ Turnpike and then onward to the GWB.  It would be useful to have that routing today.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: ipeters61 on September 09, 2018, 12:40:51 PM
Quote from: Rothman on September 09, 2018, 12:57:18 AM
Although I believe the PANYNJ turf to be a reason for the placement of the Tappan Zee, I have heard that there were more factors at play as well, such as local communities either opposing it or promoting it and the resultant politicians' involvement.

Just saying we need to be careful not to oversimplify what was a complicated political situation.
Of course.

I just figured that the other issues (mainly community opposition and high land value in Westchester County) were kind of obvious.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Beltway on September 09, 2018, 02:16:19 PM
Quote from: 02 Park Ave on September 09, 2018, 11:24:39 AM
I think that the original plan was to route the Thruway through NJ down Route 17 to the NJ Turnpike and then onward to the GWB.  It would be useful to have that routing today.

New Jersey would have to agree to participate in that.  Unless they were willing then the point is moot. 

Therefore a NY Thruway routing would be entirely within NYS and be routed somewhere around the Tappan Zee area.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: ipeters61 on September 09, 2018, 07:15:45 PM
Quote from: Beltway on September 09, 2018, 02:16:19 PM
Quote from: 02 Park Ave on September 09, 2018, 11:24:39 AM
I think that the original plan was to route the Thruway through NJ down Route 17 to the NJ Turnpike and then onward to the GWB.  It would be useful to have that routing today.

New Jersey would have to agree to participate in that.  Unless they were willing then the point is moot. 

Therefore a NY Thruway routing would be entirely within NYS and be routed somewhere around the Tappan Zee area.
I know this (very roughly) describes the current routing but I would imagine starting the NY Thruway at the end of the Palisades Parkway or Garden State Parkway being logical (with the connection to the GWB being something like NJ-3).  Of course the big issue is that the parkways restrict trucks...

By the way, going off topic, but do you know if the Garden State Parkway bans buses?  I remember taking a Peter Pan from NYC to Hartford and the driver took the Lincoln Tunnel to NJ-3 to the GS Parkway up to the Tappan Zee.  Seemed odd to me because I thought the GS Parkway was strictly for cars.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Beltway on September 09, 2018, 08:47:47 PM
Quote from: ipeters61 on September 09, 2018, 07:15:45 PM
Quote from: Beltway on September 09, 2018, 02:16:19 PM
New Jersey would have to agree to participate in that.  Unless they were willing then the point is moot. 
Therefore a NY Thruway routing would be entirely within NYS and be routed somewhere around the Tappan Zee area.
I know this (very roughly) describes the current routing but I would imagine starting the NY Thruway at the end of the Palisades Parkway or Garden State Parkway being logical (with the connection to the GWB being something like NJ-3).  Of course the big issue is that the parkways restrict trucks...

The construction of the NY Thruway well predated the Palisades Interstate Parkway (PIP), and the PIP is a parkway not designed for large trucks.  Likewise the Garden State Parkway is not designed for trucks.

The Tappan Zee Bridge location also was well situated for the Cross Westchester Expressway corridor which was the beginnings of an outer bypass of NYC (I-287).

Even before I-287 was completed in New Jersey, the preferred I-95 bypass (per AAA routings, at least for cars) of NYC was to use the Garden State Parkway and the NY Thruway and the Tappan Zee Bridge and the Cross Westchester Expressway.

So I can see multiple reasons for the location of the Tappan Zee Bridge besides the alleged intent to avoid PANYNJ administration.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Roadrunner75 on September 09, 2018, 08:53:44 PM
Quote from: ipeters61 on September 09, 2018, 07:15:45 PM
By the way, going off topic, but do you know if the Garden State Parkway bans buses?  I remember taking a Peter Pan from NYC to Hartford and the driver took the Lincoln Tunnel to NJ-3 to the GS Parkway up to the Tappan Zee.  Seemed odd to me because I thought the GS Parkway was strictly for cars.
Buses are allowed on the Parkway - Just not trucks north of 105.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Alps on September 09, 2018, 08:57:07 PM
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on September 08, 2018, 09:56:40 PM
Quote from: Alps on September 08, 2018, 12:36:07 AM
Well, it's not opening after all.
https://www.lohud.com/story/news/local/rockland/2018/09/07/fears-tappan-zee-bridge-could-collapse-boats-barred/1232918002/
And whose fault is it for building the two spans so close to the old one?
1. The problem as I understand it is unrelated to the foundations, so building the bridges close together is not the issue. Yes, it's the reason traffic isn't on the new bridge right now, but the new bridge isn't causing the old one to be in danger of collapse, and you're not going to get additional capacity from the new bridge (still 4 lanes, just with shoulders now).
2. The Port Authority jurisdiction was and still is the reason for the bridge location. It was a factor in why the new bridges are north of the original Tap.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Beltway on September 09, 2018, 09:02:36 PM
Quote from: Alps on September 09, 2018, 08:57:07 PM
2. The Port Authority jurisdiction was and still is the reason for the bridge location. It was a factor in why the new bridges are north of the original Tap.

So what is the exact boundary for PANYNJ administration?   Is there a legal definition per charter?

PANYNJ is an interstate compact and there really shouldn't be a need to utilize it when building a bridge entirely within one state.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Alps on September 09, 2018, 09:07:46 PM
Quote from: Beltway on September 09, 2018, 09:02:36 PM
Quote from: Alps on September 09, 2018, 08:57:07 PM
2. The Port Authority jurisdiction was and still is the reason for the bridge location. It was a factor in why the new bridges are north of the original Tap.

So what is the exact boundary for PANYNJ administration?   Is there a legal definition per charter?

PANYNJ is an interstate compact and there really shouldn't be a need to utilize it when building a bridge entirely within one state.
A radius of 25 miles from the Statue of Liberty, up the Hudson. The existing Tap is less than 26 miles, I believe.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Beltway on September 09, 2018, 09:14:39 PM
Quote from: Alps on September 09, 2018, 09:07:46 PM
Quote from: Beltway on September 09, 2018, 09:02:36 PM
So what is the exact boundary for PANYNJ administration?   Is there a legal definition per charter?
PANYNJ is an interstate compact and there really shouldn't be a need to utilize it when building a bridge entirely within one state.
A radius of 25 miles from the Statue of Liberty, up the Hudson. The existing Tap is less than 26 miles, I believe.

Participation seems voluntary when solely within NY, as the Verrazano-Narrows Bridge is less than 10 miles from that and is administered by the Triborough Bridge and Tunnel Authority, aka MTA Bridges and Tunnels.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on September 09, 2018, 09:36:01 PM
Quote from: Alps on September 09, 2018, 08:57:07 PM
2. The Port Authority jurisdiction was and still is the reason for the bridge location. It was a factor in why the new bridges are north of the original Tap.
is the bridge really that close to the line? I kn ow it is just outside the circle, but that degree of accuracy is crazy...
UPD: if Google maps measurements are to be believed, it is 27.20 miles to the closest point of old bridge...
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Alps on September 09, 2018, 10:42:39 PM
Quote from: Beltway on September 09, 2018, 09:14:39 PM
Quote from: Alps on September 09, 2018, 09:07:46 PM
Quote from: Beltway on September 09, 2018, 09:02:36 PM
So what is the exact boundary for PANYNJ administration?   Is there a legal definition per charter?
PANYNJ is an interstate compact and there really shouldn't be a need to utilize it when building a bridge entirely within one state.
A radius of 25 miles from the Statue of Liberty, up the Hudson. The existing Tap is less than 26 miles, I believe.

Participation seems voluntary when solely within NY, as the Verrazano-Narrows Bridge is less than 10 miles from that and is administered by the Triborough Bridge and Tunnel Authority, aka MTA Bridges and Tunnels.
Hudson River only. It's because of the bi-state compact. Any crossing within 25 miles would jeopardize the Port Authority's monopoly. Also, the one site I used said Statue of Liberty, but I may have heard Battery before. I know the Tap is about 25.2 miles from whatever "it" is.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on September 09, 2018, 11:40:49 PM
Quote from: Alps on September 09, 2018, 10:42:39 PM
Quote from: Beltway on September 09, 2018, 09:14:39 PM
Quote from: Alps on September 09, 2018, 09:07:46 PM
Quote from: Beltway on September 09, 2018, 09:02:36 PM
So what is the exact boundary for PANYNJ administration?   Is there a legal definition per charter?
PANYNJ is an interstate compact and there really shouldn't be a need to utilize it when building a bridge entirely within one state.
A radius of 25 miles from the Statue of Liberty, up the Hudson. The existing Tap is less than 26 miles, I believe.

Participation seems voluntary when solely within NY, as the Verrazano-Narrows Bridge is less than 10 miles from that and is administered by the Triborough Bridge and Tunnel Authority, aka MTA Bridges and Tunnels.
Hudson River only. It's because of the bi-state compact. Any crossing within 25 miles would jeopardize the Port Authority's monopoly. Also, the one site I used said Statue of Liberty, but I may have heard Battery before. I know the Tap is about 25.2 miles from whatever "it" is.

I'm 75% certain it's the Battery. Which is definitely under 26 miles from the old bridge.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Beltway on September 09, 2018, 11:48:15 PM
Quote from: cl94 on September 09, 2018, 11:40:49 PM
Quote from: Alps on September 09, 2018, 10:42:39 PM
Quote from: Beltway on September 09, 2018, 09:14:39 PM
Participation seems voluntary when solely within NY, as the Verrazano-Narrows Bridge is less than 10 miles from that and is administered by the Triborough Bridge and Tunnel Authority, aka MTA Bridges and Tunnels.
Hudson River only. It's because of the bi-state compact. Any crossing within 25 miles would jeopardize the Port Authority's monopoly. Also, the one site I used said Statue of Liberty, but I may have heard Battery before. I know the Tap is about 25.2 miles from whatever "it" is.
I'm 75% certain it's the Battery. Which is definitely under 26 miles from the old bridge.

I was hoping that someone would quote the pertinent language in the PANYNJ charter.  If not I'll have to go digging myself and see what I can find.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on September 10, 2018, 12:53:02 AM
Quote from: Beltway on September 09, 2018, 11:48:15 PM
Quote from: cl94 on September 09, 2018, 11:40:49 PM
Quote from: Alps on September 09, 2018, 10:42:39 PM
Quote from: Beltway on September 09, 2018, 09:14:39 PM
Participation seems voluntary when solely within NY, as the Verrazano-Narrows Bridge is less than 10 miles from that and is administered by the Triborough Bridge and Tunnel Authority, aka MTA Bridges and Tunnels.
Hudson River only. It's because of the bi-state compact. Any crossing within 25 miles would jeopardize the Port Authority's monopoly. Also, the one site I used said Statue of Liberty, but I may have heard Battery before. I know the Tap is about 25.2 miles from whatever "it" is.
I'm 75% certain it's the Battery. Which is definitely under 26 miles from the old bridge.
I was hoping that someone would quote the pertinent language in the PANYNJ charter.  If not I'll have to go digging myself and see what I can find.
Although port authority itself mentions 25 mile radius, original compact of 1921 has no radius definition, but a list of points defining port area.
https://www.nysenate.gov/legislation/laws/PNY
Quote
Beginning at a point A of latitude forty-one degrees and four minutes north and longitude seventy-three degrees and fifty-six minutes west...
That segment of the border goes east-west across Hudson at 41°4' = 41.0666 deg, and the old bridge is at 41.0698 deg according to google maps, 1000 feet from the line.

But that laundry list of coordinates spelled out in the longest possible form...
UPD:
https://www.google.com/maps/place/41%C2%B004'00.0%22N+73%C2%B054'00.0%22W/@41.062611,-73.8997313,5088m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m5!3m4!1s0x0:0x0!8m2!3d41.0666667!4d-73.9
Marker is on the border of PANYNJ jurisdiction, which goes exactly east-west across Hudson
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Beltway on September 10, 2018, 01:06:19 AM
Quote from: kalvado on September 10, 2018, 12:53:02 AM
Quote from: Beltway on September 09, 2018, 11:48:15 PM
I was hoping that someone would quote the pertinent language in the PANYNJ charter.  If not I'll have to go digging myself and see what I can find.
Although port authority itself mentions 25 mile radius, original compact of 1921 has no radius definition, but a list of points defining port area.
https://www.nysenate.gov/legislation/laws/PNY
Quote
Beginning at a point A of latitude forty-one degrees and four minutes north and longitude seventy-three degrees and fifty-six minutes west...
That segment of the border goes east-west across Hudson at 41°4' = 41.0666 deg, and the old bridge is at 41.0698 deg according to google maps, 1000 feet from the line.
But that laundry list of coordinates spelled out in the longest possible form...

https://www.usgs.gov/faqs/how-much-distance-does-a-degree-minute-and-second-cover-your-maps
At 38 degrees North latitude, one degree of latitude equals approximately 364,000 ft (69 miles), one minute equals 6068 ft (1.15 miles), one-second equals 101 ft; one-degree of longitude equals 288,200 ft (54.6 miles), one minute equals 4800 ft (0.91 mile), and one second equals 80 ft.
....

That is clear and precise enough, especially if interpreted to be 41°4'00.00" given that no seconds were specified.  I saw the long quote and (assuming the seconds are always 00.00) it looks precise enough that a survey party could have staked out the boundaries.

Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Beltway on September 10, 2018, 06:21:28 AM
This webpage shows a boundary that while not specifically cited as the official boundary, may indeed be that.

Overview of Facilities and Services
https://www.panynj.gov/about/facilities-services.html
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Roadwarriors79 on September 10, 2018, 07:16:49 AM
Quote from: 02 Park Ave on September 09, 2018, 11:24:39 AM
I think that the original plan was to route the Thruway through NJ down Route 17 to the NJ Turnpike and then onward to the GWB.  It would be useful to have that routing today.

I have never heard of any Thruway extension proposals into New Jersey. I do recall that at one time there were talks of extending the NJ Turnpike north to a connection with the Thruway. That proposal was killed decades ago.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: PHLBOS on September 10, 2018, 08:34:34 AM
Quote from: Alps on September 08, 2018, 12:36:07 AM
Well, it's not opening after all.
https://www.lohud.com/story/news/local/rockland/2018/09/07/fears-tappan-zee-bridge-could-collapse-boats-barred/1232918002/
The latest update has the new span slated to open tomorrow (Sept. 11) evening; weather permitting.
Mario Cuomo Bridge: New opening date set; contractors deem Tappan Zee Bridge 'stable' (https://amp.lohud.com/amp/1252501002)

Quote from: Lohud ArticleTappan Zee Constructors have recommended to the Thruway Authority that traffic can be shifted to the eastbound span of the new Gov. Mario M. Cuomo Bridge, and that the switch is scheduled for Tuesday evening, weather permitting.

Time will tell & could be subject to how far north along the East Coast Hurricane Florence's path goes.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: empirestate on September 10, 2018, 10:30:39 AM
Quote from: Roadrunner75 on September 09, 2018, 08:53:44 PM
Quote from: ipeters61 on September 09, 2018, 07:15:45 PM
By the way, going off topic, but do you know if the Garden State Parkway bans buses?  I remember taking a Peter Pan from NYC to Hartford and the driver took the Lincoln Tunnel to NJ-3 to the GS Parkway up to the Tappan Zee.  Seemed odd to me because I thought the GS Parkway was strictly for cars.

Buses are allowed on the Parkway - Just not trucks north of 105.

However, trucks are allowed the Garden State Parkway Connection–i.e., the bit of it in New York that is part of the Thruway system.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: shadyjay on September 10, 2018, 08:36:55 PM
Took a drive on the Thruway between Suffern and Albany this past weekend in both directions.  The southbound drive was in the dark, so I couldn't see much.  One thing I could (or couldn't) see were some new Clearview signs in spots which have no reflectivity.  These were around Exits 15A/15. 

Also, noticed some permanent variable message signs which advertised "GMCB ROADWORK".  A roadgeek would know that stands for "Governor Mario Cuomo Bridge", but I think the name is too new/not established enough to start using acronyms.  After all, this isn't the "GWB" we're talking about.

There are a ton of those "New York State Experience" signs and their accompanying signs for attractions, etc.  They appear about every 30 miles.  My first time seeing them mid-state.  What an eyesore.

The northbound trip was made in the daylight.  Not much has changed since my last drive on this section some 10 years ago.  There's construction going on along the New Baltimore northbound offramp.  It appeared to look like a service plaza construction, but consulting with the NYSTA website, looks to be the capital region welcome center being built. 

So that got me to looking around the Thruway site and found the contacts for conversion of the Spring Valley, New Rochelle, and Yonkers barriers to all-electronic tolling:
New Rochelle (let date 9/12)
Yonkers (let date 8/29)
Spring Valley (let date 10/3)
http://www.thruway.ny.gov/business/contractors/documents/index.shtml


And a link to the sign photos I got northbound from Exits 15A-24:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/shadyjay/albums/72157698882031051
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: RobbieL2415 on September 10, 2018, 08:55:06 PM
Quote from: 02 Park Ave on September 09, 2018, 11:24:39 AM
I think that the original plan was to route the Thruway through NJ down Route 17 to the NJ Turnpike and then onward to the GWB.  It would be useful to have that routing today.
One can technically do this (as long as one isn't driving a commercial vehicle) by cruising down the Palisades Parkway.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: RobbieL2415 on September 10, 2018, 08:57:35 PM
Quote from: Alps on September 09, 2018, 09:07:46 PM
Quote from: Beltway on September 09, 2018, 09:02:36 PM
Quote from: Alps on September 09, 2018, 08:57:07 PM
2. The Port Authority jurisdiction was and still is the reason for the bridge location. It was a factor in why the new bridges are north of the original Tap.

So what is the exact boundary for PANYNJ administration?   Is there a legal definition per charter?

PANYNJ is an interstate compact and there really shouldn't be a need to utilize it when building a bridge entirely within one state.
A radius of 25 miles from the Statue of Liberty, up the Hudson. The existing Tap is less than 26 miles, I believe.
A bit off-topic, but why aren't all the MTA bridges and tunnels also controlled by the Port Authority?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: SignBridge on September 10, 2018, 09:01:28 PM
I think the concept was that the Port Authority controlled all the crossings between NY & NJ and the Triboro (Robert Moses) B&T Authority controlled all crossings within NYC between boroughs. 
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on September 10, 2018, 09:10:24 PM
None of the MTA bridges/tunnels cross the Hudson.  The Verrazano crosses The Narrows.  The Rockaway bridges cross Jamaica Bay.  The Henry Hudson crosses the Harlem River.  All the others cross the East River.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: SignBridge on September 10, 2018, 10:25:19 PM
I can't believe they're going to open the new bridge on Sept. 11th. (!?!?!?) Some might consider it bad luck.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: seicer on September 11, 2018, 08:51:28 AM
It's opening is apparently rushed in some political move to boost Cuomo's governor race. Not that he needs it against Nixon.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on September 11, 2018, 10:15:00 AM
Cuomo's ego knows no bounds, given how he has been treating his way-behind opponent.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on September 11, 2018, 10:32:08 AM
Quote from: seicer on September 11, 2018, 08:51:28 AM
It's opening is apparently rushed in some political move to boost Cuomo's governor race. Not that he needs it against Nixon.
I wouldn't say it was truly rushed. The way they describe the issue is that something unexpectedly broke ("loud bang") in the old bridge being demolished; and that became a concern. With weather not being best for construction, this is a real unfortunate situation.
Now since Cuomo II used the opening as a chance to socialize with the former (laundry list of high rank positions and ambitions) - who, as a former senator, cannot even take credit for obtaining federal funding for the project - there is a federal loan for like 1/4 of total cost... Well, and overall this is not an opportunity to miss - giggle at both as much as you want.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on September 11, 2018, 11:18:48 AM
Eh, the snafu on Friday was entirely unrelated to the new bridge. They ARE rushing to get the new bridge done, but Cuomo was likely not the only reason. NYSTA probably wanted to end two-way traffic on the WB span and move WB traffic off of the ped path before the winter. That had a ton of issues last winter and there were several large accidents and closures. There's a bit of work they need to do on the approaches after EB shifts but before WB shifts and they're running out of warm weather. If I were NYSTA, I'd be trying to rush that along as well. Big PR disaster last winter and they probably don't want to repeat it.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on September 11, 2018, 02:15:24 PM
Quote from: shadyjay on September 10, 2018, 08:36:55 PM
Took a drive on the Thruway between Suffern and Albany this past weekend in both directions.  The southbound drive was in the dark, so I couldn't see much.  One thing I could (or couldn't) see were some new Clearview signs in spots which have no reflectivity.  These were around Exits 15A/15. 

Also, noticed some permanent variable message signs which advertised "GMCB ROADWORK".  A roadgeek would know that stands for "Governor Mario Cuomo Bridge", but I think the name is too new/not established enough to start using acronyms.  After all, this isn't the "GWB" we're talking about.

There are a ton of those "New York State Experience" signs and their accompanying signs for attractions, etc.  They appear about every 30 miles.  My first time seeing them mid-state.  What an eyesore.

The northbound trip was made in the daylight.  Not much has changed since my last drive on this section some 10 years ago.  There's construction going on along the New Baltimore northbound offramp.  It appeared to look like a service plaza construction, but consulting with the NYSTA website, looks to be the capital region welcome center being built. 

So that got me to looking around the Thruway site and found the contacts for conversion of the Spring Valley, New Rochelle, and Yonkers barriers to all-electronic tolling:
New Rochelle (let date 9/12)
Yonkers (let date 8/29)
Spring Valley (let date 10/3)
http://www.thruway.ny.gov/business/contractors/documents/index.shtml


And a link to the sign photos I got northbound from Exits 15A-24:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/shadyjay/albums/72157698882031051

Seeing the tandem lot in the Yonkers plans made me wonder about Harriman, since it has some stuff off the toll barrier and I could have sworn I remember reading something about it.  Alas, the plans for that one are no longer online.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: MikeCL on September 11, 2018, 04:33:23 PM
Quote from: kalvado on September 08, 2018, 10:29:59 PM
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on September 08, 2018, 09:56:40 PM
Quote from: Alps on September 08, 2018, 12:36:07 AM
Well, it's not opening after all.
https://www.lohud.com/story/news/local/rockland/2018/09/07/fears-tappan-zee-bridge-could-collapse-boats-barred/1232918002/
And whose fault is it for building the two spans so close to the old one?
I assume approaches couldn't be moved too much. Riverfront real estate is expensive, real estate near NYC is expensive, and imminent domain takes a lot of money and time...
Perfect timing with this with the new spans did the approaches eastbound side move at all? I can't really see too well when driving it seems like it did but tbh it's hard too see too much of the change.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: MikeCL on September 11, 2018, 04:37:11 PM
Quote from: ipeters61 on September 09, 2018, 07:15:45 PM
Quote from: Beltway on September 09, 2018, 02:16:19 PM
Quote from: 02 Park Ave on September 09, 2018, 11:24:39 AM
I think that the original plan was to route the Thruway through NJ down Route 17 to the NJ Turnpike and then onward to the GWB.  It would be useful to have that routing today.

New Jersey would have to agree to participate in that.  Unless they were willing then the point is moot. 

Therefore a NY Thruway routing would be entirely within NYS and be routed somewhere around the Tappan Zee area.
I know this (very roughly) describes the current routing but I would imagine starting the NY Thruway at the end of the Palisades Parkway or Garden State Parkway being logical (with the connection to the GWB being something like NJ-3).  Of course the big issue is that the parkways restrict trucks...

By the way, going off topic, but do you know if the Garden State Parkway bans buses?  I remember taking a Peter Pan from NYC to Hartford and the driver took the Lincoln Tunnel to NJ-3 to the GS Parkway up to the Tappan Zee.  Seemed odd to me because I thought the GS Parkway was strictly for cars.
Going off topic again just curious are bus and large uhals allowed on the West Side highway in NYC? I've seen a bus take the lower level of the GWB which I thought was odd.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: RobbieL2415 on September 11, 2018, 07:15:11 PM
Quote from: MikeCL on September 11, 2018, 04:33:23 PM
Quote from: kalvado on September 08, 2018, 10:29:59 PM
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on September 08, 2018, 09:56:40 PM
Quote from: Alps on September 08, 2018, 12:36:07 AM
Well, it's not opening after all.
https://www.lohud.com/story/news/local/rockland/2018/09/07/fears-tappan-zee-bridge-could-collapse-boats-barred/1232918002/
And whose fault is it for building the two spans so close to the old one?
I assume approaches couldn't be moved too much. Riverfront real estate is expensive, real estate near NYC is expensive, and imminent domain takes a lot of money and time...
Perfect timing with this with the new spans did the approaches eastbound side move at all? I can't really see too well when driving it seems like it did but tbh it's hard too see too much of the change.
No commercial vehicles (incl. busses) on the West Side from 57th Street north.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Alps on September 11, 2018, 10:13:05 PM
As of 10:07 PM, the new EB Tappan Zee has opened.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: MikeCL on September 11, 2018, 10:58:49 PM
 Nice I'll take that way home to NJ to check it out.. is the old tap still standing?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: MikeCL on September 11, 2018, 10:59:42 PM
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on September 11, 2018, 07:15:11 PM
Quote from: MikeCL on September 11, 2018, 04:33:23 PM
Quote from: kalvado on September 08, 2018, 10:29:59 PM
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on September 08, 2018, 09:56:40 PM
Quote from: Alps on September 08, 2018, 12:36:07 AM
Well, it's not opening after all.
https://www.lohud.com/story/news/local/rockland/2018/09/07/fears-tappan-zee-bridge-could-collapse-boats-barred/1232918002/
And whose fault is it for building the two spans so close to the old one?
I assume approaches couldn't be moved too much. Riverfront real estate is expensive, real estate near NYC is expensive, and imminent domain takes a lot of money and time...
Perfect timing with this with the new spans did the approaches eastbound side move at all? I can't really see too well when driving it seems like it did but tbh it's hard too see too much of the change.
No commercial vehicles (incl. busses) on the West Side from 57th Street north.
Ok
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Alps on September 12, 2018, 12:28:43 AM
Quote from: MikeCL on September 11, 2018, 10:58:49 PM
Nice I'll take that way home to NJ to check it out.. is the old tap still standing?
Pieces.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: MikeCL on September 14, 2018, 06:57:30 PM
Went over the bridge today not how I expected to cross still the same but the Other side now has the workers on the other side now.

Here is the dash cam of me crossing

https://youtu.be/w0j-AV1CKVs
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on September 15, 2018, 07:36:23 PM
I-90 WB between NY 400 and Lackawanna Toll Booth is getting a nice upgrade. They already have traffic going on a pair of new bridges over Seneca St and Potters Rd. NYSDOT is also working on the bridges over Smoke Creek and the rail tracks. The latter still is getting steel put in, the former appears to be 60-70 percent completed.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on September 17, 2018, 11:12:43 AM
Anyone who claims they have driven the Thruway, must first have done so between Buffalo and Rochester after a Bills Game, to witness the roadside cheerleaders, left lane camping, road rage, shirtless fans at the service area, brake-festing and all around confounding, unearthly experience, before they can truly call it clinched.

Disclaimer: after doing this, you will be convinced as to the need for six lanes on this segment of the Thruway. And yes, I did it yesterday, the whole works, as described above! :banghead:
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on September 17, 2018, 12:19:49 PM
The passion of Bills' fans is only surpassed by the weakness of the team's offensive line.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: froggie on September 17, 2018, 12:57:38 PM
Sorry, but when one doesn't have adequate funding to begin with, one certainly doesn't spend extravagant amounts of it to address events that only happen 8 days a year.

There may well be valid reasons to widen the Thruway.  But Bills games are not one of them.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on September 17, 2018, 01:04:03 PM
Quote from: froggie on September 17, 2018, 12:57:38 PM
There may well be valid reasons to widen the Thruway.  But Bills games are not one of them.

Oh, there are plenty. But I agree with football not being one of them.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on September 17, 2018, 02:01:20 PM
Quote from: cl94 on September 17, 2018, 01:04:03 PM
Quote from: froggie on September 17, 2018, 12:57:38 PM
There may well be valid reasons to widen the Thruway.  But Bills games are not one of them.
Oh, there are plenty. But I agree with football not being one of them.

You took me way too seriously. Summer weekends in general can be almost as bad as yesterday was; of course the Thruway should not be widened just because of Bill's games.
We don't have much precedent for an entire metro's worth of fans traveling to another metro for a football game, but it just goes to show how much travel/inter-connectivity there is between Rochester and Buffalo. Easily enough to warrant six lanes.

Quote from: Rothman on September 17, 2018, 12:19:49 PM
The passion of Bills' fans is only surpassed by the weakness of the team's offensive line.

Side note: I'm not a Bills fan; I just happened to be returning from Canada yesterday afternoon.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: SignBridge on September 17, 2018, 08:32:20 PM
Froggie, you say the Thruway Authority doesn't have adequate funding? Do you know how much money they collect in tolls every single day?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on September 17, 2018, 09:09:13 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on September 17, 2018, 08:32:20 PM
Froggie, you say the Thruway Authority doesn't have adequate funding? Do you know how much money they collect in tolls every single day?
And do you know how much they spend?
Interestingly enough, while their budget is screwed by new Tappan Zee - but seems the rest of the operations are slightly in red. Thanks to Cuomo's toll freeze, I assume.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: SignBridge on September 17, 2018, 09:12:42 PM
Are you saying the new T-Z Bridge came out of the Authority's regular operating budget? That it was not a separately funded project?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Alps on September 18, 2018, 12:03:13 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on September 17, 2018, 08:32:20 PM
Froggie, you say the Thruway Authority doesn't have adequate funding? Do you know how much money they collect in tolls every single day?
Thruway is bleeding money right now thanks to TZB and toll freezes.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on September 18, 2018, 07:18:43 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on September 17, 2018, 09:12:42 PM
Are you saying the new T-Z Bridge came out of the Authority's regular operating budget? That it was not a separately funded project?
No, I am saying NYSTA doesn't make an effort to paint a clear picture. They do separate those budgets, but go only that far - for example, debt and state funds are not separated.
Anyway, for 2017 revised budget they show $777M revenue vs $1001M spending outside of the bridge project. Which is, you know, means tolls do not cover all costs even without big projects outside of the new bridge.
That is on top of ongoing personnel cuts - mainline lost something like 30% over 20 years; and I sure hope those are toll takers replaced by EZpass readers, not maintenance folks.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on September 19, 2018, 02:32:54 PM
I don't know if I brought this up earlier, but I think it's nonsensical that the Thruway Authority is essentially undertaking a full reconstruction of the Thruway in West Seneca without widening it to 4 lanes.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on September 19, 2018, 02:44:25 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on September 19, 2018, 02:32:54 PM
I don't know if I brought this up earlier, but I think it's nonsensical that the Thruway Authority is essentially undertaking a full reconstruction of the Thruway in West Seneca without widening it to 4 lanes.

It's already is four lanes (per direction) between I-190 and NY 400.
If I recall, the current construction is on the six-lane segment south of NY 400, between there and US 219. I'm not sure that stretch needs eight lanes; a widening further north, from I-190 up to NY 33, must be a higher priority, given volumes sustained well above 100K along that segment, compared to around 95K on the segment you mention.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on September 19, 2018, 08:56:04 PM
Does anyone happen to still have the plans for the Harriman plaza AET conversion?  I saw the tandem lot on the Yonkers one and was wondering if anything similar was happening at Harriman (and if so, how it's signed).  I'm updating the exit list on my website on Saturday, and I'd like for it to be accurate if possible.

EDIT: Found them (https://www.thruway.ny.gov/oursystem/harriman/index.html), though sadly they lack signage.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on October 12, 2018, 03:30:09 PM
Exit 57/NY 75

(https://i.imgur.com/ARogyZ4h.jpg)
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: seicer on October 12, 2018, 11:02:17 PM
Surprised it was not a roundabout.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: MikeCL on October 16, 2018, 03:21:24 PM
Anyone know what's going on 95N/s near Port Chester? they took out a whole lane in both directions.. and then 95 SB off exit 21 they seem to be doing something.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: shadyjay on October 16, 2018, 09:54:53 PM
Most likely because of this:

https://www.thruway.ny.gov/oursystem/last-mile/index.html
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on November 13, 2018, 10:46:43 PM
Thruway WB between Exits 55 and Lackawanna Toll Booth has been fully reconstructed and reopened. The section between Ridge Road and the toll booths in particular received the most visible upgrades.

On my drive home earlier, it appeared as though there is room for a 3rd lane in the left shoulder. While I doubt this will happen, I wonder why the shoulder is so wide.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: route17fan on November 20, 2018, 11:22:31 PM
D214702 I-190 overhead sign replacement project with some more tubular gantries coming.

Link: http://www.thruway.ny.gov/netdata/contractors/documents/d214702_tan18-37_plans-volume-1-of-1.pdf

Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on November 21, 2018, 03:14:03 PM
I had the pleasure of driving the Thruway to Syracuse on Monday, and back to Rochester on Tuesday.

Interestingly, Tuesday from 7-8 PM was actually busier than Monday from 4-5 PM. Thanksgiving travel on the increase, maybe. Fortunately, traffic was heavy but moving along quite nicely on both days.

Looks like I'll also be heading to Buffalo and back on Sunday (no, not for the Bills game  ;-)).
Does anyone else get the privilege of traveling on the Thruway this holiday season?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on November 25, 2018, 12:52:25 PM
Quote from: webny99 on November 21, 2018, 03:14:03 PM
Looks like I'll also be heading to Buffalo and back on Sunday (no, not for the Bills game).

Sadly, due to circumstances just outside my control, our day trip got cancelled. I'm really bummed, because I always look forward to traveling on the Sunday of Thanksgiving weekend; it promises to be heavy traffic and therefore an enjoyable study and an opportunity to further build the case for six-laning the thruway.  ;-)

Guess I'll have to resort to Google Maps live traffic, and the Thruway's traffic cameras, instead of getting to experience the madness in person.  :no:

QuoteDoes anyone else get the privilege of traveling on the Thruway this holiday season?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: froggie on November 25, 2018, 02:04:25 PM
What you should do is schedule your trip for a regular weekend.  Holiday weekends such as Thanksgiving do not build a good case for widening highways because they are anomalies compared to normal flow.  Especially Thanksgiving which is the busiest travel weekend of the year.  Now if you string together a few dozen such weekends or travel periods, you'd have a better case.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on November 25, 2018, 07:01:27 PM
Oh, sorry I wasn't more clear. We head up to Canada quite often, easily a dozen or more times a year. I agree; it is good to get a variety of conditions, times of year, etc. before building a case for widening. I just look forward to traveling on holiday weekends more than the average weekend because rest assured the Thruway will be busy.

And not just because I want evidence for widening the Thruway; my favorite traffic conditions for travel are indeed (a) heavy and (b) fast moving. Unfortunately, the intense combination of the two all too often leads to an accident. There were at least two accidents in my region on the Thruway today; one just west of Syracuse early this afternoon, and another this evening (in the thick of the Bill's game traffic) near Pembroke.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on November 26, 2018, 03:14:57 PM
Quote from: froggie on November 25, 2018, 02:04:25 PM
What you should do is schedule your trip for a regular weekend.  Holiday weekends such as Thanksgiving do not build a good case for widening highways because they are anomalies compared to normal flow.  Especially Thanksgiving which is the busiest travel weekend of the year.  Now if you string together a few dozen such weekends or travel periods, you'd have a better case.

Bills games drive a decent amount of traffic between Buffalo and Rochester 8 times a year
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: froggie on November 26, 2018, 03:45:48 PM
However, that's just 8 times a year.  Most design hour volumes are looking anywhere from the lowest of the top 30 to the lowest of the top 100, depending on jurisdiction and finances.

A good rule of thumb for the Thruway, if weekend volumes are consistently higher than weekdays, would be to look at all 52 weekend volumes and take the median.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on November 26, 2018, 05:45:26 PM
I've often thought that if a lane in each direction was added to the Thruway, they could essentially close/not maintain it during the winter. Six lanes are not really needed between Thanksgiving and March (Bill's games and Christmas travel being the exceptions).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Beltway on November 26, 2018, 08:44:06 PM
Quote from: webny99 on November 26, 2018, 05:45:26 PM
I've often thought that if a lane in each direction was added to the Thruway, they could essentially close/not maintain it during the winter. Six lanes are not really needed between Thanksgiving and March (Bill's games and Christmas travel being the exceptions).

Close it how -- with barrels?  Then they would have to be maintained.  In any event even if closed the lane would still need to be maintained at least to shoulder standards.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: ipeters61 on November 27, 2018, 09:31:47 AM
I think I heard somewhere that I-66 in the DC suburbs of Virginia opens the shoulder to through traffic during peak hours (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.8801282,-77.2413111,3a,75y,271.6h,92.11t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sbAy6y_kJ5EX-uXv2yf0esg!2e0!5s20140801T000000!7i13312!8i6656).  Would that be an option on the NY Thruway if there was a large enough shoulder?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on November 27, 2018, 09:33:47 AM
Quote from: ipeters61 on November 27, 2018, 09:31:47 AM
I think I heard somewhere that I-66 in the DC suburbs of Virginia opens the shoulder to through traffic during peak hours.  Would that be an option on the NY Thruway if there was a large enough shoulder?
I really doubt they would try that stunt up here.  I-66 also has signage that helps drivers know when and how to drive on the shoulder.  It isn't like you can just open them to traffic.  Exits become more problematic if not implemented properly.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: froggie on November 27, 2018, 11:36:15 AM
^ It's also going away with the current reconstruction project that's adding the HO/T lanes to 66.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: 5foot14 on November 27, 2018, 12:43:37 PM
Quote from: Rothman on November 27, 2018, 09:33:47 AM
Quote from: ipeters61 on November 27, 2018, 09:31:47 AM
I think I heard somewhere that I-66 in the DC suburbs of Virginia opens the shoulder to through traffic during peak hours.  Would that be an option on the NY Thruway if there was a large enough shoulder?
I really doubt they would try that stunt up here.  I-66 also has signage that helps drivers know when and how to drive on the shoulder.  It isn't like you can just open them to traffic.  Exits become more problematic if not implemented properly.
They do that bs on I-93 in Massachusetts between exit 41 and 46. I can tell you from personal experience even with appropriate signage for using the breakdown lane, many people still misuse it. I've seen lots of accidents and near misses, usually always at interchanges. I wouldn't recommend it anywhere.

SM-G900P

Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: roadman on November 27, 2018, 01:41:27 PM
Quote from: 5foot14 on November 27, 2018, 12:43:37 PM
Quote from: Rothman on November 27, 2018, 09:33:47 AM
Quote from: ipeters61 on November 27, 2018, 09:31:47 AM
I think I heard somewhere that I-66 in the DC suburbs of Virginia opens the shoulder to through traffic during peak hours.  Would that be an option on the NY Thruway if there was a large enough shoulder?
I really doubt they would try that stunt up here.  I-66 also has signage that helps drivers know when and how to drive on the shoulder.  It isn't like you can just open them to traffic.  Exits become more problematic if not implemented properly.
They do that bs on I-93 in Massachusetts between exit 41 and 46. I can tell you from personal experience even with appropriate signage for using the breakdown lane, many people still misuse it. I've seen lots of accidents and near misses, usually always at interchanges. I wouldn't recommend it anywhere.
In general, experience has shown that the accident rate for shoulder (breakdown) lanes where peak hour travel is permitted is not statistically greater than the overall accident rate for the other travel lanes.  The accident problem with peak hour shoulder use tends to be exaggerated as an issue because the types of crashes, which usually involve a vehicle illegally driving on the shoulder outside the permitted hours colliding with a disabled vehicle, tend to be more severe than other accidents.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: froggie on November 27, 2018, 01:56:55 PM
A relevant FHWA report on shoulder use (https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/fhwahop10023/chap4.htm) using examples from the Netherlands, Germany, and the U.S., including the breakdown lane use in Massachusetts.  The FHWA report says the crash statistics in Massachusetts are "hard to assess" because the crash data does not indicate which lane the crash occurred in.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: ipeters61 on November 27, 2018, 02:03:55 PM
Quote from: froggie on November 27, 2018, 11:36:15 AM
^ It's also going away with the current reconstruction project that's adding the HO/T lanes to 66.
I was trying to figure out why the signage disappeared in the later Google Maps image.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on November 27, 2018, 05:49:20 PM
Yeah, I don't foresee the shoulder ever being used as a lane on the Thruway. That is just too big of a deviation from most drivers expectations on such a high quality road.

As I think I've mentioned before, all the bridges are already wide enough for six lanes. Can't be that hard to pave another lane. No ROW acquisition would be required either.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Alps on November 27, 2018, 06:27:58 PM
Toll agencies generally shy away from that. The NJ Turnpike did it on 78 but I think they restriped 14A as well to avoid the unexpected merge conflict.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: SignBridge on November 27, 2018, 08:31:37 PM
My understanding is that the NJ Turnpike Authority considered and rejected the idea of peak-hour shoulder use as potentially unsafe. Not surprising for an agency that sticks to the safest engineering principles including no exits or entrances on the left side.

The German Autobahns do allow shoulder use in some areas but the lane-control signs are very strictly controlled by dispatchers who have virtually the entire length of the lane under continuous camera surveillance. They will not open the lane to traffic if there are any disabled cars on the shoulder.

In general I agree with the NJ Tpk. Auth. about not allowing shoulder use due to the obvious danger.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: RobbieL2415 on November 27, 2018, 09:31:41 PM
I'm wondering if any of the congestion problems on the Thruway Mainline could be solved simply by:

-Raising the speed limit to 70mph and strictly enforcing minimum speed limits
-Strictly enforcing "keep right except to pass"
-Restricting oversize load trips to between 11PM and 5AM.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: 02 Park Ave on November 27, 2018, 10:39:51 PM
Strictly enforcing "Keep right except to pass" would most certainly solve a lot of problems everywhere.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: NoGoodNamesAvailable on November 27, 2018, 10:48:28 PM
Quote from: 02 Park Ave on November 27, 2018, 10:39:51 PM
Strictly enforcing "Keep right except to pass" would most certainly solve a lot of problems everywhere.

On the sections I regularly drive people don't seem to be so bad about keeping right... except the Berkshire section. I think we know which lovely commonwealth's drivers are to blame for that  :clap:
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on November 28, 2018, 07:51:03 AM
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on November 27, 2018, 09:31:41 PM
I'm wondering if any of the congestion problems on the Thruway Mainline could be solved simply by:

-Raising the speed limit to 70mph and strictly enforcing minimum speed limits
-Strictly enforcing "keep right except to pass"
-Restricting oversize load trips to between 11PM and 5AM.
In my book, the only congestion on the Thruway worth worrying about is downstate.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on November 28, 2018, 07:54:51 PM
Quote from: Rothman on November 28, 2018, 07:51:03 AM
In my book, the only congestion on the Thruway worth worrying about is downstate.

I actually agree, for the most part, unless there's an accident. You're pretty much guaranteed to hit an accident-related slowdown on a summer or holiday weekend.

It is really somewhat circular: heavy traffic causes the accident, which then makes the traffic worse yet. I'd reckon at least 3/4 of the Thruway's accidents are caused, directly or indirectly, by unsustainably high traffic volumes.You never see an accident when overall volumes are low.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on November 28, 2018, 08:54:00 PM
Looks like several former officials are making the case for raising tolls: https://www.timesunion.com/news/article/For-Thruway-needing-repair-an-old-age-not-13422575.php
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: goldfishcrackers4 on November 30, 2018, 04:31:23 PM
New overhead with curved tube installed in Utica.(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20181130/ee1024c76eae6ebfdbe7ef6d80812213.jpg)

SM-G960U

Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: NoGoodNamesAvailable on November 30, 2018, 05:35:31 PM
Quote from: goldfishcrackers4 on November 30, 2018, 04:31:23 PM
New overhead with curved tube installed in Utica.(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20181130/ee1024c76eae6ebfdbe7ef6d80812213.jpg)

SM-G960U

Now to play everyone's favorite game with new Thruway signage:

Is! It! Reflective?!!
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: seicer on November 30, 2018, 10:58:33 PM
😂

It doesn't appear to be of the same grade material, so let's hope so.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on November 30, 2018, 11:56:38 PM
I wonder what's driving the move to curved tube gantries.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: shadyjay on December 01, 2018, 12:08:53 AM
That's the best looking sign in NY I've seen in a while.  I like how the corners aren't so rounded, which makes the exit tab look awkward and not be aligned all the way to the right.  This design is much better, IMHO.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: ixnay on December 01, 2018, 08:32:41 AM
Quote from: Buffaboy on November 30, 2018, 11:56:38 PM
I wonder what's driving the move to curved tube gantries.

The deep state, no doubt.  ;-)

Those curved tube gantries look like gantries on steroids.

ixnay
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: goldfishcrackers4 on December 01, 2018, 08:34:09 AM
I'll try to get up there tonight to find out. Keep your fingers crossed.

SM-G960U

Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: seicer on December 01, 2018, 11:11:23 AM
Quote from: Buffaboy on November 30, 2018, 11:56:38 PM
I wonder what's driving the move to curved tube gantries.

I wonder if it's just the ease of installation and maintenance? But I've seen new, more traditional installations in New York that are gantries on steroids - much bigger than previous iterations: https://goo.gl/maps/af1Km8Kx1S82
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on December 01, 2018, 12:01:45 PM
NYSTA is moving to monotubes for new installations, but the shift is gradual. Buffalo and Syracuse Districts have been leading the charge. I-190 is getting a ton of monotubes next year, including a full-span gantry. NYSDOT is keeping the truss gantries.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Revive 755 on December 01, 2018, 12:15:29 PM
Quote from: seicer on December 01, 2018, 11:11:23 AM
Quote from: Buffaboy on November 30, 2018, 11:56:38 PM
I wonder what's driving the move to curved tube gantries.

I wonder if it's just the ease of installation and maintenance? But I've seen new, more traditional installations in New York that are gantries on steroids - much bigger than previous iterations: https://goo.gl/maps/af1Km8Kx1S82

Probably the same change in the AASHTO structural specifications for signs and traffic signals that has resulted in many signal mast arms using larger tubes.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: machias on December 01, 2018, 03:54:01 PM
Quote from: NoGoodNamesAvailable on November 27, 2018, 10:48:28 PM
Quote from: 02 Park Ave on November 27, 2018, 10:39:51 PM
Strictly enforcing "Keep right except to pass" would most certainly solve a lot of problems everywhere.

On the sections I regularly drive people don't seem to be so bad about keeping right... except the Berkshire section. I think we know which lovely commonwealth's drivers are to blame for that  :clap:

Having driven the length the mainline many times, I've always found the worst offenders for not keeping right could be found between Rochester and Buffalo. In fact, there's extra signs along that stretch urging motorists to keep right except to pass. Usually there's "Keep Right Except To Pass" found in the median along the Thruway, but along that stretch there's sets of two signs saying "Slower Traffic Keep Right", even though they're not placed on upgrades.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: machias on December 01, 2018, 03:55:35 PM
Quote from: shadyjay on December 01, 2018, 12:08:53 AM
That's the best looking sign in NY I've seen in a while.  I like how the corners aren't so rounded, which makes the exit tab look awkward and not be aligned all the way to the right.  This design is much better, IMHO.

The NYS Supplement to the MUTCD calls for exit tabs to be indented to the inside of the radius of the sign, unless something has recently changed. I agree this sign looks great.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Michael on December 01, 2018, 05:17:02 PM
Quote from: Revive 755 on December 01, 2018, 12:15:29 PM
Quote from: seicer on December 01, 2018, 11:11:23 AM
Quote from: Buffaboy on November 30, 2018, 11:56:38 PM
I wonder what's driving the move to curved tube gantries.

I wonder if it's just the ease of installation and maintenance? But I've seen new, more traditional installations in New York that are gantries on steroids - much bigger than previous iterations: https://goo.gl/maps/af1Km8Kx1S82

Probably the same change in the AASHTO structural specifications for signs and traffic signals that has resulted in many signal mast arms using larger tubes.

Is that change why NYSDOT seems to be on a signal replacement frenzy (at least in CNY)?  I've seen various regional signal upgrade contracts on the Projects page over the past few years, but many of them have been replacements that look like what was there before.  The first one that comes to mind is Washington St at the Arterial (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.9314509,-76.5761962,3a,75y,244.87h,87.74t/data=!3m5!1e1!3m3!1sWYWIm2Cnh2vUk2q4COKyCw!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo1.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DWYWIm2Cnh2vUk2q4COKyCw%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D17.822859%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100) in Auburn.  These signals were replaced in the 90s, and again in 2013.  I've also noticed some span wires being replaced with mast arms.  None of the posts or mast arms have been bigger, so why bother replacing them?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: seicer on December 01, 2018, 05:48:17 PM
I'm not sure. But I noted in the New York thread about somewhat newer signs along NY 13 being replaced with pretty much exact copies (with some minor changes) on new posts. And now they are replacing (admittingly) a pretty worn wire-span signal with massive mast-arms. I suspect that this signal's replacement is being tied into upgrades into signal coordination throughout. There are now some new sensors on posts the adjoining intersections to replace the in-ground loops.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: thenetwork on December 02, 2018, 12:09:52 AM
Quote from: cl94 on December 01, 2018, 12:01:45 PM
NYSTA is moving to monotubes for new installations, but the shift is gradual. Buffalo and Syracuse Districts have been leading the charge. I-190 is getting a ton of monotubes next year, including a full-span gantry. NYSDOT is keeping the truss gantries.

Does that mean the Northbound Arial-fonted gantry by Grand Island is (gasp) Endangered???
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on December 02, 2018, 03:57:15 PM
Quote from: upstatenyroads on December 01, 2018, 03:54:01 PM
Quote from: NoGoodNamesAvailable on November 27, 2018, 10:48:28 PM
Quote from: 02 Park Ave on November 27, 2018, 10:39:51 PM
Strictly enforcing "Keep right except to pass" would most certainly solve a lot of problems everywhere.
On the sections I regularly drive people don't seem to be so bad about keeping right... except the Berkshire section. I think we know which lovely commonwealth's drivers are to blame for that  :clap:
Having driven the length the mainline many times, I've always found the worst offenders for not keeping right could be found between Rochester and Buffalo. In fact, there's extra signs along that stretch urging motorists to keep right except to pass. Usually there's "Keep Right Except To Pass" found in the median along the Thruway, but along that stretch there's sets of two signs saying "Slower Traffic Keep Right", even though they're not placed on upgrades.

Yes! Thank you! Traffic moves well on the Buffalo - Rochester stretch, but you will never, ever, encounter anyone doing 80 or better that will move right. When I set the cruise to 77, I am the fastest one that spends any time at all in the right lane, period. It's bad all the time, but worst after Bill's games.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on December 03, 2018, 01:18:25 AM
Quote from: cl94 on December 01, 2018, 12:01:45 PM
NYSTA is moving to monotubes for new installations, but the shift is gradual. Buffalo and Syracuse Districts have been leading the charge. I-190 is getting a ton of monotubes next year, including a full-span gantry. NYSDOT is keeping the truss gantries.

Well they certainly aren't doing it with the reconstructed section of I-90 in Lackawanna. It appears as though they have foundations up for new trusses.

I can't wait for the monotubes to go in on I-190. The one at I-290 and I-90 looks fantastic.

And yes Michael, the signal replacement thing is interesting. Where NY-75 ends at its northern terminus, just last month they installed a 4-way signal with 2 FYAs. This is the closest sets of FYAs near my house (although I think the reconstructed I-90/NY-75 one might be closer if it has them, but they haven't installed permanent signals yet).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cu2010 on December 04, 2018, 08:03:25 PM
Is it just me, or is the "Utica" and "1 MILE" legends on the sign slightly off-center?

It looks like they're centered on the NY8 shield as opposed to the sign as a whole...

Still, looks great otherwise...
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: machias on December 05, 2018, 11:59:18 PM
Just drove the Thruway from Ripley to Carrier Circle in Syracuse. The vast majority of signs, both new and old, are really suffering in the retroreflectivity department. The worst are the Clearview overhead signs in Buffalo.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: MikeCL on December 09, 2018, 06:12:07 PM
I think it's so stupid for them to change half the signs from the tappen see to the new MCMB half the signs I see going home still have the old name.. also I think same for the battery tunnel (yeah I know different area) but it's like I don't get it.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: MikeCL on December 09, 2018, 06:13:43 PM
Also the New Rochelle tool booth seems to become cashless soon? Looks like they have the gantry going up just after the toll plaza? I assume that's what's going on.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: pugnamedmax on December 09, 2018, 08:35:43 PM
According to the Authority's website, there are no such plans to make the New England Thruway cashless as far as I am aware.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on December 09, 2018, 08:40:36 PM
Yes, it's going cashless.  The Thruway plans to end cash toll collection outside of the ticket system by the end of the year, and everything by the end of 2020.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on December 09, 2018, 08:45:14 PM
Got in on some of the Bill's traffic on the Thruway this evening. It was incredibly busy, but moving pretty well overall. Traffic generally moving about 70 mph in the left lane and 60 mph (with some 90 mph passing on the right, as usual) in the right lane. The exception was around the entrances, where a lot of braking and a slowdown to about 45 - 50 mph for both lanes was to be expected for a few miles.

Buffalo-bound traffic early this morning was even better; heavy, but moving right along. We were doing 80 in the right lane and getting passed like we were standing still. In fact, though I didn't count, I'd reckon more cars passed us than the other way around. Tempting to join the pack, but I hesitate to do so, knowing cops are looking for those doing better than 80. Speeding up to between 80 and 85 is something I will do, but only in daylight, and not with the cruise set. 78 or so is my max  cruising speed, because any higher just isn't sustainable (you have to keep braking and resetting), not to mention the risk of a speeding ticket.

Quote from: vdeane on December 09, 2018, 08:40:36 PM
Yes, it's going cashless.  The Thruway plans to end cash toll collection outside of the ticket system by the end of the year, and everything by the end of 2020.

I can't wait. It will be bliss to roll right into Buffalo without having to slow down for that pesky Williamsville Toll Barrier. Already enjoying Grand Island.  :nod:
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on December 09, 2018, 11:15:59 PM
Quote from: webny99 on December 09, 2018, 08:45:14 PM
Got in on some of the Bill's traffic on the Thruway this evening. It was incredibly busy, but moving pretty well overall. Traffic generally moving about 70 mph in the left lane and 60 mph (with some 90 mph passing on the right, as usual) in the right lane. The exception was around the entrances, where a lot of braking and a slowdown to about 45 - 50 mph for both lanes was to be expected for a few miles.

Buffalo-bound traffic early this morning was even better; heavy, but moving right along. We were doing 80 in the right lane and getting passed like we were standing still. In fact, though I didn't count, I'd reckon more cars passed us than the other way around. Tempting to join the pack, but I hesitate to do so, knowing cops are looking for those doing better than 80. Speeding up to between 80 and 85 is something I will do, but only in daylight, and not with the cruise set. 78 or so is my max  cruising speed, because any higher just isn't sustainable (you have to keep braking and resetting), not to mention the risk of a speeding ticket.

Quote from: vdeane on December 09, 2018, 08:40:36 PM
Yes, it's going cashless.  The Thruway plans to end cash toll collection outside of the ticket system by the end of the year, and everything by the end of 2020.

I can't wait. It will be bliss to roll right into Buffalo without having to slow down for that pesky Williamsville Toll Barrier. Already enjoying Grand Island.  :nod:

Yeah I was on the GI bridges earlier today doing 70 mph...felt great.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: RobbieL2415 on December 10, 2018, 12:04:02 AM
So that would be around 600mi of continuous movenent on I-90.  From Boston to just outside Cleveland.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: PHLBOS on December 10, 2018, 10:04:13 AM
Quote from: vdeane on December 09, 2018, 08:40:36 PM
Yes, it's going cashless.  The Thruway plans to end cash toll collection outside of the ticket system by the end of the year,
If by end of the year, you're referring to 2018; at the time of this post, there's only 21 days left.  How far along is the Thruway Authority on that AET conversion?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on December 10, 2018, 12:44:36 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on December 10, 2018, 10:04:13 AM
Quote from: vdeane on December 09, 2018, 08:40:36 PM
Yes, it's going cashless.  The Thruway plans to end cash toll collection outside of the ticket system by the end of the year,
If by end of the year, you're referring to 2018; at the time of this post, there's only 21 days left.  How far along is the Thruway Authority on that AET conversion?
I'm referring to whatever NYSTA was referring to on Facebook, which I didn't ask for clarification on.  As mentioned earlier, the gantries are going up for New Rochelle, so I could see them being operational in that time.  Spring Valley is already an ORT setup, so it shouldn't be too hard to convert.  Yonkers, the Tappan Zee Bridge, Harriman, and the Grand Island Bridges are already cashless.  Every other barrier on the system is part of either the mainline or Erie ticket systems.  I presume that the goal of being cashless refers to the ending of cash toll collection, and not to the actual demolition of the barrier.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: SteveG1988 on December 10, 2018, 07:14:41 PM
So in the near future we won't have to go back for a shit load of dimes when riding with our possee?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: PHLBOS on December 11, 2018, 09:11:40 AM
Quote from: SteveG1988 on December 10, 2018, 07:14:41 PM
You'll just need a bunch of checks & stamps instead.  :sombrero:
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on December 11, 2018, 02:02:39 PM
Given contract let dates, it's possibly that NYSTA will have most of the AET infrastructure for the ticket system up by the end of 2019. Minor interchanges are just getting AET equipment installed in the current booths for now. Most system interchanges will see their barriers removed. It will operate as a virtual ticket system (unlike MA, which has gone to a barrier system with AET). Plans have NOT been released for the system interchanges (minus B1, which is keeping its booths) or mainline conversions, nor do we have any specific details for the Buffalo or Syracuse Divisions. Exit 22 was already retrofitted in-house and is (supposedly) ready to go once the change happens.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Brandon on December 11, 2018, 03:01:14 PM
Quote from: SteveG1988 on December 10, 2018, 07:14:41 PM
So in the near future we won't have to go back for a shit load of dimes when riding with our possee?

No, just a shitload of EZ Passes.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: RobbieL2415 on December 11, 2018, 03:36:23 PM
Quote from: cl94 on December 11, 2018, 02:02:39 PM
Given contract let dates, it's possibly that NYSTA will have most of the AET infrastructure for the ticket system up by the end of 2019. Minor interchanges are just getting AET equipment installed in the current booths for now. Most system interchanges will see their barriers removed. It will operate as a virtual ticket system (unlike MA, which has gone to a barrier system with AET). Plans have NOT been released for the system interchanges (minus B1, which is keeping its booths) or mainline conversions, nor do we have any specific details for the Buffalo or Syracuse Divisions. Exit 22 was already retrofitted in-house and is (supposedly) ready to go once the change happens.
Maybe the booths for B1 will be turned into an ICE checkpoint.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: MNHighwayMan on December 11, 2018, 09:02:27 PM
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on December 11, 2018, 03:36:23 PM
Quote from: cl94 on December 11, 2018, 02:02:39 PM
Given contract let dates, it's possibly that NYSTA will have most of the AET infrastructure for the ticket system up by the end of 2019. Minor interchanges are just getting AET equipment installed in the current booths for now. Most system interchanges will see their barriers removed. It will operate as a virtual ticket system (unlike MA, which has gone to a barrier system with AET). Plans have NOT been released for the system interchanges (minus B1, which is keeping its booths) or mainline conversions, nor do we have any specific details for the Buffalo or Syracuse Divisions. Exit 22 was already retrofitted in-house and is (supposedly) ready to go once the change happens.
Maybe the booths for B1 will be turned into an ICE checkpoint.

Don't give them ideas.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: SteveG1988 on December 11, 2018, 10:10:55 PM
Quote from: MNHighwayMan on December 11, 2018, 09:02:27 PM
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on December 11, 2018, 03:36:23 PM
Quote from: cl94 on December 11, 2018, 02:02:39 PM
Given contract let dates, it's possibly that NYSTA will have most of the AET infrastructure for the ticket system up by the end of 2019. Minor interchanges are just getting AET equipment installed in the current booths for now. Most system interchanges will see their barriers removed. It will operate as a virtual ticket system (unlike MA, which has gone to a barrier system with AET). Plans have NOT been released for the system interchanges (minus B1, which is keeping its booths) or mainline conversions, nor do we have any specific details for the Buffalo or Syracuse Divisions. Exit 22 was already retrofitted in-house and is (supposedly) ready to go once the change happens.
Maybe the booths for B1 will be turned into an ICE checkpoint.

Don't give them ideas.

Suddenly the Bush turnpike has toll booths again.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: RobbieL2415 on December 11, 2018, 10:21:16 PM
Quote from: SteveG1988 on December 11, 2018, 10:10:55 PM
Quote from: MNHighwayMan on December 11, 2018, 09:02:27 PM
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on December 11, 2018, 03:36:23 PM
Quote from: cl94 on December 11, 2018, 02:02:39 PM
Given contract let dates, it's possibly that NYSTA will have most of the AET infrastructure for the ticket system up by the end of 2019. Minor interchanges are just getting AET equipment installed in the current booths for now. Most system interchanges will see their barriers removed. It will operate as a virtual ticket system (unlike MA, which has gone to a barrier system with AET). Plans have NOT been released for the system interchanges (minus B1, which is keeping its booths) or mainline conversions, nor do we have any specific details for the Buffalo or Syracuse Divisions. Exit 22 was already retrofitted in-house and is (supposedly) ready to go once the change happens.
Maybe the booths for B1 will be turned into an ICE checkpoint.

Don't give them ideas.

Suddenly the Bush turnpike has toll booths again.
ICE checkpoints have existed since at least the 1970s.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on December 11, 2018, 10:27:44 PM
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on December 11, 2018, 10:21:16 PM
Quote from: SteveG1988 on December 11, 2018, 10:10:55 PM
Quote from: MNHighwayMan on December 11, 2018, 09:02:27 PM
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on December 11, 2018, 03:36:23 PM
Quote from: cl94 on December 11, 2018, 02:02:39 PM
Given contract let dates, it's possibly that NYSTA will have most of the AET infrastructure for the ticket system up by the end of 2019. Minor interchanges are just getting AET equipment installed in the current booths for now. Most system interchanges will see their barriers removed. It will operate as a virtual ticket system (unlike MA, which has gone to a barrier system with AET). Plans have NOT been released for the system interchanges (minus B1, which is keeping its booths) or mainline conversions, nor do we have any specific details for the Buffalo or Syracuse Divisions. Exit 22 was already retrofitted in-house and is (supposedly) ready to go once the change happens.
Maybe the booths for B1 will be turned into an ICE checkpoint.

Don't give them ideas.

Suddenly the Bush turnpike has toll booths again.
ICE checkpoints have existed since at least the 1970s.

I think B1 is just outside the area they can set up checkpoints. But don't give them any ideas. Please. We have enough checkpoints up here.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: froggie on December 11, 2018, 10:40:07 PM
^ Well outside the zone.  100 miles is their legal limitation, so no further south than Whitehall.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on December 11, 2018, 10:49:40 PM
But they also get 100 miles from the coast. Exit B1 is 93 miles from Long Island Sound. Again, don't give CBP any ideas.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on December 11, 2018, 11:52:08 PM
Quote from: cl94 on December 11, 2018, 02:02:39 PM
Given contract let dates, it's possibly that NYSTA will have most of the AET infrastructure for the ticket system up by the end of 2019. Minor interchanges are just getting AET equipment installed in the current booths for now. Most system interchanges will see their barriers removed. It will operate as a virtual ticket system (unlike MA, which has gone to a barrier system with AET). Plans have NOT been released for the system interchanges (minus B1, which is keeping its booths) or mainline conversions, nor do we have any specific details for the Buffalo or Syracuse Divisions. Exit 22 was already retrofitted in-house and is (supposedly) ready to go once the change happens.

You're telling me the Williamsville and Lackawanna toll booths may be gone in less than a year?

That's fast if true.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: froggie on December 12, 2018, 08:00:05 AM
Quote from: cl94 on December 11, 2018, 10:49:40 PM
But they also get 100 miles from the coast. Exit B1 is 93 miles from Long Island Sound. Again, don't give CBP any ideas.

Only if you use New Haven Harbor as your "coast".  Which from a nautical perspective, is not the outer shoreline since Long Island Sound is well within US territory.

That said, I'm not sure how Homeland Security is defining the "coast" for these purposes.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on December 12, 2018, 02:07:25 PM
Quote from: froggie on December 12, 2018, 08:00:05 AM
Quote from: cl94 on December 11, 2018, 10:49:40 PM
But they also get 100 miles from the coast. Exit B1 is 93 miles from Long Island Sound. Again, don't give CBP any ideas.

Only if you use New Haven Harbor as your "coast".  Which from a nautical perspective, is not the outer shoreline since Long Island Sound is well within US territory.

That said, I'm not sure how Homeland Security is defining the "coast" for these purposes.

Which is how the feds define it. The Great Lakes coastlines and Chesapeake Bay also count as "coast" for their purposes, but the Hudson River north of Battery Park does not (for example).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: froggie on December 12, 2018, 03:30:02 PM
^ Do you have a source I could pull up for that?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on December 12, 2018, 04:09:21 PM
ESRI and CityLab generated a map (https://www.citylab.com/equity/2018/05/who-lives-in-border-patrols-100-mile-zone-probably-you-mapped/558275/) superimposing the border zone over the country. I CANNOT find a definitive government source. That being said, every news source I can find considers Chesapeake Bay, Long Island Sound, Puget Sound, and all 5 of the Great Lakes to have an "international border" at their shoreline, including NPR, the NY Times, the Washington Post, and the big 3 broadcast networks.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: empirestate on December 15, 2018, 04:54:25 PM
Quote from: cl94 on December 12, 2018, 04:09:21 PM
ESRI and CityLab generated a map (https://www.citylab.com/equity/2018/05/who-lives-in-border-patrols-100-mile-zone-probably-you-mapped/558275/) superimposing the border zone over the country. I CANNOT find a definitive government source. That being said, every news source I can find considers Chesapeake Bay, Long Island Sound, Puget Sound, and all 5 of the Great Lakes to have an "international border" at their shoreline, including NPR, the NY Times, the Washington Post, and the big 3 broadcast networks.

Try NOAA charts and publications; they should depict the baseline of the territorial sea.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on December 15, 2018, 05:14:13 PM
Quote from: empirestate on December 15, 2018, 04:54:25 PM
Quote from: cl94 on December 12, 2018, 04:09:21 PM
ESRI and CityLab generated a map (https://www.citylab.com/equity/2018/05/who-lives-in-border-patrols-100-mile-zone-probably-you-mapped/558275/) superimposing the border zone over the country. I CANNOT find a definitive government source. That being said, every news source I can find considers Chesapeake Bay, Long Island Sound, Puget Sound, and all 5 of the Great Lakes to have an "international border" at their shoreline, including NPR, the NY Times, the Washington Post, and the big 3 broadcast networks.

Try NOAA charts and publications; they should depict the baseline of the territorial sea.
It is more of a question of how CBP interprets that. I would bet they do in the most convenient way for their purposes - e.g. to cover as much territory as they can. If Lake Michigan is considered the border (probably based on boats coming from the Seaway not clearing customs until docked), then one may only be happy entire length of Hudson or Mississippi are not con...sorry, not giving any ideas.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Beltway on December 15, 2018, 06:26:54 PM
Quote from: cl94 on December 12, 2018, 04:09:21 PM
ESRI and CityLab generated a map (https://www.citylab.com/equity/2018/05/who-lives-in-border-patrols-100-mile-zone-probably-you-mapped/558275/) superimposing the border zone over the country. I CANNOT find a definitive government source. That being said, every news source I can find considers Chesapeake Bay, Long Island Sound, Puget Sound, and all 5 of the Great Lakes to have an "international border" at their shoreline, including NPR, the NY Times, the Washington Post, and the big 3 broadcast networks.

The Chesapeake Bay is contained in Maryland and Virginia, so there is no "international border" there.  The mouth of the Chesapeake Bay borders on the high seas, and that is not an "international border".
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: empirestate on December 15, 2018, 09:10:18 PM
Quote from: kalvado on December 15, 2018, 05:14:13 PM
Quote from: empirestate on December 15, 2018, 04:54:25 PM
Quote from: cl94 on December 12, 2018, 04:09:21 PM
ESRI and CityLab generated a map (https://www.citylab.com/equity/2018/05/who-lives-in-border-patrols-100-mile-zone-probably-you-mapped/558275/) superimposing the border zone over the country. I CANNOT find a definitive government source. That being said, every news source I can find considers Chesapeake Bay, Long Island Sound, Puget Sound, and all 5 of the Great Lakes to have an "international border" at their shoreline, including NPR, the NY Times, the Washington Post, and the big 3 broadcast networks.

Try NOAA charts and publications; they should depict the baseline of the territorial sea.
It is more of a question of how CBP interprets that. I would bet they do in the most convenient way for their purposes - e.g. to cover as much territory as they can. If Lake Michigan is considered the border (probably based on boats coming from the Seaway not clearing customs until docked), then one may only be happy entire length of Hudson or Mississippi are not con...sorry, not giving any ideas.

Well, I don't think there's a way to interpret the territorial waters as excluding the Hudson or Mississippi Rivers. The Great Lakes are a special case, for the reason you pointed out (while territorial waters, they are free of customs reporting requirements until a vessel is actually landed).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: MikeCL on December 26, 2018, 08:00:13 AM
I was shocked to see how quick they have the New Rochelle Cashless lanes going.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: shadyjay on December 26, 2018, 08:15:34 PM
I don't believe its how they did it, due to a picture I saw, but, I would have routed all traffic through the semi-express lanes on the far left of the plaza (where I-95 SB bends to go around the plaza), and demolished the old cash lanes.  Then straightened out both directions with a standard 3-lanes each way.  From Google streetside images, it looks like there's some abandoned pavement in there too, which I'm guessing will be ripped out.  Did they end up building a whole new gantry there, either before or after the plaza? 

As for Spring Valley, that one I'm guessing would be really easy.  It already had an open-road gantry.  Close off the "exit" to the cash lanes and just return that section to "nature". 
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: MikeCL on December 26, 2018, 09:12:54 PM
They built it after the plaza but yes all the traffic right now goes around to the ez pass lanes but I hope it's going to be wide enough because before the toll plaza it's super wide but after it's so narrow even before all this work after.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on December 26, 2018, 09:48:30 PM
I might as well ask, as per the usual, if anyone else is driving the Thruway this holiday season.

I got to do Rochester to Buffalo and back on Sunday 12/23. Traffic was heavy, but not unreasonably so. I stayed well behind an 80mph bandwagon, and as such never really had an empty stretch. I tried to keep a consistent ~77mph, while everyone else did the usual "speed up to 80+ and then brake to accommodate slower passers" thing.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: jp the roadgeek on December 27, 2018, 12:26:42 AM
Quote from: Beltway on December 15, 2018, 06:26:54 PM
Quote from: cl94 on December 12, 2018, 04:09:21 PM
ESRI and CityLab generated a map (https://www.citylab.com/equity/2018/05/who-lives-in-border-patrols-100-mile-zone-probably-you-mapped/558275/) superimposing the border zone over the country. I CANNOT find a definitive government source. That being said, every news source I can find considers Chesapeake Bay, Long Island Sound, Puget Sound, and all 5 of the Great Lakes to have an "international border" at their shoreline, including NPR, the NY Times, the Washington Post, and the big 3 broadcast networks.

The Chesapeake Bay is contained in Maryland and Virginia, so there is no "international border" there.  The mouth of the Chesapeake Bay borders on the high seas, and that is not an "international border".

In the case of Chesapeake Bay and Long Island Sount, they may be referring to the fact that there are US ports of entry contained within these bodies of water, not that the body of water itself is a border.  The Port of Baltimore for the Chesapeake, and the port of New London for LI Sound serve as ports of entry for cruise ships that sail to international ports of call.  In addition to these, there are also the Ports of New Haven and Bridgeport for cargo receiving.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Beltway on December 27, 2018, 06:30:55 AM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on December 27, 2018, 12:26:42 AM
Quote from: Beltway on December 15, 2018, 06:26:54 PM
Quote from: cl94 on December 12, 2018, 04:09:21 PM
ESRI and CityLab generated a map (https://www.citylab.com/equity/2018/05/who-lives-in-border-patrols-100-mile-zone-probably-you-mapped/558275/) superimposing the border zone over the country. I CANNOT find a definitive government source. That being said, every news source I can find considers Chesapeake Bay, Long Island Sound, Puget Sound, and all 5 of the Great Lakes to have an "international border" at their shoreline, including NPR, the NY Times, the Washington Post, and the big 3 broadcast networks.
The Chesapeake Bay is contained in Maryland and Virginia, so there is no "international border" there.  The mouth of the Chesapeake Bay borders on the high seas, and that is not an "international border".
In the case of Chesapeake Bay and Long Island Sount, they may be referring to the fact that there are US ports of entry contained within these bodies of water, not that the body of water itself is a border.  The Port of Baltimore for the Chesapeake, and the port of New London for LI Sound serve as ports of entry for cruise ships that sail to international ports of call.  In addition to these, there are also the Ports of New Haven and Bridgeport for cargo receiving.

That then would include the Great Lakes and partway up the Mississippi River.  The "international ports of call" is rather a different concept than "international borders at their shoreline".
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on December 27, 2018, 07:09:13 AM
Quote from: Beltway on December 27, 2018, 06:30:55 AM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on December 27, 2018, 12:26:42 AM
Quote from: Beltway on December 15, 2018, 06:26:54 PM
Quote from: cl94 on December 12, 2018, 04:09:21 PM
ESRI and CityLab generated a map (https://www.citylab.com/equity/2018/05/who-lives-in-border-patrols-100-mile-zone-probably-you-mapped/558275/) superimposing the border zone over the country. I CANNOT find a definitive government source. That being said, every news source I can find considers Chesapeake Bay, Long Island Sound, Puget Sound, and all 5 of the Great Lakes to have an "international border" at their shoreline, including NPR, the NY Times, the Washington Post, and the big 3 broadcast networks.
The Chesapeake Bay is contained in Maryland and Virginia, so there is no "international border" there.  The mouth of the Chesapeake Bay borders on the high seas, and that is not an "international border".
In the case of Chesapeake Bay and Long Island Sount, they may be referring to the fact that there are US ports of entry contained within these bodies of water, not that the body of water itself is a border.  The Port of Baltimore for the Chesapeake, and the port of New London for LI Sound serve as ports of entry for cruise ships that sail to international ports of call.  In addition to these, there are also the Ports of New Haven and Bridgeport for cargo receiving.

That then would include the Great Lakes and partway up the Mississippi River.  The "international ports of call" is rather a different concept than "international borders at their shoreline".
Add port of Albany on Hudson in Albany NY as another CBP serviced entry location..
And I suspect CBP will happily consider that as a border point until the issue is addressed by the court. As far as I understand, part of it is about having officers busy while there is little pax/cargo flow, and officers have no direct port of entry duties. So they need more areas to work, not less.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Beltway on December 27, 2018, 08:37:22 AM
Quote from: kalvado on December 27, 2018, 07:09:13 AM
Quote from: Beltway on December 27, 2018, 06:30:55 AM
That then would include the Great Lakes and partway up the Mississippi River.  The "international ports of call" is rather a different concept than "international borders at their shoreline".
Add port of Albany on Hudson in Albany NY as another CBP serviced entry location..
And I suspect CBP will happily consider that as a border point until the issue is addressed by the court. As far as I understand, part of it is about having officers busy while there is little pax/cargo flow, and officers have no direct port of entry duties. So they need more areas to work, not less.

Tthe upper Chesapeake Bay belongs to Maryland, and the lower Chesapeake Bay belongs to Virginia.  Therefore the Bay is part of the internal territorial waters of the U.S.

The amount of control a state has over a bay is based on the distance between the low-water line on either side of the bay's entrance.  If the entrance is equal to or less than 24 miles wide at low-tide, then a state may draw a straight baseline across the entrance, effectively making the entire bay internal waters.  If the entrance is more than 24 miles wide, a state can only draw a straight baseline 24 miles across the bay in a way that maximizes the area of internal waters.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: mrsman on January 04, 2019, 08:31:48 AM
Quote from: MikeCL on December 09, 2018, 06:12:07 PM
I think it's so stupid for them to change half the signs from the tappen see to the new MCMB half the signs I see going home still have the old name.. also I think same for the battery tunnel (yeah I know different area) but it's like I don't get it.

Agreed.  While I would prefer if these bridges did not get renamed in the first place, I believe the new names for such bridges should include the old name in all signage:

RFK Triboro Bridge
Ed Koch Queensoro Bridge
Hugh Carey Battery Tunnel
Mario Cuomo Tappan Zee Bridge
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: empirestate on January 04, 2019, 10:29:13 AM
Quote from: mrsman on January 04, 2019, 08:31:48 AM
Quote from: MikeCL on December 09, 2018, 06:12:07 PM
I think it's so stupid for them to change half the signs from the tappen see to the new MCMB half the signs I see going home still have the old name.. also I think same for the battery tunnel (yeah I know different area) but it's like I don't get it.

Agreed.  While I would prefer if these bridges did not get renamed in the first place, I believe the new names for such bridges should include the old name in all signage:

RFK Triboro Bridge
Ed Koch Queensoro Bridge
Hugh Carey Battery Tunnel
Mario Cuomo Tappan Zee Bridge

One subtle difference here is that the Mario Cuomo Bridge is actually a new bridge–a different structure than the Tappan Zee Bridge it replaced, not merely a renaming. That said, it is the bridge that crosses the Tappan Zee, so people are just gonna call it the Tappan Zee bridge.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: ipeters61 on January 04, 2019, 11:10:53 AM
Quote from: empirestate on January 04, 2019, 10:29:13 AM
Quote from: mrsman on January 04, 2019, 08:31:48 AM
Quote from: MikeCL on December 09, 2018, 06:12:07 PM
I think it's so stupid for them to change half the signs from the tappen see to the new MCMB half the signs I see going home still have the old name.. also I think same for the battery tunnel (yeah I know different area) but it's like I don't get it.

Agreed.  While I would prefer if these bridges did not get renamed in the first place, I believe the new names for such bridges should include the old name in all signage:

RFK Triboro Bridge
Ed Koch Queensoro Bridge
Hugh Carey Battery Tunnel
Mario Cuomo Tappan Zee Bridge

One subtle difference here is that the Mario Cuomo Bridge is actually a new bridge–a different structure than the Tappan Zee Bridge it replaced, not merely a renaming. That said, it is the bridge that crosses the Tappan Zee, so people are just gonna call it the Tappan Zee bridge.
Well and it was in the same place for the past 50 years, likely is being used by people who have used it for decades, and is used by the same stretch of road.  The name "Tappan Zee Bridge" isn't going anywhere any time soon.  Did any signage change with the name "Cuomo Bridge"?

Likewise, nobody calls the Thruway the Dewey Thruway.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: PHLBOS on January 04, 2019, 01:46:53 PM
Quote from: ipeters61 on January 04, 2019, 11:10:53 AMDid any signage change with the name "Cuomo Bridge"?
Some of the signs in the immediate area were changed to read Gov. Mario Cuomo Bridge but further out, most of the signs weren't changed.  An LED VMS along the northbound GSP that lists the travel times to the bridge still (thankfully IMHO) lists such as the Tappan Zee Bridge.

It is my understanding that the name Tappan Zee existed decades before the original bridge was built and refers to the general region at the Hudson.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on January 04, 2019, 01:53:18 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on January 04, 2019, 01:46:53 PM
It is my understanding that the name Tappan Zee existed decades before the original bridge was built and refers to the general region at the Hudson.

Correct. Tappan Zee has been the name of the area for 200-400 years. Tappan is a corruption of the Lenape name for the local tribe and the region, Zee is Dutch for "sea".
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: ixnay on January 05, 2019, 11:16:06 AM
Growing up reading maps of metro NYC in the '70s, whenever I gazed upon the mapped TZ Bridge and the part of the Hudson it spanned, I always thought of Tappan appliances (remember them) being given away on game shows (and vice versa).

As for the old and new TZB themselves, are they waiting for all traces of the original TZB to be removed before opening up the Nyack-bound cable stayed span?

ixnay
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Alps on January 05, 2019, 11:43:36 AM
Quote from: ixnay on January 05, 2019, 11:16:06 AM
Growing up reading maps of metro NYC in the '70s, whenever I gazed upon the mapped TZ Bridge and the part of the Hudson it spanned, I always thought of Tappan appliances (remember them) being given away on game shows (and vice versa).

As for the old and new TZB themselves, are they waiting for all traces of the original TZB to be removed before opening up the Nyack-bound cable stayed span?

ixnay
It's all open, but they're constructing a pedestrian path on the WB side, so the right half is closed.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on January 05, 2019, 11:58:24 AM
Quote from: Alps on January 05, 2019, 11:43:36 AM
Quote from: ixnay on January 05, 2019, 11:16:06 AM
Growing up reading maps of metro NYC in the '70s, whenever I gazed upon the mapped TZ Bridge and the part of the Hudson it spanned, I always thought of Tappan appliances (remember them) being given away on game shows (and vice versa).

As for the old and new TZB themselves, are they waiting for all traces of the original TZB to be removed before opening up the Nyack-bound cable stayed span?

ixnay
It's all open, but they're constructing a pedestrian path on the WB side, so the right half is closed.
Not directly related.. but I wonder if pedestrian path is envisioned as purely transportation (and how much use would that get?) or supposed to have a recreational function as well (or primarily recreational?). Google shows almost 4 miles from on ramp to off ramp...
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Alps on January 05, 2019, 12:28:13 PM
Quote from: kalvado on January 05, 2019, 11:58:24 AM
Quote from: Alps on January 05, 2019, 11:43:36 AM
Quote from: ixnay on January 05, 2019, 11:16:06 AM
Growing up reading maps of metro NYC in the '70s, whenever I gazed upon the mapped TZ Bridge and the part of the Hudson it spanned, I always thought of Tappan appliances (remember them) being given away on game shows (and vice versa).

As for the old and new TZB themselves, are they waiting for all traces of the original TZB to be removed before opening up the Nyack-bound cable stayed span?

ixnay
It's all open, but they're constructing a pedestrian path on the WB side, so the right half is closed.
Not directly related.. but I wonder if pedestrian path is envisioned as purely transportation (and how much use would that get?) or supposed to have a recreational function as well (or primarily recreational?). Google shows almost 4 miles from on ramp to off ramp...

It's a path. It connects to both sides. You decide what you want it to be.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on January 05, 2019, 12:34:53 PM
Quote from: Alps on January 05, 2019, 12:28:13 PM
It's a path. It connects to both sides. You decide what you want it to be.
Well, not really. If it is recreational - there needs to be a reasonable parking lot, preferably one on each side, to access the path. And some reasonable cleaning service.
If it is mostly transportation, a reasonable connection to street sidewalks on both sides is a must. Not to mention some bicycle accommodations.
If it is a gimmick to crazy urbanists without envisioned use, then so be it.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Alps on January 05, 2019, 04:03:46 PM
Quote from: kalvado on January 05, 2019, 12:34:53 PM
Quote from: Alps on January 05, 2019, 12:28:13 PM
It's a path. It connects to both sides. You decide what you want it to be.
Well, not really. If it is recreational - there needs to be a reasonable parking lot, preferably one on each side, to access the path. And some reasonable cleaning service.
If it is mostly transportation, a reasonable connection to street sidewalks on both sides is a must. Not to mention some bicycle accommodations.
If it is a gimmick to crazy urbanists without envisioned use, then so be it.
There is parking and connectivity on both sides, once it's done.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: PHLBOS on January 06, 2019, 04:17:51 PM
Quote from: Alps on January 05, 2019, 04:03:46 PM
Quote from: kalvado on January 05, 2019, 12:34:53 PM
Quote from: Alps on January 05, 2019, 12:28:13 PM
It's a path. It connects to both sides. You decide what you want it to be.
Well, not really. If it is recreational - there needs to be a reasonable parking lot, preferably one on each side, to access the path. And some reasonable cleaning service.
If it is mostly transportation, a reasonable connection to street sidewalks on both sides is a must. Not to mention some bicycle accommodations.
If it is a gimmick to crazy urbanists without envisioned use, then so be it.
There is parking and connectivity on both sides, once it's done.
It is my understanding that all newly-constructed bridges now have to have provisions for all non-motorized transportation modes (i.e. pedestrians & bicycles) built in.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on January 06, 2019, 04:30:03 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on January 06, 2019, 04:17:51 PM
It is my understanding that all newly-constructed bridges now have to have provisions for all non-motorized transportation modes (i.e. pedestrians & bicycles) built in.

Correct, all major crossings need to have a bike/ped path, no matter how remote or useless it may look. In the grand scheme of things, it doesn't add THAT much to the cost. In the case of Tappan Zee, the bike/ped path allowed them to run 8 lanes on the WB span until the EB span was completed.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on January 06, 2019, 04:35:25 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on January 06, 2019, 04:17:51 PM
Quote from: Alps on January 05, 2019, 04:03:46 PM
Quote from: kalvado on January 05, 2019, 12:34:53 PM
Quote from: Alps on January 05, 2019, 12:28:13 PM
It's a path. It connects to both sides. You decide what you want it to be.
Well, not really. If it is recreational - there needs to be a reasonable parking lot, preferably one on each side, to access the path. And some reasonable cleaning service.
If it is mostly transportation, a reasonable connection to street sidewalks on both sides is a must. Not to mention some bicycle accommodations.
If it is a gimmick to crazy urbanists without envisioned use, then so be it.
There is parking and connectivity on both sides, once it's done.
It is my understanding that all newly-constructed bridges now have to have provisions for all non-motorized transportation modes (i.e. pedestrians & bicycles) built in.
Which is a great progressive idea, as it removes barriers between neighborhoods, fights racial inequality and improves public health - but I still keep wondering how many people would be using 4 mile path next to a high traffic interstate. It would take about more than an hour to walk one way, which makes pedestrian commute across the bridge pretty impractical; and high traffic reduces recreational value of the path. Bike commute... maybe.
But my personal impression is that a couple tens, maybe hundreds million dollars are just being wasted.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Alps on January 06, 2019, 05:09:15 PM
Quote from: kalvado on January 06, 2019, 04:35:25 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on January 06, 2019, 04:17:51 PM
Quote from: Alps on January 05, 2019, 04:03:46 PM
Quote from: kalvado on January 05, 2019, 12:34:53 PM
Quote from: Alps on January 05, 2019, 12:28:13 PM
It's a path. It connects to both sides. You decide what you want it to be.
Well, not really. If it is recreational - there needs to be a reasonable parking lot, preferably one on each side, to access the path. And some reasonable cleaning service.
If it is mostly transportation, a reasonable connection to street sidewalks on both sides is a must. Not to mention some bicycle accommodations.
If it is a gimmick to crazy urbanists without envisioned use, then so be it.
There is parking and connectivity on both sides, once it's done.
It is my understanding that all newly-constructed bridges now have to have provisions for all non-motorized transportation modes (i.e. pedestrians & bicycles) built in.
Which is a great progressive idea, as it removes barriers between neighborhoods, fights racial inequality and improves public health - but I still keep wondering how many people would be using 4 mile path next to a high traffic interstate. It would take about more than an hour to walk one way, which makes pedestrian commute across the bridge pretty impractical; and high traffic reduces recreational value of the path. Bike commute... maybe.
But my personal impression is that a couple tens, maybe hundreds million dollars are just being wasted.
Not at all true. The extra bridge being used for the walkway was totally needed to be able to stage construction of the new EB span. By getting both directions onto the new WB span, they could then deal with the approaches, leaving only the truss that's now a problem. Even if you didn't have pedestrian accommodations, the new bridge would have been at least 86' wide to provide 7 lanes similar to the old configuration. Now it's 96'. The extra 10' isn't a whole lot in the end.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: empirestate on January 06, 2019, 06:05:38 PM
Quote from: cl94 on January 04, 2019, 01:53:18 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on January 04, 2019, 01:46:53 PM
It is my understanding that the name Tappan Zee existed decades before the original bridge was built and refers to the general region at the Hudson.

Correct. Tappan Zee has been the name of the area for 200-400 years. Tappan is a corruption of the Lenape name for the local tribe and the region, Zee is Dutch for "sea".

Specifically, "Tappan Zee" is the name of that wide part of the Hudson (as I'm pretty sure we've mentioned earlier in this thread, come to think of it).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: froggie on January 07, 2019, 09:59:18 AM
Quote from: kalvado on January 06, 2019, 04:35:25 PM
Which is a great progressive idea, as it removes barriers between neighborhoods, fights racial inequality and improves public health - but I still keep wondering how many people would be using 4 mile path next to a high traffic interstate. It would take about more than an hour to walk one way, which makes pedestrian commute across the bridge pretty impractical; and high traffic reduces recreational value of the path. Bike commute... maybe.
But my personal impression is that a couple tens, maybe hundreds million dollars are just being wasted.

If experience in the Twin Cities with parallel bike/ped paths on major bridges is any indication (MnDOT's been adding them for over 30 years), they'll get used at least by bikes.  Granted, the bridges in Minnesota aren't nearly the length of the Tappan Zee, but I can easily see bikes and longer-distance runners using the new path on the Tappan Zee.

From what I recall of the bridge cost breakdown, the cost to add the bike/ped path was basically a rounding error when compared to the new Tappan Zee's total cost.  Nevermind that, as both cl94 and Alps mentioned, they needed the extra westbound bridge width for traffic staging to finish the eastbound span.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on January 07, 2019, 11:44:59 AM
Quote from: Alps on January 06, 2019, 05:09:15 PM

Not at all true. The extra bridge being used for the walkway was totally needed to be able to stage construction of the new EB span. By getting both directions onto the new WB span, they could then deal with the approaches, leaving only the truss that's now a problem. Even if you didn't have pedestrian accommodations, the new bridge would have been at least 86' wide to provide 7 lanes similar to the old configuration. Now it's 96'. The extra 10' isn't a whole lot in the end.
Spare room for construction is an interesting argument.. I still wonder if that was "because we have that room anyway", or other ideas were on the table?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: SignBridge on January 07, 2019, 08:27:09 PM
You mean something smart like maybe a two-track rail line over the bridge?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: froggie on January 07, 2019, 10:45:01 PM
^ As I understand it, the rail line would have gone in the median.  Supposedly, the new bridges were designed and built to be "rail-ready", but I'm not completely convinced of that.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on January 08, 2019, 09:21:31 AM
Quote from: froggie on January 07, 2019, 10:45:01 PM
^ As I understand it, the rail line would have gone in the median.  Supposedly, the new bridges were designed and built to be "rail-ready", but I'm not completely convinced of that.
As far as I remember, option of rail line was eliminated at design stage as too expensive. Paying off the thing is difficult as it is.
And I doubt it would be on a median. There are two independent bridges, no median per se. Besides, rail has to connect to existing line, running along the shoreline of Hudson under the bridge, so disentangling rail from the center of the bridge would be interesting.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: PHLBOS on January 10, 2019, 05:04:40 PM
Cross-posted from the New York thread: Demolition of the (old) Tappan Zee Bridge postponed, no new date set as of yet. (https://www.lohud.com/story/news/local/rockland/tappan-zee/2019/01/10/tappan-zee-bridge-demolition-explosives-postponed/2539336002/?fbclid=IwAR0HBiemQj0_D5pymNZYyvXQ1aDQSqUnv_7dN86o2fi9X6904DLLLoSOC5k)

Quote from: lohud.com Article"The sustained winds caused delays to the preparatory work of the planned demolition operation," read a statement from Tappan Zee Constructors. "We appreciate the patience of the local community, and once we have rescheduled the operation we will provide an update."
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on January 10, 2019, 08:11:12 PM
Assuming the wind doesn't demolish the old bridge first.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: PHLBOS on January 11, 2019, 05:24:48 PM
Tuesday Jan. 15 is now the rescheduled date; however, the time has not yet been determined.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on January 12, 2019, 03:05:14 AM
Apparently speed limit changes during snow events will be enforced by VMSes now?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Ben114 on January 12, 2019, 08:46:12 AM
Quote from: PHLBOS on January 11, 2019, 05:24:48 PM
Tuesday Jan. 15 is now the rescheduled date; however, the time has not yet been determined.
It will be in the morning.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: NoGoodNamesAvailable on January 12, 2019, 02:06:23 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on January 12, 2019, 03:05:14 AM
Apparently speed limit changes during snow events will be enforced by VMSes now?

I don't care to dig through the VTL or Thruway regulations right now, but that seems highly questionable from the legal side.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: machias on January 12, 2019, 02:52:55 PM
Quote from: NoGoodNamesAvailable on January 12, 2019, 02:06:23 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on January 12, 2019, 03:05:14 AM
Apparently speed limit changes during snow events will be enforced by VMSes now?

I don't care to dig through the VTL or Thruway regulations right now, but that seems highly questionable from the legal side.

The VMSes are way too few and scattered for them to enforce a speed limit that way, unless they're sending out crews to put up a bunch of portable units in a snow storm. Too many ideas for highway modifications coming from downstate. Upstate (north and west of Albany) is a much different beast than downstate.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on January 12, 2019, 03:21:47 PM
Quote from: upstatenyroads on January 12, 2019, 02:52:55 PM
Downstate (south and east of Albany) is a much different beast than upstate.

FTFY :-P
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: RobbieL2415 on January 12, 2019, 05:38:19 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on January 12, 2019, 03:05:14 AM
Apparently speed limit changes during snow events will be enforced by VMSes now?
I've always wondered. Does that need to be codified in the motor vehicle statutes to be enforced? Or does just stating the speed limit on even non-compliant signage count?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: froggie on January 12, 2019, 08:24:50 PM
^ From the MUTCD (https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/htm/2009r1r2/part2/part2b.htm#section2B13):

Quote from: MUTCDA changeable message sign that changes the speed limit for traffic and ambient conditions may be installed provided that the appropriate speed limit is displayed at the proper times.

It's an option in the MUTCD that changeable message signs can be used to show speed limits.  So unless there's a state law to the contrary, it counts.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on January 12, 2019, 09:00:18 PM
I assume this is about big VMSes:
(https://media.localsyr.com/nxsglobal/localsyr/photo/2019/01/10/State_issues_new_Thruway_alert_0_67119335_ver1.0_640_360.jpg)
Thruway guidelines specifically mention "changeable message signs" along with stationary and portable VMSes.
Another interesting question is if the next regular speed limit sign overrides VMS message - which is the normal approach for speed limit signs.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: thenetwork on January 12, 2019, 11:13:43 PM
Quote from: kalvado on January 12, 2019, 09:00:18 PM
I assume this is about big VMSes:
(https://media.localsyr.com/nxsglobal/localsyr/photo/2019/01/10/State_issues_new_Thruway_alert_0_67119335_ver1.0_640_360.jpg)
Thruway guidelines specifically mention "changeable message signs" along with stationary and portable VMSes.
Another interesting question is if the next regular speed limit sign overrides VMS message - which is the normal approach for speed limit signs.

That could be interesting in court if contested.  I would say that the speed limit posted on a VMS like the one above) could be taken as an advisory speed and as not an override to the actual posted speed limit (which would likely be the normal 24/7/365 signs). 

Now if the VMS speed limit matches temporary speed limit signs which replace/cover up permanent signs *or* match changeable/digital speed limit signs on the ground, then I can see that VMS as being enforceable.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: RobbieL2415 on January 13, 2019, 10:38:11 AM
Quote from: froggie on January 12, 2019, 08:24:50 PM
^ From the MUTCD (https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/htm/2009r1r2/part2/part2b.htm#section2B13):

Quote from: MUTCDA changeable message sign that changes the speed limit for traffic and ambient conditions may be installed provided that the appropriate speed limit is displayed at the proper times.

It's an option in the MUTCD that changeable message signs can be used to show speed limits.  So unless there's a state law to the contrary, it counts.
There would have to be a state law establishing any compliant sign as having the force of law to begin with.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on May 27, 2019, 09:16:37 PM
Had the pleasure of driving Rochester > Buffalo on the Thruway twice this weekend, once yesterday and once today. Traffic was much lighter yesterday than usual, while traffic today was much more comparable to such. Overall, traffic was reasonable - we managed to bypass a major accident near Angola so there were no significant slowdowns.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: empirestate on May 29, 2019, 12:33:52 PM
Quote from: webny99 on May 27, 2019, 09:16:37 PM
Had the pleasure of driving Rochester > Buffalo on the Thruway twice this weekend, once yesterday and once today. Traffic was much lighter yesterday than a usual Sunday afternoon, while traffic today was much more comparable to such. Overall, traffic was reasonable - we managed to bypass a major accident near Angola so there were no significant slowdowns.

I should think that all Rochester > Buffalo trips would bypass Angola...
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on May 29, 2019, 01:12:39 PM
Quote from: empirestate on May 29, 2019, 12:33:52 PM
I should think that all Rochester > Buffalo trips would bypass Angola...

Yes, that is correct  :)

I might clarify that Rochester > Buffalo was the only stretch I did on both days.
I was in Canada earlier in the weekend, and then did a separate trip the Buffalo area (ending up at Evangola State Park) on Monday.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: WNYroadgeek on June 17, 2019, 11:38:26 PM
Huge news here. Cuomo has announced that the entire Thruway system will go cashless by the end of next year: https://www.governor.ny.gov/news/governor-cuomo-announces-selection-design-build-team-install-cashless-tolling-nys-thruway-end
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kevinb1994 on June 17, 2019, 11:40:27 PM
Quote from: WNYroadgeek on June 17, 2019, 11:38:26 PM
Huge news here. Cuomo has announced that the entire Thruway system will go cashless by the end of next year: https://www.governor.ny.gov/news/governor-cuomo-announces-selection-design-build-team-install-cashless-tolling-nys-thruway-end (https://www.governor.ny.gov/news/governor-cuomo-announces-selection-design-build-team-install-cashless-tolling-nys-thruway-end)
Not really new news, this was announced and perhaps rumored not long ago.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: MNHighwayMan on June 17, 2019, 11:43:53 PM
Quote from: kevinb1994 on June 17, 2019, 11:40:27 PM
Quote from: WNYroadgeek on June 17, 2019, 11:38:26 PM
Huge news here. Cuomo has announced that the entire Thruway system will go cashless by the end of next year: https://www.governor.ny.gov/news/governor-cuomo-announces-selection-design-build-team-install-cashless-tolling-nys-thruway-end (https://www.governor.ny.gov/news/governor-cuomo-announces-selection-design-build-team-install-cashless-tolling-nys-thruway-end)
Not really new news, this was announced and perhaps rumored not long ago.

And now it's being announced for realsies. It is "new news" to go from rumor to concrete announcement.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: froggie on June 18, 2019, 06:54:49 AM
It wasn't rumor beforehand.  Cuomo announced it in his 2018 State of the State.

That said, this still *IS* "new" news in that a construction team has been announced and a contract approved for the conversion.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kevinb1994 on June 18, 2019, 07:04:32 AM
Quote from: froggie on June 18, 2019, 06:54:49 AM
It wasn't rumor beforehand.  Cuomo announced it in his 2018 State of the State.

That said, this still *IS* "new" news in that a construction team has been announced and a contract approved for the conversion.
Thought it was familiar. Doesn't matter, I've heard it all before!
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: astralentity on June 18, 2019, 08:38:32 AM
I hope they can match the mileposts and the exit numbers to the corresponding interstate highway with this project.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on June 18, 2019, 09:49:01 AM
Quote from: astralentity on June 18, 2019, 08:38:32 AM
I hope they can match the mileposts and the exit numbers to the corresponding interstate highway with this project.
I don't see that as part of this project.  Does anyone?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: astralentity on June 18, 2019, 09:56:34 AM
Quote from: Rothman on June 18, 2019, 09:49:01 AM
Quote from: astralentity on June 18, 2019, 08:38:32 AM
I hope they can match the mileposts and the exit numbers to the corresponding interstate highway with this project.
I don't see that as part of this project.  Does anyone?

I kinda mean after the fact.  Wasn't the toll system part of the holdup for fixing this situation?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on June 18, 2019, 10:17:09 AM
Quote from: froggie on June 18, 2019, 06:54:49 AM
It wasn't rumor beforehand.  Cuomo announced it in his 2018 State of the State.

Which, to the average citizen, is basically regarded as a rumor until tangible things start happening.


Quote from: astralentity on June 18, 2019, 09:56:34 AM
Quote from: Rothman on June 18, 2019, 09:49:01 AM
Quote from: astralentity on June 18, 2019, 08:38:32 AM
I hope they can match the mileposts and the exit numbers to the corresponding interstate highway with this project.
I don't see that as part of this project.  Does anyone?
I kinda mean after the fact.  Wasn't the toll system part of the holdup for fixing this situation?

Right, I don't believe the conversion to mileage-based is necessarily part of the cashless project. But once the toll plazas are gone, switching to mileage based becomes a lot simpler and creates fewer logistical headaches.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: astralentity on June 18, 2019, 10:20:11 AM
Quote from: webny99 on June 18, 2019, 10:17:09 AM
Right, I don't believe the conversion to mileage-based is necessarily part of the cashless project. But once the toll plazas are gone, switching to mileage based becomes a lot simpler and creates fewer logistical headaches.

And also makes it easier for them to add interchanges where needed!
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on June 18, 2019, 10:27:33 AM
Quote from: astralentity on June 18, 2019, 10:20:11 AM
Quote from: webny99 on June 18, 2019, 10:17:09 AM
Right, I don't believe the conversion to mileage-based is necessarily part of the cashless project. But once the toll plazas are gone, switching to mileage based becomes a lot simpler and creates fewer logistical headaches.

And also makes it easier for them to add interchanges where needed!
...which NYSTA is very much against, since additional interchanges mean shorter trips and smaller revenues. 

There was a proposal for a new interchange somewhere in the Hudson Valley about 10 years ago.  NYSTA dismissed the idea practically out of hand.

(personal opinion emphasized)
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on June 18, 2019, 11:13:32 AM
Quote from: Rothman on June 18, 2019, 10:27:33 AM
Quote from: astralentity on June 18, 2019, 10:20:11 AM
And also makes it easier for them to add interchanges where needed!
...which NYSTA is very much against, since additional interchanges mean shorter trips and smaller revenues. 

Haven't we have had this discussion before?

More exits potentially means traffic getting on later, or off sooner, than they would otherwise. But it also means more traffic overall, due to the Thruway becoming practical for a larger number of trips. The question is not whether traffic on any given segment would increase (it would), but whether the overall vehicle miles traveled would increase (open question).

In towns like Clarence and Henrietta, more exits almost certainly means a widening, so there is a cost-saving argument to be made for fewer exits, as well.

Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on June 18, 2019, 11:34:40 AM
Quote from: webny99 on June 18, 2019, 11:13:32 AM
Quote from: Rothman on June 18, 2019, 10:27:33 AM
Quote from: astralentity on June 18, 2019, 10:20:11 AM
And also makes it easier for them to add interchanges where needed!
...which NYSTA is very much against, since additional interchanges mean shorter trips and smaller revenues. 

Haven't we have had this discussion before?

More exits potentially means traffic getting on later, or off sooner, than they would otherwise. But it also means more traffic overall, due to the Thruway becoming practical for a larger number of trips. The question is not whether traffic on any given segment would increase (it would), but whether the overall vehicle miles traveled would increase (open question).

In towns like Clarence and Henrietta, more exits almost certainly means a widening, so there is a cost-saving argument to be made for fewer exits, as well.
Go ahead and make that argument to them.  Let me know how it goes.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on June 18, 2019, 03:45:40 PM
I'm just fine making it here and not in an official setting. :sombrero:

In any case, my preference would be for a widening over more exits.
At least between the PA line and Albany, the only place I feel exits are particularly lacking is between 49 and 48A.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Jim on June 18, 2019, 04:21:37 PM
I probably just missed this earlier, but this is the first I heard definitively that the system will work like the Mass Pike: with gantries between interchanges to record travels rather than reading at entrance and exit toll plazas.

It will be interesting to me at least to see the configuration at Exit 24 after the toll booths are removed.  The weaving around there is bad enough now with traffic slowing down to go through the tolls.  Seems it could increase risk of more and more serious accidents once traffic will be moving at higher rates of speed.  Currently, 87 to 87 and 90 to 90 traffic does not need to weave, but there's an awful lot of 90 E to 87 N and 87 S to 90 W traffic that does.

I also hope that this will open up the gates to a single, mileage-based milepost and exit renumbering of all of I-87 and I-90.  But I won't count on it happening any time soon.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on June 18, 2019, 04:52:06 PM
Quote from: MNHighwayMan on June 17, 2019, 11:43:53 PM
Quote from: kevinb1994 on June 17, 2019, 11:40:27 PM
Quote from: WNYroadgeek on June 17, 2019, 11:38:26 PM
Huge news here. Cuomo has announced that the entire Thruway system will go cashless by the end of next year: https://www.governor.ny.gov/news/governor-cuomo-announces-selection-design-build-team-install-cashless-tolling-nys-thruway-end (https://www.governor.ny.gov/news/governor-cuomo-announces-selection-design-build-team-install-cashless-tolling-nys-thruway-end)
Not really new news, this was announced and perhaps rumored not long ago.

And now it's being announced for realsies. It is "new news" to go from rumor to concrete announcement.

It wasn't even a rumor. NYSTA released the first conversion contract a few months ago.

We even knew how the system would work! At least temporarily, they're installing equipment at most existing interchange toll booths. I wouldn't be surprised if that is the medium-term solution, as there is no reason to throw a gantry at every little interchange. Exit 22 has already been retrofitted. It will sort of be like how the Maine Turnpike works for Maine E-ZPass tagholders in that it's a virtual ticket system with gantries at every entrance/exit.

What IS officially a rumor is what will happen to the 23-25A (inclusive) section. Plans have NOT been released for conversions of those exits and it is thought that mainline gantries will be placed south of 23 and west of 25A, making this section free. This would certainly reduce congestion on Albany surface roads, as NY 5 and NY 7 in particular are routinely clogged with shunpikers.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on June 18, 2019, 05:09:49 PM
Quote from: Jim on June 18, 2019, 04:21:37 PM
I probably just missed this earlier, but this is the first I heard definitively that the system will work like the Mass Pike: with gantries between interchanges to record travels rather than reading at entrance and exit toll plazas.

It will be interesting to me at least to see the configuration at Exit 24 after the toll booths are removed.  The weaving around there is bad enough now with traffic slowing down to go through the tolls.  Seems it could increase risk of more and more serious accidents once traffic will be moving at higher rates of speed.  Currently, 87 to 87 and 90 to 90 traffic does not need to weave, but there's an awful lot of 90 E to 87 N and 87 S to 90 W traffic that does.

I also hope that this will open up the gates to a single, mileage-based milepost and exit renumbering of all of I-87 and I-90.  But I won't count on it happening any time soon.
87 to Thruway is probably the worst ramp there. It is deliberately bottlenecked to slow down traffic,
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Alps on June 18, 2019, 08:00:37 PM
Quote from: Jim on June 18, 2019, 04:21:37 PM
It will be interesting to me at least to see the configuration at Exit 24 after the toll booths are removed.  The weaving around there is bad enough now with traffic slowing down to go through the tolls.  Seems it could increase risk of more and more serious accidents once traffic will be moving at higher rates of speed.  Currently, 87 to 87 and 90 to 90 traffic does not need to weave, but there's an awful lot of 90 E to 87 N and 87 S to 90 W traffic that does.
I would hope that it includes direct Northway ramps as has been suggested recently. That'll unclog the weave.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on June 18, 2019, 08:06:41 PM
Regarding exit 24, the safest option would be to remove the loops that carry I-87, and instead tie the Northway stubs directly into the Thruway south of US 20.
EDIT: yeah, what Steve said.


Both ends of I-490 are also going to have potential for weaving issues, given the proximity of Exits 1 and 29, respectively. On the Victor end of it, I-490 EB to Thruway EB is going to have colossal backups. The toll booth is the only thing preventing it right now. Volumes have always been way, way too high to be sustained by a single lane ramp, and that will be accentuated with three lanes cramming into one at freeway speeds.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: RobbieL2415 on June 18, 2019, 08:12:40 PM
Quote from: webny99 on June 18, 2019, 08:06:41 PM
Regarding exit 24, the safest option would be to remove the loops that carry I-87, and instead tie the Northway stubs directly into the Thruway south of US 20.
EDIT: yeah, what Steve said.
Maybe use ramp meters? The Cross-Westchester has them now.

Both ends of I-490 are also going to have potential for weaving issues, given the proximity of Exits 1 and 29, respectively. On the Victor end of it, I-490 EB to Thruway EB is going to have colossal backups. The toll booth is the only thing preventing it right now. Volumes have always been way, way too high to be sustained by a single lane ramp, and that will be accentuated with three lanes cramming into one at freeway speeds.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on June 18, 2019, 08:25:48 PM
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on June 18, 2019, 08:12:40 PM
Quote from: webny99 on June 18, 2019, 08:06:41 PM
Regarding exit 24, the safest option would be to remove the loops that carry I-87, and instead tie the Northway stubs directly into the Thruway south of US 20.
EDIT: yeah, what Steve said.
Maybe use ramp meters? The Cross-Westchester has them now.

Quote
Both ends of I-490 are also going to have potential for weaving issues, given the proximity of Exits 1 and 29, respectively. On the Victor end of it, I-490 EB to Thruway EB is going to have colossal backups. The toll booth is the only thing preventing it right now. Volumes have always been way, way too high to be sustained by a single lane ramp, and that will be accentuated with three lanes cramming into one at freeway speeds.

FTFY, although I'm not sure which part of my post you were responding to.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on June 18, 2019, 08:43:46 PM
Quote from: froggie on June 18, 2019, 06:54:49 AM
It wasn't rumor beforehand.  Cuomo announced it in his 2018 State of the State.

That said, this still *IS* "new" news in that a construction team has been announced and a contract approved for the conversion.
The local news in Rochester actually missed that part, and reported as if nobody knew the Thruway was going cashless before now.

Quote from: Rothman on June 18, 2019, 10:27:33 AM
Quote from: astralentity on June 18, 2019, 10:20:11 AM
Quote from: webny99 on June 18, 2019, 10:17:09 AM
Right, I don't believe the conversion to mileage-based is necessarily part of the cashless project. But once the toll plazas are gone, switching to mileage based becomes a lot simpler and creates fewer logistical headaches.

And also makes it easier for them to add interchanges where needed!
...which NYSTA is very much against, since additional interchanges mean shorter trips and smaller revenues. 

There was a proposal for a new interchange somewhere in the Hudson Valley about 10 years ago.  NYSTA dismissed the idea practically out of hand.

(personal opinion emphasized)
At least in the Rochester area, a decade or so ago NYSTA wanted to add an interchange at Union Street, but local NIMBYs stopped it.

Quote from: cl94 on June 18, 2019, 04:52:06 PM
Quote from: MNHighwayMan on June 17, 2019, 11:43:53 PM
Quote from: kevinb1994 on June 17, 2019, 11:40:27 PM
Quote from: WNYroadgeek on June 17, 2019, 11:38:26 PM
Huge news here. Cuomo has announced that the entire Thruway system will go cashless by the end of next year: https://www.governor.ny.gov/news/governor-cuomo-announces-selection-design-build-team-install-cashless-tolling-nys-thruway-end (https://www.governor.ny.gov/news/governor-cuomo-announces-selection-design-build-team-install-cashless-tolling-nys-thruway-end)
Not really new news, this was announced and perhaps rumored not long ago.

And now it's being announced for realsies. It is "new news" to go from rumor to concrete announcement.

It wasn't even a rumor. NYSTA released the first conversion contract a few months ago.

We even knew how the system would work! At least temporarily, they're installing equipment at most existing interchange toll booths. I wouldn't be surprised if that is the medium-term solution, as there is no reason to throw a gantry at every little interchange. Exit 22 has already been retrofitted. It will sort of be like how the Maine Turnpike works for Maine E-ZPass tagholders in that it's a virtual ticket system with gantries at every entrance/exit.

What IS officially a rumor is what will happen to the 23-25A (inclusive) section. Plans have NOT been released for conversions of those exits and it is thought that mainline gantries will be placed south of 23 and west of 25A, making this section free. This would certainly reduce congestion on Albany surface roads, as NY 5 and NY 7 in particular are routinely clogged with shunpikers.
What's odd is that the press release mentions removing the booths (not sure where Jim got the idea that the gantries would be between interchanges, as I don't see that mentioned - it could easily be done like the Harriman barrier was).

Regarding diverting traffic, isn't the Thruway also clogged in the morning rush?  I'd also rather not have more traffic on the Northway trying to bypass I-787.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on June 18, 2019, 08:58:30 PM
Quote from: vdeane on June 18, 2019, 08:43:46 PM
What's odd is that the press release mentions removing the booths (not sure where Jim got the idea that the gantries would be between interchanges, as I don't see that mentioned - it could easily be done like the Harriman barrier was).

Being as the contract to retrofit roughly 1/3 of the ticket interchanges is out, I'll believe it when I see it. The fact that they've already converted 22 would make me think that a sane agency would go the retrofit route at least temporarily. But knowing who is in charge, a full removal isn't out of the question, even if it would significantly increase short-term costs.

What I had heard prior to this was that booths were being removed at 16, 17, 23, 24, 25, 25A, 34A, 35, 39, 45, 46, 47, and the mainline barriers. These interchanges account for the vast majority of freeway-freeway traffic on the ticket system.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on June 18, 2019, 09:09:27 PM
Quote from: cl94 on June 18, 2019, 08:58:30 PM
What I had heard prior to this was that booths were being removed at 16, 17, 23, 24, 25, 25A, 34A, 35, 39, 45, 46, 47, and the mainline barriers. These interchanges account for the vast majority of freeway-freeway traffic on the ticket system.

Can I assume you meant 36 (I-81) instead of 35?

In many ways, the booths at freeway interchanges are the diciest ones to remove, as drivers are going to expect a high speed connection. I already mentioned some of the problems with I-490, and I-690 and I-390 don't have tons of space to work with either.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Jim on June 18, 2019, 09:17:11 PM
Quote from: vdeane on June 18, 2019, 08:43:46 PM
What's odd is that the press release mentions removing the booths (not sure where Jim got the idea that the gantries would be between interchanges, as I don't see that mentioned - it could easily be done like the Harriman barrier was).

I think I got the idea from the image at the top of the press release page, and erroneously thought I read it somewhere in the text also.  So the plan is to put a gantry on each on/off ramp at or near where the current toll booths are?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on June 18, 2019, 09:23:15 PM
Quote from: webny99 on June 18, 2019, 09:09:27 PM
Can I assume you meant 36 (I-81) instead of 35?

In many ways, the booths at freeway interchanges are the diciest ones to remove, as drivers are going to expect a high speed connection. I already mentioned some of the problems with I-490, and I-690 and I-390 don't have tons of space to work with either.

Yes, I meant 36.

The 88, 490, and 890 interchanges are easy because it's the end of the freeway and conflicting traffic is limited. The others will be interesting, 24 in particular due to the volumes (it's the busiest interchange barrier by a large margin). As a medium-term measure, I fully expect them to pylon off a through lane on 90 in both directions and 87 SB to reduce weaving conflicts. 34A has close to half a mile of weaving room, so that's not a big concern. 36, they could probably partially untangle (at least leaving the Thruway) with minimal property impacts.

Quote from: Jim on June 18, 2019, 09:17:11 PM
I think I got the idea from the image at the top of the press release page, and erroneously thought I read it somewhere in the text also.  So the plan is to put a gantry on each on/off ramp at or near where the current toll booths are?

For the time being, yes. Smaller impact to mainline traffic and it may allow them to (at least temporarily) reuse existing booths and infrastructure at interchanges to speed the process. When they replaced the ramp toll at 16 with AET, provisions were added to mount equipment over the SB-WB ramp for a future AET conversion of the ticket system.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: RobbieL2415 on June 18, 2019, 09:59:26 PM
Quote from: webny99 on June 18, 2019, 08:25:48 PM
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on June 18, 2019, 08:12:40 PM
Quote from: webny99 on June 18, 2019, 08:06:41 PM
Regarding exit 24, the safest option would be to remove the loops that carry I-87, and instead tie the Northway stubs directly into the Thruway south of US 20.
EDIT: yeah, what Steve said.
Maybe use ramp meters? The Cross-Westchester has them now.

Quote
Both ends of I-490 are also going to have potential for weaving issues, given the proximity of Exits 1 and 29, respectively. On the Victor end of it, I-490 EB to Thruway EB is going to have colossal backups. The toll booth is the only thing preventing it right now. Volumes have always been way, way too high to be sustained by a single lane ramp, and that will be accentuated with three lanes cramming into one at freeway speeds.

FTFY, although I'm not sure which part of my post you were responding to.
I'm responding to the bottom quote.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: empirestate on June 18, 2019, 10:18:28 PM
Quote from: vdeane on June 18, 2019, 08:43:46 PM
At least in the Rochester area, a decade or so ago NYSTA wanted to add an interchange at Union Street, but local NIMBYs stopped it.

Longer ago than that...as I recall, it was local politicians who wanted it to create developable real estate (there's nothing whatsoever out there now), not NYSTA. Presumably it was stopped by the poor political optics of using infrastructure to create demand as opposed to anticipating and responding to it.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kevinb1994 on June 19, 2019, 02:59:11 AM
Quote from: cl94 on June 18, 2019, 04:52:06 PM
Quote from: MNHighwayMan on June 17, 2019, 11:43:53 PM
Quote from: kevinb1994 on June 17, 2019, 11:40:27 PM
Quote from: WNYroadgeek on June 17, 2019, 11:38:26 PM
Huge news here. Cuomo has announced that the entire Thruway system will go cashless by the end of next year: https://www.governor.ny.gov/news/governor-cuomo-announces-selection-design-build-team-install-cashless-tolling-nys-thruway-end (https://www.governor.ny.gov/news/governor-cuomo-announces-selection-design-build-team-install-cashless-tolling-nys-thruway-end)
Not really new news, this was announced and perhaps rumored not long ago.

And now it's being announced for realsies. It is "new news" to go from rumor to concrete announcement.

It wasn't even a rumor. NYSTA released the first conversion contract a few months ago.

We even knew how the system would work! At least temporarily, they're installing equipment at most existing interchange toll booths. I wouldn't be surprised if that is the medium-term solution, as there is no reason to throw a gantry at every little interchange. Exit 22 has already been retrofitted. It will sort of be like how the Maine Turnpike works for Maine E-ZPass tagholders in that it's a virtual ticket system with gantries at every entrance/exit.

What IS officially a rumor is what will happen to the 23-25A (inclusive) section. Plans have NOT been released for conversions of those exits and it is thought that mainline gantries will be placed south of 23 and west of 25A, making this section free. This would certainly reduce congestion on Albany surface roads, as NY 5 and NY 7 in particular are routinely clogged with shunpikers.
Thought so, thanks.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: astralentity on June 19, 2019, 08:47:13 AM
Quote from: webny99 on June 18, 2019, 08:06:41 PM
Regarding exit 24, the safest option would be to remove the loops that carry I-87, and instead tie the Northway stubs directly into the Thruway south of US 20.

I've always wondered why this was never the case....  Exit 24 is the most screwed up interchange in the state, with Exit 31 a close second.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on June 19, 2019, 09:14:22 AM
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on June 18, 2019, 09:59:26 PM
Quote from: webny99 on June 18, 2019, 08:25:48 PM
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on June 18, 2019, 08:12:40 PM
Maybe use ramp meters? The Cross-Westchester has them now.
Quote from: webny99 on June 18, 2019, 08:06:41 PM
Both ends of I-490 are also going to have potential for weaving issues, given the proximity of Exits 1 and 29, respectively. On the Victor end of it, I-490 EB to Thruway EB is going to have colossal backups. The toll booth is the only thing preventing it right now. Volumes have always been way, way too high to be sustained by a single lane ramp, and that will be accentuated with three lanes cramming into one at freeway speeds.
FTFY, although I'm not sure which part of my post you were responding to.
I'm responding to the bottom quote.

Ramp meters on I-490?

Count me skeptical. The problem there isn't with the ramp traffic. The problem is with all the traffic from a busy two lane freeway (actually three lane, prior to Exit 29) cramming into a single lane ramp. The directional split is probably 90-10 in favor of the eastbound Thruway, which is why there is going to be backups regardless of the oncoming Exit 29 traffic.


Quote from: cl94 on June 18, 2019, 09:23:15 PM
The 88, 490, and 890 interchanges are easy because it's the end of the freeway and conflicting traffic is limited.

As mentioned, the issue with Exit 45 is the single lane ramp, not the weaving / conflicting traffic.
Those ramps carry as much, if not more traffic than the Thruway itself west of there. Exit 45 WB is typically about a 55 / 45 split in favor of I-490.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: astralentity on June 19, 2019, 01:00:04 PM
Exit 25 (341) is in serious need of reconfigure.  Someone just needs to sneeze wrong and it's backed up there.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on June 19, 2019, 08:09:07 PM
Quote from: astralentity on June 19, 2019, 08:47:13 AM
Quote from: webny99 on June 18, 2019, 08:06:41 PM
Regarding exit 24, the safest option would be to remove the loops that carry I-87, and instead tie the Northway stubs directly into the Thruway south of US 20.

I've always wondered why this was never the case....  Exit 24 is the most screwed up interchange in the state, with Exit 30 a close second.
Herkimer?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on June 19, 2019, 10:10:25 PM
^ Pretty sure he meant Exit 31 (Utica), which I would agree needs to be reconfigured along with Exit 24.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: astralentity on June 20, 2019, 07:10:46 AM
Quote from: webny99 on June 19, 2019, 10:10:25 PM
^ Pretty sure he meant Exit 31 (Utica), which I would agree needs to be reconfigured along with Exit 24.

Yes, I did.   :ded:
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on June 20, 2019, 09:55:43 AM
Quote from: astralentity on June 20, 2019, 07:10:46 AM
Quote from: webny99 on June 19, 2019, 10:10:25 PM
^ Pretty sure he meant Exit 31 (Utica), which I would agree needs to be reconfigured along with Exit 24.
Yes, I did.   :ded:

Since you're new here, I might as well tell you that you can fix it if you wish by clicking the "modify" button.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: astralentity on June 20, 2019, 10:12:11 AM
Quote from: webny99 on June 20, 2019, 09:55:43 AM
Quote from: astralentity on June 20, 2019, 07:10:46 AM
Quote from: webny99 on June 19, 2019, 10:10:25 PM
^ Pretty sure he meant Exit 31 (Utica), which I would agree needs to be reconfigured along with Exit 24.
Yes, I did.   :ded:

Since you're new here, I might as well tell you that you can fix it if you wish by clicking the "modify" button.

Fixed
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: TonyTrafficLight on June 20, 2019, 12:38:15 PM
Quote from: astralentity on June 20, 2019, 07:10:46 AM
Quote from: webny99 on June 19, 2019, 10:10:25 PM
^ Pretty sure he meant Exit 31 (Utica), which I would agree needs to be reconfigured along with Exit 24.

Yes, I did.   :ded:

What should be done with Exit 31? It is kind of cramped but getting to Genesee Street north or south is pretty easy.
Though when they built Interstate 790, it's not pretty straight forward to get to it from I-90.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: astralentity on June 20, 2019, 02:03:10 PM
Quote from: TonyTrafficLight on June 20, 2019, 12:38:15 PM
Quote from: astralentity on June 20, 2019, 07:10:46 AM
Quote from: webny99 on June 19, 2019, 10:10:25 PM
^ Pretty sure he meant Exit 31 (Utica), which I would agree needs to be reconfigured along with Exit 24.

Yes, I did.   :ded:

What should be done with Exit 31? It is kind of cramped but getting to Genesee Street north or south is pretty easy.
Though when they built Interstate 790, it's not pretty straight forward to get to it from I-90.

Direct access to the I-790 arterial instead of making a loop around to even get on 49.

Even then, the arrangement for I-790 makes absolutely no sense, and I can even see extending the designation up the new expressway to Rome.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: machias on June 20, 2019, 07:54:39 PM
There's been talk over the past 10-15 years of building E-ZPass "slip ramps"  from I-90 to NY 49 where they run alongside each other, perhaps this will move along faster now. There's also been talk during that time of reconfiguring Exit 31 (again), as the lack of direct access to I-790 WEST from the Thruway has created traffic issues along Genesee Street and Coventry Ave.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on June 20, 2019, 09:09:20 PM
Regarding Exit 31, I'm in favor of bulldozing the entire trumpet altogether. Add slip ramps to and from the east at Leland Ave, and to and from the west right where NY 49 splits off. The junction with Genesee St. is also bulldozed and replaced with a diamond interchange. Problem solved.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: astralentity on June 20, 2019, 10:00:18 PM
Quote from: webny99 on June 20, 2019, 09:09:20 PM
Regarding Exit 31, I'm in favor of bulldozing the entire trumpet altogether. Add slip ramps to and from the east at Leland Ave, and to and from the west right where NY 49 splits off. The junction with Genesee St. is also bulldozed and replaced with a diamond interchange. Problem solved.

Access to 5, 8, and 12 from I-790
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on June 21, 2019, 10:17:18 AM
Quote from: astralentity on June 20, 2019, 10:00:18 PM
Quote from: webny99 on June 20, 2019, 09:09:20 PM
Regarding Exit 31, I'm in favor of bulldozing the entire trumpet altogether. Add slip ramps to and from the east at Leland Ave, and to and from the west right where NY 49 splits off. The junction with Genesee St. is also bulldozed and replaced with a diamond interchange. Problem solved.
Access to 5, 8, and 12 from I-790

What do you mean? That interchange would remain untouched.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on June 21, 2019, 10:44:16 AM
All I know is Exit 31 is stupidity incarnate.  "We'll take you south of the Thruway only to put you through an at-grade 'loop' to get back on the north side of it..."
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: astralentity on June 21, 2019, 11:08:04 AM
Quote from: webny99 on June 21, 2019, 10:17:18 AM
Quote from: astralentity on June 20, 2019, 10:00:18 PM
Quote from: webny99 on June 20, 2019, 09:09:20 PM
Regarding Exit 31, I'm in favor of bulldozing the entire trumpet altogether. Add slip ramps to and from the east at Leland Ave, and to and from the west right where NY 49 splits off. The junction with Genesee St. is also bulldozed and replaced with a diamond interchange. Problem solved.
Access to 5, 8, and 12 from I-790

What do you mean? That interchange would remain untouched.

The ramps direct to I-790 and use I-790 to access 5, 8, and 12.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on June 21, 2019, 03:12:00 PM
Quote from: astralentity on June 21, 2019, 11:08:04 AM
Quote from: webny99 on June 21, 2019, 10:17:18 AM
Quote from: astralentity on June 20, 2019, 10:00:18 PM
Quote from: webny99 on June 20, 2019, 09:09:20 PM
Regarding Exit 31, I'm in favor of bulldozing the entire trumpet altogether. Add slip ramps to and from the east at Leland Ave, and to and from the west right where NY 49 splits off. The junction with Genesee St. is also bulldozed and replaced with a diamond interchange. Problem solved.
Access to 5, 8, and 12 from I-790
What do you mean? That interchange would remain untouched.
The ramps direct to I-790 and use I-790 to access 5, 8, and 12.

I'm confused as to which ramps you are referring to? but take courage: what I proposed wouldn't touch anything involving I-790.

This (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.1131353,-75.2091841,3a,75y,116.08h,80.83t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sf6S6XiybmySTRbvQcyK00g!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en) would tie into the EB Thruway instead of ending at Leland Ave. And the new westbound Thruway exit would be approximately here (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.1130432,-75.2078103,3a,75y,313.5h,95.76t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sxPGAsy6VpFCPjc9STlj70w!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo1.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DxPGAsy6VpFCPjc9STlj70w%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D64.30013%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en). As mentioned, the existing trumpet and Genesee St. ramps would be bulldozed. A diamond interchange with Genesee St. can be built within existing ROW as needed.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on June 21, 2019, 04:06:49 PM
Quote from: webny99 on June 21, 2019, 03:12:00 PM
Quote from: astralentity on June 21, 2019, 11:08:04 AM
Quote from: webny99 on June 21, 2019, 10:17:18 AM
Quote from: astralentity on June 20, 2019, 10:00:18 PM
Quote from: webny99 on June 20, 2019, 09:09:20 PM
Regarding Exit 31, I'm in favor of bulldozing the entire trumpet altogether. Add slip ramps to and from the east at Leland Ave, and to and from the west right where NY 49 splits off. The junction with Genesee St. is also bulldozed and replaced with a diamond interchange. Problem solved.
Access to 5, 8, and 12 from I-790
What do you mean? That interchange would remain untouched.
The ramps direct to I-790 and use I-790 to access 5, 8, and 12.

I'm confused as to which ramps you are referring to? but take courage: what I proposed wouldn't touch anything involving I-790.

This (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.1131353,-75.2091841,3a,75y,116.08h,80.83t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sf6S6XiybmySTRbvQcyK00g!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en) would tie into the EB Thruway instead of ending at Leland Ave. And the new westbound Thruway exit would be approximately here (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.1130432,-75.2078103,3a,75y,313.5h,95.76t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sxPGAsy6VpFCPjc9STlj70w!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo1.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DxPGAsy6VpFCPjc9STlj70w%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D64.30013%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en). As mentioned, the existing trumpet and Genesee St. ramps would be bulldozed. A diamond interchange with Genesee St. can be built within existing ROW as needed.
If I get it right, you basically want 790 to become frontage road?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: TonyTrafficLight on June 21, 2019, 04:28:38 PM
Quote from: webny99 on June 21, 2019, 03:12:00 PM
Quote from: astralentity on June 21, 2019, 11:08:04 AM
Quote from: webny99 on June 21, 2019, 10:17:18 AM
Quote from: astralentity on June 20, 2019, 10:00:18 PM
Quote from: webny99 on June 20, 2019, 09:09:20 PM
Regarding Exit 31, I'm in favor of bulldozing the entire trumpet altogether. Add slip ramps to and from the east at Leland Ave, and to and from the west right where NY 49 splits off. The junction with Genesee St. is also bulldozed and replaced with a diamond interchange. Problem solved.
Access to 5, 8, and 12 from I-790
What do you mean? That interchange would remain untouched.
The ramps direct to I-790 and use I-790 to access 5, 8, and 12.

I'm confused as to which ramps you are referring to? but take courage: what I proposed wouldn't touch anything involving I-790.

This (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.1131353,-75.2091841,3a,75y,116.08h,80.83t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sf6S6XiybmySTRbvQcyK00g!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en) would tie into the EB Thruway instead of ending at Leland Ave. And the new westbound Thruway exit would be approximately here (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.1130432,-75.2078103,3a,75y,313.5h,95.76t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sxPGAsy6VpFCPjc9STlj70w!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo1.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DxPGAsy6VpFCPjc9STlj70w%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D64.30013%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en). As mentioned, the existing trumpet and Genesee St. ramps would be bulldozed. A diamond interchange with Genesee St. can be built within existing ROW as needed.

When they built I-790 with the "MUD Project" as it was called which partly reconstructed that area and eventually new Rt 49/I-790,
wonder why they didnt consider any of this. Everything in that area take 4 right turns and 3 lefts to get where you want to go.
I've lived her all my life and still get confused as to which road leads to which.

Also, one plan talked about for a number of years was I-790/Rt. 49/Rt 365 west toward Oneida becoming an interstate.
My grandson may see that in his lifetime maybe.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: machias on June 22, 2019, 01:06:44 AM
Quote from: TonyTrafficLight on June 21, 2019, 04:28:38 PM
Quote from: webny99 on June 21, 2019, 03:12:00 PM
Quote from: astralentity on June 21, 2019, 11:08:04 AM
Quote from: webny99 on June 21, 2019, 10:17:18 AM
Quote from: astralentity on June 20, 2019, 10:00:18 PM
Quote from: webny99 on June 20, 2019, 09:09:20 PM
Regarding Exit 31, I'm in favor of bulldozing the entire trumpet altogether. Add slip ramps to and from the east at Leland Ave, and to and from the west right where NY 49 splits off. The junction with Genesee St. is also bulldozed and replaced with a diamond interchange. Problem solved.
Access to 5, 8, and 12 from I-790
What do you mean? That interchange would remain untouched.
The ramps direct to I-790 and use I-790 to access 5, 8, and 12.

I'm confused as to which ramps you are referring to? but take courage: what I proposed wouldn't touch anything involving I-790.

This (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.1131353,-75.2091841,3a,75y,116.08h,80.83t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sf6S6XiybmySTRbvQcyK00g!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en) would tie into the EB Thruway instead of ending at Leland Ave. And the new westbound Thruway exit would be approximately here (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.1130432,-75.2078103,3a,75y,313.5h,95.76t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sxPGAsy6VpFCPjc9STlj70w!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo1.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DxPGAsy6VpFCPjc9STlj70w%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D64.30013%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en). As mentioned, the existing trumpet and Genesee St. ramps would be bulldozed. A diamond interchange with Genesee St. can be built within existing ROW as needed.

When they built I-790 with the "MUD Project" as it was called which partly reconstructed that area and eventually new Rt 49/I-790,
wonder why they didnt consider any of this. Everything in that area take 4 right turns and 3 lefts to get where you want to go.
I've lived her all my life and still get confused as to which road leads to which.

Also, one plan talked about for a number of years was I-790/Rt. 49/Rt 365 west toward Oneida becoming an interstate.
My grandson may see that in his lifetime maybe.

I pushed for years for 49 and 365 to be tied to I-790 as NY 790 and at least they're still talking about it, though it probably won't see any action for a while.

There were plans for I-790 continuing east beyond Leland Ave to meet up with NY Route 5 near West Schuyler, perhaps that could still be done again with slip ramps to and from the Thruway. The Genesee St interchange might be a good place for a SPUI.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on June 22, 2019, 11:52:46 AM
Quote from: kalvado on June 21, 2019, 04:06:49 PM
If I get it right, you basically want 790 to become frontage road?

Of sorts, yes.
I shouldn't have said I-790 wouldn't be touched - rather, just the interchange with 8, 12, and 49 (and everything west if there) would remain untouched.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: TonyTrafficLight on June 22, 2019, 07:28:01 PM
Quote from: webny99 on June 22, 2019, 11:52:46 AM
I shouldn't have said I-790 wouldn't be touched - rather, just the interchange with 8, 12, and 49 (and everything west if there) would remain untouched.

That 8-12-49 Interchange was a $100 million dollar project back in the mid-late 1980s. It's much improved than it was,
but with the building of I-790, they should have integrated that a little better.

There's a Google Play Book about the MUD project also.

Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on July 02, 2019, 08:50:48 PM
What do motorists get by paying tolls for the Thruway, especially upstate? Why is it that we pay the tolls that we do and still have cracked/older pavement, like around the PA line, but places like PA, NC/SC/GA and even FL have better functioning roads, as well as newer rest stations? I get that weather takes its toll (no pun intended) on the pavement but isn't there a better way to keep the roads smooth?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on July 02, 2019, 10:04:35 PM
There is some serious pavement quality issues between Lancaster and Pembroke that are being worked on now. Something must have gone wrong with the last resurfacing (which was only a few years ago, IIRC).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: astralentity on July 03, 2019, 07:38:58 AM
Quote from: webny99 on July 02, 2019, 10:04:35 PM
There is some serious pavement quality issues between Lancaster and Pembroke that are being worked on now. Something must have gone wrong with the last resurfacing (which was only a few years ago, IIRC).

I heard the fine folks in Irving wouldn't let the thruway crews on to repair the sections of the road that were in the worst condition.  Guess where those sections lie?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on July 03, 2019, 08:40:09 AM
Quote from: astralentity on July 03, 2019, 07:38:58 AM
I heard the fine folks in Irving wouldn't let the thruway crews on to repair the sections of the road that were in the worst condition.  Guess where those sections lie?

No guesswork required - how well I know about the segment through the Seneca Nation. It even has permanent "rough road" signs and the speed limit reduced to 55 mph.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: astralentity on July 03, 2019, 09:12:27 AM
Quote from: webny99 on July 03, 2019, 08:40:09 AM
Quote from: astralentity on July 03, 2019, 07:38:58 AM
I heard the fine folks in Irving wouldn't let the thruway crews on to repair the sections of the road that were in the worst condition.  Guess where those sections lie?

No guesswork required - how well I know about the segment through the Seneca Nation. It even has permanent "rough road" signs and the speed limit reduced to 55 mph.

I still see the road and the ROW as owned by the People, so the Senecas really can't tell the Authority where the bear goes in the woods.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: seicer on July 03, 2019, 09:42:03 AM
Some of the newest concrete pavement west of Syracuse is also beginning to fail, and it looks like the Thruway is scheduling major work on it next year.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: astralentity on July 03, 2019, 10:08:05 AM
Quote from: seicer on July 03, 2019, 09:42:03 AM
Some of the newest concrete pavement west of Syracuse is also beginning to fail, and it looks like the Thruway is scheduling major work on it next year.

And people think I'm crazy for taking I-86 for points west.  Takes a bit longer than the Thruway going to Michigan, but it's way worth it.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on July 03, 2019, 10:28:12 AM
Quote from: astralentity on July 03, 2019, 10:08:05 AM
Quote from: seicer on July 03, 2019, 09:42:03 AM
Some of the newest concrete pavement west of Syracuse is also beginning to fail, and it looks like the Thruway is scheduling major work on it next year.

And people think I'm crazy for taking I-86 for points west.  Takes a bit longer than the Thruway going to Michigan, but it's way worth it.
In what way?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on July 03, 2019, 10:36:52 AM
Quote from: Rothman on July 03, 2019, 10:28:12 AM
Quote from: astralentity on July 03, 2019, 10:08:05 AM
Quote from: seicer on July 03, 2019, 09:42:03 AM
Some of the newest concrete pavement west of Syracuse is also beginning to fail, and it looks like the Thruway is scheduling major work on it next year.

And people think I'm crazy for taking I-86 for points west.  Takes a bit longer than the Thruway going to Michigan, but it's way worth it.
In what way?
For one, overhead is not that big. Per google, shunpiking via I-88 and I-86 from Albany to Cleveland adds 25 miles, or 5% of trip mileage. Time penalty is also not that bad.
When I was driving Albany to Ithaca on a regular basis (pre-cell phone days), I-88 was my preferred daytime route for traffic reasons, and Thruway preferred nighttime one for emergency assistance reasons.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: astralentity on July 03, 2019, 10:42:25 AM
Quote from: Rothman on July 03, 2019, 10:28:12 AM
Quote from: astralentity on July 03, 2019, 10:08:05 AM
Quote from: seicer on July 03, 2019, 09:42:03 AM
Some of the newest concrete pavement west of Syracuse is also beginning to fail, and it looks like the Thruway is scheduling major work on it next year.

And people think I'm crazy for taking I-86 for points west.  Takes a bit longer than the Thruway going to Michigan, but it's way worth it.
In what way?

Haven't figured that out yet....  it seems that some just don't understand the utility of I-86 yet, probably because they remember a time when 17 wasn't quite a freeway.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: astralentity on July 03, 2019, 10:45:08 AM
Quote from: kalvado on July 03, 2019, 10:36:52 AM
Quote from: Rothman on July 03, 2019, 10:28:12 AM
Quote from: astralentity on July 03, 2019, 10:08:05 AM
Quote from: seicer on July 03, 2019, 09:42:03 AM
Some of the newest concrete pavement west of Syracuse is also beginning to fail, and it looks like the Thruway is scheduling major work on it next year.

And people think I'm crazy for taking I-86 for points west.  Takes a bit longer than the Thruway going to Michigan, but it's way worth it.
In what way?
For one, overhead is not that big. Per google, shunpiking via I-88 and I-86 from Albany to Cleveland adds 25 miles, or 5% of trip mileage. Time penalty is also not that bad.
When I was driving Albany to Ithaca on a regular basis (pre-cell phone days), I-88 was my preferred daytime route for traffic reasons, and Thruway preferred nighttime one for emergency assistance reasons.

At my work, some of our fleet came from Madison, WI.  One guy said he absolutely avoids the Thruway whenever he can.  Obviously, shunpiking around Chicago and 80-90 isn't the easiest thing, but they have a choice of taking I-90 to I-86, or I-80 to I-81 when they get to Cleveland.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on July 03, 2019, 12:21:44 PM
Quote from: astralentity on July 03, 2019, 10:42:25 AM
Quote from: Rothman on July 03, 2019, 10:28:12 AM
Quote from: astralentity on July 03, 2019, 10:08:05 AM
Quote from: seicer on July 03, 2019, 09:42:03 AM
Some of the newest concrete pavement west of Syracuse is also beginning to fail, and it looks like the Thruway is scheduling major work on it next year.
And people think I'm crazy for taking I-86 for points west.  Takes a bit longer than the Thruway going to Michigan, but it's way worth it.
In what way?
Haven't figured that out yet....  it seems that some just don't understand the utility of I-86 yet, probably because they remember a time when 17 wasn't quite a freeway.

I think you may have misunderstood Rothman. I think he was asking in what way is it worth it, not in what way do people think you're crazy.

I can think of three main reasons to take I-86: less traffic, no tolls, better scenery.
Obviously it's longer mileage and is going to take a bit longer, but YMMV as to whether the trade off is worth it.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: astralentity on July 03, 2019, 01:06:36 PM
Quote from: webny99 on July 03, 2019, 12:21:44 PM
Quote from: astralentity on July 03, 2019, 10:42:25 AM
Quote from: Rothman on July 03, 2019, 10:28:12 AM
Quote from: astralentity on July 03, 2019, 10:08:05 AM
Quote from: seicer on July 03, 2019, 09:42:03 AM
Some of the newest concrete pavement west of Syracuse is also beginning to fail, and it looks like the Thruway is scheduling major work on it next year.
And people think I'm crazy for taking I-86 for points west.  Takes a bit longer than the Thruway going to Michigan, but it's way worth it.
In what way?
Haven't figured that out yet....  it seems that some just don't understand the utility of I-86 yet, probably because they remember a time when 17 wasn't quite a freeway.

I think you may have misunderstood Rothman. I think he was asking in what way is it worth it, not in what way do people think you're crazy.

I can think of three main reasons to take I-86: less traffic, no tolls, better scenery.
Obviously it's longer mileage and is going to take a bit longer, but YMMV as to whether the trade off is worth it.

Tried going thru Canada once to get to Chicago.  The 405 > QEW > Parkway > 403 > 401 > 402 route to get to I-94 in Port Huron.  You lose about 30-40 minutes at Niagara Falls.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on July 03, 2019, 01:40:18 PM
Per Google, the difference between using I-90 vs. I-88/I-86 between Albany and Erie is 20 minutes.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: astralentity on July 03, 2019, 01:46:30 PM
Quote from: vdeane on July 03, 2019, 01:40:18 PM
Per Google, the difference between using I-90 vs. I-88/I-86 between Albany and Erie is 20 minutes.

Which really makes it a no-brainer, especially with how traffic can get snarled up in Buffalo.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on July 03, 2019, 02:09:26 PM
I have yet to be persuaded that I-90 gets "snarled" regularly in Buffalo, especially after seeing Region 5's data on the matter. :D

The traffic data actually shows that Buffalo doesn't have rush hours, but it actually peaks mid-day.  Probably reflective of the employment situation.

(personal opinion emphasized)
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on July 03, 2019, 02:34:30 PM
Quote from: astralentity on July 03, 2019, 01:06:36 PM
Quote from: webny99 on July 03, 2019, 12:21:44 PM
Quote from: astralentity on July 03, 2019, 10:42:25 AM
Quote from: Rothman on July 03, 2019, 10:28:12 AM
Quote from: astralentity on July 03, 2019, 10:08:05 AM
Quote from: seicer on July 03, 2019, 09:42:03 AM
Some of the newest concrete pavement west of Syracuse is also beginning to fail, and it looks like the Thruway is scheduling major work on it next year.
And people think I'm crazy for taking I-86 for points west.  Takes a bit longer than the Thruway going to Michigan, but it's way worth it.
In what way?
Haven't figured that out yet....  it seems that some just don't understand the utility of I-86 yet, probably because they remember a time when 17 wasn't quite a freeway.
I think you may have misunderstood Rothman. I think he was asking in what way is it worth it, not in what way do people think you're crazy.
I can think of three main reasons to take I-86: less traffic, no tolls, better scenery.
Obviously it's longer mileage and is going to take a bit longer, but YMMV as to whether the trade off is worth it.
Tried going thru Canada once to get to Chicago.  The 405 > QEW > Parkway > 403 > 401 > 402 route to get to I-94 in Port Huron.  You lose about 30-40 minutes at Niagara Falls.

:confused:
If I was confused before, I don't know what I am now. I don't see any relevance to the discussion at hand.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: astralentity on July 03, 2019, 02:38:31 PM
Quote from: webny99 on July 03, 2019, 02:34:30 PM
Quote from: astralentity on July 03, 2019, 01:06:36 PM
Quote from: webny99 on July 03, 2019, 12:21:44 PM
Quote from: astralentity on July 03, 2019, 10:42:25 AM
Quote from: Rothman on July 03, 2019, 10:28:12 AM
Quote from: astralentity on July 03, 2019, 10:08:05 AM
Quote from: seicer on July 03, 2019, 09:42:03 AM
Some of the newest concrete pavement west of Syracuse is also beginning to fail, and it looks like the Thruway is scheduling major work on it next year.
And people think I'm crazy for taking I-86 for points west.  Takes a bit longer than the Thruway going to Michigan, but it's way worth it.
In what way?
Haven't figured that out yet....  it seems that some just don't understand the utility of I-86 yet, probably because they remember a time when 17 wasn't quite a freeway.
I think you may have misunderstood Rothman. I think he was asking in what way is it worth it, not in what way do people think you're crazy.
I can think of three main reasons to take I-86: less traffic, no tolls, better scenery.
Obviously it's longer mileage and is going to take a bit longer, but YMMV as to whether the trade off is worth it.
Tried going thru Canada once to get to Chicago.  The 405 > QEW > Parkway > 403 > 401 > 402 route to get to I-94 in Port Huron.  You lose about 30-40 minutes at Niagara Falls.

:confused:
If I was confused before, I don't know what I am now. I don't see any relevance to the discussion at hand.

Trying to explain that it's 50/50 whether or not you take the Thruway or I-86 to get to points west of Erie.  Thruway may be convenient, but I-86 is a bit more cost and time effective, at least in my estimation.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on July 03, 2019, 04:14:15 PM
I don't see how I-86 could be time effective over the Thruway.  I can see the other "benefits" (less traffic and scenery), but not time.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on July 03, 2019, 04:28:40 PM
Quote from: Rothman on July 03, 2019, 02:09:26 PM
I have yet to be persuaded that I-90 gets "snarled" regularly in Buffalo, especially after seeing Region 5's data on the matter. :D

The traffic data actually shows that Buffalo doesn't have rush hours, but it actually peaks mid-day.  Probably reflective of the employment situation.

(personal opinion emphasized)

As a former employee of the Buffalo MPO, I can say that the Thruway is one of the only roadways to regularly experience severe congestion in the region. It's mostly related to the toll booths. Before the widening/lane reassignment 50-51, that stretch was the only major spot of recurrent freeway congestion in the area not linked to a toll booth or border crossing. Congestion was usually worst here during the PM rush.

That being said, you do NOT want to be approaching either of the mainline barriers, particularly the Williamsville barrier, during a traditional rush hour or major holiday travel day either in the US or Canada. It is not unusual for the WB Thruway to back up to NY 78 due to the tolls.

Quote from: Rothman on July 03, 2019, 04:14:15 PM
I don't see how I-86 could be time effective over the Thruway.  I can see the other "benefits" (less traffic and scenery), but not time.

Time is basically the only benefit the Thruway has, and even then, it's half an hour. The real reasons to use 86 are that it saves $16 in tolls and has an easier on/off for off-highway services. Relatively few Thruway exits have easy access to food if you don't want to pay service area prices. Heck, even somewhere like Newburgh, which used to be a Breezewood, has relatively little that is convenient or easy to find unless you know it's there.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on July 03, 2019, 04:34:51 PM
Good thing the toll booths are going away, then.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on July 03, 2019, 08:41:18 PM
The Google Maps traffic view begs to differ on the "Buffalo has no rush hour" thing.  Same with my personal experience.  You don't want to be driving eastbound on I-290 or NY 33 at rush hour.  I-90 EB at that hour will be stop and go in the right two lanes but flowing at the speed limit in the left two lanes.  Taking that loop ramp from NY 33 EB to I-90 EB with intent to drive to Rochester or points east at that hour is a pretty harrowing experience (not that it's ever easy).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on July 03, 2019, 11:11:55 PM
Take it up with Region 5.  It was their data. :D
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Alps on July 04, 2019, 04:23:00 AM
Quote from: Rothman on July 03, 2019, 04:14:15 PM
I don't see how I-86 could be time effective over the Thruway.  I can see the other "benefits" (less traffic and scenery), but not time.
Because 86 has less traffic, you can generally cruise at 75-79. The trucks on the Thruway in both lanes slow your average down.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on July 04, 2019, 01:23:09 PM
Quote from: Alps on July 04, 2019, 04:23:00 AM
Quote from: Rothman on July 03, 2019, 04:14:15 PM
I don't see how I-86 could be time effective over the Thruway.  I can see the other "benefits" (less traffic and scenery), but not time.
Because 86 has less traffic, you can generally cruise at 75-79. The trucks on the Thruway in both lanes slow your average down.
I still doubt it.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Beltway on July 04, 2019, 02:29:27 PM
Quote from: Rothman on July 04, 2019, 01:23:09 PM
Quote from: Alps on July 04, 2019, 04:23:00 AM
Quote from: Rothman on July 03, 2019, 04:14:15 PM
I don't see how I-86 could be time effective over the Thruway.  I can see the other "benefits" (less traffic and scenery), but not time.
Because 86 has less traffic, you can generally cruise at 75-79. The trucks on the Thruway in both lanes slow your average down.
I still doubt it.

I-86 time effective for what trip pair?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on July 04, 2019, 06:16:23 PM
Albany to Chicago
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Alps on July 04, 2019, 06:42:08 PM
Quote from: Rothman on July 04, 2019, 01:23:09 PM
Quote from: Alps on July 04, 2019, 04:23:00 AM
Quote from: Rothman on July 03, 2019, 04:14:15 PM
I don't see how I-86 could be time effective over the Thruway.  I can see the other "benefits" (less traffic and scenery), but not time.
Because 86 has less traffic, you can generally cruise at 75-79. The trucks on the Thruway in both lanes slow your average down.
I still doubt it.
On I-88 people routinely do 90-100...
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on July 04, 2019, 09:26:47 PM
Quote from: Rothman on July 03, 2019, 11:11:55 PM
Take it up with Region 5.  It was their data. :D
I was going off the congestion levels on the Google Maps traffic layer.  That said, I did pull some reports from Traffic Data Viewer (the newest version even has reports on the Thruway!) on I-90, I-190, I-290, NY 33, and NY 198, and they showed traditional direction morning/afternoon peaks.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on July 05, 2019, 03:33:50 PM
Quote from: vdeane on July 03, 2019, 08:41:18 PM
The Google Maps traffic view begs to differ on the "Buffalo has no rush hour" thing.  Same with my personal experience.  You don't want to be driving eastbound on I-290 or NY 33 at rush hour.

Yeah, I would agree with that. I-290 EB to Thruway WB is a major bottleneck, and so is NY 33 EB to Thruway EB. Obviously, long distance traffic is going to be higher around midday. It's unsurprising that many Buffalo surface streets peak around noon (which is I think what Rothman was referring to), but the freeways, especially I-290 and NY 33, and areas near employment centers definitely have the morning and afternoon peaks.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: CapeCodder on July 05, 2019, 08:45:38 PM
Does the Clifton Springs service plaza still have Roy Rogers? IIRC that's the only one I've seen in years (was passing thru on Greyhound and we stopped there.)
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: WNYroadgeek on July 06, 2019, 12:11:49 AM
Quote from: CapeCodder on July 05, 2019, 08:45:38 PM
Does the Clifton Springs service plaza still have Roy Rogers? IIRC that's the only one I've seen in years (was passing thru on Greyhound and we stopped there.)

According to NYSTA's website (http://www.thruway.ny.gov/travelers/travelplazas/index.cgi), it's a Burger King now.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: CapeCodder on July 06, 2019, 05:57:43 AM
Quote from: WNYroadgeek on July 06, 2019, 12:11:49 AM
Quote from: CapeCodder on July 05, 2019, 08:45:38 PM
Does the Clifton Springs service plaza still have Roy Rogers? IIRC that's the only one I've seen in years (was passing thru on Greyhound and we stopped there.)

According to NYSTA's website (http://www.thruway.ny.gov/travelers/travelplazas/index.cgi), it's a Burger King now.

Oh man, I guess Roy Rogers is extinct now. Wasn't bad, but at 3 AM anything will do.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Jim on July 06, 2019, 08:53:15 AM
Roy Rogers remains open at some service areas: https://www.thruway.ny.gov/travelers/travelplazas/tpmap11.pdf
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Beltway on July 06, 2019, 09:34:13 AM
Quote from: Rothman on July 04, 2019, 06:16:23 PM
Albany to Chicago

About 25 minutes and 25 miles longer per Google Maps, to use I-88 and I-86.

But that would avoid about 350 miles of tolls.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: roadman65 on July 06, 2019, 11:47:53 AM
Was given to me an old 1962 map of NJ that showed the Tappan Zee Bridge as being 50 cents in both directions as well as the Yonkers toll barrier as 25 cents.  It also showed only the section of Thruway south of Exit 8 as only I-87 as from Exits 8 to 15 was solely I-287.  I am guessing that was when I-684 was signed as I-87.

Also the map shows the Verrazano Bridge being Under Construction and NY 439 being highlighted in red on Forest Avenue, Victory Blvd, and Bay Street to St George as principal through route across the island.  Then the then Bay Ridge Ferry was 60 cents to use as the current SI Ferry to Manhattan was 67 cents (which is odd cause in 1877 the fare was a dime). 

Back to the Thruway, Exit 8 was considered to be the Elmsford exit and not White Plains as it is now.  Old Esso maps always showed the names of toll road interchanges as well as numbers.  It is interesting to see some of the changes from old till now.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: machias on July 06, 2019, 01:33:18 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on July 06, 2019, 11:47:53 AM
Back to the Thruway, Exit 8 was considered to be the Elmsford exit and not White Plains as it is now.  Old Esso maps always showed the names of toll road interchanges as well as numbers.  It is interesting to see some of the changes from old till now.

Many of the original names are still used internally. I know Exit 39 is "State Fair"  and Exit 34A is "Collamer" .
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on July 07, 2019, 08:40:02 PM
Yikes, traffic was worse than I've ever seen it before today.  I-490 was backed up approaching the toll barrier as if it was rush hour, then the Thruway was congested enough to feel like I-95 all the way to Waterloo.  Then the section east of Utica was driving like the section between Rochester-Syracuse normally does after a holiday.  To top it off, it was stop and go all the way from Schenectady to Albany because of a wreck; it took half an hour just to get from one end of the service plaza to the other.  What was normally a 3.5 hour drive took 4.5 instead!

What's really weird is that normally the peak direction after a holiday is westbound, not eastbound, especially in the summer as people head home from the Finger Lakes (Rochester and Buffalo naturally have more pull than Syracuse).  Traffic also isn't usually an issue once you get significantly east of Syracuse, but today it was.  What the heck was going on?  It's not normally fun at the end of a summer holiday, but this was way, way worse than normal even for that.  It was carmageddon!  I hope this isn't a new normal.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on July 08, 2019, 03:14:51 PM
Quote from: vdeane on July 07, 2019, 08:40:02 PM
Yikes, traffic was worse than I've ever seen it before today.  I-490 was backed up approaching the toll barrier as if it was rush hour, then the Thruway was congested enough to feel like I-95 all the way to Waterloo.

Around noon (IIRC?) there was an incident just east of the I-490 on-ramp, causing eastbound to back up from there all the way back past NY 64. When the incident cleared up, the backlog of traffic would have started to flow, which would have filled the entire road for quite a while. Maybe you got caught in the thick of that.


Quote from: vdeane on July 07, 2019, 08:40:02 PM
What's really weird is that normally the peak direction after a holiday is westbound, not eastbound, especially in the summer as people head home from the Finger Lakes (Rochester and Buffalo naturally have more pull than Syracuse). Traffic also isn't usually an issue once you get significantly east of Syracuse, but today it was.  What the heck was going on?  It's not normally fun at the end of a summer holiday, but this was way, way worse than normal even for that. It was carmageddon! I hope this isn't a new normal.

I can only speak for the area I covered, which was from Rochester to the Canadian border and back. All three border crossings into the US were crazy backed up, worse than any time in recent memory. Lewiston was backed up onto ON 405! by 10AM, which is basically unheard of. That volume of traffic flowing through the border certainly feeds the eastbound Thruway. I'd imagine a lot of the New England and Jersey plates I saw were going to be on the Thruway at least until Syracuse, if not further east.

I would definitely confirm that westbound is the peak direction between Syracuse and Rochester, but it seems to be closer - maybe even a true toss-up - as to which is busier between LeRoy and Buffalo. The latter stretch was certainly busy yesterday, but bearable; we managed to get ahead of a long string of trucks early on, while a big wave of traffic downstream from us generally kept moving at 80 mph or better.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on July 08, 2019, 08:41:49 PM
Quote from: webny99 on July 08, 2019, 03:14:51 PM
Around noon (IIRC?) there was an incident just east of the I-490 on-ramp, causing eastbound to back up from there all the way back past NY 64. When the incident cleared up, the backlog of traffic would have started to flow, which would have filled the entire road for quite a while. Maybe you got caught in the thick of that.
That explains a LOT.  I left my parents around 12:25, and it's only 15 or so minutes to the Thruway from there.  Traffic was like one giant wolf pack that never broke up.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: MASTERNC on July 08, 2019, 09:07:45 PM
Quote from: webny99 on July 08, 2019, 03:14:51 PM
Quote from: vdeane on July 07, 2019, 08:40:02 PM
Yikes, traffic was worse than I've ever seen it before today.  I-490 was backed up approaching the toll barrier as if it was rush hour, then the Thruway was congested enough to feel like I-95 all the way to Waterloo.

Around noon (IIRC?) there was an incident just east of the I-490 on-ramp, causing eastbound to back up from there all the way back past NY 64. When the incident cleared up, the backlog of traffic would have started to flow, which would have filled the entire road for quite a while. Maybe you got caught in the thick of that.


My uncle said someone lost their boat east of Batavia while he was heading in that direction yesterday - maybe that is what he meant.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on July 09, 2019, 04:08:55 PM
Funny, I have no idea what actually happened, but based on Google Maps live traffic alone, I figured it was a pretty good assumption that the left two eastbound lanes were blocked somewhere between the I-490 on-ramp and the Seneca Service Area.

(The backups would have been reversed - much worse on I-490, much better on the Thruway - if the incident had been on the right).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: roadman65 on July 09, 2019, 05:58:27 PM
Quote from: machias on July 06, 2019, 01:33:18 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on July 06, 2019, 11:47:53 AM
Back to the Thruway, Exit 8 was considered to be the Elmsford exit and not White Plains as it is now.  Old Esso maps always showed the names of toll road interchanges as well as numbers.  It is interesting to see some of the changes from old till now.

Many of the original names are still used internally. I know Exit 39 is "State Fair"  and Exit 34A is "Collamer" .
Probably only in paperwork. Not in the field it's signed White Plains and Rye.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Kniwt on September 17, 2019, 01:57:04 PM
The New York Times has a new report on the continuing controversy over the Thruway segment that passes through the Seneca Nation. No breaking news, but a good roundup of the history and (weak) prospects for a resolution anytime soon.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/17/nyregion/highway-casino-seneca-ny.html

QuoteIf ever you wanted a tangible symbol of the execrable relationship between Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo and New York's largest Native American tribe, it is the three miles of cracked, rutted and completely rotten highway running through this lakeside reservation.

The highway, Interstate 90, is so deteriorated that federal authorities have issued warnings and local drivers have blown tires and tie rods.

... Everyone agrees that the highway, which is part of the New York Thruway system but within the tribal lands of the Seneca Nation, needs to be repaired. But the reason for the lack of new asphalt is considerably more complicated, touching on decades-old grievances between the state and the Senecas; accusations of bad faith on both sides; and a legal battle over casino revenue.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on September 17, 2019, 08:50:40 PM
Interesting. I just drove that stretch this past weekend, and didn't feel comfortable going much more than about 65 mph; cruising at the usual 77 mph or so was not even a possibility. The left lanes are a bit better than the right lanes, but both are downright terrible, especially for a toll road.

My bet is on the state eventually moving in there and getting the repaving done without an agreement.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on September 17, 2019, 10:46:23 PM
No.  The State absolutely will not do it without an agreement.

State will end up giving in to the Senecas in the end.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on September 18, 2019, 08:43:01 AM
Quote from: Rothman on September 17, 2019, 10:46:23 PM
No.  The State absolutely will not do it without an agreement.

State will end up giving in to the Senecas in the end.

It was discussed as an option in the article, but I guess that should be taken with a grain of salt.

I guess I'm not sure what "giving in to the Senecas" means in this context.
Eventually, something will have to be done with the Thruway, but right now it sounds like neither side is willing to budge.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Beltway on September 18, 2019, 09:56:16 AM
Quote from: webny99 on September 18, 2019, 08:43:01 AM
Quote from: Rothman on September 17, 2019, 10:46:23 PM
No.  The State absolutely will not do it without an agreement.  State will end up giving in to the Senecas in the end.
It was discussed as an option in the article, but I guess that should be taken with a grain of salt.
I guess I'm not sure what "giving in to the Senecas" means in this context.
Eventually, something will have to be done with the Thruway, but right now it sounds like neither side is willing to budge.
Is any new right-of-way needed?  If not, I don't see where they would have any say in the matter.  The Thruway has a very wide right-of-way, enough to handle a 6-lane widening project.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on September 18, 2019, 10:50:18 AM
Quote from: Beltway on September 18, 2019, 09:56:16 AM
Quote from: webny99 on September 18, 2019, 08:43:01 AM
Quote from: Rothman on September 17, 2019, 10:46:23 PM
No.  The State absolutely will not do it without an agreement.  State will end up giving in to the Senecas in the end.
It was discussed as an option in the article, but I guess that should be taken with a grain of salt.
I guess I'm not sure what "giving in to the Senecas" means in this context.
Eventually, something will have to be done with the Thruway, but right now it sounds like neither side is willing to budge.
Is any new right-of-way needed?  If not, I don't see where they would have any say in the matter.  The Thruway has a very wide right-of-way, enough to handle a 6-lane widening project.
You realize this is a territory of sovereign nation (aka reservation), and the tribe retained land ownership, granting only easement for the road?
Even validity of that easement is being disputed by Senecas...
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Beltway on September 18, 2019, 11:06:57 AM
Quote from: kalvado on September 18, 2019, 10:50:18 AM
Quote from: Beltway on September 18, 2019, 09:56:16 AM
Is any new right-of-way needed?  If not, I don't see where they would have any say in the matter.  The Thruway has a very wide right-of-way, enough to handle a 6-lane widening project.
You realize this is a territory of sovereign nation (aka reservation), and the tribe retained land ownership, granting only easement for the road?  Even validity of that easement is being disputed by Senecas...

What exactly does that mean?   That they could claim ownership of the highway and use it for whatever purpose they want?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on September 18, 2019, 11:42:14 AM
Quote from: Beltway on September 18, 2019, 11:06:57 AM
Quote from: kalvado on September 18, 2019, 10:50:18 AM
Quote from: Beltway on September 18, 2019, 09:56:16 AM
Is any new right-of-way needed?  If not, I don't see where they would have any say in the matter.  The Thruway has a very wide right-of-way, enough to handle a 6-lane widening project.
You realize this is a territory of sovereign nation (aka reservation), and the tribe retained land ownership, granting only easement for the road?  Even validity of that easement is being disputed by Senecas...

What exactly does that mean?   That they could claim ownership of the highway and use it for whatever purpose they want?
Pretty much. It is their land and it is not subject to NYS laws. Treaties are between Senecas and Congress,  NYS is a third party here and there is little, if anything, state can legally do.

Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on September 18, 2019, 11:57:35 AM
The Senecas also have a history of laying burning tires across highways when relations get really sour.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on September 18, 2019, 11:58:40 AM
Quote from: Beltway on September 18, 2019, 09:56:16 AM
Is any new right-of-way needed?  If not, I don't see where they would have any say in the matter.  The Thruway has a very wide right-of-way, enough to handle a 6-lane widening project.

As noted, the issue isn't right-of-way; volumes on that segment are around 27K per day, so a widening isn't even warranted. The issue is the deteriorated pavement quality - almost to the point of being a gravel road - exacerbated by years of winter weather and heavy truck traffic. You can get some idea of what it's like in Street View, but the most recent is from 2016, and it's gotten much worse since then.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: thenetwork on September 18, 2019, 12:08:18 PM
Quote from: webny99 on September 18, 2019, 11:58:40 AM
Quote from: Beltway on September 18, 2019, 09:56:16 AM
Is any new right-of-way needed?  If not, I don't see where they would have any say in the matter.  The Thruway has a very wide right-of-way, enough to handle a 6-lane widening project.

As noted, the issue isn't right-of-way; volumes on that segment are around 27K per day, so a widening isn't even warranted. The issue is the deteriorated pavement quality - almost to the point of being a gravel road - exacerbated by years of winter weather and heavy truck traffic. You can get some idea of what it's like in Street View, but the most recent is from 2016, and it's gotten much worse since then.


From my prior travels through that area, even avoiding the stretch altogether -- exiting at US-20 in Irving (Exit 58) and rejoining at Exit 57-A -- isn't a bad idea.  For one thing, you can purchase no-name gasoline tax-free within the Seneca Reservation along US-20, and the road isn't loaded with too many traffic lights.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on September 18, 2019, 03:23:06 PM
Quote from: thenetwork on September 18, 2019, 12:08:18 PM
From my prior travels through that area, even avoiding the stretch altogether -- exiting at US-20 in Irving (Exit 58) and rejoining at Exit 57-A -- isn't a bad idea.  For one thing, you can purchase no-name gasoline tax-free within the Seneca Reservation along US-20, and the road isn't loaded with too many traffic lights.

I have been known to do that. The rez stations that look like modern gas stations generally have decent gas.

Quote from: Rothman on September 17, 2019, 10:46:23 PM
No.  The State absolutely will not do it without an agreement.

State will end up giving in to the Senecas in the end.

This. Similar thing happened with NY 17 through the Allegheny Reservation. NY won't do anything that might provoke the Senecas, because they HAVE been known to increase tensions. At this point, the Thruway through there needs a full reconstruction. It'll be a while before that happens.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Beltway on September 18, 2019, 04:12:29 PM
Quote from: webny99 on September 18, 2019, 11:58:40 AM
Quote from: Beltway on September 18, 2019, 09:56:16 AM
Is any new right-of-way needed?  If not, I don't see where they would have any say in the matter.  The Thruway has a very wide right-of-way, enough to handle a 6-lane widening project.
As noted, the issue isn't right-of-way; volumes on that segment are around 27K per day, so a widening isn't even warranted. The issue is the deteriorated pavement quality - almost to the point of being a gravel road - exacerbated by years of winter weather and heavy truck traffic. You can get some idea of what it's like in Street View, but the most recent is from 2016, and it's gotten much worse since then.

So the highway has been there for over 60 years.  They have to ask for permission before they can rehab the pavement?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on September 18, 2019, 04:16:23 PM
Quote from: Beltway on September 18, 2019, 04:12:29 PM
So the highway has been there for over 60 years.  They have to ask for permission before they can rehab the pavement?

I'm no expert, but my understanding is yes, because of the decades-long feud, in which the Senecas are claiming the state didn't have the right to build the Thruway through there in the first place.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on September 18, 2019, 05:06:11 PM
Quote from: Beltway on September 18, 2019, 04:12:29 PM
Quote from: webny99 on September 18, 2019, 11:58:40 AM
Quote from: Beltway on September 18, 2019, 09:56:16 AM
Is any new right-of-way needed?  If not, I don't see where they would have any say in the matter.  The Thruway has a very wide right-of-way, enough to handle a 6-lane widening project.
As noted, the issue isn't right-of-way; volumes on that segment are around 27K per day, so a widening isn't even warranted. The issue is the deteriorated pavement quality - almost to the point of being a gravel road - exacerbated by years of winter weather and heavy truck traffic. You can get some idea of what it's like in Street View, but the most recent is from 2016, and it's gotten much worse since then.

So the highway has been there for over 60 years.  They have to ask for permission before they can rehab the pavement?
Wait...how long have the Senecas been there... :D
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Beltway on September 18, 2019, 05:10:27 PM
Quote from: Rothman on September 18, 2019, 05:06:11 PM
Quote from: Beltway on September 18, 2019, 04:12:29 PM
So the highway has been there for over 60 years.  They have to ask for permission before they can rehab the pavement?
Wait...how long have the Senecas been there... :D

I would have thought that they worked all that out in the 1950s before they built the highway.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on September 18, 2019, 05:13:12 PM
Quote from: Beltway on September 18, 2019, 05:10:27 PM
Quote from: Rothman on September 18, 2019, 05:06:11 PM
Quote from: Beltway on September 18, 2019, 04:12:29 PM
So the highway has been there for over 60 years.  They have to ask for permission before they can rehab the pavement?
Wait...how long have the Senecas been there... :D

I would have thought that they worked all that out in the 1950s before they built the highway.
As with all foreign nations, treaties and agreements change.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Beltway on September 18, 2019, 05:42:13 PM
Quote from: Rothman on September 18, 2019, 05:13:12 PM
Quote from: Beltway on September 18, 2019, 05:10:27 PM
Quote from: Rothman on September 18, 2019, 05:06:11 PM
Quote from: Beltway on September 18, 2019, 04:12:29 PM
So the highway has been there for over 60 years.  They have to ask for permission before they can rehab the pavement?
Wait...how long have the Senecas been there... :D
I would have thought that they worked all that out in the 1950s before they built the highway.
As with all foreign nations, treaties and agreements change.

Where else has something like this happened?  There are Indian reservations all over the country.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on September 18, 2019, 05:45:54 PM


Quote from: Beltway on September 18, 2019, 05:42:13 PM
Quote from: Rothman on September 18, 2019, 05:13:12 PM
Quote from: Beltway on September 18, 2019, 05:10:27 PM
Quote from: Rothman on September 18, 2019, 05:06:11 PM
Quote from: Beltway on September 18, 2019, 04:12:29 PM
So the highway has been there for over 60 years.  They have to ask for permission before they can rehab the pavement?
Wait...how long have the Senecas been there... :D
I would have thought that they worked all that out in the 1950s before they built the highway.
As with all foreign nations, treaties and agreements change.

Where else has something like this happened?  There are Indian reservations all over the country.

Everywhere an American Indian nation asserted its sovereignty.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: thenetwork on September 18, 2019, 07:04:09 PM
Quote from: cl94 on September 18, 2019, 03:23:06 PM
Quote from: thenetwork on September 18, 2019, 12:08:18 PM
From my prior travels through that area, even avoiding the stretch altogether -- exiting at US-20 in Irving (Exit 58) and rejoining at Exit 57-A -- isn't a bad idea.  For one thing, you can purchase no-name gasoline tax-free within the Seneca Reservation along US-20, and the road isn't loaded with too many traffic lights.

I have been known to do that. The rez stations that look like modern gas stations generally have decent gas.

Quote from: Rothman on September 17, 2019, 10:46:23 PM
No.  The State absolutely will not do it without an agreement.

State will end up giving in to the Senecas in the end.

This. Similar thing happened with NY 17 through the Allegheny Reservation. NY won't do anything that might provoke the Senecas, because they HAVE been known to increase tensions. At this point, the Thruway through there needs a full reconstruction. It'll be a while before that happens.

Same thing is going on on the last remaining 2x2 segment of I-10 between Phoenix and Tucson.  AzDOT is getting nowhere in convincing the reservation there in widening the road there.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Alps on September 18, 2019, 08:50:34 PM
Quote from: thenetwork on September 18, 2019, 12:08:18 PM
Quote from: webny99 on September 18, 2019, 11:58:40 AM
Quote from: Beltway on September 18, 2019, 09:56:16 AM
Is any new right-of-way needed?  If not, I don't see where they would have any say in the matter.  The Thruway has a very wide right-of-way, enough to handle a 6-lane widening project.

As noted, the issue isn't right-of-way; volumes on that segment are around 27K per day, so a widening isn't even warranted. The issue is the deteriorated pavement quality - almost to the point of being a gravel road - exacerbated by years of winter weather and heavy truck traffic. You can get some idea of what it's like in Street View, but the most recent is from 2016, and it's gotten much worse since then.


From my prior travels through that area, even avoiding the stretch altogether -- exiting at US-20 in Irving (Exit 58) and rejoining at Exit 57-A -- isn't a bad idea.  For one thing, you can purchase no-name gasoline tax-free within the Seneca Reservation along US-20, and the road isn't loaded with too many traffic lights.
I refuse to give one red cent (irony, given who used to be on that cent) to terrorists who hold roads hostage.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: SignBridge on September 18, 2019, 09:00:07 PM
I don't quite get this. If the original easement to build the road is legal (have the courts ruled on this?) then doesn't the State have the legal right to maintain the road that the Senecas allowed them to build in a contract of some sort back in 1954? Isn't the original agreement still legally binding? And wouldn't it have included language that the State was legally responsible for maintenance of the road? I can't believe that such a stipulation would been overlooked.

But then again we're talking about a Thruway Authority that didn't think beyond a fifty-year lifespan (Tappan Zee Br.) Maybe they really never thought about having to repave the road some years later.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Beltway on September 18, 2019, 09:05:02 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on September 18, 2019, 09:00:07 PM
I don't quite get this. If the original easement to build the road is legal (have the courts ruled on this?) then doesn't the State have the legal right to maintain the road that the Senecas allowed them to build in a contract of some sort back in 1954? Isn't the original agreement still legally binding? And wouldn't it have included language that the State was legally responsible for maintenance of the road? I can't believe that such a stipulation would been overlooked.
I can understand the issues of acquiring more right-of-way and obtaining that from an Indian nation, such as the proposed US-219 freeway projects in WNY.

But if they are simply rehabbing pavement and/or adding lanes within the existing right-of-way, like you say the rule of law and the courts should allow and support those actions.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Alps on September 18, 2019, 09:05:20 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on September 18, 2019, 09:00:07 PM
I don't quite get this. If the original easement to build the road is legal (have the courts ruled on this?) then doesn't the State have the legal right to maintain the road that the Senecas allowed them to build in a contract of some sort back in 1954? Isn't the original agreement still legally binding? And wouldn't it have included language that the State was legally responsible for maintenance of the road? I can't believe that such a stipulation would been overlooked.

But then again we're talking about a Thruway Authority that didn't think beyond a fifty-year lifespan (Tappan Zee Br.) Maybe they really never thought about having to repave the road some years later.

You're talking international treaties now, not just legislation.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: SignBridge on September 18, 2019, 09:16:04 PM
Point taken Alps, but who has final authority on this? I assume the Federal Courts, or (no sarcasm intended) would it have to be decided by the United Nations if it's an international treaty?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on September 18, 2019, 10:43:26 PM
Since when does the UN oversee bilateral treaties? :D

Federal courts would hold certain jurisdiction.

It's just the fact of the matter due to the current legal framework that an agreement needs to be had between NYSTA and the Seneca Nation.  That's really the end of it.

You guys who want to send the Army have them again are free to feel that way, but good luck with seeing those horrible political optics come to fruition. :D
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: seicer on September 19, 2019, 07:33:18 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on September 18, 2019, 09:00:07 PM
But then again we're talking about a Thruway Authority that didn't think beyond a fifty-year lifespan (Tappan Zee Br.) Maybe they really never thought about having to repave the road some years later.

Those circumstances were different. Most steel girder highway bridges were designed with a 50 or so year lifespan (from what I recall reading in a trade magazine a while back), and steel bridges like the Tappan Zee were notoriously difficult and costly to maintain and inspect. Additionally, material shortages during the Korean War led to shortcuts in the bridge's materials and it was only designed for a 50-year lifespan with a modest amount of vehicles traveling over it (totally not the case today).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Beltway on September 19, 2019, 07:39:08 AM
What highway agency was looking 50 years into the future in the 1950s with respect to its designs? 
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: SignBridge on September 19, 2019, 08:12:19 PM
New Jersey Turnpike Authority was at least more than other similar agencies. The huge tri-level overpass where the Garden State Pkwy. crosses over the Turnpike was built with substantial room for Turnpike expansion. And their bridges over Newark Bay and the Passaic and Hackensack Rivers, all built around the same time as the Thruway haven't needed replacement from deterioration.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: RobbieL2415 on September 19, 2019, 08:18:36 PM
The sovereignty of Indian tribes is not absolute.  They are still under Federal jurisdiction and all those laws apply.  Most state laws also apply, save for those which conflict with Tribal law.  Generally, the Tribal courts only handle disputes between its members.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: empirestate on September 19, 2019, 09:49:58 PM
Quote from: webny99 on September 18, 2019, 11:58:40 AM
As noted, the issue isn't right-of-way [...]

So what, then, is the issue? What specific law or treaty condition–or even general principle–do the Senecas cite that would prevent NYSTA from carrying out maintenance on the highway? (The article isn't immediately readable to all of us.)
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: SignBridge on September 19, 2019, 09:56:27 PM
Empirestate, that is exactly the question I was trying to ask earlier. But I think you said it better.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on September 19, 2019, 10:20:37 PM
Quote from: empirestate on September 19, 2019, 09:49:58 PM
Quote from: webny99 on September 18, 2019, 11:58:40 AM
As noted, the issue isn't right-of-way [...]

So what, then, is the issue? What specific law or treaty condition–or even general principle–do the Senecas cite that would prevent NYSTA from carrying out maintenance on the highway? (The article isn't immediately readable to all of us.)
https://www.courthousenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/seneca-report.pdf
https://www.courthousenews.com/tribal-challenge-to-thruway-put-on-chopping-block/
The biggest thing they want is a share of tolls - and to make it more fun, a retroactive charge to the day Thruway was built. $1 per car for 3 miles of the road seems steep, though, but I suspect they will get at least something.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on September 20, 2019, 12:12:06 AM
They're gonna get something. But $1/car is more than twice the current toll for that stretch, which I think a judge or arbitrator will note.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: empirestate on September 20, 2019, 11:18:06 AM
Quote from: kalvado on September 19, 2019, 10:20:37 PM
Quote from: empirestate on September 19, 2019, 09:49:58 PM
Quote from: webny99 on September 18, 2019, 11:58:40 AM
As noted, the issue isn't right-of-way [...]

So what, then, is the issue? What specific law or treaty condition–or even general principle–do the Senecas cite that would prevent NYSTA from carrying out maintenance on the highway? (The article isn't immediately readable to all of us.)
https://www.courthousenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/seneca-report.pdf
https://www.courthousenews.com/tribal-challenge-to-thruway-put-on-chopping-block/
The biggest thing they want is a share of tolls - and to make it more fun, a retroactive charge to the day Thruway was built. $1 per car for 3 miles of the road seems steep, though, but I suspect they will get at least something.

That's what they want, but what do they claim the state is doing wrong? Or to put it another way, how does the Seneca nation rebut this assertion (from the second article): "There is no violation to address, and there is nothing to order state officials to do, without first negating one or more of [those] points"? What violation do they claim? What are they ordering state officials to do (or not do)?

The first article mentions trespassing–is that it? Do the Senecas simply assert that when crews arrive to perform maintenance, they are unlawfully entering someone else's property? Or has that been superseded by later decisions?

(I haven't read these documents in full–the answer's probably in there somewhere. But I figured it would be helpful to place the relevant facts into this discussion, since we're already considering the merits of the case, as it were.)
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on September 20, 2019, 01:21:50 PM
Quote from: empirestate on September 20, 2019, 11:18:06 AM
Quote from: kalvado on September 19, 2019, 10:20:37 PM
Quote from: empirestate on September 19, 2019, 09:49:58 PM
Quote from: webny99 on September 18, 2019, 11:58:40 AM
As noted, the issue isn't right-of-way [...]

So what, then, is the issue? What specific law or treaty condition–or even general principle–do the Senecas cite that would prevent NYSTA from carrying out maintenance on the highway? (The article isn't immediately readable to all of us.)
https://www.courthousenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/seneca-report.pdf
https://www.courthousenews.com/tribal-challenge-to-thruway-put-on-chopping-block/
The biggest thing they want is a share of tolls - and to make it more fun, a retroactive charge to the day Thruway was built. $1 per car for 3 miles of the road seems steep, though, but I suspect they will get at least something.

That's what they want, but what do they claim the state is doing wrong? Or to put it another way, how does the Seneca nation rebut this assertion (from the second article): "There is no violation to address, and there is nothing to order state officials to do, without first negating one or more of [those] points"? What violation do they claim? What are they ordering state officials to do (or not do)?

The first article mentions trespassing–is that it? Do the Senecas simply assert that when crews arrive to perform maintenance, they are unlawfully entering someone else's property? Or has that been superseded by later decisions?

(I haven't read these documents in full–the answer's probably in there somewhere. But I figured it would be helpful to place the relevant facts into this discussion, since we're already considering the merits of the case, as it were.)

My understanding: Senecas allowed a road through their land, and got some change for that. Now they claim the contract wasn't executed properly (they may have some point about it, and not all I's are dotted - that's for sure) so want a redo - for more money. Legal position - the original contract is illegal, so the road is built illegally, state personnel is not welcome on that patch of land.  No maintenance, no construction, no nothing - it is their property, no trespassing please. When things would go sour, blocking all uninvited visitors to their land (aka blocking stretch of thruway for drivers) can become an option.


Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on September 20, 2019, 02:46:36 PM
Quote from: kalvado on September 20, 2019, 01:21:50 PM
When things would go sour, blocking all uninvited visitors to their land (aka blocking stretch of thruway for drivers) can become an option.

Which they have done in the past. They're known for setting up roadblocks.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: steviep24 on September 20, 2019, 03:47:58 PM
Quote from: cl94 on September 20, 2019, 02:46:36 PM
Quote from: kalvado on September 20, 2019, 01:21:50 PM
When things would go sour, blocking all uninvited visitors to their land (aka blocking stretch of thruway for drivers) can become an option.

Which they have done in the past. They're known for setting up roadblocks.
Yep. Usually in the form of a giant tire fire.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: SignBridge on September 20, 2019, 08:00:28 PM
Yeah, if they are alleging that the state's maintenance crews would be trespassing, then isn't their position also that the general public is trespassing when using the road? And if that's the case why have they not permanently closed the road at their border?  That would get the State Government's attention real quick!

Of course then they couldn't be claiming entitlement to a share of toll revenues. LOL And I guess they feel they have more to gain in the long run by making their case the legally correct way, thru the courts.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: SignBridge on September 20, 2019, 08:42:04 PM
Coming from Long Island I've never travelled to that part of Western New York State and I have I have no knowledge of the politics or economy of that area.

However I must ask this historical question: Given that the State had to negotiate a payment to the Indian Nation to build the road in the first place, wouldn't it have been easier and smarter to by-pass the Reservation and avoid the whole issue? Or was there a compelling need to build the Thruway strictly along the Lake shore? Were other alignments considered at the time?

Looking at the map the Thruway could have gone straight south from Buffalo to Gowanda and then gradually curved back west and joined the current route southwest of Fredonia. Would that not have been a reasonable alternative route?   
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on September 20, 2019, 09:24:40 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on September 20, 2019, 08:42:04 PM
Looking at the map the Thruway could have gone straight south from Buffalo to Gowanda and then gradually curved back west and joined the current route southwest of Fredonia. Would that not have been a reasonable alternative route?

Not only is it significantly longer, there's only a strip of a couple miles from the lake that has flat terrain. Gowanda area is relatively hilly. The reservation is basically a strip of land that follows Cattaraugus Creek from the lake to the Gowanda village limit. Back in the 1950s, this wasn't a major political issue. Then casinos happened...
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: SignBridge on September 20, 2019, 09:32:21 PM
Okay, so you're saying given that it wasn't a major political issue at the time, it was more practical and more economical to pay the Indian Nation a one-time sum of money, than to detour 15 to 20 miles around the Reservation thru hilly terrain. Is that about right?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on September 20, 2019, 09:40:49 PM
This article has a bit more information about the history of the issue: https://www.newyorkupstate.com/western-ny/2018/04/seneca_nation_sues_new_york_state_over_thruway_being_built_on_native_land.html
https://newsmaven.io/indiancountrytoday/archive/seneca-nation-says-that-thruway-fight-is-only-the-beginning-5wIgYxe2t0-Ra5oIxfcCWQ/

This one is interesting because it details how the fight extended to a bridge inspection.  If the Thruway is like NYSDOT, work would typically be done by in-house maintenance forces and not contracted out, which I guess the Senecas don't like. https://buffalonews.com/2019/09/15/thruway-authority-to-senecas-were-ready-to-fix-the-road/

This PDF has a lot of history regarding the easement, including the federal "termination era" regarding the reservations: https://www.courthousenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/seneca-complaint.pdf
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: okc1 on September 21, 2019, 10:14:32 AM
Is giving the Senecas more land adjacent to the reservation an option, as was done near Salamanca for I-86?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: empirestate on September 23, 2019, 12:29:59 AM
Random thought I had while driving the NJ Turnpike today (we haven't done this yet, have we?): What if we had named the Thruway service areas the way the NJTP does; that is, after a prominent person associated with the nearby area?

For a couple of examples, the Ardsley plaza could be John D. Rockefeller or Washington Irving, the Seneca and Ontario plazas could be Susan B. Anthony and Frederick Douglass, the Chittenango plaza for L. Frank Baum, and so forth. Others?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: WNYroadgeek on September 25, 2019, 12:00:22 PM
We have an agreement!

QuoteThe New York State Thruway Authority today announced an agreement with the Seneca Nation of Indians to begin work to the approximately three-mile stretch of the New York State Thruway (I-90 eastbound and westbound) that runs through the Cattaraugus Territory. Work on this critical infrastructure project between exit 57A (Eden — Angola) and exit 58 (Silver Creek) will begin tomorrow and will be completed in phases to properly rebuild the roadway.

http://www.thruway.ny.gov/news/pressrel/2019/09/2019-09-25-seneca-nation-agreement.html
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: CtrlAltDel on September 25, 2019, 01:03:10 PM
Wow, that is fast:

QuoteWork on this critical infrastructure project [...] will begin tomorrow and will be completed in phases to properly rebuild the roadway.
(emphasis mine)

Still, I wonder what the agreement consists of. There was nothing in the press release about that.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: seicer on September 25, 2019, 02:33:45 PM
It's repairs for this year and what seems to be a partial reconstruction next year, taking the highway down to the concrete roadway, performing full-depth repairs, and installing a new asphalt driving surface.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: SignBridge on September 25, 2019, 06:17:11 PM
Let's hope this flies. The NYSTA must have given some substantial concession to the Seneca Nation to get this agreement done.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on September 26, 2019, 09:01:04 AM
Quote from: seicer on September 25, 2019, 02:33:45 PM
It's repairs for this year and what seems to be a partial reconstruction next year

I understood the partial reconstruction was going to be this year as well, at least if they can get it done before winter:

Quote
The project is expected to be completed within eight to 10 weeks barring any unforeseen conditions or circumstances, and weather permitting. If the weather makes full completion not possible before winter, it will be resumed and completed as soon as the weather allows in the spring.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: hbelkins on September 26, 2019, 12:42:02 PM
So, will they finally build an exit to that Indian tobacco shop?  :bigass:
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on September 26, 2019, 12:59:41 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on September 26, 2019, 12:42:02 PM
So, will they finally build an exit to that Indian tobacco shop?  :bigass:

I'd use it if it were built. Makes it easier to get cheap rez gas!
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on September 26, 2019, 01:02:02 PM
Quote from: cl94 on September 26, 2019, 12:59:41 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on September 26, 2019, 12:42:02 PM
So, will they finally build an exit to that Indian tobacco shop?  :bigass:

I'd use it if it were built. Makes it easier to get cheap rez gas!
They can build a service plaza with tobacco shop, gas station, and Taste NY store - all being just outside of FHWA jurisdiction.   
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: D-Dey65 on September 26, 2019, 01:31:40 PM
So what was it that made the Seneca Nation change their minds, if it wasn't money?



Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Beltway on September 26, 2019, 01:51:24 PM
Quote from: D-Dey65 on September 26, 2019, 01:31:40 PM
So what was it that made the Seneca Nation change their minds, if it wasn't money?

Lack of a direct interchange with the Thruway?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Duke87 on September 26, 2019, 08:40:40 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on September 20, 2019, 08:00:28 PM
Yeah, if they are alleging that the state's maintenance crews would be trespassing, then isn't their position also that the general public is trespassing when using the road? And if that's the case why have they not permanently closed the road at their border?  That would get the State Government's attention real quick!

That's not how trespassing works.

First of all, legally, you are allowed by default to walk (or drive) onto private property unless the owner of said property informs you to the contrary. This is why you see signs that say "Posted - No Trespassing" - the signs establish that you're not allowed to be there and the owner of the property can legally press charges against you (or in many states, but not in New York, shoot you) for disregarding them with no further dialogue required. If there aren't signs, the owner can still verbally tell you "hey, get off of my property", but then so long as you promptly comply with that request you have committed no crime.

The other important thing here is the owner of the property is not obligated to apply the same rules to everyone. They can tell some people "get off, you're not welcome" while allowing other people to roam freely about.

Ergo, it is perfectly consistent with property law for the Senecas to tell the state government they're not allowed to touch the road and call it trespassing if they do, while still permitting everyone else to drive through unimpeded.

Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on September 26, 2019, 09:15:24 PM
So apparently NYSTA has started work on cashless tolling around Albany and Syracuse...

The article I read says that completion systemwide will be around the end of next year.

It's a $355 million project in that area.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: GenExpwy on September 27, 2019, 04:16:53 AM
Quote from: cl94 on September 26, 2019, 12:59:41 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on September 26, 2019, 12:42:02 PM
So, will they finally build an exit to that Indian tobacco shop?  :bigass:

I'd use it if it were built. Makes it easier to get cheap rez gas!

Quite a few years ago, I saw a report on Channel 4 in Buffalo about the area's reservation gas stations. It seems that they didn't allow the county weights-and-measures inspectors to check the accuracy of their pumps (insert sovereignty rhetoric here), so WIVB did its own checking. This proved to be difficult, since the operators tended to chase away anyone with the type of calibrated container that w&m inspectors use.

The findings were that, while many pumps were accurate, there was one station (I don't remember which reservation) where the pumps were way off, and customers weren't getting anything like the bargain they thought. Caveat emptor.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: empirestate on September 27, 2019, 08:59:21 AM
Quote from: kalvado on September 26, 2019, 01:02:02 PM
Quote from: cl94 on September 26, 2019, 12:59:41 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on September 26, 2019, 12:42:02 PM
So, will they finally build an exit to that Indian tobacco shop?  :bigass:

I'd use it if it were built. Makes it easier to get cheap rez gas!
They can build a service plaza with tobacco shop, gas station, and Taste NY store - all being just outside of FHWA jurisdiction.   

And whom should they name it after? :)
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: hbelkins on September 27, 2019, 06:15:03 PM
Quote from: Duke87 on September 26, 2019, 08:40:40 PM
The other important thing here is the owner of the property is not obligated to apply the same rules to everyone. They can tell some people "get off, you're not welcome" while allowing other people to roam freely about.

That isn't entirely true. Try doing it to people with certain pigmentation, religious beliefs, genitalia, or sexual preference, and you have discriminated against a protected class.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Great Lakes Roads on September 28, 2019, 02:04:46 AM
Here is a map of the cashless tolling system and where each gantry will be located once it gets done at the end of 2020.

http://www.thruway.ny.gov/cashless/locations.html

As you can see, some of them will be on the highway (especially going through major cities like Albany and Syracuse) and some of them will be off the local exits between major cities.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Beltway on September 28, 2019, 07:38:05 AM
Quote from: Duke87 on September 26, 2019, 08:40:40 PM
Ergo, it is perfectly consistent with property law for the Senecas to tell the state government they're not allowed to touch the road and call it trespassing if they do, while still permitting everyone else to drive through unimpeded.

The state government owns the road, as in the pavement, bridges and shoulders.  They built it and spent a lot of money doing so.  Even if someone else thinks they own the land underneath, they do not own or control the road.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: empirestate on September 28, 2019, 09:25:58 AM
Quote from: hbelkins on September 27, 2019, 06:15:03 PM
Quote from: Duke87 on September 26, 2019, 08:40:40 PM
The other important thing here is the owner of the property is not obligated to apply the same rules to everyone. They can tell some people "get off, you're not welcome" while allowing other people to roam freely about.

That isn't entirely true. Try doing it to people with certain pigmentation, religious beliefs, genitalia, or sexual preference, and you have discriminated against a protected class.

Not unless you're a place of public accommodation (and in the case of sexual preference, not even then, in some areas). It's perfectly legal to order that gay black Jewish woman to get off your lawn. ;-)
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on September 28, 2019, 10:17:01 AM
Quote from: Beltway on September 28, 2019, 07:38:05 AM
Quote from: Duke87 on September 26, 2019, 08:40:40 PM
Ergo, it is perfectly consistent with property law for the Senecas to tell the state government they're not allowed to touch the road and call it trespassing if they do, while still permitting everyone else to drive through unimpeded.

The state government owns the road, as in the pavement, bridges and shoulders.  They built it and spent a lot of money doing so.  Even if someone else thinks they own the land underneath, they do not own or control the road.
Gee.  If only NY had you up here to explain the law to it.

The idea that an agreement is not legally required is patently absurd given the teams of lawyers on both NY's and the Nation's sides.  I think they know the law better than anyone on this forum.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Duke87 on September 28, 2019, 10:47:18 AM
Quote from: Beltway on September 28, 2019, 07:38:05 AM
Quote from: Duke87 on September 26, 2019, 08:40:40 PM
Ergo, it is perfectly consistent with property law for the Senecas to tell the state government they're not allowed to touch the road and call it trespassing if they do, while still permitting everyone else to drive through unimpeded.

The state government owns the road, as in the pavement, bridges and shoulders.  They built it and spent a lot of money doing so.  Even if someone else thinks they own the land underneath, they do not own or control the road.

But see, that's exactly the issue - the Senecas have been contesting the legal validity of the easement on which the road is built. If the easement is invalid, then the state illegally built the road across Seneca land and has no right to it.


Of course, this has always been political. The Senecas don't so much care about the road on its own. But it's what they make an stink about in order to protest other things the State of New York does that they don't like.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Beltway on September 28, 2019, 11:04:48 AM
Quote from: Rothman on September 28, 2019, 10:17:01 AM
Quote from: Beltway on September 28, 2019, 07:38:05 AM
Quote from: Duke87 on September 26, 2019, 08:40:40 PM
Ergo, it is perfectly consistent with property law for the Senecas to tell the state government they're not allowed to touch the road and call it trespassing if they do, while still permitting everyone else to drive through unimpeded.
The state government owns the road, as in the pavement, bridges and shoulders.  They built it and spent a lot of money doing so.  Even if someone else thinks they own the land underneath, they do not own or control the road.
Gee.  If only NY had you up here to explain the law to it.
The idea that an agreement is not legally required is patently absurd given the teams of lawyers on both NY's and the Nation's sides.  I think they know the law better than anyone on this forum.

So what is the published legal opinion of the NY state attorney general's office on the matter?

Rather than disputing the comments of people posting here, how about finding out exactly what is the rendered law on the matter, and then posting it here?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Alps on September 28, 2019, 11:36:07 AM
Quote from: Beltway on September 28, 2019, 11:04:48 AM
Quote from: Rothman on September 28, 2019, 10:17:01 AM
Quote from: Beltway on September 28, 2019, 07:38:05 AM
Quote from: Duke87 on September 26, 2019, 08:40:40 PM
Ergo, it is perfectly consistent with property law for the Senecas to tell the state government they're not allowed to touch the road and call it trespassing if they do, while still permitting everyone else to drive through unimpeded.
The state government owns the road, as in the pavement, bridges and shoulders.  They built it and spent a lot of money doing so.  Even if someone else thinks they own the land underneath, they do not own or control the road.
Gee.  If only NY had you up here to explain the law to it.
The idea that an agreement is not legally required is patently absurd given the teams of lawyers on both NY's and the Nation's sides.  I think they know the law better than anyone on this forum.

So what is the published legal opinion of the NY state attorney general's office on the matter?

Rather than disputing the comments of people posting here, how about finding out exactly what is the rendered law on the matter, and then posting it here?
Why should he have to do the work? Why don't you do it?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Beltway on September 28, 2019, 12:18:37 PM
Mercy, there -are- official news releases about this...

When Fully Complete Project will Include Full Depth Replacement and Concrete Repairs, Guiderail Replacement, and Additional Safety Enhancements

The New York State Thruway Authority today announced an agreement with the Seneca Nation of Indians to begin work to the approximately three-mile stretch of the New York State Thruway (I-90 eastbound and westbound) that runs through the Cattaraugus Territory.  Work on this critical infrastructure project between exit 57A (Eden — Angola) and exit 58 (Silver Creek) will begin tomorrow and will be completed in phases to properly rebuild the roadway.


http://www.thruway.ny.gov/news/pressrel/2019/09/2019-09-25-seneca-nation-agreement.html

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Allegany Territory (Salamanca, NY) — The Seneca Nation of Indians announced today that it has reached an agreement with the New York State Thruway Authority regarding long-needed repairs on the portion of the New York State Thruway that crosses the Nation's Cattaraugus Territory.

"After multiple requests, the Seneca Nation was finally able to engage the New York State Thruway Authority in direct communication over the last several days regarding the deplorable condition of this stretch of Thruway,"  said President Rickey Armstrong, Sr.  "That direct communication resulted in a cooperative agreement, so that this work can finally begin."


https://sni.org/news-announcements/2019/09/seneca-nation-reaches-agreement-for-thruway-repairs-on-cattaraugus-territory/
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: hbelkins on September 28, 2019, 03:23:54 PM
Dueling press releases, instead of what usually happens in that both government agencies get together and issue a joint press release with contact information for both organizations. Or, frequently, engage a third-party communications consultant to send the release.

And the Seneca release indicates that they had to contact NYSTA about the condition of the road? Hadn't the NYSTA been trying to fix it but ran into objections from the Senecas? Or is this each side trying to spin the news to its own favor?

If the Senecas were stopping the NYSTA from working on the road, but felt it was in such bad shape, and are challenging the agreement that allowed the road to be built in the first place, why didn't they move forward and fix it themselves?

Who maintains other New York state routes that cross the reservation? (Presumably portions of US 20, US 219, I-86/NY 17, and other state routes I wouldn't know). NYSDOT or the Senecas?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cu2010 on September 28, 2019, 04:12:55 PM
Quote from: GenExpwy on September 27, 2019, 04:16:53 AM
Quote from: cl94 on September 26, 2019, 12:59:41 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on September 26, 2019, 12:42:02 PM
So, will they finally build an exit to that Indian tobacco shop?  :bigass:

I'd use it if it were built. Makes it easier to get cheap rez gas!

Quite a few years ago, I saw a report on Channel 4 in Buffalo about the area's reservation gas stations. It seems that they didn't allow the county weights-and-measures inspectors to check the accuracy of their pumps (insert sovereignty rhetoric here), so WIVB did its own checking. This proved to be difficult, since the operators tended to chase away anyone with the type of calibrated container that w&m inspectors use.

The findings were that, while many pumps were accurate, there was one station (I don't remember which reservation) where the pumps were way off, and customers weren't getting anything like the bargain they thought. Caveat emptor.

There's also no standards as to gasoline quality, either.

I avoid rez gas like the plague. I don't care if it's cheap, it's not worth damaging my engine putting watered-down gas in it.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Beltway on September 28, 2019, 04:27:00 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on September 28, 2019, 03:23:54 PM
Dueling press releases, instead of what usually happens in that both government agencies get together and issue a joint press release with contact information for both organizations. Or, frequently, engage a third-party communications consultant to send the release.

I hadn't thought about that when I posted them, but now I see they were both released on the same day, Sept. 25th.

Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: hbelkins on September 28, 2019, 06:43:06 PM
Quote from: Beltway on September 28, 2019, 04:27:00 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on September 28, 2019, 03:23:54 PM
Dueling press releases, instead of what usually happens in that both government agencies get together and issue a joint press release with contact information for both organizations. Or, frequently, engage a third-party communications consultant to send the release.

I hadn't thought about that when I posted them, but now I see they were both released on the same day, Sept. 25th.

Given my job, I tend to notice such things. When KYTC is doing some sort of joint project with one of our neighbors, the agencies work together on the publicity. And for the Louisville bridges project, they hired a communications consultant that did all the PR.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Beltway on September 28, 2019, 08:56:27 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on September 28, 2019, 06:43:06 PM
Quote from: Beltway on September 28, 2019, 04:27:00 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on September 28, 2019, 03:23:54 PM
Dueling press releases, instead of what usually happens in that both government agencies get together and issue a joint press release with contact information for both organizations. Or, frequently, engage a third-party communications consultant to send the release.
I hadn't thought about that when I posted them, but now I see they were both released on the same day, Sept. 25th.
Given my job, I tend to notice such things. When KYTC is doing some sort of joint project with one of our neighbors, the agencies work together on the publicity. And for the Louisville bridges project, they hired a communications consultant that did all the PR.
Yes, I thought about that when you posted that.  I haven't worked in a PIO, but I have noticed as I have tracked various major highway projects over the years how they manage the PR/PI.  Takes a high level of professionalism.

The Woodrow Wilson Bridge Project hired a communications consultant that did all the PR, and that also was a multi-DOT project (MD/VA/DC).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on September 28, 2019, 10:15:00 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on September 28, 2019, 03:23:54 PM
If the Senecas were stopping the NYSTA from working on the road, but felt it was in such bad shape, and are challenging the agreement that allowed the road to be built in the first place, why didn't they move forward and fix it themselves?

Who maintains other New York state routes that cross the reservation? (Presumably portions of US 20, US 219, I-86/NY 17, and other state routes I wouldn't know). NYSDOT or the Senecas?
The whole issue is money.  They don't really want the Thruway gone; what they do want is for the Thruway to give them $1 for every single car to traverse that section of road since it opened.  Not surprisingly, their other major dispute is over whether they still need to give New York state a share of their casino revenue.  They also started a dispute over whether I-86 could be legally designated, since the agreement to build the Southern Tier Expressway says NY 17 and not I-86 (yes, really).  And the Senecas aren't the only nation to have monetary disputes with the state - down in the Hamptons, the Shinnecook nation is claiming that a transfer of land from a couple of years ago was invalid and should be part of their reservation, with the plan being to put billboards along Sunrise Highway.

Regarding the other roads, I know NY 417, I-86, a reference route near I-86 exit 23 (signed as Business US 219), and at least some of US 219 are NYSDOT.  Not sure of US 20 or the rest of US 219 off the top of my head, but probably NYSDOT as well.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: thenetwork on September 28, 2019, 11:05:39 PM
Quote from: cu2010 on September 28, 2019, 04:12:55 PM
Quote from: GenExpwy on September 27, 2019, 04:16:53 AM
Quote from: cl94 on September 26, 2019, 12:59:41 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on September 26, 2019, 12:42:02 PM
So, will they finally build an exit to that Indian tobacco shop?  :bigass:

I'd use it if it were built. Makes it easier to get cheap rez gas!

Quite a few years ago, I saw a report on Channel 4 in Buffalo about the area's reservation gas stations. It seems that they didn't allow the county weights-and-measures inspectors to check the accuracy of their pumps (insert sovereignty rhetoric here), so WIVB did its own checking. This proved to be difficult, since the operators tended to chase away anyone with the type of calibrated container that w&m inspectors use.

The findings were that, while many pumps were accurate, there was one station (I don't remember which reservation) where the pumps were way off, and customers weren't getting anything like the bargain they thought. Caveat emptor.

There's also no standards as to gasoline quality, either.

I avoid rez gas like the plague. I don't care if it's cheap, it's not worth damaging my engine putting watered-down gas in it.

I always try to avoid no-brand gas stations, although I DID stop at one of the Indian stations on US-20 a couple of times due to the price difference between the reservation and the nearby service plaza.  The price difference more than  paid for the tolls from PA to Niagara Falls.   

And I can see why it's hard to verify standards at the reservations ‐- they usually try to pump the gas for you.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Sam on September 28, 2019, 11:08:03 PM
Of course, once the conversion to cashless tolling on the Thruway is complete, the Senecas can build their own gantry and bill the passage fees directly. Won't even affect traffic flow.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: storm2k on September 29, 2019, 11:41:17 AM
Quote from: vdeane on September 28, 2019, 10:15:00 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on September 28, 2019, 03:23:54 PM
If the Senecas were stopping the NYSTA from working on the road, but felt it was in such bad shape, and are challenging the agreement that allowed the road to be built in the first place, why didn't they move forward and fix it themselves?

Who maintains other New York state routes that cross the reservation? (Presumably portions of US 20, US 219, I-86/NY 17, and other state routes I wouldn't know). NYSDOT or the Senecas?
The whole issue is money.  They don't really want the Thruway gone; what they do want is for the Thruway to give them $1 for every single car to traverse that section of road since it opened.  Not surprisingly, their other major dispute is over whether they still need to give New York state a share of their casino revenue.  They also started a dispute over whether I-86 could be legally designated, since the agreement to build the Southern Tier Expressway says NY 17 and not I-86 (yes, really).  And the Senecas aren't the only nation to have monetary disputes with the state - down in the Hamptons, the Shinnecook nation is claiming that a transfer of land from a couple of years ago was invalid and should be part of their reservation, with the plan being to put billboards along Sunrise Highway.

Regarding the other roads, I know NY 417, I-86, a reference route near I-86 exit 23 (signed as Business US 219), and at least some of US 219 are NYSDOT.  Not sure of US 20 or the rest of US 219 off the top of my head, but probably NYSDOT as well.

I remember traveling up 81 some years ago near Onondaga Nation and there were some homemade billboards with some... "strong" local thoughts about them. I don't know if any of 81 traverses their land, but I know that local relations with various tribal lands is fraught at best.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on September 29, 2019, 08:35:45 PM
I-81 does traverse the Onondaga reservation.  Exit 16 is inside it.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on September 30, 2019, 10:57:43 AM
Quote from: Great Lakes Roads on September 28, 2019, 02:04:46 AM
Here is a map of the cashless tolling system and where each gantry will be located once it gets done at the end of 2020.
http://www.thruway.ny.gov/cashless/locations.html
As you can see, some of them will be on the highway (especially going through major cities like Albany and Syracuse) and some of them will be off the local exits between major cities.

Wait a second.

So the interchanges slated for full toll booth removal aren't going to have gantries, and the gantries for those interchanges will instead be located between exits along the Thruway itself?

That seems like kind of a funny system. I would think either all the gantries would at the interchanges (near where the toll booths currently are), or there would be one gantry between every exit. Not a mix of both systems.

One advantage of having the gantries between interchanges is that it leaves the door open to future redesign of the interchanges.
But again, I would think that would be system-wide instead of only at the freeway-freeway interchanges.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on September 30, 2019, 11:01:20 AM
In other news, the Thruway was terrible yesterday afternoon (thanks to the Bills game...)

I remain convinced that Rochester-Buffalo is absolutely the largest migration between cities in the US for a pro sports game. You have to see it to believe it. Volumes must be double or more what they usually are on that Williamsville to LeRoy segment. It is crazy.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Beltway on September 30, 2019, 11:44:29 AM
Quote from: webny99 on September 30, 2019, 11:01:20 AM
I remain convinced that Rochester-Buffalo is absolutely the largest migration between cities in the US for a pro sports game. You have to see it to believe it. Volumes must be double or more what they usually are on that Williamsville to LeRoy segment. It is crazy.

Lots of Bills fans in Canada as well, mainly from around Toronto.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on September 30, 2019, 12:25:29 PM
Quote from: Beltway on September 30, 2019, 11:44:29 AM
Quote from: webny99 on September 30, 2019, 11:01:20 AM
I remain convinced that Rochester-Buffalo is absolutely the largest migration between cities in the US for a pro sports game. You have to see it to believe it. Volumes must be double or more what they usually are on that Williamsville to LeRoy segment. It is crazy.
Lots of Bills fans in Canada as well, mainly from around Toronto.

That's true, but in terms of sheer volume (at least attending the actual games), Rochester wins. The border is a pretty big deterrent from attending in person.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on September 30, 2019, 02:05:59 PM
Actually, per multiple meetings I attended with NITTEC, border travel spikes as well for sporting events on the American side.

(personal opinion expressed)
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on September 30, 2019, 03:04:56 PM
Quote from: Rothman on September 30, 2019, 02:05:59 PM
Actually, per multiple meetings I attended with NITTEC, border travel spikes as well for sporting events on the American side.
(personal opinion expressed)

Right, and that was certainly the case last night - I could tell even from Google Maps traffic data that the border crossings back into Canada were backed up after the game.

I guess what I meant was: even though there may be a greater number of fans in Canada, the border is enough of a deterrent - especially for those that would have to travel 1+ hours plus the border - that the number of actual game attendees from Canada is lower than what you might expect based on fan volumes alone, such that Buffalo-Canada game traffic is less than Buffalo-Rochester game traffic.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Beltway on September 30, 2019, 03:28:42 PM
Quote from: webny99 on September 30, 2019, 12:25:29 PM
Quote from: Beltway on September 30, 2019, 11:44:29 AM
Lots of Bills fans in Canada as well, mainly from around Toronto.
That's true, but in terms of sheer volume (at least attending the actual games), Rochester wins. The border is a pretty big deterrent from attending in person.

Why is that?  I have friends in the Buffalo area, and they have friends in Toronto who regularly visit them.  The ones from Toronto say that crossing the border is no hinderance at all to doing things in the U.S.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on September 30, 2019, 04:06:56 PM
Quote from: Rothman on September 30, 2019, 02:05:59 PM
Actually, per multiple meetings I attended with NITTEC, border travel spikes as well for sporting events on the American side.

Correct. It's not uncommon to see border waits in excess of 2-3 hours in advance of a football or hockey game. When the Leafs are in town, the stands at the F'n Center are mostly Toronto fans. Close to half of Bills season ticket holders are Canadian.

Quote from: webny99 on September 30, 2019, 03:04:56 PM
I guess what I meant was: even though there may be a greater number of fans in Canada, the border is enough of a deterrent - especially for those that would have to travel 1+ hours plus the border - that the number of actual game attendees from Canada is lower than what you might expect based on fan volumes alone, such that Buffalo-Canada game traffic is less than Buffalo-Rochester game traffic.

Eh...I'm not certain I'd say that.

Quote from: Beltway on September 30, 2019, 03:28:42 PM
I have friends in the Buffalo area, and they have friends in Toronto who regularly visit them.  The ones from Toronto say that crossing the border is no hinderance at all to doing things in the U.S.

Yes and no. Depends on several factors and how the CBP guy is feeling. If you have NEXUS, you're probably getting waved through the border. But CBP can also hold you there all day if the guy feels like flexing muscle, traffic be damned. And on a busy weekend, you'll spend more time waiting in the border control line than actually driving. Crossing the border has been consistently getting harder and the crossing numbers certainly are down in recent years.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Beltway on September 30, 2019, 04:13:54 PM
Quote from: cl94 on September 30, 2019, 04:06:56 PM
Quote from: Beltway on September 30, 2019, 03:28:42 PM
I have friends in the Buffalo area, and they have friends in Toronto who regularly visit them.  The ones from Toronto say that crossing the border is no hinderance at all to doing things in the U.S.
Yes and no. Depends on several factors and how the CBP guy is feeling. If you have NEXUS, you're probably getting waved through the border. But CBP can also hold you there all day if the guy feels like flexing muscle, traffic be damned. And on a busy weekend, you'll spend more time waiting in the border control line than actually driving. Crossing the border has been consistently getting harder and the crossing numbers certainly are down in recent years.

How often does that happen?  These people have made hundreds of trips over the last 10 years and they say they have not had a major delay yet, that usually you get waved thru within 5 minutes.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: RestrictOnTheHanger on September 30, 2019, 07:39:09 PM
Quote from: webny99 on September 30, 2019, 10:57:43 AM
Quote from: Great Lakes Roads on September 28, 2019, 02:04:46 AM
Here is a map of the cashless tolling system and where each gantry will be located once it gets done at the end of 2020.
http://www.thruway.ny.gov/cashless/locations.html
As you can see, some of them will be on the highway (especially going through major cities like Albany and Syracuse) and some of them will be off the local exits between major cities.

Wait a second.

So the interchanges slated for full toll booth removal aren't going to have gantries, and the gantries for those interchanges will instead be located between exits along the Thruway itself?

That seems like kind of a funny system. I would think either all the gantries would at the interchanges (near where the toll booths currently are), or there would be one gantry between every exit. Not a mix of both systems.

One advantage of having the gantries between interchanges is that it leaves the door open to future redesign of the interchanges.
But again, I would think that would be system-wide instead of only at the freeway-freeway interchanges.

According to this article that seems to be the case

https://amp.whec.com/articles/local-i-90-cashless-toll-readers-to-be-on-highway-not-exits-5507237.html
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Alps on October 01, 2019, 12:48:06 AM
Quote from: webny99 on September 30, 2019, 11:01:20 AM
In other news, the Thruway was terrible yesterday afternoon (thanks to the Bills game...)

I remain convinced that Rochester-Buffalo is absolutely the largest migration between cities in the US for a pro sports game. You have to see it to believe it. Volumes must be double or more what they usually are on that Williamsville to LeRoy segment. It is crazy.
I'm thinking Milwaukee-Green Bay could rival it.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on October 01, 2019, 02:50:13 PM
Quote from: cl94 on September 30, 2019, 04:06:56 PM
Quote from: webny99 on September 30, 2019, 03:04:56 PM
I guess what I meant was: even though there may be a greater number of fans in Canada, the border is enough of a deterrent - especially for those that would have to travel 1+ hours plus the border - that the number of actual game attendees from Canada is lower than what you might expect based on fan volumes alone, such that Buffalo-Canada game traffic is less than Buffalo-Rochester game traffic.
Eh...I'm not certain I'd say that.

I say that not based on hard data (though I'd be interested to see some if it's available), but based on my own experiences. My travels to/from Canada align with the Bills games usually about 4 or so times per season, and the uptick in traffic on the Thruway always exceeds the uptick on I-190/I-290/at the border, though all of the above are noteworthy.


Quote from: Alps on October 01, 2019, 12:48:06 AM
Quote from: webny99 on September 30, 2019, 11:01:20 AM
I remain convinced that Rochester-Buffalo is absolutely the largest migration between cities in the US for a pro sports game. You have to see it to believe it. Volumes must be double or more what they usually are on that Williamsville to LeRoy segment. It is crazy.
I'm thinking Milwaukee-Green Bay could rival it.

That would be real competition if they were a little closer to each other.. they're almost double the distance of ROC-BUF.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: MNHighwayMan on October 01, 2019, 03:14:27 PM
Quote from: webny99 on October 01, 2019, 02:50:13 PM
Quote from: Alps on October 01, 2019, 12:48:06 AM
Quote from: webny99 on September 30, 2019, 11:01:20 AM
I remain convinced that Rochester-Buffalo is absolutely the largest migration between cities in the US for a pro sports game. You have to see it to believe it. Volumes must be double or more what they usually are on that Williamsville to LeRoy segment. It is crazy.
I'm thinking Milwaukee-Green Bay could rival it.
That would be real competition if they were a little closer to each other.. they're almost double the distance of ROC-BUF.

And maybe Milwaukee fans are twice as good of fans as Rochester fans. I'm gonna need some real data here.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on October 01, 2019, 05:01:20 PM


Quote from: webny99 on October 01, 2019, 02:50:13 PM
Quote from: cl94 on September 30, 2019, 04:06:56 PM
Quote from: webny99 on September 30, 2019, 03:04:56 PM
I guess what I meant was: even though there may be a greater number of fans in Canada, the border is enough of a deterrent - especially for those that would have to travel 1+ hours plus the border - that the number of actual game attendees from Canada is lower than what you might expect based on fan volumes alone, such that Buffalo-Canada game traffic is less than Buffalo-Rochester game traffic.
Eh...I'm not certain I'd say that.

I say that not based on hard data (though I'd be interested to see some if it's available), but based on my own experiences. My travels to/from Canada align with the Bills games usually about 4 or so times per season, and the uptick in traffic on the Thruway always exceeds the uptick on I-190/I-290/at the border, though all of the above are noteworthy.

Based on your experience going in two opposite directions from the sporting events? :D
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on October 01, 2019, 10:15:26 PM
Quote from: Rothman on October 01, 2019, 05:01:20 PM
Quote from: webny99 on October 01, 2019, 02:50:13 PM
I say that not based on hard data (though I'd be interested to see some if it's available), but based on my own experiences. My travels to/from Canada align with the Bills games usually about 4 or so times per season, and the uptick in traffic on the Thruway always exceeds the uptick on I-190/I-290/at the border, though all of the above are noteworthy.
Based on your experience going in two opposite directions from the sporting events? :D

Other side of the road between whichever border crossing and Williamsville. Close enough.  :D
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on October 04, 2019, 08:58:32 PM
Quote from: RestrictOnTheHanger on September 30, 2019, 07:39:09 PM
Quote from: webny99 on September 30, 2019, 10:57:43 AM
Quote from: Great Lakes Roads on September 28, 2019, 02:04:46 AM
Here is a map of the cashless tolling system and where each gantry will be located once it gets done at the end of 2020.
http://www.thruway.ny.gov/cashless/locations.html
As you can see, some of them will be on the highway (especially going through major cities like Albany and Syracuse) and some of them will be off the local exits between major cities.
Wait a second.
So the interchanges slated for full toll booth removal aren't going to have gantries, and the gantries for those interchanges will instead be located between exits along the Thruway itself?
That seems like kind of a funny system. I would think either all the gantries would at the interchanges (near where the toll booths currently are), or there would be one gantry between every exit. Not a mix of both systems.
One advantage of having the gantries between interchanges is that it leaves the door open to future redesign of the interchanges.
But again, I would think that would be system-wide instead of only at the freeway-freeway interchanges.
According to this article that seems to be the case
https://amp.whec.com/articles/local-i-90-cashless-toll-readers-to-be-on-highway-not-exits-5507237.html

This discussion got a bit lost in the shuffle; I wanted to bring it back up, and see if any of the DOT employees, etc. could offer any further insight?

The conclusion previously had been that all gantries would be at the exits rather than on the mainline. Very interested to know when and why that changed!
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: seicer on October 05, 2019, 11:14:41 AM
There isn't any reason to have the toll gantries at interchanges when the ticketing system is eliminated. It's far easier to just charge a flat rate for a section of highway traveled, with the more expensive sections to maintain being charged higher fares.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on October 05, 2019, 11:20:30 AM
Quote from: seicer on October 05, 2019, 11:14:41 AM
There isn't any reason to have the toll gantries at interchanges when the ticketing system is eliminated. It's far easier to just charge a flat rate for a section of highway traveled, with the more expensive sections to maintain being charged higher fares.
Well... I-88 to Albany, just to start the discussion?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Revive 755 on October 05, 2019, 12:06:34 PM
Quote from: seicer on October 05, 2019, 11:14:41 AM
There isn't any reason to have the toll gantries at interchanges when the ticketing system is eliminated. It's far easier to just charge a flat rate for a section of highway traveled, with the more expensive sections to maintain being charged higher fares.

IL 390 around Chicago may be the best example of the system it sounds like the Thruway is going for.  Only one ramp toll, with the rest being mainline gantries.  https://www.bensenville.il.us/803/Route-390-Tolling-Plan (https://www.bensenville.il.us/803/Route-390-Tolling-Plan)
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Jim on October 05, 2019, 12:25:10 PM
Unless I'm missing something, I believe they can do everything they need with either ramp or mainline scanning or a combination of the two.  As long as they have enough of them that they can always tell from which ones you passed through where you got on and where you got off, the correct toll can be computed and charged.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on October 05, 2019, 12:45:27 PM
Quote from: Jim on October 05, 2019, 12:25:10 PM
Unless I'm missing something, I believe they can do everything they need with either ramp or mainline scanning or a combination of the two.  As long as they have enough of them that they can always tell from which ones you passed through where you got on and where you got off, the correct toll can be computed and charged.
Moreover, number of readers doesn't really depend on pattern.
Number of reads, on the other hand, does - and it may easily turn out IT savings are not insignificant.
If it was up to me, I would link the new pattern to the expectations of exit reconfiguration. For example, exit 24 is an eyesore, and I would expect reconfiguration will happen at some point. Gantries on remote approaches make sense. Exit 29, I believe, has no expectations for reconfiguration, so using existing infrastructure makes more sense.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: SignBridge on October 05, 2019, 08:15:36 PM
If I remember right from my last trip to Boston, I think the Masspike (I-90) also abolished their controlled system and just has gantries across the mainline, much like the tolls the Connecticut Turnpike (I-95) used to have years ago.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Alps on October 06, 2019, 12:01:50 AM
Quote from: Jim on October 05, 2019, 12:25:10 PM
Unless I'm missing something, I believe they can do everything they need with either ramp or mainline scanning or a combination of the two.  As long as they have enough of them that they can always tell from which ones you passed through where you got on and where you got off, the correct toll can be computed and charged.
For tolling, yes. But to get the best quality traffic volume and vehicle classification data, they should have gantries between every interchange. There's more that you can use detectors for than just tolling.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: ixnay on October 06, 2019, 08:46:04 AM
Quote from: MNHighwayMan on October 01, 2019, 03:14:27 PM
Quote from: webny99 on October 01, 2019, 02:50:13 PM
Quote from: Alps on October 01, 2019, 12:48:06 AM
Quote from: webny99 on September 30, 2019, 11:01:20 AM
I remain convinced that Rochester-Buffalo is absolutely the largest migration between cities in the US for a pro sports game. You have to see it to believe it. Volumes must be double or more what they usually are on that Williamsville to LeRoy segment. It is crazy.
I'm thinking Milwaukee-Green Bay could rival it.
That would be real competition if they were a little closer to each other.. they're almost double the distance of ROC-BUF.

And maybe Milwaukee fans are twice as good of fans as Rochester fans. I'm gonna need some real data here.

Per Google Maps

Milwaukee city hall to Lambeau - 116 miles via I-43/125 miles via east shore of Lake Winnebago/136 miles via I-41
Main and State Streets in Rochester to New Era Field - 78.4 miles via I-490 and the Thruway

GB to Milwaukee is close enough to twice the distance as Rochester to Orchard Park, it appears.  Of course, each fan's mileage may vary depending on where in the metro they live, side trips, etc.

ixnay
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on October 06, 2019, 08:15:28 PM
Quote from: ixnay on October 06, 2019, 08:46:04 AM
Quote from: MNHighwayMan on October 01, 2019, 03:14:27 PM
Quote from: webny99 on October 01, 2019, 02:50:13 PM
Quote from: Alps on October 01, 2019, 12:48:06 AM
Quote from: webny99 on September 30, 2019, 11:01:20 AM
I remain convinced that Rochester-Buffalo is absolutely the largest migration between cities in the US for a pro sports game. You have to see it to believe it. Volumes must be double or more what they usually are on that Williamsville to LeRoy segment. It is crazy.
I'm thinking Milwaukee-Green Bay could rival it.
That would be real competition if they were a little closer to each other.. they're almost double the distance of ROC-BUF.
And maybe Milwaukee fans are twice as good of fans as Rochester fans. I'm gonna need some real data here.
Per Google Maps
Milwaukee city hall to Lambeau - 116 miles via I-43/125 miles via east shore of Lake Winnebago/136 miles via I-41
Main and State Streets in Rochester to New Era Field - 78.4 miles via I-490 and the Thruway
GB to Milwaukee is close enough to twice the distance as Rochester to Orchard Park, it appears.  Of course, each fan's mileage may vary depending on where in the metro they live, side trips, etc.
ixnay

136 miles is a long distance to travel to a home game, but that's nothing for Bill's fans: They're even filling up the stadiums on their away games! (https://billswire.usatoday.com/2019/10/06/bills-mafia-shows-up-in-tennessee-and-team-takes-notice/amp/)  :D
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: jp the roadgeek on October 06, 2019, 11:02:28 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on October 05, 2019, 08:15:36 PM
If I remember right from my last trip to Boston, I think the Masspike (I-90) also abolished their controlled system and just has gantries across the mainline, much like the tolls the Connecticut Turnpike (I-95) used to have years ago.

True.  Plus there are no gantries between Exits 4-7 and from 10-11, which allows toll free movement in the Springfield and Worcester areas.  If NYTA implements such a system, I could see no gantries between 24 and 25A as an option.  Granted, it would add an extra toll-free option for traffic from the Northway/Free 90 to 890, but MassDOT extended the toll-free area in Springfield to Exit 7 in comparison to when tolls were waived for cars only west of Exit 6.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on October 06, 2019, 11:45:05 PM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on October 06, 2019, 11:02:28 PM
True.  Plus there are no gantries between Exits 4-7 and from 10-11, which allows toll free movement in the Springfield and Worcester areas.  If NYTA implements such a system, I could see no gantries between 24 and 25A as an option.  Granted, it would add an extra toll-free option for traffic from the Northway/Free 90 to 890, but MassDOT extended the toll-free area in Springfield to Exit 7 in comparison to when tolls were waived for cars only west of Exit 6.

I want to say that the current plan is to make 23-25A toll-free.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: roadman on October 07, 2019, 03:18:50 PM
Quote from: Alps on October 06, 2019, 12:01:50 AM
Quote from: Jim on October 05, 2019, 12:25:10 PM
Unless I'm missing something, I believe they can do everything they need with either ramp or mainline scanning or a combination of the two.  As long as they have enough of them that they can always tell from which ones you passed through where you got on and where you got off, the correct toll can be computed and charged.
For tolling, yes. But to get the best quality traffic volume and vehicle classification data, they should have gantries between every interchange. There's more that you can use detectors for than just tolling.

Agreed.  Note that the MassPike system was deliberately set up with only mainline gantries, instead of at on and of ramps, so they could easily create the free sections between certain interchanges in the Worcester and Springfield areas that others have mentioned.  Now you could have put the readers at the interchanges, and set up the billing system to recognize that movements between certain interchanges are billed as $0.00.  However, MassDOT opted for the system that was put in place.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on October 07, 2019, 05:29:59 PM
Quote from: roadman on October 07, 2019, 03:18:50 PM
Quote from: Alps on October 06, 2019, 12:01:50 AM
Quote from: Jim on October 05, 2019, 12:25:10 PM
Unless I'm missing something, I believe they can do everything they need with either ramp or mainline scanning or a combination of the two.  As long as they have enough of them that they can always tell from which ones you passed through where you got on and where you got off, the correct toll can be computed and charged.
For tolling, yes. But to get the best quality traffic volume and vehicle classification data, they should have gantries between every interchange. There's more that you can use detectors for than just tolling.

Agreed.  Note that the MassPike system was deliberately set up with only mainline gantries, instead of at on and of ramps, so they could easily create the free sections between certain interchanges in the Worcester and Springfield areas that others have mentioned.  Now you could have put the readers at the interchanges, and set up the billing system to recognize that movements between certain interchanges are billed as $0.00.  However, MassDOT opted for the system that was put in place.
You can put a gantry before free section and treat it as "exit", splitting the system into multiple "mainlines" with gantries at smaller exits. Or, even better, treat transit from end to end of a free section within certain time as a paid long-haul trip. It all depends on fantasy of planner and target toll totals.


Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on October 07, 2019, 09:35:01 PM
It's kind of cool what happens at Exit 35: the gantries for both adjacent interchanges (I-81 and I-481) are over the mainline. Thus, whichever way you go from Exit 35, you'll pass a gantry, so no gantry is needed at the exit itself. I believe that's the only exit where that happens.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Great Lakes Roads on October 08, 2019, 12:12:57 AM
Quote from: webny99 on October 07, 2019, 09:35:01 PM
It's kind of cool what happens at Exit 35: the gantries for both adjacent interchanges (I-81 and I-481) are over the mainline. Thus, whichever way you go from Exit 35, you'll pass a gantry, so no gantry is needed at the exit itself. I believe that's the only exit where that happens.

No, there will be more interchanges that will have that system. Here we go (from east to west):
Albany/Schenectady area:
- Exit 23
- Exit 24
- Exit 25
- Exit 25A

Syracuse:
-Exit 34A
-Exit 35
-Exit 36
-Exit 39

Rochester:
-Exit 44
-Exit 45
-Exit 46
-Exit 47

Otherwise, the local interchanges will pay electronically at the exit ramp.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on October 08, 2019, 01:03:34 PM
Quote from: Great Lakes Roads on October 08, 2019, 12:12:57 AM
Quote from: webny99 on October 07, 2019, 09:35:01 PM
It's kind of cool what happens at Exit 35: the gantries for both adjacent interchanges (I-81 and I-481) are over the mainline. Thus, whichever way you go from Exit 35, you'll pass a gantry, so no gantry is needed at the exit itself. I believe that's the only exit where that happens.

No, there will be more interchanges that will have that system. Here we go (from east to west):
Albany/Schenectady area:
- Exit 23
- Exit 24
- Exit 25
- Exit 25A

Syracuse:
-Exit 34A
-Exit 35
-Exit 36
-Exit 39

Rochester:
-Exit 44
-Exit 45
-Exit 46
-Exit 47

Otherwise, the local interchanges will pay electronically at the exit ramp.
The other interchanges were specifically set out to have full toll booth removal for free-flowing traffic.  Exit 35 was not; it just happens to be between two that are, hence the gantries on either side.  It's the only interchange where that is the case.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on October 08, 2019, 02:59:39 PM
^ Yes, thank you. The point is that Exit 35 is pretty minor (certainly an outlier on that list) and would have had gantries on the ramps, except for the way it's situated between two freeway-freeway exits.


In other news, "installation underway (http://www.thruway.ny.gov/cashless/locations.html)" for the gantries at both Lackawanna and Williamsville. Interested to see if they are actually up next time I'm out that way. The locations are just east of Smoke Creek and just east of Youngs Road - far enough away from the existing toll barriers that it should be pretty easy to tell. Hopefully they leave enough room for six lanes under the Williamsville gantry!  :)

I wonder what they will do about charging for the mile between the new gantry and the existing barrier. Knowing this state, probably just charge for the whole I-290 to NY 78 stretch, even though only half of it will technically be tolled!
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on October 08, 2019, 09:03:25 PM
Judging by the toll amounts, I'm pretty sure they were already charging for the full distance.  They definitely do for Woodbury/Harriman.

Looks like there's also work in the Syracuse and Albany areas.  Definitely looks like there's stuff to check out on the Thruway.

I've been wondering... do they still plan to move the Tappan Zee gantry back over to Tarrytown, or is it now staying in Nyack?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Alps on October 09, 2019, 12:44:52 AM
Quote from: vdeane on October 08, 2019, 09:03:25 PM
Judging by the toll amounts, I'm pretty sure they were already charging for the full distance.  They definitely do for Woodbury/Harriman.

Looks like there's also work in the Syracuse and Albany areas.  Definitely looks like there's stuff to check out on the Thruway.

I've been wondering... do they still plan to move the Tappan Zee gantry back over to Tarrytown, or is it now staying in Nyack?
It's permanent.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: GenExpwy on October 09, 2019, 02:57:21 AM
Quote from: vdeane on October 08, 2019, 01:03:34 PM
Quote from: Great Lakes Roads on October 08, 2019, 12:12:57 AM
Quote from: webny99 on October 07, 2019, 09:35:01 PM
It's kind of cool what happens at Exit 35: the gantries for both adjacent interchanges (I-81 and I-481) are over the mainline. Thus, whichever way you go from Exit 35, you'll pass a gantry, so no gantry is needed at the exit itself. I believe that's the only exit where that happens.

No, there will be more interchanges that will have that system. Here we go (from east to west):
Albany/Schenectady area:
- Exit 23
- Exit 24
- Exit 25
- Exit 25A

Syracuse:
-Exit 34A
-Exit 35
-Exit 36
-Exit 39

Rochester:
-Exit 44
-Exit 45
-Exit 46
-Exit 47

Otherwise, the local interchanges will pay electronically at the exit ramp.
The other interchanges were specifically set out to have full toll booth removal for free-flowing traffic.  Exit 35 was not; it just happens to be between two that are, hence the gantries on either side.  It's the only interchange where that is the case.

Strange thing about the Syracuse setup:

There's a mainline gantry between exits 36 and 37 (so that 36 can be free-flowing); and between 38 and 39 (so that 39 can be free-flowing). But then you would only need one mainline gantry between 37 and 38 to handle all of Syracuse – yet they are installing two exit gantries, at exits 37 and 38.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on October 09, 2019, 11:21:36 AM
Quote from: GenExpwy on October 09, 2019, 02:57:21 AM
Strange thing about the Syracuse setup:

There's a mainline gantry between exits 36 and 37 (so that 36 can be free-flowing); and between 38 and 39 (so that 39 can be free-flowing). But then you would only need one mainline gantry between 37 and 38 to handle all of Syracuse – yet they are installing two exit gantries, at exits 37 and 38.
You can think about it in a slighlty different way:  those 2 exits have 5 and 6.5k traffic counts, compared to 37k on Thruway.
Currently 2 exits combined have 7 lanes, likely down to single lane per direction - total of  4 lanes with 4 reader sets with free flow. Thruway will also need 4 reader sets on a gantry for 4 lanes. Probably higher grade equipment for faster mainline as well... So it may be plain cheaper to do 2 locations instead of 1 after all
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on October 09, 2019, 01:36:15 PM
Not to mention that, if the AET ramp setups are utilizing the existing toll barriers rather than removing them, they save on gantry costs as well.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on October 09, 2019, 02:16:29 PM
Still, for the sake of consistency, they might as well just add a mainline gantry, and that would also leave the door open for future changes to those interchanges. Or, even better, just don't do either one, thus making it free to travel between 37 and 38 - both local exits anyways.

My biggest thing is, I dislike the switching back and forth between mainline and interchange gantries.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on October 15, 2019, 01:07:32 PM
Quote from: webny99 on October 08, 2019, 02:59:39 PM
In other news, "installation underway (http://www.thruway.ny.gov/cashless/locations.html)" for the gantries at both Lackawanna and Williamsville. Interested to see if they are actually up next time I'm out that way.

UPDATE: There appears to a series of be mini-construction zones in the Syracuse area where the gantries are going to be placed.
No work zone speed limit or anything, just jersey barriers and slightly narrowed shoulders. I don't believe the actual gantries have been placed yet (at least not that I saw, although it was dark!)
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on October 15, 2019, 01:20:24 PM
The one south of Albany that's "installation underway" isn't placed yet either.  Most of the work appeared to be prep in the median.

EDIT: The Syracuse work is even less exciting for the most part, though one looked like it was working on the concrete support for the gantry.  The location for the gantry to replace the Williamsville barrier is the same.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: seicer on October 22, 2019, 04:06:15 PM
Troubled Thruway stretch "˜in far worse condition than we had anticipated' (https://www.ithacajournal.com/story/news/politics/albany/2019/10/21/troubled-thruway-stretch-on-seneca-land-in-far-worse-condition/4052482002/)

"The Thruway stretch had become so dilapidated in recent years that the recommended speed limit is down to 45 mph.

The troubled thoroughfare was highlighted in August by the USA TODAY Network New York, and soon after negotiations between the state and the tribe picked up urgency.

Driscoll said the recent inspection of the road is the first time they have been able to fully inspect the roadway, finding "that the concrete base of the roadway is crumbling and badly cracking in many locations, making it ineffective for our crews to simply pave over it.""
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on October 22, 2019, 05:25:59 PM
Quote from: seicer on October 22, 2019, 04:06:15 PM
Troubled Thruway stretch "˜in far worse condition than we had anticipated' (https://www.ithacajournal.com/story/news/politics/albany/2019/10/21/troubled-thruway-stretch-on-seneca-land-in-far-worse-condition/4052482002/)

"The Thruway stretch had become so dilapidated in recent years that the recommended speed limit is down to 45 mph.

The troubled thoroughfare was highlighted in August by the USA TODAY Network New York, and soon after negotiations between the state and the tribe picked up urgency.

Driscoll said the recent inspection of the road is the first time they have been able to fully inspect the roadway, finding "that the concrete base of the roadway is crumbling and badly cracking in many locations, making it ineffective for our crews to simply pave over it.""

Comments on The Buffalo News's Facebook page seem to think they can just repave it. But yeah, I knew just by looking at it that it would likely need a full reconstruction. The crack pattern is indicative of base failure. If you pave over that, it'll just fall apart after the next winter.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on October 22, 2019, 08:47:00 PM
Ah, to get on that gravy train of politicians and other appointees ending up at the Thruway.  Had to respect Driscoll's approach toward his role as NYSDOT Commissioner.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: hbelkins on October 23, 2019, 11:21:28 AM
Quote from: seicer on October 22, 2019, 04:06:15 PM
Troubled Thruway stretch "˜in far worse condition than we had anticipated' (https://www.ithacajournal.com/story/news/politics/albany/2019/10/21/troubled-thruway-stretch-on-seneca-land-in-far-worse-condition/4052482002/)

"The Thruway stretch had become so dilapidated in recent years that the recommended speed limit is down to 45 mph.

The troubled thoroughfare was highlighted in August by the USA TODAY Network New York, and soon after negotiations between the state and the tribe picked up urgency.

Driscoll said the recent inspection of the road is the first time they have been able to fully inspect the roadway, finding "that the concrete base of the roadway is crumbling and badly cracking in many locations, making it ineffective for our crews to simply pave over it.""

Interesting. Lots of states pave over original concrete by "breaking and seating" or "rubbleizing" the pavement and then laying asphalt on the broken-up concrete.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on October 23, 2019, 12:58:04 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on October 23, 2019, 11:21:28 AM
Interesting. Lots of states pave over original concrete by "breaking and seating" or "rubbleizing" the pavement and then laying asphalt on the broken-up concrete.

NY does this as well in many recent projects (i.e. NY 85). Problem, of course, is that they have at most a couple weeks until there is a major snow threat, so there just isn't time until after the winter.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Alps on October 23, 2019, 12:58:05 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on October 23, 2019, 11:21:28 AM
Quote from: seicer on October 22, 2019, 04:06:15 PM
Troubled Thruway stretch "˜in far worse condition than we had anticipated' (https://www.ithacajournal.com/story/news/politics/albany/2019/10/21/troubled-thruway-stretch-on-seneca-land-in-far-worse-condition/4052482002/)

"The Thruway stretch had become so dilapidated in recent years that the recommended speed limit is down to 45 mph.

The troubled thoroughfare was highlighted in August by the USA TODAY Network New York, and soon after negotiations between the state and the tribe picked up urgency.

Driscoll said the recent inspection of the road is the first time they have been able to fully inspect the roadway, finding "that the concrete base of the roadway is crumbling and badly cracking in many locations, making it ineffective for our crews to simply pave over it.""

Interesting. Lots of states pave over original concrete by "breaking and seating" or "rubbleizing" the pavement and then laying asphalt on the broken-up concrete.
Which in essence turns the concrete into a gravel base course. It has to be chopped up into uniformly small pieces to avoid map cracking on the surface.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: RobbieL2415 on October 24, 2019, 12:13:15 AM
Quote from: hbelkins on October 23, 2019, 11:21:28 AM
Quote from: seicer on October 22, 2019, 04:06:15 PM
Troubled Thruway stretch "˜in far worse condition than we had anticipated' (https://www.ithacajournal.com/story/news/politics/albany/2019/10/21/troubled-thruway-stretch-on-seneca-land-in-far-worse-condition/4052482002/)

"The Thruway stretch had become so dilapidated in recent years that the recommended speed limit is down to 45 mph.

The troubled thoroughfare was highlighted in August by the USA TODAY Network New York, and soon after negotiations between the state and the tribe picked up urgency.

Driscoll said the recent inspection of the road is the first time they have been able to fully inspect the roadway, finding "that the concrete base of the roadway is crumbling and badly cracking in many locations, making it ineffective for our crews to simply pave over it.""

Interesting. Lots of states pave over original concrete by "breaking and seating" or "rubbleizing" the pavement and then laying asphalt on the broken-up concrete.
Never seen that before.  They always mill down to the bituminous concrete and layer the new surface on top of that.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on October 24, 2019, 08:17:28 AM
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on October 24, 2019, 12:13:15 AM
Quote from: hbelkins on October 23, 2019, 11:21:28 AM
Quote from: seicer on October 22, 2019, 04:06:15 PM
Troubled Thruway stretch "˜in far worse condition than we had anticipated' (https://www.ithacajournal.com/story/news/politics/albany/2019/10/21/troubled-thruway-stretch-on-seneca-land-in-far-worse-condition/4052482002/)

"The Thruway stretch had become so dilapidated in recent years that the recommended speed limit is down to 45 mph.

The troubled thoroughfare was highlighted in August by the USA TODAY Network New York, and soon after negotiations between the state and the tribe picked up urgency.

Driscoll said the recent inspection of the road is the first time they have been able to fully inspect the roadway, finding "that the concrete base of the roadway is crumbling and badly cracking in many locations, making it ineffective for our crews to simply pave over it.""

Interesting. Lots of states pave over original concrete by "breaking and seating" or "rubbleizing" the pavement and then laying asphalt on the broken-up concrete.
Never seen that before.  They always mill down to the bituminous concrete and layer the new surface on top of that.
Huh.  Weird you haven't seen it.  "Crack and seat" is quite common up here in NY.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Beltway on October 24, 2019, 08:27:02 AM
Quote from: Rothman on October 24, 2019, 08:17:28 AM
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on October 24, 2019, 12:13:15 AM
Quote from: hbelkins on October 23, 2019, 11:21:28 AM
Interesting. Lots of states pave over original concrete by "breaking and seating" or "rubbleizing" the pavement and then laying asphalt on the broken-up concrete.
Never seen that before.  They always mill down to the bituminous concrete and layer the new surface on top of that.
Huh.  Weird you haven't seen it.  "Crack and seat" is quite common up here in NY.

Becoming more common here in VA.  Used on a couple of the widening projects on I-64.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on October 24, 2019, 10:26:15 AM
Quote from: Rothman on October 24, 2019, 08:17:28 AM
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on October 24, 2019, 12:13:15 AM
Quote from: hbelkins on October 23, 2019, 11:21:28 AM
Quote from: seicer on October 22, 2019, 04:06:15 PM
Troubled Thruway stretch "˜in far worse condition than we had anticipated' (https://www.ithacajournal.com/story/news/politics/albany/2019/10/21/troubled-thruway-stretch-on-seneca-land-in-far-worse-condition/4052482002/)

"The Thruway stretch had become so dilapidated in recent years that the recommended speed limit is down to 45 mph.

The troubled thoroughfare was highlighted in August by the USA TODAY Network New York, and soon after negotiations between the state and the tribe picked up urgency.

Driscoll said the recent inspection of the road is the first time they have been able to fully inspect the roadway, finding "that the concrete base of the roadway is crumbling and badly cracking in many locations, making it ineffective for our crews to simply pave over it.""

Interesting. Lots of states pave over original concrete by "breaking and seating" or "rubbleizing" the pavement and then laying asphalt on the broken-up concrete.
Never seen that before.  They always mill down to the bituminous concrete and layer the new surface on top of that.
Huh.  Weird you haven't seen it.  "Crack and seat" is quite common up here in NY.
I believe I saw it once (on rt. 85) - and even then only because I specially paid attention after someone (possibly you?) explained the technology. 
It is pretty unspectacular if you don't know what is going on...
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: hbelkins on October 24, 2019, 04:38:01 PM
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on October 24, 2019, 12:13:15 AM
Quote from: hbelkins on October 23, 2019, 11:21:28 AM
Quote from: seicer on October 22, 2019, 04:06:15 PM
Troubled Thruway stretch "˜in far worse condition than we had anticipated' (https://www.ithacajournal.com/story/news/politics/albany/2019/10/21/troubled-thruway-stretch-on-seneca-land-in-far-worse-condition/4052482002/)

"The Thruway stretch had become so dilapidated in recent years that the recommended speed limit is down to 45 mph.

The troubled thoroughfare was highlighted in August by the USA TODAY Network New York, and soon after negotiations between the state and the tribe picked up urgency.

Driscoll said the recent inspection of the road is the first time they have been able to fully inspect the roadway, finding "that the concrete base of the roadway is crumbling and badly cracking in many locations, making it ineffective for our crews to simply pave over it.""

Interesting. Lots of states pave over original concrete by "breaking and seating" or "rubbleizing" the pavement and then laying asphalt on the broken-up concrete.
Never seen that before.  They always mill down to the bituminous concrete and layer the new surface on top of that.

I've seen two different pieces of equipment do it. One was called "Thumper" and it actually had a picture of a rabbit on it. It's a big piece of metal the width of the road and looked to be about a foot thick. Hydraulics lift it up and slam it down onto the pavement. It makes a lot of noise and will definitely vibrate a passing car. The other one had a much smaller footprint, kind of like an oversized sanding pad. It seemed to work mostly by vibration and not by brute force the way "Thumper" did.

Both methods were used on different sections of I-64 between Lexington and Midway when the original 1971 concrete was repaved back in the mid-1990s. The section broken up by the "Thumper" seemed to do better than the one broken up by the other machine.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: seicer on October 24, 2019, 04:47:25 PM
Ironically, the portion west of Midway to Frankfort is still on its original concrete, although it's been rehabbed twice. I'm not sure why it's been kept for so long, but it would be a good study of pavement life cycles and costs.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: hbelkins on October 24, 2019, 07:24:05 PM
Quote from: seicer on October 24, 2019, 04:47:25 PM
Ironically, the portion west of Midway to Frankfort is still on its original concrete, although it's been rehabbed twice. I'm not sure why it's been kept for so long, but it would be a good study of pavement life cycles and costs.

That's very possible. Also, its proximity to Frankfort and Lexington (UK Transportation Center) may play a part in that.

There's still some original concrete on I-75 south of London, or there was the last time I was on that road (2017). There's also some on the Pennyrile Parkway between Hopkinsville and the WK Parkway.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Michael on November 07, 2019, 09:22:24 PM
I just saw this article on Syracuse.com:
Construction on cashless toll system for NYS Thruway has started (https://www.syracuse.com/state/2019/11/construction-on-cashless-toll-system-for-nys-thruway-has-started.html)

Here's a picture of a completed gantry from the article:
(https://www.syracuse.com/resizer/yD-mnkWSbsPCyf-rxwWeb7dF8RY=/700x0/smart/arc-anglerfish-arc2-prod-advancelocal.s3.amazonaws.com/public/ZS6ZYUENARB43HQBLQEKFH65FM.jpg)
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: ixnay on November 08, 2019, 08:29:46 AM
Are the tolltakers on the NYST unionized?  IIRC their counterparts on the PATP are.

I'm surprised that in this EZPass/SunPass/IPass era, tolltakers's unions haven't raised a *major* stink because of the endangerment of their jobs.

ixnay
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: PHLBOS on November 08, 2019, 09:55:52 AM
Quote from: ixnay on November 08, 2019, 08:29:46 AMI'm surprised that in this EZPass/SunPass/IPass era, tolltakers's unions haven't raised a *major* stink because of the endangerment of their jobs.
Not to get into a union and/or political spat here; but it should be noted that the initial plans for many tolled facilities were to have the tolls eliminated when the original bonds that built such were paid off.  Sadly, such never happened at most of these facilities (including the NYS Thruway) for a variety of reasons.  I don't intend to into such in this thread.

That said, many of these toll takers' jobs have been borrowed time for quite a while... even decades.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on November 08, 2019, 01:05:59 PM
Quote from: ixnay on November 08, 2019, 08:29:46 AM
Are the tolltakers on the NYST unionized?  IIRC their counterparts on the PATP are.

I'm surprised that in this EZPass/SunPass/IPass era, tolltakers's unions haven't raised a *major* stink because of the endangerment of their jobs.

The full-timers were transferred to other positions a year or two ago. Remaining toll takers in NY are temps hired for the transition period.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: hbelkins on November 09, 2019, 02:23:13 PM
Quote from: ixnay on November 08, 2019, 08:29:46 AM
Are the tolltakers on the NYST unionized?  IIRC their counterparts on the PATP are.

Kentucky's weren't unionized, but they were moved into other state jobs when the tolls went away. One former toll plaza employee on the Cumberland Parkway is now my colleague in the Somerset office. One of the Daniel Boone Parkway employees got her CDL and is now an equipment operator in our Perry County garage. And one, since retired, worked in accounting in our district office.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: KEVIN_224 on November 09, 2019, 07:33:11 PM
Are those toll gantries wide enough for 3 lanes, should they ever widen?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on November 09, 2019, 08:23:45 PM
Quote from: KEVIN_224 on November 09, 2019, 07:33:11 PM
Are those toll gantries wide enough for 3 lanes, should they ever widen?
Judging from image in this article - https://www.syracuse.com/state/2019/11/construction-on-cashless-toll-system-for-nys-thruway-has-started.html - yes.
Then at least in Albany area gantries go onto already 3-laned portion, seems to be the case in other urban areas as well.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on November 09, 2019, 09:09:30 PM
Quote from: KEVIN_224 on November 09, 2019, 07:33:11 PM
Are those toll gantries wide enough for 3 lanes, should they ever widen?
I don't know if any of the ticket system gantries are up yet.  The one in the article is actually at the North Grand Island Bridge.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: 02 Park Ave on November 10, 2019, 09:45:33 PM
Has the metering of traffic from the Garden State Parkway Connector to the southbound thruway begun?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on November 10, 2019, 09:57:23 PM
I noticed that the Thruway is replacing the pavement under what will be the new gantries with concrete.  Not sure why they're doing that, but I imagine that's why they're only replacing the existing toll barriers in some locations - it would certainly increase the cost.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Roadsguy on November 10, 2019, 10:17:06 PM
Quote from: vdeane on November 10, 2019, 09:57:23 PM
I noticed that the Thruway is replacing the pavement under what will be the new gantries with concrete.  Not sure why they're doing that, but I imagine that's why they're only replacing the existing toll barriers in some locations - it would certainly increase the cost.

Does NYSTA typically do full-depth reconstructions with a concrete surface like the widening around Albany? Could be so that when those sections eventually get reconstructed, they don't have to mess with the area around the gantries.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Alps on November 10, 2019, 11:26:52 PM
Quote from: 02 Park Ave on November 10, 2019, 09:45:33 PM
Has the metering of traffic from the Garden State Parkway Connector to the southbound thruway begun?
Can vouch I saw traffic being metered after 8 PM on Wednesday. Could not vouch which ramp.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on November 11, 2019, 02:20:05 PM
Quote from: vdeane on November 10, 2019, 09:57:23 PM
I noticed that the Thruway is replacing the pavement under what will be the new gantries with concrete.  Not sure why they're doing that, but I imagine that's why they're only replacing the existing toll barriers in some locations - it would certainly increase the cost.

Yes, that's what they did on Grand Island, so I was unsurprised to see the same thing on the mainline east of Williamsville.
Maybe it's somehow related to improved readability and/or durability.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on November 11, 2019, 02:43:02 PM
Quote from: webny99 on November 11, 2019, 02:20:05 PM
Quote from: vdeane on November 10, 2019, 09:57:23 PM
I noticed that the Thruway is replacing the pavement under what will be the new gantries with concrete.  Not sure why they're doing that, but I imagine that's why they're only replacing the existing toll barriers in some locations - it would certainly increase the cost.

Yes, that's what they did on Grand Island, so I was unsurprised to see the same thing on the mainline east of Williamsville.
Maybe it's somehow related to improved readability and/or durability.
And another one:
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.3098652,-74.1242151,137m/data=!3m1!1e3
Actually it can easily be due to different RF properties of concrete vs asphalt.
For whatever reason, this one seems to be different: https://www.google.com/maps/@42.2973755,-73.2447227,3a,60y,60.6h,87.7t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sXE3QJo3AW9nTurnKwAYQdg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
But with some loops in the pavement.
I wonder if there is more than one type of reading equipment..
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on November 11, 2019, 03:25:31 PM
I wouldn't be surprised if the concrete is so they won't need to redo the equipment the next time the road gets resurfaced. NYSTA resurfaces relatively frequently.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on December 02, 2019, 10:00:54 PM
The era of non-reflective lettering would appear to be over.  Within the past couple months, the Thruway replaced the EB 1 mile advance sign for exit 25A.  Driving back home from Thanksgiving, I noticed that the lettering was reflective.  This was a one-off sign replacement and not part of any other job, so I'm inclined to think that this is the first sign with reflective letters out of the Thruway's sign shop in a long time.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: SignBridge on December 02, 2019, 10:17:32 PM
Does NYSTA have their own sign shop for the BGS's or do they contract it out? If they're doing it themselves, it might explain why Thruway signs often seem a little different than NYSDOT's signs. 
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: PHLBOS on December 03, 2019, 08:46:25 AM
Quote from: 02 Park Ave on November 10, 2019, 09:45:33 PMHas the metering of traffic from the Garden State Parkway Connector to the southbound thruway begun?
No, at least as of this past Wednesday Nov. 27 between 1-1:30 PM.  That ramp was/is still in the process of being worked on/revamped.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on December 03, 2019, 01:01:23 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on December 02, 2019, 10:17:32 PM
Does NYSTA have their own sign shop for the BGS's or do they contract it out? If they're doing it themselves, it might explain why Thruway signs often seem a little different than NYSDOT's signs.

NYSTA has their own sign shop. Their standards are slightly different.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on December 03, 2019, 01:09:12 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on December 02, 2019, 10:17:32 PM
Does NYSTA have their own sign shop for the BGS's or do they contract it out? If they're doing it themselves, it might explain why Thruway signs often seem a little different than NYSDOT's signs. 
They do most signs themselves, but some do get replaced by contractors as part of other projects (such as this sign (http://nysroads.com/photos.php?route=i90&state=NY&file=101_7484.JPG) that was done as part of a paving contract).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: SignBridge on December 03, 2019, 08:29:32 PM
Thanks cl94 and vdeane. You can tell that one sign for Exit-24 is not a NYSTA built sign because it looks "normal"!
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: RestrictOnTheHanger on December 07, 2019, 09:54:04 PM
Speaking of thruway signs, why are there a bunch of signs that appear washed out at night? They are almost unreadable.

I have seen them south of exit 17 and on the i95 extension north of the Bruckner/I678/I278 interchange. Some have clearview, some are FHWA font, but that doesnt make a difference.

Some examples

I95 at the Hutch
https://maps.app.goo.gl/wZWDuVi9JN68WVmb6

Junction with I287. Interestingly, the new name for the Tappan Zee has been patched over with a FHWA font label that is as reflective as a normal sign, the rest is washed out

https://maps.app.goo.gl/Mn86XpY62bNbAC349



Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on December 07, 2019, 10:38:22 PM
NYSTA ordered non-reflective lettering for their sign shop by mistake many years ago.  Rather than order the correct stuff, they continued to use it for all their new signs until it ran out.  It's only this year that signage with the correct lettering has begun appearing again (with the exception of signs placed by contractors on larger projects).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: RestrictOnTheHanger on December 08, 2019, 08:21:08 AM
Quote from: vdeane on December 07, 2019, 10:38:22 PM
NYSTA ordered non-reflective lettering for their sign shop by mistake many years ago.  Rather than order the correct stuff, they continued to use it for all their new signs until it ran out.  It's only this year that signage with the correct lettering has begun appearing again (with the exception of signs placed by contractors on larger projects).

That would explain it and your post above. Are there any plans to fix any of those signs? Its quite dangerous at night
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: seicer on December 18, 2019, 02:08:27 PM
Video: Does the new Gov. Mario M. Cuomo Bridge alleviate traffic? (https://www.lohud.com/videos/news/2019/12/18/does-new-gov-mario-m-cuomo-bridge-alleviate-traffic/2670903001/)

"So while the new bridge is a smooth ride with four lanes over two spans and offers a majestic view of the Hudson River between Westchester and Rockland counties, it hasn't alleviated traffic in one of the busiest stretches in the metropolitan area."

Long story short: truck traffic counts are spiking because the new Cuomo Bridge offers a far cheaper drive over the Hudson (approximately $31 round-trip) than the George Washington Bridge (approximately $100 round-trip), and the roadways on both sides of the bridge can't handle the traffic.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Beltway on December 18, 2019, 03:13:14 PM
Quote from: seicer on December 18, 2019, 02:08:27 PM
Long story short: truck traffic counts are spiking because the new Cuomo Bridge offers a far cheaper drive over the Hudson (approximately $31 round-trip) than the George Washington Bridge (approximately $100 round-trip), and the roadways on both sides of the bridge can't handle the traffic.
That's good.

Means large truck traffic relief to the GWB and CBX.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: froggie on December 18, 2019, 03:14:34 PM
^ To a limited degree and not much more, if the Tappan Zee approaches are now as congested as reported.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: PHLBOS on December 18, 2019, 05:58:13 PM
Quote from: froggie on December 18, 2019, 03:14:34 PM^ To a limited degree and not much more, if the Tappan Zee approaches are now as congested as reported.
Based on what was shown on the video, the congestion traffic on the approaches appears to be heading away from the bridge rather than towards it.  If such is the case, it could be argued that the issue's more with the Thruway itself in those areas rather than the bridge.

The northbound bottleneck appears to be due to the lane drop (from 4-lanes to 3-lanes) just beyond Exit 11.  Although the video showed only one southbound shot near the I-87/287 split; one has to wonder if the congestion there is due to the Thruway (I-87 portion) is only striped for 2-lanes each-way inside the I-287 interchange (such wasn't always the case) based on the Google Street & Earth Views.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: RobbieL2415 on December 18, 2019, 06:42:15 PM
I agree with the lane drop theory.  I drove over the TZ back in July and experienced congestion before the merge.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on December 18, 2019, 07:41:30 PM
At this point, the main bottleneck re: the bridge is the lane drop in Rockland. They could stripe that bridge thing for 12 lanes (which it has the space for) and you'd still have backups as long as you immediately lose a lane on the west end. Honestly, the only real fix at this point is to widen to 8 lanes at least to Suffern. But good luck getting that done with NYSTA's funding woes.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on December 18, 2019, 08:24:17 PM
Yeah, the Thruway really needs a widening between the lane drop and the Garden State Parkway connector.  Spring Valley is where the AADT drops.  I've encountered congestion several times on that section but haven't on the portion north/west of there (of course, living around Albany rather than NYC, I'm never traveling in the peak direction either).  I would not at all be surprised if that congestion has gotten worse due to a combination of the elimination of the bottleneck at the bridge and the rising disparity in tolls between it and the George Washington.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: SignBridge on December 18, 2019, 08:28:47 PM
Cl94, how can NYSTA (or any major toll authority) have funding woes with all the toll revenue they collect? This is a semi-rhetorical question. I think I may know the answer so please just humor me here with the answers.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on December 18, 2019, 09:04:52 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on December 18, 2019, 08:28:47 PM
Cl94, how can NYSTA (or any major toll authority) have funding woes with all the toll revenue they collect? This is a semi-rhetorical question. I think I may know the answer so please just humor me here with the answers.

Politics. There has been a toll freeze in place for at least 10 years now. NYSTA was in good financial shape until the state government stopped them from raising tolls. It has gotten to the point where they can barely afford necessary maintenance.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on December 18, 2019, 09:07:01 PM
Quote from: vdeane on December 18, 2019, 08:24:17 PM
Yeah, the Thruway really needs a widening between the lane drop and the Garden State Parkway connector.

Second that. I've seen congestion there almost as many times as I've been on it - this includes 6 AM on a weekday and 9 PM on a Sunday night, among other times. The bottleneck eastbound at the Palisades Pkwy is worse than anything in Western NY period (IMO).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: SignBridge on December 18, 2019, 09:12:19 PM
Cl94, thanks. I had not been aware that Thruway tolls have not increased in ten years. That's quite a surprise. Are there any other reasons for their financial problems?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on December 18, 2019, 09:37:50 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on December 18, 2019, 09:12:19 PM
Cl94, thanks. I had not been aware that Thruway tolls have not increased in ten years. That's quite a surprise. Are there any other reasons for their financial problems?
Replacement of old Tappan Zee bridge is another issue.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on December 18, 2019, 09:45:06 PM
Quote from: kalvado on December 18, 2019, 09:37:50 PM
Replacement of old Tappan Zee bridge is another issue.

Yes. In a normal world, Tappan Zee tolls would have gone up significantly to help pay for the new bridge. But thanks to the toll freeze...
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: SignBridge on December 18, 2019, 09:56:41 PM
Hmmm.......I thought the new bridge was paid for largely with Federal funding i.e. Stimulus Funds from the Obama years. Am I mistaken about that?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on December 18, 2019, 10:49:45 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on December 18, 2019, 09:56:41 PM
Hmmm.......I thought the new bridge was paid for largely with Federal funding i.e. Stimulus Funds from the Obama years. Am I mistaken about that?
Yes.  It was a mixture of fund sources.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on December 19, 2019, 08:19:12 AM
Quote from: Rothman on December 18, 2019, 10:49:45 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on December 18, 2019, 09:56:41 PM
Hmmm.......I thought the new bridge was paid for largely with Federal funding i.e. Stimulus Funds from the Obama years. Am I mistaken about that?
Yes.  It was a mixture of fund sources.
NYSTA 2019 budget book shows ~$1.3B spending on the bridge over 3 years, 2017-1019;  $770M borrowing over 3 years and $141,000 (yes, 141 THOUSAND) of federal funds over 3 years, none of those for the bridge.
https://www.thruway.ny.gov/about/financial/budgetbooks/books/2019-budget.pdf page 42
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: PHLBOS on December 19, 2019, 09:19:32 AM
Quote from: cl94 on December 18, 2019, 09:45:06 PM
Quote from: kalvado on December 18, 2019, 09:37:50 PM
Replacement of old Tappan Zee bridge is another issue.

Yes. In a normal world, Tappan Zee tolls would have gone up significantly to help pay for the new bridge. But thanks to the toll freeze...
Isn't the toll freeze for at least the Tappan Zee crossing set to expire sometime next year?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on December 19, 2019, 09:36:58 AM
I really have to wonder if the toll freeze is a detriment.  We are talking about a facility that has 160 million vehicles using it per year to some extent and that number has grown from about 140 million in 2008.  I know not all of them are paying the full distance toll by a long shot, but that's still a whole lot of revenue coming in every year for the number of lane-miles they have in their jurisdiction.

Of course, I'd rather just have NYSDOT be the sole transportation agency for roads and highways, get rid of tolls altogether and replace with federal and state VMT taxes, but here we are.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on December 19, 2019, 09:56:51 AM
Quote from: Rothman on December 19, 2019, 09:36:58 AM
I really have to wonder if the toll freeze is a detriment.  We are talking about a facility that has 160 million vehicles using it per year to some extent and that number has grown from about 140 million in 2008.  I know not all of them are paying the full distance toll by a long shot, but that's still a whole lot of revenue coming in every year for the number of lane-miles they have in their jurisdiction.

Of course, I'd rather just have NYSDOT be the sole transportation agency for roads and highways, get rid of tolls altogether and replace with federal and state VMT taxes, but here we are.
Most of these 160M vehicles pay $4.75 EZpass toll, that is $760M a year. Probably total is much lower, as $800M is  total Thruway annual revenue, but let's go with that number
COst of the bridge is $4B, so in theory, the bridge can be paid off in 5.5 years. That is, assuming no maintenance, no loan interest and no outlay for future maintenance.
I would assume, after all is said and done, 20 years is more feasible timeline. Not great, not terrible..
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on December 19, 2019, 10:07:52 AM
Quote from: kalvado on December 19, 2019, 09:56:51 AM
Quote from: Rothman on December 19, 2019, 09:36:58 AM
I really have to wonder if the toll freeze is a detriment.  We are talking about a facility that has 160 million vehicles using it per year to some extent and that number has grown from about 140 million in 2008.  I know not all of them are paying the full distance toll by a long shot, but that's still a whole lot of revenue coming in every year for the number of lane-miles they have in their jurisdiction.

Of course, I'd rather just have NYSDOT be the sole transportation agency for roads and highways, get rid of tolls altogether and replace with federal and state VMT taxes, but here we are.
Most of these 160M vehicles pay $4.75 EZpass toll, that is $760M a year. Probably total is much lower, as $800M is  total Thruway annual revenue, but let's go with that number
COst of the bridge is $4B, so in theory, the bridge can be paid off in 5.5 years. That is, assuming no maintenance, no loan interest and no outlay for future maintenance.
I would assume, after all is said and done, 20 years is more feasible timeline. Not great, not terrible..
Keep in mind that NYSTA doesn't bear the full brunt of that cost, either.  I want to say that bank settlement money was also applied, for example.

In recent years, NYSDOT has operated on an annual budget that numbers in a few billion or so (essentially $2-3 billion + whatever PIT comes NYSDOT's way), and dwarfs NYSTA in terms of lane miles and bridge deck area, for example.

So, TZB is an understandable huge deal, but crying poverty doesn't sit well with me.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: PHLBOS on December 19, 2019, 10:41:10 AM
IIRC, the toll on for the Tappan Zee (both old & new bridges) has always been lower than those of the southern NYC-Hudson River crossings; so I don't necessarily think that the truck partial-shunpiking to the Tappan Zee to avoid the more expensive NYC crossings is necessarily a new phenomenon.  The only thing that's changed is that the new 8-lane bridge allows the traffic to move more freely in that immediate area than the old bridge allowed.

Even if the toll freeze for the bridge expired/is lifted; the chances are the new higher toll will still be priced lower than the tolls for the other southern crossings. 

OTOH, if the increase is too severe; one might see more longer-distance through-truck traffic using the much cheaper I-84 Newburgh-Beacon Bridge further north... if they're not doing such already.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on December 19, 2019, 10:42:38 AM
Quote from: Rothman on December 19, 2019, 10:07:52 AM
Quote from: kalvado on December 19, 2019, 09:56:51 AM
Quote from: Rothman on December 19, 2019, 09:36:58 AM
I really have to wonder if the toll freeze is a detriment.  We are talking about a facility that has 160 million vehicles using it per year to some extent and that number has grown from about 140 million in 2008.  I know not all of them are paying the full distance toll by a long shot, but that's still a whole lot of revenue coming in every year for the number of lane-miles they have in their jurisdiction.

Of course, I'd rather just have NYSDOT be the sole transportation agency for roads and highways, get rid of tolls altogether and replace with federal and state VMT taxes, but here we are.
Most of these 160M vehicles pay $4.75 EZpass toll, that is $760M a year. Probably total is much lower, as $800M is  total Thruway annual revenue, but let's go with that number
COst of the bridge is $4B, so in theory, the bridge can be paid off in 5.5 years. That is, assuming no maintenance, no loan interest and no outlay for future maintenance.
I would assume, after all is said and done, 20 years is more feasible timeline. Not great, not terrible..
Keep in mind that NYSTA doesn't bear the full brunt of that cost, either.  I want to say that bank settlement money was also applied, for example.

In recent years, NYSDOT has operated on an annual budget that numbers in a few billion or so (essentially $2-3 billion + whatever PIT comes NYSDOT's way), and dwarfs NYSTA in terms of lane miles and bridge deck area, for example.

So, TZB is an understandable huge deal, but crying poverty doesn't sit well with me.

Crying poverty is not, overburdening with loans - probably yes. It was a while since I went through NYSTA spreadsheets, so my memory may be not exact, but yet...
Current NYSTA budget breaks even without Daddy's bridge construction - and there are a few people here who (very understandably) advocate more new construction, e.g. new lanes - as bridge loans have to be paid off using revenue from entire system.
Like you, I don't see extra 1-2 cents a mile (on top of about 2 cents NY paying in taxes right now) as a huge problem and would gladly pay those if that would help to balance the system - but we know our Beloved Leader II would find some better use for those money. Toll roads elsewhere are often raided for cash as well...   
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on December 19, 2019, 10:45:04 AM
Quote from: PHLBOS on December 19, 2019, 10:41:10 AM
IIRC, the toll on for the Tappan Zee (both old & new bridges) has always been lower than those of the southern NYC-Hudson River crossings; so I don't necessarily think that the truck partial-shunpiking to the Tappan Zee to avoid the more expensive NYC crossings is necessarily a new phenomenon.  The only thing that's changed is that the new 8-lane bridge allows the traffic to move more freely in that immediate area than the old bridge allowed.

Even if the toll freeze for the bridge expired/is lifted; the chances are the new higher toll will still be priced lower than the tolls for the other southern crossings. 

OTOH, if the increase is too severe; one might see more longer-distance through-truck traffic using the much cheaper I-84 Newburgh-Beacon Bridge further north... if they're not doing such already.

If I understand things correctly, doubling of Tappan Zee toll would still keep it below NYC bridges
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Beltway on December 19, 2019, 11:38:23 AM
Quote from: Rothman on December 19, 2019, 10:07:52 AM
In recent years, NYSDOT has operated on an annual budget that numbers in a few billion or so (essentially $2-3 billion + whatever PIT comes NYSDOT's way), and dwarfs NYSTA in terms of lane miles and bridge deck area, for example.
NYSDOT only has a budget of $3 billion per year?

In a state with that much population (almost 20 million)?

Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: PHLBOS on December 19, 2019, 12:07:30 PM
On the subject of bridge toll increases.
The new Mario M. Cuomo Bridge toll has been proposed. Here's what it would be. (https://www.lohud.com/story/news/politics/politics-on-the-hudson/2019/12/19/mario-cuomo-bridge-toll-thruway-sets-new-toll-former-tappan-zee/2697430001/?fbclid=IwAR252sqlRgDjkiFwkPOblO36BlsZ1JPxjXFOzvcPiMr6oAAA3bi3WXAEMIE)

Quote from: Lohud.com articleThe toll on the Gov. Mario M. Cuomo Bridge could be set to increase to $5.75 for E-ZPass users by 2022, though residents of Westchester and Rockland County will get a discount maintaining the current $4.75 toll through then.

Those who pay by mail would pay more: An additional 30% plus a $2 surcharge on monthly bills beginning in 2021, which will apply across the entire Thruway system.

The state Thruway Authority's board of directors formally proposed the increase Thursday morning at its meeting in Albany, potentially ending the years-long mystery of how much the toll would rise on the $4 billion bridge crossing the Hudson River.

Once fully approved, the Thruway would begin implementing the increase in 2021, after a toll-hike moratorium expires at the end of 2020.

Among the changes, according to the authority:

-The toll for E-ZPass users, currently $4.75 on the Westchester-bound span, would increase to $5.25 in 2021 and $5.75 in 2022.

-Those who pay tolls by mail would pay 30% more, meaning they will pay about $6.83 in 2021 and $7.38 in 2022.

-They will also pay a $2 surcharge on monthly bills.

-A 40% discount for commuters would remain in place.

-A new resident discount for Westchester and Rockland residents would maintain the current E-ZPass toll of $4.75 through 2022.

-The toll for commercial traffic would also increase, with the most common trucks set to pay about $55 in 2022.

The Thruway Authority board approved the changes Thursday morning. From there, the Thruway will have to hold hearings and accept public comment before putting the increase in place.

"Now is the time to begin consideration of a (toll) adjustment process," said Thruway CFO Matt Howard. "It will allow us to conform with the Thruway Authority's pledge to keep tolls frozen through 2020."
...
Credit-rating agencies had warned that the uncertainty of the toll, which had remained at Tappan Zee levels even after the new bridge opened, could cause problems for the Thruway's bond rating.

In a report last month, Moody's Investor Services suggested that a toll increase will likely be needed by 2022. The report came as the Thruway sold $2.7 billion in bonds, in part to take advantage of low interest rates and pay off a federal loan for the bridge early.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on December 19, 2019, 12:50:35 PM
Quote from: Beltway on December 19, 2019, 11:38:23 AM
Quote from: Rothman on December 19, 2019, 10:07:52 AM
In recent years, NYSDOT has operated on an annual budget that numbers in a few billion or so (essentially $2-3 billion + whatever PIT comes NYSDOT's way), and dwarfs NYSTA in terms of lane miles and bridge deck area, for example.
NYSDOT only has a budget of $3 billion per year?

In a state with that much population (almost 20 million)?
Shocking, isn't it.  We're also a donor state and a lot of people up her grumble we'd be in a better situation if we got our fed dollars back instead of them ending up in other states where the people want smaller government anyway.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on December 19, 2019, 01:15:14 PM
That toll increase is more modest than I would have expected, but the bill by mail changes... yikes.  I wonder if the percentage increase will apply to out of state E-Zpass users as well, since the Thruway started engaging in transponder discrimination a couple years ago.  My parents are going to have to either get an E-ZPass or get hit with a very massive increase in the amount they pay - from $1.60 per year (yes, per year - their Thruway usage usually consists only of four trips/year between Rochester and Canandaigua) to $8.08-10.08 (depending on when the family picnic is held) per year!

Quote from: PHLBOS on December 19, 2019, 10:41:10 AM
IIRC, the toll on for the Tappan Zee (both old & new bridges) has always been lower than those of the southern NYC-Hudson River crossings; so I don't necessarily think that the truck partial-shunpiking to the Tappan Zee to avoid the more expensive NYC crossings is necessarily a new phenomenon.  The only thing that's changed is that the new 8-lane bridge allows the traffic to move more freely in that immediate area than the old bridge allowed.

Even if the toll freeze for the bridge expired/is lifted; the chances are the new higher toll will still be priced lower than the tolls for the other southern crossings. 

OTOH, if the increase is too severe; one might see more longer-distance through-truck traffic using the much cheaper I-84 Newburgh-Beacon Bridge further north... if they're not doing such already.
True, but the difference has been growing.  NYSTA historically hasn't raised tolls all that often, even before the toll freeze (which Cuomo implemented in part because of worried commuters over the Tappan Zee, but also because of upstate drivers unaccustomed to tolls rates changing, well, ever).  I think Thruway tolls have only gone up once or twice in my entire life.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Beltway on December 19, 2019, 01:22:28 PM
Quote from: Rothman on December 19, 2019, 12:50:35 PM
Quote from: Beltway on December 19, 2019, 11:38:23 AM
Quote from: Rothman on December 19, 2019, 10:07:52 AM
In recent years, NYSDOT has operated on an annual budget that numbers in a few billion or so (essentially $2-3 billion + whatever PIT comes NYSDOT's way), and dwarfs NYSTA in terms of lane miles and bridge deck area, for example.
NYSDOT only has a budget of $3 billion per year?
In a state with that much population (almost 20 million)?
Shocking, isn't it.  We're also a donor state and a lot of people up her grumble we'd be in a better situation if we got our fed dollars back instead of them ending up in other states where the people want smaller government anyway.
So you're claiming that they "donate" $5 billion in federal aid funds per year to the other states?

On a population weighted basis that is pretty close to what would have to happen.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on December 19, 2019, 02:10:38 PM
Newburgh-Beacon is already a long-distance alternate for truckers. 81-84 is a very busy truck route, with 84 at a little over 20% trucks between PA and the Thruway. Aren't many freeways in the state with a higher truck %.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: RobbieL2415 on December 19, 2019, 07:36:11 PM
Quote from: cl94 on December 19, 2019, 02:10:38 PM
Newburgh-Beacon is already a long-distance alternate for truckers. 81-84 is a very busy truck route, with 84 at a little over 20% trucks between PA and the Thruway. Aren't many freeways in the state with a higher truck %.
Rip van Winkle?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: hbelkins on December 20, 2019, 02:02:15 PM
Quote from: Beltway on December 19, 2019, 01:22:28 PM
Quote from: Rothman on December 19, 2019, 12:50:35 PM
Quote from: Beltway on December 19, 2019, 11:38:23 AM
Quote from: Rothman on December 19, 2019, 10:07:52 AM
In recent years, NYSDOT has operated on an annual budget that numbers in a few billion or so (essentially $2-3 billion + whatever PIT comes NYSDOT's way), and dwarfs NYSTA in terms of lane miles and bridge deck area, for example.
NYSDOT only has a budget of $3 billion per year?
In a state with that much population (almost 20 million)?
Shocking, isn't it.  We're also a donor state and a lot of people up her grumble we'd be in a better situation if we got our fed dollars back instead of them ending up in other states where the people want smaller government anyway.
So you're claiming that they "donate" $5 billion in federal aid funds per year to the other states?

On a population weighted basis that is pretty close to what would have to happen.

Yeah, I can't imagine that a densely-populated state like New York would contribute more in gas taxes than a more rural state, where people have to drive farther on a daily basis to get to work.

No doubt New York is a donor state for general tax fund revenues, but highway funding?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: MASTERNC on December 20, 2019, 06:25:00 PM
Quote from: vdeane on December 19, 2019, 01:15:14 PM
That toll increase is more modest than I would have expected, but the bill by mail changes... yikes.  I wonder if the percentage increase will apply to out of state E-Zpass users as well, since the Thruway started engaging in transponder discrimination a couple years ago.  My parents are going to have to either get an E-ZPass or get hit with a very massive increase in the amount they pay - from $1.60 per year (yes, per year - their Thruway usage usually consists only of four trips/year between Rochester and Canandaigua) to $8.08-10.08 (depending on when the family picnic is held) per year!

From what I read, tolls for non-NY E-ZPass users will be 15% higher than the NY E-ZPass rate.  It amounts to about a 9% toll increase from current rates (compared to a 24% increase for cash customers).  Looks like the increases for the bridge toll are higher than that.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on December 20, 2019, 11:07:02 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on December 20, 2019, 02:02:15 PM
Quote from: Beltway on December 19, 2019, 01:22:28 PM
Quote from: Rothman on December 19, 2019, 12:50:35 PM
Quote from: Beltway on December 19, 2019, 11:38:23 AM
Quote from: Rothman on December 19, 2019, 10:07:52 AM
In recent years, NYSDOT has operated on an annual budget that numbers in a few billion or so (essentially $2-3 billion + whatever PIT comes NYSDOT's way), and dwarfs NYSTA in terms of lane miles and bridge deck area, for example.
NYSDOT only has a budget of $3 billion per year?
In a state with that much population (almost 20 million)?
Shocking, isn't it.  We're also a donor state and a lot of people up her grumble we'd be in a better situation if we got our fed dollars back instead of them ending up in other states where the people want smaller government anyway.
So you're claiming that they "donate" $5 billion in federal aid funds per year to the other states?

On a population weighted basis that is pretty close to what would have to happen.

Yeah, I can't imagine that a densely-populated state like New York would contribute more in gas taxes than a more rural state, where people have to drive farther on a daily basis to get to work.

No doubt New York is a donor state for general tax fund revenues, but highway funding?
I didn't say anything about $5 billion.  Just that if NY got back what they put in, it'd be better off.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on December 20, 2019, 11:51:52 PM
Quote from: Rothman on December 20, 2019, 11:07:02 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on December 20, 2019, 02:02:15 PM
Quote from: Beltway on December 19, 2019, 01:22:28 PM
Quote from: Rothman on December 19, 2019, 12:50:35 PM
Quote from: Beltway on December 19, 2019, 11:38:23 AM
Quote from: Rothman on December 19, 2019, 10:07:52 AM
In recent years, NYSDOT has operated on an annual budget that numbers in a few billion or so (essentially $2-3 billion + whatever PIT comes NYSDOT's way), and dwarfs NYSTA in terms of lane miles and bridge deck area, for example.
NYSDOT only has a budget of $3 billion per year?
In a state with that much population (almost 20 million)?
Shocking, isn't it.  We're also a donor state and a lot of people up her grumble we'd be in a better situation if we got our fed dollars back instead of them ending up in other states where the people want smaller government anyway.
So you're claiming that they "donate" $5 billion in federal aid funds per year to the other states?

On a population weighted basis that is pretty close to what would have to happen.

Yeah, I can't imagine that a densely-populated state like New York would contribute more in gas taxes than a more rural state, where people have to drive farther on a daily basis to get to work.

No doubt New York is a donor state for general tax fund revenues, but highway funding?
I didn't say anything about $5 billion.  Just that if NY got back what they put in, it'd be better off.
Actually I keep hearing that highway trust fund runs all red, for all states.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on December 21, 2019, 01:08:00 PM
Quote from: kalvado on December 20, 2019, 11:51:52 PM
Quote from: Rothman on December 20, 2019, 11:07:02 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on December 20, 2019, 02:02:15 PM
Quote from: Beltway on December 19, 2019, 01:22:28 PM
Quote from: Rothman on December 19, 2019, 12:50:35 PM
Quote from: Beltway on December 19, 2019, 11:38:23 AM
Quote from: Rothman on December 19, 2019, 10:07:52 AM
In recent years, NYSDOT has operated on an annual budget that numbers in a few billion or so (essentially $2-3 billion + whatever PIT comes NYSDOT's way), and dwarfs NYSTA in terms of lane miles and bridge deck area, for example.
NYSDOT only has a budget of $3 billion per year?
In a state with that much population (almost 20 million)?
Shocking, isn't it.  We're also a donor state and a lot of people up her grumble we'd be in a better situation if we got our fed dollars back instead of them ending up in other states where the people want smaller government anyway.
So you're claiming that they "donate" $5 billion in federal aid funds per year to the other states?

On a population weighted basis that is pretty close to what would have to happen.

Yeah, I can't imagine that a densely-populated state like New York would contribute more in gas taxes than a more rural state, where people have to drive farther on a daily basis to get to work.

No doubt New York is a donor state for general tax fund revenues, but highway funding?
I didn't say anything about $5 billion.  Just that if NY got back what they put in, it'd be better off.
Actually I keep hearing that highway trust fund runs all red, for all states.
Well, make it run less red for NY and more red for a donee state. :D
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Alps on December 21, 2019, 04:01:41 PM
Quote from: Rothman on December 21, 2019, 01:08:00 PM
Quote from: kalvado on December 20, 2019, 11:51:52 PM
Actually I keep hearing that highway trust fund runs all red, for all states.
Well, make it run less red for NY and more red for a donee state. :D
Unfortunately, that's not how our nation works. From each state according to its means, to each state according to its needs. Wait, where have I heard that before?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on December 21, 2019, 04:35:05 PM
Quote from: Alps on December 21, 2019, 04:01:41 PM
Quote from: Rothman on December 21, 2019, 01:08:00 PM
Quote from: kalvado on December 20, 2019, 11:51:52 PM
Actually I keep hearing that highway trust fund runs all red, for all states.
Well, make it run less red for NY and more red for a donee state. :D
Unfortunately, that's not how our nation works. From each state according to its means, to each state according to its needs. Wait, where have I heard that before?
In the tax code?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: KEVIN_224 on December 21, 2019, 06:26:02 PM
Just a fun question as it relates to the Thruway: How is the road work in the Senaca Nation section going? I know it was held up for a long time.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on December 22, 2019, 08:32:59 AM
Quote from: kalvado on December 21, 2019, 04:35:05 PM
Quote from: Alps on December 21, 2019, 04:01:41 PM
Quote from: Rothman on December 21, 2019, 01:08:00 PM
Quote from: kalvado on December 20, 2019, 11:51:52 PM
Actually I keep hearing that highway trust fund runs all red, for all states.
Well, make it run less red for NY and more red for a donee state. :D
Unfortunately, that's not how our nation works. From each state according to its means, to each state according to its needs. Wait, where have I heard that before?
In the tax code?
...and we've come full circle to the original point: Change the tax code. :D
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: machias on December 22, 2019, 10:51:56 AM
Quote from: KEVIN_224 on December 21, 2019, 06:26:02 PM
Just a fun question as it relates to the Thruway: How is the road work in the Senaca Nation section going? I know it was held up for a long time.

When I drove through there a week ago I didn't see any work in progress.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: hbelkins on December 22, 2019, 07:26:32 PM
Quote from: machias on December 22, 2019, 10:51:56 AM
Quote from: KEVIN_224 on December 21, 2019, 06:26:02 PM
Just a fun question as it relates to the Thruway: How is the road work in the Senaca Nation section going? I know it was held up for a long time.

When I drove through there a week ago I didn't see any work in progress.

I'm guessing pavement rehab got put on hiatus for the winter.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on December 22, 2019, 08:52:02 PM
At this point, they're not getting any more work done until April at the earliest. It's prime snow season in that area and the freeze/thaw cycle is a bitch.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on February 17, 2020, 09:29:06 PM
I saw the gantry for exit 21B on my way to/from the NYC area for my roadtrip yesterday.  Contrary to what's been mentioned earlier, it appears the interchange toll locations are using full gantries rather than just re-using the booths.  I also saw evidence of work starting at exits 20 and 22, as well as between exits 23 and 24 (in addition to the work that already had begun south of exit 23).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: chays on February 19, 2020, 03:01:49 PM
I'm doing some research for a project about the NY Thruway's service plaza. I'm looking for some information that can put NY's thruway stops in perspective. Are they run-of-the-mill, compared to other states? Do some toll roads have stops with more amenities (car wash? Showers? Mechanics? Non-fast food choices?). Is there one standout among rest stops? If so, I'd love to know about it.
I'm trying to get a feel for how rest stops are reinventing themselves and if that's a common trend or not and compare how NY stands up to the other states. Any help you can provide is most appreciated!
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on February 19, 2020, 04:12:20 PM
Amenities in NY are pretty typical compared to other states with toll roads, as far as I have seen. A couple of fast food outlets, a coffee shop, convenience store, gas, restrooms (including 1 single-occupant unisex), tourist info, wifi is the typical set of amenities. Many locations have a farmer's market during the growing season.

-Sloatsburg (NB between 15A and 16) is by far the largest single-direction facility and the only one with two public levels. This one also has a parking garage.
-Directly opposite is Ramapo (SB between 16 and 15A), the smallest service area. This is basically a glorified McDonald's and, before the 1990s, required crossing the Thruway via a bridge to Sloatsburg for most services.
-Angola (both directions between 57A and 58) is the only facility in the median. Parking lots and fuel on the outside of the roadways, building in a wide median accessible by enclosed bridges. Angola is about the same size as Sloatsburg, but it serves both directions.
-New Baltimore (both directions between 21B and 21A) has a separate rest area/tourist info center/playground accessible only from NB.
-A closed pair of service areas is on the Berkshire Spur east of the Castleton-on-Hudson Bridge. These closed shortly after I-90 through Albany opened due to a lack of traffic.
-Combined service areas and welcome centers were planned on I-90 WB near Exit B3 and I-90 EB near Exit 61 in the 1990s, but never built. McDonald's would have been a major funding partner.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on February 19, 2020, 04:22:31 PM
Angola is the only service area that stands out to me, mainly because of the pedestrian bridges crossing the Thruway, and the fact that the food and restrooms are in the median.

IMO there's not really any other particular ones that are very unique or outstanding, at least not between the PA line and Albany. Scottsville (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0415174,-77.7160217,3a,25y,200.3h,86.78t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sVxwu93d6bLtnTIWzVy3YBw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!5m1!1e1) has what I assume is a historic building of some sort on-site. I've never gotten closer than the Street View car, only because my own exit (46/I-390) is just 2 more miles down the road, so I've never had a need to stop there.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Sam on February 19, 2020, 06:40:39 PM
Do the Thruway service areas not still have mechanics and repair shops?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Alps on February 19, 2020, 06:52:25 PM
Quote from: webny99 on February 19, 2020, 04:22:31 PM
Angola is the only service area that stands out to me, mainly because of the pedestrian bridges crossing the Thruway, and the fact that the food and restrooms are in the median.

IMO there's not really any other particular ones that are very unique or outstanding, at least not between the PA line and Albany. Scottsville (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0415174,-77.7160217,3a,25y,200.3h,86.78t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sVxwu93d6bLtnTIWzVy3YBw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!5m1!1e1) has what I assume is a historic building of some sort on-site. I've never gotten closer than the Street View car, only because my own exit (46/I-390) is just 2 more miles down the road, so I've never had a need to stop there.
I'll never forget my visit to Angola. It's the only rest area I've found similar to the IL tollway system's.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on February 19, 2020, 06:53:38 PM
Quote from: Sam on February 19, 2020, 06:40:39 PM
Do the Thruway service areas not still have mechanics and repair shops?

I think those were taken out with the 90s renovations.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: MASTERNC on February 19, 2020, 08:00:23 PM
Quote from: chays on February 19, 2020, 03:01:49 PM
I'm doing some research for a project about the NY Thruway's service plaza. I'm looking for some information that can put NY's thruway stops in perspective. Are they run-of-the-mill, compared to other states? Do some toll roads have stops with more amenities (car wash? Showers? Mechanics? Non-fast food choices?). Is there one standout among rest stops? If so, I'd love to know about it.
I'm trying to get a feel for how rest stops are reinventing themselves and if that's a common trend or not and compare how NY stands up to the other states. Any help you can provide is most appreciated!

I think Illinois put car washes in many of their service plazas (oases) during the last renovation.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: SignBridge on February 19, 2020, 09:24:13 PM
It's regrettable that most rest-stops today only have fast-food fare.
When I was growing up in the 1960's all these service areas had sit-down chain restaurants. Howard Johnsons was the most common, but there were other brands as well.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on February 19, 2020, 09:44:22 PM
Nobody has time to sit down and tip.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: roadman65 on February 19, 2020, 09:54:56 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on February 19, 2020, 09:24:13 PM
It's regrettable that most rest-stops today only have fast-food fare.
When I was growing up in the 1960's all these service areas had sit-down chain restaurants. Howard Johnsons was the most common, but there were other brands as well.
Not only rest stops but also Dunkin Donuts (now just Dunkin) had sit down with servers waiting on you before it went walk up and wait at counter and seat yourself.

For a while NJ Turnpike had Marriot when they owned Roy Rogers and Bob's Big Boy had your choice.  For sit down it was Bob's and for eat n run it was Roy's.  Do not know if the NYS Thruway had the two eatery concept of one sit down and other pay and wait like NJ did or not.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on February 20, 2020, 01:15:05 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on February 19, 2020, 09:24:13 PM
It's regrettable that most rest-stops today only have fast-food fare.
When I was growing up in the 1960's all these service areas had sit-down chain restaurants. Howard Johnsons was the most common, but there were other brands as well.
Who wants to spend the time to sit down and wait on service?  When I'm on the road, I want to eat my food, use the bathroom, and top off the gas tank as quickly as possible - not wait for table service.  Besides, sit-down is more awkward if you're traveling on your own and/or don't like making small talk.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: SignBridge on February 20, 2020, 04:38:03 PM
Well, maybe the best answer is to have both types, as roadman65 said in his above post. That would meet everyone's needs.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on February 20, 2020, 05:43:48 PM
There are reasons why table service restaurants have mostly disappeared from service areas around the world and those along rural freeways are mostly limited to truck stop diners and Cracker Barrel/Bob Evans/Denny's/Perkins. All of them are pure economics. Not only do quick serve restaurants cost less to operate, they also get more business, as people willing to pay the higher service area prices are generally in a rush. And the people willing to take a longer meal on the road are truckers or the older demographic, which is served by the establishments I listed above.

Edit: typo
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on February 20, 2020, 05:55:17 PM
Quote from: cl94 on February 20, 2020, 05:43:48 PM
There are reasons why table service restaurants have mostly disappeared from service areas around the world and those along rural freeways are mostly limited to truck stop diners and Cracker Barrel/Bob Evans/Denny's/Perkins. All of them are pure economics. Not only do quick serve restaurants cost more to operate, they also get more business, as people willing to pay the higher service area prices are generally in a rush. And the people willing to take a longer meal on the road are truckers or the older demographic, which is served by the establishments I listed above.
If anything, I wonder if new generation semi-fast food places, like Panera or Chipotle, will  show up in rest areas. There is a lot of room between McD and a proper table service place.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on February 20, 2020, 06:28:57 PM
Ohio has Panera in some service areas.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Beltway on February 20, 2020, 07:04:47 PM
Quote from: cl94 on February 20, 2020, 05:43:48 PM
There are reasons why table service restaurants have mostly disappeared from service areas around the world and those along rural freeways are mostly limited to truck stop diners and Cracker Barrel/Bob Evans/Denny's/Perkins. All of them are pure economics. Not only do quick serve restaurants cost more to operate, they also get more business, as people willing to pay the higher service area prices are generally in a rush. And the people willing to take a longer meal on the road are truckers or the older demographic, which is served by the establishments I listed above.

I have patronized Wendy's for at least 20 years, very good burgers and other fare.  Fast food in the sense of no table waiters.  Not very expensive.  All over the country.  Easy to find on nav system.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: froggie on February 21, 2020, 09:35:25 AM
Quote from: Rothman on February 19, 2020, 09:44:22 PM
Nobody has time to sit down and tip.

Disagree.  My wife is an example of the type of traveler who prefers to do sit down restaurants on trips.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on February 21, 2020, 09:45:01 AM
Quote from: froggie on February 21, 2020, 09:35:25 AM
Quote from: Rothman on February 19, 2020, 09:44:22 PM
Nobody has time to sit down and tip.

Disagree.  My wife is an example of the type of traveler who prefers to do sit down restaurants on trips.
Yeah, my wife used to be that way. :D
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: deathtopumpkins on February 21, 2020, 10:32:44 AM
Quote from: kalvado on February 20, 2020, 05:55:17 PM
If anything, I wonder if new generation semi-fast food places, like Panera or Chipotle, will  show up in rest areas. There is a lot of room between McD and a proper table service place.

Connecticut's newly renovated I-95 service plazas include either a Chipotle (Darien), a Qdoba (Fairfield), or a Moe's (Milford), in addition to the range of fast food options. East of New Haven they're smaller and have just Dunk's, Subway, McDonald's, etc.

New Hampshire's new Hooksett service plazas on I-93 include no national chain restaurants at all, instead including two counter-serve options: The Common Man (NH local chain) and "Hi-Way Diner".
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: froggie on February 21, 2020, 10:37:47 AM
Quote"Hi-Way Diner"

Also part of the Common Man family...as is the 104 Diner in New Hampton, the Airport Diner in Manchester, and the Tilton Diner.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: deathtopumpkins on February 21, 2020, 10:40:04 AM
Interesting. I'm guessing NHDOT just franchised out the whole food operation to the Common Man, and they chose to open two separate "brands" there? Seems like a weird decision and it would have been more efficient to just have one.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on February 21, 2020, 10:54:48 AM
Quote from: froggie on February 21, 2020, 10:37:47 AM
Quote"Hi-Way Diner"

Also part of the Common Man family...as is the 104 Diner in New Hampton, the Airport Diner in Manchester, and the Tilton Diner.
Love those diners.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on February 21, 2020, 12:26:55 PM
Quote from: Rothman on February 21, 2020, 09:45:01 AM
Quote from: froggie on February 21, 2020, 09:35:25 AM
Quote from: Rothman on February 19, 2020, 09:44:22 PM
Nobody has time to sit down and tip.
Disagree.  My wife is an example of the type of traveler who prefers to do sit down restaurants on trips.
Yeah, my wife used to be that way. :D

But, would they want to do so at a service area?

Service areas are mostly designed for quick stops: bathroom, fuel, vending, etc.
The purpose of sit-down is for a higher quality, but slower-paced, experience, and that seems to align more with an off-route type of stop -- maybe even traveling on a US or state route instead of the interstate to begin with!
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on February 21, 2020, 01:27:39 PM
Thinking about it more, I wonder if sit-down restaurants will come back into fashion when electric cars become more common, as they won't be able to quickly refuel for a couple minutes and will instead need an hour to charge most of the way.  Electric vehicle road trips inherently require longer, more frequent stops.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: froggie on February 21, 2020, 01:35:07 PM
Quote from: webny99 on February 21, 2020, 12:26:55 PM
But, would they want to do so at a service area?

Service areas are mostly designed for quick stops: bathroom, fuel, vending, etc.
The purpose of sit-down is for a higher quality, but slower-paced, experience, and that seems to align more with an off-route type of stop -- maybe even traveling on a US or state route instead of the interstate to begin with!

Service areas, despite their higher prices, eliminate the need to significantly navigate off the tollway, as well as reduces the inherent toll penalty incurred in exiting off a tollway then later hopping back on at the same exit.

So for some, the answer would be "yes".
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: empirestate on February 21, 2020, 05:08:49 PM
Quote from: chays on February 19, 2020, 03:01:49 PM
I'm doing some research for a project about the NY Thruway's service plaza. I'm looking for some information that can put NY's thruway stops in perspective. Are they run-of-the-mill, compared to other states? Do some toll roads have stops with more amenities (car wash? Showers? Mechanics? Non-fast food choices?). Is there one standout among rest stops? If so, I'd love to know about it.
I'm trying to get a feel for how rest stops are reinventing themselves and if that's a common trend or not and compare how NY stands up to the other states. Any help you can provide is most appreciated!

I'd also be curious to know if there was ever any intention of architectural significance behind the design of the renovated buildings? There are definitely some regionally relevant styles that could be (are?) invoked, but I'm not sure if that was ever deliberate.

Quote from: webny99 on February 19, 2020, 04:22:31 PM
Angola is the only service area that stands out to me, mainly because of the pedestrian bridges crossing the Thruway, and the fact that the food and restrooms are in the median.

IMO there's not really any other particular ones that are very unique or outstanding, at least not between the PA line and Albany.

Iroquois and Indian Castle were once in that category; located opposite each other, they were formerly connected by a pedestrian bridge like Ramapo/Sloatsburg.

Quote from: vdeane on February 20, 2020, 01:15:05 PM
Who wants to spend the time to sit down and wait on service?  When I'm on the road, I want to eat my food, use the bathroom, and top off the gas tank as quickly as possible - not wait for table service.  Besides, sit-down is more awkward if you're traveling on your own and/or don't like making small talk.

Oh I do, for sure. But I'm more likely to want to do so in an off-Thruway context. (And I've long moved beyond feeling the awkwardness of solo dining. It's just so commonplace in the city, and avoiding small talk couldn't be easier in this age of personal devices.)
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on February 21, 2020, 05:57:14 PM
Quote from: empirestate on February 21, 2020, 05:08:49 PM
I'd also be curious to know if there was ever any intention of architectural significance behind the design of the renovated buildings? There are definitely some regionally relevant styles that could be (are?) invoked, but I'm not sure if that was ever deliberate.

The most notable architectural difference is between the McDonald's buildings and the "everything else" buildings.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on February 21, 2020, 07:08:59 PM
Quote from: froggie on February 21, 2020, 01:35:07 PM
the inherent toll penalty incurred in exiting off a tollway then later hopping back on at the same exit.

In what states is this an issue?
Never heard of it happening anywhere in the Northeast.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on February 21, 2020, 07:12:00 PM
Quote from: webny99 on February 21, 2020, 07:08:59 PM
Quote from: froggie on February 21, 2020, 01:35:07 PM
the inherent toll penalty incurred in exiting off a tollway then later hopping back on at the same exit.

In what states is this an issue?
Never heard of it happening anywhere in the Northeast.

It's more of a thing on barrier toll systems, such as the Garden State Parkway and Illinois Tollway, that have ramp tolls. NY and MA have no penalty, can't remember the other ticket systems.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: RobbieL2415 on February 21, 2020, 07:41:47 PM
Quote from: cl94 on February 19, 2020, 04:12:20 PM
Amenities in NY are pretty typical compared to other states with toll roads, as far as I have seen. A couple of fast food outlets, a coffee shop, convenience store, gas, restrooms (including 1 single-occupant unisex), tourist info, wifi is the typical set of amenities. Many locations have a farmer's market during the growing season.

-Sloatsburg (NB between 15A and 16) is by far the largest single-direction facility and the only one with two public levels. This one also has a parking garage.
-Directly opposite is Ramapo (SB between 16 and 15A), the smallest service area. This is basically a glorified McDonald's and, before the 1990s, required crossing the Thruway via a bridge to Sloatsburg for most services.
-Angola (both directions between 57A and 58) is the only facility in the median. Parking lots and fuel on the outside of the roadways, building in a wide median accessible by enclosed bridges. Angola is about the same size as Sloatsburg, but it serves both directions.
-New Baltimore (both directions between 21B and 21A) has a separate rest area/tourist info center/playground accessible only from NB.
-A closed pair of service areas is on the Berkshire Spur east of the Castleton-on-Hudson Bridge. These closed shortly after I-90 through Albany opened due to a lack of traffic.
-Combined service areas and welcome centers were planned on I-90 WB near Exit B3 and I-90 EB near Exit 61 in the 1990s, but never built. McDonald's would have been a major funding partner.
It would appear as though the closed SPs on the Berkshire Extension are now a catering business and a maintenance yard.

There's the truck stop off the Austerlitz/New Lebanon exit, so perhaps it didn't make sense for them to build a SP.  But then again, no services from Lee to Pattersonville.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on February 21, 2020, 08:16:10 PM
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on February 21, 2020, 07:41:47 PM
There's the truck stop off the Austerlitz/New Lebanon exit, so perhaps it didn't make sense for them to build a SP.  But then again, no services from Lee to Pattersonville.

2 truck stops. The Ambest has been there for a while, Love's opened in 2016 or early 2017. Also a Pilot at B1. All 3 of those get a crapton of business, as they're some of the very few real truck facilities on 90 east of the Hudson River.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: froggie on February 22, 2020, 08:57:15 AM
Quote from: cl94 on February 21, 2020, 07:12:00 PM
Quote from: webny99 on February 21, 2020, 07:08:59 PM
Quote from: froggie on February 21, 2020, 01:35:07 PM
the inherent toll penalty incurred in exiting off a tollway then later hopping back on at the same exit.

In what states is this an issue?
Never heard of it happening anywhere in the Northeast.

It's more of a thing on barrier toll systems, such as the Garden State Parkway and Illinois Tollway, that have ramp tolls. NY and MA have no penalty, can't remember the other ticket systems.

Ticket systems have/had it as well.  I distinctly remember it along the Ohio Turnpike.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: MASTERNC on February 22, 2020, 08:35:12 PM
Quote from: froggie on February 22, 2020, 08:57:15 AM
Quote from: cl94 on February 21, 2020, 07:12:00 PM
Quote from: webny99 on February 21, 2020, 07:08:59 PM
Quote from: froggie on February 21, 2020, 01:35:07 PM
the inherent toll penalty incurred in exiting off a tollway then later hopping back on at the same exit.

In what states is this an issue?
Never heard of it happening anywhere in the Northeast.

It's more of a thing on barrier toll systems, such as the Garden State Parkway and Illinois Tollway, that have ramp tolls. NY and MA have no penalty, can't remember the other ticket systems.

Ticket systems have/had it as well.  I distinctly remember it along the Ohio Turnpike.


PA Turnpike definitely has it.  Don't think they did before the first major increase in 2005.  At that point, they rounded tolls to the next quarter, hence the penalty being created.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: RobbieL2415 on February 25, 2020, 11:07:22 AM
Quote from: cl94 on February 21, 2020, 07:12:00 PM
Quote from: webny99 on February 21, 2020, 07:08:59 PM
Quote from: froggie on February 21, 2020, 01:35:07 PM
the inherent toll penalty incurred in exiting off a tollway then later hopping back on at the same exit.

In what states is this an issue?
Never heard of it happening anywhere in the Northeast.

It's more of a thing on barrier toll systems, such as the Garden State Parkway and Illinois Tollway, that have ramp tolls. NY and MA have no penalty, can't remember the other ticket systems.
I am almost certain you would get ticketed for something like "illegal exit from limited access highway" in MA or NY.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: roadman on February 25, 2020, 11:41:59 AM
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on February 25, 2020, 11:07:22 AM
Quote from: cl94 on February 21, 2020, 07:12:00 PM
Quote from: webny99 on February 21, 2020, 07:08:59 PM
Quote from: froggie on February 21, 2020, 01:35:07 PM
the inherent toll penalty incurred in exiting off a tollway then later hopping back on at the same exit.

In what states is this an issue?
Never heard of it happening anywhere in the Northeast.

It's more of a thing on barrier toll systems, such as the Garden State Parkway and Illinois Tollway, that have ramp tolls. NY and MA have no penalty, can't remember the other ticket systems.
I am almost certain you would get ticketed for something like "illegal exit from limited access highway" in MA or NY.

I believe that froggie is referring to the fact that, on some toll highways, it's more expensive if you exit the highway and then re-enter at the same interchange than if you don't exit the highway at all.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on February 25, 2020, 12:55:29 PM
Exactly.  Take the Thruway E-ZPass tolls:
Exit 24 direct to exit 45: $9.07
Exit 24 to exit 31: $3.80
Exit 31 to exit 45: $5.32
Exit 24 to exit 45 with a stop off exit 31: $9.12

It's subtle, but there.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: froggie on February 25, 2020, 02:20:52 PM
Quote from: roadman on February 25, 2020, 11:41:59 AM
I believe that froggie is referring to the fact that, on some toll highways, it's more expensive if you exit the highway and then re-enter at the same interchange than if you don't exit the highway at all.

Yes, that is exactly what I'm referring to.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: SidS1045 on February 27, 2020, 04:55:29 PM
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on February 25, 2020, 11:07:22 AMI am almost certain you would get ticketed for something like "illegal exit from limited access highway" in MA or NY.

Not in MA, unless a cop catches you at it.  "No-fix" tickets (an officer observes the violation and mails the ticket to the violator) are illegal here.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: roadman on February 27, 2020, 05:11:58 PM
Quote from: SidS1045 on February 27, 2020, 04:55:29 PM
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on February 25, 2020, 11:07:22 AMI am almost certain you would get ticketed for something like "illegal exit from limited access highway" in MA or NY.

Not in MA, unless a cop catches you at it.  "No-fix" tickets (an officer observes the violation and mails the ticket to the violator) are illegal here.

That's not entirely correct.  In certain circumstances, police in MA can issue a citation without actually stopping the vehicle.  From MGL Chapter 90C, Section 2:

QuoteA failure to give a copy of the citation to the violator at the time and place of the violation shall constitute a defense in any court proceeding for such violation, except where the violator could not have been stopped or where additional time was reasonably necessary to determine the nature of the violation or the identity of the violator, or where the court finds that a circumstance, not inconsistent with the purpose of this section to create a uniform, simplified and non-criminal method for disposing of automobile law violations, justifies the failure(emphasis added).   In such case the violation shall be recorded upon a citation as soon as possible after such violation and the citation shall be delivered to the violator or mailed to him at his residential or mail address or to the address appearing on his license or registration as appearing in registry of motor vehicles records.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: SidS1045 on February 28, 2020, 02:57:23 PM
Quote from: roadman on February 27, 2020, 05:11:58 PM
Quote from: SidS1045 on February 27, 2020, 04:55:29 PM
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on February 25, 2020, 11:07:22 AMI am almost certain you would get ticketed for something like "illegal exit from limited access highway" in MA or NY.

Not in MA, unless a cop catches you at it.  "No-fix" tickets (an officer observes the violation and mails the ticket to the violator) are illegal here.

That's not entirely correct.  In certain circumstances, police in MA can issue a citation without actually stopping the vehicle.  From MGL Chapter 90C, Section 2:

QuoteA failure to give a copy of the citation to the violator at the time and place of the violation shall constitute a defense in any court proceeding for such violation, except where the violator could not have been stopped or where additional time was reasonably necessary to determine the nature of the violation or the identity of the violator, or where the court finds that a circumstance, not inconsistent with the purpose of this section to create a uniform, simplified and non-criminal method for disposing of automobile law violations, justifies the failure(emphasis added).   In such case the violation shall be recorded upon a citation as soon as possible after such violation and the citation shall be delivered to the violator or mailed to him at his residential or mail address or to the address appearing on his license or registration as appearing in registry of motor vehicles records.

I'd like to see some judicial history on that.  The city of Boston tried issuing no-fix tickets some 30 or 40 years ago, and none of them were upheld in court.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: roadman on February 28, 2020, 03:11:58 PM
Quote from: SidS1045 on February 28, 2020, 02:57:23 PM
Quote from: roadman on February 27, 2020, 05:11:58 PM
Quote from: SidS1045 on February 27, 2020, 04:55:29 PM
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on February 25, 2020, 11:07:22 AMI am almost certain you would get ticketed for something like "illegal exit from limited access highway" in MA or NY.

Not in MA, unless a cop catches you at it.  "No-fix" tickets (an officer observes the violation and mails the ticket to the violator) are illegal here.

That's not entirely correct.  In certain circumstances, police in MA can issue a citation without actually stopping the vehicle.  From MGL Chapter 90C, Section 2:

QuoteA failure to give a copy of the citation to the violator at the time and place of the violation shall constitute a defense in any court proceeding for such violation, except where the violator could not have been stopped or where additional time was reasonably necessary to determine the nature of the violation or the identity of the violator, or where the court finds that a circumstance, not inconsistent with the purpose of this section to create a uniform, simplified and non-criminal method for disposing of automobile law violations, justifies the failure(emphasis added).   In such case the violation shall be recorded upon a citation as soon as possible after such violation and the citation shall be delivered to the violator or mailed to him at his residential or mail address or to the address appearing on his license or registration as appearing in registry of motor vehicles records.

I'd like to see some judicial history on that.  The city of Boston tried issuing no-fix tickets some 30 or 40 years ago, and none of them were upheld in court.

I remember that.  As I recall, the Boston tickets were thrown out not on the basis of "no fix" tickets being illegal, but because the judge determined that it was clearly possible for the violators to have been stopped by the officers.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: 02 Park Ave on March 09, 2020, 10:43:20 AM
Has any information ever been issued as to how the Harriman toll plaza will be reconfigured once the Thruway goes cashless?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on March 09, 2020, 01:02:32 PM
Harriman is already cashless.  There are no plans to change it when the rest of the system converts.  See the (slightly outdated; some of these really should be showing as completed) map (http://www.thruway.ny.gov/cashless/locations.html).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: 02 Park Ave on March 09, 2020, 02:02:13 PM
I referred to the wrong toll plaza in my question.  I wanted to refer to the Woodbury toll plaza, particularly how the northbound lanes would be reconfigured.  Will they just keep the two current E-Z pass lanes for through traffic or widen them?  The Thruway is only two lanes wide from a bit north of that toll plaza.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on March 09, 2020, 08:26:10 PM
I would think they would keep it as it is now, especially as that would be an easy software change and it's only two lanes north of there.  As for what becomes of the right lane, either it becomes an exit only lane for exit 16, or ends shortly thereafter (similar to EB at exit 25 and around exits 23/24; the Thruway seems to like to avoid exit only lanes where possible).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on March 10, 2020, 02:19:50 PM
Quote from: vdeane on March 09, 2020, 08:26:10 PM
the Thruway seems to like to avoid exit only lanes where possible

Except for the annoying situation at Exit 45, where I'm actually OK with the exit only lane, but very much wish they would turn the rightmost through lane into an option lane, rather than having everybody think they need to cram into a single lane 3/4 of a mile early.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: AcE_Wolf_287 on March 17, 2020, 01:40:01 PM
does anyone know when theyre converting the toll booths to the electronic gantry later on this year? ive heard by may but i dont know if thats true
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on March 17, 2020, 02:08:03 PM
I don't know of any dates, but the gantry installation is already a work in progress at many locations.
There's a (somewhat outdated) map of the progress at each location here (http://www.thruway.ny.gov/cashless/locations.html).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: hbelkins on March 18, 2020, 02:14:46 PM
Re: Hopping on and hopping off. Why would it be illegal to get off at an exit and get back on? It happens on free routes all the time. You want to eat at a restaurant that's not in one of the service plazas. You prefer a certain brand of gas that's not available in the service plaza. You want to run in Walmart to grab a bunch of grapes to snack on.

Re: Electric cars and time to charge. This is why I say that electric cars will never become mainstream until the technology evolves to a point where they can be refueled as quickly as a traditional petroleum-powered car. Who wants to sit and wait an hour to get a full tank, when you can get that in five minutes or so if you're driving a gas or diesel vehicle?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: thenetwork on March 19, 2020, 11:09:23 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on March 18, 2020, 02:14:46 PM
Re: Hopping on and hopping off. Why would it be illegal to get off at an exit and get back on? It happens on free routes all the time. You want to eat at a restaurant that's not in one of the service plazas. You prefer a certain brand of gas that's not available in the service plaza. You want to run in Walmart to grab a bunch of grapes to snack on.

Re: Electric cars and time to charge. This is why I say that electric cars will never become mainstream until the technology evolves to a point where they can be refueled as quickly as a traditional petroleum-powered car. Who wants to sit and wait an hour to get a full tank, when you can get that in five minutes or so if you're driving a gas or diesel vehicle?

There is no illegality in leaving a Toll Road and getting backnon at the same exit in how you described it -- Unless you U-Turn before the toll plaza/toll gantry AND then head back in the OTHER Direction.

What is being said above is that on some Toll Roads, There may be a minimum toll amount for going just one exit, and the toll amount doesn't increase until a minimum amount of mileage exceeds the minimum toll amount.

For Example, if the Ohio Turnpike charged a minimum of 75 cents for traveling between any two consecutive exits:

If Car A got on at Exit 100 and got off at Exit 110 -- a 10 mile distance, they would pay the 75 cent minimum.  Then if they got back on and went to Exit 115, that would be another 75 cent minimum toll or $1.50 total.

But if Car B entered the turnpike at Exit 100 and stayed on the turnpike all the way to Exit 115, they may only have to pay 90 cents total, since they were not dinged for TWO minimum tolls.

Now if both cars rode the turnpike all the way to Exit 220, they may pay the same toll because the cents-per-mile toll costs evened out.

It's like buying soda pop at the grocery store:  If you buy individual 20oz bottles at 2 bucks each, you'll pay $6 for 60 ounces, whereas you can buy a whole two-liter for $2.50. 
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: lstone19 on March 20, 2020, 11:47:35 AM
Quote from: thenetwork on March 19, 2020, 11:09:23 PM

For Example, if the Ohio Turnpike charged a minimum of 75 cents for traveling between any two consecutive exits:

If Car A got on at Exit 100 and got off at Exit 110 -- a 10 mile distance, they would pay the 75 cent minimum.  Then if they got back on and went to Exit 115, that would be another 75 cent minimum toll or $1.50 total.

But if Car B entered the turnpike at Exit 100 and stayed on the turnpike all the way to Exit 115, they may only have to pay 90 cents total, since they were not dinged for TWO minimum tolls.

Now if both cars rode the turnpike all the way to Exit 220, they may pay the same toll because the cents-per-mile toll costs evened out.

The funny thing is several years ago, the Ohio Turnpike had a set one-exit toll that was the same for all one-exit trips, even if it was less than what the mileage rate called for. It created some arbitrage opportunities. For instance, I believe back then 2 to 91 and then immediately re-enter and go 91 to 110 was less than 2 to 110 (I just checked and even today, thanks to them rounding all tolls to the nearest quarter, you can save 25 cents by doing that although it does appear even one-exit tolls are now mileage based).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: MASTERNC on March 20, 2020, 08:50:27 PM
Looks like the Thruway is starting a crude form of cashless toll collection due to COVID-19

- Drivers enter through cash lanes without taking a ticket
- At exit, drivers tell the toll collector where they entered and their license plate number.  They will then receive a bill in the mail.

Does not sound like they are using cameras to track vehicles' entry and exit like the PA Turnpike

https://www.thruway.ny.gov/etp/index.html
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on March 20, 2020, 08:55:29 PM
Quote from: MASTERNC on March 20, 2020, 08:50:27 PM
Looks like the Thruway is starting a crude form of cashless toll collection due to COVID-19

- Drivers enter through cash lanes without taking a ticket
- At exit, drivers tell the toll collector where they entered and their license plate number.  They will then receive a bill in the mail.

Does not sound like they are using cameras to track vehicles' entry and exit like the PA Turnpike

https://www.thruway.ny.gov/etp/index.html
A bit strange. I certainly had a few cases when my EZpass failed to read and the system did record license plate number for billing purposes.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Alps on March 21, 2020, 01:39:48 AM
Quote from: MASTERNC on March 20, 2020, 08:50:27 PM
Looks like the Thruway is starting a crude form of cashless toll collection due to COVID-19

- Drivers enter through cash lanes without taking a ticket
- At exit, drivers tell the toll collector where they entered and their license plate number.  They will then receive a bill in the mail.

Does not sound like they are using cameras to track vehicles' entry and exit like the PA Turnpike

https://www.thruway.ny.gov/etp/index.html
Does this not defeat the point of isolation
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: lstone19 on March 21, 2020, 09:46:33 AM
Quote from: Alps on March 21, 2020, 01:39:48 AM
Quote from: MASTERNC on March 20, 2020, 08:50:27 PM
Looks like the Thruway is starting a crude form of cashless toll collection due to COVID-19

- Drivers enter through cash lanes without taking a ticket
- At exit, drivers tell the toll collector where they entered and their license plate number.  They will then receive a bill in the mail.

Does not sound like they are using cameras to track vehicles' entry and exit like the PA Turnpike

https://www.thruway.ny.gov/etp/index.html
Does this not defeat the point of isolation

Not really as nothing is handled by both motorist and toll (non-)collector and they speak to each other at a distance (although perhaps not six feet).

I was first think rental motorists were going to get screwed by this but then I realized you could, if they will take it, give them the license of a car you own rather than the one you're driving. Unless the collector has a camera, they won't be able to see your plate as you give it to them. The whole thing is pretty much on the honor system anyway given they'll have no record of where you actually got on.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on March 22, 2020, 10:35:35 PM
Quote from: cl94 on February 19, 2020, 04:12:20 PM
Amenities in NY are pretty typical compared to other states with toll roads, as far as I have seen. A couple of fast food outlets, a coffee shop, convenience store, gas, restrooms (including 1 single-occupant unisex), tourist info, wifi is the typical set of amenities. Many locations have a farmer's market during the growing season.

-Sloatsburg (NB between 15A and 16) is by far the largest single-direction facility and the only one with two public levels. This one also has a parking garage.
-Directly opposite is Ramapo (SB between 16 and 15A), the smallest service area. This is basically a glorified McDonald's and, before the 1990s, required crossing the Thruway via a bridge to Sloatsburg for most services.
-Angola (both directions between 57A and 58) is the only facility in the median. Parking lots and fuel on the outside of the roadways, building in a wide median accessible by enclosed bridges. Angola is about the same size as Sloatsburg, but it serves both directions.
-New Baltimore (both directions between 21B and 21A) has a separate rest area/tourist info center/playground accessible only from NB.
-A closed pair of service areas is on the Berkshire Spur east of the Castleton-on-Hudson Bridge. These closed shortly after I-90 through Albany opened due to a lack of traffic.
-Combined service areas and welcome centers were planned on I-90 WB near Exit B3 and I-90 EB near Exit 61 in the 1990s, but never built. McDonald's would have been a major funding partner.

There's also the Western New York Welcome Center. I truly wonder how much traffic that place gets.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on March 22, 2020, 10:52:38 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on March 22, 2020, 10:35:35 PM
There's also the Western New York Welcome Center. I truly wonder how much traffic that place gets.

Having been there a handful of times since it opened, I think I can safely say... not a lot. Much less than any Thruway service area. There have never been more than 5 or so other cars when we've been there. It's very visible from the highway, which is great, but accessible is another matter. Too much winding around to get in there IMO. At least they finally put stoplights in at Exit 19 (Whitehaven Road) which have been needed for a while.

The facility itself is very nice. Fewer toilets than I expected, but a clean, well-designed, and uncrowded place to stop, as long as you don't mind about 5 turns to get in there and another 5 to get out.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: SteveG1988 on April 30, 2020, 01:41:26 AM
They're wrapping up the TZB Construction yard on the western shore as construction on the Cuomo bridge wraps up. Only thing that remains is the portable building, and that's been moved closer to the road. Sign that the bridge is nearly complete
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on May 12, 2020, 04:29:39 PM
Well, this is news: all Thruway rest areas will be renovated or rebuilt in 2021-22 (https://www.news10.com/news/nys-thruway-approves-empire-state-thruway-partners-450-billion-investment-in-service-areas)

QuoteThe New York Thruway Authority gave the green light on a contract with Empire State Thruway Partners to upgrade the state's 27 service areas Tuesday. Twenty-three of the service areas will be rebuilt and four will get significant upgrades.

The 33-year contract will see an investment of $450 million from Empire State Thruway partners to provide greater food service and amenities for travelers. The plan also includes greater access to amenities for commercial truck drivers. It will also focus on promoting local tourism through I Love N.Y. /Taste N.Y. and be dedicated to using environmentally conscious infrastructure like solar panels and rainwater collection to be used in irrigation.

...

Phase one of the project is scheduled to begin with the renovation of 16 service areas next year. The remaining 11 service areas are scheduled to be renovated in phase two beginning in 2023. The Thruway Authority said renovations will be spread out so that no two consecutive areas will be closed during the process. Built in the 1950s, the last time service areas saw notable improvements were in the 1990s, according to the Thruway Authority.

Proposed changes to service areas:
Most buildings will be able to be accessed from both parking lots and fuel stations
Exterior seating, picnic/play/pet walking areas with comfort stations
Taste N.Y. farmers markets
Business centers
Call ahead ordering, kiosks and drive-thru service at most locations
Technologically advanced building maintenance systems

Additional changes at certain locations:
Proposed virtual welcome and tourism centers, virtual thruway assistance, and travel counselors
Food trucks and other seasonal offerings
Enclosed climate-controlled pet areas
Private area for nursing mothers

Changes to commercial trucking areas:
Increase truck parking at service areas system-wide by 150 parking spaces
Shower and laundry facilities
Fitness center
Healthy snacks
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on May 13, 2020, 11:34:32 AM
Yeah I just read that, big news. I really hope they add a variety of restaurants in during this time and not the standard fare of McDonalds and Roy Rogers.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Roadrunner75 on May 13, 2020, 12:41:55 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on May 13, 2020, 11:34:32 AM
Yeah I just read that, big news. I really hope they add a variety of restaurants in during this time and not the standard fare of McDonalds and Roy Rogers.
Be careful what you wish for.  They are reconstructing rest areas on the NJ Turnpike and Garden State Parkway in NJ right now and trying to "upgrade" the offerings.  But the only real food place at the reconstructed Monmouth Rest Area on the GSP is the overpriced and overrated Shake Shack.  The only other options are a Starbucks and an Auntie Anne's.  So I can wait forever to get a small expensive burger or I can grab a pretzel.  Great.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on May 13, 2020, 01:40:58 PM
I'm going to be quite disappointed if Sbarro goes.  I've always enjoyed stopping there, and the Sloatsburg and Chittenango locations have been convenient in the past.  I also enjoyed the Pizza Hut Express in Ulster, but it hasn't been convenient for me since I moved to the Capital District.

Regarding the visualizations, it's amazing how unrealistic they look right now due to the lack of social distancing and face masks in them.  My, how the world changes fast.  I do wonder about business travel, though (there are a couple of people in suits in one).  Businesses aren't going to pay people to travel if the job function can be done just as effectively remotely.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: seicer on May 13, 2020, 01:43:23 PM
The showers will be a nice benefit. There are not a lot of truck stops in the northeast for car campers (like myself) where you can easily grab showers.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: empirestate on May 13, 2020, 02:54:23 PM
Quote from: cl94 on May 12, 2020, 04:29:39 PM
Well, this is news: all Thruway rest areas will be renovated or rebuilt in 2021-22 (https://www.news10.com/news/nys-thruway-approves-empire-state-thruway-partners-450-billion-investment-in-service-areas)

I feel like they just did this...but as the article points out, that was (apparently) way back in the 90s. :spin:
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: jp the roadgeek on May 13, 2020, 03:45:29 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on May 13, 2020, 11:34:32 AM
Yeah I just read that, big news. I really hope they add a variety of restaurants in during this time and not the standard fare of McDonalds and Roy Rogers.

I don't exactly consider Roy Rogers standard fare anymore, seeing that the nearest ones to me are the ones on the Thruway.  That being said, now we know what Cuomo plans to do with some of the stimulus $$  :eyebrow:
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on May 13, 2020, 04:17:19 PM
Right now, I'd be so happy just to get the chance to use the Thruway, period, that I don't think I'd notice or care if the service areas remained exactly how they are for another 10 years.

But it is still cool that they're upgrading them. Between that and AET, the overall Thruway experience should be quite modernized in the post-COVID-19 era.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Jim on May 13, 2020, 05:10:47 PM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on May 13, 2020, 03:45:29 PM
That being said, now we know what Cuomo plans to do with some of the stimulus $$  :eyebrow:

The article I read (behind the Daily Gazette paywall: https://dailygazette.com/article/2020/05/13/contract-awarded-to-rebuild-thruway-rest-areas-27-to-be-refurbished-reconstructed) suggests this is private investment, so not any stimulus money.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Alps on May 13, 2020, 05:34:55 PM
Quote from: Jim on May 13, 2020, 05:10:47 PM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on May 13, 2020, 03:45:29 PM
That being said, now we know what Cuomo plans to do with some of the stimulus $$  :eyebrow:

The article I read (behind the Daily Gazette paywall: https://dailygazette.com/article/2020/05/13/contract-awarded-to-rebuild-thruway-rest-areas-27-to-be-refurbished-reconstructed) suggests this is private investment, so not any stimulus money.
The Thruway should be self-supporting without the need for state public money.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on May 13, 2020, 05:57:02 PM
The Thruway upgrades are a P3. Private investment to rebuild them in exchange for a 33-year operating license.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: RobbieL2415 on May 13, 2020, 09:41:15 PM
It's good to renovate the service plazas.  They haven't been spruced up in 25 years or so, at least going by the dedication placards.

I would hope the contractor adds a healthier restaurant to the mix, like a Panera or something.

I say, drop TCBY but keep McD, BK and RR.

Every single plaza should have either a Dunkin Donuts or Tim Hortons, too.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: shadyjay on May 13, 2020, 11:28:04 PM
I remember when they were being rehabbed in the early 90s.  The Thruway newsletter back then, "The Interchange" mentioned it.  We went on a family road trip out to Niagara Falls c 1992-1993, covering the Thruway from Albany to Buffalo.  (where was my camera back then?).

I would like them to keep the Roy Rogers, as you really don't find them around much anymore... at least not in New England. 
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: GenExpwy on May 15, 2020, 03:37:18 AM
Quote from: cl94 on May 12, 2020, 04:29:39 PM
Well, this is news: all Thruway rest areas will be renovated or rebuilt in 2021-22 (https://www.news10.com/news/nys-thruway-approves-empire-state-thruway-partners-450-billion-investment-in-service-areas)

QuoteThe New York Thruway Authority gave the green light on a contract with Empire State Thruway Partners to upgrade the state's 27 service areas Tuesday. Twenty-three of the service areas will be rebuilt and four will get significant upgrades.


Which four are not getting torn down?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on May 15, 2020, 12:27:15 PM
Quote from: Roadrunner75 on May 13, 2020, 12:41:55 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on May 13, 2020, 11:34:32 AM
Yeah I just read that, big news. I really hope they add a variety of restaurants in during this time and not the standard fare of McDonalds and Roy Rogers.
Be careful what you wish for.  They are reconstructing rest areas on the NJ Turnpike and Garden State Parkway in NJ right now and trying to "upgrade" the offerings.  But the only real food place at the reconstructed Monmouth Rest Area on the GSP is the overpriced and overrated Shake Shack.  The only other options are a Starbucks and an Auntie Anne's.  So I can wait forever to get a small expensive burger or I can grab a pretzel.  Great.

Yeah I should have clarified that. I think a mix would be nice, we still need chains like McDonalds on the road in case we don't want to spend $20 on a burger (I probably wouldn't). So yes, I agree 100%.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: empirestate on May 15, 2020, 01:07:39 PM
Quote from: Jim on May 13, 2020, 05:10:47 PM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on May 13, 2020, 03:45:29 PM
That being said, now we know what Cuomo plans to do with some of the stimulus $$  :eyebrow:

The article I read (behind the Daily Gazette paywall: https://dailygazette.com/article/2020/05/13/contract-awarded-to-rebuild-thruway-rest-areas-27-to-be-refurbished-reconstructed) suggests this is private investment, so not any stimulus money.

Also, something tells me this plan rather predates the prospect of stimulus money, or even the pandemic as a whole.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on May 15, 2020, 01:50:21 PM
It does.  I distinctly remember this being talked on Facebook (in the roadgeek groups and/or the Thruway's own page) months if not a year or two ago.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on May 15, 2020, 02:36:39 PM
They've been talking about service area renovations for at least a year. Definitely early 2019, if not earlier, with talk about using P3 or tourism funds even back then.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: astralentity on June 08, 2020, 12:00:16 PM
http://archive.is/WI01X

This came up on my feed today.  With everything else going on, its somehow a priority to rename the Thruway?   :banghead: :banghead: :banghead:
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: lstone19 on June 08, 2020, 12:04:40 PM
Quote from: astralentity on June 08, 2020, 12:00:16 PM
http://archive.is/WI01X

This came up on my feed today.  With everything else going on, its somehow a priority to rename the Thruway?   :banghead: :banghead: :banghead:

Seems like a big "don't care" to most of us. I've never referred to it as the "Dewey Thruway" so why would I start calling it the "Douglass Thruway"? It's the "New York Thruway" or just "Thruway" when the NY context is obvious.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on June 08, 2020, 01:55:18 PM
Yeah, it would be just a publicity stunt more than anything. No one's going to actually call it anything other than "Thruway", so it's not that big of a deal either way.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: hbelkins on June 08, 2020, 02:28:17 PM
Why does it need to be renamed? Can't they find something else to name for him? I've never heard of Dewey's name being mentioned in negative connotations like Jefferson Davis or Robert E. Lee, who are having highways un-named for them.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: astralentity on June 08, 2020, 02:48:07 PM
Quote from: webny99 on June 08, 2020, 01:55:18 PM
Yeah, it would be just a publicity stunt more than anything. No one's going to actually call it anything other than "Thruway", so it's not that big of a deal either way.

Like how I still say Tappan Zee, even though all the signs have been changed to say "Mario M. Cuomo Bridge".  And you gotta have the middle initial in there, or else!

This is kinda why I liked Larry Sharpe's idea of granting naming and partial maintenance rights to businesses.  I get sick of naming and paying for the naming of infrastructure items after politicians.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on June 08, 2020, 03:00:16 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on June 08, 2020, 02:28:17 PM
Why does it need to be renamed? Can't they find something else to name for him? I've never heard of Dewey's name being mentioned in negative connotations like Jefferson Davis or Robert E. Lee, who are having highways un-named for them.
It could be worse.  I expected new name to be Gov. Mario Cuomo Thruway
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on June 08, 2020, 03:46:25 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on June 08, 2020, 02:28:17 PM
Can't they find something else to name for him?

FWIW, the I-490 bridge in Downtown Rochester (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.1512541,-77.6118972,3a,51.2y,116.02h,95.33t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s_2l9l99RzWWP4uY2MUxyXA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e1) is already named for him.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: RobbieL2415 on June 08, 2020, 05:01:47 PM
Quote from: webny99 on June 08, 2020, 03:46:25 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on June 08, 2020, 02:28:17 PM
Can't they find something else to name for him?

FWIW, the I-490 bridge in Downtown Rochester (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.1512541,-77.6118972,3a,51.2y,116.02h,95.33t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s_2l9l99RzWWP4uY2MUxyXA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e1) is already named for him.
Interesting.  I always just called it the Genesee River Bridge.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: empirestate on June 08, 2020, 06:03:56 PM
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on June 08, 2020, 05:01:47 PM
Quote from: webny99 on June 08, 2020, 03:46:25 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on June 08, 2020, 02:28:17 PM
Can't they find something else to name for him?

FWIW, the I-490 bridge in Downtown Rochester (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.1512541,-77.6118972,3a,51.2y,116.02h,95.33t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s_2l9l99RzWWP4uY2MUxyXA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e1) is already named for him.
Interesting.  I always just called it the Genesee River Bridge.

And I the Troup-Howell Bridge. :-)

Quote from: astralentity on June 08, 2020, 12:00:16 PM
With everything else going on, its somehow a priority to rename the Thruway?

I wouldn't think so, no; do you? I have not observed there to be much correlation between introducing a bill about something, and it being a priority.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: shadyjay on June 08, 2020, 09:48:42 PM
A handful of turnpikes have been "named" before.  Florida's Turnpike is the Ronald Reagan Tpke.  The Ohio Turnpike is named for James Shocknessy (sp?).  But noone calls those roads that... they're just the Turnpike.  You may get a sign at each end saying the official name but that's it.  In my opinion, it seems like a waste of time and money.  Thomas E. Dewey would roll over in his grave, if fellow 'gov Malcolm Wilson hasn't rolled over onto him already! :-)
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on June 08, 2020, 11:01:23 PM
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on June 08, 2020, 05:01:47 PM
I always just called it the Genesee River Bridge.

The problem with that is that there are many Genesee River bridges. There's 14 north of the Thruway alone.


Quote from: empirestate on June 08, 2020, 06:03:56 PM
I have not observed there to be much correlation between introducing a bill about something, and it being a priority.

LOL!  :-D
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: zachb on June 09, 2020, 10:57:39 AM
Quote from: shadyjay on June 08, 2020, 09:48:42 PM
A handful of turnpikes have been "named" before.  Florida's Turnpike is the Ronald Reagan Tpke.  The Ohio Turnpike is named for James Shocknessy (sp?).  But noone calls those roads that... they're just the Turnpike.  You may get a sign at each end saying the official name but that's it.  In my opinion, it seems like a waste of time and money.  Thomas E. Dewey would roll over in his grave, if fellow 'gov Malcolm Wilson hasn't rolled over onto him already! :-)

I-80 in PA is officially the "Z.H. Confair Memorial Highway", and a course a bunch of random highway bridges and interchanges are named after someone
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: hbelkins on June 09, 2020, 03:58:22 PM
Funny how the naming thing works. Prior to I-26 being extended north into Tennessee, many of the bridges on US 23 south of Johnson City were named for someone. I remember TDOT saying that they would have to remove the signage naming those spans to comply with interstate standards. That was a head-scratcher, as all sorts of bridges and interchanges along non-toll interstates are named. Drive up I-79 in West Virginia if you don't believe me.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on June 09, 2020, 04:27:01 PM
Yeah, I've never known the posting of bridge names to be below interstate standards. It's certainly done in New York, there are plenty of other examples in addition to the one that can be seen in the link I posted above.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: deathtopumpkins on June 09, 2020, 06:09:30 PM
MUTCD doesn't prohibit them, but does frown on them: https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/htm/2009r1r2/part2/part2m.htm#section2M10
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Alps on June 09, 2020, 06:30:07 PM
If you're going to post bridge names, they should be small white on blue, green, or brown signs. There's no clear guidance on it, but it should be inconspicuous. The argument is that it could help with wayfinding, similar to mile markers.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: hbelkins on June 10, 2020, 01:59:06 PM
A lot of "should" and not a whole lot of "shall" there, but states routinely violate the "should" and "shall" guidelines.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Alps on June 10, 2020, 02:49:46 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on June 10, 2020, 01:59:06 PM
A lot of "should" and not a whole lot of "shall" there, but states routinely violate the "should" and "shall" guidelines.
And remember, "should" means that it requires an engineering reason not to do it, whereas "shall" cannot be violated without a compelling reason.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: hbelkins on June 11, 2020, 04:58:54 PM
Quote from: Alps on June 10, 2020, 02:49:46 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on June 10, 2020, 01:59:06 PM
A lot of "should" and not a whole lot of "shall" there, but states routinely violate the "should" and "shall" guidelines.
And remember, "should" means that it requires an engineering reason not to do it, whereas "shall" cannot be violated without a compelling reason.

It would be interesting to see what "engineering reasons" some states have used for their exceptions -- such as Kentucky putting the route number (US 23) on its brown Country Music Highway signs, or the Kentucky State Police logo on the blue signs used anytime a segment of highway is named after a state police officer.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Alps on June 12, 2020, 01:51:10 AM
Quote from: hbelkins on June 11, 2020, 04:58:54 PM
Quote from: Alps on June 10, 2020, 02:49:46 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on June 10, 2020, 01:59:06 PM
A lot of "should" and not a whole lot of "shall" there, but states routinely violate the "should" and "shall" guidelines.
And remember, "should" means that it requires an engineering reason not to do it, whereas "shall" cannot be violated without a compelling reason.

It would be interesting to see what "engineering reasons" some states have used for their exceptions -- such as Kentucky putting the route number (US 23) on its brown Country Music Highway signs, or the Kentucky State Police logo on the blue signs used anytime a segment of highway is named after a state police officer.
Scenic route signs don't run afoul of the MUTCD. These don't sound egregious the way you describe them.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Glockspeed Gaming on June 24, 2020, 12:10:03 PM
I would renumber the exits and mileposts according to I-90 and I-87, much like the Pennsylvania Turnpike does with the mainline and NE extension, or what Connecticut does with I-95 and I-395. It makes more sense that way I think, and it's less confusing to not just people who live there, but newcomers and travelers too.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Jim on June 25, 2020, 10:06:34 PM
In case anyone's interested in an update on the AET conversion on the Thruway in the general vicinity of Albany, I drove some parts today for the first time in a while and saw the structures across the main roadways are now up west of 24 and east of the Canaan barrier.  The structures at exits 27, 26, and B1 were already up on previous trips, but there is still work in progress near each.  Also lots of new signs covered in black tarps near each current and yet-to-be erected AET structure.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: theroadwayone on June 25, 2020, 10:45:13 PM
Quote from: Glockspeed Gaming on June 24, 2020, 12:10:03 PM
I would renumber the exits and mileposts according to I-90 and I-87, much like the Pennsylvania Turnpike does with the mainline and NE extension, or what Connecticut does with I-95 and I-395. It makes more sense that way I think, and it's less confusing to not just people who live there, but newcomers and travelers too.
When the PA Turnpike switched to distance-based numbering, it was just purely coincidental that Exit 31 on the NE Extension (Lansdale) happened to be at Milepost 31 on I-476 already.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: SignBridge on June 25, 2020, 10:53:04 PM
If NYSTA is converting from their traditional toll-ticket type system to a main-line barrier system like Massachusetts did on I-90, that would leave them free to renumber the exits by Interstate route. It would eliminate the problem of two exits with the same number, which would have been an issue in the traditional toll system.

But it might cause a problem with 911 callers to the Twy. Authority communications center reporting an incident say at Exit 24 and then the question would be well which Exit-24? And trust me half the callers would get it wrong when asked which Interstate route they were on. Food for thought.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on June 25, 2020, 11:10:51 PM
Quote from: theroadwayone on June 25, 2020, 10:45:13 PM
When the PA Turnpike switched to distance-based numbering, it was just purely coincidental that Exit 31 on the NE Extension (Lansdale) happened to be at Milepost 31 on I-476 already.

This will also be the case for much of I-190 if/when New York ever converts to mileage-based.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on June 25, 2020, 11:11:12 PM
Just fudge one of the exit numbers then. 
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Alps on June 26, 2020, 12:31:07 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on June 25, 2020, 10:53:04 PM
If NYSTA is converting from their traditional toll-ticket type system to a main-line barrier system like Massachusetts did on I-90, that would leave them free to renumber the exits by Interstate route. It would eliminate the problem of two exits with the same number, which would have been an issue in the traditional toll system.

But it might cause a problem with 911 callers to the Twy. Authority communications center reporting an incident say at Exit 24 and then the question would be well which Exit-24? And trust me half the callers would get it wrong when asked which Interstate route they were on. Food for thought.
They would probably do something like PA and fudge the numbers by one where this occurs. The big issue is going to be mileposting, as I-87 and I-90 would definitely have overlapping posts. You'd have to do them as "N/S" and "E/W" probably.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: lstone19 on June 26, 2020, 09:20:02 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on June 25, 2020, 10:53:04 PM
If NYSTA is converting from their traditional toll-ticket type system to a main-line barrier system like Massachusetts did on I-90, that would leave them free to renumber the exits by Interstate route.

Maybe younger drivers think about it differently but I'm of an age (and grew up in the Northeast with summers in the Adirondacks) where I make the name of the toll road primary and the route(s) secondary. So one numbering system for the named road rather than the routes has always made more sense to me even though it's not per standards.

Standards are great but when they get in the way of usability, what's the point. I know the Thruway is very non-standard with the east to west numbering of the Albany - Ripley section but I wonder how many John Q. Motorists even know west to east is standard. I think many of them see exit numbers but they probably never thought through what direction they run.*

It's been years since I've been on the Pennsylvania Turnpike and I find their new system confusing because I don't know the road well enough to know many of the exit names so when I hear an exit number in the range on both the mainline and the northeast spur, I generally don't know where it is (and if they really wanted to be correct, the numbers on the mainline should reset where I-276 starts and then again at I-95 (and then there's the I-70/I-76 multiplex where if it wasn't a named toll road, I'd prefer it follow I-70s mileage since a x0 route should be more important than a non-x0 route). And then there's the Ohio Turnpike where the numbers should change at the I-80/I-76 bump. And the NJ Turnpike. In short, numbering of named toll roads is problematic and involves compromises).

So if the NYSTA moves to mileage exit numbers, unless their goal is to de-emphasize the Thruway name (I doubt it) in favor of the route numbers, I'd still prefer it be from 0 at the NYC line to 496 at Ripley and not try to distinguish between I-87 and I-90.

And while not Thruway, the Northway (I-87 north of Albany) is also an exception in my mind. For the most part, I associate named freeways with urban freeways. The Northway is the only rural freeway I can think of that has historically been known by its name more than its number. Perhaps that was because when it was built, NYS wanted to distinguish it from the Thruway but in its early days, I rarely recall it being referred to as I-87 (and my earliest memory of it as a young kid was when it was only open to Exit 12 at Malta).

* On the subject of the general public being oblivious to standards, I once read a novel and had it ruined for me because a major plot point turned on the author's assumption that a color-blind person couldn't read a horizontal traffic signal. It apparently never occurred to the author and however many editors and proofreaders who read it that there is a standard for them.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: astralentity on June 26, 2020, 10:30:04 AM
Quote from: lstone19 on June 26, 2020, 09:20:02 AM
So if the NYSTA moves to mileage exit numbers, unless their goal is to de-emphasize the Thruway name (I doubt it) in favor of the route numbers, I'd still prefer it be from 0 at the NYC line to 496 at Ripley and not try to distinguish between I-87 and I-90.

NO...  The mileage should default to either I-90 or I-87, starting at the southern/western terminus, as stated by the MUTCD.  They can keep the Thruway miles from the NYC line to Ripley as an internal reference or similar.  Having the first exit on I-90 be "Exit 496" is only going to confuse travelers even further than they already are on our convoluted system of highways.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: machias on June 26, 2020, 01:35:10 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on June 25, 2020, 10:53:04 PM
If NYSTA is converting from their traditional toll-ticket type system to a main-line barrier system like Massachusetts did on I-90, that would leave them free to renumber the exits by Interstate route. It would eliminate the problem of two exits with the same number, which would have been an issue in the traditional toll system.

But it might cause a problem with 911 callers to the Twy. Authority communications center reporting an incident say at Exit 24 and then the question would be well which Exit-24? And trust me half the callers would get it wrong when asked which Interstate route they were on. Food for thought.

Are we sure the same 911 center would be answering a call for an emergency at Exit 24, which would be about 450 miles from the other Exit 24?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: lstone19 on June 26, 2020, 01:48:56 PM
Quote from: astralentity on June 26, 2020, 10:30:04 AM
NO...  The mileage should default to either I-90 or I-87, starting at the southern/western terminus, as stated by the MUTCD.  They can keep the Thruway miles from the NYC line to Ripley as an internal reference or similar.  Having the first exit on I-90 be "Exit 496" is only going to confuse travelers even further than they already are on our convoluted system of highways.

We will just have to disagree. I doubt most travelers will be confused because as I stated, I doubt most have any awareness that roads are normally numbered west to east. The only people who will notice are those who know the standard and they won't be confused, at worst they'll wonder why it's backwards.

When I spent much of my time in NYS, I knew very few people who referred to parts of the Thruway by route number (maybe I-95 for the NE Thruway but not for the mainline). Thanks to the long ago goofy routing of I-87 via what's now I-684, thinking of the segment south of Albany as I-87 never reached significance because for many years it wasn't in its entirety. Go back 50 years and if you were giving someone directions from Albany to NYC, would you say " take I-87 south to Newburgh, then the unnumbered Thruway to Suffern, then I-287 to Elmsford, and then I-87 to NYC" or would you just say "take the Thruway south to NYC".

While the MUTCD may say otherwise, to me an established name like the "New York State Thruway" is just as valid a highway designator as is a route number and since numbering relative to one designation creates a conflict with numbering relative to the other, something has to give. To me, it's always been Thruway first and number second. Until and unless the Thruway name goes away, IMHO, it needs to be numbered as one road and not a mix of the underlying route numbers.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on June 26, 2020, 01:54:49 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on June 25, 2020, 10:53:04 PM
If NYSTA is converting from their traditional toll-ticket type system to a main-line barrier system like Massachusetts did on I-90, that would leave them free to renumber the exits by Interstate route. It would eliminate the problem of two exits with the same number, which would have been an issue in the traditional toll system.

But it might cause a problem with 911 callers to the Twy. Authority communications center reporting an incident say at Exit 24 and then the question would be well which Exit-24? And trust me half the callers would get it wrong when asked which Interstate route they were on. Food for thought.
Physically, it's a hybrid system, with none of the "ticket" systems including the switch from I-90 to I-87 or the area around it.  As for how it will be billed, I'm not sure, but the fact that none of the new mainline gantries have names suggests that they may bill as a virtual ticket system, like MA does.

Quote from: lstone19 on June 26, 2020, 09:20:02 AM
So if the NYSTA moves to mileage exit numbers, unless their goal is to de-emphasize the Thruway name (I doubt it) in favor of the route numbers, I'd still prefer it be from 0 at the NYC line to 496 at Ripley and not try to distinguish between I-87 and I-90.
One thing to keep in mind is that NY never emphasized the Thruway to the same degree as neighboring states emphasized their toll roads, at least not in my lifetime.  Reassurance markers are just I-87 or just I-90.  Even some guide signs (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.1088231,-77.5880357,3a,75y,291.07h,89.98t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sqlK1E0FPPBBdkIiZwMhXeA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) don't include the Thruway.  Meanwhile, the MassPike and NJ Turnpike post their shields religiously, and the PTC has gigantic oversized shields at Turnpike junctions.

This ultimately comes down to the question of who are roads numbered for.  Locals will adapt, but someone from out of the area who hasn't even heard of the Thruway could get confused, especially as it isn't emphasized on signs.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: lstone19 on June 26, 2020, 03:34:17 PM
Quote from: vdeane on June 26, 2020, 01:54:49 PM
One thing to keep in mind is that NY never emphasized the Thruway to the same degree as neighboring states emphasized their toll roads, at least not in my lifetime.  Reassurance markers are just I-87 or just I-90.  Even some guide signs (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.1088231,-77.5880357,3a,75y,291.07h,89.98t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sqlK1E0FPPBBdkIiZwMhXeA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) don't include the Thruway.  Meanwhile, the MassPike and NJ Turnpike post their shields religiously, and the PTC has gigantic oversized shields at Turnpike junctions.

This ultimately comes down to the question of who are roads numbered for.  Locals will adapt, but someone from out of the area who hasn't even heard of the Thruway could get confused, especially as it isn't emphasized on signs.


Valerie, you are quite a but younger than me so your take is interesting (but I'm glad you included "at least not in my lifetime"). You may well be correct that they're de-emphasizing the name (I remember three or four years ago that it seemed every single press release at http://www.thruway.ny.gov/news/pressrel/index.html started "Thruway Authority Announces ..." (now only about half do) as if getting the Thruway Authority name out front and center was the most important thing.

But the Thruway name is not going away anytime soon. My opinion is if they want to number the I-87 and I-90 segments separately, they first need to make name modifications so that the main line isn't all "New York Thruway". You'd want to keep Thruway in the name but just like there is the New England Thruway and Niagara Thruway, maybe Hudson River Thruway for the I-87 segment and for I-90, Lake Erie Thruway for Pennsylvania to Buffalo, Erie Canal Thruway for Buffalo to Albany, and Berkshire Thruway for the current Berkshire Spur. Start emphasizing those names for a few years so people start using them instead of the generic "Thruway", then renumber. Otherwise, you will lead to confusion when people aren't sure what part of "the Thruway" they're on.

What you don't want to do is turn it into the confused mess that is the Pennsylvania Turnpike. Looking at their website, I see they have renumbered the I-95 section. Which means that for the traveler heading westbound off the NJ Turnpike, the exit numbers, in order, are 42, , then take exit 40 to stay on the Turnpike, 351, 343, 340, 339, 20, 333 (and then finally decreasing to the Ohio line). Using the I-476 exit number (20) on the Turnpike mainline is just plain stupid (and I confirmed on Google Street View that that is what they did). They really should bury the Pennsylvania Turnpike name as it just creates the expectation of a consistency that is no longer there.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on June 26, 2020, 05:10:09 PM
In this area (western NY, several hundred miles west of I-87), "Thruway" and "I-90" are basically synonyms.
To me, the part of the Thruway south of Albany is just I-87, not the Thruway. That's how I avoid confusion with the Thruway that I know and love: I-90  :)
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: jp the roadgeek on June 26, 2020, 05:43:46 PM
Having figured out what the mileage based exits would be for I-87 and I-90 as individual highways, there would only be 2 instances of duplicate exit numbers on the mainline (the Exit 1 on I-87 would be on the Deegan).  Exit 10 A/B on I-87 would be in Yonkers for Mile Square Rd and the Cross County and Exit 10 on I-90 would be in Westfield for NY 394 (about 483 miles apart).  The other would be Exit 68, which on I-87 would be in Newburgh for I-84/NY 17K and on I-90 would be for NY 400/NY 16 in West Seneca (about 368 miles apart).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: lstone19 on June 26, 2020, 05:44:59 PM
Quote from: webny99 on June 26, 2020, 05:10:09 PM
In this area (western NY, several hundred miles west of I-87), "Thruway" and "I-90" are basically synonyms.
To me, the part of the Thruway south of Albany is just I-87, not the Thruway. That's how I avoid confusion with the Thruway that I know and love: I-90  :)

And yet I'm of an age where the Thruway south of Albany would never be called I-87 because for so many years, much of it wasn't. And throw in how I-87 made its way from the Northway to the Thruway (we do love to think of those things here). Today's Thruway Exit 24, as bad as it is for I-87, is a vast improvement of the one from 40+ years ago, a simple trumpet indistinguishable from any other trumpet with southbound I-87 entering via the inside loop of the trumpet. Both I-87 and I-90 back then exited and entered the Thruway via slow ramps no faster than any other interchange.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: TheDon102 on June 26, 2020, 11:04:51 PM
In Westchester county, I've never heard people refer to the highway as the "thruway", I've only ever heard 87... I think the I-87 shields have a big effect over here.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on June 26, 2020, 11:51:59 PM
Quote from: lstone19 on June 26, 2020, 05:44:59 PM
Quote from: webny99 on June 26, 2020, 05:10:09 PM
In this area (western NY, several hundred miles west of I-87), "Thruway" and "I-90" are basically synonyms.
To me, the part of the Thruway south of Albany is just I-87, not the Thruway. That's how I avoid confusion with the Thruway that I know and love: I-90  :)

And yet I'm of an age where the Thruway south of Albany would never be called I-87 because for so many years, much of it wasn't. And throw in how I-87 made its way from the Northway to the Thruway (we do love to think of those things here). Today's Thruway Exit 24, as bad as it is for I-87, is a vast improvement of the one from 40+ years ago, a simple trumpet indistinguishable from any other trumpet with southbound I-87 entering via the inside loop of the trumpet. Both I-87 and I-90 back then exited and entered the Thruway via slow ramps no faster than any other interchange.
Time for the old dog to learn new tricks.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: RobbieL2415 on June 27, 2020, 11:57:29 PM
Possibly stupid idea:

Give all exits in the Thruway system a letter prefix:

New England Thruway: NE-##
Berkshire Extension: already B-##
Thruway Mainline: M-##
Niagara Thruway: N-##
GSP Connector: G-##

Free I-90 would be given mileage-based exits from the split from the Berkshire Conn. to I-87.

I-87 exits will switch to mileage-based at the beginning of the Northway. The one exit on the non I-87 Northway for the Crossgates Mall becomes unnumbered.

Dual mile markers are displayed on I-87 from the beginning of the Mainline to the Northway.  Each mileage set follows its respective route. Every mile marker within the Thruway system will carry the same letter prefix. So, an example Mainline setup would be:

|NYST  |       | I-87 |
|   M    |       |   1   |
|   1     |       |   2   |
|   2     |       |   3   |
|   3     |
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: storm2k on June 28, 2020, 12:18:44 PM
Quote from: vdeane on June 26, 2020, 01:54:49 PMOne thing to keep in mind is that NY never emphasized the Thruway to the same degree as neighboring states emphasized their toll roads, at least not in my lifetime.  Reassurance markers are just I-87 or just I-90.  Even some guide signs (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.1088231,-77.5880357,3a,75y,291.07h,89.98t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sqlK1E0FPPBBdkIiZwMhXeA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) don't include the Thruway.  Meanwhile, the MassPike and NJ Turnpike post their shields religiously, and the PTC has gigantic oversized shields at Turnpike junctions.

I've never understood quite how NYSTA or NYSDOT have tried to figure out how to emphasize that they're on the Thurway, because they don't put Thruway shields on their pullthrus or reassurance shields, but NYSDOT is pretty good about putting them on sign assemblies near Thruway interchanges (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0587467,-77.6433907,3a,28.3y,116.62h,92.21t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sKmNk4yJzoflDEdqwvmGHbQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192). It is a stark contrast to the NJ Turnpike, which, until recently, really did its damnedest to deemphasize that a major super important interstate was signed along its route.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on June 28, 2020, 01:03:04 PM
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on June 27, 2020, 11:57:29 PM
Possibly stupid idea:

Give all exits in the Thruway system a letter prefix:

New England Thruway: NE-##
Berkshire Extension: already B-##
Thruway Mainline: M-##
Niagara Thruway: N-##
GSP Connector: G-##

Free I-90 would be given mileage-based exits from the split from the Berkshire Conn. to I-87.

I-87 exits will switch to mileage-based at the beginning of the Northway. The one exit on the non I-87 Northway for the Crossgates Mall becomes unnumbered.

FHWA wants I-87 and I-90 to each have ONE set of exits as part of any switch. Basically, if they're switching, they want it to be done properly. Which means no more Thruway exit numbers.

Needless to say, NYSTA has no plans to switch anytime soon and you should expect 87 and 90 to be the last Interstates in the state to become distance-based.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: machias on June 28, 2020, 05:48:15 PM
Quote from: cl94 on June 28, 2020, 01:03:04 PM
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on June 27, 2020, 11:57:29 PM
Possibly stupid idea:

Give all exits in the Thruway system a letter prefix:

New England Thruway: NE-##
Berkshire Extension: already B-##
Thruway Mainline: M-##
Niagara Thruway: N-##
GSP Connector: G-##

Free I-90 would be given mileage-based exits from the split from the Berkshire Conn. to I-87.

I-87 exits will switch to mileage-based at the beginning of the Northway. The one exit on the non I-87 Northway for the Crossgates Mall becomes unnumbered.

FHWA wants I-87 and I-90 to each have ONE set of exits as part of any switch. Basically, if they're switching, they want it to be done properly. Which means no more Thruway exit numbers.

Needless to say, NYSTA has no plans to switch anytime soon and you should expect 87 and 90 to be the last Interstates in the state to become distance-based.

NYSDOT should do some further good faith on renumbering and renumber "Free 90"  in the Capital District with exit numbers starting at 349.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on June 28, 2020, 09:53:20 PM
Quote from: cl94 on June 28, 2020, 01:03:04 PM
Needless to say, NYSTA has no plans to switch anytime soon and you should expect 87 and 90 to be the last Interstates in the state to become distance-based.
Yeah, all those new gore signs they're putting up definitely don't have room for an extra digit, so they evidently expect to stay sequential for a while.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: RobbieL2415 on June 29, 2020, 12:59:42 PM
Quote from: cl94 on June 28, 2020, 01:03:04 PM
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on June 27, 2020, 11:57:29 PM
Possibly stupid idea:

Give all exits in the Thruway system a letter prefix:

New England Thruway: NE-##
Berkshire Extension: already B-##
Thruway Mainline: M-##
Niagara Thruway: N-##
GSP Connector: G-##

Free I-90 would be given mileage-based exits from the split from the Berkshire Conn. to I-87.

I-87 exits will switch to mileage-based at the beginning of the Northway. The one exit on the non I-87 Northway for the Crossgates Mall becomes unnumbered.

FHWA wants I-87 and I-90 to each have ONE set of exits as part of any switch. Basically, if they're switching, they want it to be done properly. Which means no more Thruway exit numbers.

Needless to say, NYSTA has no plans to switch anytime soon and you should expect 87 and 90 to be the last Interstates in the state to become distance-based.
I don't associate the individual Interstate numbers with the Thruway Mainline. I don't know of anyone who disagrees.

IMO if the FHWA wants to say that the Thruway is part of I-87 and I-90, it should be signed but not touch the exit numbers. I know this goes against every regulation in the book. The Thruway predates the Interstate system, it has a historical significance to the State of New York, and for the purpose of preserving that history the exit numbers should reflect it's history.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: KEVIN_224 on June 29, 2020, 08:31:08 PM
Quote from: Glockspeed Gaming on June 24, 2020, 12:10:03 PM
I would renumber the exits and mileposts according to I-90 and I-87, much like the Pennsylvania Turnpike does with the mainline and NE extension, or what Connecticut does with I-95 and I-395. It makes more sense that way I think, and it's less confusing to not just people who live there, but newcomers and travelers too.

No longer in Connecticut. I-395 from the I-95 split in Waterford north to the MA border is now mileage-based exiting.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Alps on June 30, 2020, 12:13:49 AM
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on June 29, 2020, 12:59:42 PM
Quote from: cl94 on June 28, 2020, 01:03:04 PM
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on June 27, 2020, 11:57:29 PM
Possibly stupid idea:

Give all exits in the Thruway system a letter prefix:

New England Thruway: NE-##
Berkshire Extension: already B-##
Thruway Mainline: M-##
Niagara Thruway: N-##
GSP Connector: G-##

Free I-90 would be given mileage-based exits from the split from the Berkshire Conn. to I-87.

I-87 exits will switch to mileage-based at the beginning of the Northway. The one exit on the non I-87 Northway for the Crossgates Mall becomes unnumbered.

FHWA wants I-87 and I-90 to each have ONE set of exits as part of any switch. Basically, if they're switching, they want it to be done properly. Which means no more Thruway exit numbers.

Needless to say, NYSTA has no plans to switch anytime soon and you should expect 87 and 90 to be the last Interstates in the state to become distance-based.
I don't associate the individual Interstate numbers with the Thruway Mainline. I don't know of anyone who disagrees.

IMO if the FHWA wants to say that the Thruway is part of I-87 and I-90, it should be signed but not touch the exit numbers. I know this goes against every regulation in the book. The Thruway predates the Interstate system, it has a historical significance to the State of New York, and for the purpose of preserving that history the exit numbers should reflect it's history.
I disagree. Now you know of someone.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on July 02, 2020, 12:20:23 AM
Quote from: astralentity on June 08, 2020, 12:00:16 PM
http://archive.is/WI01X

This came up on my feed today.  With everything else going on, its somehow a priority to rename the Thruway?   :banghead: :banghead: :banghead:

Fredrick Douglass is an American hero.

But it's frivolous to rename the Thruway for no reason. It's not productive at all, it's merely symbolism.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on July 02, 2020, 12:26:53 AM
Quote from: TheDon102 on June 26, 2020, 11:04:51 PM
In Westchester county, I've never heard people refer to the highway as the "thruway", I've only ever heard 87... I think the I-87 shields have a big effect over here.

It might also be due to that fact that it's a free road in Westchester County IIRC
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: D-Dey65 on July 02, 2020, 12:48:24 AM
Quote from: Buffaboy on July 02, 2020, 12:20:23 AM
Quote from: astralentity on June 08, 2020, 12:00:16 PM
http://archive.is/WI01X

This came up on my feed today.  With everything else going on, its somehow a priority to rename the Thruway?   :banghead: :banghead: :banghead:

Fredrick Douglass is an American hero.

But it's frivolous to rename the Thruway for no reason. It's not productive at all, it's merely symbolism.
That's the same way I felt about renaming Hempstead LIRR station and the adjacent bus terminal for Rosa Parks. She may have been great for taking on Jim Crow in the public transit system of the deep south, but from what I recall, there were no whites only seats on the buses of any of the predecessors to the MSBA.

Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: jp the roadgeek on July 02, 2020, 02:16:59 AM
Quote from: Buffaboy on July 02, 2020, 12:26:53 AM
Quote from: TheDon102 on June 26, 2020, 11:04:51 PM
In Westchester county, I've never heard people refer to the highway as the "thruway", I've only ever heard 87... I think the I-87 shields have a big effect over here.

It might also be due to that fact that it's a free road in Westchester County IIRC

There is a toll gantry in Ardsley. 
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on July 02, 2020, 07:45:32 AM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on July 02, 2020, 02:16:59 AM
Quote from: Buffaboy on July 02, 2020, 12:26:53 AM
Quote from: TheDon102 on June 26, 2020, 11:04:51 PM
In Westchester county, I've never heard people refer to the highway as the "thruway", I've only ever heard 87... I think the I-87 shields have a big effect over here.
It might also be due to that fact that it's a free road in Westchester County IIRC
There is a toll gantry in Ardsley.

Is that one of the ones that's free for cars?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: lstone19 on July 02, 2020, 08:17:15 AM
Quote from: webny99 on July 02, 2020, 07:45:32 AM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on July 02, 2020, 02:16:59 AM
There is a toll gantry in Ardsley.
Is that one of the ones that's free for cars?

No. You're thinking of Spring Valley (located between exits 14A and 14B) which is no toll for regular automobiles and is northbound only. Ardsley is between exits 6A and 7 and is in both directions.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on July 02, 2020, 04:28:48 PM
Quote from: lstone19 on July 02, 2020, 08:17:15 AM
Quote from: webny99 on July 02, 2020, 07:45:32 AM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on July 02, 2020, 02:16:59 AM
There is a toll gantry in Ardsley.
Is that one of the ones that's free for cars?

No. You're thinking of Spring Valley (located between exits 14A and 14B) which is no toll for regular automobiles and is northbound only. Ardsley is between exits 6A and 7 and is in both directions.
And it's technically named the Yonkers toll.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: lstone19 on July 02, 2020, 04:58:35 PM
Quote from: vdeane on July 02, 2020, 04:28:48 PM
Quote from: lstone19 on July 02, 2020, 08:17:15 AM
Quote from: webny99 on July 02, 2020, 07:45:32 AM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on July 02, 2020, 02:16:59 AM
There is a toll gantry in Ardsley.
Is that one of the ones that's free for cars?

No. You're thinking of Spring Valley (located between exits 14A and 14B) which is no toll for regular automobiles and is northbound only. Ardsley is between exits 6A and 7 and is in both directions.
And it's technically named the Yonkers toll.

I knew Ardsley was bugging me but yes, Yonkers toll but Ardsley service area.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: TheDon102 on July 03, 2020, 09:16:21 PM
Not related but the Yonkers Toll is such a waste. Everyone avoids it like the plague including me  :bigass:


Just use the Sprain to I-287 if you wanna get to the Tappan Zee Mario M. Cuomo Bridge. 
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on July 07, 2020, 01:38:49 PM
Finally got a chance to use the Thruway this past weekend (Sunday afternoon) for more than a few miles for the first time since March. Traffic was heavy by pandemic standards, but light by holiday weekend standards. In other words, busy, but manageable, and moving well aside from few rolling roadblocks heading west.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: RobbieL2415 on July 13, 2020, 05:37:51 PM
Drove the mainline over the weekend from Albany to Rochester. I noticed that the progress being made with AET is highly fragmented. Most gantries in Albany are completed and ready for activation, but gradually decline in completion the further west you go.
It would appear as though they are going with a hybrid barrier/closed ticket approach, with gantries on some ramps and at times on the Thruway proper.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: lstone19 on July 13, 2020, 05:49:39 PM
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on July 13, 2020, 05:37:51 PM
Drove the mainline over the weekend from Albany to Rochester. I noticed that the progress being made with AET is highly fragmented. Most gantries in Albany are completed and ready for activation, but gradually decline in completion the further west you go.
It would appear as though they are going with a hybrid barrier/closed ticket approach, with gantries on some ramps and at times on the Thruway proper.
Correct about the hybrid. From the data I've seen, it divides the mainline (15 - 50) that is currently one ticket section into five virtual ticket sections (15-23 plus B1-B3, 25A-34A, 36-39, 39-44, 47-50) plus eight fixed rate gantries between 23-24, 24-25, 25-25A, 34A-35, 35-36, 44-45, 45-46, and 46-47. Note that this means some of the mainline gantries are virtual ticket start, some are virtual ticket end, and some are fixed rate. It will be very interesting in the Syracuse area with 6 gantries of various types (going westbound, 34 - ticket end gantry - 34A - fixed rate - 35 - fixed rate - 36 - ticket start - 37 - 38 - ticket end - 39 - ticket start - 40).


iPad
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on July 13, 2020, 09:15:28 PM
The Buffalo area has a fair amount of work done too.  It seems like they're saving the Rochester-Syracuse portion for last.  There's a map showing the installation status on their website, though I think there's a lag; I saw some construction on the support for the gantries between 44-45, but the map says it's not yet started.
https://www.thruway.ny.gov/cashless/locations.html

While physically it will be a hybrid system, I wonder if billing-wise it will be the same as it is now.  On the map, the gantries at the current ends of the ticket system have the same names, but the new mainline ones don't, just saying things like "between exits 44 and 45".
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: lstone19 on July 13, 2020, 09:46:20 PM
Quote from: vdeane on July 13, 2020, 09:15:28 PM
The Buffalo area has a fair amount of work done too.  It seems like they're saving the Rochester-Syracuse portion for last.  There's a map showing the installation status on their website, though I think there's a lag; I saw some construction on the support for the gantries between 44-45, but the map says it's not yet started.
https://www.thruway.ny.gov/cashless/locations.html

While physically it will be a hybrid system, I wonder if billing-wise it will be the same as it is now.  On the map, the gantries at the current ends of the ticket system have the same names, but the new mainline ones don't, just saying things like "between exits 44 and 45".
I've think it was said somewhere above (can't look easily on this device) that the Thruway planned to do some sort of trip aggregating so that tolls (at least for now) are unchanged. I think they have to assuming 25A will still work as it does now. A trip from 24 to 25A will pass two fixed-rate gantries. Today that toll is $0.00 but 24 to 25 is tolled. The only way I can think of them to do this without a gantry at 25A (which is not planned AFAIK) is time - if you pass the gantries between 24 and 25 and then between 25 and 25A but then don't pass the gantry between 25A and 26 within some period of time, assume an exit at 25A and zero the other two.


iPad
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: RobbieL2415 on July 13, 2020, 10:01:33 PM
I wonder if the gap is due to a lack of a fibre line. Maybe they have to bury one.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on July 13, 2020, 10:09:49 PM
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on July 13, 2020, 10:01:33 PM
I wonder if the gap is due to a lack of a fibre line. Maybe they have to bury one.
It might have more to with the fact that Rochester doesn't have its own maintenance division like Buffalo, Syracuse, Albany, and downstate do.  West of 45 is the easternmost part of the Buffalo section while east of 45 is the westernmost part of the Syracuse section.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: mrsman on July 28, 2020, 07:30:14 AM
Quote from: lstone19 on June 26, 2020, 03:34:17 PM
Quote from: vdeane on June 26, 2020, 01:54:49 PM
One thing to keep in mind is that NY never emphasized the Thruway to the same degree as neighboring states emphasized their toll roads, at least not in my lifetime.  Reassurance markers are just I-87 or just I-90.  Even some guide signs (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.1088231,-77.5880357,3a,75y,291.07h,89.98t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sqlK1E0FPPBBdkIiZwMhXeA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) don't include the Thruway.  Meanwhile, the MassPike and NJ Turnpike post their shields religiously, and the PTC has gigantic oversized shields at Turnpike junctions.

This ultimately comes down to the question of who are roads numbered for.  Locals will adapt, but someone from out of the area who hasn't even heard of the Thruway could get confused, especially as it isn't emphasized on signs.


Valerie, you are quite a but younger than me so your take is interesting (but I'm glad you included "at least not in my lifetime"). You may well be correct that they're de-emphasizing the name (I remember three or four years ago that it seemed every single press release at http://www.thruway.ny.gov/news/pressrel/index.html started "Thruway Authority Announces ..." (now only about half do) as if getting the Thruway Authority name out front and center was the most important thing.

But the Thruway name is not going away anytime soon. My opinion is if they want to number the I-87 and I-90 segments separately, they first need to make name modifications so that the main line isn't all "New York Thruway". You'd want to keep Thruway in the name but just like there is the New England Thruway and Niagara Thruway, maybe Hudson River Thruway for the I-87 segment and for I-90, Lake Erie Thruway for Pennsylvania to Buffalo, Erie Canal Thruway for Buffalo to Albany, and Berkshire Thruway for the current Berkshire Spur. Start emphasizing those names for a few years so people start using them instead of the generic "Thruway", then renumber. Otherwise, you will lead to confusion when people aren't sure what part of "the Thruway" they're on.

What you don't want to do is turn it into the confused mess that is the Pennsylvania Turnpike. Looking at their website, I see they have renumbered the I-95 section. Which means that for the traveler heading westbound off the NJ Turnpike, the exit numbers, in order, are 42, , then take exit 40 to stay on the Turnpike, 351, 343, 340, 339, 20, 333 (and then finally decreasing to the Ohio line). Using the I-476 exit number (20) on the Turnpike mainline is just plain stupid (and I confirmed on Google Street View that that is what they did). They really should bury the Pennsylvania Turnpike name as it just creates the expectation of a consistency that is no longer there.

I do like the idea of naming the N-S and E-W sections to be something different.  Hudson Valley Thruway (87) and Upstate Thruway (90) could both be parts of the NY Thruway system.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: ixnay on July 29, 2020, 09:26:07 AM
This question fits just as well on the NYS Roads thread but since I spotted the sign on the actual Thruway (via roadwaywiz's YT channel) I'll ask it here...

On the countdown signs for exit 18 northbound (between the shields for NY 299 and the Miid-Hudson Bridge) there appears to be the shadow of a NYS highway shield, suggesting that exit 18 once fed a second NYS route besides NY 299.  Is this correct?  GSV's archives in that stretch only go back to 2012.

ixnay
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: crispy93 on July 29, 2020, 10:08:52 AM
Quote from: ixnay on July 29, 2020, 09:26:07 AM
This question fits just as well on the NYS Roads thread but since I spotted the sign on the actual Thruway (via roadwaywiz's YT channel) I'll ask it here...

On the countdown signs for exit 18 northbound (between the shields for NY 299 and the Miid-Hudson Bridge) there appears to be the shadow of a NYS highway shield, suggesting that exit 18 once fed a second NYS route besides NY 299.  Is this correct?  GSV's archives in that stretch only go back to 2012.

ixnay

If I recall correctly, the original sign just said NY 299, and a supplemental sign said "Mid-Hudson Br/Exit 18." At some point, they moved the 299 shield to the left so that they could add a Mid-Hudson Bridge shield.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: crispy93 on July 29, 2020, 10:13:55 AM
Quote from: lstone19 on July 02, 2020, 08:17:15 AM
Quote from: webny99 on July 02, 2020, 07:45:32 AM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on July 02, 2020, 02:16:59 AM
There is a toll gantry in Ardsley.
Is that one of the ones that's free for cars?

No. You're thinking of Spring Valley (located between exits 14A and 14B) which is no toll for regular automobiles and is northbound only. Ardsley is between exits 6A and 7 and is in both directions.

I haven't been through that area in a while, but it was always a "smh" moment watching out-of-state plates all exit into the toll area thinking they had to pay it
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: astralentity on July 29, 2020, 10:24:40 AM
When is the cut over date supposed to be?  I noticed they don't have the gantry for exit 26 marked in green, which has been installed for at least a month or more now.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: machias on July 29, 2020, 11:34:32 AM
Quote from: crispy93 on July 29, 2020, 10:08:52 AM
Quote from: ixnay on July 29, 2020, 09:26:07 AM
This question fits just as well on the NYS Roads thread but since I spotted the sign on the actual Thruway (via roadwaywiz's YT channel) I'll ask it here...

On the countdown signs for exit 18 northbound (between the shields for NY 299 and the Miid-Hudson Bridge) there appears to be the shadow of a NYS highway shield, suggesting that exit 18 once fed a second NYS route besides NY 299.  Is this correct?  GSV's archives in that stretch only go back to 2012.

ixnay

If I recall correctly, the original sign just said NY 299, and a supplemental sign said "Mid-Hudson Br/Exit 18." At some point, they moved the 299 shield to the left so that they could add a Mid-Hudson Bridge shield.

You are recalling correctly. This is absolutely how it was originally signed (with markers on the signs). Back in the all text days, it simply said "ROUTE 299".
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Jim on August 28, 2020, 03:38:33 PM
Regarding AET progress: I noticed that the mainline gantries between 24 and 26 had their lights on for the first time I noticed on my way home yesterday and again on my way to work this morning.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: noelbotevera on August 28, 2020, 07:33:54 PM
Three weeks ago, I clinched the I-87 portion of the NYST north of exit 8 (I-287 East). Some questions, particularly between exits 15-23:

-Why is the Sloatsburg/Ramapo pedestrian bridge closed to civilians? Ramapo is practically a McDonalds with a gas station and it could use variety, which Sloatsburg provides. I can understand why Ramapo was built this way (you're approaching NYC sprawl), but I don't see the point in closing the bridge.
-Why is exit 18 at NY 299 versus US 44/NY 55? US 44/NY 55 is closer to the Mid-Hudson Bridge.
-What's with the triple NY 17 exits? There's 15 (mostly for I-287), 15A (for NY 17..North?), then 16 (the Quickway). Why not do the obvious and reroute NY 17 onto the Thruway between exits 15 and 16? Tolled state routes are nothing new in New York (see: Hudson River bridges).
-A more historical question: why does the Thruway cross the Hudson? The US 9 corridor doesn't seem terribly mountainous versus having to build around the Catskills, which seem to get pretty close to the Hudson (ex. Bear Mountain State Park, where US 9W becomes pretty darn curvy). The Taconic corridor is too mountainous, so building along US 9 - the corridor between the Berkshires and the Catskills - would be the path of least resistance.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: lstone19 on August 28, 2020, 08:27:32 PM
Quote from: noelbotevera on August 28, 2020, 07:33:54 PM
Three weeks ago, I clinched the I-87 portion of the NYST north of exit 8 (I-287 East). Some questions, particularly between exits 15-23:

-What's with the triple NY 17 exits? There's 15 (mostly for I-287), 15A (for NY 17..North?), then 16 (the Quickway). Why not do the obvious and reroute NY 17 onto the Thruway between exits 15 and 16? Tolled state routes are nothing new in New York (see: Hudson River bridges).

Big difference between tolled highways and tolled bridges.

What's now 15 and 15A used to be one interchange where 15 is with NY17 going over the hill via Hillburn. When 15 was reconstructed into a high-speed interchange in connection with the completion of I-287 in NJ, NY 17 North was severed so you could not get from NJ 17 to Hillburn. NY 17 was rerouted via the Thruway (free) between 15 and 15A.

But why should NY 17 stay on the Thruway to 16. Rerouting it is not obvious to me. What's gained? You'd need another route number for what is now 17 in the stretch. And with NY 17 west of Harriman being deemphasized in favor of I-86, there's little to be gained from a through route number (a through number only if you consider NJ 17 to be part of the same route as NY 17).

Quote
-A more historical question: why does the Thruway cross the Hudson? The US 9 corridor doesn't seem terribly mountainous versus having to build around the Catskills, which seem to get pretty close to the Hudson (ex. Bear Mountain State Park, where US 9W becomes pretty darn curvy). The Taconic corridor is too mountainous, so building along US 9 - the corridor between the Berkshires and the Catskills - would be the path of least resistance.

The Thruway has to cross the Hudson somewhere to get to Buffalo. I think you're really asking why go up the west side rather than the east side and then cross near Albany. The east side has the Taconic while the west side had nothing of a high-speed nature. And the Catskills, perhaps more than today, were a big destination. It could and does serve the Catskills from the west side far better than it could from the east side. And for traffic from NJ and points south heading north to Albany on the west side is far better than the double-crossing that traffic would encounter if it went up the east side.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: noelbotevera on August 28, 2020, 08:39:35 PM
Quote from: lstone19 on August 28, 2020, 08:27:32 PM
Quote from: noelbotevera on August 28, 2020, 07:33:54 PM
Three weeks ago, I clinched the I-87 portion of the NYST north of exit 8 (I-287 East). Some questions, particularly between exits 15-23:

-What's with the triple NY 17 exits? There's 15 (mostly for I-287), 15A (for NY 17..North?), then 16 (the Quickway). Why not do the obvious and reroute NY 17 onto the Thruway between exits 15 and 16? Tolled state routes are nothing new in New York (see: Hudson River bridges).

Big difference between tolled highways and tolled bridges.

What's now 15 and 15A used to be one interchange where 15 is with NY17 going over the hill via Hillburn. When 15 was reconstructed into a high-speed interchange in connection with the completion of I-287 in NJ, NY 17 North was severed so you could not get from NJ 17 to Hillburn. NY 17 was rerouted via the Thruway (free) between 15 and 15A.

But why should NY 17 stay on the Thruway to 16. Rerouting it is not obvious to me. What's gained? You'd need another route number for what is now 17 in the stretch. And with NY 17 west of Harriman being deemphasized in favor of I-86, there's little to be gained from a through route number (a through number only if you consider NJ 17 to be part of the same route as NY 17).

Quote
-A more historical question: why does the Thruway cross the Hudson? The US 9 corridor doesn't seem terribly mountainous versus having to build around the Catskills, which seem to get pretty close to the Hudson (ex. Bear Mountain State Park, where US 9W becomes pretty darn curvy). The Taconic corridor is too mountainous, so building along US 9 - the corridor between the Berkshires and the Catskills - would be the path of least resistance.

The Thruway has to cross the Hudson somewhere to get to Buffalo. I think you're really asking why go up the west side rather than the east side and then cross near Albany. The east side has the Taconic while the west side had nothing of a high-speed nature. And the Catskills, perhaps more than today, were a big destination. It could and does serve the Catskills from the west side far better than it could from the east side. And for traffic from NJ and points south heading north to Albany on the west side is far better than the double-crossing that traffic would encounter if it went up the east side.
People are likely aware of NY 17 as the Quickway, and in fact New York encourages using the Thruway to continue on 17 (a sign past exit 16 tells you that NJ 17 is reached via exit 15). Nothing's stopping NYSDOT from decommissioning NY 17's surface stretch; IMO it'd simplify things slightly (use the Thruway to connect with NY 17). However, I did not know about I-287 ruining NJ/NY 17's Thruway connection.

As for the latter response, obviously improving US 9W is out of the question. But, the Taconic is limited to passenger cars - so there's no good high speed route for trucks on the east side of the Hudson. I guess better than nothing on the west side. However, it is true that I hadn't considered the NJ traffic (from NYC suburbs) heading north to the Catskills/Albany, so I suppose crossing the Hudson near NYC instead of Albany would better serve those people. Which raises another question: aren't those the same people who opposed the completion of I-287 north of exit 47? Why would they support the Thruway (admittedly it is a different corridor) but not I-287?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: lstone19 on August 28, 2020, 09:17:03 PM
Quote from: noelbotevera on August 28, 2020, 08:39:35 PM
People are likely aware of NY 17 as the Quickway, and in fact New York encourages using the Thruway to continue on 17 (a sign past exit 16 tells you that NJ 17 is reached via exit 15). Nothing's stopping NYSDOT from decommissioning NY 17's surface stretch; IMO it'd simplify things slightly (use the Thruway to connect with NY 17). However, I did not know about I-287 ruining NJ/NY 17's Thruway connection.

Again, why? What is gained by multiplexing NY 17 on what is already I-87? But I'm one of the people who think people think of toll roads by their names before their numbers.

Quote
As for the latter response, obviously improving US 9W is out of the question. But, the Taconic is limited to passenger cars - so there's no good high speed route for trucks on the east side of the Hudson. I guess better than nothing on the west side. However, it is true that I hadn't considered the NJ traffic (from NYC suburbs) heading north to the Catskills/Albany, so I suppose crossing the Hudson near NYC instead of Albany would better serve those people. Which raises another question: aren't those the same people who opposed the completion of I-287 north of exit 47? Why would they support the Thruway (admittedly it is a different corridor) but not I-287?

Keep in mind that the Thruway was built over 60 years ago in the 50's while I-287 was not finished until the 80's. Opposition to highway construction tends to be very, very local. The people objecting to I-287 IN NEW JERSEY between Montville and Suffern were probably not even there 30 years earlier and were not going to be concerned with what was going on over that line IN NEW YORK. Even if they were there when the Thruway was built, I doubt they were actively supporting its construction, they just weren't objecting (or maybe they did object and New York ignored them).

But you're writing in the present tense as if there's an active decision going on as to where to route the Thruway. It was built over 60 years ago. That shipped sailed before most of us (including me) were born.

Now some wild speculation by me but the Thruway's purpose, when built, was primarily to connect New York state and particularly its major cities and less for local traffic. The west side of the Hudson has always seemed less developed than the east side. It was probably less disruptive to go where it is than up the east side. And like most limited access highways, it was built to supplement the existing local highways, not replace them.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: noelbotevera on August 28, 2020, 09:29:06 PM
Quote from: lstone19 on August 28, 2020, 09:17:03 PM
Quote from: noelbotevera on August 28, 2020, 08:39:35 PM

As for the latter response, obviously improving US 9W is out of the question. But, the Taconic is limited to passenger cars - so there's no good high speed route for trucks on the east side of the Hudson. I guess better than nothing on the west side. However, it is true that I hadn't considered the NJ traffic (from NYC suburbs) heading north to the Catskills/Albany, so I suppose crossing the Hudson near NYC instead of Albany would better serve those people. Which raises another question: aren't those the same people who opposed the completion of I-287 north of exit 47? Why would they support the Thruway (admittedly it is a different corridor) but not I-287?

Keep in mind that the Thruway was built over 60 years ago in the 50's while I-287 was not finished until the 80's. Opposition to highway construction tends to be very, very local. The people objecting to I-287 IN NEW JERSEY between Montville and Suffern were probably not even there 30 years ago and were not going to be concerned with what was going on over that line IN NEW YORK. Even if they were there when the Thruway was built, I doubt they were actively supporting its construction, they just weren't objecting (or maybe they did object and New York ignored them).

But you're writing in the present tense as if there's an active decision going on as to where to route the Thruway. It was built over 60 years ago. That shipped sailed before most of us (including me) were born.

Now some wild speculation by me but the Thruway's purpose, when built, was primarily to connect New York state and particularly its major cities and less for local traffic. The west side of the Hudson has always seemed less developed than the east side. It was probably less disruptive to go where it is than up the east side. And like most limited access highways, it was built to supplement the existing local highways, not replace them.
I suppose I'm wording this poorly, but I-287 reached exit 47 by 1965; the Thruway was built 10 years earlier in 1955. It wouldn't be wrong to assume that the groups who opposed I-287 northward in 1965 were around to oppose projects like the Thruway in '55. To be fair, we are talking different sides of the line here, so perhaps it's wrong to equate NJ road projects with NY road projects.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: lstone19 on August 28, 2020, 09:37:21 PM
Quote from: noelbotevera on August 28, 2020, 09:29:06 PM
I suppose I'm wording this poorly, but I-287 reached exit 47 by 1965; the Thruway was built 10 years earlier in 1955. It wouldn't be wrong to assume that the groups who opposed I-287 northward in 1965 were around to oppose projects like the Thruway in '55. To be fair, we are talking different sides of the line here, so perhaps it's wrong to equate NJ road projects with NY road projects.

As I said, this sort of opposition tends to be very local. I grew up in NJ in a community where there was some NIMBY opposition to I-78 (the section between I-287 and NJ 24). The opposition was barely a blip outside of our immediate area and it was not opposition to any other roads - just the section of I-78 that would pass through our community. I very much doubt that more than a few of the people who would oppose I-287 cared what was going on in New York as it was too far away to be on their radar.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Alps on August 28, 2020, 10:04:06 PM
Quote from: noelbotevera on August 28, 2020, 09:29:06 PM
Quote from: lstone19 on August 28, 2020, 09:17:03 PM
Quote from: noelbotevera on August 28, 2020, 08:39:35 PM

As for the latter response, obviously improving US 9W is out of the question. But, the Taconic is limited to passenger cars - so there's no good high speed route for trucks on the east side of the Hudson. I guess better than nothing on the west side. However, it is true that I hadn't considered the NJ traffic (from NYC suburbs) heading north to the Catskills/Albany, so I suppose crossing the Hudson near NYC instead of Albany would better serve those people. Which raises another question: aren't those the same people who opposed the completion of I-287 north of exit 47? Why would they support the Thruway (admittedly it is a different corridor) but not I-287?

Keep in mind that the Thruway was built over 60 years ago in the 50's while I-287 was not finished until the 80's. Opposition to highway construction tends to be very, very local. The people objecting to I-287 IN NEW JERSEY between Montville and Suffern were probably not even there 30 years ago and were not going to be concerned with what was going on over that line IN NEW YORK. Even if they were there when the Thruway was built, I doubt they were actively supporting its construction, they just weren't objecting (or maybe they did object and New York ignored them).

But you're writing in the present tense as if there's an active decision going on as to where to route the Thruway. It was built over 60 years ago. That shipped sailed before most of us (including me) were born.

Now some wild speculation by me but the Thruway's purpose, when built, was primarily to connect New York state and particularly its major cities and less for local traffic. The west side of the Hudson has always seemed less developed than the east side. It was probably less disruptive to go where it is than up the east side. And like most limited access highways, it was built to supplement the existing local highways, not replace them.
I suppose I'm wording this poorly, but I-287 reached exit 47 by 1965; the Thruway was built 10 years earlier in 1955. It wouldn't be wrong to assume that the groups who opposed I-287 northward in 1965 were around to oppose projects like the Thruway in '55. To be fair, we are talking different sides of the line here, so perhaps it's wrong to equate NJ road projects with NY road projects.
There was not nearly the amount of opposition in the 1950s - in fact, most people loved new highways - compared to the late 1960s.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: SignBridge on August 28, 2020, 10:16:18 PM
Alps is correct. In the 1950's the public mostly welcomed new highway (and bridge) construction as progress. Local roads were jammed to capacity by the ever increasing traffic of the post WWII suburban growth era. When a new freeway opened, now you could go somewhere in 45 minutes instead of 2 hours.

It wasn't until the late 1960's that notable opposition to new Interstate construction developed resulting in the current mess of legal red tape slowing down most new construction today.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: 74/171FAN on August 29, 2020, 10:09:19 AM
Going into fictional territory, the surface portion of NY 17 could easily be renumbered as an extended NY 32.  Then the debatable concurrencies could be eliminated.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on August 29, 2020, 02:58:53 PM


Quote from: 74/171FAN on August 29, 2020, 10:09:19 AM
Going into fictional territory

DENIED.

Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: seicer on August 29, 2020, 08:54:15 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on August 28, 2020, 10:16:18 PM
Alps is correct. In the 1950's the public mostly welcomed new highway (and bridge) construction as progress. Local roads were jammed to capacity by the ever increasing traffic of the post WWII suburban growth era. When a new freeway opened, now you could go somewhere in 45 minutes instead of 2 hours.

It wasn't until the late 1960's that notable opposition to new Interstate construction developed resulting in the current mess of legal red tape slowing down most new construction today.

Depended where. The Quickway was welcomed as it was tourists coming from the city congesting the roadway, but much of that was built in stages from the 1950s into the 1970s. I would think that more of the opposition came during the Robert Moses era of the 1970s as the result of wholesale clearing of neighborhoods for highways (and associated redevelopment projects.) As far as I can research into other segments of NY 17, especially west of Corning, there was not as much opposition to any specific routing with the exception of the Allegany Reservation of the Seneca Nation.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Alps on August 29, 2020, 10:14:10 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on August 29, 2020, 10:09:19 AM
Going into fictional territory, the surface portion of NY 17 could easily be renumbered as an extended NY 32.  Then the debatable concurrencies could be eliminated.
I mean, once I-86 is completed (ha) and NY 17 truncated, this makes sense.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: seicer on August 31, 2020, 08:34:13 AM
Wouldn't it make more sense to renumber the original alignments back to NY 17, since so many of its children (e.g. 17K, 17M) still exist? Or if they are all discontinuous, wouldn't it make sense to renumber those alignments with suffixes (e.g. 17T) or three digits (e.g. 170, 171).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Alps on August 31, 2020, 10:21:32 AM
Quote from: seicer on August 31, 2020, 08:34:13 AM
Wouldn't it make more sense to renumber the original alignments back to NY 17, since so many of its children (e.g. 17K, 17M) still exist? Or if they are all discontinuous, wouldn't it make sense to renumber those alignments with suffixes (e.g. 17T) or three digits (e.g. 170, 171).
You're bringing in different states' numbering rules. After this many decades of the old alignments having other numbers, I wouldn't seek to renumber them back to 17. If anything, I'd renumber the child routes.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: hbelkins on August 31, 2020, 12:03:18 PM
Quote from: noelbotevera on August 28, 2020, 07:33:54 PM
-A more historical question: why does the Thruway cross the Hudson?

To give Cuomo a bridge to rename for his father.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Flyer78 on August 31, 2020, 05:16:52 PM
Quote from: noelbotevera on August 28, 2020, 07:33:54 PM

-Why is the Sloatsburg/Ramapo pedestrian bridge closed to civilians? Ramapo is practically a McDonalds with a gas station and it could use variety, which Sloatsburg provides. I can understand why Ramapo was built this way (you're approaching NYC sprawl), but I don't see the point in closing the bridge.


I was familiar with the one on the I-90 mainline in the 80s and early 90s. (Used to connect the westbound Iroquois to the eastbound Indian Castle, mp 210) After the renovations of the early 90s, all the plaza's were redone, though some had a cheaper rebuild than others - You describe Ramapo well. I guess I don't have an official answer, but I do have a few guesses...

The bridges were pretty basic, minimally heated and certainly not cooled in the summer. They were also not accessible to disabled (stairs only). Per http://www.empirestateroads.com/photos/gallery3.html (11th picture down) the upstate one was removed 2001. Is the Ramapo bridge regularly used at all by staff?

In addition to accessibility, there may also be concern about traffic - you had to cross the service plaza roads to get to the bridge.

Finally, there may be a franchise agreement in place - the McDonald's service plazas were definitely a different design than the other non McDonald's conversions. Per https://www.timestelegram.com/news/20191123/thruway-rest-stops-to-get-total-overhaul (https://www.timestelegram.com/news/20191123/thruway-rest-stops-to-get-total-overhaul), eleven plazas are owned by McDs, and they will be among the last to be renovated under the (proposed) new plans.



Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on August 31, 2020, 05:29:44 PM
Quote from: Flyer78 on August 31, 2020, 05:16:52 PM
Quote from: noelbotevera on August 28, 2020, 07:33:54 PM

-Why is the Sloatsburg/Ramapo pedestrian bridge closed to civilians? Ramapo is practically a McDonalds with a gas station and it could use variety, which Sloatsburg provides. I can understand why Ramapo was built this way (you're approaching NYC sprawl), but I don't see the point in closing the bridge.


I was familiar with the one on the I-90 mainline in the 80s and early 90s. (Used to connect the westbound Iroquois to the eastbound Indian Castle, mp 210) After the renovations of the early 90s, all the plaza's were redone, though some had a cheaper rebuild than others - You describe Ramapo well. I guess I don't have an official answer, but I do have a few guesses...

The bridges were pretty basic, minimally heated and certainly not cooled in the summer. They were also not accessible to disabled (stairs only). Per http://www.empirestateroads.com/photos/gallery3.html (11th picture down) the upstate one was removed 2001. Is the Ramapo bridge regularly used at all by staff?

In addition to accessibility, there may also be concern about traffic - you had to cross the service plaza roads to get to the bridge.

Finally, there may be a franchise agreement in place - the McDonald's service plazas were definitely a different design than the other non McDonald's conversions. Per https://www.timestelegram.com/news/20191123/thruway-rest-stops-to-get-total-overhaul (https://www.timestelegram.com/news/20191123/thruway-rest-stops-to-get-total-overhaul), eleven plazas are owned by McDs, and they will be among the last to be renovated under the (proposed) new plans.
If those bridges were anywhere similar to ones at Angola service area, they are indeed a bit uncomfortable... 
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Flyer78 on August 31, 2020, 09:52:19 PM
From my memory, the Angola bridges have tile floors (at a minimum)... so they may be an upgrade...
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on August 31, 2020, 10:31:46 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on August 31, 2020, 12:03:18 PM
Quote from: noelbotevera on August 28, 2020, 07:33:54 PM
-A more historical question: why does the Thruway cross the Hudson?

To give Cuomo a bridge to rename for his father.

Nicely played. (I originally thought he was referring to the Berkshire Spur crossing, not the I-87/I-287 one.)
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Jim on September 01, 2020, 02:13:23 PM
How do you drive on for 15+ more miles with a gash in your truck, dumping red powder along the way?

https://cbs6albany.com/news/local/man-arrested-accused-striking-overpass-leaving-trail-of-iron-oxide-on-thruway

https://www.timesunion.com/news/article/Troopers-charge-driver-they-say-let-iron-oxide-15530828.php

There was a good picture of the truck where it finally stopped in Amsterdam on Twitter, but I'm not able to track it down today.

I can confirm that the road was very red on my rides both ways yesterday and still somewhat red (with cleanup crews continuing work) on my way by this morning.  Going WB yesterday, I could see smaller patches of the iron oxide on the shoulder here and there out to Exit 27, and also on the Route 30 bridge over the Mohawk.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: empirestate on September 03, 2020, 01:24:54 PM
Quote from: noelbotevera on August 28, 2020, 07:33:54 PM
Three weeks ago, I clinched the I-87 portion of the NYST north of exit 8 (I-287 East). Some questions, particularly between exits 15-23:

-Why is the Sloatsburg/Ramapo pedestrian bridge closed to civilians? Ramapo is practically a McDonalds with a gas station and it could use variety, which Sloatsburg provides. I can understand why Ramapo was built this way (you're approaching NYC sprawl), but I don't see the point in closing the bridge.

If I had to guess, I'd say it's to do with the expense of keeping the bridge up to current codes for public accessibility, including ADA requirements as well as general safety and maintenance.

Quote-Why is exit 18 at NY 299 versus US 44/NY 55? US 44/NY 55 is closer to the Mid-Hudson Bridge.

For one thing, in fact it isn't. The shorter route is via NY 299 (especially if you consider the pre-upgrade routing along New Paltz Road, though I don't know the exact timing of when that occurred). For another, it's closer to New Paltz. The crossing of US 44 isn't near any population center.

Quote-What's with the triple NY 17 exits? There's 15 (mostly for I-287), 15A (for NY 17..North?), then 16 (the Quickway). Why not do the obvious and reroute NY 17 onto the Thruway between exits 15 and 16? Tolled state routes are nothing new in New York (see: Hudson River bridges).

This I'm not sure about, since I don't see why it's obvious that NY 17 would be rerouted. That isn't usual elsewhere in the state, such as where NY 5 or NY 5S run closely parallel to the Thruway; what seems to suggest it would be inevitable here?

Quote-A more historical question: why does the Thruway cross the Hudson? The US 9 corridor doesn't seem terribly mountainous versus having to build around the Catskills, which seem to get pretty close to the Hudson (ex. Bear Mountain State Park, where US 9W becomes pretty darn curvy). The Taconic corridor is too mountainous, so building along US 9 - the corridor between the Berkshires and the Catskills - would be the path of least resistance.

Well, US 9 is indeed less mountainous than the Catskills, but not appreciably less mountainous than where the Thruway actually runs. And US 9W at Bear Mountain is yet another location entirely; it looks like the confusion here is just from comparing areas that aren't comparable.

As for why the Thruway runs up the west side of the Hudson, it's probably simply because there are more population centers there. Newburgh and Kingston, and yes, access to the Catskills, probably provide enough justification. Also remember that I-87, as distinct from the Thruway, was indeed intended to run up the east side of the Hudson, until it wasn't.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Mr. Matté on September 03, 2020, 01:35:58 PM
Quote from: empirestate on September 03, 2020, 01:24:54 PM
Quote from: noelbotevera on August 28, 2020, 07:33:54 PM
Three weeks ago, I clinched the I-87 portion of the NYST north of exit 8 (I-287 East). Some questions, particularly between exits 15-23:

-Why is the Sloatsburg/Ramapo pedestrian bridge closed to civilians? Ramapo is practically a McDonalds with a gas station and it could use variety, which Sloatsburg provides. I can understand why Ramapo was built this way (you're approaching NYC sprawl), but I don't see the point in closing the bridge.
Per this RFP for the plazas, it was scheduled to be demo'd this year (COVID probably halted that): https://www.thruway.ny.gov/external/service-area-rfp/response-01-31-19.pdf

Quote
Quote-A more historical question: why does the Thruway cross the Hudson? The US 9 corridor doesn't seem terribly mountainous versus having to build around the Catskills, which seem to get pretty close to the Hudson (ex. Bear Mountain State Park, where US 9W becomes pretty darn curvy). The Taconic corridor is too mountainous, so building along US 9 - the corridor between the Berkshires and the Catskills - would be the path of least resistance.

Well, US 9 is indeed less mountainous than the Catskills, but not appreciably less mountainous than where the Thruway actually runs. And US 9W at Bear Mountain is yet another location entirely; it looks like the confusion here is just from comparing areas that aren't comparable.

As for why the Thruway runs up the west side of the Hudson, it's probably simply because there are more population centers there. Newburgh and Kingston, and yes, access to the Catskills, probably provide enough justification. Also remember that I-87, as distinct from the Thruway, was indeed intended to run up the east side of the Hudson, until it wasn't.

If I-87 been routed off the Thruway across the Tappio Z. Cuomo Bridge (whether on a new alignment near US 9 or along I-684), when it reentered the Thruway presumably at Newburgh, was there a high-speed interchange already designed there, maybe similar to the current interchange, or was it always planned on being a Breezewood along NY 300?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on September 03, 2020, 08:47:05 PM
Quote from: Mr. Matté on September 03, 2020, 01:35:58 PM
If I-87 been routed off the Thruway across the Tappio Z. Cuomo Bridge (whether on a new alignment near US 9 or along I-684), when it reentered the Thruway presumably at Newburgh, was there a high-speed interchange already designed there, maybe similar to the current interchange, or was it always planned on being a Breezewood along NY 300?
That's an interesting question.  I wonder if that's why it was a Breezewood for so long, when the other freeways had at least a trumpet or double trumpet built?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on September 05, 2020, 09:37:08 PM
Different topic, but all the AET gantries in this area are all installed! Is there an official date for the switch to AET?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on September 06, 2020, 04:39:27 PM
All the gantries were installed system-wide about a week ago.  Still, a lot of them don't yet have the equipment installed.  After that's done, they'll be doing a 30 day test.  No word yet on an official live date.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on September 18, 2020, 05:25:30 AM
And something like a date for AET: "cash tolls end in November"
https://www.wxxinews.org/post/thruway-authority-cash-tolling-ends-november
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on September 18, 2020, 12:04:00 PM
Quote from: kalvado on September 18, 2020, 05:25:30 AM
And something like a date for AET: "cash tolls end in November"
https://www.wxxinews.org/post/thruway-authority-cash-tolling-ends-november

I call that progress. Thanks for sharing!
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Jim on October 13, 2020, 08:13:43 AM
In recent days, jersey barriers are being put up to separate opposing traffic around the Exit 24 tolls, extending the current split points to be closer to the booths.  The one on the east side of the toll booths looks like it's just long enough that it doesn't block the tandem truck lot, and I'm guessing that gap in the barrier will remain after the toll booths are removed.  But it makes me wonder how it's going too work when traffic passing through that area doesn't have to slow down to pass through the toll booths.  As of now, trucks normally can't wait for opening in traffic to get to and from the WB/SB lanes.  They just pull out and traffic stops.  I don't see that working as well once the toll booths are removed.

Unrelated, I hope that the signage in that area will be improved so traffic approaching what will eventually be the former location of the toll booths so traffic that is not familiar with the configuration can have more time to get into the lanes they need to be in to proceed on either I-90 or I-87.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: deathtopumpkins on October 13, 2020, 09:32:56 AM
When the MassPike went AET, most of the tandem lots, park-and-rides, maintenance facilities, etc. did not retain median cut-throughs. Some other method of access was provided for bi-directional access, e.g. a connection to the local street grid. Exit 6 did retain its median cut-through for the tandem lot though, complete with a new turn lane.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on October 13, 2020, 11:45:21 AM
Quote from: deathtopumpkins on October 13, 2020, 09:32:56 AM
When the MassPike went AET, most of the tandem lots, park-and-rides, maintenance facilities, etc. did not retain median cut-throughs. Some other method of access was provided for bi-directional access, e.g. a connection to the local street grid. Exit 6 did retain its median cut-through for the tandem lot though, complete with a new turn lane.
Thinking about exit 24, area I am most familiar with,  there is already some street access to (not from) that lot; but I don't see any option for a tandem to get onto mainline from that lot. Setting up a facility in the median after booth removal may work..
We all hope that spaghetti is going to see some construction in the foreseeable future, but I am not holding my breath given the situation. 
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Flyer78 on October 16, 2020, 11:00:52 AM
Go-live of AET is definitely closer, but still no exact date. Local news outlets have been running stories, mostly parroting the official press release:

http://www.thruway.ny.gov/news/pressrel/2020/10/2020-10-14-cashless-tolling.html

One of the linked pages from there is a history of toll collections, with some nice vintage pictures of toll booths, past tickets, etc.

https://www.thruway.ny.gov/oursystem/toll-collector-history.html
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Jim on October 16, 2020, 12:13:35 PM
Looking this morning at the extra construction on the south/west side of the road just on the Thruway side of the tool booths, I am wondering if the exit from the tandem truck area is being reconfigured so it joins the NB offramp.  That's what looks like to me.  That would eliminate the right turn into the soon-to-be-faster traffic to get on I-90 East and I-87 North.  Doesn't help the left turners leaving the lot who are trying to enter the Thruway though.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on October 16, 2020, 12:46:36 PM
Quote from: Jim on October 16, 2020, 12:13:35 PM
Looking this morning at the extra construction on the south/west side of the road just on the Thruway side of the tool booths, I am wondering if the exit from the tandem truck area is being reconfigured so it joins the NB offramp.  That's what looks like to me.  That would eliminate the right turn into the soon-to-be-faster traffic to get on I-90 East and I-87 North.  Doesn't help the left turners leaving the lot who are trying to enter the Thruway though.
Last I heard, tandem trailers leaving the lot are going to have to exit eastbound and turn around to get to the Thruway.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: empirestate on October 17, 2020, 01:54:38 AM
Quote from: Flyer78 on October 16, 2020, 11:00:52 AM
Go-live of AET is definitely closer, but still no exact date. Local news outlets have been running stories, mostly parroting the official press release:

http://www.thruway.ny.gov/news/pressrel/2020/10/2020-10-14-cashless-tolling.html

One of the linked pages from there is a history of toll collections, with some nice vintage pictures of toll booths, past tickets, etc.

https://www.thruway.ny.gov/oursystem/toll-collector-history.html

It's not exact, but the date is right there in the history page: November 2020.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on October 17, 2020, 12:35:08 PM
Quote from: empirestate on October 17, 2020, 01:54:38 AM
It's not exact, but the date is right there in the history page: November 2020.

There is an exact date, but it has not been publicized yet.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: TheDon102 on October 17, 2020, 01:10:11 PM
Will the thruway authority's capital plans ever become as ambitious as the NJTA :biggrin:
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: storm2k on October 17, 2020, 08:26:52 PM
Quote from: TheDon102 on October 17, 2020, 01:10:11 PM
Will the thruway authority's capital plans ever become as ambitious as the NJTA :biggrin:

the thruway authority oversees something like double or triple the lane mileage of the njta, so who's to say?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cpzilliacus on October 27, 2020, 12:47:07 AM
Quote from: storm2k on October 17, 2020, 08:26:52 PM
Quote from: TheDon102 on October 17, 2020, 01:10:11 PM
Will the thruway authority's capital plans ever become as ambitious as the NJTA :biggrin:

the thruway authority oversees something like double or triple the lane mileage of the njta, so who's to say?

How about 3 lanes each way for a total of 6 between Exit 16 (NY-17, Harriman) and Exit 23 (I-787) outside Albany?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: bluecountry on October 27, 2020, 10:56:53 AM
Quote from: cpzilliacus on October 27, 2020, 12:47:07 AM
Quote from: storm2k on October 17, 2020, 08:26:52 PM
Quote from: TheDon102 on October 17, 2020, 01:10:11 PM
Will the thruway authority's capital plans ever become as ambitious as the NJTA :biggrin:

the thruway authority oversees something like double or triple the lane mileage of the njta, so who's to say?

How about 3 lanes each way for a total of 6 between Exit 16 (NY-17, Harriman) and Exit 23 (I-787) outside Albany?
Not needed.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on October 27, 2020, 11:04:21 AM
Quote from: bluecountry on October 27, 2020, 10:56:53 AM
Quote from: cpzilliacus on October 27, 2020, 12:47:07 AM
How about 3 lanes each way for a total of 6 between Exit 16 (NY-17, Harriman) and Exit 23 (I-787) outside Albany?
Not needed.

Maybe not this year, but certainly needed from June to October every other year.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on October 27, 2020, 02:46:35 PM
Quote from: bluecountry on October 27, 2020, 10:56:53 AM
Quote from: cpzilliacus on October 27, 2020, 12:47:07 AM
Quote from: storm2k on October 17, 2020, 08:26:52 PM
Quote from: TheDon102 on October 17, 2020, 01:10:11 PM
Will the thruway authority's capital plans ever become as ambitious as the NJTA :biggrin:

the thruway authority oversees something like double or triple the lane mileage of the njta, so who's to say?

How about 3 lanes each way for a total of 6 between Exit 16 (NY-17, Harriman) and Exit 23 (I-787) outside Albany?
Not needed.
Not really obvious. I don't know what are the k- and D- factors for Thruway are. Those may be reasonably low, but truck percentage is high. Anyway, Highway Capacity Manual gives 21 to 37 AADT for LOS B in rolling terrain for a 4-lane road. I would expect LOS B range of 30-35 maybe.
Published data for that stretch is minimum of 37, and is 43 anywhere south of Kingston.  So LOS C or worse is all but certain along entire length...   
It is not the end of the world, as far as I remember SC initiated I-95 widening at 50 AADT. SO situation is "survivable", but  "not needed" is definitely an optimistic statement.
But since NYSTA just paid for new Tappan Zee bridge (aka Daddy's bridge), don't hold your breath. 
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on October 27, 2020, 04:03:59 PM
There are a couple factors at play here:


Would I pay a little more to travel on a Thruway that is mostly 6+ lanes? Absolutely, and not just because it's routinely operating at LOS D or worse. But the chances of that happening anytime soon are somewhere between slim and none.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: RobbieL2415 on October 27, 2020, 04:56:53 PM
Quote from: cl94 on October 27, 2020, 04:03:59 PM
There are a couple factors at play here:


  • Between 18 and 23, traffic counts are generally higher on weekends than on weekdays. Thus, the cost-benefit analysis produces fewer benefits relative to cost than if peak traffic occurred on weekdays.
  • NYSTA has no money. As it is, they're barely scraping up enough money to repair bridges and there are a few major spans that will likely require replacement or major rehab in the coming decade. Toll increases are a political non-starter.

Would I pay a little more to travel on a Thruway that is mostly 6+ lanes? Absolutely, and not just because it's routinely operating at LOS D or worse. But the chances of that happening anytime soon are somewhere between slim and none.
Have they every lobbied for the removal/dieting of the TSP, seeing as how it's a free alternative for cars to get to Albany?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: NoGoodNamesAvailable on October 27, 2020, 05:08:05 PM
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on October 27, 2020, 04:56:53 PM
Quote from: cl94 on October 27, 2020, 04:03:59 PM
There are a couple factors at play here:


  • Between 18 and 23, traffic counts are generally higher on weekends than on weekdays. Thus, the cost-benefit analysis produces fewer benefits relative to cost than if peak traffic occurred on weekdays.
  • NYSTA has no money. As it is, they're barely scraping up enough money to repair bridges and there are a few major spans that will likely require replacement or major rehab in the coming decade. Toll increases are a political non-starter.

Would I pay a little more to travel on a Thruway that is mostly 6+ lanes? Absolutely, and not just because it's routinely operating at LOS D or worse. But the chances of that happening anytime soon are somewhere between slim and none.
Have they every lobbied for the removal/dieting of the TSP, seeing as how it's a free alternative for cars to get to Albany?

As far as shunpikes go, I don't think the TSP is one of the more egregious ones. The Taconic is a pretty white-knuckle ride through Putnam and Southern Dutchess counties, and at night deer are a big risk. I live in Southern Dutchess and I don't take the Taconic to or from Albany after dark. The (fairly reasonable) toll on the Thruway is more than worth it for me for a significantly lower chance of hitting a deer. Even when I do take the Taconic I usually cut over to the Thruway on the Rip Van Winkle to save some time. Others agree with me because the northern part of the Taconic is desolate 95% of the time.

Since the Taconic is so regionally important for the Hudson Valley, downgrading the road in any way is simply not feasible.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cpzilliacus on October 27, 2020, 05:53:32 PM
Quote from: cl94 on October 27, 2020, 04:03:59 PM
There are a couple factors at play here:


  • Between 18 and 23, traffic counts are generally higher on weekends than on weekdays. Thus, the cost-benefit analysis produces fewer benefits relative to cost than if peak traffic occurred on weekdays.

I agree.  I am not sure I have ever driven any part of the New York State Thruway network on a weekday, so all of my experience on it is on weekdays and holidays.

Quote from: cl94 on October 27, 2020, 04:03:59 PM
  • NYSTA has no money. As it is, they're barely scraping up enough money to repair bridges and there are a few major spans that will likely require replacement or major rehab in the coming decade. Toll increases are a political non-starter.

The current governor of New York is apparently opposed to any increase in Thruway tolls.

Quote from: cl94 on October 27, 2020, 04:03:59 PM
Would I pay a little more to travel on a Thruway that is mostly 6+ lanes? Absolutely, and not just because it's routinely operating at LOS D or worse. But the chances of that happening anytime soon are somewhere between slim and none.

Another state toll road that was nearly all four lanes divided is the Pennsylvania Turnpike (east-west mainline and the Northeast Extension).  The parts of the Penn Pike that have been reconstructed and widened to six lanes represent a big improvement for Turnpike customers paying those steep and ever-increasing tolls.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on October 27, 2020, 05:54:37 PM
I think NYSTA claiming poverty is more than a little suspicious.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on October 27, 2020, 06:11:18 PM
Quote from: Rothman on October 27, 2020, 05:54:37 PM
I think NYSTA claiming poverty is more than a little suspicious.
They are on the hook for the bridge debt payment ($300M in 2020) and they have high capital expenses right now - cashless project costs something like $250M in 2020 and $500M total.
Without that, things will be just fine. Not "lets do 6 lanes" fine, but good enough for a government job.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on October 27, 2020, 06:16:22 PM
Quote from: kalvado on October 27, 2020, 06:11:18 PM
Quote from: Rothman on October 27, 2020, 05:54:37 PM
I think NYSTA claiming poverty is more than a little suspicious.
They are on the hook for the bridge debt payment ($300M in 2020) and they have high capital expenses right now - cashless project costs something like $250M in 2020 and $500M total.
Without that, things will be just fine. Not "lets do 6 lanes" fine, but good enough for a government job.
I'm sure their finances are above board.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on October 27, 2020, 06:29:11 PM
Quote from: Rothman on October 27, 2020, 06:16:22 PM
Quote from: kalvado on October 27, 2020, 06:11:18 PM
Quote from: Rothman on October 27, 2020, 05:54:37 PM
I think NYSTA claiming poverty is more than a little suspicious.
They are on the hook for the bridge debt payment ($300M in 2020) and they have high capital expenses right now - cashless project costs something like $250M in 2020 and $500M total.
Without that, things will be just fine. Not "lets do 6 lanes" fine, but good enough for a government job.
I'm sure their finances are above board.
Yes, but their revenues and expenses are likely reported somewhat honestly. And debt service is the line they need to borrow for.  Borrowing for cashless transition is probably reasonable, but borrowing to keep debt paid...  :crazy:

I am pretty sure that taking on that debt was ordered from above, though
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Alps on October 27, 2020, 07:44:19 PM
Quote from: kalvado on October 27, 2020, 06:29:11 PM
Quote from: Rothman on October 27, 2020, 06:16:22 PM
Quote from: kalvado on October 27, 2020, 06:11:18 PM
Quote from: Rothman on October 27, 2020, 05:54:37 PM
I think NYSTA claiming poverty is more than a little suspicious.
They are on the hook for the bridge debt payment ($300M in 2020) and they have high capital expenses right now - cashless project costs something like $250M in 2020 and $500M total.
Without that, things will be just fine. Not "lets do 6 lanes" fine, but good enough for a government job.
I'm sure their finances are above board.
Yes, but their revenues and expenses are likely reported somewhat honestly. And debt service is the line they need to borrow for.  Borrowing for cashless transition is probably reasonable, but borrowing to keep debt paid...  :crazy:

I am pretty sure that taking on that debt was ordered from above, though
I thought 2020 was the last year before they were allowed to raise tolls, in the agreement to replace the bridge. Maybe that is specific to the bridge itself, but I expect it to happen soon.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on October 27, 2020, 07:51:47 PM
Quote from: Alps on October 27, 2020, 07:44:19 PM
I thought 2020 was the last year before they were allowed to raise tolls, in the agreement to replace the bridge. Maybe that is specific to the bridge itself, but I expect it to happen soon.

Bridge tolls are being hiked in 2021 and 2022 at minimum. Systemwide tolls are being hiked for cash and OOS users in 2021 and, given the amount of crap I'm hearing Upstate about it, it might be a while before there's another one.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: SignBridge on October 27, 2020, 08:32:41 PM
Wasn't the new Tappan Zee Bridge paid for with some degree of Federal funding?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cpzilliacus on October 28, 2020, 08:08:16 AM
Quote from: cl94 on October 27, 2020, 07:51:47 PM
Quote from: Alps on October 27, 2020, 07:44:19 PM
I thought 2020 was the last year before they were allowed to raise tolls, in the agreement to replace the bridge. Maybe that is specific to the bridge itself, but I expect it to happen soon.

Bridge tolls are being hiked in 2021 and 2022 at minimum. Systemwide tolls are being hiked for cash and OOS users in 2021 and, given the amount of crap I'm hearing Upstate about it, it might be a while before there's another one.

Do you mean bridge tolls on the Thruway network or New York State Bridge Authority tolls?  Or both?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on October 28, 2020, 08:43:27 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on October 27, 2020, 08:32:41 PM
Wasn't the new Tappan Zee Bridge paid for with some degree of Federal funding?
No federal funds for toll roads. Some federal repayable loans at most.
Despite Senator Billary taking a glory ride alongside with Cuomo II on bridge opening, she didn't do much to help with the project.
With the current state of affairs, tolls have to go up by a factor of 1.5 at least. Gradual increase would be taken easier, but this is the result of populist measures - steep catch-up. Will certainly result in more upstate-downstate tensions, as "poor upstate will subsidize rich downstate commuters" is not totally untrue in this case.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on October 28, 2020, 10:55:33 AM
Quote from: kalvado on October 28, 2020, 08:43:27 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on October 27, 2020, 08:32:41 PM
Wasn't the new Tappan Zee Bridge paid for with some degree of Federal funding?
No federal funds for toll roads. Some federal repayable loans at most.
Despite Senator Billary taking a glory ride alongside with Cuomo II on bridge opening, she didn't do much to help with the project.
With the current state of affairs, tolls have to go up by a factor of 1.5 at least. Gradual increase would be taken easier, but this is the result of populist measures - steep catch-up. Will certainly result in more upstate-downstate tensions, as "poor upstate will subsidize rich downstate commuters" is not totally untrue in this case.
Well...$1.6 billion isn't chump change and that's what USDOT loaned NY for the project.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on October 28, 2020, 10:56:54 AM
Quote from: Rothman on October 28, 2020, 10:55:33 AM
Quote from: kalvado on October 28, 2020, 08:43:27 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on October 27, 2020, 08:32:41 PM
Wasn't the new Tappan Zee Bridge paid for with some degree of Federal funding?
No federal funds for toll roads. Some federal repayable loans at most.
Despite Senator Billary taking a glory ride alongside with Cuomo II on bridge opening, she didn't do much to help with the project.
With the current state of affairs, tolls have to go up by a factor of 1.5 at least. Gradual increase would be taken easier, but this is the result of populist measures - steep catch-up. Will certainly result in more upstate-downstate tensions, as "poor upstate will subsidize rich downstate commuters" is not totally untrue in this case.
Well...$1.6 billion isn't chump change and that's what USDOT loaned NY for the project.
Highlighted the keyword here
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on October 28, 2020, 06:41:56 PM
Quote from: cpzilliacus on October 28, 2020, 08:08:16 AM
Quote from: cl94 on October 27, 2020, 07:51:47 PM
Quote from: Alps on October 27, 2020, 07:44:19 PM
I thought 2020 was the last year before they were allowed to raise tolls, in the agreement to replace the bridge. Maybe that is specific to the bridge itself, but I expect it to happen soon.

Bridge tolls are being hiked in 2021 and 2022 at minimum. Systemwide tolls are being hiked for cash and OOS users in 2021 and, given the amount of crap I'm hearing Upstate about it, it might be a while before there's another one.

Do you mean bridge tolls on the Thruway network or New York State Bridge Authority tolls?  Or both?

I meant the new bridge across the Tappan Zee in particular, but the other Thruway system bridge tolls are increasing as part of the 2021 systemwide increase. Bridge Authority has a separate toll increase occurring in 2021 as well that will coincide with introduction of AET on the Newburgh-Beacon Bridge.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cpzilliacus on October 28, 2020, 07:07:52 PM
Quote from: kalvado on October 28, 2020, 08:43:27 AM
With the current state of affairs, tolls have to go up by a factor of 1.5 at least. Gradual increase would be taken easier, but this is the result of populist measures - steep catch-up. Will certainly result in more upstate-downstate tensions, as "poor upstate will subsidize rich downstate commuters" is not totally untrue in this case.

Sounds like Pennsylvania and their motor fuel taxes, kept at the same (low) level as the bridges (especially) and pavement got worse and worse.  Finally, Act 89 rammed through a very steep (by U.S. standards) increase in the tax rates on Diesel fuel and gasoline for an assortment of repairs to the state highway system, especially the hundreds of structurally deficient bridges.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on November 10, 2020, 08:46:28 AM
I wnt through a few of those open road gantries yesterday's night. They are apparently live, even if billing is still the old style.
One thing I don't like is pretty bright light into the face as you drive under the gantry.
Is it just me, or Masspike actually uses something less intrusive? IR seems an obvious option..
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: MASTERNC on November 10, 2020, 02:56:03 PM
Quote from: kalvado on November 10, 2020, 08:46:28 AM
I wnt through a few of those open road gantries yesterday's night. They are apparently live, even if billing is still the old style.
One thing I don't like is pretty bright light into the face as you drive under the gantry.
Is it just me, or Masspike actually uses something less intrusive? IR seems an obvious option..

PA uses the same bright lights for its overhead gantries.  Think Delaware's lights are fairly bright on I-95 as well.  The MD gantry I pass on US 40 doesn't seem as bad.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: 02 Park Ave on November 10, 2020, 07:23:20 PM
Quote from: kalvado on November 10, 2020, 08:46:28 AM
I wnt through a few of those open road gantries yesterday's night. They are apparently live, even if billing is still the old style.
One thing I don't like is pretty bright light into the face as you drive under the gantry.
Is it just me, or Masspike actually uses something less intrusive? IR seems an obvious option..

Perhaps the use of Low Pressure Sodium lighting would be better there.  It disturbs the human circadian rhythm the least of all lighting sources.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: seicer on November 10, 2020, 11:12:13 PM
The bright LED lighting is necessary for the operation of the cameras that capture the plates on the vehicles. They are basically strobe lights that activate when a vehicle passes a sensor. To minimize the impact of having bright lights flash at motorists at night, a set of lights always remain on while the strobes fire. You can see this work in a different setting with the strobe lights at toll plazas that don't require having always-on LED lights.

--

On a related note, I didn't realize the concrete pavement used at the toiling sites was formed off-site and laid into place: https://www.fortmiller.com/first-sections-of-super-slab-installed-on-nys-thruway-cashless-tolling-project/
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on November 11, 2020, 08:32:31 PM
They must think they're getting close to activation, because when I was down near exit 16 today I noticed that the overhead signs for the ORT lanes have been taken down.  A couple of the sign structures have covered up signs for the AET gantry, though the two mile advance only has the sign for exit 16.  There are a couple VMS signs saying "E-ZPass keep left" and "cash keep right".

There are also new covered-up signs on I-90 west approaching the exit 24 toll booth.  Not sure what those are exactly.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on November 11, 2020, 08:46:50 PM
Activation is scheduled for some point in the very near future. I'm not finding an official announcement, so I am not at liberty to share the date, but I'm honestly shocked it hasn't been announced. Massachusetts gave a bit more public warning.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: D-Dey65 on November 11, 2020, 08:58:12 PM
But the question is how well do they work? If they're anything like the Triborough Bridge, or the Francis Scott Key Bridge, they wasted money setting these things up.

Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Jim on November 11, 2020, 09:04:36 PM
Quote from: cl94 on November 11, 2020, 08:46:50 PM
Activation is scheduled for some point in the very near future. I'm not finding an official announcement, so I am not at liberty to share the date, but I'm honestly shocked it hasn't been announced. Massachusetts gave a bit more public warning.

There's this story that's been picked up in various places around the state:

https://www.democratandchronicle.com/story/news/politics/albany/2020/11/11/new-york-thruway-cashless-tolling-poised-to-begin/6249127002/?utm_campaign=snd-autopilot
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on November 12, 2020, 12:27:52 PM
Quote from: Jim on November 11, 2020, 09:04:36 PM
There's this story that's been picked up in various places around the state:

https://www.democratandchronicle.com/story/news/politics/albany/2020/11/11/new-york-thruway-cashless-tolling-poised-to-begin/6249127002/?utm_campaign=snd-autopilot

"As soon as this weekend" is in line with what I have been told. Let's just say that, unless you drive the Thruway on a daily basis, your next trip might be AET.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Jim on November 12, 2020, 12:39:51 PM
I'm tempted to leave my E-ZPass home tomorrow to be able to get my hands on a final-days ticket.  Not willing to pay the "lost ticket" toll amount to be able to keep it, however..
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Jim on November 12, 2020, 12:41:00 PM
And there it is: Cuomo says Saturday.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on November 12, 2020, 12:50:11 PM
Let's hope.  I'm getting sick of dealing with idiots at exits 24 and 45.  That said, last weekend would have likely been better, not only because I would have liked to drive though it AET before updating my website (to figure out how they're doing billing, as no names for the new mainline gantries appear on their website), but also because the weather was great last weekend, while this weekend it's supposed to rain.  I'd hate to see it get pushed back.  At least the rain is forecast for Friday morning and Sunday.

Given the lack of announcement, I honestly wonder if they're even going to have one at all.  They might just be planning to have everyone wake up one day to discover the Thruway is now AET.
(guess they're having an announcement after all)
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on November 12, 2020, 01:21:26 PM
Quote from: vdeane on November 12, 2020, 12:50:11 PM
That said, last weekend would have likely been better, not only because I would have liked to drive though it AET before updating my website (to figure out how they're doing billing, as no names for the new mainline gantries appear on their website), but also because the weather was great last weekend, while this weekend it's supposed to rain.  I'd hate to see it get pushed back.  At least the rain is forecast for Friday morning and Sunday.

No comment.

Quote from: Jim on November 12, 2020, 12:41:00 PM
And there it is: Cuomo says Saturday.

Switchover is tomorrow night at midnight. A little over 34 hours left if you want a toll ticket.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: lstone19 on November 12, 2020, 06:23:23 PM
I wonder how they handle the actual logistics of the changeover. For a period after they switch, there will be people who entered before the switch and received tickets. Someone could enter at Woodbury just a few minutes before the switch and go all the way to Buffalo not getting there for eight hours or so (allowing time for some service area stops).

Or maybe they start photos of non EZ-Pass vehicles a few hours before the switch and so that they have the entry information if they exit after the switch.

No matter how they do it, it seems like the change from one large ticket section to several shorter virtual ticket sections with mainline gantries in the urban sections is a complication, even for EZ-Pass users (e.g. car enters at 15 and at changeover time is already past the gantry between 22 and 23 (end of the new 15 to 23 virtual ticket section) and then is scanned at the gantry between 23 and 24 before exiting at 24. System would have entry at 15, no exit from the virtual ticket section (as that gantry was passed before it went live), then the barrier gantry between 23 and 24).

Thinking some more, I'll bet all the gantries will be scanning several hours in advance so they have records and can reconstruct a trip that crossed the changeover if needed.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Jim on November 12, 2020, 08:03:26 PM
The overhead VMS signs changed from "Coming in November" to "Friday PM" for my commute home.

The pavement restriping on the 24 NB/WB ramp and what looks like the new exit from the Exit 24 Tandem Lot was more visible to my on my exiting EB 24 exiting this morning.

Hopefully the toll booths at 24 will be a high priority for removal once that process begins.  Though I really don't look forward to the high speed weaves that are sure to be on their way once the roadway is clear.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: shadyjay on November 12, 2020, 10:29:04 PM
Quote from: Jim on November 12, 2020, 08:03:26 PM
Hopefully the toll booths at 24 will be a high priority for removal once that process begins.  Though I really don't look forward to the high speed weaves that are sure to be on their way once the roadway is clear.

And I'm assuming at the south end of the ticket system at Harriman/Exit 16, all traffic will be directed through the EZ-Pass only lanes so that you don't have to go through the old booths, if even for a short time.

The Exit 24 toll will definitely push traffic through that cluster at a much higher speed than at present.  But given there's no gantry going up there (and instead, mainline barriers), I'm guessing the Thruway authority has a reconstruction project up its sleeve here, perhaps a direct ThruwayNB->NorthwayNB and NorthwaySB->ThruwaySB ramp.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on November 12, 2020, 11:45:48 PM
Let's address 16 and 24:

- 16 is indeed being rerouted to the E-ZPass lanes. New gantry is up over the express lanes.
- 24...no reconstruction in the next few years, unless they're keeping it really under wraps. There will be a medium-term reconfiguration similar to what we've seen on the Mass Pike. The button copy will be replaced as part of this, so get your pictures now (if it's not gone already).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on November 13, 2020, 12:20:35 AM
Well, I guess if I want a ticket I'll have to go to eBay  :-D.

When are the barriers coming down?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on November 13, 2020, 09:49:12 AM
Quote from: Buffaboy on November 13, 2020, 12:20:35 AM
When are the barriers coming down?

Don't hold your breath. Others may know of a more exact timeline, but last I heard they'll be removed over the course of 2021.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: empirestate on November 13, 2020, 12:57:09 PM
Quote from: cl94 on November 12, 2020, 11:45:48 PM
Let's address 16 and 24:

- 16 is indeed being rerouted to the E-ZPass lanes. New gantry is up over the express lanes.
- 24...no reconstruction in the next few years, unless they're keeping it really under wraps. There will be a medium-term reconfiguration similar to what we've seen on the Mass Pike. The button copy will be replaced as part of this, so get your pictures now (if it's not gone already).

I've started a thread in Fictional Highways where we can imagine reconfigurations of all Thruway interchanges, now that toll booths will no longer be necessary:
https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=27979.0
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: hotdogPi on November 13, 2020, 08:25:35 PM
No more free I-87 ↔︎ I-88?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: lstone19 on November 13, 2020, 08:32:22 PM
Quote from: 1 on November 13, 2020, 08:25:35 PM
No more free I-87 ↔︎ I-88?
According to the toll schedules posted on the NYSTA website, yes there still will be. With no gantry at 25A, I assume it will work on time. For instance, it you're scanned WB at the gantry between 25 and 25A (25/25A for short) but not at the 25A/26 gantry within a certain amount of time, then it will assume you exited at 25A and refund the 25/25A toll (and the same for the 24/25 gantry as the free area for 25A traffic is 24 to 26).

For traffic entering at 25A, I'd assume first scan at 25/25A EB or 25A/26 WB triggers an assumed 25A entry and appropriate toll adjustments.


iPad
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: shadyjay on November 13, 2020, 09:17:56 PM
Quote from: webny99 on November 13, 2020, 09:49:12 AM
Quote from: Buffaboy on November 13, 2020, 12:20:35 AM
When are the barriers coming down?

Don't hold your breath. Others may know of a more exact timeline, but last I heard they'll be removed over the course of 2021.

Yup, that's what the Thruway AET site says.  Now how quick that occurs remains to be seen.  When the Mass Pike converted a few years back, they had a very aggressive toll barrier removal schedule.  Just hours after the system went live, they were already tearing down the booths at the mainline plazas and they were all gone within, what, a month or so?  Regardless, it was very quick.

Now the Thruway is a much longer system and it would take more than a month to remove all the booths.  I'd start with the major I-90 mainline and Berkshire Spur ones (Int 24/Northway as well), and move on to interchanges next.  Not sure how much they're going to get removed, with the onset of colder/winter weather any time now.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Jim on November 13, 2020, 09:38:57 PM
If anyone can't wait until morning to see some of what's been under those covered-up signs for the last several weeks, the Thruway is tweeting some pictures:

https://twitter.com/NYSThruway/status/1327435640720535554
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: SteveG1988 on November 14, 2020, 07:56:23 AM
Just drove it this morning from 0400-0730. It's live and going. All signs are uncovered between NY60 and I690.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Jim on November 14, 2020, 10:05:22 AM
It occurred to me as I was driving SB on the Northway yesterday afternoon to get on the Thruway that there is no clear indication (other than the New York Thruway shields on the signs) that traffic taking the ramp to get on at 24 is entering a toll road.  And now, a toll road without a cash option.  Most other states seem to be much more clear about the fact you're going to enter a toll road if you take this particular ramp.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on November 14, 2020, 11:39:47 AM
Quote from: SteveG1988 on November 14, 2020, 07:56:23 AM
Just drove it this morning from 0400-0730. It's live and going. All signs are uncovered between NY60 and I690.

Great news, can't wait to see how it's going (hopefully sometime in the next few weeks)!  :thumbsup:
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: shadyjay on November 14, 2020, 01:25:12 PM
Quote from: Jim on November 14, 2020, 10:05:22 AM
It occurred to me as I was driving SB on the Northway yesterday afternoon to get on the Thruway that there is no clear indication (other than the New York Thruway shields on the signs) that traffic taking the ramp to get on at 24 is entering a toll road.  And now, a toll road without a cash option.  Most other states seem to be much more clear about the fact you're going to enter a toll road if you take this particular ramp.

Not necessarily.  Its only been within the past few years where some states have added "TOLL ROAD" or "TOLL" black on yellow banners to such signs.  Mass. never used to have any indication that you were turning onto a toll road.  Now its common to see the yellow/black "TOLL ROAD" banner on those ramps.  On Mass Pike entrance signs, there was never a toll road indication, until they went to AET.  Now there's purple "EZ-PASS or Pay-By-Plate" banners.

Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on November 15, 2020, 09:03:22 PM
I found the Design Build Project page for the Thruway, which has the information for the cashless tolling and the booth removal.  Lost of interesting stuff, particularly part 6 and sections 2-5, 15, and 24 of part 7.  One of the documents also noted exit 24, Williamsville, Lackawanna, exit 45, and Caanan as the booths with incentives for early removal (in that order of decreasing reward).
https://www.thruway.ny.gov/business/design-build/

Looking at the cameras on 511 that are pointed at Williamsville and Lackawanna, booth removal has already begun.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Jim on November 15, 2020, 09:07:32 PM
I hope the Thruway plans to do what Delaware did, at least for a while, and put a removed toll booth on display somewhere.  I also hope that one or more of the old blue signs above the toll booths will be moved to a museum.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: storm2k on November 15, 2020, 09:21:29 PM
Quote from: Jim on November 14, 2020, 10:05:22 AM
It occurred to me as I was driving SB on the Northway yesterday afternoon to get on the Thruway that there is no clear indication (other than the New York Thruway shields on the signs) that traffic taking the ramp to get on at 24 is entering a toll road.  And now, a toll road without a cash option.  Most other states seem to be much more clear about the fact you're going to enter a toll road if you take this particular ramp.

IIRC, the requirements for the black on yellow toll banners was something that did not come until the 2009 MUTCD. Hence why it's all over the place if they exist. I would imagine that future sign replacements will include the toll banners.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on November 15, 2020, 09:24:13 PM
Quote from: Jim on November 15, 2020, 09:07:32 PM
I hope the Thruway plans to do what Delaware did, at least for a while, and put a removed toll booth on display somewhere.  I also hope that one or more of the old blue signs above the toll booths will be moved to a museum.
The exit 17 booths actually aren't being removed, though they aren't exactly classic.

Quote from: storm2k on November 15, 2020, 09:21:29 PM
Quote from: Jim on November 14, 2020, 10:05:22 AM
It occurred to me as I was driving SB on the Northway yesterday afternoon to get on the Thruway that there is no clear indication (other than the New York Thruway shields on the signs) that traffic taking the ramp to get on at 24 is entering a toll road.  And now, a toll road without a cash option.  Most other states seem to be much more clear about the fact you're going to enter a toll road if you take this particular ramp.

IIRC, the requirements for the black on yellow toll banners was something that did not come until the 2009 MUTCD. Hence why it's all over the place if they exist. I would imagine that future sign replacements will include the toll banners.
Probably.  They were added to NY 17 as part of the exit 131 project.
http://nysroads.com/photos.php?route=i86q&state=NY&file=102_1519.JPG
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on November 15, 2020, 10:15:03 PM
Quote from: vdeane on November 15, 2020, 09:03:22 PM
I found the Design Build Project page for the Thruway, which has the information for the cashless tolling and the booth removal.  Lost of interesting stuff, particularly part 6 and sections 2-5, 15, and 24 of part 7.  One of the documents also noted exit 24, Williamsville, Lackawanna, exit 45, and Caanan as the booths with incentives for early removal (in that order of decreasing reward).
https://www.thruway.ny.gov/business/design-build/

Looking at the cameras on 511 that are pointed at Williamsville and Lackawanna, booth removal has already begun.

One of our sources in the project has told us that Caanan removal will begin within the next couple days. 24 had demo equipment standing by yesterday.

Most interesting to me are the record plans, particularly Exit 24's 511 pages.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on November 15, 2020, 11:17:34 PM
Since someone brought up the Mass Pike and thinking it was a quick job, the construction site at the western terminus was there for much longer than it needed to be.  Can't tell you how many times I went through there and the work had been done for the parking and whatnot and the 55 mph constuction zone signs were still up.  It was frustrating.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cu2010 on November 16, 2020, 12:15:46 AM
Quote from: vdeane on November 15, 2020, 09:24:13 PM
Quote from: Jim on November 15, 2020, 09:07:32 PM
I hope the Thruway plans to do what Delaware did, at least for a while, and put a removed toll booth on display somewhere.  I also hope that one or more of the old blue signs above the toll booths will be moved to a museum.
The exit 17 booths actually aren't being removed, though they aren't exactly classic.

I wonder why Exit 17's booths aren't being removed? That's an interstate-to-interstate connection... I realize the booths aren't that old but are they seriously going to keep them up forever?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on November 16, 2020, 12:12:47 PM
Quote from: cu2010 on November 16, 2020, 12:15:46 AM
Quote from: vdeane on November 15, 2020, 09:24:13 PM
Quote from: Jim on November 15, 2020, 09:07:32 PM
I hope the Thruway plans to do what Delaware did, at least for a while, and put a removed toll booth on display somewhere.  I also hope that one or more of the old blue signs above the toll booths will be moved to a museum.
The exit 17 booths actually aren't being removed, though they aren't exactly classic.

I wonder why Exit 17's booths aren't being removed? That's an interstate-to-interstate connection... I realize the booths aren't that old but are they seriously going to keep them up forever?

17 has "express lanes" down the middle and NYSTA uses the bridges for other purposes. They're just routing all traffic through the express lanes. Right now, there are two lanes of traffic in each direction, will likely be expanded to 3 by removing one booth per direction.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on November 16, 2020, 12:35:20 PM
Quote from: vdeane on November 15, 2020, 09:03:22 PM
One of the documents also noted ... exit 45 ... as the booths with incentives for early removal

I know I've mentioned this before, but the single lane ramp from I-490 EB to the Thruway EB is going to be a problem once the toll booths are removed. Hopefully they realize how bad that bottleneck is and widen the EB ramp to two lanes as part of the project. Otherwise, I foresee recurring backups well beyond Exit 29.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Jim on November 16, 2020, 01:59:35 PM
Exiting at 24 today, the traffic was all routed through two booths in the middle, with a lot of activity that seems to indicate that demolition work is imminent.  Looks like access to get into the tandem lot has moved to a new ramp just beyond the old entrance.  That was blocked off with orange cones and a state trooper parked across the entrance.

With all of the overhead signs already down or covered and no green or red lane indicators, the toll plaza took on a bleak look.  Combined with the drizzly morning, it looked like a picture out of Cold War-era Eastern Europe.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: 02 Park Ave on November 16, 2020, 04:45:12 PM
I drove up to Cornwall yesterday on the Thruway.  The right hand northbound lanes at Exit 16, which were formerly for both Exit 16 and the main line toll booths, are now for Exit 16 exclusively.  Through traffic has to use the former E-ZPass express lanes.  I thought that this would be the case as the Thruway is only two lanes wide north of there anyway.

However there was no signage indicating this change.  There were signs over the right hand lane for Exit 16 but that was it.  Some motorists must have been surprised.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Jim on November 16, 2020, 07:05:20 PM
And, of course, getting on at 24 this evening, there was a car sitting in one of the toll booth lanes, with 10 or so surely annoyed drivers in line behind, waiting for someone to hand him a ticket.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: MASTERNC on November 16, 2020, 09:07:40 PM
Quote from: Jim on November 16, 2020, 07:05:20 PM
And, of course, getting on at 24 this evening, there was a car sitting in one of the toll booth lanes, with 10 or so surely annoyed drivers in line behind, waiting for someone to hand him a ticket.

This still happens on the PA Turnpike, and it has been cashless for six months.  It's amazing people don't read the signs on the toll booths.  Until the toll booths are removed (the PA schedule has not been accelerated from the original 2022 conversion timeline), it will unfortunately continue.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on November 16, 2020, 09:30:31 PM
This would be part of why there are heavy incentives to at least partially remove the booths so drivers realize that a stop is not required. I don't think we'll have full removal at the major plazas before Thanksgiving, but I would be surprised if I need to drive through toll booth lanes at 24 next week.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: seicer on November 17, 2020, 08:34:10 AM
I watched someone get out of their car and look around for a toll taker while several of us were honking our horns on one of the ramps (where only ONE lane was open). :D
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: 1995hoo on November 17, 2020, 08:44:32 AM
Quote from: seicer on November 17, 2020, 08:34:10 AM
I watched someone get out of their car and look around for a toll taker while several of us were honking our horns on one of the ramps (where only ONE lane was open). :D

Sounds very similar to what happened over seven years ago at the Golden Gate Bridge. I saw the same thing happen at the grocery store when they first rolled out the automated checkout lanes some years back, as well–one man walked up and was baffled as to where the cashier was.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=svzY_uJtvWQ
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: roadman65 on November 17, 2020, 08:57:04 AM
The classic I-95 shield on the NE Thruway plaza at New Rochelle will fall when  the plaza gets removed.  Another part of history done.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: D-Dey65 on November 17, 2020, 09:16:52 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on November 17, 2020, 08:57:04 AM
The classic I-95 shield on the NE Thruway plaza at New Rochelle will fall when  the plaza gets removed.  Another part of history done.
I'm pretty sure that's been gone for a while:
https://www.google.com/maps/@40.9261142,-73.7702059,3a,75y,53.36h,89.54t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s4-dl1etkdG6cP0BRsFayRw!2e0!5s20191101T000000!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en

Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on November 17, 2020, 01:00:35 PM
Quote from: MASTERNC on November 16, 2020, 09:07:40 PM
Quote from: Jim on November 16, 2020, 07:05:20 PM
And, of course, getting on at 24 this evening, there was a car sitting in one of the toll booth lanes, with 10 or so surely annoyed drivers in line behind, waiting for someone to hand him a ticket.

This still happens on the PA Turnpike, and it has been cashless for six months.  It's amazing people don't read the signs on the toll booths.  Until the toll booths are removed (the PA schedule has not been accelerated from the original 2022 conversion timeline), it will unfortunately continue.
That is one reason why I don't like when facilities go AET but don't remove the booths.  The whole point of AET is so that drivers don't have to be inconvenienced by the booths.  Keeping them is just the worst of both worlds.  I don't like it with the Golden Gate, and I don't like it with the PTC (which I don't expect to remove the booths anytime soon, even on their original timetable... now that they're already AET, I doubt they'll see a point, especially given their finances).  Not sure if Maryland is removing booths or not now that they're AET.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: 74/171FAN on November 17, 2020, 01:25:24 PM
Quote from: vdeane on November 17, 2020, 01:00:35 PM
Quote from: MASTERNC on November 16, 2020, 09:07:40 PM
Quote from: Jim on November 16, 2020, 07:05:20 PM
And, of course, getting on at 24 this evening, there was a car sitting in one of the toll booth lanes, with 10 or so surely annoyed drivers in line behind, waiting for someone to hand him a ticket.

This still happens on the PA Turnpike, and it has been cashless for six months.  It's amazing people don't read the signs on the toll booths.  Until the toll booths are removed (the PA schedule has not been accelerated from the original 2022 conversion timeline), it will unfortunately continue.
That is one reason why I don't like when facilities go AET but don't remove the booths.  The whole point of AET is so that drivers don't have to be inconvenienced by the booths.  Keeping them is just the worst of both worlds.  I don't like it with the Golden Gate, and I don't like it with the PTC (which I don't expect to remove the booths anytime soon, even on their original timetable... now that they're already AET, I doubt they'll see a point, especially given their finances).  Not sure if Maryland is removing booths or not now that they're AET.

Hopefully we will not have a CA 75 Coronado Bridge situation with toll booths that have not been used since 2002.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: 1995hoo on November 17, 2020, 02:02:14 PM
Quote from: vdeane on November 17, 2020, 01:00:35 PM
Quote from: MASTERNC on November 16, 2020, 09:07:40 PM
Quote from: Jim on November 16, 2020, 07:05:20 PM
And, of course, getting on at 24 this evening, there was a car sitting in one of the toll booth lanes, with 10 or so surely annoyed drivers in line behind, waiting for someone to hand him a ticket.

This still happens on the PA Turnpike, and it has been cashless for six months.  It's amazing people don't read the signs on the toll booths.  Until the toll booths are removed (the PA schedule has not been accelerated from the original 2022 conversion timeline), it will unfortunately continue.
That is one reason why I don't like when facilities go AET but don't remove the booths.  The whole point of AET is so that drivers don't have to be inconvenienced by the booths.  Keeping them is just the worst of both worlds.  I don't like it with the Golden Gate, and I don't like it with the PTC (which I don't expect to remove the booths anytime soon, even on their original timetable... now that they're already AET, I doubt they'll see a point, especially given their finances).  Not sure if Maryland is removing booths or not now that they're AET.

Heh, I'd say the most extreme example was when the Verrazano went to one-way tolling. The Brooklyn-bound tollbooths remained in place for something like 25 years, although there didn't seem to be many people mistakenly stopping for those.

BTW, when we were on the Pennsylvania Turnpike last month, there was some level of construction at the westernmost toll plaza (Gateway, I think?) and at the western end of the former ticket system, but I wasn't able to get a good look at what they were doing and whether any demolition was involved.

Maryland was removing the Bay Bridge toll plaza. Don't know whether they finished the work; I haven't passed that way since July 2019.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: MASTERNC on November 17, 2020, 08:33:15 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on November 17, 2020, 02:02:14 PM

Heh, I'd say the most extreme example was when the Verrazano went to one-way tolling. The Brooklyn-bound tollbooths remained in place for something like 25 years, although there didn't seem to be many people mistakenly stopping for those.

BTW, when we were on the Pennsylvania Turnpike last month, there was some level of construction at the westernmost toll plaza (Gateway, I think?) and at the western end of the former ticket system, but I wasn't able to get a good look at what they were doing and whether any demolition was involved.

Maryland was removing the Bay Bridge toll plaza. Don't know whether they finished the work; I haven't passed that way since July 2019.

I think there was a plan to expand the Express lanes at the western end of the ticket system on the PA Turnpike.  I haven't heard of anything else.  The schedule was to install gantries and remove toll plazas on the eastern end in 2022 and elsewhere in 2024.

As for Maryland, the Bay Bridge plaza removal was planned pre-COVID and was more to end backups than a plan to end cash tolling.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on November 17, 2020, 09:44:38 PM
Maryland is demolishing the Hatem Bridge plaza right now. Unlike PA, they accelerated their timeline for everything and want to remove the booths as soon as possible.

Re: the Golden Gate Bridge, I maintain that they're leaving those booths to meter traffic as much as anything. There's a RIRO and heavy weave area immediately after the toll plaza, so the booths reduce potential conflicts at the RIRO. There's also the not-insignificant fact that the tolling equipment is mounted in the toll lanes, as geometry makes it difficult to install a gantry elsewhere without closing or heavily modifying ramps.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Mr. Matté on November 17, 2020, 10:31:25 PM
Quote from: cl94 on November 17, 2020, 09:44:38 PM
Maryland is demolishing the Hatem Bridge plaza right now. Unlike PA, they accelerated their timeline for everything and want to remove the booths as soon as possible.

The Hatem Bridge is unusual in that it allows restricted bicycle traffic but they still forced the cyclists to pay the $8 toll. Since that is going AET, are cyclists still getting tolled?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on November 18, 2020, 09:48:16 AM
Quote from: cl94 on November 17, 2020, 09:44:38 PM
Re: the Golden Gate Bridge, I maintain that they're leaving those booths to meter traffic as much as anything.

... which is ultimately what's been happening at Thruway Exit 45 until now. They might as well leave those booths there unless they're prepared to widen the I-490 EB to Thruway EB ramp.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: MASTERNC on November 18, 2020, 09:51:34 AM
Quote from: cl94 on November 17, 2020, 09:44:38 PM
Maryland is demolishing the Hatem Bridge plaza right now. Unlike PA, they accelerated their timeline for everything and want to remove the booths as soon as possible.

Hatem and Key Bridge toll plaza removals were also planned pre-COVID.  If they start removing the booths at the tunnels and I-95, it's a different story.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: D-Dey65 on November 18, 2020, 10:29:45 AM
Quote from: Mr. Matté on November 17, 2020, 10:31:25 PM
Quote from: cl94 on November 17, 2020, 09:44:38 PM
Maryland is demolishing the Hatem Bridge plaza right now. Unlike PA, they accelerated their timeline for everything and want to remove the booths as soon as possible.

The Hatem Bridge is unusual in that it allows restricted bicycle traffic but they still forced the cyclists to pay the $8 toll. Since that is going AET, are cyclists still getting tolled?
If they are, I hope they start charging a lot less. Still, I'm disappointed I never took any pictures of the toll plaza.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on November 18, 2020, 12:44:12 PM
As of noon today, exit 24 still had all the booths - but there were some orange lane control signs for westbound traffic and an excavator moved from the shoulder to position few feet away from booths. I would bet on at least some booths demolished by the end of the day.   
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: empirestate on November 18, 2020, 11:43:21 PM
Quote from: webny99 on November 18, 2020, 09:48:16 AM
Quote from: cl94 on November 17, 2020, 09:44:38 PM
Re: the Golden Gate Bridge, I maintain that they're leaving those booths to meter traffic as much as anything.

... which is ultimately what's been happening at Thruway Exit 45 until now. They might as well leave those booths there unless they're prepared to widen the I-490 EB to Thruway EB ramp.

I wonder if there's a chance to segregate EB and WB Thruway traffic in advance of the booths? Really, this would be helpful at any of the trumpet interchanges, so there isn't as much jockeying for position in the short distance between the booths and the ramps.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on November 19, 2020, 08:05:08 AM
Quote from: empirestate on November 18, 2020, 11:43:21 PM
Quote from: webny99 on November 18, 2020, 09:48:16 AM
Quote from: cl94 on November 17, 2020, 09:44:38 PM
Re: the Golden Gate Bridge, I maintain that they're leaving those booths to meter traffic as much as anything.

... which is ultimately what's been happening at Thruway Exit 45 until now. They might as well leave those booths there unless they're prepared to widen the I-490 EB to Thruway EB ramp.

I wonder if there's a chance to segregate EB and WB Thruway traffic in advance of the booths? Really, this would be helpful at any of the trumpet interchanges, so there isn't as much jockeying for position in the short distance between the booths and the ramps.

Interesting. I can think of several locations where that could work nicely (Exit 44, for example), but the termini of I-490 aren't among them because of the close proximity of Exits 1 and 29, respectively.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on November 19, 2020, 08:13:38 AM
Another exit I haven't heard much about is 31 (Utica). Personally, I'd love to see the trumpet torn down completely and replaced with slip ramps to/from the west (near where NY 49 splits off), and to/from the east (near Leland Ave).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: RobbieL2415 on November 19, 2020, 08:41:22 AM
Why does Exit 45 advance signage not mention NY 96? Will it mention it once the toll plazas are removed?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Jim on November 19, 2020, 11:23:06 AM
Quote from: kalvado on November 18, 2020, 12:44:12 PM
As of noon today, exit 24 still had all the booths - but there were some orange lane control signs for westbound traffic and an excavator moved from the shoulder to position few feet away from booths. I would bet on at least some booths demolished by the end of the day.

Sure enough, I just went through the 24 tolls and the 3 rightmost booths on the westbound direction are gone.  The removed booths themselves are lined up on the shoulder, a pretty odd sight.  It also looked like paving work was underway in the area of the removed booths, so I expect WB traffic to be moved over there soon and demolition will continue.

I've been taking lots of pictures over the last few weeks as I drive through, and hope to pull them off the camera some time soon.  Unfortunately, these have all been solo commuting trips so I'm not expecting a ton of good quality.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: jwags on November 19, 2020, 11:54:58 AM
I found this page very interesting. It describes the new tolling segments in detail. I understand they did this to allow for interchange expansion but overall it seems like a strange implementation. It shows in the toll schedule that most of the mainline gantry's charge tolls that are less than $0.25. Almost seems not worth the construction cost. Seems reminiscent of the $0.10 tolls that RI used to charge on the Sakonnet river bridge.

http://www.thruway.ny.gov/cashless/billing-segments.html
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: lstone19 on November 19, 2020, 12:28:11 PM
Quote from: jwags on November 19, 2020, 11:54:58 AM
I found this page very interesting. It describes the new tolling segments in detail. I understand they did this to allow for interchange expansion but overall it seems like a strange implementation. It shows in the toll schedule that most of the mainline gantry's charge tolls that are less than $0.25. Almost seems not worth the construction cost. Seems reminiscent of the $0.10 tolls that RI used to charge on the Sakonnet river bridge.

What I find odd is the back-to-back virtual ticket sections (VTS) from 36 to 39 and 39 to 44. It allows no ramp gantry at 39 but why the mini 36 to 39 section. That requires one more gantry than if they had just made 36 to 39 more fixed toll highway gantrys. As impletmented, it requires 36/37 (meaning between 36 and 37) and 38/39 highway gantries to start and end the VTS and ramp gantries at 37 and 38. Had they just gone with more fixed toll gantries, the 36/37 and 38/39 gantries become fixed toll gantries and the 37 and 38 ramp gantries would be replaced with a single 37/38 fixed toll highway gantry.

New toll schedules can be found at http://www.thruway.ny.gov/travelers/tolls/schedules/index.html. Gotta love the $0.04 toll to go between 36 and 37.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on November 19, 2020, 01:10:32 PM
Quote from: jwags on November 19, 2020, 11:54:58 AM
I found this page very interesting. It describes the new tolling segments in detail. I understand they did this to allow for interchange expansion but overall it seems like a strange implementation. It shows in the toll schedule that most of the mainline gantry's charge tolls that are less than $0.25. Almost seems not worth the construction cost. Seems reminiscent of the $0.10 tolls that RI used to charge on the Sakonnet river bridge.

http://www.thruway.ny.gov/cashless/billing-segments.html
Yeah, seriously.  I understand the physical implementation, but why not have the computer process it as once charge like the MassPike did?  Or, if they insist on blowing up everyone's statements, at least give the gantries names to be consistent with the rest of the system!  This is literally the stupidest possible way to implement the billing.

Quote from: webny99 on November 19, 2020, 08:13:38 AM
Another exit I haven't heard much about is 31 (Utica). Personally, I'd love to see the trumpet torn down completely and replaced with slip ramps to/from the west (near where NY 49 splits off), and to/from the east (near Leland Ave).
I'd love to see something like that, but it would need some reconfiguration to maintain local access to/from Genesee Street.

Quote from: webny99 on November 19, 2020, 08:05:08 AM
Quote from: empirestate on November 18, 2020, 11:43:21 PM
Quote from: webny99 on November 18, 2020, 09:48:16 AM
Quote from: cl94 on November 17, 2020, 09:44:38 PM
Re: the Golden Gate Bridge, I maintain that they're leaving those booths to meter traffic as much as anything.

... which is ultimately what's been happening at Thruway Exit 45 until now. They might as well leave those booths there unless they're prepared to widen the I-490 EB to Thruway EB ramp.

I wonder if there's a chance to segregate EB and WB Thruway traffic in advance of the booths? Really, this would be helpful at any of the trumpet interchanges, so there isn't as much jockeying for position in the short distance between the booths and the ramps.

Interesting. I can think of several locations where that could work nicely (Exit 44, for example), but the termini of I-490 aren't among them because of the close proximity of Exits 1 and 29, respectively.
Don't forget the Loomis Road/Gateway Drive RIROs.  And in any case, would such be needed after the booths are demolished?  And you'd have to put up temporary signs... seems like more trouble than it's worth, to me.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: lstone19 on November 19, 2020, 01:43:43 PM
Quote from: vdeane on November 19, 2020, 01:10:32 PM
Yeah, seriously.  I understand the physical implementation, but why not have the computer process it as once charge like the MassPike did?  Or, if they insist on blowing up everyone's statements, at least give the gantries names to be consistent with the rest of the system!  This is literally the stupidest possible way to implement the billing.

Particularly since as near as I can figure out, handling 25A requires some back-office post-processing as there is not a gantry at 25A for them to directly determine who entered or exited at 25A. I'm assuming it will work something like this:
- Scanned at the 24/25 gantry and charged.
- Scanned at the 25/25A gantry and charged.
- After some reasonable period of time, if not scanned at the 25A/26 gantry (start of the 25A to 34A VTS), assume car exited at 25A and refund the 24/25 and 25/25A tolls.

Even if entering at 25A, you'll probably be initially charged and then refunded as a delay in receiving a transaction from another gantry (it happens, at least here in Illinois), could cause the transactions to be received out of order. If that happens, just because the first scan received by the master system was just after 25A doesn't mean a before 25A scan isn't coming.

Anyway, due to the 25A issue, the system needs to put the scans together to determine where a car initially entered and finally left so why not put that altogether into one toll transaction on your statement.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on November 19, 2020, 02:47:49 PM
Quote from: vdeane on November 19, 2020, 01:10:32 PM
Quote from: webny99 on November 19, 2020, 08:05:08 AM
Quote from: empirestate on November 18, 2020, 11:43:21 PM
I wonder if there's a chance to segregate EB and WB Thruway traffic in advance of the booths? Really, this would be helpful at any of the trumpet interchanges, so there isn't as much jockeying for position in the short distance between the booths and the ramps.
Interesting. I can think of several locations where that could work nicely (Exit 44, for example), but the termini of I-490 aren't among them because of the close proximity of Exits 1 and 29, respectively.
Don't forget the Loomis Road/Gateway Drive RIROs.  And in any case, would such be needed after the booths are demolished?  And you'd have to put up temporary signs... seems like more trouble than it's worth, to me.

Both good points, and I had actually forgotten that the Exit 44 entrance is only one lane anyways... so there wouldn't be much point there.

Exit 25A might be a better example of where pre-segregation could work, obviously in a theoretical world in which the booths weren't coming down.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on November 19, 2020, 05:11:52 PM
Drove through 24 about 45 minutes ago. 3-4 booths are down.

As far as 17, currently set up as 3 lanes through the middle for traffic to/from 84/300, with traffic entering the Thruway from the tandem lot/offices/NYSP barracks using the rightmost booth on the entry side.

No real work at B1 or B2 yet, but those are not a priority. One of our fellow members informed me earlier that B3 demolition is ongoing (night work) and should be complete by Thanksgiving.

Outside of my area, 50 might be down by the weekend, with that crew moving to 55 next week to get that done before the holiday.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: MASTERNC on November 19, 2020, 08:07:26 PM
Quote from: cl94 on November 19, 2020, 05:11:52 PM
Drove through 24 about 45 minutes ago. 3-4 booths are down.

As far as 17, currently set up as 3 lanes through the middle for traffic to/from 84/300, with traffic entering the Thruway from the tandem lot/offices/NYSP barracks using the rightmost booth on the entry side.

No real work at B1 or B2 yet, but those are not a priority. One of our fellow members informed me earlier that B3 demolition is ongoing (night work) and should be complete by Thanksgiving.

Outside of my area, 50 might be down by the weekend, with that crew moving to 55 next week to get that done before the holiday.

You would be right about 50

https://twitter.com/NYSThruway/status/1329469688003358723
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on November 19, 2020, 08:22:32 PM
I wonder why the Thruway doesn't have a "Project Map - Phase II" for booth removal on their site like they had "Project Map - Phase I" for gantry installation.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on November 19, 2020, 10:41:12 PM
Quote from: MASTERNC on November 19, 2020, 08:07:26 PM
Quote from: cl94 on November 19, 2020, 05:11:52 PM
Outside of my area, 50 might be down by the weekend, with that crew moving to 55 next week to get that done before the holiday.

You would be right about 50

[tweet snipped]

Exciting! That Williamsville Barrier is the single one I was most excited about seeing removed. :cheers:
I can't wait to drive through there with the booths gone. It will be interesting to see how the signage and lane configurations for Exit 50 are handled. I'd like to see six lanes extended to Exit 49, but I'm not holding my breath, at least for now.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: GenExpwy on November 20, 2020, 02:49:20 AM
Quote from: lstone19 on November 19, 2020, 01:43:43 PM
Quote from: vdeane on November 19, 2020, 01:10:32 PM
Yeah, seriously.  I understand the physical implementation, but why not have the computer process it as once charge like the MassPike did?  Or, if they insist on blowing up everyone's statements, at least give the gantries names to be consistent with the rest of the system!  This is literally the stupidest possible way to implement the billing.

Particularly since as near as I can figure out, handling 25A requires some back-office post-processing as there is not a gantry at 25A for them to directly determine who entered or exited at 25A. I'm assuming it will work something like this:
- Scanned at the 24/25 gantry and charged.
- Scanned at the 25/25A gantry and charged.
- After some reasonable period of time, if not scanned at the 25A/26 gantry (start of the 25A to 34A VTS), assume car exited at 25A and refund the 24/25 and 25/25A tolls.

Even if entering at 25A, you'll probably be initially charged and then refunded as a delay in receiving a transaction from another gantry (it happens, at least here in Illinois), could cause the transactions to be received out of order. If that happens, just because the first scan received by the master system was just after 25A doesn't mean a before 25A scan isn't coming.

Anyway, due to the 25A issue, the system needs to put the scans together to determine where a car initially entered and finally left so why not put that altogether into one toll transaction on your statement.

I can think of another complication there: the gantry between 25 and 24 is east of the Guilderland (eastbound) Service Area. Consider this scenario:

- Alice enters at 25A, exits at 25, does some business in Schenectady, re-enters at 25, and exits at 24.

- Bob enters at 25A, has a leisurely lunch at the Service Area, and exits at 24.

As I understand it, Alice should not be charged for the 25A to 25 trip, and should be charged for the separate 25 to 24 trip; while Bob's trip should be completely free no matter how slowly he ate his McNuggets. But how would the mainline gantries tell them apart?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on November 20, 2020, 08:19:41 AM
Definitely an interesting situation there, but I guess it depends on the specifics of the timing.

Say they build in an extra hour, to account for people stopping at the service area. If Bob takes more than an hour at the service area, he gets charged for 25 to 24. If Alice can do her stops in Schenectady and get back on in less than an hour, she gets to go from 25 to 24 for free. Either way, it's tough to imagine that comes into play more than a handful of times per day, if even that.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: lstone19 on November 20, 2020, 08:35:12 AM
Quote from: webny99 on November 20, 2020, 08:19:41 AM
Definitely an interesting situation there, but I guess it depends on the specifics of the timing.

Say they build in an extra hour, to account for people stopping at the service area. If Bob takes more than an hour at the service area, he gets charged for 25 to 24. If Alice can do her stops in Schenectady and get back on in less than an hour, she gets to go from 25 to 24 for free. Either way, it's tough to imagine that comes into play more than a handful of times per day, if even that.

And I'm sure there are some cheap people who would exit at 25A, make a U-turn at the first exit, and get right back on to get a free ride between 24 and 26. That won't work with time being used to indirectly determine who entered or exited at 25A.

Similar with timing being used to make assumptions about what you did, here in Chicago, I've had CTA's (transit) fare collection system assume a transfer where I actually had ridden A to B, done my business at B, and re-entered to return to A. Should have been two fares but I got away with a one fare plus a transfer.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: MASTERNC on November 20, 2020, 08:41:53 AM
Quote from: webny99 on November 19, 2020, 10:41:12 PM
Quote from: MASTERNC on November 19, 2020, 08:07:26 PM
Quote from: cl94 on November 19, 2020, 05:11:52 PM
Outside of my area, 50 might be down by the weekend, with that crew moving to 55 next week to get that done before the holiday.

You would be right about 50

[tweet snipped]

Exciting! That Williamsville Barrier is the single one I was most excited about seeing removed. :cheers:
I can't wait to drive through there with the booths gone. It will be interesting to see how the signage and lane configurations for Exit 50 are handled. I'd like to see six lanes extended to Exit 49, but I'm not holding my breath, at least for now.

This might give you an idea of lane configurations right now

https://twitter.com/NYSThruway/status/1328725084899520513
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on November 20, 2020, 11:26:44 AM
Quote from: webny99 on November 20, 2020, 08:19:41 AM
Definitely an interesting situation there, but I guess it depends on the specifics of the timing.

Say they build in an extra hour, to account for people stopping at the service area. If Bob takes more than an hour at the service area, he gets charged for 25 to 24. If Alice can do her stops in Schenectady and get back on in less than an hour, she gets to go from 25 to 24 for free. Either way, it's tough to imagine that comes into play more than a handful of times per day, if even that.
With Thruway, there is an easier way to deal with the issue - "submit your claim in writing via USPS". Cost of a stamp outweighs extra toll by a lot... 
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on November 20, 2020, 11:31:13 AM
Quote from: GenExpwy on November 20, 2020, 02:49:20 AM
I can think of another complication there: the gantry between 25 and 24 is east of the Guilderland (eastbound) Service Area. Consider this scenario:

- Alice enters at 25A, exits at 25, does some business in Schenectady, re-enters at 25, and exits at 24.

- Bob enters at 25A, has a leisurely lunch at the Service Area, and exits at 24.

As I understand it, Alice should not be charged for the 25A to 25 trip, and should be charged for the separate 25 to 24 trip; while Bob's trip should be completely free no matter how slowly he ate his McNuggets. But how would the mainline gantries tell them apart?

It won't. Service areas allow 4 hour parking, so they would theoretically need to allow travel time between gantries + 4 hours for free passage.

Quote from: lstone19 on November 20, 2020, 08:35:12 AM
And I'm sure there are some cheap people who would exit at 25A, make a U-turn at the first exit, and get right back on to get a free ride between 24 and 26. That won't work with time being used to indirectly determine who entered or exited at 25A.

I mean, I've planned gas stops for the truck stop at 25A to get a free ride (or at least a partial free ride). Totally legitimate and something a not-insignificant amount of people do.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Jim on November 20, 2020, 11:38:04 AM
I've also hopped on and off at various exits for whatever purpose and enjoyed the benefit that my commuter plan's "first 30 miles" would reset and reduce my toll.  I guess that won't work anymore within segments with the mainline tolls instead of ramp tolls.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: seicer on November 20, 2020, 11:40:47 AM
Quote from: cl94 on November 20, 2020, 11:31:13 AM
Quote from: GenExpwy on November 20, 2020, 02:49:20 AM
I can think of another complication there: the gantry between 25 and 24 is east of the Guilderland (eastbound) Service Area. Consider this scenario:

- Alice enters at 25A, exits at 25, does some business in Schenectady, re-enters at 25, and exits at 24.

- Bob enters at 25A, has a leisurely lunch at the Service Area, and exits at 24.

As I understand it, Alice should not be charged for the 25A to 25 trip, and should be charged for the separate 25 to 24 trip; while Bob's trip should be completely free no matter how slowly he ate his McNuggets. But how would the mainline gantries tell them apart?

It won't. Service areas allow 4 hour parking, so they would theoretically need to allow travel time between gantries + 4 hours for free passage.

I've car camped (>6 hours) before and after the NYSTA conversion and have had no issues.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on November 20, 2020, 12:58:12 PM
Quote from: webny99 on November 19, 2020, 10:41:12 PM
Quote from: MASTERNC on November 19, 2020, 08:07:26 PM
Quote from: cl94 on November 19, 2020, 05:11:52 PM
Outside of my area, 50 might be down by the weekend, with that crew moving to 55 next week to get that done before the holiday.

You would be right about 50

[tweet snipped]

Exciting! That Williamsville Barrier is the single one I was most excited about seeing removed. :cheers:
I can't wait to drive through there with the booths gone. It will be interesting to see how the signage and lane configurations for Exit 50 are handled. I'd like to see six lanes extended to Exit 49, but I'm not holding my breath, at least for now.
Yeah, it doesn't look like they have plans to.  I don't believe those gantries are wide enough, and page 10 of their terminus concept plans (https://newnybridge.sharepoint.com/sites/DesignBuildProjects/Shared%20Documents/Forms/AllItems.aspx?originalPath=aHR0cHM6Ly9uZXdueWJyaWRnZS5zaGFyZXBvaW50LmNvbS86Zjovcy9EZXNpZ25CdWlsZFByb2plY3RzL0VzcWZlUW4zRmpSR3RzZnNvdC05WGpzQmw3d05INTZBV2g5MUxiME9NNldueXc%5FcnRpbWU9Um5tWjlYeU4yRWc&id=%2Fsites%2FDesignBuildProjects%2FShared%20Documents%2FStatewide%20Cashless%20Tolling%2FConformed%20RFP%20%2D%20Part%207%20Engineering%20Data%2FPart%207%2C%20Section%20%205%20%2D%20Terminus%20Concept%20Plans%2FNYSTA%20Terminus%20Locations%204%2E29%2E19%2Epdf&parent=%2Fsites%2FDesignBuildProjects%2FShared%20Documents%2FStatewide%20Cashless%20Tolling%2FConformed%20RFP%20%2D%20Part%207%20Engineering%20Data%2FPart%207%2C%20Section%20%205%20%2D%20Terminus%20Concept%20Plans) actually has the westbound approach reduced in width from the existing three lanes to two (even though there is probably enough room to strip in a third WB lane under NY 277; the span of the bridge over the EB lanes doesn't look like it's wider than the span over the WB lanes, anyways, and the WB lanes look a little wide on street view).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: empirestate on November 20, 2020, 03:12:14 PM
Quote from: webny99 on November 19, 2020, 08:05:08 AM
Interesting. I can think of several locations where that could work nicely (Exit 44, for example), but the termini of I-490 aren't among them because of the close proximity of Exits 1 and 29, respectively.

Exit 1 is too close, but I think 29 is just far enough away for it to work. The bigger obstacle would be the simple fact that only one lane exists for EB through movements.

Quote from: RobbieL2415 on November 19, 2020, 08:41:22 AM
Why does Exit 45 advance signage not mention NY 96? Will it mention it once the toll plazas are removed?

My guess is that NY 96 doesn't serve any substantially different destinations than I-490 does (that aren't also served by other exits, such as 44).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on November 20, 2020, 04:27:25 PM
Quote from: empirestate on November 20, 2020, 03:12:14 PM
Exit 1 is too close, but I think 29 is just far enough away for it to work. The bigger obstacle would be the simple fact that only one lane exists for EB through movements.

Yeah, that is definitely the biggest issue there, which is why I think the EB ramp should be widened regardless, but especially once the booths come down.


Quote from: vdeane on November 20, 2020, 12:58:12 PM
Yeah, it doesn't look like they have plans to.  I don't believe those gantries are wide enough, and page 10 of their terminus concept plans (https://newnybridge.sharepoint.com/sites/DesignBuildProjects/Shared%20Documents/Forms/AllItems.aspx?originalPath=aHR0cHM6Ly9uZXdueWJyaWRnZS5zaGFyZXBvaW50LmNvbS86Zjovcy9EZXNpZ25CdWlsZFByb2plY3RzL0VzcWZlUW4zRmpSR3RzZnNvdC05WGpzQmw3d05INTZBV2g5MUxiME9NNldueXc%5FcnRpbWU9Um5tWjlYeU4yRWc&id=%2Fsites%2FDesignBuildProjects%2FShared%20Documents%2FStatewide%20Cashless%20Tolling%2FConformed%20RFP%20%2D%20Part%207%20Engineering%20Data%2FPart%207%2C%20Section%20%205%20%2D%20Terminus%20Concept%20Plans%2FNYSTA%20Terminus%20Locations%204%2E29%2E19%2Epdf&parent=%2Fsites%2FDesignBuildProjects%2FShared%20Documents%2FStatewide%20Cashless%20Tolling%2FConformed%20RFP%20%2D%20Part%207%20Engineering%20Data%2FPart%207%2C%20Section%20%205%20%2D%20Terminus%20Concept%20Plans) actually has the westbound approach reduced in width from the existing three lanes to two (even though there is probably enough room to strip in a third WB lane under NY 277; the span of the bridge over the EB lanes doesn't look like it's wider than the span over the WB lanes, anyways, and the WB lanes look a little wide on street view).

At the very least, it would make sense to keep it three lanes westbound from where the current third lane begins to Exit 50. Unless I'm missing something, I don't see any reason why you couldn't fit a third lane under NY 277. After all, they already did just that on the eastbound side. The current two westbound lanes have always struck me as extra-wide, too.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Jim on November 21, 2020, 06:06:43 PM
To continue the play-by-play of the Exit 24 toll plaza demolition, as of this afternoon, all traffic in both directions was going through the middle 7 lanes, which are the only ones still standing.  They've been working from both ends.

Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on November 21, 2020, 08:22:39 PM
Interesting.  When I went through there, WB traffic was being routed around the booths.  It was nice to not go through them.

Meanwhile at exit 45, the booths are gone and traffic is in the final lane configuration, though paving hasn't been done yet.  It's really nice (especially since I nearly always had to deal with some slowpoke at these two interchanges), but it does make entering and exiting the Thruway anti-climatic.  The experience is more like the Buffalo and downstate portions, where it's just another road that happens to be maintained by a different organization.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Jim on November 21, 2020, 08:32:45 PM
Quote from: Jim on November 21, 2020, 06:06:43 PM
To continue the play-by-play of the Exit 24 toll plaza demolition, as of this afternoon, all traffic in both directions was going through the middle 7 lanes, which are the only ones still standing.  They've been working from both ends.

I either didn't observe the situation correctly earlier or it changed by the time I went back through getting on the Thruway, because I went around the remaining booths.  I'm guessing I just didn't notice where the oncoming traffic was going earlier.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on November 23, 2020, 10:25:33 AM
I was going to post about how NYSTA is handling the barrier arrangement in the Albany area...but it's taking them forever to post tolls. My trip from the 14th has yet to post to my E-ZPass account and the pay by plate lookup also has nothing.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: hotdogPi on November 23, 2020, 11:05:28 AM
Quote from: cl94 on November 23, 2020, 10:25:33 AM
I was going to post about how NYSTA is handling the barrier arrangement in the Albany area...but it's taking them forever to post tolls. My trip from the 14th has yet to post to my E-ZPass account and the pay by plate lookup also has nothing.

Some places (particularly thinking of the 10¢ tolls in Rhode Island that have since been removed) don't charge you until you reach a certain amount of money owed.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on November 23, 2020, 12:38:01 PM
Quote from: 1 on November 23, 2020, 11:05:28 AM
Some places (particularly thinking of the 10¢ tolls in Rhode Island that have since been removed) don't charge you until you reach a certain amount of money owed.

NYSTA posts everything to the account. Even the $0 toll for 24-25A.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Jim on November 23, 2020, 02:24:57 PM
More play-by-play for those interested.  As of early afternoon today.  I entered at 25 for the first time since the switchover.  There are just two toll booth lanes remaining, the far rightmost for exiting traffic.  Completely free flowing for entering.  Nice!

Exiting at 24, all traffic was funneled to two lanes in the middle of the portion of the plaza that remains standing.  Looks like it's close to being ready to shift exiting traffic around the remaining plaza lanes.

This seems to me to be really impressive progress.  Maybe it's easier than the Mass Pike plaza removals because they had tunnels under the plazas there, if I am remembering correctly.  States/agencies that take forever to remove plazas after an AET switchover should hang their heads in shame...
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on November 23, 2020, 02:59:41 PM
Quote from: Jim on November 23, 2020, 02:24:57 PM
Maybe it's easier than the Mass Pike plaza removals because they had tunnels under the plazas there, if I am remembering correctly.  States/agencies that take forever to remove plazas after an AET switchover should hang their heads in shame...

24 at least has a utility tunnel underneath, but they seem to just be abandoning that in place for the time being. A utility tunnel with no surface access other than from the admin building is certainly easier to cover up and built around than something workers use to access the booths.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: 02 Park Ave on November 23, 2020, 04:36:13 PM
Here is an update on 16:  The right hand lanes remain Exit 16 only with the former E-ZPass lanes being for all through traffic with no signage indicating that for them.  Surprisingly there is a VMS in the vicinity which could readily be used to provide this information.  However, it only displays still another COVID message.

How many motorists heading for Albany have found themselves on the Quickway?  That's anyone's guess.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: NoGoodNamesAvailable on November 24, 2020, 11:07:10 AM
Quote from: 02 Park Ave on November 23, 2020, 04:36:13 PM
Here is an update on 16:  The right hand lanes remain Exit 16 only with the former E-ZPass lanes being for all through traffic with no signage indicating that for them.  Surprisingly there is a VMS in the vicinity which could readily be used to provide this information.  However, it only displays still another COVID message.

How many motorists heading for Albany have found themselves on the Quickway?  That's anyone's guess.

When I drove by last night there was a portable VMS reading (I-87 THRUWAY/2 LEFT LANES) or something along those lines. Still not enough notice in my opinion, but there was one sign.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Jim on November 24, 2020, 09:55:35 PM
Maybe there's more happening at 24 than I thought.  Today and tonight there was some major digging going on where the booths were removed closest to to the building.  Maybe the utility tunnel mentioned upthread is being removed?  On the opposite end they quickly patched and paved and moved entering traffic to go around the remaining part of the plaza.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: astralentity on November 25, 2020, 09:25:12 AM
Ok, now that we're cashless, can we PLEASE get the mileposts and exit numbers on I-90 and I-87 fixed once and for all?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on November 26, 2020, 04:46:51 PM
Drove through 24 today and it looked a little different...

Approaching from 87 SB
(https://scontent-cdg2-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/127961553_4013465145332814_4822900935529554989_n.jpg?_nc_cat=104&ccb=2&_nc_sid=b9115d&_nc_ohc=07kF9v5VryMAX-pkdpF&_nc_ht=scontent-cdg2-1.xx&oh=015d60a59e2320414d317df031b1e09a&oe=5FE72E31)

Oh look, something is missing...
(https://scontent-cdg2-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/128141052_4013465215332807_3128515602868009202_n.jpg?_nc_cat=102&ccb=2&_nc_sid=b9115d&_nc_ohc=CVE807MtC3oAX_DnFz7&_nc_ht=scontent-cdg2-1.xx&oh=99a8e7ed2bb5d82a9ac58c58c17e93cb&oe=5FE77764)

Entering traffic was routed around the remaining booths and is free-flowing. Exiting traffic went through the remaining booths.
(https://scontent-cdg2-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/127185453_4013465271999468_6731990879357196043_n.jpg?_nc_cat=108&ccb=2&_nc_sid=b9115d&_nc_ohc=h8E_0HviKTIAX_J9Px4&_nc_ht=scontent-cdg2-1.xx&oh=53cbe164223c8895d733a9d21603a341&oe=5FE46FDD)
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Jim on November 27, 2020, 10:14:00 PM
My November NYSTA E-ZPass statement was just posted, and I was interested to see how the new tolling would show up.  And... no transactions show up since November 13, the day of the conversion.  I made over a dozen trips on the Thruway since, and figured at least some would make the cut for this one, which says it covers activity up to November 24.  This doesn't look like the result of a smooth conversion...
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: SignBridge on November 27, 2020, 10:24:26 PM
Not surprising during a period of transition. The charges will probably show up on your next statement.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on November 27, 2020, 11:00:08 PM
As of tonight, I have three charges since the transition:

- 24-23, dated November 14, posted yesterday
- 23-B2, dated November 14, posted today
- B1-B3, dated November 14, posted today

The trips that made these tolls were 24-B2 and B1-B3. So, at least right now, the system is listing the "barrier tolls" separately from the virtual ticket sections (of which there are now 5).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Jim on December 02, 2020, 10:40:45 AM
I made my first ride to Albany in over a week.  No more toll plaza at 24 this morning.  There's still a ton of construction and debris in the middle of the road, but all traffic is now free flowing.  They really need to straighten out the lane configurations soon, though.  The lanes at least for exiting curve around the remaining construction, and as soon as those get covered by a little snow it will be impossible for anyone to know where they're suppose to be driving.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on December 06, 2020, 09:49:37 PM
Some transactions from around Thanksgiving have finally posted to my account in the past two days.  Only some, though.  Just the mainline tolls around Syracuse and west - none of the virtual ticket systems or the mainline tolls around the Capital District have posted.  Looks like they might be having issues, and like they may be processing everything manually for some reason.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on December 07, 2020, 11:04:56 AM
Quote from: vdeane on December 06, 2020, 09:49:37 PM
Some transactions from around Thanksgiving have finally posted to my account in the past two days.  Only some, though.  Just the mainline tolls around Syracuse and west - none of the virtual ticket systems or the mainline tolls around the Capital District have posted.  Looks like they might be having issues, and like they may be processing everything manually for some reason.
In case you wondered why everything is delayed:
QuoteNew York State Thruway Authority says it instituted a delay in posting toll transactions to ensure a smooth transition to the new cashless tolling system.
https://www.timesunion.com/news/article/Getting-There-E-ZPass-charges-shouldn-t-take-too-15777579.php
There are no technical issues, they just care about drivers! [ /sarcasm]
My 11/21 charges were posted 05/12; still no pre-thanksgiving ones.
An interesting line in activity view is
Quote11/16/2020 01:30:30
REBILLNOCHANGE
Qeval processed from 08/10/2020 to 11/07/2020 and toll usage is 10.18
Apparently refers to my trip to Syracuse on 11/10; however actual old system toll was $10.55 
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kramie13 on December 07, 2020, 02:50:57 PM
Quote from: GenExpwy on November 20, 2020, 02:49:20 AM
I can think of another complication there: the gantry between 25 and 24 is east of the Guilderland (eastbound) Service Area. Consider this scenario:

- Alice enters at 25A, exits at 25, does some business in Schenectady, re-enters at 25, and exits at 24.

- Bob enters at 25A, has a leisurely lunch at the Service Area, and exits at 24.

As I understand it, Alice should not be charged for the 25A to 25 trip, and should be charged for the separate 25 to 24 trip; while Bob's trip should be completely free no matter how slowly he ate his McNuggets. But how would the mainline gantries tell them apart?

Why would the driver driving from exit 25A to exit 24 have a free ride, but the driver from exit 25 to 24 still has to pay a toll?  The first driver is driving a longer distance!  This sounds completely backwards!
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on December 07, 2020, 03:09:51 PM
Quote from: kramie13 on December 07, 2020, 02:50:57 PM
Why would the driver driving from exit 25A to exit 24 have a free ride, but the driver from exit 25 to 24 still has to pay a toll?  The first driver is driving a longer distance!  This sounds completely backwards!

The compromise for cancelling I-88 east of the Thruway was free passage from I-88 to one of Exit 24, 25, or 26. Basically put in place to avoid a toll trap and discourage people from shunpiking along US 20 or NY 7. Why they kept the toll in place for 24-25 after the conversion is beyond me, as is the reason for placing toll gantries between 25 and 26.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Jim on December 07, 2020, 03:15:33 PM
Quote from: kramie13 on December 07, 2020, 02:50:57 PM
Why would the driver driving from exit 25A to exit 24 have a free ride, but the driver from exit 25 to 24 still has to pay a toll?  The first driver is driving a longer distance!  This sounds completely backwards!

The reason as I recall it (minimal searching has not dug up any verification of this) is that I-88 was planned to proceed along I-890 and NY 7 to Troy.  When it was switched to end at new Thruway exit 25A, I-88 funding was used to add the third lane between 25A and 24 in exchange for traffic between 25A and any of but only 26, 25, or 24 having a toll-free ride, essentially taking an unsigned I-88 extension instead of the Thruway in those cases.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: lstone19 on December 07, 2020, 03:20:03 PM
Quote from: cl94 on December 07, 2020, 03:09:51 PM
The compromise for cancelling I-88 east of the Thruway was free passage from I-88 to one of Exit 24, 25, or 26. Basically put in place to avoid a toll trap and discourage people from shunpiking along US 20 or NY 7. Why they kept the toll in place for 24-25 after the conversion is beyond me, as is the reason for placing toll gantries between 25 and 26.

Only travel to/from 25A gets the free trip east of 24 or west of 26. Travel between 24 and 25 and between 25 and 26 still pays. If you travel between a point south or east of 24 to 25A, the toll to/from 24 and 25A is the same which is less than the toll to 25.

So my question would be why didn't they put a gantry at 25A to give them accurate information as to who entered or exited there rather than having to derive it from reads and lack of reads at the neighboring gantries.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: empirestate on December 07, 2020, 07:38:41 PM
Quote from: vdeane on December 06, 2020, 09:49:37 PM
Some transactions from around Thanksgiving have finally posted to my account in the past two days.  Only some, though.  Just the mainline tolls around Syracuse and west - none of the virtual ticket systems or the mainline tolls around the Capital District have posted.  Looks like they might be having issues, and like they may be processing everything manually for some reason.

Same here; even within a single trip, some but not all of the transactions have posted. And even one trip from before the conversion, when the E-ZPass was read at a booth, has not posted.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: astralentity on December 11, 2020, 08:31:43 AM
I just checked my EZPass account.  I have no transactions posted since 11/12.  I should at least have some showing up for the 24-26 area.

I cross checked with the pay by plate website, nothing there either.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on December 11, 2020, 12:57:24 PM
Last I checked, the virtual ticket systems west of exit 34A have posted to my account, so that part has fully processed.  Still nothing east of 34A.  I wonder if the reason the mainline gantry tolls around the Capital District haven't posted is because they still haven't posted the 25A-34A virtual ticket system - if you only know about those mainline gantries, you wouldn't know if I took I-88 or not.

I must say, I'm not happy with how long it's taking - or with the fact that the changes to billing mean that what once used to be two lines in my account is now 16.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: lstone19 on December 11, 2020, 06:01:04 PM
Quote from: vdeane on December 11, 2020, 12:57:24 PM
Last I checked, the virtual ticket systems west of exit 34A have posted to my account, so that part has fully processed.  Still nothing east of 34A.  I wonder if the reason the mainline gantry tolls around the Capital District haven't posted is because they still haven't posted the 25A-34A virtual ticket system - if you only know about those mainline gantries, you wouldn't know if I took I-88 or not.

You may be on to something. Others have reported seeing tolls from the 23/24 gantry and the 15-23-B3 virtual ticket section. But unless I missed it, no reports of tolls from the 24/25 and 25/25A gantries nor the 25A-34A VTS all of which would be affected by the 25A special rules. I wonder if their programming to figure out 25A is proving to be problematic. It would not surprise me if a gantry suddenly appears without fanfare at 25A so they can track the 25A entries and exits rather than trying to infer them from the lack of a scan on the other side of 25A.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: noelbotevera on December 11, 2020, 09:09:05 PM
Unpopular opinion: remove all gantries between 24-26. Give everyone a free ride.

Not saying I'm an expert but I don't think NYSTA is gonna cry over losing a $0.67 (or less) toll trip.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on December 11, 2020, 09:54:01 PM
I feel like if NYSTA was interested in putting a gantry over 25A they would have just made it part of the virtual ticket system in the first place.  It's clearly one of the "high volume" interchanges selected to use mainline gantries instead.  The simple answer would be what noelbotevera posted.  Are more complicated but still simpler than what they actually did answer would be to have the virtual ticket system end west of 26, put a gantry in the middle of 25A, and put a pair of gantries on the ramps at 25 leading to/from the east.  That would have required one fewer gantry and no processing algorithms.  I have no idea why they didn't do this, unless they were hoping that people who don't regularly use exit 25A wouldn't notice that it can be used for a free ride.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on December 11, 2020, 11:13:56 PM
Quote from: vdeane on December 11, 2020, 09:54:01 PM
I have no idea why they didn't do this, unless they were hoping that people who don't regularly use exit 25A wouldn't notice that it can be used for a free ride.

That is part of it. Operational inertia is certainly a factor, but NYSTA likes keeping the free ride a secret. There's a reason it's not signed anywhere.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: empirestate on December 12, 2020, 04:39:45 PM
Quote from: cl94 on December 11, 2020, 11:13:56 PM
Quote from: vdeane on December 11, 2020, 09:54:01 PM
I have no idea why they didn't do this, unless they were hoping that people who don't regularly use exit 25A wouldn't notice that it can be used for a free ride.

That is part of it. Operational inertia is certainly a factor, but NYSTA likes keeping the free ride a secret. There's a reason it's not signed anywhere.

I'm guessing it's bureaucratic inertia more than anything else. To change something like this would require a lot of meetings, hearings, voting, and just general rulemaking, which is likely a more arduous and protracted process than just figuring out how to make it work operationally.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Jim on December 12, 2020, 05:32:11 PM
Quote from: noelbotevera on December 11, 2020, 09:09:05 PM
Unpopular opinion: remove all gantries between 24-26. Give everyone a free ride.

Not saying I'm an expert but I don't think NYSTA is gonna cry over losing a $0.67 (or less) toll trip.

I'd say that's a popular opinion, because who likes paying tolls?  But that 67 cents or less is multiplied enough times over add up to some significant money, I'm sure.  Especially 24-25 is a heavy commuter corridor in normal times.  I expect many of them, like me for my 24-27 commute, purchase the $88 annual commuter plan, and would no longer do so if the Albany-Schenectady segments became toll free.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on December 12, 2020, 11:41:30 PM
In other news, I've heard that the toll barriers are gone at exits 25 and 24.  With exit 45 already gone and the traffic cameras showing Williamsville, Lackawanna, and Canaan gone, it looks like the six priority barriers have been removed.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Roadgeek Adam on December 13, 2020, 12:11:35 AM
Quote from: vdeane on December 12, 2020, 11:41:30 PM
In other news, I've heard that the toll barriers are gone at exits 25 and 24.  With exit 45 already gone and the traffic cameras showing Williamsville, Lackawanna, and Canaan gone, it looks like the six priority barriers have been removed.

Williamsville is gone save for the headhouse. The lane alignment is unusual (2 westbound, 3 eastbound). I'd personally go 3-3 instead of 2-3. Has been gone since December 5, when they demolished the last 3 lanes on the southern end.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on December 13, 2020, 12:43:54 AM
I suspect NYSTA didn't want to widen the WB Thruway under NY 277, even though there's probably enough room.  I always thought it was odd that they didn't keep the third lane to exit 50, but I guess they always viewed that as queuing space for the barrier and not a legitimate third lane of travel.  Meanwhile, EB was already three lanes there, so they just kept it.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on December 13, 2020, 11:25:15 AM
So I'm guessing the third EB lane ends somewhere in the vicinity of where the booths were?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Jim on December 15, 2020, 11:16:19 AM
I just exited EB at 24 for the first time since the construction mostly wrapped up.  All of the obsolete signs have been removed (like "Tool Booths Ahead").  What is now the weave area between where I-87 NB and I-90 EB traffic converge and the ramps to re-divide those routes and the ramps to the southern stub of the Northway and the new Tandem lot entry ramp is a total mess.  There are lane divider lines all over the place, some of which are current, some of which are insufficiently removed old lines from various construction configurations.  Even on a bright, sunny day today I really could not tell where lanes are supposed to be.  Combine that with people blowing through at 80 MPH and we have a really dangerous stretch right now.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on December 15, 2020, 12:48:56 PM
I can confirm that B3 and 24 are gone, having passed through B3 on Friday and 24 on Sunday. B3 has very little evidence left beyond a widening. As of Friday, it was single-lane EB traffic, so I wasn't paying too much attention to lane lines, but removal is progressing very quickly.

24...yeah, that's a mess. Sunday afternoon was cloudy, so I could see the lane lines pretty clearly, but I see that becoming a mess in any other weather conditions.

15 has barely been touched as of Sunday (couldn't see the 16 plaza when passing through on US 6). Some work was beginning at B1 on Friday; B2, 19, and 23 were basically untouched as of the 3rd. 17 is funneling everyone through the middle 3 lanes, but with plastic lane dividers. 17 will not be removed as part of this contract.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: lstone19 on December 15, 2020, 12:55:57 PM
Quote from: cl94 on December 15, 2020, 12:48:56 PM
5 has barely been touched as of Sunday (couldn't see the 16 plaza when passing through on US 6).

Isn't all the traffic at 15 going through the high-speed lanes? If so, then removing the old booths should be low priority since there's no traffic going through them (except for the 16 NB entry traffic which used the far right lane of that plaza).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: astralentity on December 15, 2020, 01:41:53 PM
Quote from: Jim on December 15, 2020, 11:16:19 AM
I just exited EB at 24 for the first time since the construction mostly wrapped up.  All of the obsolete signs have been removed (like "Tool Booths Ahead").  What is now the weave area between where I-87 NB and I-90 EB traffic converge and the ramps to re-divide those routes and the ramps to the southern stub of the Northway and the new Tandem lot entry ramp is a total mess.  There are lane divider lines all over the place, some of which are current, some of which are insufficiently removed old lines from various construction configurations.  Even on a bright, sunny day today I really could not tell where lanes are supposed to be.  Combine that with people blowing through at 80 MPH and we have a really dangerous stretch right now.

Time to reconfigure that interchange..... again.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: astralentity on December 15, 2020, 02:06:11 PM
Update on ezpass... my little trip out to Auburn on Saturday posted, I took the Thruway from Amsterdam to I-481, so that's correct.  Still nothing between 11/13 and 12/11.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on December 15, 2020, 04:08:49 PM
What Exit 24 looked like as of 2 days ago exiting the Thruway.

(https://scontent-cdg2-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/131818731_4065348016811193_2140881141102478227_o.jpg?_nc_cat=100&ccb=2&_nc_sid=825194&_nc_ohc=ORXfWcMdOCMAX--CnJ8&_nc_ht=scontent-cdg2-1.xx&oh=a8c4c1c558f874e813cf3b6ed43412d2&oe=5FFF45D7)
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Jim on December 19, 2020, 11:13:38 PM
A bunch of my post-conversion November transactions were posted to my E-ZPass account this week.  Interestingly, some of them are showing up broken down as 24-25, 25-25A, and 25A-26 or 27 (the ones with my non-commuter plan transponder) but others are grouping 24-27 as a single transaction (the ones with my commuter plan transponder).

Nothing showing yet from any December travels.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: astralentity on December 20, 2020, 04:53:50 PM
Stupid question... what is the Thruway's reasoning behind keeping the I-587 shield off of the exit 19 guide signs?  It's clearly connected to I-87 via the roundabout at the exit ramp.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on December 20, 2020, 08:18:04 PM
It looks like the last of my charges from Thanksgiving FINALLY posted on Friday, so it took 20-26 days for everything to post (and 8-15 days for things to START posting!).  Yikes.  I hope they won't keep taking that long!

I still hate how they break everything apart.  If they're not doing it for people on the annual permit program, I don't get why they're doing it for the rest of us.  They clearly have the capability to make this not annoying... why aren't they?

Update 12/31: More on the toll billing saga - it's still taking a long time.  It took 10 days for the tolls on my drive out around Christmas to finish posting.  Meanwhile, all the mainline tolls for my drive back (and the virtual ticket systems for Syracuse west) posted - but the Albany gantries posted incorrectly (FYI, they do group 24-25A for that movement).  What will happen when the last virtual ticket system toll posts, I don't know.  Clearly this system back-processing for exit 25A is NOT working out.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: empirestate on January 01, 2021, 01:05:42 AM
Quote from: astralentity on December 20, 2020, 04:53:50 PM
Stupid question... what is the Thruway's reasoning behind keeping the I-587 shield off of the exit 19 guide signs?  It's clearly connected to I-87 via the roundabout at the exit ramp.

If I were to guess, I'd say it's simply the absence of reasoning. The exit has always been, and still is, at NY 28, and no new route has been built there since. (That's in contrast to, say, the exits at NY 15 and NY 19, where a new highway facility was built and added to the signage, while also retaining the older routes.)

If the question ever came up, they might reason that it makes sense to sign I-587 from the Thruway, but since nothing's ever really changed, the question never arose, and so they never reasoned anything at all.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on January 01, 2021, 11:28:27 AM
I can't believe I haven't seen the last two pages... I really missed out! I had no idea the Williamsville and Lackawanna barriers have been taken down because I haven't left my house that much due to the pandemic.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on January 01, 2021, 10:56:22 PM
Quote from: empirestate on January 01, 2021, 01:05:42 AM
Quote from: astralentity on December 20, 2020, 04:53:50 PM
Stupid question... what is the Thruway's reasoning behind keeping the I-587 shield off of the exit 19 guide signs?  It's clearly connected to I-87 via the roundabout at the exit ramp.

If I were to guess, I'd say it's simply the absence of reasoning. The exit has always been, and still is, at NY 28, and no new route has been built there since. (That's in contrast to, say, the exits at NY 15 and NY 19, where a new highway facility was built and added to the signage, while also retaining the older routes.)

If the question ever came up, they might reason that it makes sense to sign I-587 from the Thruway, but since nothing's ever really changed, the question never arose, and so they never reasoned anything at all.
I guess a better question is, why does NYSDOT sign I-587?  It ends at a roundabout and a traffic light that is being converted to a roundabout, has no interchanges in between, didn't even have a median barrier across one bridge for a long while, and is concurrent with NY 28 for its whole length.  I can see a stronger case for signing I-478 than I-587 (though now that I think about it... why not just extend NY 9A along I-478 if you don't want to sign the interstate?), and that isn't signed.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on January 02, 2021, 01:07:39 AM
Quote from: vdeane on January 01, 2021, 10:56:22 PM
Quote from: empirestate on January 01, 2021, 01:05:42 AM
Quote from: astralentity on December 20, 2020, 04:53:50 PM
Stupid question... what is the Thruway's reasoning behind keeping the I-587 shield off of the exit 19 guide signs?  It's clearly connected to I-87 via the roundabout at the exit ramp.

If I were to guess, I'd say it's simply the absence of reasoning. The exit has always been, and still is, at NY 28, and no new route has been built there since. (That's in contrast to, say, the exits at NY 15 and NY 19, where a new highway facility was built and added to the signage, while also retaining the older routes.)

If the question ever came up, they might reason that it makes sense to sign I-587 from the Thruway, but since nothing's ever really changed, the question never arose, and so they never reasoned anything at all.
I guess a better question is, why does NYSDOT sign I-587?  It ends at a roundabout and a traffic light that is being converted to a roundabout, has no interchanges in between, didn't even have a median barrier across one bridge for a long while, and is concurrent with NY 28 for its whole length.  I can see a stronger case for signing I-478 than I-587 (though now that I think about it... why not just extend NY 9A along I-478 if you don't want to sign the interstate?), and that isn't signed.

I wouldn't be surprized if that was a part of Thruway deal or something - a 3DI to big enough municipalities along the road. 790 and 587 seem to be there just for the sake of it.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: astralentity on January 02, 2021, 11:00:56 PM
Quote from: kalvado on January 02, 2021, 01:07:39 AM
Quote from: vdeane on January 01, 2021, 10:56:22 PM
Quote from: empirestate on January 01, 2021, 01:05:42 AM
Quote from: astralentity on December 20, 2020, 04:53:50 PM
Stupid question... what is the Thruway's reasoning behind keeping the I-587 shield off of the exit 19 guide signs?  It's clearly connected to I-87 via the roundabout at the exit ramp.

If I were to guess, I'd say it's simply the absence of reasoning. The exit has always been, and still is, at NY 28, and no new route has been built there since. (That's in contrast to, say, the exits at NY 15 and NY 19, where a new highway facility was built and added to the signage, while also retaining the older routes.)

If the question ever came up, they might reason that it makes sense to sign I-587 from the Thruway, but since nothing's ever really changed, the question never arose, and so they never reasoned anything at all.
I guess a better question is, why does NYSDOT sign I-587?  It ends at a roundabout and a traffic light that is being converted to a roundabout, has no interchanges in between, didn't even have a median barrier across one bridge for a long while, and is concurrent with NY 28 for its whole length.  I can see a stronger case for signing I-478 than I-587 (though now that I think about it... why not just extend NY 9A along I-478 if you don't want to sign the interstate?), and that isn't signed.

I wouldn't be surprized if that was a part of Thruway deal or something - a 3DI to big enough municipalities along the road. 790 and 587 seem to be there just for the sake of it.

I am of the belief that I-790 should now be extended to Rome since they made 49 a complete expressway.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on January 02, 2021, 11:10:55 PM
That was an actual proposal; NYSDOT tried to get it rerouted/extended to NY 825.  FHWA, however, wanted it to go all the way to downtown Rome... and the NY 49 freeway to the west of there does not meet interstate standards, most notably with the at-grade railroad crossing.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: machias on January 03, 2021, 12:58:16 AM
Quote from: vdeane on January 02, 2021, 11:10:55 PM
That was an actual proposal; NYSDOT tried to get it rerouted/extended to NY 825.  FHWA, however, wanted it to go all the way to downtown Rome... and the NY 49 freeway to the west of there does not meet interstate standards, most notably with the at-grade railroad crossing.

There's a very long range proposal of extending I-790 all the way to Thruway Exit 33, but it's only in discussion phase on the HOCTS agenda once in a while. There has been talk about renumbering NY 365 from Verona to Rome, and NY 49 from Rome to Utica as NY 790.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Jim on January 05, 2021, 09:28:04 PM
I've finally finished posting a bunch of my pictures, almost all from the Amsterdam to Albany stretch, of the Thruway AET conversion.  You can go to https://www.teresco.org/pics/ and scroll all the way down to the bottom, where you'll find several links from August to December showing progress on gantry construction, signage, and toll booth demolition.  Quality is pretty poor, as I was driving for almost all and what you see were the ones that I decided reached a very low minimum standard for inclusion.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: TonyTrafficLight on January 06, 2021, 02:14:39 PM
Nice photos. Is the bridge over the Mohawk in Amsterdam done yet?
Was sill under construction mid October when I crossed over it.

That route along Rt 49 from Rome going west along the north shore Oneida Lake is a nice ride to take.
Lots of small towns and hamlets along that drive.

You got lucky you didn't hit any Lake Effect snow along some of those routes.
Rt 274, 46 and 49 are a lot of fun most normal winters.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Jim on January 06, 2021, 02:58:35 PM
Still one lane closed each way on the NY 30 bridge in Amsterdam.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: machias on January 06, 2021, 06:47:04 PM
Quote from: Jim on January 05, 2021, 09:28:04 PM
I've finally finished posting a bunch of my pictures, almost all from the Amsterdam to Albany stretch, of the Thruway AET conversion.  You can go to https://www.teresco.org/pics/ and scroll all the way down to the bottom, where you'll find several links from August to December showing progress on gantry construction, signage, and toll booth demolition.  Quality is pretty poor, as I was driving for almost all and what you see were the ones that I decided reached a very low minimum standard for inclusion.

Yay! My "SOUTH" patch over an errant WEST is still there, almost 20 years later
(https://www.teresco.org/pics/cny-20201209/P1040154-close.jpg)
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: SignBridge on January 06, 2021, 08:21:24 PM
Good to hear that NYSDOT listened to you and corrected the problem. Not always the case with those people.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Alps on January 13, 2021, 12:46:20 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on January 06, 2021, 08:21:24 PM
Good to hear that NYSDOT listened to you and corrected the problem. Not always the case with those people.
SignBridge, you say that NYSDOT doesn't always listen. What has been your experience with that agency?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on January 13, 2021, 12:49:29 AM
Quote from: Alps on January 13, 2021, 12:46:20 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on January 06, 2021, 08:21:24 PM
Good to hear that NYSDOT listened to you and corrected the problem. Not always the case with those people.
SignBridge, you say that NYSDOT doesn't always listen. What has been your experience with that agency?

I can't speak for his experience with Region 2, but I've had very unpleasant experiences dealing with Regions 1 and 5, both professionally and otherwise. Whoever answers the phones/emails at those offices is a very stereotypical grumpy government worker.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: SignBridge on January 13, 2021, 08:19:25 PM
Quote from: Alps on January 13, 2021, 12:46:20 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on January 06, 2021, 08:21:24 PM
Good to hear that NYSDOT listened to you and corrected the problem. Not always the case with those people.
SignBridge, you say that NYSDOT doesn't always listen. What has been your experience with that agency?

LOL, oh so now you're after me today huh? NYSDOT's people can be very stubborn. Not always, but there is for example an ongoing argument with them in a neighboring community and they refuse to listen to reason. They put up new signals and reconfigured lanes at an intersection where there was no problem with traffic flow. The changes they made caused big problems to develop including blocks long traffic back-ups. Various community civic leaders have tried to talk to DOT and get them to either change it back or make additional changes to rectify the problems, and when they respond at all to the inquiries they insist that the revised set-up is correct the way it is, despite the serious traffic jams that didn't exist before. This is in contrast to the Nassau County DPW which does work well with local civic leaders, residents, etc re: issues on county roads.

I could cite other examples as well where NYSDOT's engineers are very intractable, and act like they are always right even when presented with evidence to the contrary.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on January 13, 2021, 09:28:37 PM
It's hard to say what's going on without knowing more about the issue, but there are design considerations other than traffic flow, and one of those could have overridden such considerations.  Perhaps there was a safety problem.  Or perhaps there was a standards issue (like what happened here (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.3296621,-73.6852947,3a,75y,289.9h,72.84t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sXioLt6BrchYgKiMzq6dQyA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) - the option lane was changed to straight-only because the MUTCD does not allow option lanes with protected-only left turns).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: hbelkins on January 14, 2021, 03:55:34 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on January 13, 2021, 08:19:25 PM

I could cite other examples as well where NYSDOT's engineers are very intractable, and act like they are always right even when presented with evidence to the contrary.

Engineers are very hesitant to do anything outside of guidelines. The instance I always fall back to was one here in Kentucky on the AA Highway. After a number of fatal wrecks at an intersection, local leaders and residents kept requesting a traffic light be installed. The intersection didn't meet warrants for a signal, so the request was always denied. But the Transportation Cabinet secretary at the time was not an engineer. After the locals approached him, he overrode the engineers and had the signal installed.

The best advice for the locals in this situation would be to take their case to the highest non-engineer who has jurisdiction over NYSDOT.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Alps on January 15, 2021, 12:01:23 AM
Quote from: hbelkins on January 14, 2021, 03:55:34 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on January 13, 2021, 08:19:25 PM

I could cite other examples as well where NYSDOT's engineers are very intractable, and act like they are always right even when presented with evidence to the contrary.

Engineers are very hesitant to do anything outside of guidelines. The instance I always fall back to was one here in Kentucky on the AA Highway. After a number of fatal wrecks at an intersection, local leaders and residents kept requesting a traffic light be installed. The intersection didn't meet warrants for a signal, so the request was always denied. But the Transportation Cabinet secretary at the time was not an engineer. After the locals approached him, he overrode the engineers and had the signal installed.

The best advice for the locals in this situation would be to take their case to the highest non-engineer who has jurisdiction over NYSDOT.
Engineers are legally responsible for their decisions.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on January 15, 2021, 08:48:42 AM
Quote from: Alps on January 15, 2021, 12:01:23 AM
Quote from: hbelkins on January 14, 2021, 03:55:34 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on January 13, 2021, 08:19:25 PM

I could cite other examples as well where NYSDOT's engineers are very intractable, and act like they are always right even when presented with evidence to the contrary.

Engineers are very hesitant to do anything outside of guidelines. The instance I always fall back to was one here in Kentucky on the AA Highway. After a number of fatal wrecks at an intersection, local leaders and residents kept requesting a traffic light be installed. The intersection didn't meet warrants for a signal, so the request was always denied. But the Transportation Cabinet secretary at the time was not an engineer. After the locals approached him, he overrode the engineers and had the signal installed.

The best advice for the locals in this situation would be to take their case to the highest non-engineer who has jurisdiction over NYSDOT.
Engineers are legally responsible for their decisions.
You made my day. Was any DOT engineer legally prosecuted in recent history?
In particular, for the case @hbelkins mentioned - installing traffic light when it is not required (not on interstate or roundabout, I assume).
The problem I see is exactly the opposite - while such responsibility exists on the books, it is not applied - but management influence is very real. So, as
@SignBridge describes, engineers are doing things for the pleasure of management, population be damned. Flirting with forum limitations, I can add that this is not totally unlike issues with police.

Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on January 15, 2021, 09:06:56 AM
Quote from: kalvado on January 15, 2021, 08:48:42 AM
Quote from: Alps on January 15, 2021, 12:01:23 AM
Quote from: hbelkins on January 14, 2021, 03:55:34 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on January 13, 2021, 08:19:25 PM

I could cite other examples as well where NYSDOT's engineers are very intractable, and act like they are always right even when presented with evidence to the contrary.

Engineers are very hesitant to do anything outside of guidelines. The instance I always fall back to was one here in Kentucky on the AA Highway. After a number of fatal wrecks at an intersection, local leaders and residents kept requesting a traffic light be installed. The intersection didn't meet warrants for a signal, so the request was always denied. But the Transportation Cabinet secretary at the time was not an engineer. After the locals approached him, he overrode the engineers and had the signal installed.

The best advice for the locals in this situation would be to take their case to the highest non-engineer who has jurisdiction over NYSDOT.
Engineers are legally responsible for their decisions.
You made my day. Was any DOT engineer legally prosecuted in recent history?
In particular, for the case @hbelkins mentioned - installing traffic light when it is not required (not on interstate or roundabout, I assume).
The problem I see is exactly the opposite - while such responsibility exists on the books, it is not applied - but management influence is very real. So, as
@SignBridge describes, engineers are doing things for the pleasure of management, population be damned. Flirting with forum limitations, I can add that this is not totally unlike issues with police.
No, they aren't prosecuted frequently since they are careful about when they use their PE stamps.

That said, NYSDOT is sued frequently enough, but I don't think the grounds are due to specific design issues that often.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on January 15, 2021, 10:02:41 AM
Quote from: Rothman on January 15, 2021, 09:06:56 AM
Quote from: kalvado on January 15, 2021, 08:48:42 AM
Quote from: Alps on January 15, 2021, 12:01:23 AM
Quote from: hbelkins on January 14, 2021, 03:55:34 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on January 13, 2021, 08:19:25 PM

I could cite other examples as well where NYSDOT's engineers are very intractable, and act like they are always right even when presented with evidence to the contrary.

Engineers are very hesitant to do anything outside of guidelines. The instance I always fall back to was one here in Kentucky on the AA Highway. After a number of fatal wrecks at an intersection, local leaders and residents kept requesting a traffic light be installed. The intersection didn't meet warrants for a signal, so the request was always denied. But the Transportation Cabinet secretary at the time was not an engineer. After the locals approached him, he overrode the engineers and had the signal installed.

The best advice for the locals in this situation would be to take their case to the highest non-engineer who has jurisdiction over NYSDOT.
Engineers are legally responsible for their decisions.
You made my day. Was any DOT engineer legally prosecuted in recent history?
In particular, for the case @hbelkins mentioned - installing traffic light when it is not required (not on interstate or roundabout, I assume).
The problem I see is exactly the opposite - while such responsibility exists on the books, it is not applied - but management influence is very real. So, as
@SignBridge describes, engineers are doing things for the pleasure of management, population be damned. Flirting with forum limitations, I can add that this is not totally unlike issues with police.
No, they aren't prosecuted frequently since they are careful about when they use their PE stamps.

That said, NYSDOT is sued frequently enough, but I don't think the grounds are due to specific design issues that often.

Of course, whenever a crash occurs, NYSDOT may expect to get sued, part of a litigation culture. Especially if crash occurs after a reconstruction - and we may be dead sure that a crash will occur sooner or later.  Just thinking about that limo crash, where a pretty reasonable design at a challenging spot is
With that, I can easily point out several apparent design mistakes in the area, which go uncorrected for decades, actually cause problems, and some of them survived full road reconstruction. So I am not holding NYSDOT engineering talent at high regard. More like the opposite...
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on January 15, 2021, 02:18:51 PM
Quote from: kalvado on January 15, 2021, 10:02:41 AM
Quote from: Rothman on January 15, 2021, 09:06:56 AM
Quote from: kalvado on January 15, 2021, 08:48:42 AM
Quote from: Alps on January 15, 2021, 12:01:23 AM
Quote from: hbelkins on January 14, 2021, 03:55:34 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on January 13, 2021, 08:19:25 PM

I could cite other examples as well where NYSDOT's engineers are very intractable, and act like they are always right even when presented with evidence to the contrary.

Engineers are very hesitant to do anything outside of guidelines. The instance I always fall back to was one here in Kentucky on the AA Highway. After a number of fatal wrecks at an intersection, local leaders and residents kept requesting a traffic light be installed. The intersection didn't meet warrants for a signal, so the request was always denied. But the Transportation Cabinet secretary at the time was not an engineer. After the locals approached him, he overrode the engineers and had the signal installed.

The best advice for the locals in this situation would be to take their case to the highest non-engineer who has jurisdiction over NYSDOT.
Engineers are legally responsible for their decisions.
You made my day. Was any DOT engineer legally prosecuted in recent history?
In particular, for the case @hbelkins mentioned - installing traffic light when it is not required (not on interstate or roundabout, I assume).
The problem I see is exactly the opposite - while such responsibility exists on the books, it is not applied - but management influence is very real. So, as
@SignBridge describes, engineers are doing things for the pleasure of management, population be damned. Flirting with forum limitations, I can add that this is not totally unlike issues with police.
No, they aren't prosecuted frequently since they are careful about when they use their PE stamps.

That said, NYSDOT is sued frequently enough, but I don't think the grounds are due to specific design issues that often.

Of course, whenever a crash occurs, NYSDOT may expect to get sued, part of a litigation culture. Especially if crash occurs after a reconstruction - and we may be dead sure that a crash will occur sooner or later.  Just thinking about that limo crash, where a pretty reasonable design at a challenging spot is
With that, I can easily point out several apparent design mistakes in the area, which go uncorrected for decades, actually cause problems, and some of them survived full road reconstruction. So I am not holding NYSDOT engineering talent at high regard. More like the opposite...
I'm sure NYSDOT values your opinion. :D

Makes me wonder how many you saw were designed by consultants. :D
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: machias on January 15, 2021, 06:03:45 PM
Quote from: cl94 on January 13, 2021, 12:49:29 AM
Quote from: Alps on January 13, 2021, 12:46:20 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on January 06, 2021, 08:21:24 PM
Good to hear that NYSDOT listened to you and corrected the problem. Not always the case with those people.
SignBridge, you say that NYSDOT doesn't always listen. What has been your experience with that agency?

I can't speak for his experience with Region 2, but I've had very unpleasant experiences dealing with Regions 1 and 5, both professionally and otherwise. Whoever answers the phones/emails at those offices is a very stereotypical grumpy government worker.

The only difficulties I've ever had with NYSDOT was Region 9 when bringing up their issues with mixed case legend on guide signs.  They found "exit 105b" to be perfectly fine on NY Route 17.

The most difficult has always been the Thruway Authority. When asked about county line signs and their importance with GPS and weather alerts by county, told me in no uncertain terms they couldn't do that and suggested I should buy a map.

Regions 2, 3, and 7 have always been pleasant and responsive and if they didn't agree, they've told me why. I had a really great discussion with R3 many years ago over what constituted a control city on non-Thruway interstate approaches to the Thruway and that "Thruway" wasn't really a valid destination, hence the newer signs that say "Albany - Buffalo".
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: machias on January 15, 2021, 06:05:27 PM
Quote from: machias on January 15, 2021, 06:03:45 PM
Quote from: cl94 on January 13, 2021, 12:49:29 AM
Quote from: Alps on January 13, 2021, 12:46:20 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on January 06, 2021, 08:21:24 PM
Good to hear that NYSDOT listened to you and corrected the problem. Not always the case with those people.
SignBridge, you say that NYSDOT doesn't always listen. What has been your experience with that agency?

I can't speak for his experience with Region 2, but I've had very unpleasant experiences dealing with Regions 1 and 5, both professionally and otherwise. Whoever answers the phones/emails at those offices is a very stereotypical grumpy government worker.

The only difficulties I've ever had with NYSDOT was Region 9 when bringing up their issues with mixed case legend on guide signs.  They found "exit 105b" to be perfectly fine on NY Route 17.

The most difficult has always been the Thruway Authority. When asked about county line signs and their importance with GPS and weather alerts by county, told me in no uncertain terms they couldn't do that and suggested I should buy a map.

Regions 2, 3, and 7 have always been pleasant and responsive and if they didn't agree, they've told me why. I had a really great discussion with R3 many years ago over what constituted a control city on non-Thruway interstate approaches to the Thruway and that "Thruway" wasn't really a valid destination, hence the newer signs that say "Albany - Buffalo".

Oh, and it made a big difference in response time, after I interviewed with them while working on my civil engineering degree. I thought that R2 was going to roll their eyes and say, "oh it's *that* guy" but they didn't, but all the regions seemed more responsive after that.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on January 15, 2021, 07:00:20 PM
Quote from: Rothman on January 15, 2021, 02:18:51 PM
Quote from: kalvado on January 15, 2021, 10:02:41 AM
Quote from: Rothman on January 15, 2021, 09:06:56 AM
Quote from: kalvado on January 15, 2021, 08:48:42 AM
Quote from: Alps on January 15, 2021, 12:01:23 AM
Quote from: hbelkins on January 14, 2021, 03:55:34 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on January 13, 2021, 08:19:25 PM

I could cite other examples as well where NYSDOT's engineers are very intractable, and act like they are always right even when presented with evidence to the contrary.

Engineers are very hesitant to do anything outside of guidelines. The instance I always fall back to was one here in Kentucky on the AA Highway. After a number of fatal wrecks at an intersection, local leaders and residents kept requesting a traffic light be installed. The intersection didn't meet warrants for a signal, so the request was always denied. But the Transportation Cabinet secretary at the time was not an engineer. After the locals approached him, he overrode the engineers and had the signal installed.

The best advice for the locals in this situation would be to take their case to the highest non-engineer who has jurisdiction over NYSDOT.
Engineers are legally responsible for their decisions.
You made my day. Was any DOT engineer legally prosecuted in recent history?
In particular, for the case @hbelkins mentioned - installing traffic light when it is not required (not on interstate or roundabout, I assume).
The problem I see is exactly the opposite - while such responsibility exists on the books, it is not applied - but management influence is very real. So, as
@SignBridge describes, engineers are doing things for the pleasure of management, population be damned. Flirting with forum limitations, I can add that this is not totally unlike issues with police.
No, they aren't prosecuted frequently since they are careful about when they use their PE stamps.

That said, NYSDOT is sued frequently enough, but I don't think the grounds are due to specific design issues that often.

Of course, whenever a crash occurs, NYSDOT may expect to get sued, part of a litigation culture. Especially if crash occurs after a reconstruction - and we may be dead sure that a crash will occur sooner or later.  Just thinking about that limo crash, where a pretty reasonable design at a challenging spot is
With that, I can easily point out several apparent design mistakes in the area, which go uncorrected for decades, actually cause problems, and some of them survived full road reconstruction. So I am not holding NYSDOT engineering talent at high regard. More like the opposite...
I'm sure NYSDOT values your opinion. :D

Makes me wonder how many you saw were designed by consultants. :D
You see, this is exactly what I am talking about:
Quote from: kalvado on January 15, 2021, 08:48:42 AM
engineers are doing things for the pleasure of management, population be damned. Flirting with forum limitations, I can add that this is not totally unlike issues with police.
As for consultants... Excuses I heard also include "this is the way it is described in a book", "management doesn't want to have things changed"... Makes me wonder if NYSDOT engineering positions can  be downgraded from PE to high school diploma or equivalent, minimum wage +$1/hour without any loss...
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on January 15, 2021, 07:20:47 PM
Quote from: kalvado on January 15, 2021, 07:00:20 PM
Quote from: Rothman on January 15, 2021, 02:18:51 PM
Quote from: kalvado on January 15, 2021, 10:02:41 AM
Quote from: Rothman on January 15, 2021, 09:06:56 AM
Quote from: kalvado on January 15, 2021, 08:48:42 AM
Quote from: Alps on January 15, 2021, 12:01:23 AM
Quote from: hbelkins on January 14, 2021, 03:55:34 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on January 13, 2021, 08:19:25 PM

I could cite other examples as well where NYSDOT's engineers are very intractable, and act like they are always right even when presented with evidence to the contrary.

Engineers are very hesitant to do anything outside of guidelines. The instance I always fall back to was one here in Kentucky on the AA Highway. After a number of fatal wrecks at an intersection, local leaders and residents kept requesting a traffic light be installed. The intersection didn't meet warrants for a signal, so the request was always denied. But the Transportation Cabinet secretary at the time was not an engineer. After the locals approached him, he overrode the engineers and had the signal installed.

The best advice for the locals in this situation would be to take their case to the highest non-engineer who has jurisdiction over NYSDOT.
Engineers are legally responsible for their decisions.
You made my day. Was any DOT engineer legally prosecuted in recent history?
In particular, for the case @hbelkins mentioned - installing traffic light when it is not required (not on interstate or roundabout, I assume).
The problem I see is exactly the opposite - while such responsibility exists on the books, it is not applied - but management influence is very real. So, as
@SignBridge describes, engineers are doing things for the pleasure of management, population be damned. Flirting with forum limitations, I can add that this is not totally unlike issues with police.
No, they aren't prosecuted frequently since they are careful about when they use their PE stamps.

That said, NYSDOT is sued frequently enough, but I don't think the grounds are due to specific design issues that often.

Of course, whenever a crash occurs, NYSDOT may expect to get sued, part of a litigation culture. Especially if crash occurs after a reconstruction - and we may be dead sure that a crash will occur sooner or later.  Just thinking about that limo crash, where a pretty reasonable design at a challenging spot is
With that, I can easily point out several apparent design mistakes in the area, which go uncorrected for decades, actually cause problems, and some of them survived full road reconstruction. So I am not holding NYSDOT engineering talent at high regard. More like the opposite...
I'm sure NYSDOT values your opinion. :D

Makes me wonder how many you saw were designed by consultants. :D
You see, this is exactly what I am talking about:
Quote from: kalvado on January 15, 2021, 08:48:42 AM
engineers are doing things for the pleasure of management, population be damned. Flirting with forum limitations, I can add that this is not totally unlike issues with police.
As for consultants... Excuses I heard also include "this is the way it is described in a book", "management doesn't want to have things changed"... Makes me wonder if NYSDOT engineering positions can  be downgraded from PE to high school diploma or equivalent, minimum wage +$1/hour without any loss...
Nah.  With a statement like that, you're ignorant of what work they actually do.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on January 15, 2021, 08:52:07 PM
Quote from: Rothman on January 15, 2021, 07:20:47 PM
Quote from: kalvado on January 15, 2021, 07:00:20 PM
Quote from: Rothman on January 15, 2021, 02:18:51 PM
Quote from: kalvado on January 15, 2021, 10:02:41 AM
Quote from: Rothman on January 15, 2021, 09:06:56 AM
Quote from: kalvado on January 15, 2021, 08:48:42 AM
Quote from: Alps on January 15, 2021, 12:01:23 AM
Quote from: hbelkins on January 14, 2021, 03:55:34 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on January 13, 2021, 08:19:25 PM

I could cite other examples as well where NYSDOT's engineers are very intractable, and act like they are always right even when presented with evidence to the contrary.

Engineers are very hesitant to do anything outside of guidelines. The instance I always fall back to was one here in Kentucky on the AA Highway. After a number of fatal wrecks at an intersection, local leaders and residents kept requesting a traffic light be installed. The intersection didn't meet warrants for a signal, so the request was always denied. But the Transportation Cabinet secretary at the time was not an engineer. After the locals approached him, he overrode the engineers and had the signal installed.

The best advice for the locals in this situation would be to take their case to the highest non-engineer who has jurisdiction over NYSDOT.
Engineers are legally responsible for their decisions.
You made my day. Was any DOT engineer legally prosecuted in recent history?
In particular, for the case @hbelkins mentioned - installing traffic light when it is not required (not on interstate or roundabout, I assume).
The problem I see is exactly the opposite - while such responsibility exists on the books, it is not applied - but management influence is very real. So, as
@SignBridge describes, engineers are doing things for the pleasure of management, population be damned. Flirting with forum limitations, I can add that this is not totally unlike issues with police.
No, they aren't prosecuted frequently since they are careful about when they use their PE stamps.

That said, NYSDOT is sued frequently enough, but I don't think the grounds are due to specific design issues that often.

Of course, whenever a crash occurs, NYSDOT may expect to get sued, part of a litigation culture. Especially if crash occurs after a reconstruction - and we may be dead sure that a crash will occur sooner or later.  Just thinking about that limo crash, where a pretty reasonable design at a challenging spot is
With that, I can easily point out several apparent design mistakes in the area, which go uncorrected for decades, actually cause problems, and some of them survived full road reconstruction. So I am not holding NYSDOT engineering talent at high regard. More like the opposite...
I'm sure NYSDOT values your opinion. :D

Makes me wonder how many you saw were designed by consultants. :D
You see, this is exactly what I am talking about:
Quote from: kalvado on January 15, 2021, 08:48:42 AM
engineers are doing things for the pleasure of management, population be damned. Flirting with forum limitations, I can add that this is not totally unlike issues with police.
As for consultants... Excuses I heard also include "this is the way it is described in a book", "management doesn't want to have things changed"... Makes me wonder if NYSDOT engineering positions can  be downgraded from PE to high school diploma or equivalent, minimum wage +$1/hour without any loss...
Nah.  With a statement like that, you're ignorant of what work they actually do.
I sure hope structural design folks are held to higher standards as their failures are harder to ignore. Minneapolis bridge will be remembered for decades...
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on January 15, 2021, 10:12:08 PM
The toll billing saga continues.  I just got billed earlier this week by plate for a toll that had already posted to my E-ZPass account a month before (the toll was discovered in my E-ZPass transaction log, but has my plate number rather than the transponder number) via the transponder.  Ridiculous.  Now they're double billing people.  The billing system for the cashless tolling is a big fat failure.

I sent a demand to the E-ZPass service center that the duplicate charge be removed a few days ago, but have gotten no response.  And to think I thought having a transponder would save me from cashless tolling billing shenanigans.  This is exactly why I never do toll by plate - ever.  For any reason.  No matter what.  Maybe I need to apply that policy to all AET facilities period, regardless of whether they use E-ZPass or not.

I'm losing respect for the Thruway Authority very, very fast.  Two round trips since the cashless conversion, and both have taken a long time for all the charges to appear and have both been billed incorrectly.  And the Thruway has never answered an email that I've sent them.  Ever.  And their site is an insecure mess that will only use https if you manually type it in the URL (I checked with Google, lest it just be my old bookmark - anyone who visits that site by any normal means does indeed only get insecure http; and they expect people to type in account details on their contact forms?).  Setting it up to automatically use https is easy - I was able to do it in less than 5 minutes for my site, and I didn't know anything about how before that, only that it could be done.  The fact that NYSTA didn't do that tells us everything we need to know.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on January 16, 2021, 12:39:06 AM


Quote from: vdeane on January 15, 2021, 10:12:08 PM
The toll billing saga continues.  I just got billed earlier this week by plate for a toll that had already posted to my E-ZPass account a month before (the toll was discovered in my E-ZPass transaction log, but has my plate number rather than the transponder number) via the transponder.  Ridiculous.  Now they're double billing people.  The billing system for the cashless tolling is a big fat failure.

I sent a demand to the E-ZPass service center that the duplicate charge be removed a few days ago, but have gotten no response.  And to think I thought having a transponder would save me from cashless tolling billing shenanigans.  This is exactly why I never do toll by plate - ever.  For any reason.  No matter what.  Maybe I need to apply that policy to all AET facilities period, regardless of whether they use E-ZPass or not.

I'm losing respect for the Thruway Authority very, very fast.  Two round trips since the cashless conversion, and both have taken a long time for all the charges to appear and have both been billed incorrectly.  And the Thruway has never answered an email that I've sent them.  Ever.  And their site is an insecure mess that will only use https if you manually type it in the URL (I checked with Google, lest it just be my old bookmark - anyone who visits that site by any normal means does indeed only get insecure http; and they expect people to type in account details on their contact forms?).  Setting it up to automatically use https is easy - I was able to do it in less than 5 minutes for my site, and I didn't know anything about how before that, only that it could be done.  The fact that NYSTA didn't do that tells us everything we need to know.

Wow.  I haven't been double billed like that.  But, postings are taking up to ten days.  Half of a round trip to Rome I took on Thursday has shown up already...but not the other half.

When I go to E-ZPass NY, Google Chrome reports a secure connection without having to type in https.

Sorry it's such a mess.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: lstone19 on January 16, 2021, 08:27:15 AM
While the delays in posting tolls are indicative of a problem, one mistaken billing is anecdotal evidence, not a pattern. It shouldn't happen but it does.

In the 15 or so years I've had EZ-Pass, I am only aware of two mistaken billings:
1) Illinois (home system) showed a transponder read and then a second later, a video toll (posted from a license plate scan from the violation system)
2) Indiana charged me as a five-axle truck. There's a story in there. Indiana had (don't know if they still do - haven't been on the road in four or five years) gates on the EZ-Pass lanes. Better to delay dozens of motorists than let one vehicle through which didn't scan. So if one didn't, that lane came to a standstill until an employee came out to deal with it. At the mainline plazas, they also had EZ-Pass lanes on both sides of the cash lanes (which did not have EZ-Pass scanners) with the left being designated for cars and the right for trucks. I assumed they marked them like that to separate faster and slower vehicles but perhaps not. So one day, I was approaching the "pay" (as opposed to "get ticket") plaza and I saw a long line at the one car EZ-Pass lane on the left that was not moving so I went to the "truck" EZ-Pass lane on the right. And then about two hours later, got an unexpected alert that my EZ-Pass account had replenished. And checking my account, found I had been charged about $40 for a ~$5 toll. That took a month to straighten out. For all the teething pains NYSTA is having, it does not appear to be as bad as what Indiana did which was clearly for their benefit, not the motorists (such as apparently all cars with EZ-Pass must use only one plaza lane which could be shut down at any moment to deal with a problem and then you just have to wait - so much for EZ-Pass being faster than cash).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: hotdogPi on January 16, 2021, 08:29:25 AM
Does anyone know if there have been any issues with Massachusetts's bill by mail? I haven't heard a single horror story there.

(If the answer is no, I want a definite answer, not just a lack of responses.)
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: SignBridge on January 16, 2021, 08:32:54 PM
The last trip I took on the Masspike was in the Fall of 2019 and I had no billing issues. Trips in both directions correctly billed on my E-Z Pass.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on January 16, 2021, 10:03:05 PM
Quote from: Rothman on January 16, 2021, 12:39:06 AM
When I go to E-ZPass NY, Google Chrome reports a secure connection without having to type in https.
The SSL issue is the Thruway's own site, not E-ZPass NY.

Quote from: lstone19 on January 16, 2021, 08:27:15 AM
While the delays in posting tolls are indicative of a problem, one mistaken billing is anecdotal evidence, not a pattern. It shouldn't happen but it does.
Actually, it's not just one.  I believe I posted about the other before.  When I was driving home from Christmas, they processed the Capital District mainline gantries before the virtual ticket system to the west, giving me a free ride from 25A-24, even though I didn't use exit 25A.  And with this double billing happening on my way home from Thanksgiving, that means 100% of my round trips on the Thruway so far since the cashless conversion have had a billing issue.  Meanwhile, I never had an issue in the 11 prior years I've had my E-ZPass.  I don't think the timing is a coincidence, especially with the other issues.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: lstone19 on January 16, 2021, 10:16:39 PM
Quote from: vdeane on January 16, 2021, 10:03:05 PM
Actually, it's not just one.  I believe I posted about the other before.  When I was driving home from Christmas, they processed the Capital District mainline gantries before the virtual ticket system to the west, giving me a free ride from 25A-24, even though I didn't use exit 25A.  And with this double billing happening on my way home from Thanksgiving, that means 100% of my round trips on the Thruway so far since the cashless conversion have had a billing issue.  Meanwhile, I never had an issue in the 11 prior years I've had my E-ZPass.  I don't think the timing is a coincidence, especially with the other issues.

Point taken. With further thought on it, it did seem that the rollout happened very quickly. Probably too quickly, and probably, and not surprisingly, for political reasons. I suspect they were pushed to roll it out before they were ready and based on some of the comments further up in the topic, before they fully had the 25A issue worked out.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: deathtopumpkins on January 18, 2021, 09:04:33 AM
Quote from: 1 on January 16, 2021, 08:29:25 AM
Does anyone know if there have been any issues with Massachusetts's bill by mail? I haven't heard a single horror story there.

(If the answer is no, I want a definite answer, not just a lack of responses.)

Local news has run plenty of stories about supposed issues. Most have been no fault of MassDOT's (e.g. countless overdramatic articles about 'outrageous' late fees), but some are legitimate.

A quick Google search turns up:
https://www.boston25news.com/news/fox25-investigates-more-problems-for-drivers-with-states-new-electronic-tolling/500194149/
https://www.boston25news.com/news/25-investigates-drivers-call-new-tolling-fees-extortion/604801046/
https://whdh.com/news/hank-investigates-incorrect-ez-pass-charges/
https://boston.cbslocal.com/2018/02/12/massachusetts-license-plate-confusion-fines-wbz-tv-i-team-massdot/

The biggest issue has been trying to distinguish between all the different specialty license plates which leads to duplicate plate numbers, with most of those cases being out-of-state tolls, but some in-state. This is a big problem with any ALPR system, not just electronic tolling, and not just in Massachusetts.
I'm hoping this exact issue doesn't affect me too - I have a NH specialty plate, but FL SunPass doesn't have it as an option so I had to enter it as a standard passenger plate.

Having a transponder I've never used toll-by-plate, but the AETS conversion did lead to significantly longer E-ZPass processing times. Used to be near enough instantaneous, now it takes up to a week for transactions to show up.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: 02 Park Ave on January 18, 2021, 10:37:41 PM
On my journey to Cornwall yesterday, it appeared that work had started yet on toll booth removal at neither the Harriman nor Woodbury plaza.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on January 18, 2021, 11:25:47 PM
Quote from: 02 Park Ave on January 18, 2021, 10:37:41 PM
On my journey to Cornwall yesterday, it appeared that work had started yet on toll booth removal at neither the Harriman nor Woodbury plaza.

Both of these are very low priority. Only traffic between the north and Exit 16 actually has to pass through booths, and that's not a particularly heavy pair of movements.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: jmacswimmer on January 19, 2021, 10:45:01 AM
Quote from: 1 on January 16, 2021, 08:29:25 AM
Does anyone know if there have been any issues with Massachusetts's bill by mail? I haven't heard a single horror story there.

(If the answer is no, I want a definite answer, not just a lack of responses.)

I had an E-ZPass toll miscalculated the last time I was on the Mass Pike:

Entering at Sturbridge and continuing into Boston, I was expecting the Sturbridge-Weston portion to be tolled as follows for my out-of-state E-ZPass:
ENTRY: 83   EXIT: 120  AMOUNT: $2.00

Instead, it was split up into 2 overlapping charges:
ENTRY: 83   EXIT: 109  AMOUNT: $1.40
ENTRY: 104   EXIT: 120  AMOUNT: $1.40

Since this only amounted to an $0.80 overcharge it didn't seem worth the time & energy to fight, but it certainly struck me as an odd way for the system to mess up (taking the correct reads from each gantry but then combining them incorrectly).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on January 19, 2021, 01:42:42 PM
Quote from: jmacswimmer on January 19, 2021, 10:45:01 AM
Quote from: 1 on January 16, 2021, 08:29:25 AM
Does anyone know if there have been any issues with Massachusetts's bill by mail? I haven't heard a single horror story there.

(If the answer is no, I want a definite answer, not just a lack of responses.)

I had an E-ZPass toll miscalculated the last time I was on the Mass Pike:

Entering at Sturbridge and continuing into Boston, I was expecting the Sturbridge-Weston portion to be tolled as follows for my out-of-state E-ZPass:
ENTRY: 83   EXIT: 120  AMOUNT: $2.00

Instead, it was split up into 2 overlapping charges:
ENTRY: 83   EXIT: 109  AMOUNT: $1.40
ENTRY: 104   EXIT: 120  AMOUNT: $1.40

Since this only amounted to an $0.80 overcharge it didn't seem worth the time & energy to fight, but it certainly struck me as an odd way for the system to mess up (taking the correct reads from each gantry but then combining them incorrectly).
Great.  Another flub to look out for.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Alps on January 19, 2021, 03:09:51 PM
Quote from: jmacswimmer on January 19, 2021, 10:45:01 AM
Quote from: 1 on January 16, 2021, 08:29:25 AM
Does anyone know if there have been any issues with Massachusetts's bill by mail? I haven't heard a single horror story there.

(If the answer is no, I want a definite answer, not just a lack of responses.)

I had an E-ZPass toll miscalculated the last time I was on the Mass Pike:

Entering at Sturbridge and continuing into Boston, I was expecting the Sturbridge-Weston portion to be tolled as follows for my out-of-state E-ZPass:
ENTRY: 83   EXIT: 120  AMOUNT: $2.00

Instead, it was split up into 2 overlapping charges:
ENTRY: 83   EXIT: 109  AMOUNT: $1.40
ENTRY: 104   EXIT: 120  AMOUNT: $1.40

Since this only amounted to an $0.80 overcharge it didn't seem worth the time & energy to fight, but it certainly struck me as an odd way for the system to mess up (taking the correct reads from each gantry but then combining them incorrectly).
That's the sort of thing the agency really does need to know about. Their gantries should be synched in time so that even if one is delayed in reporting, the report gets inserted in the correct frame, so to speak.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: shadyjay on January 21, 2021, 04:56:34 PM
Drove the Thruway from Exit 8 up to Exit 17 today, my first trip since AET went live.  I will see how long it takes the transaction to be posted to my EZ-Pass account.

I did notice all the blue signs advertising the Thruway Advisory Radio were tarped over.  Is the HAR being phased out? 
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on January 21, 2021, 09:07:15 PM
It took about four days for my virtual ticket system charges south of Albany to appear for a recent clinching trip, which is much more reasonable than intra-upstate trips are.  Figures that they favor downstate.

Regarding the HAR... I just noticed that the page on their site is gone.  And now that I think about it, I don't recall seeing the sign for it on the Northway as of late.  Uh oh.  How do they expect people to know about conditions?  Use their phone while driving?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Flyer78 on January 22, 2021, 10:06:12 AM
Were the transmitters located at the toll plaza admin buildings? (Wouldn't explain the Northway)... Just curious if they could have been a collateral loss...
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: shadyjay on January 22, 2021, 11:50:46 AM
Northway probably only had Thruway HAR a few miles north of Int 24 so that motorists SB had access to what was happening on the Thruway. 

I find it odd that the signs are tarped and not removed. 

I did see the Thruway app they want you to download.  It supposebly "talks to you" but that's a lot of moves for someone just trying to find traffic info, and a lot of time with your eyes off the road.  I guess traffic info, amber alerts, etc could just be shown on the VMS signs. 
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on January 22, 2021, 12:46:40 PM
Yeah, that sign on the Northway was SB about a mile north of exit 2 so travelers approaching the Thruway could get any alerts.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: shadyjay on January 29, 2021, 06:33:05 PM
My Thruway trip on 1/21 was posted to my account on 1/26, showing correctly as entry-Woodbury Toll (the mainline) and exit-Newburgh (I-84).  This was a few days after the Newburgh-Beacon Bridge toll was posted to my account.  I have EZ-PASS through Mass.  Prior to getting my EZ-PASS, I never had a problem with toll-by-mail on the Mass Pike... but the extra charges for tbm made me want to get the EZ-PASS.  It is so much easier now and more convenient. 

Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: SignBridge on January 29, 2021, 09:01:00 PM
Convenient was when we just used to pay cash back in the 1980's and didn't have any of this complicated b/s. But yeah, the toll-plaza traffic jams on holidays and weekends were a problem. I guess I didn't appreciate that 'cause I usually travelled mid-day/mid-week.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: D-Dey65 on January 29, 2021, 09:20:14 PM
The only complaints I've had about E-Z Pass anywhere is not being billed when I know I should've been. It seems these malfunctions occur whether you have a transponder or not.


Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: MASTERNC on February 05, 2021, 08:02:54 PM
Quote from: D-Dey65 on January 29, 2021, 09:20:14 PM
The only complaints I've had about E-Z Pass anywhere is not being billed when I know I should've been. It seems these malfunctions occur whether you have a transponder or not.


It's rare but it happens.  Only time I've experience it is when traveling on the I-95 Express Lanes in Maryland on a holiday evening after a thunderstorm (thought maybe the storm had knocked something out).  It was only 50 cents but I was never billed.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: 74/171FAN on February 05, 2021, 08:52:07 PM
Quote from: MASTERNC on February 05, 2021, 08:02:54 PM
Quote from: D-Dey65 on January 29, 2021, 09:20:14 PM
The only complaints I've had about E-Z Pass anywhere is not being billed when I know I should've been. It seems these malfunctions occur whether you have a transponder or not.

It's rare but it happens.  Only time I've experience it is when traveling on the I-95 Express Lanes in Maryland on a holiday evening after a thunderstorm (thought maybe the storm had knocked something out).  It was only 50 cents but I was never billed.

Ironically, I just noticed this today for a trip I took over the Hatem Bridge (US 40) in Maryland back in December.  All of my other tolls (even my earlier Harbor Tunnel toll that day) came through just fine.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Jim on February 09, 2021, 07:56:17 AM
I find it amusing that at least some traffic reports are still saying things like "no problems at the 24 tolls".

I've been through the area a few times in the last week.  There is definitely some confusion among those unfamiliar with the area on where to go due to the lack of advance signage.  I saw a pickup truck come to a complete stop in the left lane just up the onramp to 87 south after the split, apparently trying to figure out how to get back to take 90 west.  Fortunately traffic was light, the roads were dry, and I don't think it ended up causing an accident.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: deathtopumpkins on February 11, 2021, 09:16:19 AM
Drove the Thruway from Albany to PA and back over the last 2 days, and made a few observations:

All the mainline plazas were gone except Ripley (which I was the only one to slow down at all from highway speed to go through). This is very nice indeed!

The weave at 24 is awful now. I think it would help in the interim to separate the lanes from each ramp with at least a double solid line, if not a buffer, and provide advance signage for which lane to be in, so no one should ever need to make more than 1 lane change in the weave area. MassDOT did exactly this at old Exit 11A (I-495) on the MassPike.

Is it just me or should the signs before each AET gantry that instruct motorists without E-ZPass have a question mark after the E-ZPass logo? Presently they read "NO E-ZPASS - CALL **866" (or whatever the number is). As written the sign implies E-ZPass is not accepted and if you were hoping to pay with it you should call the number. I like to think people are more intelligent than that, but I do wonder if they've gotten calls along those lines before...
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: roadman65 on February 11, 2021, 09:33:53 AM
As a toll collector in Florida I can say many won't see the sign and follow their GPS as many think that device is the almighty and could care less what route they are alone than read other other important signs.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: roadman65 on February 11, 2021, 10:06:37 AM
 X-(I see at Suffern by photos on East Coast Roads they eliminated the Tappan Zee Bridge name by using smaller font and narrow spacing to fit the entire Gov. Mario M. Cuomo Bridge name on the area once made for Tappan Zee Br.
https://www.eastcoastroads.com/states/ny/inter/i287/photogal/east
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on February 11, 2021, 12:55:59 PM
Doing like the I-495 exit on the MassPike seems excessive; not only is this the I-90 mainline, there's double the length for traffic to sort itself out, a tandem lot, and two ramps going right, not just one.  It definitely could use a repave/re-striping and more advance signage, though.  I think there is more work yet to be done; they just rushed to get everything removed by winter, so I would think/hope that these issues would be addressed as the toll booth removal project progresses.  If it were me, I'd have an "I-90, keep left; I-87/US 20/Crossgates, keep right" sign on each approach and a gantry with advance signs where the ramps come together.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: lstone19 on February 11, 2021, 01:20:21 PM
I would think there shouldn't be much weaving going on at 24. The dominant flows should be 87 to 87 and 90 to 90. In both directions, 87 enters on the right and then departs on the right. Although no doubt some see the former site of the toll plaza to be a passing opportunity rather than just going with the flow until they're established on the next highway. If inadequate signage has been provided as mentioned above, they really need to be fixing that (perhaps some NYSTA vs. NYDOT issues like neither sees the need to provide advance signage for what happens on the other's road).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on February 11, 2021, 01:44:00 PM
Quote from: lstone19 on February 11, 2021, 01:20:21 PM
I would think there shouldn't be much weaving going on at 24. The dominant flows should be 87 to 87 and 90 to 90. In both directions, 87 enters on the right and then departs on the right. Although no doubt some see the former site of the toll plaza to be a passing opportunity rather than just going with the flow until they're established on the next highway. If inadequate signage has been provided as mentioned above, they really need to be fixing that (perhaps some NYSTA vs. NYDOT issues like neither sees the need to provide advance signage for what happens on the other's road).

There is more weaving than you would think. Sure, there's little traffic between the south and east, but that movement is handled by 787. North and west has a surprising amount of traffic and there's no good alternate unless you're coming from a ways into Saratoga County.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: PurdueBill on February 11, 2021, 02:19:14 PM
Quote from: deathtopumpkins on February 11, 2021, 09:16:19 AM
Drove the Thruway from Albany to PA and back over the last 2 days, and made a few observations:

All the mainline plazas were gone except Ripley (which I was the only one to slow down at all from highway speed to go through). This is very nice indeed!

The weave at 24 is awful now. I think it would help in the interim to separate the lanes from each ramp with at least a double solid line, if not a buffer, and provide advance signage for which lane to be in, so no one should ever need to make more than 1 lane change in the weave area. MassDOT did exactly this at old Exit 11A (I-495) on the MassPike.

Is it just me or should the signs before each AET gantry that instruct motorists without E-ZPass have a question mark after the E-ZPass logo? Presently they read "NO E-ZPASS - CALL **866" (or whatever the number is). As written the sign implies E-ZPass is not accepted and if you were hoping to pay with it you should call the number. I like to think people are more intelligent than that, but I do wonder if they've gotten calls along those lines before...

That was my exact thought when I saw a photo of that sign.  I don't get why they don't have a question mark or alternately didn't phrase it differently. 
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on February 11, 2021, 09:08:58 PM
Quote from: deathtopumpkins on February 11, 2021, 09:16:19 AM
Drove the Thruway from Albany to PA and back over the last 2 days, and made a few observations:

All the mainline plazas were gone except Ripley (which I was the only one to slow down at all from highway speed to go through). This is very nice indeed!

You mean people were threading their cars through the booths at 70 MPH...?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: deathtopumpkins on February 12, 2021, 08:59:14 AM
Quote from: Buffaboy on February 11, 2021, 09:08:58 PM
Quote from: deathtopumpkins on February 11, 2021, 09:16:19 AM
Drove the Thruway from Albany to PA and back over the last 2 days, and made a few observations:

All the mainline plazas were gone except Ripley (which I was the only one to slow down at all from highway speed to go through). This is very nice indeed!

You mean people were threading their cars through the booths at 70 MPH...?

Probably not quite 70 but close. I slowed down to about 30 (posted limit is 20) and a truck flew past me in the lane to my right. I was in front of them approaching the plaza and they were long gone by the time I got back up to speed.

As annoying as it is to have the plazas gated in IL, IN, and OH, at least it forces people to actually slow down!
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on February 19, 2021, 05:26:38 PM
^^^ Now that's wild.

I was able to drive on the Thruway from Exit 57 to Exit 52 this afternoon. It's amazing how much different the area around the former Lackawanna toll barrier looks. My whole trip felt faster even though I've been using EZPass for several years now.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Jim on February 26, 2021, 11:07:57 PM
My newest E-ZPass statement from NYSTA looks a lot more like it did before AET now.  Tolls are posting quickly, and they're compressing trips to single lines like the Mass Pike does, with entry and exit interchanges shown only, not separated out into multiple pieces when passing through the mainline gantries.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: 02 Park Ave on March 10, 2021, 12:11:51 PM
it appears that work has started on the removal of the old northbound toll booths at Woodbury.  The Harriman toll plaza remains as it was.

They are still using two portable VMSs to advise northbound through travelers to use the two left lanes transiting the Exit 16 area.  There is a large permanently mounted overhead VMS in that area which could be used for that purpose but it displays still another COVID message.

Along the northbound ramp for Exit 16 there still is a "PAY TOLL ½ MILE" sign.  That sign must be out of date by two years or so.  Subsequent to that sign there is also one for E-ZPass and pay by mail.

There is a lot of work to be done in this area.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on March 10, 2021, 01:05:00 PM
That doesn't sound different from the way it's looked since AET went live in November.  NY didn't have entry cameras at the toll barriers, so the fact that all traffic is being routed through the gantry doesn't mean anything.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on March 15, 2021, 09:20:01 PM
They've announced the next set of toll barriers to be removed.  Some of these are what I expected (exits 23, 25A, and 47), but others surprised me.  I would have thought exit 44, exit B1, and Ripley would have taken higher priority over exits 34A, 48, and especially B2 (which I would have thought to be one of the lowest priorities for removal!).

https://www.governor.ny.gov/news/governor-cuomo-announces-toll-booth-removal-and-interchange-reconstruction-resume-nys-thruway
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on March 15, 2021, 09:40:36 PM
Quote from: vdeane on March 15, 2021, 09:20:01 PM
They've announced the next set of toll barriers to be removed.  Some of these are what I expected (exits 23, 25A, and 47), but others surprised me.  I would have thought exit 44, exit B1, and Ripley would have taken higher priority over exits 34A, 48, and especially B2 (which I would have thought to be one of the lowest priorities for removal!).

Interesting. 48 is the most surprising one on the list to me (that and 43 would have been my last two picks for the Buffalo-Syracuse segment), while Ripley is the most surprising omission. B2 is an interesting one. You'd think they were prioritizing cases where the route ends at the Thruway, but then 44 should have made the cut.

Of the double trumpets, I'd have guessed both 39 and 46 over 34A, but 34A makes a good trial because it's got the longest merge area. Signage is going to have to be significantly improved at all three (that's what I thought about 45, too, but no improvements there yet).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Jim on March 15, 2021, 10:07:23 PM
Quote from: webny99 on March 15, 2021, 09:40:36 PM
**text snipped**

Signage is going to have to be significantly improved at all three (that's what I thought about 45, too, but no improvements there yet).

Speaking of signage improvements, 24 remains a mess, with no advance indication for those unfamiliar where to be to get on I-87 or I-90 in either direction.  Nothing suggesting a lower speed through the weave areas.  Now that it's been configured like this, some regulars seem to feel the need to do 80+ through the whole thing and refuse to let people complete their weaving, while others are very timid, confused, and dangerously slow as they come through.  I can't believe they've let it stay this way for months after the toll plaza removal was completed.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on March 15, 2021, 10:10:28 PM
Quote from: webny99 on March 15, 2021, 09:40:36 PM
Quote from: vdeane on March 15, 2021, 09:20:01 PM
They've announced the next set of toll barriers to be removed.  Some of these are what I expected (exits 23, 25A, and 47), but others surprised me.  I would have thought exit 44, exit B1, and Ripley would have taken higher priority over exits 34A, 48, and especially B2 (which I would have thought to be one of the lowest priorities for removal!).

Interesting. 48 is the most surprising one on the list to me (that and 43 would have been my last two picks for the Buffalo-Syracuse segment), while Ripley is the most surprising omission. B2 is an interesting one. You'd think they were prioritizing cases where the route ends at the Thruway, but then 44 should have made the cut.

Of the double trumpets, I'd have guessed both 39 and 46 over 34A, but 34A makes a good trial because it's got the longest merge area. Signage is going to have to be significantly improved at all three (that's what I thought about 45, too, but no improvements there yet).
Interesting is certainly one way to put it.  B2 is a former double trumpet where the extension of the Parkway further north was cancelled, and the road was later modified to remove that end of the interchange and feed directly into the Thruway.  For some reason, they only modified it northbound, and southbound still narrows to one lane with a visible "stub" (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4133259,-73.5489498,3a,79.3y,192.96h,69.77t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1stOC46oct0W5OxRwKC20UlQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656).  Traffic counts are very low there - they only have three toll lanes (total)!

Quote from: Jim on March 15, 2021, 10:07:23 PM
Quote from: webny99 on March 15, 2021, 09:40:36 PM
**text snipped**

Signage is going to have to be significantly improved at all three (that's what I thought about 45, too, but no improvements there yet).

Speaking of signage improvements, 24 remains a mess, with no advance indication for those unfamiliar where to be to get on I-87 or I-90 in either direction.  Nothing suggesting a lower speed through the weave areas.  Now that it's been configured like this, some regulars seem to feel the need to do 80+ through the whole thing and refuse to let people complete their weaving, while others are very timid, confused, and dangerously slow as they come through.  I can't believe they've let it stay this way for months after the toll plaza removal was completed.
Lane-wise, it's pretty much in its final configuration, though I would expect they would eventually get around to resurfacing it.  Signage-wise, can they even put down the concrete foundations for a new overhead sign structure in the winter?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Jim on March 15, 2021, 10:30:49 PM
Quote from: vdeane on March 15, 2021, 10:10:28 PM
Lane-wise, it's pretty much in its final configuration, though I would expect they would eventually get around to resurfacing it.  Signage-wise, can they even put down the concrete foundations for a new overhead sign structure in the winter?

I don't know about that, but it seems at least some actual or advisory speeds and temp construction-type signage to warn people, something like "I-90 left 2 lanes, I-87 right two lanes" at or near the merge points in each direction.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on March 15, 2021, 10:51:00 PM
The thing with 48 is that it's not particularly prone to getting lake effect snow. West of there starts getting into the snow belt. You can't realistically touch 61 until lake effect season is over.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on March 15, 2021, 11:07:55 PM
Quote from: cl94 on March 15, 2021, 10:51:00 PM
The thing with 48 is that it's not particularly prone to getting lake effect snow. West of there starts getting into the snow belt. You can't realistically touch 61 until lake effect season is over.

Batavia can get its fair share of lake effect snow, but certainly less than points south and west.
44 or 46 would have also worked; they're both busier than 48 and even further out of Lake Erie's range.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: empirestate on March 17, 2021, 11:46:17 AM
Quote from: webny99 on March 15, 2021, 09:40:36 PM
Interesting. 48 is the most surprising one on the list to me (that and 43 would have been my last two picks for the Buffalo-Syracuse segment), while Ripley is the most surprising omission. B2 is an interesting one. You'd think they were prioritizing cases where the route ends at the Thruway, but then 44 should have made the cut.

Well, B2 is already in the midst of an overpass replacement, so perhaps it was just as easy to knock down the toll booth while they're in the neighborhood.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on March 17, 2021, 12:33:03 PM
Quote from: empirestate on March 17, 2021, 11:46:17 AM
Quote from: webny99 on March 15, 2021, 09:40:36 PM
B2 is an interesting one. You'd think they were prioritizing cases where the route ends at the Thruway, but then 44 should have made the cut.

Well, B2 is already in the midst of an overpass replacement, so perhaps it was just as easy to knock down the toll booth while they're in the neighborhood.

That's probably it. That's a bit out of my usual range, so I wasn't aware of the bridge replacement going on there.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: empirestate on March 17, 2021, 02:58:56 PM
Quote from: webny99 on March 17, 2021, 12:33:03 PM
Quote from: empirestate on March 17, 2021, 11:46:17 AM
Quote from: webny99 on March 15, 2021, 09:40:36 PM
B2 is an interesting one. You'd think they were prioritizing cases where the route ends at the Thruway, but then 44 should have made the cut.

Well, B2 is already in the midst of an overpass replacement, so perhaps it was just as easy to knock down the toll booth while they're in the neighborhood.

That's probably it. That's a bit out of my usual range, so I wasn't aware of the bridge replacement going on there.

We go through regularly, as it's the fastest way between Dutchess County and northern New England that doesn't involve Connecticut.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on April 01, 2021, 12:55:49 PM
Looks like the Thruway has finally put the schedule of toll booth removals/reconstructions on their website.
http://thruway.ny.gov/cashless/demo-schedule.html
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on April 01, 2021, 04:40:14 PM
Quote from: vdeane on April 01, 2021, 12:55:49 PM
Looks like the Thruway has finally put the schedule of toll booth removals/reconstructions on their website.
http://thruway.ny.gov/cashless/demo-schedule.html
Ramp from Thruway EB to I-690 is in sore need of reconstruction.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on April 01, 2021, 04:46:09 PM
Quote from: Rothman on April 01, 2021, 04:40:14 PM
Quote from: vdeane on April 01, 2021, 12:55:49 PM
Looks like the Thruway has finally put the schedule of toll booth removals/reconstructions on their website.
http://thruway.ny.gov/cashless/demo-schedule.html
Ramp from Thruway EB to I-690 is in sore need of reconstruction.

Agreed, and really all of Exit 39.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on April 01, 2021, 05:08:14 PM
Quote from: Rothman on April 01, 2021, 04:40:14 PM
Quote from: vdeane on April 01, 2021, 12:55:49 PM
Looks like the Thruway has finally put the schedule of toll booth removals/reconstructions on their website.
http://thruway.ny.gov/cashless/demo-schedule.html
Ramp from Thruway EB to I-690 is in sore need of reconstruction.
I wonder what are the plans for 24  - just re-stripping, or something beyond that? They are planning  2 months of work; that is a lot for stripping and signs, but  not enough for anything serious...
23 has a longer allocation. Are they planning for some reconfiguration? I can see some, but a flyover would be required...
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on April 01, 2021, 08:37:24 PM
I believe there's a link to the final configurations a few pages back.  The work includes pavement reconstruction work around the former plaza and probably signage.

I imagine things would take longer at 23 because there's still a toll barrier there.  The booths there were not part of the quick demo rush last fall.  It also looks like they will be working on a LOT of booths concurrently in the June-August timeframe.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: machias on April 02, 2021, 08:44:54 PM
Quote from: webny99 on April 01, 2021, 04:46:09 PM
Quote from: Rothman on April 01, 2021, 04:40:14 PM
Quote from: vdeane on April 01, 2021, 12:55:49 PM
Looks like the Thruway has finally put the schedule of toll booth removals/reconstructions on their website.
http://thruway.ny.gov/cashless/demo-schedule.html
Ramp from Thruway EB to I-690 is in sore need of reconstruction.

Agreed, and really all of Exit 39.

They just built in the late 1980s, how on earth can it need work already? /s
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: crispy93 on April 16, 2021, 12:15:49 PM
There's still a Construction Ahead - Stay Alert! sign on I-84 w/b approaching the Thruway, along with an old No Shoulder sign afterward. They were put up when the 84/87 interchange was being built maybe 15 years ago? Can't believe they haven't been taken down. NYSTA maintained I-84, which was the style at the time. You can even roll GSV back to 2007 and see when it was still orange https://www.google.com/maps/@41.5137846,-74.0491554,3a,48.9y,277.07h,88.02t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sM1muMp0ZWwJF1TWGoqXGVQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: seicer on April 16, 2021, 02:11:54 PM
Quote from: machias on April 02, 2021, 08:44:54 PM
They just built in the late 1980s, how on earth can it need work already? /s

Salt. Plus, that's 30+ years.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on April 16, 2021, 10:44:42 PM
Quote from: seicer on April 16, 2021, 02:11:54 PM
Quote from: machias on April 02, 2021, 08:44:54 PM
They just built in the late 1980s, how on earth can it need work already? /s

Salt. Plus, that's 30+ years.
/s means sarcasm.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Jim on April 17, 2021, 04:53:03 PM
Activity has started at Exit 27's toll booths.  At least one booth is completely gutted and it looks like some parts have been removed from a couple more.

I've been in contact with some local officials to see if they can help save some piece of the toll booths to put on display in one of our local parks, but I don't think anything's going to come of it.  I was thinking a whole booth would be nice but if not that maybe the old blue Thruway sign on the top.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: SignBridge on April 17, 2021, 07:58:28 PM
That would be an interesting display for a public park. So people can show their grand children how tolls were paid for a hundred years by actually stopping and handing money to an attendant. Kind of like telling children (and young adults) today about dial telephones. And phone booths..........
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Roadgeek Adam on April 17, 2021, 11:48:32 PM
49 is down save for parts of the mounting supports.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on April 17, 2021, 11:58:31 PM
All of the Berkshire Spur's toll plazas have been removed with relatively unimpeded traffic. The mainline barrier at Canaan is in the final stages of paving with a lane closure. B1 went from mostly up to completely down and paved over in the span of 2 weeks.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: empirestate on April 18, 2021, 05:49:40 PM
Quote from: cl94 on April 17, 2021, 11:58:31 PM
All of the Berkshire Spur's toll plazas have been removed with relatively unimpeded traffic. The mainline barrier at Canaan is in the final stages of paving with a lane closure. B1 went from mostly up to completely down and paved over in the span of 2 weeks.

Yes, B2 was also removed when I went through two weeks ago. However (perhaps apropos to the above), the little building with the "B2" on top of it still stands. I'm guessing it will stay as some kind of little maintenance depot.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Jim on April 22, 2021, 09:20:17 AM
At Exit 27 this morning: 2 booths in process of being demolished (unfortunately, it doesn't look like they're trying to save anything) and 2 booths still standing with traffic passing through, one in each direction.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on April 24, 2021, 03:55:43 PM
Toll plaza at 25A is completely down. A permanent concrete median barrier has been installed and the EB exit ramp at I-88 Exit 25 has been modified to allow for WB exiting traffic to reenter and access the tandem lot. If not for the new asphalt at the former booths themselves, it would be hard to tell where exactly they were.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Jim on April 24, 2021, 08:21:39 PM
Also 26 was completely down and the area paved over when I went through on Thursday.

27 was still half up half down on Friday afternoon.  The area of roadway near the booths that were removed was dug down somewhat below the road surface.

I did get word from a couple of local officials that they were able to acquire one of the 27 toll booths intact and have possession of it for a future exhibit, hopefully at Riverlink Park.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on April 24, 2021, 10:28:43 PM
Quote from: Jim on April 24, 2021, 08:21:39 PM
I did get word from a couple of local officials that they were able to acquire one of the 27 toll booths intact and have possession of it for a future exhibit, hopefully at Riverlink Park.
Still, it will be less impressive than the whole barrier preserved from the Merritt.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Roadgeek Adam on April 24, 2021, 10:47:54 PM
Would you rather have nothing? Because that's always an option too.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on April 25, 2021, 12:07:07 AM
Quote from: Roadgeek Adam on April 24, 2021, 10:47:54 PM
Would you rather have nothing? Because that's always an option too.
Do you presume that preserving a full barrier is somehow impossible or something?  There are plenty still around if they want to try going for the full experience.  IMO individual booths don't exactly evoke the full experience of going through a barrier, especially since the differences between the various toll agencies is largely in canopy design; the Thruway booths and the Delaware Turnpike booth that used to be on display at the rest area are very similar, for example, even though the full barriers look nothing alike.

(although honestly, it never even occurred to me to make a Merritt experience until it had already been brought up here)
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Roadgeek Adam on April 25, 2021, 12:18:56 AM
My point is the Thruway Authority/contractor didn't have to give the local officials anything. They were nice enough to give them one. One is better than none. We don't need the full thing.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Jim on April 25, 2021, 07:32:46 AM
When I suggested it, I really expected a response that it would be nice but that it would cost too much, or that there would be no way to get anything worth saving from without damaging it too much in the removal process.  I was happy to get a "I love this idea, let's try to make it happen" response.  I figured at best the city could get the old "New York Thruway" blue sign from on top, or some artifacts from inside the toll booths.  I'm just glad that a small piece of local history has a chance to be preserved.  For placement in the park, I'm thinking one booth is about right.  As I understand it, the Historic Amsterdam League (http://www.historicamsterdam.org/) will be taking the lead on what to do with the toll booth.

If someone wanted to preserve a few complete lanes, it seems it would have been best to keep them in-place.  I don't think you'd reconstruct the big concrete barriers and all that.  In-place preservation is not feasible at most of the regular exits without rerouting the ramps around the old booths.  Too late now, but maybe something like the two lanes on the right when exiting at 24 could have been preserved with enough space remaining to have the 8 travel lanes.  Though the 24 tolls were built much more recently than what you have/had at most other exits, so the historic interest might be lower.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: astralentity on April 25, 2021, 07:00:27 PM
Now that the Thruway is completely converted to electronic tolling only, my position still stands that the exit numbers and mileage need to be reset to match that of I-90 and I-87 separately.  No more B prefixed mile markers and exits.  Please for the love of God.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on April 25, 2021, 09:21:49 PM
Quote from: Jim on April 25, 2021, 07:32:46 AM
When I suggested it, I really expected a response that it would be nice but that it would cost too much, or that there would be no way to get anything worth saving from without damaging it too much in the removal process.  I was happy to get a "I love this idea, let's try to make it happen" response.  I figured at best the city could get the old "New York Thruway" blue sign from on top, or some artifacts from inside the toll booths.  I'm just glad that a small piece of local history has a chance to be preserved.  For placement in the park, I'm thinking one booth is about right.  As I understand it, the Historic Amsterdam League (http://www.historicamsterdam.org/) will be taking the lead on what to do with the toll booth.

If someone wanted to preserve a few complete lanes, it seems it would have been best to keep them in-place.  I don't think you'd reconstruct the big concrete barriers and all that.  In-place preservation is not feasible at most of the regular exits without rerouting the ramps around the old booths.  Too late now, but maybe something like the two lanes on the right when exiting at 24 could have been preserved with enough space remaining to have the 8 travel lanes.  Though the 24 tolls were built much more recently than what you have/had at most other exits, so the historic interest might be lower.
The Merritt one  seems to have (https://nysroads.com/photos.php?route=ct15&state=CT&file=101_0731.JPG), but then, they have the Conservancy.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: empirestate on April 26, 2021, 12:47:57 PM
Quote from: astralentity on April 25, 2021, 07:00:27 PM
Now that the Thruway is completely converted to electronic tolling only, my position still stands that the exit numbers and mileage need to be reset to match that of I-90 and I-87 separately.  No more B prefixed mile markers and exits.  Please for the love of God.

What's the correlation between the numbering and the mode of toll collection?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: astralentity on April 26, 2021, 07:11:32 PM
Quote from: empirestate on April 26, 2021, 12:47:57 PM
Quote from: astralentity on April 25, 2021, 07:00:27 PM
Now that the Thruway is completely converted to electronic tolling only, my position still stands that the exit numbers and mileage need to be reset to match that of I-90 and I-87 separately.  No more B prefixed mile markers and exits.  Please for the love of God.

What's the correlation between the numbering and the mode of toll collection?

IIRC it had a lot to do with the old ticket system, but then again that could've just been cover for the politics of it all.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: MASTERNC on April 26, 2021, 07:29:57 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on April 17, 2021, 07:58:28 PM
That would be an interesting display for a public park. So people can show their grand children how tolls were paid for a hundred years by actually stopping and handing money to an attendant. Kind of like telling children (and young adults) today about dial telephones. And phone booths..........

More like a children's museum item
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: empirestate on April 26, 2021, 08:52:02 PM
Quote from: astralentity on April 26, 2021, 07:11:32 PM
Quote from: empirestate on April 26, 2021, 12:47:57 PM
What's the correlation between the numbering and the mode of toll collection?

IIRC it had a lot to do with the old ticket system, but then again that could've just been cover for the politics of it all.

Right, but what was it about the old ticket system, that you recall? (I'm asking because I don't know, not because I doubt you.)

I'm not sure it was ever about anything but that it's the Thruway, it was there first, it's a self-contained system under a separate authority, and it just generally takes precedence, so why shouldn't everybody else adjust to it instead of the other way around?...and so forth and so on. Maybe they did put forth some more persuasive argument, but my hunch is that most of the persuasion has remained within our own little community here. :)
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: SignBridge on April 26, 2021, 09:11:06 PM
I thought the issue was that if you renumbered the exits on the separate numerical routes you might have duplicate exit numbers on the Thruway toll system which would have caused confusion re: toll computation. In fact you could enter and leave the T'way at two exits with the same number, right?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: shadyjay on April 26, 2021, 10:20:33 PM
If you look at other toll roads with ticket systems (or former ticket systems), the route number doesn't mean anything... it's all about the authority road itself, as it was built before the interstates.  The Ohio Turnpike changes from I-80 to I-76 near its east end, yet its exit numbers are basically I-80's (as I-80 exists on the road entirely to the west)... I-76 gets ignored, as it was added on later.  Same thing with the PA Turnpike.... I-76 leaves at Valley Forge and I-276 begin, but yet the mileage and exit numbers continue from the start of the turnpike at the OH state line.  When I-95's interchange was built, those few miles that got signed I-95 received I-95 exit numbers/mileage to keep that road continuous.  There's no ticket system to worry about at that point, it having been moved back to the west.  Mass Pike didn't matter, since its I-90 from end to end. 

The Maine Turnpike was under a ticket system and I-95 exited and reentered twice, changing exit numbers and causing much confusion.  The solution there was just to reroute I-95.  Unfortunately, you can't just reroute I-90 or I-87 in New York as you're dealing with roads with two different orientations (E/W and N/S). 

Now one has to wonder if the Thruway is under its own authority and funding source, is it required by federal law to switch to mile-based exit numbers?  Many other turnpikes held onto sequential numbering even as other interstates had mile-based exits.  I have a RMcN atlas from the 80s which shows sequential exits on the Ohio Turnpike, but mile-based exits on the free interstates.  They converted later probably as a courtesy to motorists to be on par with the rest of the state. 

Perhaps if the New York Thruway was divided into two ticket systems on the mainline, then the switch may have occured years ago... such as one ticket for Harriman-to-Selkirk and another from Schenectady-to-Buffalo.  Then the exits could have changed and there'd be no confusion.  You'd need two more booths but you could have had free travel Selkirk to Schenectady on the mainline, and retained the Int. 24/Northway and the Berkshire spur "Exit" B3 plaza as straight-up fixed barrier tolls. 
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on April 26, 2021, 10:38:09 PM
The thing with Thruway exit numbers is that FHWA wanted both I-87 and I-90 to have a single set of numbers that increased from S-N or W-E. I-87 would still have at least two Exit 2s if you renumbered its non-Thruway portions. With the Ohio Turnpike, no numbers are repeated along I-76, so it isn't confusing, but there is no way to have I-90 exit numbers increase in one direction without renumbering the Thruway. I assume that the Kansas Turnpike's weirdness with I-70 exit numbers predates the current FHWA edicts.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: astralentity on April 26, 2021, 11:11:18 PM
I guess I can't see where the confusion would lie if I-90 and I-87 had their own continuous set of numbers.  The modern IT half of my brain says the computer system wouldn't care what the I number was, just the internal gantry number in the database.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Jim on April 27, 2021, 08:24:55 AM
So to me it comes down to this choice:

Two major interstate highways get single sets of consistent, mile-based exit numbers, doing what is done in almost the entire rest of the country.  This is at the expense of one road (Thruway) having two sets of exit numbers that switch when it clearly makes basically a 90 degree turn.

or

The Thruway maintaining a single set of exit numbers at the expense of two major interstate highways each having 3 inconsistent sets of exit numbers.

The only valid reasons I can think of for keeping the status quo are that it costs money to change (though it's party, party, party, spend, spend, spend in NYS this year anyway) and that it would take some short amount of time for people to get used to the new numbers.  So let's just do this right, already.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: jemacedo9 on April 27, 2021, 09:43:56 AM
The PA Turnpike had the same single numbering scheme for the mainline and the NE Extension.
Mainline (I-76 and I-276) were Exits 1-30
NE Extension I-476 was Exits 31-38.

When the renumbering took place, there would have been two duplicates:  56 (Pittsburgh on the mainline and Lehigh Valley on the NE Ext) and 75 (New Stanton on the mainline and Mahoning Valley on the NE Ext). 
The answer:  fudge one of the exit numbers by one.  Problem solved.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: lstone19 on April 27, 2021, 09:56:07 AM
Quote from: jemacedo9 on April 27, 2021, 09:43:56 AM
The PA Turnpike had the same single numbering scheme for the mainline and the NE Extension.
Mainline (I-76 and I-276) were Exits 1-30
NE Extension I-476 was Exits 31-38.

When the renumbering took place, there would have been two duplicates:  56 (Pittsburgh on the mainline and Lehigh Valley on the NE Ext) and 75 (New Stanton on the mainline and Mahoning Valley on the NE Ext). 
The answer:  fudge one of the exit numbers by one.  Problem solved.

And at least for me, as a result, the PA Turnpike name is no longer relevant since saying PA Turnpike Exit nnn no longer gives me a general sense of where the exit is since for the low numbers, without having memorized all the exits, it does not tell me which road it's on. From a Marketing perspective, the PA Turnpike's renumbering was a major negative for the PA Turnpike "brand".
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: empirestate on April 27, 2021, 10:28:28 AM
Quote from: jemacedo9 on April 27, 2021, 09:43:56 AM
The PA Turnpike had the same single numbering scheme for the mainline and the NE Extension.
Mainline (I-76 and I-276) were Exits 1-30
NE Extension I-476 was Exits 31-38.

When the renumbering took place, there would have been two duplicates:  56 (Pittsburgh on the mainline and Lehigh Valley on the NE Ext) and 75 (New Stanton on the mainline and Mahoning Valley on the NE Ext). 
The answer:  fudge one of the exit numbers by one.  Problem solved.

Sure, no question that the issue could have been solved. We're just wondering if that was indeed the reason all along. What did NYSTA actually say about it, when asked? I can't recall one way or the other.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on April 27, 2021, 10:32:44 AM
Quote from: lstone19 on April 27, 2021, 09:56:07 AM
Quote from: jemacedo9 on April 27, 2021, 09:43:56 AM
The PA Turnpike had the same single numbering scheme for the mainline and the NE Extension.
Mainline (I-76 and I-276) were Exits 1-30
NE Extension I-476 was Exits 31-38.

When the renumbering took place, there would have been two duplicates:  56 (Pittsburgh on the mainline and Lehigh Valley on the NE Ext) and 75 (New Stanton on the mainline and Mahoning Valley on the NE Ext). 
The answer:  fudge one of the exit numbers by one.  Problem solved.

And at least for me, as a result, the PA Turnpike name is no longer relevant since saying PA Turnpike Exit nnn no longer gives me a general sense of where the exit is since for the low numbers, without having memorized all the exits, it does not tell me which road it's on. From a Marketing perspective, the PA Turnpike's renumbering was a major negative for the PA Turnpike "brand".
And how important that branding really is? I can understand FLorida, where 95 and turnpike are almost direct competition for some distance. Thruway is the road in the area. 
ANyway, a stupid question... If someone in NYSTA decides to show who is the most important person  around... COuld they consider just dropping interstate designations altogether? They do not get FHWA funding, so that is not the reason to keep the number. Of course FHWA could pressure the state.
There is a FHWA loan for Tappan Zee bridge, some agreement about I-88 traffic - but does that give FHWA enough leverage?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on April 27, 2021, 12:59:58 PM
Quote from: jemacedo9 on April 27, 2021, 09:43:56 AM
The PA Turnpike had the same single numbering scheme for the mainline and the NE Extension.
Mainline (I-76 and I-276) were Exits 1-30
NE Extension I-476 was Exits 31-38.

When the renumbering took place, there would have been two duplicates:  56 (Pittsburgh on the mainline and Lehigh Valley on the NE Ext) and 75 (New Stanton on the mainline and Mahoning Valley on the NE Ext). 
The answer:  fudge one of the exit numbers by one.  Problem solved.
The situation is not analogous.  The Northeast Extension is really a spur from the rest of the PA Turnpike, not an extension (much like how the Berkshire Spur branches off the Thruway).  As such, it makes sense that it would have a separate set of exit numbers.  The Thruway mainline is continuous - in fact, I-87 exits itself in both directions multiple times!  It's more like how I-76 and I-95 hop off/on the PA Turnpike, only more complicated.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: MASTERNC on April 27, 2021, 02:51:17 PM
Quote from: jemacedo9 on April 27, 2021, 09:43:56 AM
The PA Turnpike had the same single numbering scheme for the mainline and the NE Extension.
Mainline (I-76 and I-276) were Exits 1-30
NE Extension I-476 was Exits 31-38.

When the renumbering took place, there would have been two duplicates:  56 (Pittsburgh on the mainline and Lehigh Valley on the NE Ext) and 75 (New Stanton on the mainline and Mahoning Valley on the NE Ext). 
The answer:  fudge one of the exit numbers by one.  Problem solved.

Technically I think Exit 31 (Lansdale) might have been fudged as well.  Think it is closer to the 29-30 mile marker.  The Warrendale main line toll plaza on I-76 was also considered "Exit" 30.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: lstone19 on April 27, 2021, 03:57:18 PM
With more thought on the matter, I think what the ISTHA (Illinois) has done is instructive. Unlike the Thruway, ISTHA was late to exit numbering but what they did, they just went with the appropriate south-to-north or west-to-east number for the mileage. I don't believe any attempt has been made to avoid duplicates. But for tolls, reference is made to plaza numbers (and name) and plaza numbers have nothing to do with mileage or exit numbers (they're mostly sequential by road with some out of sequence due to when they were built). Plus ISTHA has always marketed the roads by their individual names rather than a blanket name covering the whole thing (although while their is the "Illinois Tollways" umbrella name, I never hear it used to describe a particularly road).

For that to work in NY, the Thruway needs to move away from the "New York State Thruway" name to describe the road and divide it into sub-Thruways and push those names so exit numbers match with a name (I made that suggestion almost a year ago and several pages back). Something like "Hudson River Thruway" for the I-87 section and "Erie Canal Thruway" for the Buffalo to Albany section of I-90. They already have the New England Thruway and the Niagara Thruway so the precedent is there.

As it is, EB through Thruway traffic at Exit 24 diverges to the right which would help reinforce the idea you're moving from one road to another.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Michael on April 28, 2021, 06:23:18 PM
A few weeks ago, The Citizen's website had a gallery (https://auburnpub.com/news/local/history/gallery-weedsports-iconic-thruway-toll-plaza-now-part-of-a-vanishing-americana/collection_07e5d469-c340-5bc0-8029-5a9aa1e761e4.html) of pictures from the Weedsport toll plaza, including pictures inside a booth.  It was pretty neat, but I wish they were color.  I've always wondered what the inside of a Thruway toll booth looked like!
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Roadgeekteen on May 03, 2021, 07:28:17 PM
In your opinion, what is the best scenery on the Thruway?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on May 03, 2021, 07:44:41 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 03, 2021, 07:28:17 PM
In your opinion, what is the best scenery on the Thruway?
Between Utica and Amsterdam.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on May 03, 2021, 09:51:15 PM
Quote from: Rothman on May 03, 2021, 07:44:41 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 03, 2021, 07:28:17 PM
In your opinion, what is the best scenery on the Thruway?
Between Utica and Amsterdam.

On this, we can agree. I can't even think of any other good candidates... certainly nothing west of Syracuse (this (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0006663,-77.4250904,3a,15y,155.68h,88.52t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sogbk2nj3IdnBPv9KVpn_kw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e1) is about as scenic as it gets, and even that's a stretch).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: froggie on May 03, 2021, 10:04:50 PM
I'd argue somewhere in the vicinity of Kingston, especially northbound.

There IS an otherwise very fantastic view westbound somewhere west of Amsterdam...but it unfortunately gets completely ruined by a large billboard halfway up the hill.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: dkblake on May 03, 2021, 10:10:33 PM
Quote from: webny99 on May 03, 2021, 09:51:15 PM
Quote from: Rothman on May 03, 2021, 07:44:41 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 03, 2021, 07:28:17 PM
In your opinion, what is the best scenery on the Thruway?
Between Utica and Amsterdam.

On this, we can agree. I can't even think of any other good candidates... certainly nothing west of Syracuse (this (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0006663,-77.4250904,3a,15y,155.68h,88.52t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sogbk2nj3IdnBPv9KVpn_kw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e1) is about as scenic as it gets, and even that's a stretch).

The stretch just west of Herkimer is pretty nice too (not the best picture, but looking down on Frankfort and Ilion): https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0268177,-75.0335144,3a,75y,204.33h,89.86t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sUCFyfQvKNcjU9eH0bIq_kA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
(https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0268177,-75.0335144,3a,75y,204.33h,89.86t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sUCFyfQvKNcjU9eH0bIq_kA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on May 03, 2021, 10:16:16 PM
Quote from: dkblake on May 03, 2021, 10:10:33 PM
Quote from: webny99 on May 03, 2021, 09:51:15 PM
Quote from: Rothman on May 03, 2021, 07:44:41 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 03, 2021, 07:28:17 PM
In your opinion, what is the best scenery on the Thruway?
Between Utica and Amsterdam.

On this, we can agree. I can't even think of any other good candidates... certainly nothing west of Syracuse (this (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0006663,-77.4250904,3a,15y,155.68h,88.52t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sogbk2nj3IdnBPv9KVpn_kw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e1) is about as scenic as it gets, and even that's a stretch).

The stretch just west of Herkimer is pretty nice too (not the best picture, but looking down on Frankfort and Ilion): https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0268177,-75.0335144,3a,75y,204.33h,89.86t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sUCFyfQvKNcjU9eH0bIq_kA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
(https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0268177,-75.0335144,3a,75y,204.33h,89.86t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sUCFyfQvKNcjU9eH0bIq_kA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)

Indeed. That would be included in Utica-Amsterdam.  :D
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on May 03, 2021, 10:18:25 PM
You need to go on I-87 (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.9097079,-74.0427374,3a,30.1y,-2.26h,90.64t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s8rQjwSzLiepqlwpp_HcFzg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) more often.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on May 03, 2021, 10:24:24 PM
Quote from: froggie on May 03, 2021, 10:04:50 PM
There IS an otherwise very fantastic view westbound somewhere west of Amsterdam...but it unfortunately gets completely ruined by a large billboard halfway up the hill.

Is this (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0047448,-74.8829204,3a,15y,253.51h,88.11t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1scQezaTCaJcXA2GgJW7qBwg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!5m1!1e1) the one you're thinking of?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: froggie on May 03, 2021, 10:27:02 PM
Yep.  Visible beginning near the top of the descent, and gets more obnoxious as you descend.

A billboard has been there since at least 2003 (when I first started traveling the region)...wouldn't surprise me if it's been longer.

Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on May 03, 2021, 10:34:04 PM
Quote from: vdeane on May 03, 2021, 10:18:25 PM
You need to go on I-87 (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.9097079,-74.0427374,3a,30.1y,-2.26h,90.64t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s8rQjwSzLiepqlwpp_HcFzg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) more often.

Nice pavement quality  :D

In seriousness, that may be a bit more dramatic than the Mohawk Valley, but I still prefer the Mohawk Valley, partly because the scenery is closer to the road (that makes a difference, especially in the fall), and partly because it's cool at night as well with the lights from various towns visible in the valleys.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: dkblake on May 03, 2021, 10:50:49 PM
Quote from: webny99 on May 03, 2021, 10:16:16 PM
Quote from: dkblake on May 03, 2021, 10:10:33 PM
Quote from: webny99 on May 03, 2021, 09:51:15 PM
Quote from: Rothman on May 03, 2021, 07:44:41 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 03, 2021, 07:28:17 PM
In your opinion, what is the best scenery on the Thruway?
Between Utica and Amsterdam.

On this, we can agree. I can't even think of any other good candidates... certainly nothing west of Syracuse (this (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0006663,-77.4250904,3a,15y,155.68h,88.52t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sogbk2nj3IdnBPv9KVpn_kw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e1) is about as scenic as it gets, and even that's a stretch).

The stretch just west of Herkimer is pretty nice too (not the best picture, but looking down on Frankfort and Ilion): https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0268177,-75.0335144,3a,75y,204.33h,89.86t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sUCFyfQvKNcjU9eH0bIq_kA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
(https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0268177,-75.0335144,3a,75y,204.33h,89.86t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sUCFyfQvKNcjU9eH0bIq_kA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)

Indeed. That would be included in Utica-Amsterdam.  :D

D'oh! Mentally flipped the Utica/Herkimer exits. It's interesting to me how much the character of I-90 changes somewhere around the Canastota exit from these beautiful valley views to straight and flat. This was intensified for me because I used to drive between MA and Syracuse during undergrad, and the few times I drove west to Rochester or Buffalo I almost felt like I was on another road.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: paul02474 on May 04, 2021, 12:51:24 AM
Quote from: lstone19 on April 27, 2021, 03:57:18 PM

For that to work in NY, the Thruway needs to move away from the "New York State Thruway" name to describe the road and divide it into sub-Thruways and push those names so exit numbers match with a name (I made that suggestion almost a year ago and several pages back). Something like "Hudson River Thruway" for the I-87 section and "Erie Canal Thruway" for the Buffalo to Albany section of I-90. They already have the New England Thruway and the Niagara Thruway so the precedent is there.

You raise an interesting question pertaining to branding of the Thruway. According to the Thruway's website, the NY State Thruway consists of seven segments for a total length of 570 miles.

THE MAINLINE (New York - Buffalo): 426 miles
ERIE SECTION (Buffalo - Pennsylvania Line): 70 miles
NIAGARA SECTION I-190 (Buffalo - Niagara Falls): 21 miles
BERKSHIRE SECTION (Selkirk - Massachusetts Line): 24 miles
NEW ENGLAND SECTION (I-95) (Bronx - Connecticut Line): 15 miles
GARDEN STATE PARKWAY CONNECTION (Spring Valley - New Jersey): 3 miles
CROSS WESTCHESTER EXPRESSWAY (I-287) (Mainline I-87 in Tarrytown - I-95 in Rye): 11 miles

The current exit numbers were critical for the ticketed system, from Woodbury to Buffalo. The folks who printed the tickets, the toll takers, and the drivers holding onto the tickets needed an exit system that was aligned to the task of calculating tolls.

Electronic tolling has eliminated any need to maintain the current exit numbers. Consider the current situation on I-87 and I-90.

NY Thruway Exit 5 (NY 100 North in Yonkers) is 11 miles north of the current endpoint of I-87 in The Bronx.
NY Thruway Exit 60 (NY 394 - Westfield) is 11 miles east of the Pennsylvania border.

Prior to all-electronic tolling, this would have presented a challenge for toll takers and navigation. Using electronic tolling, you will get a toll statement based on the gantries you pass through. You will pay for a passenger car with a NY EZ Pass (out of state EZ Pass) (Pay by mail):
Yonkers gantry: $1.19 ($1.37) ($1.54)
Spring Valley gantry: $0.00 ($0.00) $0.00)
Harriman gantry: $0.00 ($0.00) $0.00)
Newburgh to Albany Downtown: $4.98 ($5.73) ($6.48)
Gantry between Exit 23 & 24: $0.27 ($0.31) ($0.35)
Gantry between Exit 24 & 25: $0.27 ($0.31) ($0.35)
Gantry between Exit 25 $ 25A: $0.22 ($0.26) ($0.29)
I-88 Schenectady to I-481 Syracuse: $5.26 ($6.05) ($6.84)
East Syracuse gantry: $0.11 ($0.12) ($0.14)
Syracuse gantry: $0.18 ($0.21) ($0.23)
I-81 to I-690 Syracuse: $0.30 ($0.34) ($0.38)
I-690 to Canandaigua: $2.57 ($2.96) ($3.35)
Rochester East gantry: $0.17 ($0.20) ($0.22)
Rochester gantry $0.51 ($0.59) ($0.67)
Rochester West gantry: $0.72 $0.83) ($0.94)
I-490 Leroy to I-290 Buffalo: $1.87 ($2.15) ($2.43)
Blasdell to the Westfield exit: $2.48 ($2.85) ($3.23)

Thus, some Thruway computer will charge you a total toll of $18.62 with a NY EZ Pass, $21.43 with an out of state EZ Pass, and $24.21 pay by mail.
https://www.thruway.ny.gov/cashless/locations.html

If you change all the signs on the Thruway, change all the exit numbers, change the font to Clearview, it wouldn't matter. You would be charged based on the gantries you pass through and the toll between Yonkers and Westfield will be the same. This means there's no longer an excuse for three different exit number schemes for I-87 and three different exit number schemes for I-90, one of which operates east to west instead of the federal standard of west to east.

If NY can spend a small fortune on those non-compliant New York State Experience signs, they can renumber I-87 and I-90.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on May 04, 2021, 09:43:12 AM
Quote from: dkblake on May 03, 2021, 10:50:49 PM
Quote from: webny99 on May 03, 2021, 10:16:16 PM
Quote from: dkblake on May 03, 2021, 10:10:33 PM
The stretch just west of Herkimer is pretty nice too (not the best picture, but looking down on Frankfort and Ilion): https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0268177,-75.0335144,3a,75y,204.33h,89.86t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sUCFyfQvKNcjU9eH0bIq_kA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
(https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0268177,-75.0335144,3a,75y,204.33h,89.86t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sUCFyfQvKNcjU9eH0bIq_kA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)

Indeed. That would be included in Utica-Amsterdam.

D'oh! Mentally flipped the Utica/Herkimer exits. It's interesting to me how much the character of I-90 changes somewhere around the Canastota exit from these beautiful valley views to straight and flat. This was intensified for me because I used to drive between MA and Syracuse during undergrad, and the few times I drove west to Rochester or Buffalo I almost felt like I was on another road.

Yeah, I agree, except that being from west of Syracuse I take the opposite view: it is almost like a different road through the Mohawk Valley.  :)

I'd say the transition zone is from Utica to Canastota. West of there it's extremely boring all the way to Buffalo, and really all the way to the PA line. Aside from Buffalo, the Seneca reservation might be the most interesting segment.. and even that's not particularly noteworthy now that it's finally paved.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Jim on May 09, 2021, 09:11:50 PM
I got to enjoy the scenic Mohawk Valley part of the Thruway in travels out and back to Syracuse today.  Got a couple pictures of the billboard Froggie mentioned.

(https://www.teresco.org/pics/cny-20210509/P1040381-800.jpg)
(https://www.teresco.org/pics/cny-20210509/P1040382-800.jpg)

So in the last week or so I've been through or at least seen many of the interchanges from 23 to 36.  I was surprised that the toll plazas at 23 and 31 were still fully intact, as those are both interchanges with a 3di.  25 (for months), 26, 27, and 28 are completely gone, as is 35.  At 36 (I-81 interchange), it looks like they were just removed, as paving was not yet complete with a bit of a dip in one lane, and some crazy extra lines still evident.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on May 13, 2021, 04:36:54 PM
Major accident on the westbound Thruway near the Montezuma wildlife refuge:
https://www.syracuse.com/crime/2021/05/crash-on-new-york-state-thruway-near-montezuma-backs-up-traffic.html
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: TonyTrafficLight on May 14, 2021, 11:21:51 AM
Quote from: Jim on May 09, 2021, 09:11:50 PM
I got to enjoy the scenic Mohawk Valley part of the Thruway in travels out and back to Syracuse today.  Got a couple pictures of the billboard Froggie mentioned.

(https://www.teresco.org/pics/cny-20210509/P1040381-800.jpg)
(https://www.teresco.org/pics/cny-20210509/P1040382-800.jpg)

So in the last week or so I've been through or at least seen many of the interchanges from 23 to 36.  I was surprised that the toll plazas at 23 and 31 were still fully intact, as those are both interchanges with a 3di.  25 (for months), 26, 27, and 28 are completely gone, as is 35.  At 36 (I-81 interchange), it looks like they were just removed, as paving was not yet complete with a bit of a dip in one lane, and some crazy extra lines still evident.

That looks like the hill just past Little Falls Exit 29A going westbound. Tribes Hill(?) I think.

Exit 34A, 34, 33 & 32 still have all their toll plaza standing as of this past weekend.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Jim on May 14, 2021, 01:13:56 PM
Quote from: TonyTrafficLight on May 14, 2021, 11:21:51 AM
That looks like the hill just past Little Falls Exit 29A going westbound. Tribes Hill(?) I think.

Not Tribes Hill, which is between Amsterdam and Fonda.  But yes, coming down the big hill west of 29A, with the old Shu-Maker Mountain ski area just off to the left when you get near the bottom of the hill.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on May 14, 2021, 01:16:18 PM
Yup. I linked to the Street View location in reply# 2271.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: storm2k on May 14, 2021, 05:55:14 PM
Drove the Thruway from 15 to 21 today. Harriman barrier is mostly down, just a few outer lanes remaining, but easy enough to work around since they just move all the traffic thru the existing Express EZ-Pass lanes. 21 plaza still intact, even though the new electronic gantry is fully done.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cu2010 on May 14, 2021, 06:30:51 PM
Drove the Thruway between 36 and Ripley the other day. 36's booths are gone, paving continues. Williamsville is essentially gone, with only landscaping work remaining; it felt so nice not to get backed up there. Lackawanna's booths are gone but lanes remain shifted to the right; Exit 56 remains closed as a result. Ripley's booths remain.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on May 14, 2021, 09:53:12 PM
34 still fully intact as of today. 48A only has the concrete splitter islands remaining, with the southernmost islands gone and being paved over. 24 looked like they were getting ready to start reconstruction.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on May 14, 2021, 10:12:41 PM
Quote from: storm2k on May 14, 2021, 05:55:14 PM
Drove the Thruway from 15 to 21 today. Harriman barrier is mostly down, just a few outer lanes remaining, but easy enough to work around since they just move all the traffic thru the existing Express EZ-Pass lanes. 21 plaza still intact, even though the new electronic gantry is fully done.
You mean Woodbury?  Harriman was the fixed-rate barrier serving 3/4 movements of exit 16.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: stormwatch7721 on May 14, 2021, 10:24:41 PM
What do the new toll booths look like?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on May 14, 2021, 10:38:33 PM
Quote from: stormwatch7721 on May 14, 2021, 10:24:41 PM
What do the new toll booths look like?
What new booths?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: stormwatch7721 on May 14, 2021, 10:55:33 PM
I thought they went unmanned and torn town with new ones. :confused:
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on May 14, 2021, 11:00:07 PM
Quote from: stormwatch7721 on May 14, 2021, 10:55:33 PM
I thought they went unmanned and torn town with new ones. :confused:
I'd hardly call this (https://nysroads.com/photos.php?route=i87&state=NY&file=102_1290.JPG) or this (https://nysroads.com/photos.php?route=i790&state=NY&file=102_1208.JPG) "booths".  They're gantries.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Jim on May 14, 2021, 11:41:51 PM
Something you don't see every day:

(https://www.teresco.org/temp/netoverthruway.jpg)

For a few days earlier this week, this net was propped up above the Thruway just about at the WB 26 offramp during work on the overhead wires that cross the road at that location.

It was all gone as of today.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on May 14, 2021, 11:45:20 PM
Quote from: Jim on May 14, 2021, 11:41:51 PM
Something you don't see every day:

(https://www.teresco.org/temp/netoverthruway.jpg)

For a few days earlier this week, this net was propped up above the Thruway just about at the WB 26 offramp during work on the overhead wires that cross the road at that location.

It was all gone as of today.

Whoa, that is a major optical illusion. It looks just like a view of a lake in the distance.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on May 15, 2021, 08:46:30 PM
Most of the booths west of Buffalo remain intact. 61 hasn't been touched as of today. Work is ongoing at 55 with the WB entrance ramp closed.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: thenetwork on May 16, 2021, 12:47:46 PM
Just out of curiosity:  With electronic tolling replacing all of the tollbooths & barriers along the Thruway, has the Thruway Authority ever considered bringing back tolls via high-speed gantries to the I-190 stretch through Downtown Buffalo, or is there some agreement or law that will never allow that stretch to be tolled again?   And could they ever install gantry tolling along the current free section of I-90 on the mainline in Buffalo?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: storm2k on May 16, 2021, 05:00:58 PM
Quote from: vdeane on May 14, 2021, 10:12:41 PM
Quote from: storm2k on May 14, 2021, 05:55:14 PM
Drove the Thruway from 15 to 21 today. Harriman barrier is mostly down, just a few outer lanes remaining, but easy enough to work around since they just move all the traffic thru the existing Express EZ-Pass lanes. 21 plaza still intact, even though the new electronic gantry is fully done.
You mean Woodbury?  Harriman was the fixed-rate barrier serving 3/4 movements of exit 16.

Yeah, meant whatever the mainline barrier that was the southern start/end of the ticket system was.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: baugh17 on May 16, 2021, 08:12:40 PM
Exit 30 (Herkimer) toll booths were removed in the past week. 
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on May 16, 2021, 09:58:45 PM
Quote from: thenetwork on May 16, 2021, 12:47:46 PM
Just out of curiosity:  With electronic tolling replacing all of the tollbooths & barriers along the Thruway, has the Thruway Authority ever considered bringing back tolls via high-speed gantries to the I-190 stretch through Downtown Buffalo, or is there some agreement or law that will never allow that stretch to be tolled again?   And could they ever install gantry tolling along the current free section of I-90 on the mainline in Buffalo?
I doubt it.  The objections that resulted in those tolls being removed in return for I-84 going back to NYSDOT was over having to pay a toll to go downtown, not over traffic congestion.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on May 16, 2021, 10:15:27 PM
Food for thought: a 1948 newspaper article describes the "Throughway" as being capable of supporting speeds up to 75 MPH. Why isn't this the case today? I understand those were primitive plans then, but were they carried through into 1954?

https://www.newspapers.com/clip/77827745/
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: empirestate on May 16, 2021, 10:25:52 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on May 16, 2021, 10:15:27 PM
Food for thought: a 1948 newspaper article describes the "Throughway" as being capable of supporting speeds up to 75 MPH. Why isn't this the case today?

Isn't it? Most if not all of the original Thruway could easily support 75 mph (and does, obviously).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on May 16, 2021, 10:30:27 PM
It sure does support 75 mph and more.. I think he meant why isn't the limit 75 mph.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on May 16, 2021, 10:31:09 PM
Quote from: webny99 on May 16, 2021, 10:30:27 PM
It sure does support 75 mph and more.. I think he meant why isn't the limit 75 mph.

Yeah
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on May 16, 2021, 10:43:40 PM
I'd say mostly just because NY is stubborn about raising their speed limits in general. Of course, you can go 75 mph on the Thruway without worrying too much, generally nothing under 80 will get you a ticket .

I suspect they know their tolerance would increase with an increased limit, and that's one big reason they're hesitant to raise it from 65 mph.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on May 17, 2021, 12:44:05 AM
Quote from: webny99 on May 16, 2021, 10:30:27 PM
It sure does support 75 mph and more.. I think he meant why isn't the limit 75 mph.
Legally, because NYS doesn't allow speed limits above 65 - and has a full jurisdiction on Thruway.
Technically, because there need to be a safety margin between design speed and speed limit
Besides, I suspect posted speed limit has to allow travel of all vehicles at that speed 8n normal conditions, including heavy trucks. 75 may be on a high side of regular 18-wheeler traffic as of right now.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on May 17, 2021, 12:51:18 AM
Quote from: vdeane on May 16, 2021, 09:58:45 PM
Quote from: thenetwork on May 16, 2021, 12:47:46 PM
Just out of curiosity:  With electronic tolling replacing all of the tollbooths & barriers along the Thruway, has the Thruway Authority ever considered bringing back tolls via high-speed gantries to the I-190 stretch through Downtown Buffalo, or is there some agreement or law that will never allow that stretch to be tolled again?   And could they ever install gantry tolling along the current free section of I-90 on the mainline in Buffalo?
I doubt it.  The objections that resulted in those tolls being removed in return for I-84 going back to NYSDOT was over having to pay a toll to go downtown, not over traffic congestion.
I believe booth congestion was still the main point, redirected money flow just added insult to injury.
If "tolled commute" would be the issue, 23-24-25 could also be brought up. However I know a few people in Schenectady who pay for commuter plan instead
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: empirestate on May 17, 2021, 09:13:27 AM
Quote from: Buffaboy on May 16, 2021, 10:31:09 PM
Quote from: webny99 on May 16, 2021, 10:30:27 PM
It sure does support 75 mph and more.. I think he meant why isn't the limit 75 mph.

Yeah

Oh, yeah, that would depend on state law, and roads anywhere are routinely designed for higher speeds than the legal limit would allow. So the answer would be the same as why NYS hasn't adopted a 75 mph limit anywhere, Thruway or otherwise, and whatever that answer is, it's of course typical of most states, particularly those in the Northeast.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: roadman65 on May 17, 2021, 09:55:07 AM
Quote from: empirestate on May 17, 2021, 09:13:27 AM
Quote from: Buffaboy on May 16, 2021, 10:31:09 PM
Quote from: webny99 on May 16, 2021, 10:30:27 PM
It sure does support 75 mph and more.. I think he meant why isn't the limit 75 mph.

Yeah

Oh, yeah, that would depend on state law, and roads anywhere are routinely designed for higher speeds than the legal limit would allow. So the answer would be the same as why NYS hasn't adopted a 75 mph limit anywhere, Thruway or otherwise, and whatever that answer is, it's of course typical of most states, particularly those in the Northeast.

At least it's 10 mph higher than the LIE, which remains 55 still in Nassau and Suffolk where 65 should be. At least in the latter county anyway.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: froggie on May 17, 2021, 10:51:48 AM
Quote from: webny99 on May 16, 2021, 10:43:40 PM
I'd say mostly just because NY is stubborn about raising their speed limits in general.

FTFY...
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on May 17, 2021, 11:00:06 AM
Well, yes, that goes without saying...  :D
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: baugh17 on May 19, 2021, 09:58:37 PM
Quote from: baugh17 on May 16, 2021, 08:12:40 PM
Exit 30 (Herkimer) toll booths were removed in the past week.

Update as of this evening...

29A (Little Falls) - Booths are gone
30 (Herkimer) - Booths are gone, just paved in the last few days where the booths used to stand
31 (Utica) - Booths were removed overnight last night
32 (Westmoreland) - NEXT...
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: machias on May 19, 2021, 11:51:05 PM
Quote from: webny99 on May 16, 2021, 10:30:27 PM
It sure does support 75 mph and more.. I think he meant why isn't the limit 75 mph.

Because New York Legislature can't thinking outside the box and because the LIE has to have a low speed limit, so doesn't the Thruway over 500 miles away.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Roadgeekteen on May 19, 2021, 11:52:03 PM
Quote from: machias on May 19, 2021, 11:51:05 PM
Quote from: webny99 on May 16, 2021, 10:30:27 PM
It sure does support 75 mph and more.. I think he meant why isn't the limit 75 mph.

Because New York Legislature can't thinking outside the box and because the LIE has to have a low speed limit, so doesn't the Thruway over 500 miles away.
The LIE doesn't have to have a low speed limit.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Jim on May 20, 2021, 09:25:31 AM
It would be nice if the Thruway could complete the work at 24 with a complete repaving and better signs.  The toll booths have been gone for many months, and the weather's been decent for quite a while now.

The issue with the pavement quality led to recent a lane-wide pothole near where the old toll booths were.  Coming through a couple weeks ago probably at 50 or 60 MPH in heaving morning rush traffic, it was too late to do anything but slow down just a bit by the time I saw it.  I hit it hard, and the damages are 2 wheel bearings, 2 tires, repairs to both front rims, one of which was visibly bent, and an alignment.  Amazingly, no flat tires.  I completely expected I'd be pulling over and calling for help before I got to work.

By the next morning, the pothole was replaced by a large patch.  I can't be the only one who is ending up with a big repair bill because of this.

So let's get this done right already.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: dkblake on May 20, 2021, 05:13:12 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 19, 2021, 11:52:03 PM
Quote from: machias on May 19, 2021, 11:51:05 PM
Quote from: webny99 on May 16, 2021, 10:30:27 PM
It sure does support 75 mph and more.. I think he meant why isn't the limit 75 mph.

Because New York Legislature can't thinking outside the box and because the LIE has to have a low speed limit, so doesn't the Thruway over 500 miles away.
The LIE doesn't have to have a low speed limit.

But however will motorists navigate a 3-lane-plus-wide, flat, straight highway except at a maximum of 55 mph?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Roadgeekteen on May 20, 2021, 06:18:25 PM
I wonder how they will renumber the Thruway exits once they are converted to mileage. Will they use dedicated numbers for the Thruway or will they use I-87 and I-90 numbers?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Sam on May 20, 2021, 11:44:32 PM
Three new VMS'es were installed this week at the entrance to the Thruway at Exit 42. I don't know if it was a NYSTA project or NYSDOT. (One sign is on the old tandem lot entrance, but two are well off Thruway property.) I don't see any news or contract info on the Thruway web site. I imagine they could be to inform motorists of a Thruway closure, now that the toll collectors are gone. Are these going up anywhere else?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: DJ Particle on May 21, 2021, 12:01:02 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 20, 2021, 06:18:25 PM
I wonder how they will renumber the Thruway exits once they are converted to mileage. Will they use dedicated numbers for the Thruway or will they use I-87 and I-90 numbers?

I would say that since the Thruway (and its extensions) has its own mileposts, they will use those.  Seems logical.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Roadgeekteen on May 21, 2021, 12:07:15 AM
Quote from: DJ Particle on May 21, 2021, 12:01:02 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 20, 2021, 06:18:25 PM
I wonder how they will renumber the Thruway exits once they are converted to mileage. Will they use dedicated numbers for the Thruway or will they use I-87 and I-90 numbers?

I would say that since the Thruway (and its extensions) has its own mileposts, they will use those.  Seems logical.
I guess. Wonder what the MUTCD thinks.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on May 21, 2021, 05:17:48 PM
I've mentioned several times on here that the ramp from I-490 EB to the Thruway EB was going to be an issue when the nice weather hit. Well, now the nice weather is here, and wouldn't you know it.. it's already an issue. There's just no way around the fact that that ramp really needs to be widened.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: storm2k on May 21, 2021, 10:43:43 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 21, 2021, 12:07:15 AM
Quote from: DJ Particle on May 21, 2021, 12:01:02 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 20, 2021, 06:18:25 PM
I wonder how they will renumber the Thruway exits once they are converted to mileage. Will they use dedicated numbers for the Thruway or will they use I-87 and I-90 numbers?

I would say that since the Thruway (and its extensions) has its own mileposts, they will use those.  Seems logical.
I guess. Wonder what the MUTCD thinks.

The MUTCD is just a bunch of words and pictures in a book or a PDF, so I doubt it's going to say much at all.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Roadgeekteen on May 21, 2021, 11:06:03 PM
Quote from: storm2k on May 21, 2021, 10:43:43 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 21, 2021, 12:07:15 AM
Quote from: DJ Particle on May 21, 2021, 12:01:02 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 20, 2021, 06:18:25 PM
I wonder how they will renumber the Thruway exits once they are converted to mileage. Will they use dedicated numbers for the Thruway or will they use I-87 and I-90 numbers?

I would say that since the Thruway (and its extensions) has its own mileposts, they will use those.  Seems logical.
I guess. Wonder what the MUTCD thinks.

The MUTCD is just a bunch of words and pictures in a book or a PDF, so I doubt it's going to say much at all.
I mean the FWA.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: baugh17 on May 22, 2021, 12:15:10 AM
Quote from: Sam on May 20, 2021, 11:44:32 PM
Three new VMS'es were installed this week at the entrance to the Thruway at Exit 42. I don't know if it was a NYSTA project or NYSDOT. (One sign is on the old tandem lot entrance, but two are well off Thruway property.) I don't see any news or contract info on the Thruway web site. I imagine they could be to inform motorists of a Thruway closure, now that the toll collectors are gone. Are these going up anywhere else?

Thruway project.  Message boards were erected in the Utica area about a year ago but I have not seen them utilized.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on May 22, 2021, 12:08:56 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 21, 2021, 11:06:03 PM
Quote from: storm2k on May 21, 2021, 10:43:43 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 21, 2021, 12:07:15 AM
Quote from: DJ Particle on May 21, 2021, 12:01:02 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 20, 2021, 06:18:25 PM
I wonder how they will renumber the Thruway exits once they are converted to mileage. Will they use dedicated numbers for the Thruway or will they use I-87 and I-90 numbers?

I would say that since the Thruway (and its extensions) has its own mileposts, they will use those.  Seems logical.
I guess. Wonder what the MUTCD thinks.

The MUTCD is just a bunch of words and pictures in a book or a PDF, so I doubt it's going to say much at all.
I mean the FWA.
Who? :D
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: SignBridge on May 22, 2021, 08:18:26 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 21, 2021, 11:06:03 PM
Quote from: storm2k on May 21, 2021, 10:43:43 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 21, 2021, 12:07:15 AM
Quote from: DJ Particle on May 21, 2021, 12:01:02 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 20, 2021, 06:18:25 PM
I wonder how they will renumber the Thruway exits once they are converted to mileage. Will they use dedicated numbers for the Thruway or will they use I-87 and I-90 numbers?

I would say that since the Thruway (and its extensions) has its own mileposts, they will use those.  Seems logical.
I guess. Wonder what the MUTCD thinks.

The MUTCD is just a bunch of words and pictures in a book or a PDF, so I doubt it's going to say much at all.
I mean the FWA.

The MUTCD will say what it has always said. That all controlled-access highways are to be numbered from south-to-north and west-to-east using the mileage based numbering system beginning at the southern or westernmost point on that numbered route within the particular state. It further specifies the specific numbering set-up for spur-routes and circular-routes. It makes no exceptions for the toll-roads that were built and numbered before the Interstate Highway System originated. End of story.

I'm not saying I necessarily agree with it in all cases, but that is what it says.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Roadgeekteen on May 22, 2021, 10:51:18 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on May 22, 2021, 08:18:26 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 21, 2021, 11:06:03 PM
Quote from: storm2k on May 21, 2021, 10:43:43 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 21, 2021, 12:07:15 AM
Quote from: DJ Particle on May 21, 2021, 12:01:02 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 20, 2021, 06:18:25 PM
I wonder how they will renumber the Thruway exits once they are converted to mileage. Will they use dedicated numbers for the Thruway or will they use I-87 and I-90 numbers?

I would say that since the Thruway (and its extensions) has its own mileposts, they will use those.  Seems logical.
I guess. Wonder what the MUTCD thinks.

The MUTCD is just a bunch of words and pictures in a book or a PDF, so I doubt it's going to say much at all.
I mean the FWA.

The MUTCD will say what it has always said. That all controlled-access highways are to be numbered from south-to-north and west-to-east using the mileage based numbering system beginning at the southern or westernmost point on that numbered route within the particular state. It further specifies the specific numbering set-up for spur-routes and circular-routes. It makes no exceptions for the toll-roads that were built and numbered before the Interstate Highway System originated. End of story.

I'm not saying I necessarily agree with it in all cases, but that is what it says.
Does the Thrwuway take precedent over the interstates in New York?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: odditude on May 23, 2021, 01:57:12 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 22, 2021, 10:51:18 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on May 22, 2021, 08:18:26 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 21, 2021, 11:06:03 PM
Quote from: storm2k on May 21, 2021, 10:43:43 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 21, 2021, 12:07:15 AM
Quote from: DJ Particle on May 21, 2021, 12:01:02 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 20, 2021, 06:18:25 PM
I wonder how they will renumber the Thruway exits once they are converted to mileage. Will they use dedicated numbers for the Thruway or will they use I-87 and I-90 numbers?

I would say that since the Thruway (and its extensions) has its own mileposts, they will use those.  Seems logical.
I guess. Wonder what the MUTCD thinks.

The MUTCD is just a bunch of words and pictures in a book or a PDF, so I doubt it's going to say much at all.
I mean the FWA.

The MUTCD will say what it has always said. That all controlled-access highways are to be numbered from south-to-north and west-to-east using the mileage based numbering system beginning at the southern or westernmost point on that numbered route within the particular state. It further specifies the specific numbering set-up for spur-routes and circular-routes. It makes no exceptions for the toll-roads that were built and numbered before the Interstate Highway System originated. End of story.

I'm not saying I necessarily agree with it in all cases, but that is what it says.
Does the Thrwuway take precedent over the interstates in New York?

Quote from: SignBridgeIt makes no exceptions for the toll-roads that were built and numbered before the Interstate Highway System originated. End of story.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: machias on May 23, 2021, 02:23:19 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 22, 2021, 10:51:18 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on May 22, 2021, 08:18:26 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 21, 2021, 11:06:03 PM
Quote from: storm2k on May 21, 2021, 10:43:43 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 21, 2021, 12:07:15 AM
Quote from: DJ Particle on May 21, 2021, 12:01:02 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 20, 2021, 06:18:25 PM
I wonder how they will renumber the Thruway exits once they are converted to mileage. Will they use dedicated numbers for the Thruway or will they use I-87 and I-90 numbers?

I would say that since the Thruway (and its extensions) has its own mileposts, they will use those.  Seems logical.
I guess. Wonder what the MUTCD thinks.

The MUTCD is just a bunch of words and pictures in a book or a PDF, so I doubt it's going to say much at all.
I mean the FWA.

The MUTCD will say what it has always said. That all controlled-access highways are to be numbered from south-to-north and west-to-east using the mileage based numbering system beginning at the southern or westernmost point on that numbered route within the particular state. It further specifies the specific numbering set-up for spur-routes and circular-routes. It makes no exceptions for the toll-roads that were built and numbered before the Interstate Highway System originated. End of story.

I'm not saying I necessarily agree with it in all cases, but that is what it says.
Does the Thrwuway take precedent over the interstates in New York?

There is nothing special about the Thruway. It shouldn't be treated as a destination or control city on guide signs on approaches and it no longer has the need to stick to its original interchange numbering to keep toll tickets "easy to understand" . Like the ISTHA in Illinois, they can number the interchanges internally with their own numbering system all they want. They already have names (like the Penna Turnpike, albeit not shown on signs). I-87 should have one set of mileposts and one set of interchange numbers based on distance from the south end in New York to the Canadian Border. I-90 should have one set of mileposts and one set of interchange numbers based on the distance from the PA line to the Mass Line. Just like the MUTCD says. There's no reason for the Thruway authority to cling to its outdated interchange numbering system and for that matter it's weird hesitancy to post county line markers, which would be useful during significant weather events since the National Weather Service conveys watches and warning by county.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Roadgeekteen on May 23, 2021, 02:54:13 PM
Quote from: machias on May 23, 2021, 02:23:19 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 22, 2021, 10:51:18 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on May 22, 2021, 08:18:26 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 21, 2021, 11:06:03 PM
Quote from: storm2k on May 21, 2021, 10:43:43 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 21, 2021, 12:07:15 AM
Quote from: DJ Particle on May 21, 2021, 12:01:02 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 20, 2021, 06:18:25 PM
I wonder how they will renumber the Thruway exits once they are converted to mileage. Will they use dedicated numbers for the Thruway or will they use I-87 and I-90 numbers?

I would say that since the Thruway (and its extensions) has its own mileposts, they will use those.  Seems logical.
I guess. Wonder what the MUTCD thinks.

The MUTCD is just a bunch of words and pictures in a book or a PDF, so I doubt it's going to say much at all.
I mean the FWA.

The MUTCD will say what it has always said. That all controlled-access highways are to be numbered from south-to-north and west-to-east using the mileage based numbering system beginning at the southern or westernmost point on that numbered route within the particular state. It further specifies the specific numbering set-up for spur-routes and circular-routes. It makes no exceptions for the toll-roads that were built and numbered before the Interstate Highway System originated. End of story.

I'm not saying I necessarily agree with it in all cases, but that is what it says.
Does the Thrwuway take precedent over the interstates in New York?

There is nothing special about the Thruway. It shouldn't be treated as a destination or control city on guide signs on approaches and it no longer has the need to stick to its original interchange numbering to keep toll tickets "easy to understand" . Like the ISTHA in Illinois, they can number the interchanges internally with their own numbering system all they want. They already have names (like the Penna Turnpike, albeit not shown on signs). I-87 should have one set of mileposts and one set of interchange numbers based on distance from the south end in New York to the Canadian Border. I-90 should have one set of mileposts and one set of interchange numbers based on the distance from the PA line to the Mass Line. Just like the MUTCD says. There's no reason for the Thruway authority to cling to its outdated interchange numbering system and for that matter it's weird hesitancy to post county line markers, which would be useful during significant weather events since the National Weather Service conveys watches and warning by county.
It could be helpful for Buffalo and other upstate NY drivers to know the distance to NYC, but I get you.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on May 23, 2021, 06:59:36 PM
Quote from: machias on May 23, 2021, 02:23:19 PMThere is nothing special about the Thruway. It shouldn't be treated as a destination or control city on guide signs on approaches and it no longer has the need to stick to its original interchange numbering to keep toll tickets "easy to understand" . Like the ISTHA in Illinois, they can number the interchanges internally with their own numbering system all they want. They already have names (like the Penna Turnpike, albeit not shown on signs).

The interchanges are normally named after one of the exit destinations, correct? I can't say I've ever seen a list of them, but I imagine most are self-explanatory enough that I (and most others here) could probably guess them correctly offhand.


Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 23, 2021, 02:54:13 PM
It could be helpful for Buffalo and other upstate NY drivers to know the distance to NYC, but I get you.

However, most people driving from Buffalo to NYC wouldn't use the Thruway. They'd use I-86 or I-81 to Binghamton and then either NY 17 or I-81/I-380/I-80 depending on where they're going in the NYC area.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Roadgeek Adam on May 23, 2021, 07:04:46 PM
I use 90-63-408-390-17-81-380-80 if going straight through, which is rare.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Roadgeekteen on May 23, 2021, 07:40:27 PM
Quote from: webny99 on May 23, 2021, 06:59:36 PM
Quote from: machias on May 23, 2021, 02:23:19 PMThere is nothing special about the Thruway. It shouldn't be treated as a destination or control city on guide signs on approaches and it no longer has the need to stick to its original interchange numbering to keep toll tickets "easy to understand" . Like the ISTHA in Illinois, they can number the interchanges internally with their own numbering system all they want. They already have names (like the Penna Turnpike, albeit not shown on signs).

The interchanges are normally named after one of the exit destinations, correct? I can't say I've ever seen a list of them, but I imagine most are self-explanatory enough that I (and most others here) could probably guess them correctly offhand.


Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 23, 2021, 02:54:13 PM
It could be helpful for Buffalo and other upstate NY drivers to know the distance to NYC, but I get you.

However, most people driving from Buffalo to NYC wouldn't use the Thruway. They'd use I-86 or I-81 to Binghamton and then either NY 17 or I-81/I-380/I-80 depending on where they're going in the NYC area.
Um maybe only for Utica then.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on May 23, 2021, 08:20:49 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 22, 2021, 10:51:18 PM
Does the Thrwuway take precedent over the interstates in New York?
I'm going to be contrarian to the other roadgeeks here and answer yes, at least as far as the general public is concerned.  To people here in the Capital District, I-87 is the Northway, I-90 is free 90, and the Thruway is the Thruway.  This is despite the fact that the Thruway uses I-87 and I-90 reassurance shields almost exclusively, with less branding on signs than the Turnpikes in bordering MA, NJ, or PA.  I assume the fact that the Thruway has its own milemarkers and exit numbers, which reset when I-90 and I-87 leave the Thruway, contributes to this perception.  This is especially pronounced in the Capital District, though even further west, people more commonly refer to the Thruway than to I-90, and the Thruway is considered distinct from the other freeways in the state (outside of the free section around Buffalo).  This is largely due to the ticket system that existed prior to the AET conversion; it's hard to not think of a road as being its own thing, separate from everything else, if you have to drive though booths to get on and off.  It will be interesting to see if perception changes over the next few years.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: machias on May 23, 2021, 08:44:53 PM
Quote from: webny99 on May 23, 2021, 06:59:36 PM
Quote from: machias on May 23, 2021, 02:23:19 PMThere is nothing special about the Thruway. It shouldn't be treated as a destination or control city on guide signs on approaches and it no longer has the need to stick to its original interchange numbering to keep toll tickets "easy to understand" . Like the ISTHA in Illinois, they can number the interchanges internally with their own numbering system all they want. They already have names (like the Penna Turnpike, albeit not shown on signs).

The interchanges are normally named after one of the exit destinations, correct? I can't say I've ever seen a list of them, but I imagine most are self-explanatory enough that I (and most others here) could probably guess them correctly offhand.


For the most part, yes. I'm only really familiar with the interchange names in Syracuse

Exit 34A is Collamer
Exit 35 is Carrier Circle
Exit 36 is Syracuse
Exit 37 is Electronics Park
Not sure about Exit 38
Exit 39 is State Fair
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: froggie on May 23, 2021, 10:33:58 PM
QuoteNot sure about Exit 38

Liverpool
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on May 23, 2021, 10:53:12 PM
Quote from: vdeane on May 23, 2021, 08:20:49 PM
... even further west, people more commonly refer to the Thruway than to I-90, and the Thruway is considered distinct from the other freeways in the state (outside of the free section around Buffalo).

Absolutely. It's always the Thruway, not I-90. This is probably even more pronounced west of Syracuse because then the Thruway is just I-90, not I-87, since I-87 south of Albany irrelevant for anyone in Western NY unless they go out of their way to use it (hence why I still haven't clinched the section between Harriman and the Berkshire Connector).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: storm2k on May 24, 2021, 01:57:52 AM
Quote from: vdeane on May 23, 2021, 08:20:49 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 22, 2021, 10:51:18 PM
Does the Thrwuway take precedent over the interstates in New York?
I'm going to be contrarian to the other roadgeeks here and answer yes, at least as far as the general public is concerned.  To people here in the Capital District, I-87 is the Northway, I-90 is free 90, and the Thruway is the Thruway.  This is despite the fact that the Thruway uses I-87 and I-90 reassurance shields almost exclusively, with less branding on signs than the Turnpikes in bordering MA, NJ, or PA.  I assume the fact that the Thruway has its own milemarkers and exit numbers, which reset when I-90 and I-87 leave the Thruway, contributes to this perception.  This is especially pronounced in the Capital District, though even further west, people more commonly refer to the Thruway than to I-90, and the Thruway is considered distinct from the other freeways in the state (outside of the free section around Buffalo).  This is largely due to the ticket system that existed prior to the AET conversion; it's hard to not think of a road as being its own thing, separate from everything else, if you have to drive though booths to get on and off.  It will be interesting to see if perception changes over the next few years.

I'm in complete agreement with you on this. No one in the NYC area thinks of the Thruway as I-87 because that road is two distinct roads: the Major Deegan south of the Bronx line, and the Thruway north of it. Plus, much like the NJ Turnpike, all Thruway signs are posted with both an interstate shield and the Thruway blue circle shield. And even though signs on its mainline mostly only use its associated interstate routes, almost every entrance to the PA Turnpike has one of those big oversized PA Turnpike shields. That's how the average motorist is going to think of these roads, and that's completely fine.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: bluecountry on May 24, 2021, 04:34:29 PM
Quote from: webny99 on May 03, 2021, 09:51:15 PM
Quote from: Rothman on May 03, 2021, 07:44:41 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 03, 2021, 07:28:17 PM
In your opinion, what is the best scenery on the Thruway?
Between Utica and Amsterdam.

On this, we can agree. I can't even think of any other good candidates... certainly nothing west of Syracuse (this (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0006663,-77.4250904,3a,15y,155.68h,88.52t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sogbk2nj3IdnBPv9KVpn_kw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e1) is about as scenic as it gets, and even that's a stretch).
Umm the Catskills....
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Roadgeekteen on May 24, 2021, 04:50:22 PM
Quote from: bluecountry on May 24, 2021, 04:34:29 PM
Quote from: webny99 on May 03, 2021, 09:51:15 PM
Quote from: Rothman on May 03, 2021, 07:44:41 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 03, 2021, 07:28:17 PM
In your opinion, what is the best scenery on the Thruway?
Between Utica and Amsterdam.

On this, we can agree. I can't even think of any other good candidates... certainly nothing west of Syracuse (this (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0006663,-77.4250904,3a,15y,155.68h,88.52t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sogbk2nj3IdnBPv9KVpn_kw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e1) is about as scenic as it gets, and even that's a stretch).
Umm the Catskills....
The Catskills are east of Syracuse.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on May 24, 2021, 07:13:42 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 24, 2021, 04:50:22 PM
Quote from: bluecountry on May 24, 2021, 04:34:29 PM
Quote from: webny99 on May 03, 2021, 09:51:15 PM
Quote from: Rothman on May 03, 2021, 07:44:41 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 03, 2021, 07:28:17 PM
In your opinion, what is the best scenery on the Thruway?
Between Utica and Amsterdam.

On this, we can agree. I can't even think of any other good candidates... certainly nothing west of Syracuse (this (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0006663,-77.4250904,3a,15y,155.68h,88.52t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sogbk2nj3IdnBPv9KVpn_kw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e1) is about as scenic as it gets, and even that's a stretch).
Umm the Catskills....
The Catskills are east of Syracuse.
The Thruway doesn't go through the Catskills, either.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on May 24, 2021, 07:21:03 PM
Quote from: Rothman on May 24, 2021, 07:13:42 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 24, 2021, 04:50:22 PM
Quote from: bluecountry on May 24, 2021, 04:34:29 PM
Quote from: webny99 on May 03, 2021, 09:51:15 PM
Quote from: Rothman on May 03, 2021, 07:44:41 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 03, 2021, 07:28:17 PM
In your opinion, what is the best scenery on the Thruway?
Between Utica and Amsterdam.

On this, we can agree. I can't even think of any other good candidates... certainly nothing west of Syracuse (this (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0006663,-77.4250904,3a,15y,155.68h,88.52t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sogbk2nj3IdnBPv9KVpn_kw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e1) is about as scenic as it gets, and even that's a stretch).
Umm the Catskills....
The Catskills are east of Syracuse.
The Thruway doesn't go through the Catskills, either.
Thruway goes between Catskills and Catskill, passing over Catskill creek..
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: empirestate on May 25, 2021, 01:06:35 AM
Quote from: kalvado on May 24, 2021, 07:21:03 PM
Quote from: Rothman on May 24, 2021, 07:13:42 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 24, 2021, 04:50:22 PM
Quote from: bluecountry on May 24, 2021, 04:34:29 PM
Quote from: webny99 on May 03, 2021, 09:51:15 PM
Quote from: Rothman on May 03, 2021, 07:44:41 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 03, 2021, 07:28:17 PM
In your opinion, what is the best scenery on the Thruway?
Between Utica and Amsterdam.

On this, we can agree. I can't even think of any other good candidates... certainly nothing west of Syracuse (this (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0006663,-77.4250904,3a,15y,155.68h,88.52t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sogbk2nj3IdnBPv9KVpn_kw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e1) is about as scenic as it gets, and even that's a stretch).
Umm the Catskills....
The Catskills are east of Syracuse.
The Thruway doesn't go through the Catskills, either.
Thruway goes between Catskills and Catskill, passing over Catskill creek..
And has views of said Catskills.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on May 25, 2021, 08:37:05 AM
Not only does the Thruway have many views of the Catskills and run inland of Catskill village, the Thruway itself enters Catskill Park for a mile or two near the Ulster service area if NYSDEC GIS is to be believed. South of there to just south of Exit 19, the line generally follows the west ROW line (but the Exit 19 trumpet is partially inside the park).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on May 25, 2021, 10:03:55 AM
It still isn't as scenic as the drive from Utica to Amsterdam.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: froggie on May 25, 2021, 10:24:07 AM
Scenery is in the eye of the beholder...
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: roadman65 on May 25, 2021, 11:15:48 AM
Quote from: froggie on May 25, 2021, 10:24:07 AM
Scenery is in the eye of the beholder...

So true as some see Garbage as beauty. 

Heck look at modern art.  Some see it as art and some see that as trash.

Then a ceremony I once went to for the Knights of Columbus was said by many members to be beautiful, but to me I did not see any beauty in it when I attended.

This is AARoads where many get mad at others if you say something looks great and the other person fails to share your view.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on May 25, 2021, 11:18:15 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on May 25, 2021, 11:15:48 AM
So true as some see Garbage as beauty... This is AARoads where many get mad at others if you say something looks great and the other person fails to share your view.

Oh, man. LOL. This is almost worthy of being added to my signature.  :-D
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on May 25, 2021, 04:29:03 PM
Quote from: cl94 on May 25, 2021, 08:37:05 AM
Not only does the Thruway have many views of the Catskills and run inland of Catskill village, the Thruway itself enters Catskill Park for a mile or two near the Ulster service area if NYSDEC GIS is to be believed. South of there to just south of Exit 19, the line generally follows the west ROW line (but the Exit 19 trumpet is partially inside the park).
There are also "entering Catskill Park" signs on US 209 and NY 28 heading west crossing the Thruway.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: TonyTrafficLight on May 27, 2021, 11:47:40 AM
Toll Booths at Exit 32 Westmoreland are no more. Looks like they've been there a few days working. Old Park and Drive next to the booths is ripped up and was moved into the Tractor Trailer Lot on the other side of the old booths. I still remember the days of that lot having 20 or so Rite-Aid trailers and others in it. Now there's 1 or 2 total.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: baugh17 on May 30, 2021, 07:26:04 PM
Quote from: TonyTrafficLight on May 27, 2021, 11:47:40 AM
Toll Booths at Exit 32 Westmoreland are no more. Looks like they've been there a few days working. Old Park and Drive next to the booths is ripped up and was moved into the Tractor Trailer Lot on the other side of the old booths. I still remember the days of that lot having 20 or so Rite-Aid trailers and others in it. Now there's 1 or 2 total.

Here's what I was able to confirm during my travels to Syracuse this weekend...

Exit 32 (Westmoreland)...Gone
Exit 33 (Verona)...Still there, and presumably will be next
Exit 34 (Canastota)...Could not confirm
Exit 34A (I-481)...Could not confirm
Exit 35 (East Syracuse)...Gone
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on May 30, 2021, 08:42:15 PM
Quote from: baugh17 on May 30, 2021, 07:26:04 PM
Quote from: TonyTrafficLight on May 27, 2021, 11:47:40 AM
Toll Booths at Exit 32 Westmoreland are no more. Looks like they've been there a few days working. Old Park and Drive next to the booths is ripped up and was moved into the Tractor Trailer Lot on the other side of the old booths. I still remember the days of that lot having 20 or so Rite-Aid trailers and others in it. Now there's 1 or 2 total.

Here's what I was able to confirm during my travels to Syracuse this weekend...

Exit 32 (Westmoreland)...Gone
Exit 33 (Verona)...Still there, and presumably will be next
Exit 34 (Canastota)...Could not confirm
Exit 34A (I-481)...Could not confirm
Exit 35 (East Syracuse)...Gone

34A is gone as of Thursday. 34 was still there 2 weeks ago, may be down now.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: baugh17 on May 30, 2021, 10:29:22 PM
Quote from: cl94 on May 30, 2021, 08:42:15 PM
Quote from: baugh17 on May 30, 2021, 07:26:04 PM
Quote from: TonyTrafficLight on May 27, 2021, 11:47:40 AM
Toll Booths at Exit 32 Westmoreland are no more. Looks like they've been there a few days working. Old Park and Drive next to the booths is ripped up and was moved into the Tractor Trailer Lot on the other side of the old booths. I still remember the days of that lot having 20 or so Rite-Aid trailers and others in it. Now there's 1 or 2 total.

Here's what I was able to confirm during my travels to Syracuse this weekend...

Exit 32 (Westmoreland)...Gone
Exit 33 (Verona)...Still there, and presumably will be next
Exit 34 (Canastota)...Could not confirm
Exit 34A (I-481)...Could not confirm
Exit 35 (East Syracuse)...Gone

34A is gone as of Thursday. 34 was still there 2 weeks ago, may be down now.

I hope to have a better update next weekend (I'm heading to Buffalo on Saturday).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on May 31, 2021, 08:40:14 PM
33 and 34 are still there.  Further east, 48 and 48A are down.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Roadgeek Adam on May 31, 2021, 11:46:29 PM
49 is completely gone now. They just put up a new median barrier the other day. 36 is gone save for the tollhouse, which has a part of the roof overhang collapsing. My guess is the tollhouse at 36 is coming down. (The one at 49 is not, state troopers like to use it for some reason.)
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on June 01, 2021, 12:59:40 PM
Other interesting note: at 45, the sign on I-490 near exit 29 for the Thruway with two indicating which lane to be in for each direction of I-90.  The old toll booth warning sign on the bridge has been replaced with "freeway ends" for some reason; not exactly normal to see such a sign approaching a freeway/freeway interchange.  :confused:

No changes at exit 47 yet.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on June 02, 2021, 03:45:49 AM
I found this picture of the Thruway on the History Channel website. I knew exactly where this was when I saw it.

(https://www.history.com/.image/ar_4:3%2Cc_fill%2Ccs_srgb%2Cfl_progressive%2Cq_auto:good%2Cw_1200/MTU3ODc5MDgyOTQxODg0MTI3/the-ny-state-thruway-parallels-then-spans-the-erie-canal.jpg)

I couldn't figure out the age though. The lack of trees completely threw me off, but this has to be 1954...
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on June 02, 2021, 06:47:03 AM
Quote from: Buffaboy on June 02, 2021, 03:45:49 AM
I found this picture of the Thruway on the History Channel website. I knew exactly where this was when I saw it.

(https://www.history.com/.image/ar_4:3%2Cc_fill%2Ccs_srgb%2Cfl_progressive%2Cq_auto:good%2Cw_1200/MTU3ODc5MDgyOTQxODg0MTI3/the-ny-state-thruway-parallels-then-spans-the-erie-canal.jpg)

I couldn't figure out the age though. The lack of trees completely threw me off, but this has to be 1954...
Why 1954 exactly?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on June 02, 2021, 09:57:23 AM
That's a guess, but because the section between Utica and Syracuse opened first, and the earthwork and roadway looks new, I figured it would be either that year or 2-3 years newer.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on June 02, 2021, 01:02:43 PM
According to the Thruway's site, the first section to open as we know the Thruway today (excluding the small sections that were built before toll collection), was Rochester to Lowell, which is west of exit 32.
https://www.thruway.ny.gov/oursystem/toll-collector-history.html
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: RobbieL2415 on June 02, 2021, 02:33:51 PM
Honestly, and as I've said a few times before, just mark the mileage for I-90/I-87 alongside the original Thruway posts.

It's the motorist's own fault if they can't understand what it means.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: DJ Particle on June 02, 2021, 11:56:44 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on June 02, 2021, 03:45:49 AM
I found this picture of the Thruway on the History Channel website. I knew exactly where this was when I saw it.

(https://www.history.com/.image/ar_4:3%2Cc_fill%2Ccs_srgb%2Cfl_progressive%2Cq_auto:good%2Cw_1200/MTU3ODc5MDgyOTQxODg0MTI3/the-ny-state-thruway-parallels-then-spans-the-erie-canal.jpg)

I couldn't figure out the age though. The lack of trees completely threw me off, but this has to be 1954...

Here?
https://www.google.com/maps/place/Utica,+NY/@43.1299805,-75.2623679,7404m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m5!3m4!1s0x89d93751356a7629:0x111a362618edfc86!8m2!3d43.100903!4d-75.232664
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: TonyTrafficLight on June 03, 2021, 06:30:15 AM
Not sure if that is the Mohawk Street Bridge over the canal in Marcy center of the photo.

Rt 49 would be the road top left. It was a main road from Utica to Rome and would have been more developed, plus
the curve in the Thruway top of the photo doesnt match the road alignment.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on June 03, 2021, 07:57:18 AM
Quote from: vdeane on June 01, 2021, 12:59:40 PM
Other interesting note: at 45, the sign on I-490 near exit 29 for the Thruway with two indicating which lane to be in for each direction of I-90.  The old toll booth warning sign on the bridge has been replaced with "freeway ends" for some reason; not exactly normal to see such a sign approaching a freeway/freeway interchange.  :confused:

I noticed that as well. Maybe because you do have to slow down significantly for the ramps to the Thruway? It is a free-flowing connection, but not a high-speed one, especially the trumpet.

Quote from: vdeane on June 01, 2021, 12:59:40 PM
No changes at exit 47 yet.

I haven't been down to that end of I-490 in an embarrassingly long time. Are the booths gone there yet?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on June 03, 2021, 07:59:14 AM
I had a chance to drive part of I-87 south of Albany this past weekend (between New Paltz and Catskill) and I'm officially on the bandwagon with those of you claiming that it needs to be widened. It was OK heading north, but terrible heading southbound with all the traffic heading back towards the NYC area. It reminded me of how Buffalo-Syracuse sometimes gets in the summer, with long, slow-moving packs of traffic, but even worse.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on June 03, 2021, 02:09:19 PM
Quote from: webny99 on June 03, 2021, 07:57:18 AM
I haven't been down to that end of I-490 in an embarrassingly long time. Are the booths gone there yet?
Like I said, no change.  Booths still there and everything.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on June 03, 2021, 04:10:34 PM
Quote from: vdeane on June 03, 2021, 02:09:19 PM
Quote from: webny99 on June 03, 2021, 07:57:18 AM
I haven't been down to that end of I-490 in an embarrassingly long time. Are the booths gone there yet?
Like I said, no change.  Booths still there and everything.

Ah, OK. I wasn't sure what your baseline was.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on June 03, 2021, 08:34:24 PM
Quote from: webny99 on June 03, 2021, 04:10:34 PM
Quote from: vdeane on June 03, 2021, 02:09:19 PM
Quote from: webny99 on June 03, 2021, 07:57:18 AM
I haven't been down to that end of I-490 in an embarrassingly long time. Are the booths gone there yet?
Like I said, no change.  Booths still there and everything.

Ah, OK. I wasn't sure what your baseline was.
You can track the progress on the Thruway site (https://www.thruway.ny.gov/cashless/demo-schedule.html), though it seems they only update that page once a month or so.  Exit 47 isn't slated to begin construction until July.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: baugh17 on June 06, 2021, 03:46:10 PM
Quote from: baugh17 on June 06, 2021, 03:45:27 PM
Quote from: baugh17 on June 06, 2021, 03:42:16 PM
Quote from: vdeane on June 03, 2021, 08:34:24 PM
Quote from: webny99 on June 03, 2021, 04:10:34 PM
Quote from: vdeane on June 03, 2021, 02:09:19 PM
Quote from: webny99 on June 03, 2021, 07:57:18 AM
I haven't been down to that end of I-490 in an embarrassingly long time. Are the booths gone there yet?
Like I said, no change.  Booths still there and everything.

Ah, OK. I wasn't sure what your baseline was.
You can track the progress on the Thruway site (https://www.thruway.ny.gov/cashless/demo-schedule.html), though it seems they only update that page once a month or so.  Exit 47 isn't slated to begin construction until July.
Observations from my drive out to Buffalo on Saturday...

33...I did not notice if they had started work here.  There were still there last weekend.
34...Confirmed still there
35-36...Gone
37...???
38-39...Gone
40-43...Still there
44-45...??? (From previous reports, I believe both are gone)
46...Still there
47...Still there apparently
48-48A-49-Williamsville Barrier...Gone (Appears 48 was just removed)
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on June 06, 2021, 10:03:48 PM
37 is gone per the Thruway site.  45 was one of the top priority for removal, so it's been gone since last year.  44 was still there as of May 30, and construction is slated to start in "June 2021" per the Thruway site, so it may or may not still be there (probably still is, since it's only been a week, and the larger/busier ones can take a bit longer to remove).

EDIT:
Also worth mentioning, here's what the signage looks like on I-490 east approaching the Thruway:
(https://nysroads.com/images/gallery/NY/i490/102_1785-s.JPG)

I-90 also has a couple error "state speed limit" signs.  One of them is a permanent install, the other is actually patched for the work zone limit.
(https://nysroads.com/images/gallery/NY/i90/102_1777-s.JPG)
(https://nysroads.com/images/gallery/NY/i90/102_1779-s.JPG)
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: 74/171FAN on June 08, 2021, 09:52:20 AM
QuoteI-90 also has a couple error "state speed limit" signs.  One of them is a permanent install, the other is actually patched for the work zone limit.

I guess it is not a surprise considering I have seen regular "SPEED LIMIT 55" in some locations though I cannot think of a specific one offhand.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on June 08, 2021, 03:12:33 PM
There are quite a few scattered around Region 5.  Here's one along NY 394 (https://nysroads.com/photos.php?route=ny394&state=NY&file=102_1751.JPG).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: SignBridge on June 08, 2021, 08:54:42 PM
Shouldn't those I-90 east/west signs in the above photo also show the Thruway logo with the I-90 shields?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on June 08, 2021, 09:58:03 PM
The Thruway logo isn't used as prominently as one would see with, say, the PA Turnpike, NJ Turnpike, or MassPike.  It's used on practically no reassurance shields and whether it's used on guide signs varies by region.  Even many Thruway signs (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.9409037,-78.7662756,3a,75y,11.1h,92.15t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sGrpKXLCmdFHJKFm-2RMBlw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) don't use it.

They may have also only had so much room - those signs replaced a previous one (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0203425,-77.4438453,3a,75y,150.62h,89.89t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sgDV8z8P9FRHbZ6Z8sQePIg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: SignBridge on June 08, 2021, 10:07:04 PM
Thanks vdeane. Interesting that the old sign at least said Thruway on it.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: shadyjay on June 09, 2021, 05:22:55 PM
Quote from: vdeane on June 08, 2021, 09:58:03 PM
The Thruway logo isn't used as prominently as one would see with, say, the PA Turnpike, NJ Turnpike, or MassPike.  It's used on practically no reassurance shields and whether it's used on guide signs varies by region. 

Downstate you'll see Thruway trailblazers on the approach to the Thruway in the Bronx and in the Suffern area (Exits 15-15A, on both reassurance and overheads).  Other than on approach roads to the Thruway from the surface, no others, though some overheads replaced in recent years on the mainline at Exits 17 and 23 have space for such.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: crispy93 on June 10, 2021, 03:07:48 PM
Quote from: vdeane on June 06, 2021, 10:03:48 PM
37 is gone per the Thruway site.  45 was one of the top priority for removal, so it's been gone since last year.  44 was still there as of May 30, and construction is slated to start in "June 2021" per the Thruway site, so it may or may not still be there (probably still is, since it's only been a week, and the larger/busier ones can take a bit longer to remove).

EDIT:
Also worth mentioning, here's what the signage looks like on I-490 east approaching the Thruway:
(https://nysroads.com/images/gallery/NY/i490/102_1785-s.JPG)

I-90 also has a couple error "state speed limit" signs.  One of them is a permanent install, the other is actually patched for the work zone limit.
(https://nysroads.com/images/gallery/NY/i90/102_1777-s.JPG)
(https://nysroads.com/images/gallery/NY/i90/102_1779-s.JPG)

There are some STATE SPEED LIMIT 55 signs on NY 27 in Massapequa that were patched over when the limit was reduced to 45. The STATE is whited out, and the "4" that patches over the "5" is a different font; they look hideous. Not sure why they couldn't get a hold of some regular 45 mph signs. There's also a STATE SPEED LIMIT 35 sign with the STATE covered up on this service road in Queens, which is interesting because there are no 55 mph zones in NYC: https://goo.gl/maps/Cgbd21dctEkD1kjh8

But I digress
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Harvestman on June 11, 2021, 02:17:46 AM
Stupid question, but I'm not from the area so...
What's the status of the Thruway information radio frequencies? I've looked up a couple of them and the FCC licenses appear to have been cancelled back in January.  I didn't see any signs mentioning them on my trip to Syracuse earlier this year.  Are they officially a thing of the past or still being phased out?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on June 11, 2021, 02:14:25 PM
The signs were all taken down late last year/early this year and the page on the website was removed too.  I didn't know the FCC licenses were cancelled too.  I guess it really is gone then.

In the past couple years or so it seemed like the quality of the radio had been going down; more static, less consistent with the broadcast format, nothing on the radio even when there's a bad incident, an incident mentioned on the radio that had cleared a while back, etc.  So on the one hand, good riddance, but on the other, I'm sad to see it go.  I had all the stations they used on my AM presets and used to check them when the sign was flashing or I was caught in stop and go traffic.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: shadyjay on June 11, 2021, 08:18:53 PM
Signs in the lower Hudson Valley are still up, but tarped.

Funny how they want you to use the app now, but that's on your phone and that would be against NYS policy on hands free driving.  So there's no legal way to get traffic info if you're a solo driver on the Thruway.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on June 11, 2021, 10:59:01 PM
When I-190 went toll free and when the booths were ripped out...so were the ground plates for the transmitters for the traffic radio.  Whoops.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: baugh17 on June 12, 2021, 11:06:22 AM
Quote from: shadyjay on June 11, 2021, 08:18:53 PM
Signs in the lower Hudson Valley are still up, but tarped.

Funny how they want you to use the app now, but that's on your phone and that would be against NYS policy on hands free driving.  So there's no legal way to get traffic info if you're a solo driver on the Thruway.

Well, they have been installing the new message boards at the entrances for about the past year or so, though I have yet to catch one in active use outside of the occasional sign test.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on June 13, 2021, 03:37:31 AM
I guess with people using apps like Waze, the hazard stations have fallen out of favor. Still, Waze or other apps can be a distraction to anyone driving and having some sort of audio feedback instead would be much safer.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Snappyjack on June 13, 2021, 04:34:41 PM
Any word on when the Ripley barrier is going to be coming down? Passed through on Thursday and was surprised to see it still up. I saw Exit 47 was still standing as well, but no others to speak of.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on June 13, 2021, 09:32:51 PM
Everything is here, though it's only updated once a month: https://www.thruway.ny.gov/cashless/demo-schedule.html

It appears Ripley will be removed in July.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: RobbieL2415 on June 16, 2021, 02:43:50 PM
How are they doing AMBER alerts if they took out the traffic info signs? Is NYS doing them over the EAS?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on June 16, 2021, 02:44:53 PM
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on June 16, 2021, 02:43:50 PM
How are they doing AMBER alerts if they took out the traffic info signs? Is NYS doing them over the EAS?
It's only the radio sign beacons.  Amber Alerts are also done through VMSes.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: RobbieL2415 on June 16, 2021, 02:47:37 PM
Quote from: Rothman on June 16, 2021, 02:44:53 PM
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on June 16, 2021, 02:43:50 PM
How are they doing AMBER alerts if they took out the traffic info signs? Is NYS doing them over the EAS?
It's only the radio sign beacons.  Amber Alerts are also done through VMSes.
I see.
I could've sworn I've seen a second pair of flashing yellows below the "traffic advisory when flashing" that said "AMBER alert when flashing".
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: shadyjay on June 16, 2021, 05:06:44 PM
You have seen that!  The amber alert flashers/placards were below the "URGENT MESSAGE WHEN FLASHING" placard.  For an example, see here:
https://www.google.com/search?q=new+york+thruway+advisory+radio+sign&sxsrf=ALeKk01c5Pyi3nmOj-ISkBmDRhW61xtJ5g:1623877348469&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjGh47Ehp3xAhXvSDABHagPBUkQ_AUoAnoECAEQBA&biw=1920&bih=880

I have (in the past year or so) seen amber alerts on the Thruway posted on the VMSs.  That's probably a better way to get people to keep a look out for a particular vehicle, vs turning to a radio station and waiting for the message.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on June 26, 2021, 03:06:45 PM
I drove on I-90 from E.57 to I-490 yesterday, where the I-490 booths are still up.

Also, I-490 could use some TLC in the Rochester area, as well as NY-590 which I also drove on.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: RobbieL2415 on June 28, 2021, 11:35:39 AM
Quote from: Buffaboy on June 26, 2021, 03:06:45 PM
I drove on I-90 from E.57 to I-490 yesterday, where the I-490 booths are still up.

Also, I-490 could use some TLC in the Rochester area, as well as NY-590 which I also drove on.

Yeah, the half of 490 that's east of the Genesee River needs to be rehabbed.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Plutonic Panda on July 07, 2021, 03:02:26 PM
Now this is cool. I'm glad to see NY invest in its rest areas. Oklahoma would just opt to close them.

https://www.thruway.ny.gov/travelers/travelplazas/service-area-project/index.html?fbclid=IwAR1fuiL6r9WoDfHpgvUA8Q9qRfwTMLuRkwIldYq79mI9KixKmSZkOsLlFf8
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: MASTERNC on July 07, 2021, 04:00:29 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on July 07, 2021, 03:02:26 PM
Now this is cool. I'm glad to see NY invest in its rest areas. Oklahoma would just opt to close them.

https://www.thruway.ny.gov/travelers/travelplazas/service-area-project/index.html?fbclid=IwAR1fuiL6r9WoDfHpgvUA8Q9qRfwTMLuRkwIldYq79mI9KixKmSZkOsLlFf8

Makes the PA Turnpike look like a third world operation with only 4-5 repeating brands. I know HMSHost has a Panera franchise, so I'd kill for one or two on that road.

The only downside is a lot of the existing restaurant concepts have permanently closed already in anticipation of the future renovations. You can see a lot of patched over logos on service area signs.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on July 07, 2021, 06:26:15 PM
Quote from: MASTERNC on July 07, 2021, 04:00:29 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on July 07, 2021, 03:02:26 PM
Now this is cool. I'm glad to see NY invest in its rest areas. Oklahoma would just opt to close them.

https://www.thruway.ny.gov/travelers/travelplazas/service-area-project/index.html?fbclid=IwAR1fuiL6r9WoDfHpgvUA8Q9qRfwTMLuRkwIldYq79mI9KixKmSZkOsLlFf8

Makes the PA Turnpike look like a third world operation with only 4-5 repeating brands. I know HMSHost has a Panera franchise, so I'd kill for one or two on that road.

The only downside is a lot of the existing restaurant concepts have permanently closed already in anticipation of the future renovations. You can see a lot of patched over logos on service area signs.

Most of them closed for COVID and never reopened.

Regarding the operations side, Applegreen (apparently the private operator of the new service areas) operates some of the UK's motorway service areas. The renderings/amenities look far more like European offerings than we're used to seeing in the US, which will be a major improvement. I don't like how many Shake Shacks are going in to replace cheaper options, but whatever. Not like I ever buy food on the Thruway anyway.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on July 07, 2021, 06:34:04 PM
Shake Shack isn't the place it used to be.  Sell outs. :D
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: seicer on July 07, 2021, 08:23:17 PM
I am pretty excited about the showers that are year-round. As someone who remote works (and works from wherever), it's nice to have a reliable place to shower when I am in central New York. Truck stops with showers that are aplenty in the south and midwest are sparse to non-existent in the northeast; and year-round showers are hard to come by, especially from parks that want to charge a full rate to camp when you just want to shower. And Planet Fitness isn't all that available outside of many cities.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on July 07, 2021, 09:23:21 PM
As exciting as it would be to have Panera Bread at some locations, overall I greatly prefer the current (or at least pre-COVID) restaurant offerings to the new ones.  What's with no longer offering pizza on the Thruway?  What genius thought that up?  :pan: Sbarro, you will be missed!
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on July 07, 2021, 09:36:06 PM
Quote from: vdeane on July 07, 2021, 09:23:21 PM
As exciting as it would be to have Panera Bread at some locations, overall I greatly prefer the current (or at least pre-COVID) restaurant offerings to the new ones.  What's with no longer offering pizza on the Thruway?  What genius thought that up?  :pan: Sbarro, you will be missed!
Looks to be a trend in travel food - shift towards fancy, expensive and slow service. With options, e.g. in an airport, being limited, audience is pretty captive and has to follow.
Flying J in Batavia was a nice way to deviate from the captive offering. I wonder if Thruway would allow for more services signs...
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on July 07, 2021, 09:47:28 PM
Quote from: vdeane on July 07, 2021, 09:23:21 PM
As exciting as it would be to have Panera Bread at some locations, overall I greatly prefer the current (or at least pre-COVID) restaurant offerings to the new ones.  What's with no longer offering pizza on the Thruway?  What genius thought that up?  :pan: Sbarro, you will be missed!
No, no.  Sbarro will not be missed.  Sbarro is never missed.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: machias on July 08, 2021, 07:18:18 PM
Quote from: kalvado on July 07, 2021, 09:36:06 PM
Quote from: vdeane on July 07, 2021, 09:23:21 PM
As exciting as it would be to have Panera Bread at some locations, overall I greatly prefer the current (or at least pre-COVID) restaurant offerings to the new ones.  What's with no longer offering pizza on the Thruway?  What genius thought that up?  :pan: Sbarro, you will be missed!
Looks to be a trend in travel food - shift towards fancy, expensive and slow service. With options, e.g. in an airport, being limited, audience is pretty captive and has to follow.
Flying J in Batavia was a nice way to deviate from the captive offering. I wonder if Thruway would allow for more services signs...

I'm pretty certain the Thruway Authority will never put up more service signs. They don't even have service signs westbound after Angola, and there's plenty of services at the remaining interchanges. Service signs are just not their thing.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on July 08, 2021, 10:16:40 PM
The way they bill is also a HUGE disincentive to get off within a virtual ticket system, at least for those of us who actually read our E-ZPass statements and reconcile them with our travels.  What used to be quick and easy is now like piecing together a jigsaw puzzle out of a full length novel (especially as they don't process in order).  Getting off adds yet another line to an already way too long statement.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on July 08, 2021, 11:43:07 PM
I've yet to have a problem with E-ZPass billing.  I am confused by the difficulty vdeane's finding in her statements.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: storm2k on July 09, 2021, 01:44:34 AM
Quote from: machias on July 08, 2021, 07:18:18 PM
Quote from: kalvado on July 07, 2021, 09:36:06 PM
Quote from: vdeane on July 07, 2021, 09:23:21 PM
As exciting as it would be to have Panera Bread at some locations, overall I greatly prefer the current (or at least pre-COVID) restaurant offerings to the new ones.  What's with no longer offering pizza on the Thruway?  What genius thought that up?  :pan: Sbarro, you will be missed!
Looks to be a trend in travel food - shift towards fancy, expensive and slow service. With options, e.g. in an airport, being limited, audience is pretty captive and has to follow.
Flying J in Batavia was a nice way to deviate from the captive offering. I wonder if Thruway would allow for more services signs...

I'm pretty certain the Thruway Authority will never put up more service signs. They don't even have service signs westbound after Angola, and there's plenty of services at the remaining interchanges. Service signs are just not their thing.

No toll authority generally endorses service signs since their goal is to keep you on their toll road until you reach your destination. The NJ Turnpike only puts up lodging signs, and that's only from Exit 8 southward. The PA Turnpike only has some lodging and attraction signs ahead of their various exits. Posting food or gas service signs would be more of an encouragement to get off the toll road to seek services instead of spending your money at the service areas.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Jim on July 09, 2021, 10:12:53 AM
Quote from: Rothman on July 08, 2021, 11:43:07 PM
I've yet to have a problem with E-ZPass billing.  I am confused by the difficulty vdeane's finding in her statements.

For myself, the initial glitches with lengthy delays in things showing up after the conversion were a little annoying but that seems to have cleared up.  My statements are longer with some trips that were previously a single entry still being split.  Commuter plan trips between 27 and 24 show up as single $0.00 entries, but trips on our tag not on a plan break that trip down into what is charged in each segment, 27-25A, 25A-25, and 25-24.  Since I'm not getting these in hard copy or printing them, if the statement spills onto an extra page or two, it doesn't bother me.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on July 09, 2021, 11:08:08 AM
Quote from: Jim on July 09, 2021, 10:12:53 AM
Quote from: Rothman on July 08, 2021, 11:43:07 PM
I've yet to have a problem with E-ZPass billing.  I am confused by the difficulty vdeane's finding in her statements.

For myself, the initial glitches with lengthy delays in things showing up after the conversion were a little annoying but that seems to have cleared up.  My statements are longer with some trips that were previously a single entry still being split.  Commuter plan trips between 27 and 24 show up as single $0.00 entries, but trips on our tag not on a plan break that trip down into what is charged in each segment, 27-25A, 25A-25, and 25-24.  Since I'm not getting these in hard copy or printing them, if the statement spills onto an extra page or two, it doesn't bother me.
Taking not bothering to a whole new level:
I am not using Thruway too much (despite driving through I-87 - I-90 interchange on a daily basis). My personal EZpass accounting is pretty much limited to occasional "Account replenished" text. As long as it doesn't happen too often (which it doesn't), it just goes into  "general cost of living" category. 
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on July 09, 2021, 12:58:21 PM
Quote from: Jim on July 09, 2021, 10:12:53 AM
Quote from: Rothman on July 08, 2021, 11:43:07 PM
I've yet to have a problem with E-ZPass billing.  I am confused by the difficulty vdeane's finding in her statements.

For myself, the initial glitches with lengthy delays in things showing up after the conversion were a little annoying but that seems to have cleared up.  My statements are longer with some trips that were previously a single entry still being split.  Commuter plan trips between 27 and 24 show up as single $0.00 entries, but trips on our tag not on a plan break that trip down into what is charged in each segment, 27-25A, 25A-25, and 25-24.  Since I'm not getting these in hard copy or printing them, if the statement spills onto an extra page or two, it doesn't bother me.
Yes, that.  Take my typical drive from Albany to Rochester, which I take many times per year.  It used to appear on the statement like this:
24-45

Now it appears like this, usually in approximately this order:
34A-35
35-36
44-45
36-39
39-44
25A-34A
25-25A
24-25

This is VERY annoying, especially when you factor in that this is only one way - the same thing happens going the other way.  The formula is basically mainline tolls Syracuse west, then virtual ticket tolls Syracuse west, Albany-Syracuse virtual ticket tolls, then finally the Albany-Schenectady mainline tolls (the ones affected by the I-88 free zone).  South and east of Albany bill like west of Syracuse.  MassDOT got it right and amalgamates the gantries together into a virtual virtual ticket system (double word intended), but the Thruway doesn't.

Note that they did not name the gantries like they did for the former barrier tolls downstate, so these don't even stand out on the statement.  They're billed as if you got on at one interchange on the former ticket system, got off at the next, and then got back on again, multiple times.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: empirestate on July 09, 2021, 05:47:40 PM
Quote from: Rothman on July 08, 2021, 11:43:07 PM
I've yet to have a problem with E-ZPass billing.  I am confused by the difficulty vdeane's finding in her statements.

On the other hand, I have had the same problem on my bills, so I understand it fully. That's a weird quirk of humans, that we can be baffled by something unless we've observed it personally (And usually it seems I'm on the other side of that equation!)
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on July 09, 2021, 10:53:25 PM
Quote from: empirestate on July 09, 2021, 05:47:40 PM
Quote from: Rothman on July 08, 2021, 11:43:07 PM
I've yet to have a problem with E-ZPass billing.  I am confused by the difficulty vdeane's finding in her statements.

On the other hand, I have had the same problem on my bills, so I understand it fully. That's a weird quirk of humans, that we can be baffled by something unless we've observed it personally (And usually it seems I'm on the other side of that equation!)
The "problem" seems to be the segmentation of long trips?  I think this is a case where such segmentation bothers some people and not others, rather than an unobserved issue.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Sam on July 10, 2021, 09:00:52 AM
Maybe I missed the discussion earlier (or more likely didn't understand it) but why segments? Why not continue to pay between the entry and exit points like with the ticket system? If they want to define segments internally to allow free sections or directional tolls on bridges that's fine, but why do I need to pay 5 tolls for 5 segments between two exits?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: storm2k on July 10, 2021, 04:54:04 PM
Quote from: kalvado on July 09, 2021, 11:08:08 AM
Quote from: Jim on July 09, 2021, 10:12:53 AM
Quote from: Rothman on July 08, 2021, 11:43:07 PM
I've yet to have a problem with E-ZPass billing.  I am confused by the difficulty vdeane's finding in her statements.

For myself, the initial glitches with lengthy delays in things showing up after the conversion were a little annoying but that seems to have cleared up.  My statements are longer with some trips that were previously a single entry still being split.  Commuter plan trips between 27 and 24 show up as single $0.00 entries, but trips on our tag not on a plan break that trip down into what is charged in each segment, 27-25A, 25A-25, and 25-24.  Since I'm not getting these in hard copy or printing them, if the statement spills onto an extra page or two, it doesn't bother me.
Taking not bothering to a whole new level:
I am not using Thruway too much (despite driving through I-87 - I-90 interchange on a daily basis). My personal EZpass accounting is pretty much limited to occasional "Account replenished" text. As long as it doesn't happen too often (which it doesn't), it just goes into  "general cost of living" category. 

I'm like this, too. I'll peek at my statements online to make sure nothing squirrely has happened (esp because the NJ Turnpike likes to give me "GO TOLL UNPAID" messages at exit points sometimes but they'll show up on my statement properly deducted and tied to my tag number so it's not like they did a LP match) but otherwise, EZ-Pass is just one of those things that gets filled up once and a while and that's about the extent of my care.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on July 10, 2021, 11:51:55 PM
Quote from: Sam on July 10, 2021, 09:00:52 AM
Maybe I missed the discussion earlier (or more likely didn't understand it) but why segments? Why not continue to pay between the entry and exit points like with the ticket system? If they want to define segments internally to allow free sections or directional tolls on bridges that's fine, but why do I need to pay 5 tolls for 5 segments between two exits?
Physically, it's because they didn't want to erect ramp gantries (https://nysroads.com/photos.php?route=i90a&state=NY&file=102_1790.JPG) at the higher volume interchanges, I presume so that traffic wouldn't have to be constricted funneling though the gantry prior to the system being implemented.  In terms of billing, I have no idea, but I presume it's some variant of lack of imagination.  They've always billed based on what toll points people pass through, and they've always billed the ticket system as between two interchanges, so nobody really sat down to determine if such was still relevant in the era of AET.

My big problem is that I have a hard time holding all that information in my head.  If they treated the mainline gantries the way they treated barrier tolls, it would be easier, as they would naturally break up the statement a bit, and I wouldn't have to keep track of as much stuff in my brain.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: empirestate on July 11, 2021, 11:55:45 PM
Quote from: Rothman on July 09, 2021, 10:53:25 PM
Quote from: empirestate on July 09, 2021, 05:47:40 PM
Quote from: Rothman on July 08, 2021, 11:43:07 PM
I've yet to have a problem with E-ZPass billing.  I am confused by the difficulty vdeane's finding in her statements.

On the other hand, I have had the same problem on my bills, so I understand it fully. That's a weird quirk of humans, that we can be baffled by something unless we've observed it personally (And usually it seems I'm on the other side of that equation!)
The "problem" seems to be the segmentation of long trips?  I think this is a case where such segmentation bothers some people and not others, rather than an unobserved issue.

Well, it's just that you mentioned being confused by it, rather than unbothered. And again, I know that feeling well myself, so it's not a criticism–it's a reaction we probably all have at one time or another!

But yes, that's what it is–what used to be a single-line entry on the bill is now split into multiple segments listed non-consecutively. It's much more confusing and complex to read, and thus the billing has gotten worse, rather than better, in this respect.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on July 12, 2021, 07:14:34 AM
Quote from: empirestate on July 11, 2021, 11:55:45 PM
Quote from: Rothman on July 09, 2021, 10:53:25 PM
Quote from: empirestate on July 09, 2021, 05:47:40 PM
Quote from: Rothman on July 08, 2021, 11:43:07 PM
I've yet to have a problem with E-ZPass billing.  I am confused by the difficulty vdeane's finding in her statements.

On the other hand, I have had the same problem on my bills, so I understand it fully. That's a weird quirk of humans, that we can be baffled by something unless we've observed it personally (And usually it seems I'm on the other side of that equation!)
The "problem" seems to be the segmentation of long trips?  I think this is a case where such segmentation bothers some people and not others, rather than an unobserved issue.

Well, it's just that you mentioned being confused by it, rather than unbothered. And again, I know that feeling well myself, so it's not a criticism–it's a reaction we probably all have at one time or another!

But yes, that's what it is–what used to be a single-line entry on the bill is now split into multiple segments listed non-consecutively. It's much more confusing and complex to read, and thus the billing has gotten worse, rather than better, in this respect.
Confused by the difficulty people are havimg with their statements, not the statements themselves.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: seicer on July 12, 2021, 09:53:50 AM
It does make it a little more confusing to calculate how much I've spent on tolls for business expenses, but it's not impossible to calculate.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on July 12, 2021, 10:49:09 AM
Quote from: seicer on July 12, 2021, 09:53:50 AM
It does make it a little more confusing to calculate how much I've spent on tolls for business expenses, but it's not impossible to calculate.
Ah, this I can see.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: seicer on July 12, 2021, 12:37:46 PM
I use Quickbooks and it runs in the background. I mark whether or not a trip (from point A to point B) is business-related or not. Based on that, I can then use the NY Ez-Pass site to determine costs but it gets messy if the dates aren't aligned up or if there are tolling errors. Thankfully, it doesn't have to be perfect - the IRS is pretty lenient in these types of cases.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Roadgeek Adam on July 12, 2021, 06:53:30 PM
Just a couple updates: 56 came down 10 days ago. 57A is also down and repaved. 57 still stands.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: MASTERNC on July 12, 2021, 07:35:26 PM
Just for those keeping score, I traveled from Buffalo to Amsterdam on the way to Vermont, and had the transactions post in this order:

Day 1 (next business day after travel):
35-34A
36-35
45-44
46-45
47-46

Day 2 (third business day after travel):
50-47
44-39
39-36
34A-27

So it looks like the fixed "barrier" tolls post first, followed by any "closed loop" segment tolls.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Alps on July 12, 2021, 11:57:58 PM
STAY OUT OF POLITICS.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on July 13, 2021, 01:04:26 PM
One thing I do still find interesting is how, despite trying to shift to more upscale options like Shake Shack and Panera Bread, the majority of new service areas when I looked last night will have Burger King as their primary restaurant.  How is Burger King "upscale"?  In fact, many service areas had only Burger King and Starbuck's/Dunkin Donuts around (in fact, there were even a few that didn't even have Burger King).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: SignBridge on July 13, 2021, 09:30:39 PM
I agree with you Vdeane. Burger King can hardly be called upscale. But neither are Shake Shack and Panera Bread. In fact I don't think there is much upscale anything at highway rest areas in the Northeast, though Starbucks might qualify.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Roadgeekteen on July 13, 2021, 10:23:33 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on July 13, 2021, 09:30:39 PM
I agree with you Vdeane. Burger King can hardly be called upscale. But neither are Shake Shack and Panera Bread. In fact I don't think there is much upscale anything at highway rest areas in the Northeast, though Starbucks might qualify.
Starbucks isn't upscale.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: froggie on July 13, 2021, 10:24:48 PM
It's more upscale than Dunkin.  By a good bit.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Roadgeekteen on July 13, 2021, 10:29:37 PM
Quote from: froggie on July 13, 2021, 10:24:48 PM
It's more upscale than Dunkin.  By a good bit.
And shake shack is more upscale than Mcdonalds, but I wouldn't call either upscale.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: froggie on July 13, 2021, 11:00:08 PM
This may not be the case chain-wide, but of the occasional Starbucks' I've walked into, they have at least approached the upscale line if not had a toe across it.

Dunkin, meanwhile, feels like the McDonalds of the coffee world...
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Alps on July 14, 2021, 12:29:44 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on July 13, 2021, 10:23:33 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on July 13, 2021, 09:30:39 PM
I agree with you Vdeane. Burger King can hardly be called upscale. But neither are Shake Shack and Panera Bread. In fact I don't think there is much upscale anything at highway rest areas in the Northeast, though Starbucks might qualify.
Starbucks isn't upscale.
On a price and experience basis, they are.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Jim on July 14, 2021, 01:43:57 PM
Finally some new signs starting to appear at Exit 24.  Here's what's right where the I-90 EB and I-87 NB ramps merge before the stretch where the toll booths used to be:

(https://www.teresco.org/pics/exit24-20210714/P1050075-800.jpg)

Then approaching the split for I-90 EB and I-87 NB there are new signs behind the old that look to be the same except an "Exit Only" banner across the bottom of the Exit 1N panel.

(https://www.teresco.org/pics/exit24-20210714/P1050076-800.jpg)

Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: machias on July 14, 2021, 01:58:14 PM
Quote from: Jim on July 14, 2021, 01:43:57 PM
Finally some new signs starting to appear at Exit 24.  Here's what's right where the I-90 EB and I-87 NB ramps merge before the stretch where the toll booths used to be:

(https://www.teresco.org/pics/exit24-20210714/P1050075-800.jpg)

Then approaching the split for I-90 EB and I-87 NB there are new signs behind the old that look to be the same except an "Exit Only" banner across the bottom of the Exit 1N panel.

(https://www.teresco.org/pics/exit24-20210714/P1050076-800.jpg)



Decent looks signs, though the "1/4 MILE" on the pull thru gets my attention, technically you're still on 90 EAST at that point and the 1/4 MILE is redundant. Also, and this is a tiny nitpick that makes no difference whatsoever, I thought the NYSDOT standard was no border on the bottom edge of the exit number panel. Otherwise, they look good, do what they're suppose to do, and will probably do well for the next two decades.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: seicer on July 14, 2021, 02:26:02 PM
Now if they can repave the lanes because it can be incredibly confusing to drive on in certain conditions...
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on July 14, 2021, 08:41:31 PM
Quote from: machias on July 14, 2021, 01:58:14 PM
Also, and this is a tiny nitpick that makes no difference whatsoever, I thought the NYSDOT standard was no border on the bottom edge of the exit number panel.
I believe the cashless tolling contract was design-build, so neither NYSDOT nor NYSTA would have designed the signs.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: shadyjay on July 14, 2021, 09:57:17 PM
Quote from: machias on July 14, 2021, 01:58:14 PM
Decent looks signs, though the "1/4 MILE" on the pull thru gets my attention, technically you're still on 90 EAST at that point and the 1/4 MILE is redundant.

Also, don't forget at this point, you're technically on I-90 East  *AND*  I-87 North.  But I get what you're saying.... I-87 North exits from itself, while I-90 East takes the thru lanes, hence why the "1/4 MILE" seems redundant. 
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Jim on July 14, 2021, 10:32:00 PM
Got this one tonight on my way home, approaching from I-90 WB.  Unfortunately backlit and with road spray from the storm that had just moved through (and later flooded parts of Rensselear County).

(https://www.teresco.org/pics/exit24-20210714/P1050078-800.jpg)
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: storm2k on July 15, 2021, 02:18:42 PM
Quote from: Jim on July 14, 2021, 10:32:00 PM
Got this one tonight on my way home, approaching from I-90 WB.  Unfortunately backlit and with road spray from the storm that had just moved through (and later flooded parts of Rensselear County).

(https://www.teresco.org/pics/exit24-20210714/P1050078-800.jpg)

Interesting that they're not using Thruway shields here.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: SignBridge on July 15, 2021, 04:30:57 PM
Surprising they would bother putting mileage on those signs. That's not usually done along with lane arrows.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on July 15, 2021, 08:48:15 PM
Quote from: storm2k on July 15, 2021, 02:18:42 PM
Quote from: Jim on July 14, 2021, 10:32:00 PM
Got this one tonight on my way home, approaching from I-90 WB.  Unfortunately backlit and with road spray from the storm that had just moved through (and later flooded parts of Rensselear County).

(https://www.teresco.org/pics/exit24-20210714/P1050078-800.jpg)

Interesting that they're not using Thruway shields here.
It's not like the old signs (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.7003801,-73.8445918,3a,30.8y,333.93h,93.72t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1su7NdEEF66i4cFiXayr3DPg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) had them either.  The Thruway shield isn't used nearly as often as the shields for the MassPike, PA Turnpike, or NJ Turnpike.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: shadyjay on July 15, 2021, 09:00:58 PM
The Thruway shield is used on the approaches to the Thruway, not necessarily on the Thruway itself.  It is seen on the pull-throughs on I-90 about 1/4 mile behind this image, and on the Northway exit for the Thruway.  There are, of course, exceptions.  When the I-84 direct connect with the Thruway was constructed, Thruway logos appear just past the toll booths at the north/south split.  And in a couple places, Thruway shields are posted on pull-throughs on the mainline itself... but usually only at major junctions (Exit 15-15A-I-287 South & NY 17, Exit 24-SB). 

Then there are the places where space for a Thruway shield was... sort of... provided, but never got one.  NB at the I-84 exit comes to mind. 
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Jim on July 15, 2021, 09:03:39 PM
Apologies to those who don't need a sign update play-by-play, but here are a couple more from today.

A better view of the one I posted above, this time as I am going from I-87 SB to I-90 WB.

(https://www.teresco.org/pics/exit24-20210714/P1050084-800.jpg)

And new between my commutes home yesterday and today, the replacement for what's in the background.

(https://www.teresco.org/pics/exit24-20210714/P1050085-800.jpg)

Here's an older and closer-up picture of the button copy ones in the background whose days look to be numbered.  Taken December 3, 2015.  I assume those date from the total reconfiguration of 24 back in what, maybe the mid 80's?

(https://www.teresco.org/pics/signs/20151203/exits25-61exits23-1-close.jpg)
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Jim on July 20, 2021, 04:03:45 PM
Driving the Berkshire Spur over the weekend, I was impressed by the job done in removing the Canaan barrier.  If I didn't know the area where it was so well, I doubt I would have been able to tell it was ever there.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Roadgeek Adam on July 21, 2021, 12:55:58 AM
The last of the main 4 barriers in the suburbs of Buffalo, 57 is now down as well.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: empirestate on July 25, 2021, 01:21:04 PM
Quote from: Jim on July 20, 2021, 04:03:45 PM
Driving the Berkshire Spur over the weekend, I was impressed by the job done in removing the Canaan barrier.  If I didn't know the area where it was so well, I doubt I would have been able to tell it was ever there.

And the last time I passed through Exit B2, the booth was fully gone but the side building remains–complete with "B2" still on the chimney.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Jim on July 25, 2021, 02:14:37 PM
Also forgot to mention that the repaving at 24 has finally taken place.   Obviously a much smoother ride and you can actually tell where the lanes are now.  My bank account wishes that they did at least a first pass at this back in the winter so I wouldn't have had my big repair bill from the giant pothole hit.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on July 25, 2021, 09:35:18 PM
The booths are gone at 44 but the splitter islands the booths were in are currently still there.  Not fun to go through right now - those splitter islands are hard to see without the booths there.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: goldfishcrackers4 on July 31, 2021, 04:08:47 PM
What's the deal with the route 13 bridge replacement over the Thruway in Canastota? Dumped big piles of dirt in the spring, put up signals. No activity since.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: TonyTrafficLight on August 02, 2021, 09:07:08 AM
Quote from: goldfishcrackers4 on July 31, 2021, 04:08:47 PM
What's the deal with the route 13 bridge replacement over the Thruway in Canastota? Dumped big piles of dirt in the spring, put up signals. No activity since.

Last I went by there about 3 weeks ago there weren't even any new footings for the bridge yet. Contractor issues?
They started it towards the beginning of April.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: TheGrassGuy on August 05, 2021, 11:24:29 AM
At the Sloatsburg SA as I type this... saw that all the other service areas for 72 miles were closed, and assumed it was because of the pandemic. Turns out they're remodeling all the service areas (or at least the NB ones)
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on August 05, 2021, 01:01:11 PM
Quote from: TheGrassGuy on August 05, 2021, 11:24:29 AM
At the Sloatsburg SA as I type this... saw that all the other service areas for 72 miles were closed, and assumed it was because of the pandemic. Turns out they're remodeling all the service areas (or at least the NB ones)
It's all of them.  The first ones closed a week ago.  Even before the closure, many restaurants never reopened after the pandemic in anticipation of this.  They're planning to avoid having two in a row in any direction closed at the same time.
https://www.thruway.ny.gov/travelers/travelplazas/service-area-project/index.html
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: 02 Park Ave on August 05, 2021, 01:31:10 PM
I hope that when they close Sloatsburg that travelers will be able to use the pedestrian walkway to access the Ramapo Service Area directly across the Thruway.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on August 05, 2021, 02:19:04 PM
Quote from: 02 Park Ave on August 05, 2021, 01:31:10 PM
I hope that when they close Sloatsburg that travelers will be able to use the pedestrian walkway to access the Ramapo Service Area directly across the Thruway.

Doubtful. Isn't ADA compliant, so they can't let anybody use it.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: SignBridge on August 05, 2021, 04:09:51 PM
Are you saying they can't let people without disabilities use it?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on August 05, 2021, 04:52:52 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on August 05, 2021, 04:09:51 PM
Are you saying they can't let people without disabilities use it?
That's exactly how ADA works. All or none.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Jim on August 05, 2021, 05:46:34 PM
Quote from: kalvado on August 05, 2021, 04:52:52 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on August 05, 2021, 04:09:51 PM
Are you saying they can't let people without disabilities use it?
That's exactly how ADA works. All or none.

At a college where I worked in the past, one of the older buildings had a 3-step stone staircase for which it didn't make sense to build a ramp and install an automatic door, as accessible entrances were located very nearby in each direction.  The college was forced to keep that door locked other than as an emergency exit (though people used it as a regular exit all the time).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Roadgeek Adam on August 05, 2021, 09:38:59 PM
Keep in mind, the Ramapo Service Area used to just be a parking lot for Sloatsburg on the south side and that overpass severed as a connection to Sloatsburg. With there now a service area on the Ramapo side, there's no reason for the overpass anymore other than connections for staff.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on August 12, 2021, 12:41:12 AM
Out of curiosity, does anyone have pictures of the Breckenridge Toll Barrier in Buffalo? I drive on I-190 all of the time and forget it was there. I don't even remember going through it when I was younger.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on August 14, 2021, 10:11:36 PM
A bus rolled over on the WB Thruway near Weedsport today, causing injuries to all passengers and a 10-mile traffic backup:
https://www.syracuse.com/news/2021/08/at-least-25-injured-in-bus-accident-on-ny-thruway-near-weedsport.html
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on August 17, 2021, 12:42:47 PM
I was analyzing the service areas projected restaurants list, and I noted that for the I-87 ones, all but a couple of them have something more restaurant more interesting than Starbucks/Dunkin/Burger King, but for the I-90 corridor, a significant majority of them do not.  Looks like the benefits of this project predominantly go to downstate NY while upstate is getting a downgrade.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: seicer on August 17, 2021, 02:09:02 PM
Traffic counts? At least they are all getting upgrades with showers :)

What's the plan for the one lonesome service area west of Buffalo?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on August 17, 2021, 02:51:19 PM
Quote from: seicer on August 17, 2021, 02:09:02 PM
Traffic counts? At least they are all getting upgrades with showers :)

What's the plan for the one lonesome service area west of Buffalo?
https://www.thruway.ny.gov/travelers/travelplazas/service-area-project/locations.html - click on a map for more information
Old lineup for areas where renovation didn't start:
https://www.thruway.ny.gov/travelers/travelplazas/index.cgi
Looks like things are more or less coherent.
FOr example, Oneida area. Was:  Burger King, Starbucks, Sbarro Will be: Burger King, Starbucks (Drive-Thru), Panera Bread
Seneca: Was: Tim Horton's, Checkers (Closed) will be: Dunkin Donuts (Drive-Thru)
Angola: was:  McDonald's, LavAzza, Sandella's, Ella's Pizza and Pasta, Subway, Moe's Southwest Grill, Auntie Anne's, Carvel, Cinnabon; will be: Starbucks (Drive-Thru), Shake Shack, Panda Express, Auntie Anne's, Cinnabon (How would they go with a drive-through???)  - this may be a downgrade...
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: MASTERNC on August 17, 2021, 06:26:37 PM
Quote from: kalvado on August 17, 2021, 02:51:19 PM
Quote from: seicer on August 17, 2021, 02:09:02 PM
Traffic counts? At least they are all getting upgrades with showers :)

What's the plan for the one lonesome service area west of Buffalo?
https://www.thruway.ny.gov/travelers/travelplazas/service-area-project/locations.html - click on a map for more information
Old lineup for areas where renovation didn't start:
https://www.thruway.ny.gov/travelers/travelplazas/index.cgi
Looks like things are more or less coherent.
FOr example, Oneida area. Was:  Burger King, Starbucks, Sbarro Will be: Burger King, Starbucks (Drive-Thru), Panera Bread
Seneca: Was: Tim Horton's, Checkers (Closed) will be: Dunkin Donuts (Drive-Thru)
Angola: was:  McDonald's, LavAzza, Sandella's, Ella's Pizza and Pasta, Subway, Moe's Southwest Grill, Auntie Anne's, Carvel, Cinnabon; will be: Starbucks (Drive-Thru), Shake Shack, Panda Express, Auntie Anne's, Cinnabon (How would they go with a drive-through???)  - this may be a downgrade...


They might do a freestanding Starbucks in each direction like Delaware did on I-95.  The exterior rendering for Angola is inconsistent with the median location of the building, though.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on August 17, 2021, 08:14:08 PM
Quote from: kalvado on August 17, 2021, 02:51:19 PM
Quote from: seicer on August 17, 2021, 02:09:02 PM
Traffic counts? At least they are all getting upgrades with showers :)

What's the plan for the one lonesome service area west of Buffalo?
https://www.thruway.ny.gov/travelers/travelplazas/service-area-project/locations.html - click on a map for more information
Old lineup for areas where renovation didn't start:
https://www.thruway.ny.gov/travelers/travelplazas/index.cgi
Looks like things are more or less coherent.
FOr example, Oneida area. Was:  Burger King, Starbucks, Sbarro Will be: Burger King, Starbucks (Drive-Thru), Panera Bread
Seneca: Was: Tim Horton's, Checkers (Closed) will be: Dunkin Donuts (Drive-Thru)
Angola: was:  McDonald's, LavAzza, Sandella's, Ella's Pizza and Pasta, Subway, Moe's Southwest Grill, Auntie Anne's, Carvel, Cinnabon; will be: Starbucks (Drive-Thru), Shake Shack, Panda Express, Auntie Anne's, Cinnabon (How would they go with a drive-through???)  - this may be a downgrade...

Keep in mind that many concepts closed during the pandemic and never re-opened, and as such are not listed on that page.  For example, Ulster is missing Pizza Hut Express.

Comparing the projected list to to a pamphlet I got in 2012...
Angola has fewer restaurants but still qualifies as interesting, at least.  I think it has more restaurants than would be possible even if they had everything a new service area could have.
Whether Clarence is a downgrade depends on how you feel about Dunkin vs. Tim Hortons.
Seneca is a downgrade; (Dunkin vs. Tim Hortons/Villa Pizza/Checkers).
Junius Ponds is arguable an upgrade (Starbucks/Shake Shack vs. Dunkin/Roy Rogers).
Port Byron is a downgrade (Burger King/Dunkin vs. McDonald's/Boston Pizza).
Warners is a downgrade (Starbucks/Burger Kings vs. McDonald's/Boston Pizza).
DeWitt is a downgrade even though it only has McDonald's - better not want lunch there, because all they'll have is coffee with Starbuck's.
Chittenango is a downgrade as well (Starbucks vs. Starbucks/Sbarro).
Schuyler is like DeWitt, only with Dunkin instead.  I guess a sufficient number of donuts qualifies as a meal?
Iroquois swaps Dunkin for Starbucks and loses Nathan's and whatever Freshen's is.
Indian Castle... now this is brutal!  From Roy Rogers/Nathan's/Starbucks to just Starbucks.
Mohawk is an actual upgrade unless you don't care for coffee or donuts (Dunkin/Burger King vs. McDonald's).
Guilderland is a downgrade (Burger King/Starbucks vs. McDonald's/Boston Pizza).

Onto I-87...
New Baltimore will still be interesting, but have fewer restaurants.
Malden is a downgrade (Dunkin/Burger King vs. McDonald's/Boston Pizza/Gourmet Cup/Sandella's).
Ulster is a downgrade, losing Roy Rogers/Nathan's/Pizza Hut Express/Arthur Treacher's in favor of Panda Express.  Starbucks stays.
Sloatsburg will have one fewer restaurant but stay interesting.
Ramapo is getting a massive upgrade (Starbucks/Shake Shack/Panera Bread/Panda Express vs. McDonald's/Pizzeria Uno/LavAzza - how all that fit in what looks like a normal McDonald's, I have no idea!).
Ardsley is a downgrade (losing Popeyes; Burger King and Starbucks stay).

Service areas not listed are comparable to what was there before.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on August 17, 2021, 10:05:12 PM
DeWitt is right next to the Carrier Circle exit, which itself is a de facto service area and arguably the best exit along the Thruway for services. If any service area gets downgraded, it should be that one. I always stop at the Speedway/McDonald's/etc. just off the circle instead of the service area because the restrooms are generally cleaner and the food/gas/etc. is cheaper

With Ramapo, remember that they're tearing down the building and starting new. Plenty of room for a larger building, though I could see them putting in a parking garage and/or abandoning the wastewater treatment plant to tie into municipal sewage. Only a few buildings are actually staying. Sloatsburg and a couple others.

Remember also that they chose the size of the facilities based on traffic. The ones that are being "downgraded" have little business as it is. The locations being upgraded are undersized relative to the traffic they receive. I think every location will have an "Applegreen Market", which will likely be on par with gas station food options or maybe half a step above.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: GenExpwy on August 18, 2021, 03:21:20 AM
Have they given up on Chick-fil-a (and Popeye's), or are the chicken locations still in negotiation? I don't see either one listed anywhere.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on August 18, 2021, 10:20:48 PM
Quote from: cl94 on August 17, 2021, 10:05:12 PM
DeWitt is right next to the Carrier Circle exit, which itself is a de facto service area and arguably the best exit along the Thruway for services. If any service area gets downgraded, it should be that one. I always stop at the Speedway/McDonald's/etc. just off the circle instead of the service area because the restrooms are generally cleaner and the food/gas/etc. is cheaper

With Ramapo, remember that they're tearing down the building and starting new. Plenty of room for a larger building, though I could see them putting in a parking garage and/or abandoning the wastewater treatment plant to tie into municipal sewage. Only a few buildings are actually staying. Sloatsburg and a couple others.

Remember also that they chose the size of the facilities based on traffic. The ones that are being "downgraded" have little business as it is. The locations being upgraded are undersized relative to the traffic they receive. I think every location will have an "Applegreen Market", which will likely be on par with gas station food options or maybe half a step above.
I know they're building new buildings... I was wondering how the existing places fit in Ramapo.  From the outside, it looks like any other McDonalds (though I later measured and it's twice as large as the other two McDonalds locations I looked at... that must be how; I wonder why it looks like McDonalds rather than like the other service areas).

I guess the question is what kind of gas station Applegreen will be comparable too.  Hopefully at least Cumberland Farms or Stewart's.  Probably not Sheetz or Wawa.

Quote from: GenExpwy on August 18, 2021, 03:21:20 AM
Have they given up on Chick-fil-a (and Popeye's), or are the chicken locations still in negotiation? I don't see either one listed anywhere.
Quite possibly.  They were on the lists, but vanished when the political controversy around it started.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: seicer on August 23, 2021, 09:19:58 PM
Sheetz has ruled out moving to New York flat-out. I'm not sure why.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on August 23, 2021, 09:51:18 PM
Quote from: seicer on August 23, 2021, 09:19:58 PM
Sheetz has ruled out moving to New York flat-out. I'm not sure why.

Few reasons:

1. New York fire code requires sprinklers and full fire alarm systems in gas station buildings. Sheetz does not want to modify their designs to include sprinklers. This is the biggest reason.
2. NY has weird accounting requirements that companies often don't like dealing with. For example, NY requires some types of stores and restaurants to have paper records of transactions in a back room (unless this has changed).
3. Sheetz has more to gain by expanding south and west, where the competition is less fierce and the economy isn't stagnant with a shrinking population.

Probably others that I'm not thinking of immediately, but there are many reasons why New York isn't a place high on the expansion list for most chains.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on August 27, 2021, 03:57:24 PM
Quote from: kalvado on August 17, 2021, 02:51:19 PM
Quote from: seicer on August 17, 2021, 02:09:02 PM
Traffic counts? At least they are all getting upgrades with showers :)

What's the plan for the one lonesome service area west of Buffalo?
https://www.thruway.ny.gov/travelers/travelplazas/service-area-project/locations.html - click on a map for more information
Old lineup for areas where renovation didn't start:
https://www.thruway.ny.gov/travelers/travelplazas/index.cgi
Looks like things are more or less coherent.
FOr example, Oneida area. Was:  Burger King, Starbucks, Sbarro Will be: Burger King, Starbucks (Drive-Thru), Panera Bread
Seneca: Was: Tim Horton's, Checkers (Closed) will be: Dunkin Donuts (Drive-Thru)
Angola: was:  McDonald's, LavAzza, Sandella's, Ella's Pizza and Pasta, Subway, Moe's Southwest Grill, Auntie Anne's, Carvel, Cinnabon; will be: Starbucks (Drive-Thru), Shake Shack, Panda Express, Auntie Anne's, Cinnabon (How would they go with a drive-through???)  - this may be a downgrade...

Shake Shack in Angola? That's a nice 20 minute road trip for me.

If this doesn't fall through then that'll be the first location in WNY. It almost seems too good to be true.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on September 06, 2021, 03:33:31 PM
I thought this article that was posted to another thread was interesting.  It would certainly solve some problems if NYSTA had been dissolved and the Thruway given to NYSDOT.  There would likely be reference markers and normal county/town line signs, and the impediment to doing mile-based numbers for I-90 and I-87 based on their own mileage would be gone.  Maybe the direct ramps for I-87 at exit 24 would have been built, too, along with widening the ramp to I-90 east from I-490 at exit 45 (since the toll booths would have gone down before the state went into preservation mode, rather than after).

Quote from: sprjus4 on September 03, 2021, 11:17:06 PM
Speaking of tolls, off topic, but here's an interesting article from July 20, 1982. What ever happened with this?

Thruway's Tolls to End in "˜96 with Federal Aid (https://www.nytimes.com/1982/07/20/nyregion/thruway-s-tolls-to-end-in-96-with-federal-aid.html)
QuoteStarting in 1996, motorists in New York State will be able to use the Gov. Thomas E. Dewey Thruway without paying tolls, under the terms of an agreement signed here today by representatives of the Federal Highway Trust and state officials.

The annual saving for truck and passenger car owners, assuming tolls in 1996 would be the same as now, would be $155 million. Under the agreement, the Federal Government will contribute $9.8 million next year and more in subsequent years to repair and rehabilitate the 559-mile road linking New York City, Albany and Buffalo. In the next 14 years, the total Washington contribution to repairing the Thruway may reach $550 million, officials said.

Bonds Will Be Paid in 1996

In return, the New York State Thruway Authority agreed that in 1996, when all its bonds are paid off, it would recommend to the State Legislature that the authority be abolished and the road be made toll free.

Under the terms of the agreement, if the Legislature does not eliminate the tolls, it must repay to the Federal Government all funds contributed by the Highway Trust. Officials here said such a repayment was most unlikely.

''New York's dream of a toll-free state Thruway will at long last come true,'' said Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan, who introduced the bill in Congress to make the agreement possible.

The Democratic Senator spoke during a brief ceremony at the Thruway headquarters here, attended by Lester P. Lamm, executive director of the Federal Highway Trust; Gerald Cummins, chairman of the Thruway Authority, and William C. Hennessy, State Transportation Commissioner. Shift of Jurisdiction

When the tolls expire in 1996, the Thruway and its employees, now totaling 2,500, will probably come under the jurisdiction of the Transportation Department. The Thruway Authority's budget for 1982 is $183 million, which is used for operations, maintenance and redemption of bonds.

At present, Thruway tolls are about 2.5 cents a mile for passenger cars, or $8.65 for a trip from New York to Buffalo. For Buffalo to New York, the total is $1.50 higher because of the Tappan Zee Bridge eastbound toll.

A possibility under the agreement signed today is that the bridge toll, too, will be eliminated in 1996.


Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: SignBridge on September 06, 2021, 08:06:37 PM
Very interesting. I too would like to know what happened to that agreement. One thing I do know is that special authorities that operate public works projects usually have as their main priority the objective of perpetuating their own existence.

Interestingly, Massachusetts a few years ago abolished their Turnpike Authority, though tolls are still being collected by Mass DOT maybe ? 
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Roadgeek Adam on September 06, 2021, 08:21:21 PM
I mean, the simpler answer is if you take out more bonds, you can delay the toll agreement by having more bonds to pay off.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Plutonic Panda on September 06, 2021, 10:10:58 PM
I'd be for keeping tolls under the condition they widen and modernize the thruway and remove the tolls once paid off.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: SignBridge on September 06, 2021, 10:29:06 PM
That's usually how it works. And then when the bonds are again almost paid off, the Authority will need to do another big expansion project of some kind and the cycle begins again and that's how the tolls remain forever and the Toll Authority perpetuates its existence......LOL
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Plutonic Panda on September 06, 2021, 10:38:40 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on September 06, 2021, 10:29:06 PM
That's usually how it works. And then when the bonds are again almost paid off, the Authority will need to do another big expansion project of some kind and the cycle begins again and that's how the tolls remain forever and the Toll Authority perpetuates its existence......LOL
It can be done though examples exist.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on September 07, 2021, 12:07:39 PM
That's roughly what happened in MA.  Every time the bonds were due to be paid off, the Turnpike Authority would skimp on maintenance for a few years and they take out new bonds to fix everything.  Now the AET tolling is paying for the cash toll booth removal.  Talk about irony.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on September 07, 2021, 12:17:47 PM
The thing to remember is that it's not like there's more federal money that would be coming New York's way if the Thruway went toll-free. Other states have looked at abolishing tolls until they realized that their federal road money wouldn't increase to make up for it. Massachusetts looked at killing MassPike tolls when MassDOT became a thing, but they decided to keep them because it would have ended up being a massive funding hit. Same thing with the Thruway: 570 miles of freeway and several large bridges that are paid for with tolls. Close to 30% of New York's Interstate mileage is NYSTA. You'd need to take NY's already-inadequate road funding and apply it to an extra 570 freeway miles which are kept in pretty good condition with tolls.

TL;DR: At this point, NYSTA basically exists to maintain the Thruway, allowing state/federal road funding to go elsewhere. Taxes would need to go up by a decent amount to make up for the loss in toll revenue.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on September 07, 2021, 12:22:51 PM
The question is, why doesn't the federal money go up?  Isn't it supposed to be set by a formula that takes the mileage of eligible roadway into account?  Seems like the feds need to re-run that formula every time rather than distribute based on what the formula said decades ago.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on September 07, 2021, 12:31:08 PM
Quote from: vdeane on September 07, 2021, 12:22:51 PM
The question is, why doesn't the federal money go up?  Isn't it supposed to be set by a formula that takes the mileage of eligible roadway into account?  Seems like the feds need to re-run that formula every time rather than distribute based on what the formula said decades ago.
In theory - yes. One thing to keep in mind, though:
(https://www.pgpf.org/sites/default/files/highway-trust-fund-explainer-chart-3.jpg)
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on September 07, 2021, 12:53:27 PM
Quote from: vdeane on September 07, 2021, 12:22:51 PM
The question is, why doesn't the federal money go up?  Isn't it supposed to be set by a formula that takes the mileage of eligible roadway into account?  Seems like the feds need to re-run that formula every time rather than distribute based on what the formula said decades ago.

I believe NYSDOT already snags NHPP funds based upon the Thruway's Interstate Highway mileage.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on September 07, 2021, 09:17:16 PM
Sounds then like the deal mentioned stayed in effect and NY simply took advantage of Congress eliminating the provision of federal law that said that places where toll roads were included in federal funding apportionments had to go toll free when the bonds were paid off.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: astralentity on September 08, 2021, 07:56:25 AM
Quote from: vdeane on September 06, 2021, 03:33:31 PM
I thought this article that was posted to another thread was interesting.  It would certainly solve some problems if NYSTA had been dissolved and the Thruway given to NYSDOT.  There would likely be reference markers and normal county/town line signs, and the impediment to doing mile-based numbers for I-90 and I-87 based on their own mileage would be gone.  Maybe the direct ramps for I-87 at exit 24 would have been built, too, along with widening the ramp to I-90 east from I-490 at exit 45 (since the toll booths would have gone down before the state went into preservation mode, rather than after).

Well now that the booths are gone, I will be advocating for Exit 24 be reconfigured so that the stub end of the Northway is directly connected and get rid of that BS that wraps around Crossgates.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on September 09, 2021, 09:35:26 PM
Quote from: astralentity on September 08, 2021, 07:56:25 AM
Quote from: vdeane on September 06, 2021, 03:33:31 PM
I thought this article that was posted to another thread was interesting.  It would certainly solve some problems if NYSTA had been dissolved and the Thruway given to NYSDOT.  There would likely be reference markers and normal county/town line signs, and the impediment to doing mile-based numbers for I-90 and I-87 based on their own mileage would be gone.  Maybe the direct ramps for I-87 at exit 24 would have been built, too, along with widening the ramp to I-90 east from I-490 at exit 45 (since the toll booths would have gone down before the state went into preservation mode, rather than after).

Well now that the booths are gone, I will be advocating for Exit 24 be reconfigured so that the stub end of the Northway is directly connected and get rid of that BS that wraps around Crossgates.
A lot of traffic uses those Crossgates ramps - enough that I can't imagine what traffic would be like if they were gone.  The Town of Guilderland certainly wouldn't be happy - in fact, they're trying to encourage non-Crossgates traffic to bypass US 20 with those ramps!
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on September 09, 2021, 09:57:05 PM
Quote from: vdeane on September 09, 2021, 09:35:26 PM
A lot of traffic uses those Crossgates ramps - enough that I can't imagine what traffic would be like if they were gone.  The Town of Guilderland certainly wouldn't be happy - in fact, they're trying to encourage non-Crossgates traffic to bypass US 20 with those ramps!

Didn't the town have something to do with paying for those ramps? I know that part of the ring road is technically a town road, but I could swear the ramps had some weirdness as well.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on September 10, 2021, 07:18:05 AM
Quote from: vdeane on September 09, 2021, 09:35:26 PM
Quote from: astralentity on September 08, 2021, 07:56:25 AM
Quote from: vdeane on September 06, 2021, 03:33:31 PM
I thought this article that was posted to another thread was interesting.  It would certainly solve some problems if NYSTA had been dissolved and the Thruway given to NYSDOT.  There would likely be reference markers and normal county/town line signs, and the impediment to doing mile-based numbers for I-90 and I-87 based on their own mileage would be gone.  Maybe the direct ramps for I-87 at exit 24 would have been built, too, along with widening the ramp to I-90 east from I-490 at exit 45 (since the toll booths would have gone down before the state went into preservation mode, rather than after).

Well now that the booths are gone, I will be advocating for Exit 24 be reconfigured so that the stub end of the Northway is directly connected and get rid of that BS that wraps around Crossgates.
A lot of traffic uses those Crossgates ramps - enough that I can't imagine what traffic would be like if they were gone.  The Town of Guilderland certainly wouldn't be happy - in fact, they're trying to encourage non-Crossgates traffic to bypass US 20 with those ramps!
The way I read that post is removal of U-ramps funneling I-87 Thruway traffic to and from tollbooths are in question. They do not go around crossgates, though. Reconfiguring I87 Thruway < = > Northway connection is a great idea (not without issues, of course).
Keeping Crossgates exit may be an issue since exits cannot serve just commercial centers. A smart lawyer would have to pen an explanation why those ramps serve town of Guilderland rather than just the mall.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: astralentity on September 10, 2021, 08:51:39 AM
Quote from: vdeane on September 09, 2021, 09:35:26 PM
Quote from: astralentity on September 08, 2021, 07:56:25 AM
Quote from: vdeane on September 06, 2021, 03:33:31 PM
I thought this article that was posted to another thread was interesting.  It would certainly solve some problems if NYSTA had been dissolved and the Thruway given to NYSDOT.  There would likely be reference markers and normal county/town line signs, and the impediment to doing mile-based numbers for I-90 and I-87 based on their own mileage would be gone.  Maybe the direct ramps for I-87 at exit 24 would have been built, too, along with widening the ramp to I-90 east from I-490 at exit 45 (since the toll booths would have gone down before the state went into preservation mode, rather than after).

Well now that the booths are gone, I will be advocating for Exit 24 be reconfigured so that the stub end of the Northway is directly connected and get rid of that BS that wraps around Crossgates.
A lot of traffic uses those Crossgates ramps - enough that I can't imagine what traffic would be like if they were gone.  The Town of Guilderland certainly wouldn't be happy - in fact, they're trying to encourage non-Crossgates traffic to bypass US 20 with those ramps!

I wasn't talking about the ramps, I was talking about the section of the Thruway between Western Avenue and Rapp Road.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: astralentity on September 10, 2021, 08:56:09 AM
Quote from: kalvado on September 10, 2021, 07:18:05 AM
Quote from: vdeane on September 09, 2021, 09:35:26 PM
Quote from: astralentity on September 08, 2021, 07:56:25 AM
Quote from: vdeane on September 06, 2021, 03:33:31 PM
I thought this article that was posted to another thread was interesting.  It would certainly solve some problems if NYSTA had been dissolved and the Thruway given to NYSDOT.  There would likely be reference markers and normal county/town line signs, and the impediment to doing mile-based numbers for I-90 and I-87 based on their own mileage would be gone.  Maybe the direct ramps for I-87 at exit 24 would have been built, too, along with widening the ramp to I-90 east from I-490 at exit 45 (since the toll booths would have gone down before the state went into preservation mode, rather than after).

Well now that the booths are gone, I will be advocating for Exit 24 be reconfigured so that the stub end of the Northway is directly connected and get rid of that BS that wraps around Crossgates.
A lot of traffic uses those Crossgates ramps - enough that I can't imagine what traffic would be like if they were gone.  The Town of Guilderland certainly wouldn't be happy - in fact, they're trying to encourage non-Crossgates traffic to bypass US 20 with those ramps!
The way I read that post is removal of U-ramps funneling I-87 Thruway traffic to and from tollbooths are in question. They do not go around crossgates, though. Reconfiguring I87 Thruway < = > Northway connection is a great idea (not without issues, of course).
Keeping Crossgates exit may be an issue since exits cannot serve just commercial centers. A smart lawyer would have to pen an explanation why those ramps serve town of Guilderland rather than just the mall.

Is the workaround with that because the section of the Northway between Western Avenue and I-90 without any specific Interstate designation?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: lstone19 on September 10, 2021, 10:14:07 AM
Quote from: astralentity on September 10, 2021, 08:51:39 AM
Quote from: vdeane on September 09, 2021, 09:35:26 PM
Quote from: astralentity on September 08, 2021, 07:56:25 AM
Quote from: vdeane on September 06, 2021, 03:33:31 PM
I thought this article that was posted to another thread was interesting.  It would certainly solve some problems if NYSTA had been dissolved and the Thruway given to NYSDOT.  There would likely be reference markers and normal county/town line signs, and the impediment to doing mile-based numbers for I-90 and I-87 based on their own mileage would be gone.  Maybe the direct ramps for I-87 at exit 24 would have been built, too, along with widening the ramp to I-90 east from I-490 at exit 45 (since the toll booths would have gone down before the state went into preservation mode, rather than after).

Well now that the booths are gone, I will be advocating for Exit 24 be reconfigured so that the stub end of the Northway is directly connected and get rid of that BS that wraps around Crossgates.
A lot of traffic uses those Crossgates ramps - enough that I can't imagine what traffic would be like if they were gone.  The Town of Guilderland certainly wouldn't be happy - in fact, they're trying to encourage non-Crossgates traffic to bypass US 20 with those ramps!

I wasn't talking about the ramps, I was talking about the section of the Thruway between Western Avenue and Rapp Road.
The Thruway predates Crossgates by many, many years. Crossgates was fitted around the Thruway, not vice versa.


iPhone
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on September 10, 2021, 10:19:26 AM
Quote from: astralentity on September 10, 2021, 08:51:39 AM
Quote from: vdeane on September 09, 2021, 09:35:26 PM
Quote from: astralentity on September 08, 2021, 07:56:25 AM
Quote from: vdeane on September 06, 2021, 03:33:31 PM
I thought this article that was posted to another thread was interesting.  It would certainly solve some problems if NYSTA had been dissolved and the Thruway given to NYSDOT.  There would likely be reference markers and normal county/town line signs, and the impediment to doing mile-based numbers for I-90 and I-87 based on their own mileage would be gone.  Maybe the direct ramps for I-87 at exit 24 would have been built, too, along with widening the ramp to I-90 east from I-490 at exit 45 (since the toll booths would have gone down before the state went into preservation mode, rather than after).

Well now that the booths are gone, I will be advocating for Exit 24 be reconfigured so that the stub end of the Northway is directly connected and get rid of that BS that wraps around Crossgates.
A lot of traffic uses those Crossgates ramps - enough that I can't imagine what traffic would be like if they were gone.  The Town of Guilderland certainly wouldn't be happy - in fact, they're trying to encourage non-Crossgates traffic to bypass US 20 with those ramps!

I wasn't talking about the ramps, I was talking about the section of the Thruway between Western Avenue and Rapp Road.
Are you suggesting tweaking the designation or removing the highway?
Highway will stay, no questions asked. Shields... Who cares about it, really?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: lstone19 on September 10, 2021, 10:52:28 AM
Quote from: kalvado on September 10, 2021, 10:19:26 AM
Quote from: astralentity on September 10, 2021, 08:51:39 AM
Quote from: vdeane on September 09, 2021, 09:35:26 PM
Quote from: astralentity on September 08, 2021, 07:56:25 AM
Quote from: vdeane on September 06, 2021, 03:33:31 PM
I thought this article that was posted to another thread was interesting.  It would certainly solve some problems if NYSTA had been dissolved and the Thruway given to NYSDOT.  There would likely be reference markers and normal county/town line signs, and the impediment to doing mile-based numbers for I-90 and I-87 based on their own mileage would be gone.  Maybe the direct ramps for I-87 at exit 24 would have been built, too, along with widening the ramp to I-90 east from I-490 at exit 45 (since the toll booths would have gone down before the state went into preservation mode, rather than after).

Well now that the booths are gone, I will be advocating for Exit 24 be reconfigured so that the stub end of the Northway is directly connected and get rid of that BS that wraps around Crossgates.
A lot of traffic uses those Crossgates ramps - enough that I can't imagine what traffic would be like if they were gone.  The Town of Guilderland certainly wouldn't be happy - in fact, they're trying to encourage non-Crossgates traffic to bypass US 20 with those ramps!

I wasn't talking about the ramps, I was talking about the section of the Thruway between Western Avenue and Rapp Road.
Are you suggesting tweaking the designation or removing the highway?
Highway will stay, no questions asked. Shields... Who cares about it, really?

After posting my own reply above, it occurred to me that astralentity is objecting to the road being there, not the way it seemingly wraps around Crossgates. My opinion is even if the long-needed ramps from the Thruway to the Northway get built, the original Thruway mainline is still needed as long high-speed ramps for NB I-87 to WB I-90 and v.v. traffic which I believe is still pretty substantial. The last thing Northway interchange 1 / I-90 interchange 1 needs is more traffic. If anything, it needs more high-speed ramps. Traffic-flow should govern ramp configuration, not route numbers.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: astralentity on September 10, 2021, 12:02:55 PM
Quote from: lstone19 on September 10, 2021, 10:52:28 AM
Quote from: kalvado on September 10, 2021, 10:19:26 AM
Quote from: astralentity on September 10, 2021, 08:51:39 AM
Quote from: vdeane on September 09, 2021, 09:35:26 PM
Quote from: astralentity on September 08, 2021, 07:56:25 AM
Quote from: vdeane on September 06, 2021, 03:33:31 PM
I thought this article that was posted to another thread was interesting.  It would certainly solve some problems if NYSTA had been dissolved and the Thruway given to NYSDOT.  There would likely be reference markers and normal county/town line signs, and the impediment to doing mile-based numbers for I-90 and I-87 based on their own mileage would be gone.  Maybe the direct ramps for I-87 at exit 24 would have been built, too, along with widening the ramp to I-90 east from I-490 at exit 45 (since the toll booths would have gone down before the state went into preservation mode, rather than after).

Well now that the booths are gone, I will be advocating for Exit 24 be reconfigured so that the stub end of the Northway is directly connected and get rid of that BS that wraps around Crossgates.
A lot of traffic uses those Crossgates ramps - enough that I can't imagine what traffic would be like if they were gone.  The Town of Guilderland certainly wouldn't be happy - in fact, they're trying to encourage non-Crossgates traffic to bypass US 20 with those ramps!

I wasn't talking about the ramps, I was talking about the section of the Thruway between Western Avenue and Rapp Road.
Are you suggesting tweaking the designation or removing the highway?
Highway will stay, no questions asked. Shields... Who cares about it, really?

After posting my own reply above, it occurred to me that astralentity is objecting to the road being there, not the way it seemingly wraps around Crossgates. My opinion is even if the long-needed ramps from the Thruway to the Northway get built, the original Thruway mainline is still needed as long high-speed ramps for NB I-87 to WB I-90 and v.v. traffic which I believe is still pretty substantial. The last thing Northway interchange 1 / I-90 interchange 1 needs is more traffic. If anything, it needs more high-speed ramps. Traffic-flow should govern ramp configuration, not route numbers.

I see your point there.  I was looking at safety concerns with the way that interchange was redone, especially the northbound ramp to I-90 east.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Jim on September 10, 2021, 12:28:24 PM
Solution to I-87/I-90/US 20: massive multilane roundabout.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Jim on September 10, 2021, 12:32:43 PM
But seriously on this, if it could be worked out and paid for to reconfigure I-87 through traffic to use the Northway stub to tie into the Thruway just south of Western Ave, I wonder if it's better to retain the big looping on and off ramps currently used by traffic entering and exiting the Thruway to/from the south, or to concurrently reconfigure the current I-90 Exit 1N/S to handle that.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on September 10, 2021, 12:58:49 PM
I would think the easiest solution would be to add in the ramps with ramps to/from US 20 (full if possible, partial if not) and leave the existing roads alone.  Trying to remove that part of the Thruway would lead to nasty weaves and a LOT of traffic on a loop ramp (the other loop ramp would probably get a ton of traffic regardless).  It would also simplify the Crossgates/US 20 traffic issue by allowing those interchanges to be partial.  Removing the Thruway would allow for more ROW around US 20 at least, but at the cost of a massive rebuild of the whole area.

Quote from: cl94 on September 09, 2021, 09:57:05 PM
Quote from: vdeane on September 09, 2021, 09:35:26 PM
A lot of traffic uses those Crossgates ramps - enough that I can't imagine what traffic would be like if they were gone.  The Town of Guilderland certainly wouldn't be happy - in fact, they're trying to encourage non-Crossgates traffic to bypass US 20 with those ramps!

Didn't the town have something to do with paying for those ramps? I know that part of the ring road is technically a town road, but I could swear the ramps had some weirdness as well.
Yeah.  I believe the off ramp was done by Pyramid and the on ramp years later by the Town.

Quote from: astralentity on September 10, 2021, 08:56:09 AM
Quote from: kalvado on September 10, 2021, 07:18:05 AM
Quote from: vdeane on September 09, 2021, 09:35:26 PM
Quote from: astralentity on September 08, 2021, 07:56:25 AM
Quote from: vdeane on September 06, 2021, 03:33:31 PM
I thought this article that was posted to another thread was interesting.  It would certainly solve some problems if NYSTA had been dissolved and the Thruway given to NYSDOT.  There would likely be reference markers and normal county/town line signs, and the impediment to doing mile-based numbers for I-90 and I-87 based on their own mileage would be gone.  Maybe the direct ramps for I-87 at exit 24 would have been built, too, along with widening the ramp to I-90 east from I-490 at exit 45 (since the toll booths would have gone down before the state went into preservation mode, rather than after).

Well now that the booths are gone, I will be advocating for Exit 24 be reconfigured so that the stub end of the Northway is directly connected and get rid of that BS that wraps around Crossgates.
A lot of traffic uses those Crossgates ramps - enough that I can't imagine what traffic would be like if they were gone.  The Town of Guilderland certainly wouldn't be happy - in fact, they're trying to encourage non-Crossgates traffic to bypass US 20 with those ramps!
The way I read that post is removal of U-ramps funneling I-87 Thruway traffic to and from tollbooths are in question. They do not go around crossgates, though. Reconfiguring I87 Thruway < = > Northway connection is a great idea (not without issues, of course).
Keeping Crossgates exit may be an issue since exits cannot serve just commercial centers. A smart lawyer would have to pen an explanation why those ramps serve town of Guilderland rather than just the mall.

Is the workaround with that because the section of the Northway between Western Avenue and I-90 without any specific Interstate designation?
That's part of the situation here, but keep in mind that the prohibition is on directly taking ramps to malls - not ramps that happen to service commercial areas.  As noted, the majority of the road is the town's, not private (only the part around the back of the mall near Macy's is private; the rest is public).  The road also directly services more than just the mall - there are also hotels, and soon to arrive is also Costco and I believe apartments (with a roundabout at the ramps and a road diet on the ring road in the planned mitigation measures).  The goal of using this road to take traffic off of Western Avenue is also mentioned in at least one study of the area.  The Crossgates road has a far better claim to interstate access than the one for DestiNY USA (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0698498,-76.1721234,17z).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on September 10, 2021, 01:51:00 PM
Quote from: Jim on September 10, 2021, 12:32:43 PM
But seriously on this, if it could be worked out and paid for to reconfigure I-87 through traffic to use the Northway stub to tie into the Thruway just south of Western Ave, I wonder if it's better to retain the big looping on and off ramps currently used by traffic entering and exiting the Thruway to/from the south, or to concurrently reconfigure the current I-90 Exit 1N/S to handle that.
Biggest issue with straight connection would be amount of weaving. 2 miles of Northway between Western and Sand Creek have something like 10 ramps total, on and off. And long haul Thruway traffic will be dumped into that mess with little warning.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Jim on September 10, 2021, 04:25:37 PM
Seems like a good but possibly unattainable goal would be some sort of I-87 "Express" where Thruway to Northway traffic might not have any exits between the Thruway and the airport exit.

Sorry if this is wandering to fictional territory.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: shadyjay on September 10, 2021, 04:35:14 PM
This is what I would do... add the ramps in red at the bottom of this image.  Keep everything else the same. 

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51443696701_51de60ab2b_c.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2mnUoKX)exit24mod (https://flic.kr/p/2mnUoKX) by Jay Hogan (https://www.flickr.com/photos/shadyjay/), on Flickr

This would help relieve some of the weaving at existing Thruway Exit 24 in all directions. 
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on September 10, 2021, 04:44:55 PM
^If you added those two ramps in red, you could also eliminate the U-shaped ramps for I-87 traffic just north of your screenshot.

Another option would be to keep the U-shaped ramps and make the new ramps EZ-Pass only, although that doesn't matter as much now with AET.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on September 10, 2021, 04:46:51 PM
Quote from: shadyjay on September 10, 2021, 04:35:14 PM
This is what I would do... add the ramps in red at the bottom of this image.  Keep everything else the same. 

[image snipped]

This would help relieve some of the weaving at existing Thruway Exit 24 in all directions.

This would not be ideal. The shortest path between the UAlbany area and the south would now involve a loop ramp and a few nasty weaves. Enough people make the affected movements for it to be problematic.

The only way to build a direct connection without creating worse issues at Exit 1 and along current NY 910F is by building a C-D system as suggested by Jim. Such an express lane system would need to go north of Exit 1, possibly north of Exit 2, in order to ensure that only I-87 through traffic uses the direct connection. This, of course, would be extremely expensive. Note that the area north of I-90 is protected land that can't be touched, so anything up there would need to fall inside the existing ROW. This is a large reason why nothing has been done with that area: there's little that can realistically be done here short of taking out the tandem lot for a couple of direct ramps or braiding/channelization at the former toll plaza.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on September 10, 2021, 04:58:16 PM
Quote from: cl94 on September 10, 2021, 04:46:51 PM
Quote from: shadyjay on September 10, 2021, 04:35:14 PM
This is what I would do... add the ramps in red at the bottom of this image.  Keep everything else the same. 

[image snipped]

This would help relieve some of the weaving at existing Thruway Exit 24 in all directions.

This would not be ideal. The shortest path between the UAlbany area and the south would now involve a loop ramp and a few nasty weaves. Enough people make the affected movements for it to be problematic.

What about leaving the signage on I-90 as-is and keeping the existing I-87 U-ramps for the I-90 EB to I-87 SB movement?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on September 10, 2021, 05:21:24 PM
Quote from: cl94 on September 10, 2021, 04:46:51 PM
Quote from: shadyjay on September 10, 2021, 04:35:14 PM
This is what I would do... add the ramps in red at the bottom of this image.  Keep everything else the same. 

[image snipped]

This would help relieve some of the weaving at existing Thruway Exit 24 in all directions.

This would not be ideal. The shortest path between the UAlbany area and the south would now involve a loop ramp and a few nasty weaves. Enough people make the affected movements for it to be problematic.

The only way to build a direct connection without creating worse issues at Exit 1 and along current NY 910F is by building a C-D system as suggested by Jim. Such an express lane system would need to go north of Exit 1, possibly north of Exit 2, in order to ensure that only I-87 through traffic uses the direct connection. This, of course, would be extremely expensive. Note that the area north of I-90 is protected land that can't be touched, so anything up there would need to fall inside the existing ROW. This is a large reason why nothing has been done with that area: there's little that can realistically be done here short of taking out the tandem lot for a couple of direct ramps or braiding/channelization at the former toll plaza.
This gets into some fictional as well, but a thruway exit to 85 may be the answer to ualbany concerns. 85 is a pretty good road up to that point, so while not all-interstate, it would be an all-highway connection.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Roadgeek Adam on September 10, 2021, 09:21:57 PM
You aren't the only one with the NY 85 exit interest. I also agree with one.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: shadyjay on September 10, 2021, 09:58:28 PM
The flaw with my "red ramps" is that, yes, there is no US 20 access.  And you would have to cross over to get to I-90.  The solution would be to retain the existing Exit 24, and use this new one for thru traffic on I-87 North only to points north of the Northway/I-90 interchange.  You could then sign the mainline Thruway as the exit (as much as I hate to say that, but it would give I-87 a sense of contiguous-ness as a single road that you don't get now (exit to stay on, then exit again). 

To keep this from getting too fictional, has NYSTA/NYSDOT stated anything about the real-life future of Exit 24? 
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on September 10, 2021, 10:20:51 PM
Yeah, simply adding the two obvious ramps wouldn't work, especially if the current ramps were removed.  Not only would there be weaving issues with all the ramps around, keep in mind that the existing interchange at Western Ave would need to be demolished in order for those ramps to fit (that loop is NOT original to the interchange, which was to be a tight diamond) - and that is a a MAJOR connection.  I'm also curious if those two ramps would even fit, given the two adjacent apartment complexes.

A NY 85 interchange is an interesting idea.  It would fill a gap in the system.  I'm not sure what the interchange between NY 85 and the Southside Route would have looked like (or, for that matter, how I-87 would have originally connected to the Thruway, as the Southside Route was to feed directly into I-787 near exit 23).  It would be an interesting challenge too, given the proximity to the Krumkill Road interchange, unless it ended up being a diamond with roundabouts or something like that.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on September 10, 2021, 11:14:53 PM
A NY 85 interchange would be useful regardless. Not like there isn't the ROW for it.

Quote from: vdeane on September 10, 2021, 10:20:51 PM
Yeah, simply adding the two obvious ramps wouldn't work, especially if the current ramps were removed.  Not only would there be weaving issues with all the ramps around, keep in mind that the existing interchange at Western Ave would need to be demolished in order for those ramps to fit (that loop is NOT original to the interchange, which was to be a tight diamond) - and that is a a MAJOR connection.  I'm also curious if those two ramps would even fit, given the two adjacent apartment complexes.

Yes, the loop ramp and its associated bridge was built around when the exit ramp to Crossgates went in. This ramp cuts diagonally across the ROW the stubs would have used and there is very, very little ROW to shoehorn in direct ramps to the stub.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on September 10, 2021, 11:17:31 PM
Quote from: cl94 on September 10, 2021, 11:14:53 PM
A NY 85 interchange would be useful regardless. Not like there isn't the ROW for it.

And now with AET, it could be an interesting test case for a non-trumpet interchange.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: froggie on September 11, 2021, 12:58:38 AM
Quote from: vdeane on September 10, 2021, 10:20:51 PMkeep in mind that the existing interchange at Western Ave would need to be demolished in order for those ramps to fit

I don't think that's the case.  Some years back (on some fictional thread), I figured out a way to retain the partial interchange at Western and still build that direct Northway-Thruway South connection.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: lstone19 on September 11, 2021, 07:49:18 AM
Quote from: froggie on September 11, 2021, 12:58:38 AM
Quote from: vdeane on September 10, 2021, 10:20:51 PMkeep in mind that the existing interchange at Western Ave would need to be demolished in order for those ramps to fit

I don't think that's the case.  Some years back (on some fictional thread), I figured out a way to retain the partial interchange at Western and still build that direct Northway-Thruway South connection.
At one point about ten or so years ago, the Thruway had a proposal to build those ramps as EZ-Pass only on their website. Nothing happened and it disappeared from the website. I believe the proposal would have retained the current Western Ave. interchange.


iPad
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: TonyTrafficLight on September 14, 2021, 03:13:43 PM
Quote from: goldfishcrackers4 on July 31, 2021, 04:08:47 PM
What's the deal with the route 13 bridge replacement over the Thruway in Canastota? Dumped big piles of dirt in the spring, put up signals. No activity since.

Did you read in the local roadwork projects, lRt 13 was closed over the Thruway for a paving project, so I assume the old bridge is getting repaved?
Wonder what happened with the replacement.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Jim on October 18, 2021, 07:44:47 PM
Over the last several days, some temporary-looking signs have been added along the ramps approaching to the I-87/I-90 overlap/weave area where the toll plaza used to be at Exit 24, warning traffic to keep left/right for I-87/I-90/To US 20 (SB Northway stub).  They look to be mounted on wooden supports for now, but I assume they'll be more permanently mounted.  About time!  There's also some new signage for the tandem trailer entrance on the EB/NB side.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: mrsman on October 19, 2021, 10:24:38 AM
Quote from: lstone19 on September 11, 2021, 07:49:18 AM
Quote from: froggie on September 11, 2021, 12:58:38 AM
Quote from: vdeane on September 10, 2021, 10:20:51 PMkeep in mind that the existing interchange at Western Ave would need to be demolished in order for those ramps to fit

I don't think that's the case.  Some years back (on some fictional thread), I figured out a way to retain the partial interchange at Western and still build that direct Northway-Thruway South connection.
At one point about ten or so years ago, the Thruway had a proposal to build those ramps as EZ-Pass only on their website. Nothing happened and it disappeared from the website. I believe the proposal would have retained the current Western Ave. interchange.


iPad

And this is largely the point of the whole discussion that we've had up here.  The old toll booths and the double trumpet ramps that enable them would simply not fit - so no discussion of fininshing the connection between Thruway and Northway was even contemplated.

Then, as EZ-Pass came in to be, the technology allowed for less expansive direct ramps, but doing so would be somewhat difficult as the ramps would only be available for EZ-=Pass customers only.  I know that the Penn Turnpike built a few ramps like that, but those were for ramps to access office parks, not a major regional connection like Thruway to Northway.  To the extent that you have a lot of non-local drivers who would want to make that movement, many of which do not have an EZ-Pass, you would not want to encourage a movement that has such complexity.

Now in the AET era, we can contemplate direct ramps that are open to everyone. 

I imagine if a Thruway exit for NY-85 were contemplated, the U-shaped ramps to I-90 are retained, and the Northway exit for Western Ave were converted to a half-diamond, direct ramps between the Thruway and Northway can be placed without adverse traffic effects.  Fewer turning movements would be needed at the 87/90 interchange, as more traffic would be directed to straight movements.  While not restricting access from the Thruway to Northway connection only to long distance traffic, with the retention of the U-shaped ramps and the connection to NY-85, very little local traffic would have a use for the Thruway to Northway connection. 
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on October 26, 2021, 01:38:19 PM
Something happened with Castleton Bridge (one connecting exit 21A to B1-B3):
https://www.timesunion.com/news/article/Castleton-Bridge-closed-westbound-for-emergency-16565304.php
Lets hope it is something small, not another "bridge closed for a few months, thanks god it didn't collapse" type of problem.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: lstone19 on October 26, 2021, 01:52:07 PM
Quote from: kalvado on October 26, 2021, 01:38:19 PM
Something happened with Castleton Bridge (one connecting exit 21A to B1-B3):
https://www.timesunion.com/news/article/Castleton-Bridge-closed-westbound-for-emergency-16565304.php
Lets hope it is something small, not another "bridge closed for a few months, thanks god it didn't collapse" type of problem.

That's behind a paywall so could only see a little of it.

To further confuse things, the home page of the Thruway's website says "Road Closure I-90 Westbound beyond exit B1 due to emergency maintenance: All traffic must use Exit B1." Of course, I-90 leaves the Thruway at Exit B1 so it's the unnumbered Thruway, not I-90, that's closed beyond exit B1.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on October 26, 2021, 01:52:57 PM
Quote
All westbound traffic must exit I-90 at Exit B1 and was being encouraged to reconnect with the Thruway at Exit 24 in Albany.

... but what about those headed for the Thruway southbound? That's a very long detour with not a lot of alternatives. Would US 9 all the way to NY 23 be a good alternate?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on October 26, 2021, 03:41:26 PM
Quote from: webny99 on October 26, 2021, 01:52:57 PM
Quote
All westbound traffic must exit I-90 at Exit B1 and was being encouraged to reconnect with the Thruway at Exit 24 in Albany.

... but what about those headed for the Thruway southbound? That's a very long detour with not a lot of alternatives. Would US 9 all the way to NY 23 be a good alternate?
Taconic would work for cars. Trucks.... I would dare saying that going to I-91 for most cases would be a good idea, 9 goes through too many towns
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: froggie on October 26, 2021, 03:43:21 PM
Long haul truckers who are east of 91 are probably not going to take the Mass Pike/Berkshire Spur to the southbound Thruway to begin with.  If they're already on the Berkshire Spur, backtracking to 91 is definitely NOT going to happen...too far, too long, and having to pay the Mass Pike tolls again.

9H can be used to avoid most of the towns along 9 that kalvado is referencing.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on October 26, 2021, 04:53:35 PM
Quote from: froggie on October 26, 2021, 03:43:21 PM
Long haul truckers who are east of 91 are probably not going to take the Mass Pike/Berkshire Spur to the southbound Thruway to begin with.  If they're already on the Berkshire Spur, backtracking to 91 is definitely NOT going to happen...too far, too long, and having to pay the Mass Pike tolls again.

Certainly agreed on that point... I was mostly just thinking of options that avoided backtracking north to I-787 before heading south again, but doing that is still a much smaller backtrack than I-91 if you're already west of I-91, as I would assume most people making that movement are.


Quote from: froggie on October 26, 2021, 03:43:21 PM
9H can be used to avoid most of the towns along 9 that kalvado is referencing.

9H doesn't look like a bad route, but you've still got to deal with Hudson or backtrack on US 9 to get to the Rip Van Winkle Bridge.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on October 26, 2021, 05:41:28 PM
Quote from: froggie on October 26, 2021, 03:43:21 PM
Long haul truckers who are east of 91 are probably not going to take the Mass Pike/Berkshire Spur to the southbound Thruway to begin with.  If they're already on the Berkshire Spur, backtracking to 91 is definitely NOT going to happen...too far, too long, and having to pay the Mass Pike tolls again.

9H can be used to avoid most of the towns along 9 that kalvado is referencing.
And while we're at this... What is the deal with the alphabet soup of all the 9's?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: empirestate on October 26, 2021, 06:03:38 PM
Quote from: webny99 on October 26, 2021, 04:53:35 PM
9H doesn't look like a bad route, but you've still got to deal with Hudson or backtrack on US 9 to get to the Rip Van Winkle Bridge.

At that point you may as well head on south to the Rhinecliff Bridge, unless you're bound for Greene County.

Quote from: kalvado on October 26, 2021, 05:41:28 PM
And while we're at this... What is the deal with the alphabet soup of all the 9's?

Depends what you mean by "deal," I guess. New York is fairly well known (in our circles) for having a series of suffixed routes to show a relation to a long main route. Generally, though not always, the suffixed routes avoid the towns and cities while US 9 (and US 9W) goes through them.

One interesting exception is NY 9D, which goes through Cold Spring, Beacon and Wappingers Falls while US 9 avoids them–yet still manages to be the much more heavily trafficked route. (However, the stretch between Wappingers Falls and the Newburgh-Beacon Bridge often backs up heavily, as it is the only way to reach much of that area.)
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Alps on October 26, 2021, 06:43:23 PM
Quote from: lstone19 on October 26, 2021, 01:52:07 PM
Quote from: kalvado on October 26, 2021, 01:38:19 PM
Something happened with Castleton Bridge (one connecting exit 21A to B1-B3):
https://www.timesunion.com/news/article/Castleton-Bridge-closed-westbound-for-emergency-16565304.php
Lets hope it is something small, not another "bridge closed for a few months, thanks god it didn't collapse" type of problem.

That's behind a paywall so could only see a little of it.

To further confuse things, the home page of the Thruway's website says "Road Closure I-90 Westbound beyond exit B1 due to emergency maintenance: All traffic must use Exit B1." Of course, I-90 leaves the Thruway at Exit B1 so it's the unnumbered Thruway, not I-90, that's closed beyond exit B1.
Click on it, and as soon as you see the title text, hit Ctrl+A C. That selects all and then copies it before the paywall rushes in to ruin the view. Paste it in Notepad, Word, etc. and you can read the text.
QuoteCASTLETON – A need for emergency pothole repairs closed the westbound side of the Castleton Bridge, a heavily traveled span that links the Berkshire Spur of Interstate 90 to the Thruway.

The bridge has been undergoing renovations for months and lanes on the bridge have been closed to accommodate crews working on the span.

The Thruway Authority announced the closure late Tuesday morning.

Before the closure, there was just one lane of traffic moving in each direction. Closure of the westbound lane forced the detour.

All westbound traffic must exit I-90 at Exit B1 and was being encouraged to reconnect with the Thruway at Exit 24 in Albany.

The temporary closure has not caused any significant traffic backups but motorists should pick other routes to avoid delays, according to the Thruway Authority. The portion of I-90 that travels through Rensselaer and Albany north of the Berkshire Spur is the only nearby highway route that links westbound travelers to the Thruway.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Alps on October 26, 2021, 06:44:20 PM
Quote from: froggie on October 26, 2021, 03:43:21 PM
Long haul truckers who are east of 91 are probably not going to take the Mass Pike/Berkshire Spur to the southbound Thruway to begin with.  If they're already on the Berkshire Spur, backtracking to 91 is definitely NOT going to happen...too far, too long, and having to pay the Mass Pike tolls again.

9H can be used to avoid most of the towns along 9 that kalvado is referencing.

I would expect 90-787-87 to be the default alternative for trucks as far as what the state would prefer.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on October 26, 2021, 08:43:54 PM
Earlier today, Google was suggesting I-90->I-787.  Right now it's suggesting US 9->NY 9H->NY 66->local streets (bike route 23)->US 9->NY 23.  That only saves two minutes over I-90->I-787, and avoids this stop sign (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4909743,-73.6764768,3a,50.6y,281.06h,90.04t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sWJkJeAFhdV58VtT5e2D3vg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192).  Keeping it on numbered routes going through Hudson brings the route to time parity.

While NY 9H still goes through Hudson, it's worth nothing that the worst delays with US 9 in that area are in the northern suburbs (which NY 9H bypasses), not Hudson itself.  Most of the core business area is along NY 23B anyways.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Mr. Matté on October 27, 2021, 08:43:58 AM
Quote from: Alps on October 26, 2021, 06:43:23 PM
Click on it, and as soon as you see the title text, hit Ctrl+A C. That selects all and then copies it before the paywall rushes in to ruin the view. Paste it in Notepad, Word, etc. and you can read the text.

Or, to the chagrin of the Missouri governor (https://www.businessinsider.com/governor-wants-to-prosecute-journalist-who-found-ssns-exposed-online-2021-10), use "inspect element" to manually delete out the boxes blocking the view; typically scrolling can be restored by deleting any parts of code with "overflow:hidden".
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Roadgeek Adam on October 27, 2021, 12:14:11 PM
Off topic, but the rubble pile they left at the Ripley (61) toll barrier is gone, replaced by high hill of grass and dirt.

The tandem lots are now well signed. Unfortunately, the flasher for a "toll booth" is still there going EB and they are still flashing for no reason. They are also repaving the Thruway through there, like the booths on the exits.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: 02 Park Ave on October 27, 2021, 05:44:10 PM
Quote from: kalvado on October 26, 2021, 01:38:19 PM
Something happened with Castleton Bridge (one connecting exit 21A to B1-B3):
https://www.timesunion.com/news/article/Castleton-Bridge-closed-westbound-for-emergency-16565304.php
Lets hope it is something small, not another "bridge closed for a few months, thanks god it didn't collapse" type of problem.

The bridge was reopened at 4:30 this afternoon to westbound traffic.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on October 27, 2021, 09:24:39 PM
I was on most of free 90 today, and the VMS on I-90 west in Rensselaer County did indeed indicate I-90->I-787 as the official detour.  Also, it's amazing how many trucks there were out on the road.  It's easy to think of the Castleton-on-Hudson Bridge as not being used much, but trucks clearly use it (also, dealing with tandems on non-Thruway roads is weird).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on October 27, 2021, 09:34:10 PM
Quote from: vdeane on October 27, 2021, 09:24:39 PM
I was on most of free 90 today, and the VMS on I-90 west in Rensselaer County did indeed indicate I-90->I-787 as the official detour.  Also, it's amazing how many trucks there were out on the road.  It's easy to think of the Castleton-on-Hudson Bridge as not being used much, but trucks clearly use it (also, dealing with tandems on non-Thruway roads is weird).

Yeah, the Castleton-on-Hudson always seems to have a lot of truck traffic every time I've been on it (most recently last month). I would imagine trucks are far more likely to opt for that route over free I-90, while it's probably closer to 50/50 among car traffic (not to mention the trucks crossing the Hudson and heading south on I-87.. I'm sure there's plenty of those as well).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: froggie on October 27, 2021, 10:20:22 PM
Quote from: webny99 on October 27, 2021, 09:34:10 PM
Quote from: vdeane on October 27, 2021, 09:24:39 PM
I was on most of free 90 today, and the VMS on I-90 west in Rensselaer County did indeed indicate I-90->I-787 as the official detour.  Also, it's amazing how many trucks there were out on the road.  It's easy to think of the Castleton-on-Hudson Bridge as not being used much, but trucks clearly use it (also, dealing with tandems on non-Thruway roads is weird).

Yeah, the Castleton-on-Hudson always seems to have a lot of truck traffic every time I've been on it (most recently last month). I would imagine trucks are far more likely to opt for that route over free I-90, while it's probably closer to 50/50 among car traffic (not to mention the trucks crossing the Hudson and heading south on I-87.. I'm sure there's plenty of those as well).

Traffic and truck volume data from NYSDOT & NYSTA would surprise you then.  The data from 2018 (most recent year in the most recent NYSDOT report) indicates that virtually ALL of the truck traffic on the Castleton-on-Hudson bridge is turning north towards Albany at the Thruway mainline.  Approximately 1400 trucks a day out of 17K ADT total (so ~8% trucks).  Only about 3100 of that 17K coming off the bridge is turning south on the Thruway (almost all of it passenger vehicles).

At Exit B1, virtually all of the truck traffic coming from the bridge is continuing on the Berkshire Spur towards MA.  Approximately 2600 vpd (almost all passenger vehicles, same as above) exit from the bridge at B1 onto Free 90.

The traffic/truck data further suggests that, coming from MA, it's roughly a 2-1 split for trucks taking Free 90 versus going over the bridge while there are slightly more cars (~2K) taking the bridge versus turning north along Free 90.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on October 27, 2021, 10:48:02 PM
Quote from: froggie on October 27, 2021, 10:20:22 PM
Traffic and truck volume data from NYSDOT & NYSTA would surprise you then.  The data from 2018 (most recent year in the most recent NYSDOT report) indicates that virtually ALL of the truck traffic on the Castleton-on-Hudson bridge is turning north towards Albany at the Thruway mainline.  Approximately 1400 trucks a day out of 17K ADT total (so ~8% trucks).  Only about 3100 of that 17K coming off the bridge is turning south on the Thruway (almost all of it passenger vehicles).

8% trucks? That seems very low.

Poor word choice on my part though, as I didn't mean to make it sound like there are tons of trucks turning south on I-87, but I'm sure there are at least some. Of course, you would expect most traffic (both cars and trucks) to be turning north there.


Quote from: froggie on October 27, 2021, 10:20:22 PM
At Exit B1, virtually all of the truck traffic coming from the bridge is continuing on the Berkshire Spur towards MA.  Approximately 2600 vpd (almost all passenger vehicles, same as above) exit from the bridge at B1 onto Free 90.

I'm not sure this is relevant to my point, but it's certainly not surprising. That's almost exclusively a local movement for traffic to/from Albany's southeastern suburbs and points south (and to a lesser extent as an access point to US 9 from points west). Any long-distance traffic would continue on I-87 to most parts of the Albany area, so I wouldn't expect many trucks to be making that movement.

In fact, I've always thought it strange that the B1 interchange is configured so that through traffic on I-90 eastbound has to take the loop ramp... it should be the other way around.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on October 28, 2021, 01:06:14 PM
Looking at the traffic data, the parts of the Thruway I looked at tend to have truck percentages around 20%, as does I-90 as it exits off at B1.  It then drops a lot past exit 12 (truck stop) and is 9% west of there, so that's why it's lower; the truck traffic is split between the two.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on October 28, 2021, 01:45:43 PM
Quote from: vdeane on October 28, 2021, 01:06:14 PM
Looking at the traffic data, the parts of the Thruway I looked at tend to have truck percentages around 20%, as does I-90 as it exits off at B1.  It then drops a lot past exit 12 (truck stop) and is 9% west of there, so that's why it's lower; the truck traffic is split between the two.

I guess the Castleton-on-Hudson just isn't very busy by Thruway standards, period. Doesn't change the fact that it's had plenty of truck traffic every time I've been on it, but I suppose it makes sense that some trucks are shunpiking it just like some cars are.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: RobbieL2415 on October 28, 2021, 02:21:00 PM
Quote from: webny99 on October 28, 2021, 01:45:43 PM
Quote from: vdeane on October 28, 2021, 01:06:14 PM
Looking at the traffic data, the parts of the Thruway I looked at tend to have truck percentages around 20%, as does I-90 as it exits off at B1.  It then drops a lot past exit 12 (truck stop) and is 9% west of there, so that's why it's lower; the truck traffic is split between the two.

I guess the Castleton-on-Hudson just isn't very busy by Thruway standards, period. Doesn't change the fact that it's had plenty of truck traffic every time I've been on it, but I suppose it makes sense that some trucks are shunpiking it just like some cars are.
Now THERE's a bridge that's in a sorry state.
One lane is always closed on that bridge because they're fixing something.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on October 28, 2021, 03:26:59 PM
^ Yeah, in case you weren't aware, this entire discussion stemmed from a full westbound closure earlier this week...
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: shadyjay on November 02, 2021, 09:16:53 PM
Looks like the New England Thruway's "Last Mile" construction project has been completed. 

And, from the people that brought you "Bryam"....
There's a Facebook post on the Thruway's FB page that shows the new signage on the ramp from I-95 South to I-287 West.  On the ramp, there's a split for Midland Ave and I-287, however the I-287 pull-through lacks an I-287 shield.  Instead, it just says "Cross Westchester Expy/White Plains/Gov Mario M Cuomo Br". 

Looks like there's some new diagrammatic SB signage for the I-95 South to I-287 exit.  Did they put one of these up in CT as well, to replace the existing Exit 21 1 mile advance?


Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on November 10, 2021, 07:58:47 PM
Another general Thruway note: noticed last weekend that the signage on the approaches to the Thruway from I-490 EB and NY 332 has seen MAJOR improvements/upgrades. There's now 1 mile and 1/2 mile advances on NY 332, and at least three overhead advance signs on I-490. WB I-490 between the Thruway and Exit 29 also has new signage, including at least one new overhead.

I'm impressed, for the most part. Signage improvements to Thruway approaches were badly needed, so hopefully other exits have seen changes as well. I'll have to grab some pictures next time I'm out that way.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Roadgeek Adam on November 10, 2021, 09:37:08 PM
55 and 49 have seen some new signs installed EB.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on November 11, 2021, 11:56:59 AM
Quote from: Roadgeek Adam on November 10, 2021, 09:37:08 PM
55 and 49 have seen some new signs installed EB.

Yes, one replaced the "Toll Booths Ahead" signage. It caught be by surprise last week.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Jim on November 11, 2021, 12:02:19 PM
Looked like some work was underway yesterday around 24 to make some of the temporary-looking signs more permanent.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: dgolub on November 14, 2021, 08:36:39 AM
Quote from: shadyjay on November 02, 2021, 09:16:53 PM
Looks like the New England Thruway's "Last Mile" construction project has been completed. 

And, from the people that brought you "Bryam"....
There's a Facebook post on the Thruway's FB page that shows the new signage on the ramp from I-95 South to I-287 West.  On the ramp, there's a split for Midland Ave and I-287, however the I-287 pull-through lacks an I-287 shield.  Instead, it just says "Cross Westchester Expy/White Plains/Gov Mario M Cuomo Br". 

Looks like there's some new diagrammatic SB signage for the I-95 South to I-287 exit.  Did they put one of these up in CT as well, to replace the existing Exit 21 1 mile advance?

I've been through there a couple of times since they finished.  (Unfortunately, my pictures from both times are crap due to sun glare.)  The new signage is only on the New York side, not in Connecticut.  You're correct about the lack of an I-287 shield on the ramp signage, but that was also the case prior to the construction.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: mariethefoxy on November 17, 2021, 09:57:43 PM
Quote from: shadyjay on November 02, 2021, 09:16:53 PM
Looks like the New England Thruway's "Last Mile" construction project has been completed. 

And, from the people that brought you "Bryam"....
There's a Facebook post on the Thruway's FB page that shows the new signage on the ramp from I-95 South to I-287 West.  On the ramp, there's a split for Midland Ave and I-287, however the I-287 pull-through lacks an I-287 shield.  Instead, it just says "Cross Westchester Expy/White Plains/Gov Mario M Cuomo Br". 

Looks like there's some new diagrammatic SB signage for the I-95 South to I-287 exit.  Did they put one of these up in CT as well, to replace the existing Exit 21 1 mile advance?

As of Nov 14 the CT side still had the last era of the borderless exit tab signs for Exit 21 with it still saying Tappan Zee Bridge.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on November 18, 2021, 12:47:29 PM
The Thruway put before/after pictures of every tolling point* on the former ticket system on its site.

*Exit 20 is only included once despite being a conventional interchange with two barriers.  One can argue about exit 17 as well.

https://www.thruway.ny.gov/cashless/before-and-after.pdf
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on November 18, 2021, 01:13:11 PM
Quote from: vdeane on November 18, 2021, 12:47:29 PM
The Thruway put before/after pictures of every tolling point* on the former ticket system on its site.

*Exit 20 is only included once despite being a conventional interchange with two barriers.  One can argue about exit 17 as well.

https://www.thruway.ny.gov/cashless/before-and-after.pdf

That was fun. Thanks for sharing! It was nice to get a look at Exits 39, 46, and 47, as I haven't been through those interchanges since the booth removals. Also, some of the new signage I mentioned at Exits 44 and 45 is visible in each of their respective "after" photos.

As for Exit 45, also note there's a two-lane weave to get from the Thruway EB to NY 96, plus an auxiliary lane for "overlength trucks" that probably doesn't help for drivers trying to figure out what lane they need to be in. It's weird how much shorter the merge area seems with the booths gone. You'd think it would feel longer, not shorter, but then again traffic is also moving at much higher speeds now with no real need to slow down beyond what's necessary for the ramp.


Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on November 18, 2021, 02:25:16 PM
The question now is "how long until 23, 25, 45, and/or 47 get a redesign to address the weaving and geometry issues issues?" 23 has a death weave especially entering the Thruway that the toll booths served as a speed bump for, while 25 has a pair of sharp curves on either side of the old booth that, again, the toll booths slowed traffic for.

I haven't been through 45 and 47 in a while, but those are also freeway termini with an exit right next to the former toll plaza that likely have weaving issues.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: DrSmith on November 26, 2021, 03:53:57 PM
Quote from: vdeane on November 18, 2021, 12:47:29 PM
The Thruway put before/after pictures of every tolling point* on the former ticket system on its site.

*Exit 20 is only included once despite being a conventional interchange with two barriers.  One can argue about exit 17 as well.

https://www.thruway.ny.gov/cashless/before-and-after.pdf

Maybe it is only me, those signs that are installed at the new electronic toll barriers are not clear to me. If I don't have an EZ-PASS am I supposed to call the number so they can bill me? I assume no, but the wording and layout lets me see how that is a possible conclusion. To add to my questions is that shortly afterward was another sign stating that your registration can be suspended for not paying the toll. Again, I assume this means for not paying the bill the Thruway sends you in the mail or if I don't call the number and do the work myself (and have people remember all the needed details).

On separate note, maybe New Yorkers will now have wished Connecticut added tolls even if it meant the I-684 CT toll barrier. The Connecticut folks have been the biggest toll evaders on the Mass Pike and maybe can now add the Thruway to the list.
https://www.courant.com/politics/hc-pol-connecticut-massachusetts-tolls-20190203-20190204-en5ply2y2nckdmfltf4dpmjwfa-story.html
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: noelbotevera on November 27, 2021, 12:47:08 PM
Question about Thruway history: what's with the mix of tolling schemes?

South of exit 16, it seems the Thruway was intended more as a commuter road more than a turnpike (as in the Pennsylvania and Ohio Turnpikes). Here they built a lot more exits, making a ticket system tricky to work with, but I've been under the impression that the Thruway was meant to be the quickest way upstate - I.e. the Adirondacks. Was there more focus on developing the NYC - Binghamton corridor (given that NY 17 was also being upgraded) or simply relieving congestion in the NYC area?

North of 16, it's clear that the Thruway was supposed to be a turnpike, given the long distances between exits and bypasses of cities. This makes sense, given that the fastest way across western NY was probably US 20 and the region was a huge manufacturing hub in the '50s.

Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: lstone19 on November 27, 2021, 02:38:39 PM
Quote from: noelbotevera on November 27, 2021, 12:47:08 PM
Question about Thruway history: what's with the mix of tolling schemes?

South of exit 16, it seems the Thruway was intended more as a commuter road more than a turnpike (as in the Pennsylvania and Ohio Turnpikes). Here they built a lot more exits, making a ticket system tricky to work with, but I've been under the impression that the Thruway was meant to be the quickest way upstate - I.e. the Adirondacks. Was there more focus on developing the NYC - Binghamton corridor (given that NY 17 was also being upgraded) or simply relieving congestion in the NYC area?

North of 16, it's clear that the Thruway was supposed to be a turnpike, given the long distances between exits and bypasses of cities. This makes sense, given that the fastest way across western NY was probably US 20 and the region was a huge manufacturing hub in the '50s.

Without answering the question (because I don't know), it's important to know that as built, the ticket section started at 14, not 16. The recent Spring Valley commercial vehicle toll used to be a full plaza that was the start/end of the ticket section. 14B and 15A did not yet exist and 15 and 16 were normal trumpet interchanges. The move to the more recent Woodbury plaza was due to the amount of traffic entering/exiting at 16 to/from the South. By eliminating tickets for them, it greatly sped up toll processing at the end of the ticket section (Spring Valley used to have monumental summer Sunday night backups - Woodbury was not great but nowhere near as bad as Spring Valley had been).

I was always fascinated by how prior to AET traffic entering northbound at 16 had to pre-pay the 16 to 15 toll and then a minute later get the 16 entry ticket that was discounted by the amount pre-paid.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Alps on November 27, 2021, 04:43:43 PM
Quote from: lstone19 on November 27, 2021, 02:38:39 PM
Quote from: noelbotevera on November 27, 2021, 12:47:08 PM
Question about Thruway history: what's with the mix of tolling schemes?

South of exit 16, it seems the Thruway was intended more as a commuter road more than a turnpike (as in the Pennsylvania and Ohio Turnpikes). Here they built a lot more exits, making a ticket system tricky to work with, but I've been under the impression that the Thruway was meant to be the quickest way upstate - I.e. the Adirondacks. Was there more focus on developing the NYC - Binghamton corridor (given that NY 17 was also being upgraded) or simply relieving congestion in the NYC area?

North of 16, it's clear that the Thruway was supposed to be a turnpike, given the long distances between exits and bypasses of cities. This makes sense, given that the fastest way across western NY was probably US 20 and the region was a huge manufacturing hub in the '50s.

Without answering the question (because I don't know), it's important to know that as built, the ticket section started at 14, not 16. The recent Spring Valley commercial vehicle toll used to be a full plaza that was the start/end of the ticket section. 14B and 15A did not yet exist and 15 and 16 were normal trumpet interchanges. The move to the more recent Woodbury plaza was due to the amount of traffic entering/exiting at 16 to/from the South. By eliminating tickets for them, it greatly sped up toll processing at the end of the ticket section (Spring Valley used to have monumental summer Sunday night backups - Woodbury was not great but nowhere near as bad as Spring Valley had been).

I was always fascinated by how prior to AET traffic entering northbound at 16 had to pre-pay the 16 to 15 toll and then a minute later get the 16 entry ticket that was discounted by the amount pre-paid.
I wouldn't call the old 15 trumpet normal... on the 17 side anyway.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: lstone19 on November 27, 2021, 05:07:14 PM
Quote from: Alps on November 27, 2021, 04:43:43 PM
I wouldn't call the old 15 trumpet normal... on the 17 side anyway.

Definitely true on the Rt. 17 side which was designed primarily for traffic to/from NJ 17. But on the Thruway side, before today's flyover ramps, it was a normal trumpet with a single toll plaza.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on November 28, 2021, 05:49:04 PM
The Thruway between Rochester and Syracuse has had issues seemingly all day today, between accidents and Thanksgiving travel. I seem to remember Buffalo-Rochester having more issues in the past, but westbound traffic was slowed up well east of Rochester today.

I used 45-41 on a day trip yesterday and it was busy - probably the busiest I've seen it since the start of 2020. Westbound was especially busy, with packs of cars a mile or more in length forming just like they used to pre-covid. I couldn't help but wonder if Thanksgiving travelers were trying to beat the bad weather forecasted for today, which turned out to be mostly just flurries with temps hovering just above freezing.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on November 28, 2021, 08:47:22 PM
Quote from: webny99 on November 28, 2021, 05:49:04 PM
The Thruway between Rochester and Syracuse has had issues seemingly all day today, between accidents and Thanksgiving travel. I seem to remember Buffalo-Rochester having more issues in the past, but westbound traffic was slowed up well east of Rochester today.

I used 45-41 on a day trip yesterday and it was busy - probably the busiest I've seen it since the start of 2020. Westbound was especially busy, with packs of cars a mile or more in length forming just like they used to pre-covid. I couldn't help but wonder if Thanksgiving travelers were trying to beat the bad weather forecasted for today, which turned out to be mostly just flurries with temps hovering just above freezing.
Honestly, this felt like the busiest Thanksgiving in my memory.  Slowdowns from accidents practically every 10 miles (one of which was stop and go for three miles) from Rochester to Syracuse and solid cars the whole way (making maintaining cruise control next to impossible) except between exits 29A and 28.  And that's just eastbound; westbound appeared to have had things even worse.

It seems like, with the obvious exception of last year, traffic just keeps getting worse.  I sure hope I get a chance to transfer to Rochester some day, because I've been getting sick of the long drive even before factoring in the traffic.  It's to the point where I've started taking additional time off around the summer holidays to avoid the peak travel days.

It's weird; I never thought of there being a big storm today, but everyone in Rochester seems to think there was supposed to be one.  I guess something must have been forecast earlier in the week that vanished before I started looking at Rochester weather in depth, and the locals never got the memo.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on November 28, 2021, 10:29:24 PM
Quote from: vdeane on November 28, 2021, 08:47:22 PM
It's weird; I never thought of there being a big storm today, but everyone in Rochester seems to think there was supposed to be one.  I guess something must have been forecast earlier in the week that vanished before I started looking at Rochester weather in depth, and the locals never got the memo.

Yeah, early last week I had heard there was supposed to be a storm this weekend, but by the time I checked the weekend forecast on Thurs/Fri, only flurries and light accumulation was expected, which is pretty much what happened. On balance, yesterday had better traveling weather than today, but not by much.

The Lake Erie snow machine is definitely in motion, though... and that makes it no fun to travel west or south of Buffalo this time of year. I-90 from Erie to Buffalo has to be up there pretty high on the list of "Interstates To Avoid During Winter".
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on November 28, 2021, 10:54:22 PM
There was a weird slowdown tonight between the Spur and I-787 on the Thruway (I-87).  Couldn't believe it was just traffic.  Can't believe there wasn't an accident that caused it.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on November 29, 2021, 08:24:58 AM
Quote from: Rothman on November 28, 2021, 10:54:22 PM
There was a weird slowdown tonight between the Spur and I-787 on the Thruway (I-87).  Couldn't believe it was just traffic.  Can't believe there wasn't an accident that caused it.

Which direction? If it was southbound, it could have been the lane drop at I-787 causing issues.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on November 29, 2021, 12:45:18 PM
Quote from: webny99 on November 28, 2021, 10:29:24 PM
Quote from: vdeane on November 28, 2021, 08:47:22 PM
It's weird; I never thought of there being a big storm today, but everyone in Rochester seems to think there was supposed to be one.  I guess something must have been forecast earlier in the week that vanished before I started looking at Rochester weather in depth, and the locals never got the memo.

Yeah, early last week I had heard there was supposed to be a storm this weekend, but by the time I checked the weekend forecast on Thurs/Fri, only flurries and light accumulation was expected, which is pretty much what happened. On balance, yesterday had better traveling weather than today, but not by much.

The Lake Erie snow machine is definitely in motion, though... and that makes it no fun to travel west or south of Buffalo this time of year. I-90 from Erie to Buffalo has to be up there pretty high on the list of "Interstates To Avoid During Winter".
There is one thing worse than driving the Thruway along Lake Erie in winter: driving roads other than the Thruway along Lake Erie in winter.  The difference in the level of plowing is stark.  On Friday, the Thruway was bare pavement, just a few flurries, hardly anything to worry about... while NY 76 and all the other roads south of US 20 were snow-covered and roads to avoid unless you had to be there (or were crazy and stubborn like me).

Quote from: webny99 on November 29, 2021, 08:24:58 AM
Quote from: Rothman on November 28, 2021, 10:54:22 PM
There was a weird slowdown tonight between the Spur and I-787 on the Thruway (I-87).  Couldn't believe it was just traffic.  Can't believe there wasn't an accident that caused it.

Which direction? If it was southbound, it could have been the lane drop at I-787 causing issues.
The order of the spur and I-787 implies northbound... plus heading south in that section would be beyond the lane drop anyways.

I know some people brake for the gantries... I wonder if that could have compounded out given the traffic levels.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: froggie on November 29, 2021, 02:11:04 PM
Quote from: vdeane on November 29, 2021, 12:45:18 PM
There is one thing worse than driving the Thruway along Lake Erie in winter: driving roads other than the Thruway along Lake Erie in winter.  The difference in the level of plowing is stark.

In my experience, this is not limited to along Lake Erie.  Replace "Lake Erie" with "the Hudson Valley" in your statement and it would be just as valid.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: SignBridge on November 29, 2021, 07:44:46 PM
I remember seeing comments a few years back about how I-84 was plowed better when it was the Thruway Authority than it is now under NYS DOT. Kudo's to NYSTA for good winter operations.

They may not be very good at designing and installing BGS's but at least they know how to plow snow effectively.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on November 29, 2021, 08:03:10 PM
Pfft.  Everyone's hurting for plow drivers.  This winter is going to suck, especially now that the Golden Snowball race is off and running.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on November 29, 2021, 09:37:49 PM
Quote from: froggie on November 29, 2021, 02:11:04 PM
Quote from: vdeane on November 29, 2021, 12:45:18 PM
There is one thing worse than driving the Thruway along Lake Erie in winter: driving roads other than the Thruway along Lake Erie in winter.  The difference in the level of plowing is stark.

In my experience, this is not limited to along Lake Erie.  Replace "Lake Erie" with "the Hudson Valley" in your statement and it would be just as valid.

The difference in plowing may exist everywhere, but the Hudson Valley is not nearly so nasty in winter as the Lake Erie snowbelt (or even the Lake Ontario snowbelt, for that matter).

The irony is that the Thruway's emergency detours were established due to winter weather, but when there's significant snow, the Thruway is where you want to be.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on November 30, 2021, 08:55:33 AM
I'd say the Hudson Valley can be nasty for a different reason - it's a lot hillier than the Lake Erie/Ontario snowbelts, so the backroads can be treacherous even when the snowfall totals aren't that high.

Of course, you've got some terrain in the Allegany and Tug Hill regions too, but it's very different in a way that's kind of hard to describe- less densely populated and the roads aren't nearly so winding and twisting in general.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: froggie on November 30, 2021, 10:21:09 AM
Quote from: vdeane on November 29, 2021, 09:37:49 PM
Quote from: froggie on November 29, 2021, 02:11:04 PM
Quote from: vdeane on November 29, 2021, 12:45:18 PM
There is one thing worse than driving the Thruway along Lake Erie in winter: driving roads other than the Thruway along Lake Erie in winter.  The difference in the level of plowing is stark.

In my experience, this is not limited to along Lake Erie.  Replace "Lake Erie" with "the Hudson Valley" in your statement and it would be just as valid.

The difference in plowing may exist everywhere, but the Hudson Valley is not nearly so nasty in winter as the Lake Erie snowbelt (or even the Lake Ontario snowbelt, for that matter).

I would disagree.  As webny noted, there's a different variety of nastiness in the Hudson Valley.  Sure, the lake-effect off the lakes is significant in its quantity, but it's also very predictable.  Hudson Valley, as with northern PA and here in Vermont, is more prone to snow squalls which are more sudden, less predictable, and deadlier than lake effect snow.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: empirestate on November 30, 2021, 10:57:58 AM
Quote from: froggie on November 30, 2021, 10:21:09 AM
Quote from: vdeane on November 29, 2021, 09:37:49 PM
Quote from: froggie on November 29, 2021, 02:11:04 PM
Quote from: vdeane on November 29, 2021, 12:45:18 PM
There is one thing worse than driving the Thruway along Lake Erie in winter: driving roads other than the Thruway along Lake Erie in winter.  The difference in the level of plowing is stark.

In my experience, this is not limited to along Lake Erie.  Replace "Lake Erie" with "the Hudson Valley" in your statement and it would be just as valid.

The difference in plowing may exist everywhere, but the Hudson Valley is not nearly so nasty in winter as the Lake Erie snowbelt (or even the Lake Ontario snowbelt, for that matter).

I would disagree.  As webny noted, there's a different variety of nastiness in the Hudson Valley.  Sure, the lake-effect off the lakes is significant in its quantity, but it's also very predictable.  Hudson Valley, as with northern PA and here in Vermont, is more prone to snow squalls which are more sudden, less predictable, and deadlier than lake effect snow.


Having lived in both regions, my observation is that the Hudson Valley in general seems less prepared for winter weather when it does arrive–as if they consider the region to have a milder climate, and weren't necessarily expecting heavy snow.

Then again, I've also noticed that WNY also seems less prepared for winter each year than I perceive it to have done when I was younger, so there's that.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on November 30, 2021, 12:57:33 PM
The region does have a milder climate than out west.  Albany gets about half the annual snowfall as Rochester, for example.  Snow maps in the Capital District can be interesting - several inches in the higher terrain with coatings or small totals (sometimes even nothing) in the valley.  Of course, we're also far enough north that we usually get clipped by nor'easters rather than get hit head on.

I can't say I've had much issue with the Thruway or any state roads south of here.  Just avoid driving when a nor'easter is coming through or a major cross-country storm is making its way across.  Along the Great Lakes, not only does it snow more, it snows more often making even finding a clear day more of a challenge in and of itself.  Pretty much anywhere is going to get hairy in the middle of a storm.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on November 30, 2021, 01:50:56 PM
Quote from: vdeane on November 30, 2021, 12:57:33 PM
The region does have a milder climate than out west.  Albany gets about half the annual snowfall as Rochester, for example.  Snow maps in the Capital District can be interesting - several inches in the higher terrain with coatings or small totals (sometimes even nothing) in the valley.  Of course, we're also far enough north that we usually get clipped by nor'easters rather than get hit head on.

I can't say I've had much issue with the Thruway or any state roads south of here.  Just avoid driving when a nor'easter is coming through or a major cross-country storm is making its way across.  Along the Great Lakes, not only does it snow more, it snows more often making even finding a clear day more of a challenge in and of itself.  Pretty much anywhere is going to get hairy in the middle of a storm.
Albany is in the closed valley, which makes a lot of difference. Since we're talking Thruway in Hudson valley, Saugerties may be a good point of comparison.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: empirestate on November 30, 2021, 04:14:20 PM
Quote from: vdeane on November 30, 2021, 12:57:33 PM
The region does have a milder climate than out west.

It does, especially NYC and the island, which are moderated by the ocean–and that effect extends inland somewhat. But I mean that they think it's milder than it actually is, perhaps because they assume the moderating effect extends farther from the coast than it does.

I would describe it as similar to the reaction whenever tornadoes threaten the tri-state area. While tornadoes are relatively scarce here, the public reaction often seems as if they believe them to be impossible.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on December 12, 2021, 05:38:12 PM
The Thruway installed some additional signs at the interchanges, including some interesting exit advance signs when leaving the Thruway:
https://nysroads.com/photos.php?route=i490&state=NY&file=102_2726.JPG
https://nysroads.com/photos.php?route=i90a&state=NY&file=102_2785.JPG
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: MikeCL on December 14, 2021, 08:48:54 PM
Quote from: shadyjay on November 02, 2021, 09:16:53 PM
Looks like the New England Thruway's "Last Mile" construction project has been completed. 

And, from the people that brought you "Bryam"....
There's a Facebook post on the Thruway's FB page that shows the new signage on the ramp from I-95 South to I-287 West.  On the ramp, there's a split for Midland Ave and I-287, however the I-287 pull-through lacks an I-287 shield.  Instead, it just says "Cross Westchester Expy/White Plains/Gov Mario M Cuomo Br". 

Looks like there's some new diagrammatic SB signage for the I-95 South to I-287 exit.  Did they put one of these up in CT as well, to replace the existing Exit 21 1 mile advance?
Something I've been wondering why is the NY/Conn signage on the bridge on the NB side anymore? It's been missing at least 3 years.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Great Lakes Roads on December 22, 2021, 10:04:18 PM
https://buffalochronicle.com/2021/12/22/hochul-will-fund-construction-of-ten-new-thruway-exits-including-at-least-two-in-western-new-york/

Does this mean that the Thruway will receive new mile-based exit numbers if these new exits get built?  :hmmm:
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on December 22, 2021, 10:08:25 PM
Quote from: Great Lakes Roads on December 22, 2021, 10:04:18 PM
https://buffalochronicle.com/2021/12/22/hochul-will-fund-construction-of-ten-new-thruway-exits-including-at-least-two-in-western-new-york/

Does this mean that the Thruway will receive new mile-based exit numbers if these new exits get built?  :hmmm:

I need another source. The Buffalo Chronicle is best known for pushing out a ton of fake news about the 2019 Canadian election (https://www.canadaland.com/the-buffalo-chronicle-is-not-reliable/), as well as discredited domestic stories (https://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-trending-55005815). Seriously, the list I could link to is a mile long (https://leadstories.com/hoax-alert/2020/04/fact-check-15.html).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Dannny on January 28, 2022, 11:01:59 PM
Question, when traveling southbound on the Thruway, (while it's still I-90), coming up on exit 24, there's a Mass Pike shield on the right, (and top) of the gantry indicating that to get to the Mass pike, you should stay on the Thruway to the Berkshire spur, which would lead back to I-90, becoming the Mass Pike.
My question is, for people traveling southbound coming up on exit 24, wouldn't it be more logical to keep left, stay on I-90, which become the Pike anyway?  I mean on google maps its just about, (almost exactly) the same distance (and time) to stay on I-90 then it is to keep right on the Thruway to the Berkshire connection. Actually, I think its even a bit shorter to stay on I-90 VS the Thruway. For me personally, If I was unfamiliar with the routes, I'd prefer to stay on I-90 the whole way, rather then hop onto the Thruway, I-87, then onto the Berkshire spur. This just seems less direct and more of a way for newcomers to get lost/potentially miss the Berkshire spur. Does anyone know why its the way it is?

Google maps photo link:
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.7075426,-73.8595179,3a,55.1y,135.95h,108.43t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1stA0pxpLBJ2FmSVPA3zPYhw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on January 28, 2022, 11:08:13 PM
Quote from: Dannny on January 28, 2022, 11:01:59 PM
Question, when traveling southbound on the Thruway, (while it's still I-90), coming up on exit 24, there's a Mass Pike shield on the right, (and top) of the gantry indicating that to get to the Mass pike, you should stay on the Thruway to the Berkshire spur, which would lead back to I-90, becoming the Mass Pike.
My question is, for people traveling southbound coming up on exit 24, wouldn't it be more logical to keep left, stay on I-90, which become the Pike anyway?  I mean on google maps its exactly the same distance (and time) to stay on I-90 then it is to keep right on the Thurway to the Berkshire connection. Its not like one is 20 miles out of the way. For me personally, If I was unfamiliar with the routes, I'd prefer to stay on I-90 the whole way, rather then hop onto the Thruway, I-87, then onto the Berkshire spur. This just seems less direct and more of a way for newcomers to get lost/potentially miss the Berkshire spur. Does anyone know why its the way it is?

Google maps photo link:
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.7075426,-73.8595179,3a,55.1y,135.95h,108.43t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1stA0pxpLBJ2FmSVPA3zPYhw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Google Maps used to lead you the way that it thought was quicker (Thruway is 65 mph the entire way).  Now, if you don't mess with it, it'll send you the most "fuel efficient" way.

Given that the Castleton-on-Hudson Bridge is always under construction anyway, it is probably a draw with either way you go.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: lstone19 on January 28, 2022, 11:16:15 PM
Quote from: Dannny on January 28, 2022, 11:01:59 PM
Question, when traveling southbound on the Thruway, (while it's still I-90), coming up on exit 24, there's a Mass Pike shield on the right, (and top) of the gantry indicating that to get to the Mass pike, you should stay on the Thruway to the Berkshire spur, which would lead back to I-90, becoming the Mass Pike.
My question is, for people traveling southbound coming up on exit 24, wouldn't it be more logical to keep left, stay on I-90, which become the Pike anyway?  I mean on google maps its exactly the same distance (and time) to stay on I-90 then it is to keep right on the Thurway to the Berkshire connection. Its not like one is 20 miles out of the way. For me personally, If I was unfamiliar with the routes, I'd prefer to stay on I-90 the whole way, rather then hop onto the Thruway, I-87, then onto the Berkshire spur. This just seems less direct and more of a way for newcomers to get lost/potentially miss the Berkshire spur. Does anyone know why its the way it is?

First, it's in the Thruway's financial interest to have people stay on the Thruway.

Second, the Thruway predates the Interstate Highway System and pre-dates I-90 through Albany. So there's a lot of historical precedent to suggesting through traffic stay on the Thruway. For those (like me) who think of it being the Thruway primary and I-90 secondary, all Thruway is the more intuitive way to go.

Third, Exit 24 from the Thruway eastbound (not southbound at that point) has only been a high-speed exit relatively recently. As built, both 24 and B1 for that movement were slow-speed trumpets.

Fourth, prior to EZ-Pass and later cashless tolling, exiting at 24 and then re-entering meant stopping to pay at 24 and stopping again at B1 to get a new ticket.

Fifth, I-90 through Albany has characteristics of an urban freeway. Given equal distance between the two routes, the all-Thruway route should be somewhat faster.

That all said, the very few times I've gone through there, I went I-90 exiting/entering at 24 and B1. And while the left exit at 24 for I-90 eastbound might make the route more obvious for some, the old-style exit right for I-90 at B1 when going west is not at all obvious to the unfamiliar motorist.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: roadman65 on January 28, 2022, 11:27:21 PM
The I-87 Northway does sign Boston via the free I-90 over the toll road at the very same exchange.  That is because NYSDOT signs that and not NYSTA and like the toll road bureaucracy keeping folks on their own ditto for the state road agency.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: zzcarp on January 28, 2022, 11:32:49 PM
Quote from: Rothman on January 28, 2022, 11:08:13 PM
Quote from: Dannny on January 28, 2022, 11:01:59 PM
Question, when traveling southbound on the Thruway, (while it's still I-90), coming up on exit 24, there's a Mass Pike shield on the right, (and top) of the gantry indicating that to get to the Mass pike, you should stay on the Thruway to the Berkshire spur, which would lead back to I-90, becoming the Mass Pike.
My question is, for people traveling southbound coming up on exit 24, wouldn't it be more logical to keep left, stay on I-90, which become the Pike anyway?  I mean on google maps its exactly the same distance (and time) to stay on I-90 then it is to keep right on the Thurway to the Berkshire connection. Its not like one is 20 miles out of the way. For me personally, If I was unfamiliar with the routes, I'd prefer to stay on I-90 the whole way, rather then hop onto the Thruway, I-87, then onto the Berkshire spur. This just seems less direct and more of a way for newcomers to get lost/potentially miss the Berkshire spur. Does anyone know why its the way it is?

Google maps photo link:
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.7075426,-73.8595179,3a,55.1y,135.95h,108.43t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1stA0pxpLBJ2FmSVPA3zPYhw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Google Maps used to lead you the way that it thought was quicker (Thruway is 65 mph the entire way).  Now, if you don't mess with it, it'll send you the most "fuel efficient" way.

Given that the Castleton-on-Hudson Bridge is always under construction anyway, it is probably a draw with either way you go.

I'm sure the signage is to encourage travelers to use the all-toll route to the Berkshire Connector rather than the free stretch of I-90 through Albany.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on January 28, 2022, 11:33:55 PM
Quote from: zzcarp on January 28, 2022, 11:32:49 PM
Quote from: Rothman on January 28, 2022, 11:08:13 PM
Quote from: Dannny on January 28, 2022, 11:01:59 PM
Question, when traveling southbound on the Thruway, (while it's still I-90), coming up on exit 24, there's a Mass Pike shield on the right, (and top) of the gantry indicating that to get to the Mass pike, you should stay on the Thruway to the Berkshire spur, which would lead back to I-90, becoming the Mass Pike.
My question is, for people traveling southbound coming up on exit 24, wouldn't it be more logical to keep left, stay on I-90, which become the Pike anyway?  I mean on google maps its exactly the same distance (and time) to stay on I-90 then it is to keep right on the Thurway to the Berkshire connection. Its not like one is 20 miles out of the way. For me personally, If I was unfamiliar with the routes, I'd prefer to stay on I-90 the whole way, rather then hop onto the Thruway, I-87, then onto the Berkshire spur. This just seems less direct and more of a way for newcomers to get lost/potentially miss the Berkshire spur. Does anyone know why its the way it is?

Google maps photo link:
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.7075426,-73.8595179,3a,55.1y,135.95h,108.43t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1stA0pxpLBJ2FmSVPA3zPYhw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Google Maps used to lead you the way that it thought was quicker (Thruway is 65 mph the entire way).  Now, if you don't mess with it, it'll send you the most "fuel efficient" way.

Given that the Castleton-on-Hudson Bridge is always under construction anyway, it is probably a draw with either way you go.

I'm sure the signage is to encourage travelers to use the all-toll route to the Berkshire Connector rather than the free stretch of I-90 through Albany.
Sure.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: empirestate on January 29, 2022, 12:21:47 AM
You really want to think of it in terms of the roads themselves, rather than their numbers. From that standpoint, to go to Boston you stay on the Thruway, then "turn left" onto the Berkshire Spur (of the Thruway). Simple as that. On the other hand, if you want to go through Albany, you get off onto the freeway that goes through Albany.

In the end, though, yeah–it's pretty much a wash either way. The reason to take the route through Albany is because you want to go through Albany. The reason to follow I-90 is because you want to follow I-90. Or, the reason to take the Thruway route is because you want to use the Thruway. And naturally, this is the perspective of the Thruway people, so that's how they sign it. (You can ascribe as nefarious or as innocent a motivation to this as you want; but the reality invariably lies at neither extreme.)
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on January 29, 2022, 12:32:04 AM
It should be noted that there have been pushes over the years at multiple levels to try and keep through traffic on the Thruway to reduce congestion in Albany. At least one of these involved moving I-90 to the Berkshire Spur and redesignating the current free segment as I-88 or an x87. This, of course, never happened due to the Castleton Bridge not meeting Interstate standards. The Berkshire Spur has a crapton of extra capacity and I-90 through Albany is prone to congestion, so it is a logical move to make.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: lstone19 on January 29, 2022, 12:35:17 AM
Also consider that the Interstate Highway System, as originally intended, was to go through cities. For many cities, it was expected that through traffic would follow a three-digit loop interstate around that city. That didn't always happen, particularly when interstates were routed on pre-existing toll roads which already did not go through the heart of cities (hence I-90 being the bypass of Syracuse and Rochester).

There are very few interstates, if I was going from end to end, that I would not leave for a bypass route depending on time of day and traffic conditions. If I were driving I-90 from Boston to Seattle, I might leave it for Albany, likely for Cleveland, and almost certainly for Chicago.

So to expect that through traffic should stay on the numbered route goes against the original design.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Plutonic Panda on January 29, 2022, 01:14:25 AM
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.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: lstone19 on January 29, 2022, 02:38:40 AM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on January 29, 2022, 01:14:25 AM
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
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: roadman65 on January 29, 2022, 11:00:20 AM
Quote from: lstone19 on January 29, 2022, 02:38:40 AM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on January 29, 2022, 01:14:25 AM
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


Keep in mind I-80 was to leave the Ohio Turnpike in metro Cleveland to return to it later on as I-480 was to be the original I-80 until it made sense to someone to just leave it on the toll road and make I-480 the free route.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: MATraveler128 on January 29, 2022, 12:00:54 PM
I-80 in Illinois does the same. It serves Chicago, but bypasses the city to the south.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: roadman65 on January 29, 2022, 12:02:43 PM
I-90 in Chicago was later changed to stay more in Downtown as the I-290 alignment was originally I-90.  Aligning it on the Kennedy Expressway kept it more in urban environments than being on the Ike.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on January 29, 2022, 12:06:18 PM
Quote from: cl94 on January 29, 2022, 12:32:04 AM
It should be noted that there have been pushes over the years at multiple levels to try and keep through traffic on the Thruway to reduce congestion in Albany. At least one of these involved moving I-90 to the Berkshire Spur and redesignating the current free segment as I-88 or an x87. This, of course, never happened due to the Castleton Bridge not meeting Interstate standards. The Berkshire Spur has a crapton of extra capacity and I-90 through Albany is prone to congestion, so it is a logical move to make.

Not to get too far into fictional territory, but I would certainly support this. I think an I-X90 makes a lot more sense than an I-X87. The I-X90's are of course all in use currently, but if I-99 was extended to Rochester, I-390 would be available.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: lstone19 on January 29, 2022, 12:21:09 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 29, 2022, 12:06:18 PM
Quote from: cl94 on January 29, 2022, 12:32:04 AM
It should be noted that there have been pushes over the years at multiple levels to try and keep through traffic on the Thruway to reduce congestion in Albany. At least one of these involved moving I-90 to the Berkshire Spur and redesignating the current free segment as I-88 or an x87. This, of course, never happened due to the Castleton Bridge not meeting Interstate standards. The Berkshire Spur has a crapton of extra capacity and I-90 through Albany is prone to congestion, so it is a logical move to make.

Not to get too far into fictional territory, but I would certainly support this. I think an I-X90 makes a lot more sense than an I-X87. The I-X90's are of course all in use currently, but if I-99 was extended to Rochester, I-390 would be available.

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.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Sam on January 29, 2022, 04:44:59 PM
Quote from: lstone19 on January 29, 2022, 12:21:09 PM
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 :)
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: lstone19 on January 29, 2022, 04:47:39 PM
Quote from: Sam on January 29, 2022, 04:44:59 PM
Quote from: lstone19 on January 29, 2022, 12:21:09 PM
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
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Alps on January 29, 2022, 08:14:21 PM
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.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on January 30, 2022, 12:07:30 AM
Quote from: lstone19 on January 29, 2022, 02:38:40 AM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on January 29, 2022, 01:14:25 AM
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.

Quote from: Alps on January 29, 2022, 08:14:21 PM
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.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Alps on January 30, 2022, 12:26:06 AM
Quote from: vdeane on January 30, 2022, 12:07:30 AM

Quote from: Alps on January 29, 2022, 08:14:21 PM
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.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on January 30, 2022, 12:37:15 AM
Quote from: Alps on January 30, 2022, 12:26:06 AM
Quote from: vdeane on January 30, 2022, 12:07:30 AM

Quote from: Alps on January 29, 2022, 08:14:21 PM
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.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Alps on January 30, 2022, 01:12:11 AM
Quote from: vdeane on January 30, 2022, 12:37:15 AM
Quote from: Alps on January 30, 2022, 12:26:06 AM
Quote from: vdeane on January 30, 2022, 12:07:30 AM

Quote from: Alps on January 29, 2022, 08:14:21 PM
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.)
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on February 21, 2022, 11:46:45 PM
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?).

(https://www.signify.com/b-dam/signify/en-us/blog/posts/led/2020/highfocus-gen-2-led-high-mast-luminaire/highfocus-gen-2-led-high-mast-luminaire-scalable.jpg)

Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Plutonic Panda on February 21, 2022, 11:51:16 PM
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
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: NoGoodNamesAvailable on February 22, 2022, 01:03:28 AM
Quote from: Buffaboy on February 21, 2022, 11:46:45 PM
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?).

(https://www.signify.com/b-dam/signify/en-us/blog/posts/led/2020/highfocus-gen-2-led-high-mast-luminaire/highfocus-gen-2-led-high-mast-luminaire-scalable.jpg)

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.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on February 22, 2022, 07:57:55 AM
Quote from: NoGoodNamesAvailable on February 22, 2022, 01:03:28 AM
Quote from: Buffaboy on February 21, 2022, 11:46:45 PM
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?).

(https://www.signify.com/b-dam/signify/en-us/blog/posts/led/2020/highfocus-gen-2-led-high-mast-luminaire/highfocus-gen-2-led-high-mast-luminaire-scalable.jpg)

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.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on February 22, 2022, 08:15:47 AM
Most lighting on freeways in NY looks like this (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.1642229,-77.5387737,3a,20.5y,350.72h,93.26t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s2N0o29bGfV9bpyR6_2XNVw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e1). The taller high mast lighting isn't common, but it can be found (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.1107539,-77.6024851,3a,52.5y,305.78h,104.98t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s8ay_4dmhe6ESLZ2P2RMCWA!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3D8ay_4dmhe6ESLZ2P2RMCWA%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D304.04666%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e1), usually at major interchanges (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.1460586,-77.5417448,3a,75y,163.68h,106.66t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1smMTn97LqouhIEduajfBbdg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e1). It's true that we don't have anything like this stretch of QEW/ON 403 (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.4007842,-79.7509014,3a,24.9y,210.1h,100.26t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sDEDu5kzaLgykrJL-w3bdPw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e1) 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.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: shadyjay on February 22, 2022, 05:12:19 PM
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.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on February 22, 2022, 05:37:00 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on February 21, 2022, 11:46:45 PM
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.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: SignBridge on February 22, 2022, 08:00:00 PM
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. 
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on February 22, 2022, 08:59:43 PM
Quote from: cl94 on February 22, 2022, 05:37:00 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on February 21, 2022, 11:46:45 PM
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
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: ARMOURERERIC on August 01, 2022, 11:46:19 PM
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.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Ted$8roadFan on August 29, 2022, 04:52:23 AM
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.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: TMETSJETSYT on August 29, 2022, 07:09:13 AM
Wdym? Like "Enterning ___ County" or "Welcome to ____ County"?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: TMETSJETSYT on August 29, 2022, 07:10:33 AM
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.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Ted$8roadFan on August 29, 2022, 07:12:45 AM
Quote from: TMETSJETSYT on August 29, 2022, 07:09:13 AM
Wdym? Like "Enterning ___ County" or "Welcome to ____ County"?

Yes. Even a simple "Erie County"  would suffice.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: TMETSJETSYT on August 29, 2022, 07:16:17 AM
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.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on August 29, 2022, 09:02:20 AM
Yes, the Thruway not signing county lines has been a subject of contention amongst roadgeeks and on this forum for a long time.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on August 29, 2022, 12:57:55 PM
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.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on August 31, 2022, 09:41:38 PM
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
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on August 31, 2022, 10:25:56 PM
Quote from: vdeane on August 31, 2022, 09:41:38 PM
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... 
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: seicer on September 01, 2022, 09:08:53 AM
The company that has the contract for the service area has a service for cleaning; the restaurants are not responsible for that.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on September 01, 2022, 09:42:42 AM
Quote from: seicer on September 01, 2022, 09:08:53 AM
The company that has the contract for the service area has a service for cleaning; the restaurants are not responsible for that.
My impression was that entire service area is under same management, whatever franchise they operate is still theirs. If I remember correctly, there were even signs "if this restroom needs attention, please come to McD counter"
So  a Starbucks-only day may be interesting in terms of people on deck (and revenue!).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on September 01, 2022, 01:08:52 PM
Quote from: vdeane on August 31, 2022, 09:41:38 PM
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
I drove past it yesterday.  Pretty ugly for a new building.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Ted$8roadFan on September 01, 2022, 01:54:44 PM
Any idea how old the Thruway service plazas are now?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Flyer78 on September 01, 2022, 03:00:30 PM
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on September 01, 2022, 01:54:44 PM
Any idea how old the Thruway service plazas are now?
Most were rebuilt in the early 90s and managed by predecessor companies to what is now Applegreen.

Some were just expanded and not a total-rebuild.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on September 01, 2022, 04:10:09 PM
Quote from: Rothman on September 01, 2022, 01:08:52 PM
Quote from: vdeane on August 31, 2022, 09:41:38 PM
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
I drove past it yesterday.  Pretty ugly for a new building.
I saw New Baltimore the other day. Looks like they will finish the building by xmas. And yes, as ugly as it gets
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on September 01, 2022, 05:54:26 PM
^ And the ones with the slanted roof and big windows are probably the better looking ones of these new ugly service areas, too!  It's a shame, the old ones look so nice.

In other news, Chittenango looks like its reopening is imminent, and Junius Ponds won't be long off.  I expect Seneca to close immediately upon Junius Ponds reopening, not only because that's what happened with Oneida (not sure why they didn't wait until after Labor Day), but because the barricades to close it are already staged.

Quote from: kalvado on August 31, 2022, 10:25:56 PM
Quote from: vdeane on August 31, 2022, 09:41:38 PM
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... 
On the project map (https://www.thruway.ny.gov/travelers/travelplazas/service-area-project/locations.html), if you click on the service area and switch to the "information" tab on the popup, it includes a list of projected restaurants (minus the chicken "food concepts", at least at some locations).  I can confirm that Indian Castle is indeed Starbucks/Popeyes, and also that Chick-fil-A will be coming to Chittenango (the sign is on the building already).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on September 05, 2022, 01:00:37 AM
On the I-190 lights thing (which I can't believe I asked about in February), I've noticed that the Jersey barriers appear to have a ton of sockets spaced dozens of feet apart up to I-90. I'm wondering if this is for future lighting, as I haven't been able to find it in Street View. Nor do I remember I-190 having lighting to begin with. (Edit: apparently there were)

With the service areas, I drove from Buffalo to Massachusetts a few weeks ago and saw a bunch of service stations going up. I didn't pay attention to which ones were under construction, but I saw steel frames in some places and finished buildings with signs up in others. I believe Chick-fil-A was one of the tenants. Nothing else stood out to me.

https://youtu.be/9476hJMSKEw
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on September 05, 2022, 11:42:36 AM
I thought those buildings looked small, but wow.  It doesn't look like there's very much seating there.  How are people supposed to enjoy their meal, especially if EV charging means people will be there for a while?  Also, I hope there's the ability to add EV charging to every spot on the lot, because that's what they're going to need if everyone is going to be driving an EV.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on September 05, 2022, 01:53:52 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on September 05, 2022, 01:00:37 AM
On the I-190 lights thing (which I can't believe I asked about in February), I've noticed that the Jersey barriers appear to have a ton of sockets spaced dozens of feet apart up to I-90. I'm wondering if this is for future lighting, as I haven't been able to find it in Street View. Nor do I remember I-190 having lighting to begin with. (Edit: apparently there were)

190 had lighting that was removed after the windstorm last December due to structural issues with the poles. Once new poles are obtained, the lighting will be reinstalled.

Re: the service areas, all will be 100% managed by Applegreen, an Irish motorway service area operator which operates several similar facilities in Europe. Given the European roots, I'm curious if they'll be more like British/Irish service areas in how they're run. The old ones were a combo of McDonald's corporate, HMSHost, and Delaware North.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Buffaboy on September 05, 2022, 03:16:50 PM
Yeah the seating is pretty limited it seems, I wonder why. Maybe related to the pandemic?

I wonder if they'll bring European restaurants to the US with these service areas in the future.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: storm2k on September 05, 2022, 05:40:11 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on September 05, 2022, 03:16:50 PM
I wonder if they'll bring European restaurants to the US with these service areas in the future.

I highly doubt it. They're also part of the consortium that bought out HMSHost's service area businesses in other states (including the NJ Turnpike and the Garden State Parkway) and there's no real move to change what they have because I think they understand the American market enough to know what American motorists like. The move these days is 1-2 familiar fast food restaurants (the move is really towards Popeyes these days in a lot of places) with a mix of some somewhat but not too much higher end grab and go options.

As for the seating situation, I'll have to wait and see what it works out to be. I don't feel like these necessarily need to be cavernous places persay. I would assume they did some studies involving how long people stay and how much seating they need and go from there. I never felt like most of the service areas on the NJ Turnpike are honestly all that huge and it never seems to be a major issue. So who knows.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on September 05, 2022, 06:18:25 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on September 05, 2022, 03:16:50 PM
Yeah the seating is pretty limited it seems, I wonder why. Maybe related to the pandemic?

I wonder if they'll bring European restaurants to the US with these service areas in the future.
This is a smaller service area to begin with. The traffic count is just about 25k daily on that stretch. I remember some similar-sized to this one on Masspike.
A stopped bus, though, would be a disaster...

This is how big that sitting area was in the previous version. A bit bigger, but not much, I believe.
(https://img.restaurantguru.com/r14b-Roy-Rogers-design-2021-09-3.jpg)
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: MASTERNC on September 06, 2022, 08:38:54 AM
Quote from: storm2k on September 05, 2022, 05:40:11 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on September 05, 2022, 03:16:50 PM
I wonder if they'll bring European restaurants to the US with these service areas in the future.

I highly doubt it. They're also part of the consortium that bought out HMSHost's service area businesses in other states (including the NJ Turnpike and the Garden State Parkway) and there's no real move to change what they have because I think they understand the American market enough to know what American motorists like. The move these days is 1-2 familiar fast food restaurants (the move is really towards Popeyes these days in a lot of places) with a mix of some somewhat but not too much higher end grab and go options.

As for the seating situation, I'll have to wait and see what it works out to be. I don't feel like these necessarily need to be cavernous places persay. I would assume they did some studies involving how long people stay and how much seating they need and go from there. I never felt like most of the service areas on the NJ Turnpike are honestly all that huge and it never seems to be a major issue. So who knows.

Did not realize the HMS Host business had been bought out.  Maybe they'll improve the variety on other toll roads so it's not just Roy Rogers or Burger King at every service plaza (looking at you, PA Turnpike).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: RobbieL2415 on September 06, 2022, 11:18:27 AM
I always thought the Thruway rest stop interiors looked like the inside of a Bugaboo Creek restaurant.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: seicer on September 06, 2022, 07:13:36 PM
The new Indian Castle Service Area has opened: https://bigfrog104.com/take-a-look-the-first-ny-thruway-rest-area-is-completed-open/

- Was this one of the least visited service areas?
- There is very little indoor seating. Do they expect most people (including large crowds coming from buses) to eat outdoors? Or are they expecting that much traffic to be diverted to the lone drive-through for Starbucks? At least there is more outdoor seating which will be nice 6 months of the year.
- The hallway to the restrooms is only wide enough for one person and the restrooms are comically small. There are only four stalls. Competing for space in the hallway are entrances to the gender-neutral restrooms and the water fountain/bottling filling station.
- Parking is more plentiful.
- There are no showers at this location but others will include them.

I'm all on board with the new service areas, notably because they will include showers and updated amenities, but this seems to be a downscale of what was there.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on September 06, 2022, 08:39:58 PM
I've stopped at Indian Castle for gas frequently.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: seicer on September 06, 2022, 10:46:50 PM
I swear the old plaza was larger.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: 02 Park Ave on September 07, 2022, 10:06:27 PM
There was a terrible fatal head-on collision on the Thruway in Orange County early yesterday morning.  Here is a link to an article, with videos, about it:


https://www.theyeshivaworld.com/news/featured/2121672/shocking-dashcam-footage-wrong-way-driver-nearly-hits-hatzolah-volunteer-minutes-before-fatal-crash-on-thruway.html
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: SignBridge on September 07, 2022, 10:32:28 PM
Bad week on the Thruway in the downstate area. This afternoon the road was closed in both directions due to a low hanging wire in the West Nyack area. Westbound was backed up all the way across the Tappan Zee Bridge.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Jim on September 10, 2022, 11:04:56 PM
Quote from: seicer on September 06, 2022, 07:13:36 PM
The new Indian Castle Service Area has opened: https://bigfrog104.com/take-a-look-the-first-ny-thruway-rest-area-is-completed-open/

- Was this one of the least visited service areas?
- There is very little indoor seating. Do they expect most people (including large crowds coming from buses) to eat outdoors? Or are they expecting that much traffic to be diverted to the lone drive-through for Starbucks? At least there is more outdoor seating which will be nice 6 months of the year.
- The hallway to the restrooms is only wide enough for one person and the restrooms are comically small. There are only four stalls. Competing for space in the hallway are entrances to the gender-neutral restrooms and the water fountain/bottling filling station.
- Parking is more plentiful.
- There are no showers at this location but others will include them.

I'm all on board with the new service areas, notably because they will include showers and updated amenities, but this seems to be a downscale of what was there.

I stopped here this evening when headed home from Ithaca, just to see the new setup.  I agree it's small, even smaller than I expected after reading this post a few days ago.  There can't be seating for more than 25-30 people inside.  One bus comes, and the building will be overwhelmed, especially the rest rooms, not that you'd be able to walk to them through the tiny area in front of the Popeye's and Starbucks.  I really hope many of the others will have a little more space to move around.  Notably missing is any of the New York history and tourism info that was prominent in most of the old buildings.

I saw that the WB service area just east of Syracuse is also open now, including what's now the closest Chick-fil-A to me that's not beyond airport security (until the ones announced for Clifton Park, Latham, and most recently North Greenbush actually happen).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on September 11, 2022, 12:07:35 AM
Quote from: Jim on September 10, 2022, 11:04:56 PM
Quote from: seicer on September 06, 2022, 07:13:36 PM
The new Indian Castle Service Area has opened: https://bigfrog104.com/take-a-look-the-first-ny-thruway-rest-area-is-completed-open/

- Was this one of the least visited service areas?
- There is very little indoor seating. Do they expect most people (including large crowds coming from buses) to eat outdoors? Or are they expecting that much traffic to be diverted to the lone drive-through for Starbucks? At least there is more outdoor seating which will be nice 6 months of the year.
- The hallway to the restrooms is only wide enough for one person and the restrooms are comically small. There are only four stalls. Competing for space in the hallway are entrances to the gender-neutral restrooms and the water fountain/bottling filling station.
- Parking is more plentiful.
- There are no showers at this location but others will include them.

I'm all on board with the new service areas, notably because they will include showers and updated amenities, but this seems to be a downscale of what was there.

I stopped here this evening when headed home from Ithaca, just to see the new setup.  I agree it's small, even smaller than I expected after reading this post a few days ago.  There can't be seating for more than 25-30 people inside.  One bus comes, and the building will be overwhelmed, especially the rest rooms, not that you'd be able to walk to them through the tiny area in front of the Popeye's and Starbucks.  I really hope many of the others will have a little more space to move around.  Notably missing is any of the New York history and tourism info that was prominent in most of the old buildings.

I saw that the WB service area just east of Syracuse is also open now, including what's now the closest Chick-fil-A to me that's not beyond airport security (until the ones announced for Clifton Park, Latham, and most recently North Greenbush actually happen).
There's always Cicero...
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on September 11, 2022, 12:53:08 AM
Quote from: seicer on September 06, 2022, 07:13:36 PM
The new Indian Castle Service Area has opened: https://bigfrog104.com/take-a-look-the-first-ny-thruway-rest-area-is-completed-open/

- Was this one of the least visited service areas?
- There is very little indoor seating. Do they expect most people (including large crowds coming from buses) to eat outdoors? Or are they expecting that much traffic to be diverted to the lone drive-through for Starbucks? At least there is more outdoor seating which will be nice 6 months of the year.
- The hallway to the restrooms is only wide enough for one person and the restrooms are comically small. There are only four stalls. Competing for space in the hallway are entrances to the gender-neutral restrooms and the water fountain/bottling filling station.
- Parking is more plentiful.
- There are no showers at this location but others will include them.

I'm all on board with the new service areas, notably because they will include showers and updated amenities, but this seems to be a downscale of what was there.

The new service areas were allegedly sized based on traffic. Notably, Ramapo will be upsized when it is rebuilt, but several of the less-visited ones Upstate will be downsized. The old service areas were mostly one size and some of the locations were overbuilt relative to the traffic they received. I guess the thought is to maximize the area being used to reduce operating costs, but it removes some of the flexibility present in the old service areas in terms of the ability to handle an unexpected crush of people.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Jim on September 11, 2022, 09:01:47 AM
Quote from: Rothman on September 11, 2022, 12:07:35 AM
There's always Cicero...

Which was my stop just before Indian Castle.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on September 11, 2022, 11:04:56 AM
Quote from: cl94 on September 11, 2022, 12:53:08 AM
Quote from: seicer on September 06, 2022, 07:13:36 PM
The new Indian Castle Service Area has opened: https://bigfrog104.com/take-a-look-the-first-ny-thruway-rest-area-is-completed-open/

- Was this one of the least visited service areas?
- There is very little indoor seating. Do they expect most people (including large crowds coming from buses) to eat outdoors? Or are they expecting that much traffic to be diverted to the lone drive-through for Starbucks? At least there is more outdoor seating which will be nice 6 months of the year.
- The hallway to the restrooms is only wide enough for one person and the restrooms are comically small. There are only four stalls. Competing for space in the hallway are entrances to the gender-neutral restrooms and the water fountain/bottling filling station.
- Parking is more plentiful.
- There are no showers at this location but others will include them.

I'm all on board with the new service areas, notably because they will include showers and updated amenities, but this seems to be a downscale of what was there.

The new service areas were allegedly sized based on traffic. Notably, Ramapo will be upsized when it is rebuilt, but several of the less-visited ones Upstate will be downsized. The old service areas were mostly one size and some of the locations were overbuilt relative to the traffic they received. I guess the thought is to maximize the area being used to reduce operating costs, but it removes some of the flexibility present in the old service areas in terms of the ability to handle an unexpected crush of people.
At least 2 standard layouts for old ones: restrooms to the right of main entrance, and restrooms all the way down the hall.
New ones seem to come in several "levels" - 2, 2A, 2B, 3 and 3B (maybe I missed something else). Level 3 could larger ones; renderings for 2B and 3 seem to be almost identical though. Not that those renderings are too informative, though; they posted a standard one with cars parked next to the building for Angola...
UPD: there are also Level 1 in DeWitt and Schuyler. Those seem to be glorified convenience stores.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on September 11, 2022, 02:03:10 PM
Quote from: cl94 on September 11, 2022, 12:53:08 AM
Quote from: seicer on September 06, 2022, 07:13:36 PM
The new Indian Castle Service Area has opened: https://bigfrog104.com/take-a-look-the-first-ny-thruway-rest-area-is-completed-open/

- Was this one of the least visited service areas?
- There is very little indoor seating. Do they expect most people (including large crowds coming from buses) to eat outdoors? Or are they expecting that much traffic to be diverted to the lone drive-through for Starbucks? At least there is more outdoor seating which will be nice 6 months of the year.
- The hallway to the restrooms is only wide enough for one person and the restrooms are comically small. There are only four stalls. Competing for space in the hallway are entrances to the gender-neutral restrooms and the water fountain/bottling filling station.
- Parking is more plentiful.
- There are no showers at this location but others will include them.

I'm all on board with the new service areas, notably because they will include showers and updated amenities, but this seems to be a downscale of what was there.

The new service areas were allegedly sized based on traffic. Notably, Ramapo will be upsized when it is rebuilt, but several of the less-visited ones Upstate will be downsized. The old service areas were mostly one size and some of the locations were overbuilt relative to the traffic they received. I guess the thought is to maximize the area being used to reduce operating costs, but it removes some of the flexibility present in the old service areas in terms of the ability to handle an unexpected crush of people.

Interesting. Based on AADT volumes, I would definitely say "yes" to the question of whether Indian Castle is one of the least-visited service areas. It's got to be the least-visited on I-90 EB, and surely less-visited than anything on I-87's portion of the Thruway. Same for Iroquois (and to a lesser extent Schuyler) on I-90 WB.

The ones between Buffalo and Rochester (Pembroke and Scottsville EB; Ontario and Clarence WB) were always inundated and barely able to handle the influx of traffic before and after Bills games even in their current/previous configuration, so I sure hope they don't get downsized.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on September 11, 2022, 04:26:27 PM
^ Ontario, Clarence, and Pembroke are level 3, but Scottsville is only level 2 like Indian Castle.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on September 11, 2022, 04:34:37 PM
Quote from: webny99 on September 11, 2022, 02:03:10 PM
Quote from: cl94 on September 11, 2022, 12:53:08 AM
Quote from: seicer on September 06, 2022, 07:13:36 PM
The new Indian Castle Service Area has opened: https://bigfrog104.com/take-a-look-the-first-ny-thruway-rest-area-is-completed-open/

- Was this one of the least visited service areas?
- There is very little indoor seating. Do they expect most people (including large crowds coming from buses) to eat outdoors? Or are they expecting that much traffic to be diverted to the lone drive-through for Starbucks? At least there is more outdoor seating which will be nice 6 months of the year.
- The hallway to the restrooms is only wide enough for one person and the restrooms are comically small. There are only four stalls. Competing for space in the hallway are entrances to the gender-neutral restrooms and the water fountain/bottling filling station.
- Parking is more plentiful.
- There are no showers at this location but others will include them.

I'm all on board with the new service areas, notably because they will include showers and updated amenities, but this seems to be a downscale of what was there.

The new service areas were allegedly sized based on traffic. Notably, Ramapo will be upsized when it is rebuilt, but several of the less-visited ones Upstate will be downsized. The old service areas were mostly one size and some of the locations were overbuilt relative to the traffic they received. I guess the thought is to maximize the area being used to reduce operating costs, but it removes some of the flexibility present in the old service areas in terms of the ability to handle an unexpected crush of people.

Interesting. Based on AADT volumes, I would definitely say "yes" to the question of whether Indian Castle is one of the least-visited service areas. It's got to be the least-visited on I-90 EB, and surely less-visited than anything on I-87's portion of the Thruway. Same for Iroquois (and to a lesser extent Schuyler) on I-90 WB.

The ones between Buffalo and Rochester (Pembroke and Scottsville EB; Ontario and Clarence WB) were always inundated and barely able to handle the influx of traffic before and after Bills games even in their current/previous configuration, so I sure hope they don't get downsized.
I wonder if AADT is a good indication here. Short haul traffic is building up AADT in urban areas, but has low rest area stop rates. If we consider at least 2 hour trips which are likely to stop at some point, Indian Castle is ideally situated towards the middle of the Syracuse-Albany stretch. On the other hand, they are not going to have anything bigger on Syracuse-Albany stretch anyway. Interestingly enough, westbound plazas may be a bit larger. NYC to Adirondack traffic? 
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Ted$8roadFan on September 11, 2022, 07:05:15 PM
Quote from: webny99 on September 11, 2022, 02:03:10 PM
Quote from: cl94 on September 11, 2022, 12:53:08 AM
Quote from: seicer on September 06, 2022, 07:13:36 PM
The new Indian Castle Service Area has opened: https://bigfrog104.com/take-a-look-the-first-ny-thruway-rest-area-is-completed-open/

- Was this one of the least visited service areas?
- There is very little indoor seating. Do they expect most people (including large crowds coming from buses) to eat outdoors? Or are they expecting that much traffic to be diverted to the lone drive-through for Starbucks? At least there is more outdoor seating which will be nice 6 months of the year.
- The hallway to the restrooms is only wide enough for one person and the restrooms are comically small. There are only four stalls. Competing for space in the hallway are entrances to the gender-neutral restrooms and the water fountain/bottling filling station.
- Parking is more plentiful.
- There are no showers at this location but others will include them.

I'm all on board with the new service areas, notably because they will include showers and updated amenities, but this seems to be a downscale of what was there.

The new service areas were allegedly sized based on traffic. Notably, Ramapo will be upsized when it is rebuilt, but several of the less-visited ones Upstate will be downsized. The old service areas were mostly one size and some of the locations were overbuilt relative to the traffic they received. I guess the thought is to maximize the area being used to reduce operating costs, but it removes some of the flexibility present in the old service areas in terms of the ability to handle an unexpected crush of people.

Interesting. Based on AADT volumes, I would definitely say "yes" to the question of whether Indian Castle is one of the least-visited service areas. It's got to be the least-visited on I-90 EB, and surely less-visited than anything on I-87's portion of the Thruway. Same for Iroquois (and to a lesser extent Schuyler) on I-90 WB.

The ones between Buffalo and Rochester (Pembroke and Scottsville EB; Ontario and Clarence WB) were always inundated and barely able to handle the influx of traffic before and after Bills games even in their current/previous configuration, so I sure hope they don't get downsized.

Don't downsize indeed. A few years ago on my way to Toronto, not only was there a long line of cars on the Thruway WB (summer Friday afternoon), the Clarence rest area was overwhelmed.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: thenetwork on September 11, 2022, 07:13:27 PM
Quote from: Jim on September 10, 2022, 11:04:56 PM
Quote from: seicer on September 06, 2022, 07:13:36 PM
The new Indian Castle Service Area has opened: https://bigfrog104.com/take-a-look-the-first-ny-thruway-rest-area-is-completed-open/

- Was this one of the least visited service areas?
- There is very little indoor seating. Do they expect most people (including large crowds coming from buses) to eat outdoors? Or are they expecting that much traffic to be diverted to the lone drive-through for Starbucks? At least there is more outdoor seating which will be nice 6 months of the year.
- The hallway to the restrooms is only wide enough for one person and the restrooms are comically small. There are only four stalls. Competing for space in the hallway are entrances to the gender-neutral restrooms and the water fountain/bottling filling station.
- Parking is more plentiful.
- There are no showers at this location but others will include them.

I'm all on board with the new service areas, notably because they will include showers and updated amenities, but this seems to be a downscale of what was there.

I stopped here this evening when headed home from Ithaca, just to see the new setup.  I agree it's small, even smaller than I expected after reading this post a few days ago.  There can't be seating for more than 25-30 people inside.  One bus comes, and the building will be overwhelmed, especially the rest rooms, not that you'd be able to walk to them through the tiny area in front of the Popeye's and Starbucks.  I really hope many of the others will have a little more space to move around.  Notably missing is any of the New York history and tourism info that was prominent in most of the old buildings.

I saw that the WB service area just east of Syracuse is also open now, including what's now the closest Chick-fil-A to me that's not beyond airport security (until the ones announced for Clifton Park, Latham, and most recently North Greenbush actually happen).

When word gets out that some of these smaller service plazas are not "bus-friendly" anymore, they will start flocking to larger plazas or off-Thruway facilities. 
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: MASTERNC on September 12, 2022, 11:16:33 AM
Looks like another service area opened east of Syracuse.  The main restaurant is Chick-Fil-A, which is closed Sundays (not leaving much else food wise on that day) but the fact it might be on a more lightly traveled stretch probably offsets that.

QuoteThe new Chittenango Service Area is now open to Thruway travelers on I-90 westbound between Exit 34 (Canastota) & Exit 34A (Syracuse I-481). The new location features Chick-fil-A, Starbucks, and Applegreen Market.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: lstone19 on September 12, 2022, 01:02:52 PM
Quote from: MASTERNC on September 12, 2022, 11:16:33 AM
Looks like another service area opened east of Syracuse.  The main restaurant is Chick-Fil-A, which is closed Sundays (not leaving much else food wise on that day) but the fact it might be on a more lightly traveled stretch probably offsets that.

No, it doesn't. Absolutely unacceptable to have the main (sounds like close to only) restaurant closed any day. This and other stuff makes it sound like the Thruway is becoming a third-world toll toad. If a restaurant wants to be in a toll road service plaza, they need to be open the standard hours and don't get to choose to close one day a week for their own reasons. Why would NYSTA even accept their bid?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on September 12, 2022, 02:16:21 PM
Quote from: lstone19 on September 12, 2022, 01:02:52 PM
Quote from: MASTERNC on September 12, 2022, 11:16:33 AM
Looks like another service area opened east of Syracuse.  The main restaurant is Chick-Fil-A, which is closed Sundays (not leaving much else food wise on that day) but the fact it might be on a more lightly traveled stretch probably offsets that.

No, it doesn't. Absolutely unacceptable to have the main (sounds like close to only) restaurant closed any day. This and other stuff makes it sound like the Thruway is becoming a third-world toll toad. If a restaurant wants to be in a toll road service plaza, they need to be open the standard hours and don't get to choose to close one day a week for their own reasons. Why would NYSTA even accept their bid?
Two things:
1. This is not to serve meager upstaters, this is to extract cash from NYCers. Chittenango  is there to give them last city meal before turning north of Friday or Saturday. On the way back, Chittenango  is too close to Adirondack. Smaller service areas getting NYC-bound traffic on Sunday - Guilderland,  Ulster, Modena, have Panda and Burger King. New Baltimore has CFA - but also has Panera. 
2. With AET, it should be easier to patronize local businesses. Not that there would be a lot of choice on Sunday afternoon close to highway... Even less chance for bus-capable places.  I wonder if a new Pilot would show up at some point?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on September 12, 2022, 02:58:25 PM
Quote from: kalvado on September 12, 2022, 02:16:21 PM
Quote from: lstone19 on September 12, 2022, 01:02:52 PM
Quote from: MASTERNC on September 12, 2022, 11:16:33 AM
Looks like another service area opened east of Syracuse.  The main restaurant is Chick-Fil-A, which is closed Sundays (not leaving much else food wise on that day) but the fact it might be on a more lightly traveled stretch probably offsets that.

No, it doesn't. Absolutely unacceptable to have the main (sounds like close to only) restaurant closed any day. This and other stuff makes it sound like the Thruway is becoming a third-world toll toad. If a restaurant wants to be in a toll road service plaza, they need to be open the standard hours and don't get to choose to close one day a week for their own reasons. Why would NYSTA even accept their bid?
Two things:
1. This is not to serve meager upstaters, this is to extract cash from NYCers. Chittenango  is there to give them last city meal before turning north of Friday or Saturday. On the way back, Chittenango  is too close to Adirondack. Smaller service areas getting NYC-bound traffic on Sunday - Guilderland,  Ulster, Modena, have Panda and Burger King. New Baltimore has CFA - but also has Panera. 
2. With AET, it should be easier to patronize local businesses. Not that there would be a lot of choice on Sunday afternoon close to highway... Even less chance for bus-capable places.  I wonder if a new Pilot would show up at some point?
See Fonda for the new Pilot.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on September 12, 2022, 03:48:35 PM
Quote from: Rothman on September 12, 2022, 02:58:25 PM
Quote from: kalvado on September 12, 2022, 02:16:21 PM
Quote from: lstone19 on September 12, 2022, 01:02:52 PM
Quote from: MASTERNC on September 12, 2022, 11:16:33 AM
Looks like another service area opened east of Syracuse.  The main restaurant is Chick-Fil-A, which is closed Sundays (not leaving much else food wise on that day) but the fact it might be on a more lightly traveled stretch probably offsets that.

No, it doesn't. Absolutely unacceptable to have the main (sounds like close to only) restaurant closed any day. This and other stuff makes it sound like the Thruway is becoming a third-world toll toad. If a restaurant wants to be in a toll road service plaza, they need to be open the standard hours and don't get to choose to close one day a week for their own reasons. Why would NYSTA even accept their bid?
Two things:
1. This is not to serve meager upstaters, this is to extract cash from NYCers. Chittenango  is there to give them last city meal before turning north of Friday or Saturday. On the way back, Chittenango  is too close to Adirondack. Smaller service areas getting NYC-bound traffic on Sunday - Guilderland,  Ulster, Modena, have Panda and Burger King. New Baltimore has CFA - but also has Panera. 
2. With AET, it should be easier to patronize local businesses. Not that there would be a lot of choice on Sunday afternoon close to highway... Even less chance for bus-capable places.  I wonder if a new Pilot would show up at some point?
See Fonda for the new Pilot.
That was quick!
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: froggie on September 12, 2022, 08:06:22 PM
Wasn't there already a TA at the Fultonville exit?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on September 12, 2022, 08:07:57 PM
Quote from: vdeane on September 11, 2022, 04:26:27 PM
^ Ontario, Clarence, and Pembroke are level 3, but Scottsville is only level 2 like Indian Castle.

Makes sense from the perspective that 46-47 is the least-traveled section between Buffalo and Syracuse, but it seems odd that Ontario and Scottsville would be different from each other, considering they're both on that same segment.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on September 12, 2022, 09:27:27 PM
Quote from: webny99 on September 12, 2022, 08:07:57 PM
Quote from: vdeane on September 11, 2022, 04:26:27 PM
^ Ontario, Clarence, and Pembroke are level 3, but Scottsville is only level 2 like Indian Castle.

Makes sense from the perspective that 46-47 is the least-traveled section between Buffalo and Syracuse, but it seems odd that Ontario and Scottsville would be different from each other, considering they're both on that same segment.
Maybe the beginning of a segment has less demand as people leaving the city are likely fed and relieved before trip?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: baugh17 on September 12, 2022, 09:45:27 PM
Quote from: froggie on September 12, 2022, 08:06:22 PM
Wasn't there already a TA at the Fultonville exit?

Love's just opened recently at the Waterloo exit (Across from a Petro).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on September 12, 2022, 09:47:32 PM
Quote from: kalvado on September 12, 2022, 09:27:27 PM
Quote from: webny99 on September 12, 2022, 08:07:57 PM
Quote from: vdeane on September 11, 2022, 04:26:27 PM
^ Ontario, Clarence, and Pembroke are level 3, but Scottsville is only level 2 like Indian Castle.

Makes sense from the perspective that 46-47 is the least-traveled section between Buffalo and Syracuse, but it seems odd that Ontario and Scottsville would be different from each other, considering they're both on that same segment.
Maybe the beginning of a segment has less demand as people leaving the city are likely fed and relieved before trip?

Except that both areas are near the end of the segment in their respective direction. And if that was the case, you'd think Ontario would be the smaller one, not Scottsville, due to traffic from Rochester having entered at I-390.

There's also another building on-site at the Scottsville Plaza, possibly a historic building of some sort (?) that could be impacting things. It's visible in old Street View (https://goo.gl/maps/vVL2oLBN5HazqZC58), but the signage is unclear, and I haven't stopped there in so long that I don't remember what it is myself.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: seicer on September 12, 2022, 09:55:01 PM
I would say that commercial truck stops are far and few between in the Northeast, and practically non-existant in many areas.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on September 12, 2022, 09:58:16 PM
Quote from: webny99 on September 12, 2022, 08:07:57 PM
Quote from: vdeane on September 11, 2022, 04:26:27 PM
^ Ontario, Clarence, and Pembroke are level 3, but Scottsville is only level 2 like Indian Castle.

Makes sense from the perspective that 46-47 is the least-traveled section between Buffalo and Syracuse, but it seems odd that Ontario and Scottsville would be different from each other, considering they're both on that same segment.
That actually happens a few times.  Iroquois/Indian Castle is like that, as are Mohawk/Pattersonville, Warners/DeWitt and Port Byron, and Clifton Springs/Seneca and Junius Ponds.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on September 12, 2022, 10:15:57 PM
Quote from: baugh17 on September 12, 2022, 09:45:27 PM
Quote from: froggie on September 12, 2022, 08:06:22 PM
Wasn't there already a TA at the Fultonville exit?

Love's just opened recently at the Waterloo exit (Across from a Petro).

Indeed. I passed through there just a few weeks ago at around 2PM on a weekday and it was a hot mess, I can't imagine what it's like at peak travel times. There's a new stoplight at the Love's too, which makes 4 total on NY 414 between the casino and NY 318. It would have sounded crazy a decade ago, but NY 414 could really stand to be widened to 4 lanes there. It's starting to feel almost like a mini-urbanized area of its own.

I've even noticed that Google has started routing via NY 14/NY 318 between the Thruway and Auburn instead of NY 414, probably 1) to save on tolls for minimal extra time, and 2) avoid the gnarly left turn from 414 SB onto 318 EB, which appeared to be backed up several cycle lengths (the new Love's light seemed to be so poorly timed that NB traffic was backing up through the 318 intersection, so the aforementioned left turn was basically "green arrow/whenever NB traffic stops for you" only).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on September 12, 2022, 10:23:14 PM
Quote from: vdeane on September 12, 2022, 09:58:16 PM
Quote from: webny99 on September 12, 2022, 08:07:57 PM
Quote from: vdeane on September 11, 2022, 04:26:27 PM
^ Ontario, Clarence, and Pembroke are level 3, but Scottsville is only level 2 like Indian Castle.

Makes sense from the perspective that 46-47 is the least-traveled section between Buffalo and Syracuse, but it seems odd that Ontario and Scottsville would be different from each other, considering they're both on that same segment.
That actually happens a few times.  Iroquois/Indian Castle is like that, as are Mohawk/Pattersonville, Warners/DeWitt and Port Byron, and Clifton Springs/Seneca and Junius Ponds.

In terms of one being smaller than the other, I was referring to them being between the same two exits (that would be the case for the first two pairs, but not the others).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Jim on September 12, 2022, 11:31:35 PM
Quote from: froggie on September 12, 2022, 08:06:22 PM
Wasn't there already a TA at the Fultonville exit?

At the times I've been by since it opened, the new Fultonville Pilot has been much busier than I've ever seen the TA.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on September 13, 2022, 07:45:26 PM
Quote from: webny99 on September 12, 2022, 10:15:57 PM
I've even noticed that Google has started routing via NY 14/NY 318 between the Thruway and Auburn instead of NY 414, probably 1) to save on tolls for minimal extra time, and 2) avoid the gnarly left turn from 414 SB onto 318 EB, which appeared to be backed up several cycle lengths (the new Love's light seemed to be so poorly timed that NB traffic was backing up through the 318 intersection, so the aforementioned left turn was basically "green arrow/whenever NB traffic stops for you" only).
It's worth noting that Google no longer routes based on what route is the fastest, but which is the most fuel efficient.  It's not uncommon for me to change the route and have the travel time decrease these days, and at sometime, that routing is one of those times (forcing it to take NY 414 shaved off a minute when I tried it last night), though it might change during the day (rather than evening/night).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: storm2k on September 13, 2022, 08:23:30 PM
Quote from: vdeane on September 13, 2022, 07:45:26 PM
Quote from: webny99 on September 12, 2022, 10:15:57 PM
I've even noticed that Google has started routing via NY 14/NY 318 between the Thruway and Auburn instead of NY 414, probably 1) to save on tolls for minimal extra time, and 2) avoid the gnarly left turn from 414 SB onto 318 EB, which appeared to be backed up several cycle lengths (the new Love's light seemed to be so poorly timed that NB traffic was backing up through the 318 intersection, so the aforementioned left turn was basically "green arrow/whenever NB traffic stops for you" only).
It's worth noting that Google no longer routes based on what route is the fastest, but which is the most fuel efficient.  It's not uncommon for me to change the route and have the travel time decrease these days, and at sometime, that routing is one of those times (forcing it to take NY 414 shaved off a minute when I tried it last night), though it might change during the day (rather than evening/night).

That setting can be toggled off in the options, but it is on by default.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on September 13, 2022, 09:34:53 PM
^ I don't see that option in the directions.  Is it an account option rather than a directions option?  Or is it a mobile one?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: froggie on September 13, 2022, 09:51:25 PM
Quote from: vdeane on September 13, 2022, 09:34:53 PM
^ I don't see that option in the directions.  Is it an account option rather than a directions option?  Or is it a mobile one?

It's on the app, not on the website (at least in my experience).  Turned on/off via the Route Options menu.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on September 13, 2022, 10:40:33 PM
Quote from: vdeane on September 13, 2022, 07:45:26 PM
Quote from: webny99 on September 12, 2022, 10:15:57 PM
I've even noticed that Google has started routing via NY 14/NY 318 between the Thruway and Auburn instead of NY 414, probably 1) to save on tolls for minimal extra time, and 2) avoid the gnarly left turn from 414 SB onto 318 EB, which appeared to be backed up several cycle lengths (the new Love's light seemed to be so poorly timed that NB traffic was backing up through the 318 intersection, so the aforementioned left turn was basically "green arrow/whenever NB traffic stops for you" only).
It's worth noting that Google no longer routes based on what route is the fastest, but which is the most fuel efficient.  It's not uncommon for me to change the route and have the travel time decrease these days, and at sometime, that routing is one of those times (forcing it to take NY 414 shaved off a minute when I tried it last night), though it might change during the day (rather than evening/night).

I've noticed it will sometimes say "Best route now due to traffic conditions", rather than "Fastest route..." explicitly. However, it's usually still within a minute or two when it does that.

I haven't noticed anything significantly longer time-wise being the default unless you choose to prefer fuel-efficient routes, although the most fuel-efficient is usually still an option even when it's not the default.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: machias on September 18, 2022, 09:37:05 PM
Quote from: seicer on September 06, 2022, 07:13:36 PM
The new Indian Castle Service Area has opened: https://bigfrog104.com/take-a-look-the-first-ny-thruway-rest-area-is-completed-open/

- Was this one of the least visited service areas?
- There is very little indoor seating. Do they expect most people (including large crowds coming from buses) to eat outdoors? Or are they expecting that much traffic to be diverted to the lone drive-through for Starbucks? At least there is more outdoor seating which will be nice 6 months of the year.
- The hallway to the restrooms is only wide enough for one person and the restrooms are comically small. There are only four stalls. Competing for space in the hallway are entrances to the gender-neutral restrooms and the water fountain/bottling filling station.
- Parking is more plentiful.
- There are no showers at this location but others will include them.

I'm all on board with the new service areas, notably because they will include showers and updated amenities, but this seems to be a downscale of what was there.

I'm surprised to see the approach signs haven't been updated. Those signs are REALLY old.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: TonyTrafficLight on October 18, 2022, 09:20:54 AM
Another local bridge project delayed. I was wondering what the delay was. Bridge project started in May 2022
and they expected it to reopen in November. Pretty long detour will still be in effect during winter. Should be fun.

(https://i.imgur.com/2cG4Cuz.png)
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on October 18, 2022, 01:47:41 PM


Quote from: TonyTrafficLight on October 18, 2022, 09:20:54 AM
Another local bridge project delayed. I was wondering what the delay was. Bridge project started in May 2022
and they expected it to reopen in November. Pretty long detour will still be in effect during winter. Should be fun.

(https://i.imgur.com/2cG4Cuz.png)

Local?  Seems to be Thruway-administered.  Looks like NYSDOT was only mentioned for detour management.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on October 18, 2022, 03:56:54 PM
Quote from: Rothman on October 18, 2022, 01:47:41 PM


Quote from: TonyTrafficLight on October 18, 2022, 09:20:54 AM
Another local bridge project delayed. I was wondering what the delay was. Bridge project started in May 2022
and they expected it to reopen in November. Pretty long detour will still be in effect during winter. Should be fun.

(https://i.imgur.com/2cG4Cuz.png)

Local?  Seems to be Thruway-administered.  Looks like NYSDOT was only mentioned for detour management.
A  bridge for local traffic,  contracted to a local construction company.. NYSDOT vs NYSTA may be a very important part from your perspective, but as a driver I really don't care...
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on October 18, 2022, 05:18:28 PM


Quote from: kalvado on October 18, 2022, 03:56:54 PM
Quote from: Rothman on October 18, 2022, 01:47:41 PM


Quote from: TonyTrafficLight on October 18, 2022, 09:20:54 AM
Another local bridge project delayed. I was wondering what the delay was. Bridge project started in May 2022
and they expected it to reopen in November. Pretty long detour will still be in effect during winter. Should be fun.

(https://i.imgur.com/2cG4Cuz.png)

Local?  Seems to be Thruway-administered.  Looks like NYSDOT was only mentioned for detour management.
A  bridge for local traffic,  contracted to a local construction company.. NYSDOT vs NYSTA may be a very important part from your perspective, but as a driver I really don't care...

Most bridge projects are awarded to "local" contractors in NY.

Point being, the bridge is the responsibility of the Thruway and not a locality.

Every bridge carries local traffic...
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on October 19, 2022, 07:54:51 AM
Quote from: Rothman on October 18, 2022, 05:18:28 PM


Quote from: kalvado on October 18, 2022, 03:56:54 PM
Quote from: Rothman on October 18, 2022, 01:47:41 PM


Quote from: TonyTrafficLight on October 18, 2022, 09:20:54 AM
Another local bridge project delayed. I was wondering what the delay was. Bridge project started in May 2022
and they expected it to reopen in November. Pretty long detour will still be in effect during winter. Should be fun.

(https://i.imgur.com/2cG4Cuz.png)

Local?  Seems to be Thruway-administered.  Looks like NYSDOT was only mentioned for detour management.
A  bridge for local traffic,  contracted to a local construction company.. NYSDOT vs NYSTA may be a very important part from your perspective, but as a driver I really don't care...

Most bridge projects are awarded to "local" contractors in NY.

Point being, the bridge is the responsibility of the Thruway and not a locality.

Every bridge carries local traffic...
A more generic question though - do you think the same contractor would run into the same problem if project was administered by NYSDOT or locality? Or they wouldn't choose that contractor at all and another one would be more successful in getting required supplies?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on October 19, 2022, 09:04:57 AM
Quote from: kalvado on October 19, 2022, 07:54:51 AM
Quote from: Rothman on October 18, 2022, 05:18:28 PM


Quote from: kalvado on October 18, 2022, 03:56:54 PM
Quote from: Rothman on October 18, 2022, 01:47:41 PM


Quote from: TonyTrafficLight on October 18, 2022, 09:20:54 AM
Another local bridge project delayed. I was wondering what the delay was. Bridge project started in May 2022
and they expected it to reopen in November. Pretty long detour will still be in effect during winter. Should be fun.

(https://i.imgur.com/2cG4Cuz.png)

Local?  Seems to be Thruway-administered.  Looks like NYSDOT was only mentioned for detour management.
A  bridge for local traffic,  contracted to a local construction company.. NYSDOT vs NYSTA may be a very important part from your perspective, but as a driver I really don't care...

Most bridge projects are awarded to "local" contractors in NY.

Point being, the bridge is the responsibility of the Thruway and not a locality.

Every bridge carries local traffic...
A more generic question though - do you think the same contractor would run into the same problem if project was administered by NYSDOT or locality? Or they wouldn't choose that contractor at all and another one would be more successful in getting required supplies?
Given the state of the market and supply chain, all contractors are running into issues obtaining materials.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: TonyTrafficLight on October 19, 2022, 10:18:38 AM
Quote from: Rothman on October 18, 2022, 01:47:41 PM


Quote from: TonyTrafficLight on October 18, 2022, 09:20:54 AM
Another local bridge project delayed. I was wondering what the delay was. Bridge project started in May 2022
and they expected it to reopen in November. Pretty long detour will still be in effect during winter. Should be fun.

(https://i.imgur.com/2cG4Cuz.png)

Local?  Seems to be Thruway-administered.  Looks like NYSDOT was only mentioned for detour management.

Local = it's a few miles from my home and some of the detour is part of my daily commute was my point.

It's an Oneida County Road designated as County Road 840 that connects State Rt. 840 to State Rt. 233
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on October 19, 2022, 10:25:29 AM
Quote from: Rothman on October 19, 2022, 09:04:57 AM
Quote from: kalvado on October 19, 2022, 07:54:51 AM
Quote from: Rothman on October 18, 2022, 05:18:28 PM


Quote from: kalvado on October 18, 2022, 03:56:54 PM
Quote from: Rothman on October 18, 2022, 01:47:41 PM


Quote from: TonyTrafficLight on October 18, 2022, 09:20:54 AM
Another local bridge project delayed. I was wondering what the delay was. Bridge project started in May 2022
and they expected it to reopen in November. Pretty long detour will still be in effect during winter. Should be fun.

(https://i.imgur.com/2cG4Cuz.png)

Local?  Seems to be Thruway-administered.  Looks like NYSDOT was only mentioned for detour management.
A  bridge for local traffic,  contracted to a local construction company.. NYSDOT vs NYSTA may be a very important part from your perspective, but as a driver I really don't care...

Most bridge projects are awarded to "local" contractors in NY.

Point being, the bridge is the responsibility of the Thruway and not a locality.

Every bridge carries local traffic...
A more generic question though - do you think the same contractor would run into the same problem if project was administered by NYSDOT or locality? Or they wouldn't choose that contractor at all and another one would be more successful in getting required supplies?
Given the state of the market and supply chain, all contractors are running into issues obtaining materials.
with that in mind, I really appreciate that Sitterly road overpass over I-87 (which was hit in spring 2021 and had to be partially removed) happened on schedule, if not a bit sooner than planned.  That is a nearby (not using local just in case!)  one, which had some effect on me. 
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: PurdueBill on October 22, 2022, 01:12:44 PM
Quote from: machias on September 18, 2022, 09:37:05 PM
Quote from: seicer on September 06, 2022, 07:13:36 PM
The new Indian Castle Service Area has opened: https://bigfrog104.com/take-a-look-the-first-ny-thruway-rest-area-is-completed-open/

- Was this one of the least visited service areas?
- There is very little indoor seating. Do they expect most people (including large crowds coming from buses) to eat outdoors? Or are they expecting that much traffic to be diverted to the lone drive-through for Starbucks? At least there is more outdoor seating which will be nice 6 months of the year.
- The hallway to the restrooms is only wide enough for one person and the restrooms are comically small. There are only four stalls. Competing for space in the hallway are entrances to the gender-neutral restrooms and the water fountain/bottling filling station.
- Parking is more plentiful.
- There are no showers at this location but others will include them.

I'm all on board with the new service areas, notably because they will include showers and updated amenities, but this seems to be a downscale of what was there.

I'm surprised to see the approach signs haven't been updated. Those signs are REALLY old.

There are few signs remaining with the old "Thruway font" that used to be all over signs like "E-ZPass accepted in all lanes" (which are all gone now); wonder how long until the last of them are gone.  The signs sorting cars from trucks at plaza entrances also show it, although newer ones don't.

They are down to one Roy Rogers on the whole Thruway now?  Yikes. 
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on October 22, 2022, 02:25:11 PM
Quote from: PurdueBill on October 22, 2022, 01:12:44 PM
Quote from: machias on September 18, 2022, 09:37:05 PM
Quote from: seicer on September 06, 2022, 07:13:36 PM
The new Indian Castle Service Area has opened: https://bigfrog104.com/take-a-look-the-first-ny-thruway-rest-area-is-completed-open/

- Was this one of the least visited service areas?
- There is very little indoor seating. Do they expect most people (including large crowds coming from buses) to eat outdoors? Or are they expecting that much traffic to be diverted to the lone drive-through for Starbucks? At least there is more outdoor seating which will be nice 6 months of the year.
- The hallway to the restrooms is only wide enough for one person and the restrooms are comically small. There are only four stalls. Competing for space in the hallway are entrances to the gender-neutral restrooms and the water fountain/bottling filling station.
- Parking is more plentiful.
- There are no showers at this location but others will include them.

I'm all on board with the new service areas, notably because they will include showers and updated amenities, but this seems to be a downscale of what was there.

I'm surprised to see the approach signs haven't been updated. Those signs are REALLY old.

There are few signs remaining with the old "Thruway font" that used to be all over signs like "E-ZPass accepted in all lanes" (which are all gone now); wonder how long until the last of them are gone.  The signs sorting cars from trucks at plaza entrances also show it, although newer ones don't.

They are down to one Roy Rogers on the whole Thruway now?  Yikes.
After our last visit, I'd say, "Thank goodness."
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Jim on October 22, 2022, 09:45:20 PM
It seems the Thruway has really given up on caring about the remaining old service areas.  I stopped at Malden tonight at prime dinner time and only the McDonald's was open (when did value meals go over $12 at McDonald's?!  I didn't buy anything.).  The other restaurants looked to be closed permanently.  The bathroom was pretty disgusting and the smell was coming out into the rest of the building.  It seems an overall closure can't be that close since the construction at the next areas in both directions didn't look to be nearing completion.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on October 23, 2022, 01:54:14 PM
Quote from: Jim on October 22, 2022, 09:45:20 PM
It seems the Thruway has really given up on caring about the remaining old service areas.  I stopped at Malden tonight at prime dinner time and only the McDonald's was open (when did value meals go over $12 at McDonald's?!  I didn't buy anything.).  The other restaurants looked to be closed permanently.  The bathroom was pretty disgusting and the smell was coming out into the rest of the building.  It seems an overall closure can't be that close since the construction at the next areas in both directions didn't look to be nearing completion.
Amen to that.  I don't think that's a recent phenomenon, either.  I think there were many restaurants that never reopened from the COVID shutdowns since they didn't feel like coming back just to close again a few years alter.  Malden is a phase 2 service area, too, so it's not like closure will be imminent even with New Baltimore and Plattekill reopen.

Speaking of the service areas, the map shows that Seneca is still open.  What's with that?  They closed Oneida immediately once Indian Castle reopened despite it only being a couple days before Labor Day weekend, they have the stuff staged for a closure, and Junius Ponds reopened, yet it seems that Seneca hasn't started yet.  Looks like it's a map error.  The regular service area page lists it as closed.  Also looking at the regular service area page, it seems that the Applegreen convenience store will be the only 24 hour retailer at the new service areas.  The practice of designating one of the actual restaurants as a 24 hour service seems like it's being discontinued.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: machias on October 23, 2022, 06:29:08 PM
Quote from: PurdueBill on October 22, 2022, 01:12:44 PM
Quote from: machias on September 18, 2022, 09:37:05 PM
Quote from: seicer on September 06, 2022, 07:13:36 PM
The new Indian Castle Service Area has opened: https://bigfrog104.com/take-a-look-the-first-ny-thruway-rest-area-is-completed-open/

- Was this one of the least visited service areas?
- There is very little indoor seating. Do they expect most people (including large crowds coming from buses) to eat outdoors? Or are they expecting that much traffic to be diverted to the lone drive-through for Starbucks? At least there is more outdoor seating which will be nice 6 months of the year.
- The hallway to the restrooms is only wide enough for one person and the restrooms are comically small. There are only four stalls. Competing for space in the hallway are entrances to the gender-neutral restrooms and the water fountain/bottling filling station.
- Parking is more plentiful.
- There are no showers at this location but others will include them.

I'm all on board with the new service areas, notably because they will include showers and updated amenities, but this seems to be a downscale of what was there.

I'm surprised to see the approach signs haven't been updated. Those signs are REALLY old.

There are few signs remaining with the old "Thruway font" that used to be all over signs like "E-ZPass accepted in all lanes" (which are all gone now); wonder how long until the last of them are gone.  The signs sorting cars from trucks at plaza entrances also show it, although newer ones don't.



Those "Thruway font" signs for Service Areas were installed when the plazas were rebuilt in the 90s. The Thruway had just moved from a mix of reflective taping/screening and button copy signs to the new all reflective material signs, and that "font" was part of those signs.  The Thruway called it Series D.  Prior to those Service Area signs, there'd be a generic service area/logo sign with the name of the service area in a centered tab on top. Some were in button copy, some not, and some would have a mix, where the border would be button copy and the legend reflective tape or vice versa. That was common on interchange signing of the times as well.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on October 27, 2022, 03:23:56 PM
In today's news...

https://buffalonews.com/news/local/accident-and-incident/westbound-side-of-i-90-closed-at-batavia-pembroke-exits-due-to-fiery-truck-crash/article_d86fc820-5616-11ed-82dd-db1f0a0b5d9d.html
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: shadyjay on October 30, 2022, 09:06:27 PM
Saw this today on the Thruway SB:

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/52465336322_f12827dbae_4k.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2nWbyCb)87SB-Exit14A-new (https://flic.kr/p/2nWbyCb) by Jay Hogan (https://www.flickr.com/photos/shadyjay/), on Flickr


They look so non-New York-esque, especially with the [more] squared edges and curved pipe gantries.  At least the exit tab can sit square to the body of the sign, and hopefully they are visible at night!
(There's another one of similar design heading north/west at Exit 13-N).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: mariethefoxy on October 31, 2022, 02:42:22 AM
Quote from: shadyjay on October 30, 2022, 09:06:27 PM
Saw this today on the Thruway SB:

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/52465336322_f12827dbae_4k.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2nWbyCb)87SB-Exit14A-new (https://flic.kr/p/2nWbyCb) by Jay Hogan (https://www.flickr.com/photos/shadyjay/), on Flickr


They look so non-New York-esque, especially with the [more] squared edges and curved pipe gantries.  At least the exit tab can sit square to the body of the sign, and hopefully they are visible at night!
(There's another one of similar design heading north/west at Exit 13-N).

with an emphasis on hopefully are visible at night, the Thruway installed a few newer signs about 10 years ago on the NE thruway and they have grey lettering with a high vis green background and they are very difficult to read at night, worse than the worn out button copy they replaced!
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on October 31, 2022, 07:01:33 AM
Quote from: shadyjay on October 30, 2022, 09:06:27 PM
Saw this today on the Thruway SB:

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/52465336322_f12827dbae_4k.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2nWbyCb)87SB-Exit14A-new (https://flic.kr/p/2nWbyCb) by Jay Hogan (https://www.flickr.com/photos/shadyjay/), on Flickr


They look so non-New York-esque, especially with the [more] squared edges and curved pipe gantries.  At least the exit tab can sit square to the body of the sign, and hopefully they are visible at night!
(There's another one of similar design heading north/west at Exit 13-N).
Western NY has a bunch of monotubes.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on October 31, 2022, 11:57:58 AM
Quote from: shadyjay on October 30, 2022, 09:06:27 PM
Saw this today on the Thruway SB:

[img]


Wow, traffic is actually moving at speed there? That's a first!  ;-)
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: machias on October 31, 2022, 03:49:59 PM
Quote from: mariethefoxy on October 31, 2022, 02:42:22 AM

with an emphasis on hopefully are visible at night, the Thruway installed a few newer signs about 10 years ago on the NE thruway and they have grey lettering with a high vis green background and they are very difficult to read at night, worse than the worn out button copy they replaced!

There's a whole bunch of signs along the mainline in Buffalo with this exact same problem. Apparently the Thruway sign department bought the wrong reflective material but decided they had to use it up before getting new.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: shadyjay on October 31, 2022, 04:05:52 PM
Quote from: webny99 on October 31, 2022, 11:57:58 AM
Wow, traffic is actually moving at speed there? That's a first!  ;-)

For a Sunday afternoon in October, I was expecting to be sitting in traffic between the 287's, but outside of one slowdown, heading east towards the TZB was highway-speed.  Heading west/north, that was a different story.  Again, surprised, but not disappointed!
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: RyanB06 on November 01, 2022, 08:43:59 PM
Quote from: shadyjay on October 30, 2022, 09:06:27 PM
Saw this today on the Thruway SB:

<snip>

They look so non-New York-esque, especially with the [more] squared edges and curved pipe gantries.  At least the exit tab can sit square to the body of the sign, and hopefully they are visible at night!
(There's another one of similar design heading north/west at Exit 13-N).
That almost looks New Jersey-spec with the incomplete border around the exit tab.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kirbykart on November 15, 2022, 10:04:27 AM
Quote from: vdeane on October 23, 2022, 01:54:14 PM
Quote from: Jim on October 22, 2022, 09:45:20 PM
It seems the Thruway has really given up on caring about the remaining old service areas.  I stopped at Malden tonight at prime dinner time and only the McDonald's was open (when did value meals go over $12 at McDonald's?!  I didn't buy anything.).  The other restaurants looked to be closed permanently.  The bathroom was pretty disgusting and the smell was coming out into the rest of the building.  It seems an overall closure can't be that close since the construction at the next areas in both directions didn't look to be nearing completion.
Amen to that.  I don't think that's a recent phenomenon, either.  I think there were many restaurants that never reopened from the COVID shutdowns since they didn't feel like coming back just to close again a few years alter.  Malden is a phase 2 service area, too, so it's not like closure will be imminent even with New Baltimore and Plattekill reopen.

Speaking of the service areas, the map shows that Seneca is still open.  What's with that?  They closed Oneida immediately once Indian Castle reopened despite it only being a couple days before Labor Day weekend, they have the stuff staged for a closure, and Junius Ponds reopened, yet it seems that Seneca hasn't started yet.  Looks like it's a map error.  The regular service area page lists it as closed.  Also looking at the regular service area page, it seems that the Applegreen convenience store will be the only 24 hour retailer at the new service areas.  The practice of designating one of the actual restaurants as a 24 hour service seems like it's being discontinued.

Wow, some of them are open already? That's neat!
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: froggie on November 18, 2022, 07:08:47 PM
Heading up the Thruway from Harriman to Albany yesterday...Plattekill and New Baltimore had only gas open.  Malden was fully open, but I wasn't horribly impressed.

(EDIT) Meanwhile, every Thruway VMS was announcing a commercial vehicle ban west of Exit 46 (on the Thruway and including I-190) beginning at 4pm yesterday because of the snow.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kirbykart on November 19, 2022, 12:38:55 PM
Quote from: froggie on November 18, 2022, 07:08:47 PM
Heading up the Thruway from Harriman to Albany yesterday...Plattekill and New Baltimore had only gas open.  Malden was fully open, but I wasn't horribly impressed.

(EDIT) Meanwhile, every Thruway VMS was announcing a commercial vehicle ban west of Exit 46 (on the Thruway and including I-190) beginning at 4pm yesterday because of the snow.

Yeah, I heard there were feet in Erie County. It seems that for once, the Southern Tier has been spared from the worst of the storm!
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: GenExpwy on November 20, 2022, 08:34:57 AM
Quote from: kirbykart on November 19, 2022, 12:38:55 PM
Quote from: froggie on November 18, 2022, 07:08:47 PM
Heading up the Thruway from Harriman to Albany yesterday...Plattekill and New Baltimore had only gas open.  Malden was fully open, but I wasn't horribly impressed.

(EDIT) Meanwhile, every Thruway VMS was announcing a commercial vehicle ban west of Exit 46 (on the Thruway and including I-190) beginning at 4pm yesterday because of the snow.

Yeah, I heard there were feet in Erie County. It seems that for once, the Southern Tier has been spared from the worst of the storm!

VMSes on 390 in southern Livingston County yesterday:

I-90
ALTERNATE

CONTINUE
I-390 SB
I-86 WB
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on November 20, 2022, 01:54:48 PM
Quote from: GenExpwy on November 20, 2022, 08:34:57 AM
Quote from: kirbykart on November 19, 2022, 12:38:55 PM
Quote from: froggie on November 18, 2022, 07:08:47 PM
Heading up the Thruway from Harriman to Albany yesterday...Plattekill and New Baltimore had only gas open.  Malden was fully open, but I wasn't horribly impressed.

(EDIT) Meanwhile, every Thruway VMS was announcing a commercial vehicle ban west of Exit 46 (on the Thruway and including I-190) beginning at 4pm yesterday because of the snow.

Yeah, I heard there were feet in Erie County. It seems that for once, the Southern Tier has been spared from the worst of the storm!

VMSes on 390 in southern Livingston County yesterday:

I-90
ALTERNATE

CONTINUE
I-390 SB
I-86 WB

That's sort of like the signs on I-390 NB that tell truck traffic to take I-390 to the Thruway. That's the all-freeway route, but anyone that's familiar with the area knows it's shorter/faster to take one of several shortcuts. In this case, NY 36 is the obvious shortcut. It saves about 25 miles/20 minutes over taking I-390 SB all the way to I-86 WB.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kirbykart on November 21, 2022, 07:17:02 PM
Quote from: GenExpwy on November 20, 2022, 08:34:57 AM
Quote from: kirbykart on November 19, 2022, 12:38:55 PM
Quote from: froggie on November 18, 2022, 07:08:47 PM
Heading up the Thruway from Harriman to Albany yesterday...Plattekill and New Baltimore had only gas open.  Malden was fully open, but I wasn't horribly impressed.

(EDIT) Meanwhile, every Thruway VMS was announcing a commercial vehicle ban west of Exit 46 (on the Thruway and including I-190) beginning at 4pm yesterday because of the snow.

Yeah, I heard there were feet in Erie County. It seems that for once, the Southern Tier has been spared from the worst of the storm!

VMSes on 390 in southern Livingston County yesterday:

I-90
ALTERNATE

CONTINUE
I-390 SB
I-86 WB

By the way, what is the deal with 86 & 390's bizzare interchange?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on November 21, 2022, 07:47:22 PM
Quote from: kirbykart on November 21, 2022, 07:17:02 PM
By the way, what is the deal with 86 & 390's bizzare interchange?

What in particular do you think is bizarre?

The U-shaped ramp from I-86 EB to I-390 NB carries very little traffic. It was presumably built that way so that the movements on I-390 to/from the east would be the predominant through movements, as they certainly are traffic-wise.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: froggie on November 21, 2022, 11:10:36 PM
^ It's also a way for what would otherwise commonly be a trumpet interchange to have a low-usage loop ramp enter and exit on the right instead of on the left.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kirbykart on November 25, 2022, 12:58:47 PM
Quote from: webny99 on November 21, 2022, 07:47:22 PM
Quote from: kirbykart on November 21, 2022, 07:17:02 PM
By the way, what is the deal with 86 & 390's bizzare interchange?

What in particular do you think is bizarre?

The U-shaped ramp from I-86 EB to I-390 NB carries very little traffic. It was presumably built that way so that the movements on I-390 to/from the east would be the predominant through movements, as they certainly are traffic-wise.

That makes sense, I just always thought that a pelican (that's the term I've heard for that type of interchange) is bizzare in and of itself.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: froggie on November 25, 2022, 01:44:51 PM
Quote from: kirbykart on November 25, 2022, 12:58:47 PM
That makes sense, I just always thought that a pelican (that's the term I've heard for that type of interchange) is bizzare in and of itself.

The only place I've seen that name applied to that type of interchange is on an Australian website.  I have not seen it in use in the US.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kirbykart on November 26, 2022, 12:22:55 PM
^Yes, I also heard that term on an Australian website, and I figure it's just easier to use a single term for the interchange style regardless of location.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: James on November 26, 2022, 05:38:08 PM
Will I-90 ever be rerouted onto I-87 and the Berkshire Connecter in the Albany region? Seems like it'd reduce confusion for long distance traffic and divert it away from local Albany traffic. The current section of I-90 from Exit 24 to Exit B1 could be renamed to like I-487 or something.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on November 26, 2022, 06:37:03 PM
Quote from: James on November 26, 2022, 05:38:08 PM
Will I-90 ever be rerouted onto I-87 and the Berkshire Connecter in the Albany region? Seems like it'd reduce confusion for long distance traffic and divert it away from local Albany traffic. The current section of I-90 from Exit 24 to Exit B1 could be renamed to like I-487 or something.

Current free I-90 should become I-390 when it becomes available when I-99 is extended to Rochester.  ;-)

Seriously, this has been proposed many times but it is ultimately fictional as there just isn't enough incentive to shake up the status quo.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on November 26, 2022, 06:39:46 PM
Quote from: James on November 26, 2022, 05:38:08 PM
Will I-90 ever be rerouted onto I-87 and the Berkshire Connecter in the Albany region? Seems like it'd reduce confusion for long distance traffic and divert it away from local Albany traffic. The current section of I-90 from Exit 24 to Exit B1 could be renamed to like I-487 or something.
Don't hold your breath. It may happen someday, miracles do happen after all. 
And it's probably not that big of a confusion if both routes are about the same, both  distance and time-wise. Local traffic on free I-90 is usually not that bad even during the commute. And most people would take Waze's suggestion regardless of route number.

As for numbering, I-88 could be brought up. All that is purely fictional though.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on November 26, 2022, 07:16:36 PM
Quote from: James on November 26, 2022, 05:38:08 PM
Will I-90 ever be rerouted onto I-87 and the Berkshire Connecter in the Albany region? Seems like it'd reduce confusion for long distance traffic and divert it away from local Albany traffic. The current section of I-90 from Exit 24 to Exit B1 could be renamed to like I-487 or something.
Flat no.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: lstone19 on November 26, 2022, 07:53:38 PM
Quote from: James on November 26, 2022, 05:38:08 PM
Will I-90 ever be rerouted onto I-87 and the Berkshire Connecter in the Albany region? Seems like it'd reduce confusion for long distance traffic and divert it away from local Albany traffic. The current section of I-90 from Exit 24 to Exit B1 could be renamed to like I-487 or something.

In general, 2dis go through cities while 3dis go around them. So given that, I-90 is correct where it is (yes, there are exceptions, some of them involving the Thruway). But if you're going to change I-90 at Albany, then you should also be re-routing I-90 around Cleveland via I-271 and I-480, I-94 around Chicago via I-294, and I-5 around L.A. and San Diego via I-405 and I-805 respectively just to name a few.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: James on November 26, 2022, 08:48:03 PM
Quote from: kalvado on November 26, 2022, 06:39:46 PM
Quote from: James on November 26, 2022, 05:38:08 PM
Will I-90 ever be rerouted onto I-87 and the Berkshire Connecter in the Albany region? Seems like it'd reduce confusion for long distance traffic and divert it away from local Albany traffic. The current section of I-90 from Exit 24 to Exit B1 could be renamed to like I-487 or something.
Don't hold your breath. It may happen someday, miracles do happen after all. 
And it's probably not that big of a confusion if both routes are about the same, both  distance and time-wise. Local traffic on free I-90 is usually not that bad even during the commute. And most people would take Waze's suggestion regardless of route number.

As for numbering, I-88 could be brought up. All that is purely fictional though.

Fair enough. I checked on GMaps and both ways from Exit 24 to Exit B1 are almost virtually identical distance-wise.
It's probably fine as it is now but I bet if they could go back in time, then NYSDoT would 100% reroute I-90 onto I-87 and NY 912M just to divert Boston-oriented traffic away from what's supposed to be the local Albany highway (and maybe to juice out a few more cents via Thruway tolls).

If there's anything that actually should be changed though, it's the direction of the I-90/NY 912M trumpet interchange.


Quote from: lstone19 on November 26, 2022, 07:53:38 PM
Quote from: James on November 26, 2022, 05:38:08 PM
Will I-90 ever be rerouted onto I-87 and the Berkshire Connecter in the Albany region? Seems like it'd reduce confusion for long distance traffic and divert it away from local Albany traffic. The current section of I-90 from Exit 24 to Exit B1 could be renamed to like I-487 or something.

In general, 2dis go through cities while 3dis go around them. So given that, I-90 is correct where it is (yes, there are exceptions, some of them involving the Thruway). But if you're going to change I-90 at Albany, then you should also be re-routing I-90 around Cleveland via I-271 and I-480, I-94 around Chicago via I-294, and I-5 around L.A. and San Diego via I-405 and I-805 respectively just to name a few.
No, not necessarily. For example, I-75/I-275 in Tampa or heck, I-90/I-490 in Rochester.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on November 26, 2022, 09:43:21 PM
Quote from: James on November 26, 2022, 08:48:03 PM
It's probably fine as it is now but I bet if they could go back in time, then NYSDoT would 100% reroute I-90 onto I-87 and NY 912M just to divert Boston-oriented traffic away from what's supposed to be the local Albany highway (and maybe to juice out a few more cents via Thruway tolls).

They already do that at the I-87/I-90 split (https://goo.gl/maps/kQEm3Ubot2dLh48PA) to encourage I-90 thru traffic to stay on the Thruway.


Quote from: James on November 26, 2022, 08:48:03 PM
Quote from: lstone19 on November 26, 2022, 07:53:38 PM
Quote from: James on November 26, 2022, 05:38:08 PM
Will I-90 ever be rerouted onto I-87 and the Berkshire Connecter in the Albany region? Seems like it'd reduce confusion for long distance traffic and divert it away from local Albany traffic. The current section of I-90 from Exit 24 to Exit B1 could be renamed to like I-487 or something.

In general, 2dis go through cities while 3dis go around them. So given that, I-90 is correct where it is (yes, there are exceptions, some of them involving the Thruway). But if you're going to change I-90 at Albany, then you should also be re-routing I-90 around Cleveland via I-271 and I-480, I-94 around Chicago via I-294, and I-5 around L.A. and San Diego via I-405 and I-805 respectively just to name a few.
No, not necessarily. For example, I-75/I-275 in Tampa or heck, I-90/I-490 in Rochester.

The 2di normally takes the shorter route (there are exceptions to this too, such as I-75 in Macon, but they're fewer). I-90 vs. the Thruway in Albany is one case where it is a true toss-up, so it wouldn't matter from a numbering perspective, but there's just not a strong enough case to change it.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on November 27, 2022, 01:57:46 PM
Quote from: webny99 on November 26, 2022, 09:43:21 PM
Quote from: James on November 26, 2022, 08:48:03 PM
It's probably fine as it is now but I bet if they could go back in time, then NYSDoT would 100% reroute I-90 onto I-87 and NY 912M just to divert Boston-oriented traffic away from what's supposed to be the local Albany highway (and maybe to juice out a few more cents via Thruway tolls).

They already do that at the I-87/I-90 split (https://goo.gl/maps/kQEm3Ubot2dLh48PA) to encourage I-90 thru traffic to stay on the Thruway.
Just for reference: NYSDOT and NYSTA are different agencies, and looks like they are not great friends.
So, NYSDOT would actually lose no revenue from cars using whatever routing and gains some from trucks logging free I-90 mileage. NYSTA would benefit from tolls, something like $1.50 for cars I believe.
The condition of Castleton bridge is another interesting question. It looks and feels to be in need of massive renovation, if not replacement. I didn't drive there since the last renovation cycle started, though.
And political aspect...  It was a little news footnote when some obscure road was closed in 2016 due to bridge pre-failure conditions. Closing I-90 would make headlines.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: lstone19 on November 27, 2022, 03:46:09 PM
I'll admit my memory is hazy but as a child in the 60s, IIRC, 90 was originally routed via the Thruway from 24 to B1 and was rerouted on to "freebie 90"  only once it was built. I do recall when exit 24, if not going on to the Northway, went straight on to Washington Ave.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: MASTERNC on November 30, 2022, 08:33:35 AM
Looks like the Thruway Authority wants to remove any discount for those without NY E-ZPass transponders.  Not only would they pay the same rate as the Toll-by-Plate users, but the differential would increase from 30% to 75%.  I know the MTA does this but it makes no sense to charge E-ZPass users the same rate as those whose license plates need to be looked up and a bill to be mailed.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on November 30, 2022, 08:38:37 AM
Quote from: MASTERNC on November 30, 2022, 08:33:35 AM
Looks like the Thruway Authority wants to remove any discount for those without NY E-ZPass transponders.  Not only would they pay the same rate as the Toll-by-Plate users, but the differential would increase from 30% to 75%.
I wonder if that would become a popular trend...
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: MASTERNC on November 30, 2022, 08:39:57 AM
Quote from: kalvado on November 30, 2022, 08:38:37 AM
Quote from: MASTERNC on November 30, 2022, 08:33:35 AM
Looks like the Thruway Authority wants to remove any discount for those without NY E-ZPass transponders.  Not only would they pay the same rate as the Toll-by-Plate users, but the differential would increase from 30% to 75%.
I wonder if that would become a popular trend...

Waiting for our friends in PA to do that.  Right now, any E-ZPass user gets about a 60% discount.  It definitely flies in the face of interoperability if agencies are treating their own customers differently than others.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on November 30, 2022, 08:48:59 AM
Quote from: MASTERNC on November 30, 2022, 08:39:57 AM
Quote from: kalvado on November 30, 2022, 08:38:37 AM
Quote from: MASTERNC on November 30, 2022, 08:33:35 AM
Looks like the Thruway Authority wants to remove any discount for those without NY E-ZPass transponders.  Not only would they pay the same rate as the Toll-by-Plate users, but the differential would increase from 30% to 75%.
I wonder if that would become a popular trend...

Waiting for our friends in PA to do that.  Right now, any E-ZPass user gets about a 60% discount.  It definitely flies in the face of interoperability if agencies are treating their own customers differently than others.
It still provides the main benefit of interoperability - hassle free toll. For me, that is more important than toll value. In fact the only case where I am a bit concerned over toll value is NYC bridges.
I can certainly understand that toll value can be an issue for those who use their E-ZPass more than once a month, though.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on November 30, 2022, 12:50:42 PM
I'd go so far as to say that having one rate for in-state transponders and forcing the out of state transponders to pay the cash/bill by mail rate is the norm.  NY and MA are unusual in having a separate rate category for out of state transponders, and PA is sadly even more unusual in not having any form of transponder discrimination at all (let's hope they don't get ideas, even their E-ZPass tolls are high enough, and their bill by mail rate is astronomical).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: MASTERNC on November 30, 2022, 01:11:23 PM
Quote from: vdeane on November 30, 2022, 12:50:42 PM
I'd go so far as to say that having one rate for in-state transponders and forcing the out of state transponders to pay the cash/bill by mail rate is the norm.  NY and MA are unusual in having a separate rate category for out of state transponders, and PA is sadly even more unusual in not having any form of transponder discrimination at all (let's hope they don't get ideas, even their E-ZPass tolls are high enough, and their bill by mail rate is astronomical).

I would say it has become the norm (sadly) but the toll-by-mail rate is astronomically higher because of the added costs of that method.  Those costs don't exist for any E-ZPass (unless there is some sort of fee for inter-agency transactions).  A middle rate (like NY has now and MD/MA use) makes much more sense.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on November 30, 2022, 01:16:17 PM
Quote from: vdeane on November 30, 2022, 12:50:42 PM
I'd go so far as to say that having one rate for in-state transponders and forcing the out of state transponders to pay the cash/bill by mail rate is the norm.  NY and MA are unusual in having a separate rate category for out of state transponders, and PA is sadly even more unusual in not having any form of transponder discrimination at all (let's hope they don't get ideas, even their E-ZPass tolls are high enough, and their bill by mail rate is astronomical).
An interesting aspect of it is the degree of government control over toll road. That ranges from Masspike maintained by DOT to NYSTA ranging from government when it needs to (for registration suspensions) to almost private (accountability wise); and totally independent agencies (Indiana Toll road, seems like PA turnpike is next). There should be a correlation in policies. 
I can totally see traditional "they don't vote here" approach being primary motivation for those with more government influence.
On an operational side of things, EZpass tolls should be cheaper than by-plate and possibly cheapest for a home agency tag,  just due to billing complexity and efficiency of funds collection. But that is likey the minor consideration   
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: RestrictOnTheHanger on December 06, 2022, 10:25:17 PM
The full proposal is up. 5 % increases for NY EZPasses in 2024 and 2027, out of state and toll by mail rates jump to 75% above NY EZpass rates. Tappan Zee tolls increase each year.

https://www.thruway.ny.gov/news/adjustment/index.html

IIRC, there are not any significant interagency fees or markups  for out of state transponders, but interagency processing/settlements/disputes (initiated by users) in theory take up some time and $. But not enough to justify a huge differential. EZPass publishes derailed rules and standards for toll agencies if anyone is so inclined to read them, they provide some interesting operational details.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: storm2k on December 07, 2022, 01:54:18 AM
Quote from: RestrictOnTheHanger on December 06, 2022, 10:25:17 PM
The full proposal is up. 5 % increases for NY EZPasses in 2024 and 2027, out of state and toll by mail rates jump to 75% above NY EZpass rates. Tappan Zee tolls increase each year.

https://www.thruway.ny.gov/news/adjustment/index.html

IIRC, there are not any significant interagency fees or markups  for out of state transponders, but interagency processing/settlements/disputes (initiated by users) in theory take up some time and $. But not enough to justify a huge differential. EZPass publishes derailed rules and standards for toll agencies if anyone is so inclined to read them, they provide some interesting operational details.

There isn't, as evidenced by the fact that for the first 15 years or so of E-ZPass existence, you paid the E-ZPass rate and that was that. This is just an easy way for agencies to collect more toll revenue without having to do a lot since the days of cash tolls are ending for pretty much every agency out there.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Jim on December 19, 2022, 09:03:48 PM
A few days ago, I noticed that "New York" lost its space here on the Thruway at Exit 24.  I grabbed a pretty poor quality picture with my iPad this morning.

(https://www.teresco.org/temp/exit24.jpg)

I drive under those 4-5 times a week and just noticed it this week.  Has it been like this and I just hadn't noticed before?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Snappyjack on December 19, 2022, 09:51:59 PM
Yup. In fact, it's a whole new sign assembly.

Here's GSV from 5 months ago.. https://maps.app.goo.gl/6soek4oSiRb5BqVaA
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: storm2k on December 20, 2022, 01:28:40 PM
Quote from: Jim on December 19, 2022, 09:03:48 PM
A few days ago, I noticed that "New York" lost its space here on the Thruway at Exit 24.  I grabbed a pretty poor quality picture with my iPad this morning.

(https://www.teresco.org/temp/exit24.jpg)

I drive under those 4-5 times a week and just noticed it this week.  Has it been like this and I just hadn't noticed before?


The spacing on the 87 and 90 shields on the lefthand sign feel a bit "off" as well. Feels like they should be spaced out a bit more. Also technically should be 90 East to 87 North but that's an argument for a different day.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kramie13 on December 21, 2022, 01:43:25 PM
Quote from: Jim on December 19, 2022, 09:03:48 PM
(https://www.teresco.org/temp/exit24.jpg)

I-90 goes to Boston, yet the sign assembly directs Boston-bound drivers to take I-87 south?   :confused:  :confused:  :confused:

I'm guessing this is a ploy to get people to stay on the toll road and pay tolls?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: MATraveler128 on December 21, 2022, 01:46:55 PM
Quote from: kramie13 on December 21, 2022, 01:43:25 PM
Quote from: Jim on December 19, 2022, 09:03:48 PM
(https://www.teresco.org/temp/exit24.jpg)

I-90 goes to Boston, yet the sign assembly directs Boston-bound drivers to take I-87 south?   :confused:  :confused:  :confused:

I'm guessing this is a ploy to get people to stay on the toll road and pay tolls?

It's actually faster to use the Thruway down to the Berkshire Spur rather than staying on free 90 through Albany, which is partly why Boston is signed on I-87 south.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on December 21, 2022, 03:06:34 PM
Quote from: BlueOutback7 on December 21, 2022, 01:46:55 PM
Quote from: kramie13 on December 21, 2022, 01:43:25 PM
Quote from: Jim on December 19, 2022, 09:03:48 PM
....

I-90 goes to Boston, yet the sign assembly directs Boston-bound drivers to take I-87 south?   :confused:  :confused:  :confused:

I'm guessing this is a ploy to get people to stay on the toll road and pay tolls?

It's actually faster to use the Thruway down to the Berkshire Spur rather than staying on free 90 through Albany, which is partly why Boston is signed on I-87 south.
Not faster per se, more like it depends on traffic and roadwork. Very close to break even with empty roads, and going around the city may be good from city perspective.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on December 21, 2022, 05:09:52 PM
Quote from: kalvado on December 21, 2022, 03:06:34 PM
Quote from: BlueOutback7 on December 21, 2022, 01:46:55 PM
Quote from: kramie13 on December 21, 2022, 01:43:25 PM
Quote from: Jim on December 19, 2022, 09:03:48 PM
....

I-90 goes to Boston, yet the sign assembly directs Boston-bound drivers to take I-87 south?   :confused:  :confused:  :confused:

I'm guessing this is a ploy to get people to stay on the toll road and pay tolls?

It's actually faster to use the Thruway down to the Berkshire Spur rather than staying on free 90 through Albany, which is partly why Boston is signed on I-87 south.
Not faster per se, more like it depends on traffic and roadwork. Very close to break even with empty roads, and going around the city may be good from city perspective.
The time has become closer with the removal of the toll booths.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: GCEDW on December 23, 2022, 01:54:43 PM
On January 1st, the Ramapo and Warners service areas will close for construction, and the remaining McDonald's will be closed and be replaced with temporary dining options (primarily Applegreen C-stores): https://www.thruway.ny.gov/news/pressrel/2022/12/2022-12-21-service-area-changes.html
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Mr. Matté on December 23, 2022, 02:26:01 PM
Where the heck are they going to fit in a playground at the Ramapo plaza?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: D-Dey65 on December 25, 2022, 10:40:19 AM
When the thruway was built in Ardsley, it divided the Valentine Everit Macy County Park. I'd like to see the two sections reunited again with a pedestrian bridge over the thruway. I would've opted for the possibility for a bridge under the thruway, but there's too much of a risk of flooding from the Saw Mill River.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: James on December 26, 2022, 09:01:16 PM
Any guesses for when the Thruway will be open again?

I frequently take Exit 46 to Exit 47 for my commute to work so it'd be nice if they could at least reopen the Thruway piece by piece.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on December 27, 2022, 12:07:53 PM
Quote from: James on December 26, 2022, 09:01:16 PM
Any guesses for when the Thruway will be open again?

I frequently take Exit 46 to Exit 47 for my commute to work so it'd be nice if they could at least reopen the Thruway piece by piece.

Per thruway.ny.gov, it looks like the Thruway has now reopened. Most major highways have reopened or will at some point today, except for I-190 which remains closed south of I-290.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: storm2k on January 05, 2023, 08:44:44 PM
No more golden arches: Thruway McDonald's being replaced with other food options (https://www.timesunion.com/business/article/No-more-Golden-Arches-NYS-Thruway-McDonald-s-17692058.php)

Thruway McD's contract expired on December 31st. Applegreen now has the remaining service areas that McD's had and will be rebuilt like the other service areas.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on January 05, 2023, 10:53:08 PM
Quote from: storm2k on January 05, 2023, 08:44:44 PM
No more golden arches: Thruway McDonald's being replaced with other food options (https://www.timesunion.com/business/article/No-more-Golden-Arches-NYS-Thruway-McDonald-s-17692058.php)

Thruway McD's contract expired on December 31st. Applegreen now has the remaining service areas that McD's had and will be rebuilt like the other service areas.
Somebody is really late to the party with this one. :D
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: TheDon102 on January 12, 2023, 08:37:12 PM
Replacement of the North Avenue Bridge over I-95 (New England Thruway) in New Rochelle starts this month.

Link -  https://www.thruway.ny.gov/oursystem/north-ave-bridge/index.html?fbclid=IwAR0Bm226-5oiPVdOovK0d8BbLPhtM92KF6uS3bcLLKICd4dWT2l7SXGcIig (https://www.thruway.ny.gov/oursystem/north-ave-bridge/index.html?fbclid=IwAR0Bm226-5oiPVdOovK0d8BbLPhtM92KF6uS3bcLLKICd4dWT2l7SXGcIig)
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: D-Dey65 on January 18, 2023, 11:43:05 PM
Quote from: TheDon102 on January 12, 2023, 08:37:12 PM
Replacement of the North Avenue Bridge over I-95 (New England Thruway) in New Rochelle starts this month.

Link -  https://www.thruway.ny.gov/oursystem/north-ave-bridge/index.html?fbclid=IwAR0Bm226-5oiPVdOovK0d8BbLPhtM92KF6uS3bcLLKICd4dWT2l7SXGcIig (https://www.thruway.ny.gov/oursystem/north-ave-bridge/index.html?fbclid=IwAR0Bm226-5oiPVdOovK0d8BbLPhtM92KF6uS3bcLLKICd4dWT2l7SXGcIig)
Another bridge they have to rebuild there is Centre Street... and not just over the New England Thruway.

Let me show you people the reason why:
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/02/Centre_Avenue_Bridges%3B_New_Rochelle%2C_NY-1.jpg/640px-Centre_Avenue_Bridges%3B_New_Rochelle%2C_NY-1.jpg)
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cockroachking on January 18, 2023, 11:51:39 PM
The 3-ton posted bridge is the railroad crossing; the Thruway bridge itself appears to be just fine on a quick GSV inspection, other than the original guiderail.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: D-Dey65 on January 18, 2023, 11:55:29 PM
Quote from: cockroachking on January 18, 2023, 11:51:39 PM
The 3-ton posted bridge is the railroad crossing; the Thruway bridge itself appears to be just fine on a quick GSV inspection, other than the original guiderail.
Well, then the MTA should be the one to replace it, and hope it doesn't have a negative impact on the one over the Thruway.

Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cockroachking on January 19, 2023, 12:04:42 AM
After a quick check of the NYSDOT Westchester County Bridge Inventory (https://www.dot.ny.gov/main/bridgedata/repository/WestchesterBridgeData.pdf), this would appear to be correct: MTA owns the railroad bridge (BIN 2262260), which is listed in poor condition, while the Thruway bridge (BIN 5514540) is not in poor condition.

Fun fact: The railroad bridge (BIN 2262260) was originally constructed in 1886, so the fact that is operation at all (albeit the 3 ton posted limit) impresses me.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: D-Dey65 on January 19, 2023, 12:15:16 AM
This image of the North Avenue Bridge over the Thruway made an impression on me;
https://www.google.com/maps/@40.9134037,-73.7838766,3a,75y,343.39h,89.59t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sTyPEkuSofinMziJdF2e3qA!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixelspa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DTyPEkuSofinMziJdF2e3qA%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D163.91614%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en
(https://www.google.com/maps/@40.9134037,-73.7838766,3a,75y,343.39h,89.59t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sTyPEkuSofinMziJdF2e3qA!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixelspa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DTyPEkuSofinMziJdF2e3qA%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D163.91614%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en)
And my impression is, they're right for doing it.



Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cockroachking on January 19, 2023, 12:30:56 AM
Well, whenever there is that much spalling, it is no surprise that is on the list of replacements, especially since spalling's visible effects would alarm the general public. It is also worth noting that to no one's surprise, it is listed in poor condition according to NYSDOT (BIN 5514550).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: SignBridge on January 19, 2023, 04:40:05 PM
Thruway bridge was built circa 1958.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cockroachking on January 19, 2023, 05:49:55 PM
NYSDOT has both the North Ave and Centre St bridges as built in 1954.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: SignBridge on January 19, 2023, 10:34:38 PM
Well I don't think NYSDOT even built those bridges. It would have been the Thruway Authority. But they may have been built between 1954-58. The New England Thruway opened circa 1958.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cockroachking on January 20, 2023, 10:41:56 AM
No, NYSTA built and owns them, but NYSDOT is the only agency in NY to my knowledge that published a bridge inventory, and it includes every road bridge in the state, no matter the owner.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: jmacswimmer on January 24, 2023, 12:36:10 PM
Quote from: RestrictOnTheHanger on December 06, 2022, 10:25:17 PM
The full proposal is up. 5 % increases for NY EZPasses in 2024 and 2027, out of state and toll by mail rates jump to 75% above NY EZpass rates. Tappan Zee tolls increase each year.

https://www.thruway.ny.gov/news/adjustment/index.html

IIRC, there are not any significant interagency fees or markups  for out of state transponders, but interagency processing/settlements/disputes (initiated by users) in theory take up some time and $. But not enough to justify a huge differential. EZPass publishes derailed rules and standards for toll agencies if anyone is so inclined to read them, they provide some interesting operational details.

Reading about this has me pondering whether it makes sense in the future to open a New York E-ZPass account (in addition to my Maryland account) purely for road trips to the northeast that would involve NYSTA/PANYNJ/MTAB&T crossings. From perusing the NY E-ZPass website, I discovered they offer a pay-per-trip option that allows you to simply have a checking account debited for each toll rather than pre-paying account funds (which would be perfect for more infrequent use).  The only thing I can't figure out, and was hoping someone here could weigh in on: I understand transponders can be officially issued by either NYSTA, PANYNJ, or MTAB&T, but it's not clear from the website which one you'd get for simply opening a pay-per-trip account without any of the various agency's discount plans. Is it just luck-of-the-draw which one you get? Asking because I see there is a monthly service fee for PANYNJ accounts, but not NYSTA or MTAB&T.

I typically use the Tappan Zee whenever I drive to New England and have no issue with the current $6.61 out-of-state rate (which is only 86 cents over the NY rate), but I agree with the discussion a few pages back that the principle of matching it to the tolls-by-mail rate is rather annoying. I can understand an out-of-state EZ-Pass toll costing slightly more to collect due to interagency processing as you note, which is why I don't mind the 3-tiered system that MDTA & MassDOT (and NYSTA for the moment) use. I recall PANYNJ used to give all E-ZPass users the 2-tiered discount based on peak vs. off-peak (I paid $12.50 for the Goethals with my Maryland account in 2018), but they limited it to NY & NJ accounts only starting with the 2020 toll increase. In addition to the PTC (as vdeane noted a couple pages back), DRJTBC comes to mind as one of the few remaining toll agencies that offers a discounted E-ZPass rate to any & all transponders.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on January 24, 2023, 12:49:25 PM
For online orders, which one is assigned is based on address.  For NYC and Long Island, it's a MTA tag.  For all other NY addresses, it's a Thruway tag.  All out of state addresses get the PANYNJ tag.  The way around this is to buy it at a retail location, but I don't know how that interacts with the pay per trip option.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: jmacswimmer on January 24, 2023, 01:05:09 PM
Quote from: vdeane on January 24, 2023, 12:49:25 PM
For online orders, which one is assigned is based on address.  For NYC and Long Island, it's a MTA tag.  For all other NY addresses, it's a Thruway tag.  All out of state addresses get the PANYNJ tag.  The way around this is to buy it at a retail location, but I don't know how that interacts with the pay per trip option.

Good to know, thanks for the insight. I'll have to stop at one of the Thruway service areas and pick up a transponder whenever I'm up that way again :-D (I would assume the on-the-go tags sold at Thruway service areas are NYSTA tags?) My understanding from reading the pay-per-trip FAQ is that I'd open the account as a typical pre-funded account (with the $25 used to purchase the on-the-go tag), but the account can then be changed to pay-per-trip somewhere in settings. It would then drain the pre-funded balance first and switch to debiting a checking account once that money is gone.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: RobbieL2415 on January 24, 2023, 01:49:16 PM
Quote from: vdeane on January 24, 2023, 12:49:25 PM
For online orders, which one is assigned is based on address.  For NYC and Long Island, it's a MTA tag.  For all other NY addresses, it's a Thruway tag.  All out of state addresses get the PANYNJ tag.  The way around this is to buy it at a retail location, but I don't know how that interacts with the pay per trip option.
I live in CT and was issue a MTA B&T tag.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: MASTERNC on January 24, 2023, 02:38:22 PM
Quote from: vdeane on January 24, 2023, 12:49:25 PM
For online orders, which one is assigned is based on address.  For NYC and Long Island, it's a MTA tag.  For all other NY addresses, it's a Thruway tag.  All out of state addresses get the PANYNJ tag.  The way around this is to buy it at a retail location, but I don't know how that interacts with the pay per trip option.

I don't know about the pay-per-trip option, but I did buy a Thruway tag in Buffalo and registered it first to my grandfather's address in the area (to be safe), then changed to mine the next day.  It has stayed with the Thruway ever since.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Mr. Matté on January 24, 2023, 07:40:51 PM
I have a Thruway tag (picked up at Sloatsburg in 2021), logging onto my E-ZPassNY account, I have the option to switch to a bank account. You'll also need to switch your account type from standard to PPT.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: baugh17 on January 26, 2023, 07:00:32 PM
Just putting this out there...

https://www.wktv.com/news/local/griffo-pushing-for-changes-to-thruway-numbering-system/article_ca65ce40-9dc5-11ed-9fa1-1b4d3943781d.html?fbclid=IwAR3NFK9vGEZbYIQaMnZ_3SZpOzhxNrjcxVQtjz8mSqoulACbRPKwPeVqgsc
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on January 26, 2023, 07:29:26 PM
Quote from: baugh17 on January 26, 2023, 07:00:32 PM
Just putting this out there...

https://www.wktv.com/news/local/griffo-pushing-for-changes-to-thruway-numbering-system/article_ca65ce40-9dc5-11ed-9fa1-1b4d3943781d.html?fbclid=IwAR3NFK9vGEZbYIQaMnZ_3SZpOzhxNrjcxVQtjz8mSqoulACbRPKwPeVqgsc
Thruway: "We're too stupid to figure it out."

Despite the fact every other state did...
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on January 26, 2023, 08:01:09 PM
Quote from: Rothman on January 26, 2023, 07:29:26 PM
Quote from: baugh17 on January 26, 2023, 07:00:32 PM
Just putting this out there...

https://www.wktv.com/news/local/griffo-pushing-for-changes-to-thruway-numbering-system/article_ca65ce40-9dc5-11ed-9fa1-1b4d3943781d.html?fbclid=IwAR3NFK9vGEZbYIQaMnZ_3SZpOzhxNrjcxVQtjz8mSqoulACbRPKwPeVqgsc
Thruway: "We're too stupid to figure it out."

Despite the fact every other state did...
Thruway PR director: Hey, someone, there is a letter from an idiot. Can someone  write some bullshit back so they get lost? Are there any interns available?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: froggie on January 26, 2023, 09:05:07 PM
There's enough obstinance in the Thruway Authority to where I think legislation is the ONLY way it will happen.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: SignBridge on January 26, 2023, 09:05:39 PM
Quote from: kalvado on January 26, 2023, 08:01:09 PM
Quote from: Rothman on January 26, 2023, 07:29:26 PM
Quote from: baugh17 on January 26, 2023, 07:00:32 PM
Just putting this out there...

https://www.wktv.com/news/local/griffo-pushing-for-changes-to-thruway-numbering-system/article_ca65ce40-9dc5-11ed-9fa1-1b4d3943781d.html?fbclid=IwAR3NFK9vGEZbYIQaMnZ_3SZpOzhxNrjcxVQtjz8mSqoulACbRPKwPeVqgsc
Thruway: "We're too stupid to figure it out."

Despite the fact every other state did...
Thruway PR director: Hey, someone, there is a letter from an idiot. Can someone  write some bullshit back so they get lost? Are there any interns available?

Those NYSTA people are either BS-ing us or they're very ignorant. The stumbling blocks they mention such as closely spaced exits within a mile  and concurrent/overlapping routes are addressed in the MUTCD.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Roadgeek Adam on January 26, 2023, 09:13:26 PM
They have no desire to comply. That's been obvious for a long time.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: PurdueBill on January 26, 2023, 09:36:37 PM
Quote from: kalvado on January 26, 2023, 08:01:09 PM
Quote from: Rothman on January 26, 2023, 07:29:26 PM
Quote from: baugh17 on January 26, 2023, 07:00:32 PM
Just putting this out there...

https://www.wktv.com/news/local/griffo-pushing-for-changes-to-thruway-numbering-system/article_ca65ce40-9dc5-11ed-9fa1-1b4d3943781d.html?fbclid=IwAR3NFK9vGEZbYIQaMnZ_3SZpOzhxNrjcxVQtjz8mSqoulACbRPKwPeVqgsc
Thruway: "We're too stupid to figure it out."

Despite the fact every other state did...
Thruway PR director: Hey, someone, there is a letter from an idiot. Can someone  write some bullshit back so they get lost? Are there any interns available?

The comments on the news story are also groaners. Lots of the usual false dichotomy of saying someone plans on doing this instead of doing that when in reality, they can actually do both.

If the Thruway went from Exit 1 at NYC to Exit 496 at the PA line, at least it would be consistent through the Thruway, even if backwards on the I-90 part.  The Ohio Turnpike carries one set of exit numbers across 80/90, just 80, and just 76, helped by the non-duplication of nearby exit numbers on 76 thanks to a large jump.

I suppose the Thruway will counter that if they continue the mileage-based numbering on 90, increasing westbound, the same numbers might be used on the Northway if NYSDOT went mileage-based too as 87's mileage would continue from the Thruway mileage.  Oh well, it's not rare for similar exit numbers on different roads in an area--people can figure it out. 
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on January 26, 2023, 09:45:23 PM
^ FHWA would want the mileage and exit numbers to follow I-87 and I-90, not the Thruway, which is probably the reason the Thruway Authority is so resistant in the first place.  I doubt they'd care so much if they could number the exits 1A-495.  Unlike NYSDOT, the Thruway doesn't do reference markers, so everything they have is likely inventoried according to milepoint from the NYC line.  If they were to switch, suddenly all their records would be wrong.  I would think it would be easy enough to set up a conversion table, especially with everything computerized these days, but institutional inertia is real.

With the recent switch to AET and their insistence on spamming E-ZPass statements with every gantry read, there is no longer any need to keep the entire former ticket system on one numbering system.  Further, that "multiple exits in a mile" situation hardly ever happens on the mainline north of Yonkers (where it would honestly make sense since exits 1-5 are basically blended anyways) - and where it does, the exits already share a number with alphabet soup.  That said, the Thruway clearly has no interest.  Recent sign replacements don't even leave open the possibility without replacing exit tabs or even the whole sign.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Jim on January 26, 2023, 09:55:00 PM
Seems to me it's way past time to abolish NYSTA and roll its operations into the DOT, like, as I understand it, Massachusetts managed to do.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: akotchi on January 26, 2023, 11:09:02 PM
Quote from: PurdueBill on January 26, 2023, 09:36:37 PM
Quote from: kalvado on January 26, 2023, 08:01:09 PM
Quote from: Rothman on January 26, 2023, 07:29:26 PM
Quote from: baugh17 on January 26, 2023, 07:00:32 PM
Just putting this out there...

https://www.wktv.com/news/local/griffo-pushing-for-changes-to-thruway-numbering-system/article_ca65ce40-9dc5-11ed-9fa1-1b4d3943781d.html?fbclid=IwAR3NFK9vGEZbYIQaMnZ_3SZpOzhxNrjcxVQtjz8mSqoulACbRPKwPeVqgsc
Thruway: "We're too stupid to figure it out."

Despite the fact every other state did...
Thruway PR director: Hey, someone, there is a letter from an idiot. Can someone  write some bullshit back so they get lost? Are there any interns available?

The comments on the news story are also groaners. Lots of the usual false dichotomy of saying someone plans on doing this instead of doing that when in reality, they can actually do both.

If the Thruway went from Exit 1 at NYC to Exit 496 at the PA line, at least it would be consistent through the Thruway, even if backwards on the I-90 part.  The Ohio Turnpike carries one set of exit numbers across 80/90, just 80, and just 76, helped by the non-duplication of nearby exit numbers on 76 thanks to a large jump.

I suppose the Thruway will counter that if they continue the mileage-based numbering on 90, increasing westbound, the same numbers might be used on the Northway if NYSDOT went mileage-based too as 87's mileage would continue from the Thruway mileage.  Oh well, it's not rare for similar exit numbers on different roads in an area--people can figure it out. 

Philadelphia-area folks have gotten used to similar exit numbers on I-76 (Schuykill Expy.) and I-276 (Turnpike) east of the Valley Forge interchange . . .
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: jp the roadgeek on January 26, 2023, 11:25:50 PM
Quote from: akotchi on January 26, 2023, 11:09:02 PM
Quote from: PurdueBill on January 26, 2023, 09:36:37 PM
Quote from: kalvado on January 26, 2023, 08:01:09 PM
Quote from: Rothman on January 26, 2023, 07:29:26 PM
Quote from: baugh17 on January 26, 2023, 07:00:32 PM
Just putting this out there...

https://www.wktv.com/news/local/griffo-pushing-for-changes-to-thruway-numbering-system/article_ca65ce40-9dc5-11ed-9fa1-1b4d3943781d.html?fbclid=IwAR3NFK9vGEZbYIQaMnZ_3SZpOzhxNrjcxVQtjz8mSqoulACbRPKwPeVqgsc
Thruway: "We're too stupid to figure it out."

Despite the fact every other state did...
Thruway PR director: Hey, someone, there is a letter from an idiot. Can someone  write some bullshit back so they get lost? Are there any interns available?

The comments on the news story are also groaners. Lots of the usual false dichotomy of saying someone plans on doing this instead of doing that when in reality, they can actually do both.

If the Thruway went from Exit 1 at NYC to Exit 496 at the PA line, at least it would be consistent through the Thruway, even if backwards on the I-90 part.  The Ohio Turnpike carries one set of exit numbers across 80/90, just 80, and just 76, helped by the non-duplication of nearby exit numbers on 76 thanks to a large jump.

I suppose the Thruway will counter that if they continue the mileage-based numbering on 90, increasing westbound, the same numbers might be used on the Northway if NYSDOT went mileage-based too as 87's mileage would continue from the Thruway mileage.  Oh well, it's not rare for similar exit numbers on different roads in an area--people can figure it out. 

Philadelphia-area folks have gotten used to similar exit numbers on I-76 (Schuykill Expy.) and I-276 (Turnpike) east of the Valley Forge interchange . . .

The real question with 87's numbers for the Thruway is whether or not they would include Deegan mileage.  If you go by Thruway mileage, you'd still have multiple sets of numbers for 87 even if you continue them onto the Northway. If they went true mileage based for both 87 and 90, the numbers at Exit 24 would actually be used for the NYSRR section that connects the I-90 and I-87 portions because the 24 ramps would be mainline 87 and mainline 90.  Exit 347 would be 90 East to 87 South, and Exit 156 (or 148 if mileposts reset at the Yonkers line) would be I-87 North to I-90 West.  If an internal system is used and 87 resets at the Yonkers line, the Deegan mileage could be added back for the Northway with a sudden jump from 148 to 157.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on January 27, 2023, 06:50:16 AM
Quote from: Jim on January 26, 2023, 09:55:00 PM
Seems to me it's way past time to abolish NYSTA and roll its operations into the DOT, like, as I understand it, Massachusetts managed to do.
Public authorities in NY revel in how independent they are from the State, despite any control the Governor has over the board membership.  Makes me wonder if any public authority was actually abolished in NY ever (i.e., not combined like the ones that became MTA, but actually abolished).  Probably only after corruption that couldn't be ignored.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on January 27, 2023, 07:26:44 AM
Quote from: froggie on January 26, 2023, 09:05:07 PM
There's enough obstinance in the Thruway Authority to where I think legislation is the ONLY way it will happen.
Since NYSTA doesn't get any money from FHWA or NYS, and they are knee deep in debt for the new bridge, and handicapped by toll control... And used  to be a piggy bank for fringe projects.... Unfunded mandate is a so important thing to comply!
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on January 27, 2023, 08:04:16 AM
Quote from: kalvado on January 27, 2023, 07:26:44 AM
Quote from: froggie on January 26, 2023, 09:05:07 PM
There's enough obstinance in the Thruway Authority to where I think legislation is the ONLY way it will happen.
Since NYSTA doesn't get any money from FHWA or NYS, and they are knee deep in debt for the new bridge, and handicapped by toll control... And used  to be a piggy bank for fringe projects.... Unfunded mandate is a so important thing to comply!
That's not totally true.  For bridges over the Thruway, there are convoluted agreements regarding maintenance between NYSDOT and NYSTA.  I believe typically it is one agency pays 2/3 of the replacement cost, while the other pays a 1/3.  And then, one agency is responsible for the substructure, while the other is responsible for the wearable surface/deck.  I wouldn't be surprised if there were differences from NYSDOT Region to NYSDOT Region, but when NYSDOT is responsible for the minority cost of a bridge replacement, the funding flows from NYSDOT to NYSTA.

(personal opinion emphasized)
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: PurdueBill on January 27, 2023, 11:00:56 AM
Quote from: vdeane on January 26, 2023, 09:45:23 PM
^ FHWA would want the mileage and exit numbers to follow I-87 and I-90, not the Thruway, which is probably the reason the Thruway Authority is so resistant in the first place.  I doubt they'd care so much if they could number the exits 1A-495.  Unlike NYSDOT, the Thruway doesn't do reference markers, so everything they have is likely inventoried according to milepoint from the NYC line.  If they were to switch, suddenly all their records would be wrong.  I would think it would be easy enough to set up a conversion table, especially with everything computerized these days, but institutional inertia is real.

With the recent switch to AET and their insistence on spamming E-ZPass statements with every gantry read, there is no longer any need to keep the entire former ticket system on one numbering system.  Further, that "multiple exits in a mile" situation hardly ever happens on the mainline north of Yonkers (where it would honestly make sense since exits 1-5 are basically blended anyways) - and where it does, the exits already share a number with alphabet soup.  That said, the Thruway clearly has no interest.  Recent sign replacements don't even leave open the possibility without replacing exit tabs or even the whole sign.

If the Thruway were to actually be willing to post mileage-based exit numbers from 1 to 496 based on the existing milemakers, then FHWA should be willing to just go along...either side resisting "good" trying to get what they think is "perfect" just ends up in a stalemate like we have now. 
The Kansas Turnpike has continuous numbering over 3 different route numbers (one created just for the sake of the 65 MPH limit) and even makes I-70's exit numbers jump downward and back up--the Thruway having one set would not be the end of the world. Best option probably not, but a better option than the existing situation.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: lstone19 on January 27, 2023, 11:19:16 AM
Quote from: PurdueBill on January 27, 2023, 11:00:56 AM
If the Thruway were to actually be willing to post mileage-based exit numbers from 1 to 496 based on the existing milemakers, then FHWA should be willing to just go along...either side resisting "good" trying to get what they think is "perfect" just ends up in a stalemate like we have now. 
The Kansas Turnpike has continuous numbering over 3 different route numbers (one created just for the sake of the 65 MPH limit) and even makes I-70's exit numbers jump downward and back up--the Thruway having one set would not be the end of the world. Best option probably not, but a better option than the existing situation.

This. I've said this before but I think the obsession with route numbers taking precedence over named toll roads when the toll roads preceded the route numbers and have established history with the public does the public a disservice. Having until just very recently lived in areas with long established toll roads,  I've generally found the toll road name has greater recognition with the public than the number.

Personally, I find the current Pennsylvania Turnpike numbering a confusing mess. There's no longer any consistency when you're on the "Turnpike" so they might as get rid of the Turnpike name and, while they're at it, get rid of the tolls. :-)

Back to the Thruway, it's unfortunate that they've gone from what I used to think of as the gold standard for how to run a toll road to being just another third world toll road with way too much expended on justifying their own opinions and existence.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on January 27, 2023, 01:35:26 PM
Quote from: vdeane on January 26, 2023, 09:45:23 PM
^ FHWA would want the mileage and exit numbers to follow I-87 and I-90, not the Thruway, which is probably the reason the Thruway Authority is so resistant in the first place.  I doubt they'd care so much if they could number the exits 1A-495.  Unlike NYSDOT, the Thruway doesn't do reference markers, so everything they have is likely inventoried according to milepoint from the NYC line.  If they were to switch, suddenly all their records would be wrong.  I would think it would be easy enough to set up a conversion table, especially with everything computerized these days, but institutional inertia is real.

Certainly true, but I would think the bigger issue as they see it isn't the re-numbering itself, but the fact that mileposts would be duplicated along almost the entire length of the Thruway. Even if there's no duplicate exits, having two of every milepost is still a problem.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on January 27, 2023, 07:17:10 PM
Talking about exit number confusion... Can you try deciphering the highway part of this alert from last Monday's snow storm? I guess it is not an NWS text, but an automatic interpretation by a website. Still a nice puzzle.
(https://i.imgur.com/OpCumqw.png)
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on January 27, 2023, 09:39:26 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 27, 2023, 01:35:26 PM
Quote from: vdeane on January 26, 2023, 09:45:23 PM
^ FHWA would want the mileage and exit numbers to follow I-87 and I-90, not the Thruway, which is probably the reason the Thruway Authority is so resistant in the first place.  I doubt they'd care so much if they could number the exits 1A-495.  Unlike NYSDOT, the Thruway doesn't do reference markers, so everything they have is likely inventoried according to milepoint from the NYC line.  If they were to switch, suddenly all their records would be wrong.  I would think it would be easy enough to set up a conversion table, especially with everything computerized these days, but institutional inertia is real.

Certainly true, but I would think the bigger issue as they see it isn't the re-numbering itself, but the fact that mileposts would be duplicated along almost the entire length of the Thruway. Even if there's no duplicate exits, having two of every milepost is still a problem.
It would be neither a new nor an unsolved problem, though.  The Thruway is more than just the mainline.  Most famously, there's the Berkshire Spur (B), but there's also the Niagara Thruway (N), Garden State Parkway connector (GS), Cross Westchester Expressway (CW), and New England Thruway (NE).  Historically, there was also I-84 (I-84 (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.515219,-74.0772229,3a,17.4y,301.09h,86.34t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s-v-jQNPmYjlyRjlkgYzGGA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)), which is the closest equivalent.  Were the Thruway to make the switch, treating every road like they treated I-84 would IMO be the way to go.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Ted$8roadFan on January 28, 2023, 09:45:26 AM
Quote from: vdeane on January 27, 2023, 09:39:26 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 27, 2023, 01:35:26 PM
Quote from: vdeane on January 26, 2023, 09:45:23 PM
^ FHWA would want the mileage and exit numbers to follow I-87 and I-90, not the Thruway, which is probably the reason the Thruway Authority is so resistant in the first place.  I doubt they'd care so much if they could number the exits 1A-495.  Unlike NYSDOT, the Thruway doesn't do reference markers, so everything they have is likely inventoried according to milepoint from the NYC line.  If they were to switch, suddenly all their records would be wrong.  I would think it would be easy enough to set up a conversion table, especially with everything computerized these days, but institutional inertia is real.

Certainly true, but I would think the bigger issue as they see it isn't the re-numbering itself, but the fact that mileposts would be duplicated along almost the entire length of the Thruway. Even if there's no duplicate exits, having two of every milepost is still a problem.
It would be neither a new nor an unsolved problem, though.  The Thruway is more than just the mainline.  Most famously, there's the Berkshire Spur (B), but there's also the Niagara Thruway (N), Garden State Parkway connector (GS), Cross Westchester Expressway (CW), and New England Thruway (NE).  Historically, there was also I-84 (I-84 (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.515219,-74.0772229,3a,17.4y,301.09h,86.34t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s-v-jQNPmYjlyRjlkgYzGGA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)), which is the closest equivalent.  Were the Thruway to make the switch, treating every road like they treated I-84 would IMO be the way to go.

Could the NYSTA use letter suffixes for the spurs, like they currently do for the Berkshire Spur (B1, B2, B3, etc.)?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: D-Dey65 on January 28, 2023, 11:17:11 AM
Quote from: cockroachking on January 19, 2023, 12:04:42 AM
After a quick check of the NYSDOT Westchester County Bridge Inventory (https://www.dot.ny.gov/John%20Madden/repository/WestchesterBridgeData.pdf), this would appear to be correct: MTA owns the railroad bridge (BIN 2262260), which is listed in poor condition, while the Thruway bridge (BIN 5514540) is not in poor condition.

Fun fact: The railroad bridge (BIN 2262260) was originally constructed in 1886, so the fact that is operation at all (albeit the 3 ton posted limit) impresses me.
Okay, so we all know Centre Avenue over the thruway is in decent condition. The height issue concerns me though.
http://bridgereports.com/1393234
Now compare it to the bridge over the railroad.
http://bridgereports.com/1385799

The Thruway Authority wants to raise the North Avenue Bridge to a height that's only two inches higher than the Centre Avenue Bridge over the railroad tracks. Now, I could suggest replacing both Centre Avenue Bridges with something of equal clearances, but that would require steeper climbs for drivers on Centre Avenue and Grove Street. You could also try lowering the road, but that would require a steep descent from the bridge over Webster Avenue and the Metro-North New Haven Line.


BTW, I wasn't able to get that link to the NYSDOT Bridge Inventory. I tried putting in the correct link, but it keeps changing to "John Madden" for some stupid reason.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on January 28, 2023, 04:22:28 PM
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on January 28, 2023, 09:45:26 AM
Quote from: vdeane on January 27, 2023, 09:39:26 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 27, 2023, 01:35:26 PM
Quote from: vdeane on January 26, 2023, 09:45:23 PM
^ FHWA would want the mileage and exit numbers to follow I-87 and I-90, not the Thruway, which is probably the reason the Thruway Authority is so resistant in the first place.  I doubt they'd care so much if they could number the exits 1A-495.  Unlike NYSDOT, the Thruway doesn't do reference markers, so everything they have is likely inventoried according to milepoint from the NYC line.  If they were to switch, suddenly all their records would be wrong.  I would think it would be easy enough to set up a conversion table, especially with everything computerized these days, but institutional inertia is real.

Certainly true, but I would think the bigger issue as they see it isn't the re-numbering itself, but the fact that mileposts would be duplicated along almost the entire length of the Thruway. Even if there's no duplicate exits, having two of every milepost is still a problem.
It would be neither a new nor an unsolved problem, though.  The Thruway is more than just the mainline.  Most famously, there's the Berkshire Spur (B), but there's also the Niagara Thruway (N), Garden State Parkway connector (GS), Cross Westchester Expressway (CW), and New England Thruway (NE).  Historically, there was also I-84 (I-84 (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.515219,-74.0772229,3a,17.4y,301.09h,86.34t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s-v-jQNPmYjlyRjlkgYzGGA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)), which is the closest equivalent.  Were the Thruway to make the switch, treating every road like they treated I-84 would IMO be the way to go.

Could the NYSTA use letter suffixes for the spurs, like they currently do for the Berkshire Spur (B1, B2, B3, etc.)?
Not sure what the point would be.  Only the Berkshire Spur is on a virtual ticket system, and it's not like any exit numbers on it would duplicate I-87's numbers.  Suffixes could work for differentiating I-90 and I-87 on toll statements, though.  They still use interchange numbers even for fixed-price gantries (except for New Rochelle, Yonkers, the GMCB, Spring Valley, Harriman, and the Grand Island bridges).

The potential for duplicates exists in numbers 157 and lower.  Of that, numbers below 53 are off the ticket system on I-87, and 66-76 are off the ticket systems for I-90, so any number in the ranges of 53-66 and 76-157 could potentially duplicate.  In those ranges, the biggest probability of duplication are 133 (current exits 46 and 21B) and maybe 144 (current exits 45 and 22).  It's probably easy enough to fudge numbers just like the Pennsylvania Turnpike does.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: PurdueBill on January 28, 2023, 04:29:26 PM
Quote from: vdeane on January 28, 2023, 04:22:28 PM
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on January 28, 2023, 09:45:26 AM
Quote from: vdeane on January 27, 2023, 09:39:26 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 27, 2023, 01:35:26 PM
Quote from: vdeane on January 26, 2023, 09:45:23 PM
^ FHWA would want the mileage and exit numbers to follow I-87 and I-90, not the Thruway, which is probably the reason the Thruway Authority is so resistant in the first place.  I doubt they'd care so much if they could number the exits 1A-495.  Unlike NYSDOT, the Thruway doesn't do reference markers, so everything they have is likely inventoried according to milepoint from the NYC line.  If they were to switch, suddenly all their records would be wrong.  I would think it would be easy enough to set up a conversion table, especially with everything computerized these days, but institutional inertia is real.

Certainly true, but I would think the bigger issue as they see it isn't the re-numbering itself, but the fact that mileposts would be duplicated along almost the entire length of the Thruway. Even if there's no duplicate exits, having two of every milepost is still a problem.
It would be neither a new nor an unsolved problem, though.  The Thruway is more than just the mainline.  Most famously, there's the Berkshire Spur (B), but there's also the Niagara Thruway (N), Garden State Parkway connector (GS), Cross Westchester Expressway (CW), and New England Thruway (NE).  Historically, there was also I-84 (I-84 (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.515219,-74.0772229,3a,17.4y,301.09h,86.34t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s-v-jQNPmYjlyRjlkgYzGGA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)), which is the closest equivalent.  Were the Thruway to make the switch, treating every road like they treated I-84 would IMO be the way to go.

Could the NYSTA use letter suffixes for the spurs, like they currently do for the Berkshire Spur (B1, B2, B3, etc.)?
Not sure what the point would be.  Only the Berkshire Spur is on a virtual ticket system, and it's not like any exit numbers on it would duplicate I-87's numbers.  Suffixes could work for differentiating I-90 and I-87 on toll statements, though.  They still use interchange numbers even for fixed-price gantries (except for New Rochelle, Yonkers, the GMCB, Spring Valley, Harriman, and the Grand Island bridges).

The potential for duplicates exists in numbers 157 and lower.  Of that, numbers below 53 are off the ticket system on I-87, and 66-76 are off the ticket systems for I-90, so any number in the ranges of 53-66 and 76-157 could potentially duplicate.  In those ranges, the biggest probability of duplication are 133 (current exits 46 and 21B) and maybe 144 (current exits 45 and 22).  It's probably easy enough to fudge numbers just like the Pennsylvania Turnpike does.

With AET and losing the need for interchanges to be "ticket tollway double trumpets" everywhere comes the potential for more interchanges to be added more easily which could be done as traditional diamonds or variants.  That only increases the chances of duplicate exit numbers on the mainline Thruway were it to be numbered with 87's mileage and 90's mileage.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on January 28, 2023, 04:46:59 PM
I'm not sure what the actual possibility of new interchanges being built is in the foreseeable future.  I know some people around Buffalo were calling for something at Youngs Road (no potential to duplicate) a while back, but I'm not sure the Thruway is actually interested.

Again, I definitely don't see the need for signage to have prefixes/suffixes with this.  There is NO continuous ticket system down the mainline and Berkshire Spur the way there used to be.  There are no less than six: NYC-Albany/MA, Albany-Syracuse, West Syracuse, Syracuse-Rochester, Rochester-Buffalo, and Buffalo-PA.  MassDOT may aggregate toll gantries into a single charge, but NYSTA does not.  In any case, I could see using suffixes like E or N to differentiate on bills to make them more clear, but I don't see why that would need to extend to signage.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kirbykart on January 30, 2023, 06:34:55 PM
Quote from: vdeane on January 28, 2023, 04:46:59 PM
I'm not sure what the actual possibility of new interchanges being built is in the foreseeable future.  I know some people around Buffalo were calling for something at Youngs Road (no potential to duplicate) a while back, but I'm not sure the Thruway is actually interested.

Just looked at the area on Google Maps. That'd be pretty tight to fit a new interchange in. Also, what would the utility of this be? Do the NY 78 exit going WB and NY 33 exit going EB not serve the airport well enough? Really any benefit of this is already covered by NY 78, which is very close to where this would be.

Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: MASTERNC on January 30, 2023, 09:40:28 PM
Quote from: kirbykart on January 30, 2023, 06:34:55 PM
Quote from: vdeane on January 28, 2023, 04:46:59 PM
I'm not sure what the actual possibility of new interchanges being built is in the foreseeable future.  I know some people around Buffalo were calling for something at Youngs Road (no potential to duplicate) a while back, but I'm not sure the Thruway is actually interested.

Just looked at the area on Google Maps. That'd be pretty tight to fit a new interchange in. Also, what would the utility of this be? Do the NY 78 exit going WB and NY 33 exit going EB not serve the airport well enough? Really any benefit of this is already covered by NY 78, which is very close to where this would be.



Having family in that area, Youngs Rd also isn't well equipped for the traffic that would result from having an interchange. It is only a two lane road except around select intersections
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on January 30, 2023, 09:56:31 PM
Quote from: MASTERNC on January 30, 2023, 09:40:28 PM
Quote from: kirbykart on January 30, 2023, 06:34:55 PM
Quote from: vdeane on January 28, 2023, 04:46:59 PM
I'm not sure what the actual possibility of new interchanges being built is in the foreseeable future.  I know some people around Buffalo were calling for something at Youngs Road (no potential to duplicate) a while back, but I'm not sure the Thruway is actually interested.

Just looked at the area on Google Maps. That'd be pretty tight to fit a new interchange in. Also, what would the utility of this be? Do the NY 78 exit going WB and NY 33 exit going EB not serve the airport well enough? Really any benefit of this is already covered by NY 78, which is very close to where this would be.



Having family in that area, Youngs Rd also isn't well equipped for the traffic that would result from having an interchange. It is only a two lane road except around select intersections

Until I looked it up just now, I was thinking Youngs Rd was between NY 78 and Pembroke. I could see another interchange further east to serve Clarence/Akron and Alden, but I can't see why another interchange would be needed between NY 78 and I-290, which are already among the most closely-spaced exits on the tolled portion of I-90.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Roadgeek Adam on January 31, 2023, 10:44:49 AM
Driving on Youngs Road almost every day on my way home, there's more than enough room if you're willing to relocate the toll booth east of a proposed 49A. I also know it would get used for airport traffic and I certainly would use it rather than drive to exit 49 or have to get off at 51 to take 33 to Aero Drive to Youngs Road (which is mostly what I do).

Youngs Road to Aero Drive has the economy lot to the airport and it would get used for that purpose. There's also a bunch of business parks right at Youngs Road.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: James on February 01, 2023, 02:44:33 PM
Will the Thruway ever be expanded to six lanes in certain areas?

The entirety of I-87 from Albany to NYC should definitely be six lanes minimum as well as I-90 from Exit 49 (NY-78) to Exit 57 (NY-75) in the Buffalo area.

Like, it's pretty weird that the ~150 mile Interstate route directly connecting the state capital to one of the largest cities in the world is still only four lanes for much of its length.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Roadgeek Adam on February 01, 2023, 02:57:18 PM
So how many people's homes and businesses would you like to level for that occur? Traffic post-pandemic up here hasn't been terrible between 50 and 55. 50 is the only major bottleneck and that's mostly 90 EB exit 50.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cockroachking on February 01, 2023, 06:38:30 PM
Quote from: Roadgeek Adam on February 01, 2023, 02:57:18 PM
So how many people's homes and businesses would you like to level for that occur?
Where exactly would this be an issue? To my knowledge, the entirety of the Thruway that is not already 6+ lanes was built with the intention of adding lanes in the median in the future (albeit with slightly narrower than 10ft standard inner shoulders on the narrowest 44ft median sections).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: froggie on February 01, 2023, 09:31:31 PM
Quote from: cockroachking on February 01, 2023, 06:38:30 PM
Quote from: Roadgeek Adam on February 01, 2023, 02:57:18 PM
So how many people's homes and businesses would you like to level for that occur?
Where exactly would this be an issue? To my knowledge, the entirety of the Thruway that is not already 6+ lanes was built with the intention of adding lanes in the median in the future (albeit with slightly narrower than 10ft standard inner shoulders on the narrowest 44ft median sections).

James mentioned through Buffalo.  And while Exit 50-55 is already 6 lanes, getting that to 8 lanes is likely where additional ROW would be needed and I'd bet that's what Adam was alluding to.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: James on February 01, 2023, 10:16:49 PM
Quote from: froggie on February 01, 2023, 09:31:31 PM
Quote from: cockroachking on February 01, 2023, 06:38:30 PM
Quote from: Roadgeek Adam on February 01, 2023, 02:57:18 PM
So how many people's homes and businesses would you like to level for that occur?
Where exactly would this be an issue? To my knowledge, the entirety of the Thruway that is not already 6+ lanes was built with the intention of adding lanes in the median in the future (albeit with slightly narrower than 10ft standard inner shoulders on the narrowest 44ft median sections).

James mentioned through Buffalo.  And while Exit 50-55 is already 6 lanes, getting that to 8 lanes is likely where additional ROW would be needed and I'd bet that's what Adam was alluding to.


Yes, to clarify, I meant that I-90 from Exit 49 to Exit 50 should be six lanes (why it's not, I really don't understand) as well as from Exit 55 to Exit 57 because of how busy those particular exits can be when the Bills play.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on February 01, 2023, 11:17:43 PM
I agree that Exit 49 to 50 is a high priority for 6-lanes. I would rather see that than any further widening on the untolled section through Buffalo.

The untolled section (especially Exit 50 to 52) is very busy, but usually moves at least at speed. If anything, the fact that we think it needs widening is proof that Upstate NY is spoiled with light traffic. I would like to see an extra lane WB (SB) between Exit 50 and 51, and a flyover or some sort of modification for the NY 33 EB loop to I-90 EB. But other than that, in the unlikely event that funding ever becomes available, I would rather see widening projects on the exurban/rural segments of the Thruway, which would include Harriman to Albany high on the list.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: burgess87 on February 02, 2023, 11:18:29 AM
Quote from: webny99 on February 01, 2023, 11:17:43 PM
I agree that Exit 49 to 50 is a high priority for 6-lanes. I would rather see that than any further widening on the untolled section through Buffalo.

The untolled section (especially Exit 50 to 52) is very busy, but usually moves at least at speed. If anything, the fact that we think it needs widening is proof that Upstate NY is spoiled with light traffic. I would like to see an extra lane WB (SB) between Exit 50 and 51, and a flyover or some sort of modification for the NY 33 EB loop to I-90 EB. But other than that, in the unlikely event that funding ever becomes available, I would rather see widening projects on the exurban/rural segments of the Thruway, which would include Harriman to Albany high on the list.

I don't see how IH 90 between Buffalo & Rochester isn't already six lanes.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on February 02, 2023, 12:58:40 PM
Quote from: burgess87 on February 02, 2023, 11:18:29 AM
Quote from: webny99 on February 01, 2023, 11:17:43 PM
I agree that Exit 49 to 50 is a high priority for 6-lanes. I would rather see that than any further widening on the untolled section through Buffalo.

The untolled section (especially Exit 50 to 52) is very busy, but usually moves at least at speed. If anything, the fact that we think it needs widening is proof that Upstate NY is spoiled with light traffic. I would like to see an extra lane WB (SB) between Exit 50 and 51, and a flyover or some sort of modification for the NY 33 EB loop to I-90 EB. But other than that, in the unlikely event that funding ever becomes available, I would rather see widening projects on the exurban/rural segments of the Thruway, which would include Harriman to Albany high on the list.

I don't see how IH 90 between Buffalo & Rochester isn't already six lanes.
Certain governor freezing tolls and spending all thruway money on a bridge named after another governor with the same last name has nothing to do with that, though. Neither does  handing over Canal to NYSTA jurisdiction.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: James on February 02, 2023, 01:18:02 PM
Quote from: burgess87 on February 02, 2023, 11:18:29 AM
Quote from: webny99 on February 01, 2023, 11:17:43 PM
I agree that Exit 49 to 50 is a high priority for 6-lanes. I would rather see that than any further widening on the untolled section through Buffalo.

The untolled section (especially Exit 50 to 52) is very busy, but usually moves at least at speed. If anything, the fact that we think it needs widening is proof that Upstate NY is spoiled with light traffic. I would like to see an extra lane WB (SB) between Exit 50 and 51, and a flyover or some sort of modification for the NY 33 EB loop to I-90 EB. But other than that, in the unlikely event that funding ever becomes available, I would rather see widening projects on the exurban/rural segments of the Thruway, which would include Harriman to Albany high on the list.

I don't see how IH 90 between Buffalo & Rochester isn't already six lanes.

I mean, I do take Exit 46 to Exit 47 every day as part of my commute to work and there definitely isn't really a need for more than four lanes from Exit 49 onwards going EB.

Also, what's with the lack of overhead signage at Interstate junctions?

Like here (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.002492,-77.4287542,3a,75y,306.96h,86.93t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s8RprofrqqnFfKlxvsBYnaQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en): plenty of space for an "I-90 WEST, Buffalo" pull-through sign.

Or here. (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0584065,-77.642154,3a,75y,211.2h,92.71t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s1cD_tMxEhMdo_VYvopNWMw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en) Like, literally such an obvious place for an "I-390 SOUTH, Corning" pull-through sign.

(Btw, does anyone know how to hyperlink?)
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: hotdogPi on February 02, 2023, 01:19:48 PM
Quote from: James on February 02, 2023, 01:18:02 PM
(Btw, does anyone know how to hyperlink?)

[url=https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0584065,-77.642154,3a,75y,211.2h,92.71t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s1cD_tMxEhMdo_VYvopNWMw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en]here[/url]
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: James on February 02, 2023, 01:24:18 PM
Quote from: 1 on February 02, 2023, 01:19:48 PM
Quote from: James on February 02, 2023, 01:18:02 PM
(Btw, does anyone know how to hyperlink?)

[url=https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0584065,-77.642154,3a,75y,211.2h,92.71t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s1cD_tMxEhMdo_VYvopNWMw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en]here[/url]

Appreciate ya
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on February 02, 2023, 02:02:21 PM
Quote from: James on February 02, 2023, 01:18:02 PM
Quote from: burgess87 on February 02, 2023, 11:18:29 AM
I don't see how IH 90 between Buffalo & Rochester isn't already six lanes.

I mean, I do take Exit 46 to Exit 47 every day as part of my commute to work and there definitely isn't really a need for more than four lanes from Exit 49 onwards going EB.

I agree that 46 to 47 doesn't need widening, but that segment also isn't as busy as west of 47. If there was to be a widening east from Buffalo, 47 would be the logical place for a lane drop given how much EB traffic exits/WB traffic enters at I-490.

The most recent AADT volumes show only about 30k on 46-47 and 40k on 47-48, which is absolutely the difference in whether widening is needed (IMO).


Quote from: James on February 02, 2023, 01:18:02 PM
Like here (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.002492,-77.4287542,3a,75y,306.96h,86.93t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s8RprofrqqnFfKlxvsBYnaQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en): plenty of space for an "I-90 WEST, Buffalo" pull-through sign.

This should really be an APL. Unfortunately the I-490 exit only has a single lane. It widens to two lanes when you get near the exit,  but I would much rather have the right thru lane be an option lane. As it is now, the exiting traffic is too much volume for one lane so you get a lot of unnecessary braking and jockeying for position in the exit lane.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on February 02, 2023, 02:20:44 PM
Another Thruway question that vdeane or Rothman may be able to answer: does NYSTA perform regular AADT counts? I'm curious because the Statewide Traffic Data Viewer is lacking data for much of the Thruway, and segments it does have are often outdated, estimates only, and/or lacking the full datasets that you can get from NYSDOT counts.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on February 02, 2023, 05:46:43 PM


Quote from: webny99 on February 02, 2023, 02:20:44 PM
Another Thruway question that vdeane or Rothman may be able to answer: does NYSTA perform regular AADT counts? I'm curious because the Statewide Traffic Data Viewer is lacking data for much of the Thruway, and segments it does have are often outdated, estimates only, and/or lacking the full datasets that you can get from NYSDOT counts.

I'd be surprised if they don't.  Keep in mind the Statewide Traffic Data Viewer is NYSDOT, so of course it doesn't have NYSTA's data in it, other than what pieces have been shared over the years.

If you want NYSTA's data, go to NYSTA.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: froggie on February 02, 2023, 11:13:00 PM
It may not be NYSDOT that performs traffic counts on the Thruway, but IINM the state is still required to submit that data to FHWA every year.  Finding those volumes, though, is the trick.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on February 02, 2023, 11:21:40 PM
Yup, exactly. Going to NYSTA seems to be easier said than done - I'm not sure they have anything publicly available other than what's been shared to NYSDOT.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on February 03, 2023, 07:15:51 AM
Quote from: webny99 on February 02, 2023, 11:21:40 PM
Yup, exactly. Going to NYSTA seems to be easier said than done - I'm not sure they have anything publicly available other than what's been shared to NYSDOT.
Aren't public authorities fun? 
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on February 03, 2023, 02:10:34 PM
Quote from: Rothman on February 03, 2023, 07:15:51 AM
Quote from: webny99 on February 02, 2023, 11:21:40 PM
Yup, exactly. Going to NYSTA seems to be easier said than done - I'm not sure they have anything publicly available other than what's been shared to NYSDOT.
Aren't public authorities fun?
NYSTA is a public benefit corporation
As far as I understand, that means they behave like a private corporation when they need to, and as public authority when they want to....
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on February 03, 2023, 03:55:49 PM
Quote from: kalvado on February 03, 2023, 02:10:34 PM
Quote from: Rothman on February 03, 2023, 07:15:51 AM
Quote from: webny99 on February 02, 2023, 11:21:40 PM
Yup, exactly. Going to NYSTA seems to be easier said than done - I'm not sure they have anything publicly available other than what's been shared to NYSDOT.
Aren't public authorities fun?
NYSTA is a public benefit corporation
As far as I understand, that means they behave like a private corporation when they need to, and as public authority when they want to....
What's the A in NYSTA stand for again? :D
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on February 03, 2023, 04:59:13 PM
Quote from: Rothman on February 03, 2023, 03:55:49 PM
Quote from: kalvado on February 03, 2023, 02:10:34 PM
Quote from: Rothman on February 03, 2023, 07:15:51 AM
Quote from: webny99 on February 02, 2023, 11:21:40 PM
Yup, exactly. Going to NYSTA seems to be easier said than done - I'm not sure they have anything publicly available other than what's been shared to NYSDOT.
Aren't public authorities fun?
NYSTA is a public benefit corporation
As far as I understand, that means they behave like a private corporation when they need to, and as public authority when they want to....
What's the A in NYSTA stand for again? :D
Isn't it fun when authority is actually a corporation?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Jim on February 28, 2023, 08:48:31 PM
From WRGB Channel 6 news in Albany: Thruway's cashless tolling implementation impacting travelers and truckers (https://cbs6albany.com/news/local/thruways-cashless-tolling-implementation-impacting-travelers-and-truckers-ezpass-dinapoli-nys-office-of-the-toll-payer-advocate-errors)

Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: J N Winkler on February 28, 2023, 09:16:28 PM
Notwithstanding the Thruway being a public benefit corporation, I will be shocked if they are exempt from FOIL.  Now, whether one actually wants to pay to have a request fulfilled . . .
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: roadman65 on March 01, 2023, 03:52:25 PM
Why does closer to New York City, the Gov. Mario M. Cuomo Bridge appear on mileage signs? From Albany southward it's just NYC as sole mileage control city, and then closer to the metro area the bridge starts to appear with it.
https://goo.gl/maps/TNX7vLKo3kpkGppn7
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Roadgeekteen on March 01, 2023, 03:55:05 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on March 01, 2023, 03:52:25 PM
Why does closer to New York City, the Gov. Mario M. Cuomo Bridge appear on mileage signs? From Albany southward it's just NYC as sole mileage control city, and then closer to the metro area the bridge starts to appear with it.
https://goo.gl/maps/TNX7vLKo3kpkGppn7
The bridge is a helpful benchmark for travelers, so I like having it on signs.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: jmacswimmer on March 01, 2023, 05:21:38 PM
^

Personally I think it's moreso for the benefit of I-287 traffic, which merged in at exit 15 just upstream of this sign and is (presumably) using the MCB to bypass New York versus continue towards it as I-87 traffic does.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: roadman65 on March 02, 2023, 02:09:30 PM
Quote from: jmacswimmer on March 01, 2023, 05:21:38 PM
^

Personally I think it's moreso for the benefit of I-287 traffic, which merged in at exit 15 just upstream of this sign and is (presumably) using the MCB to bypass New York versus continue towards it as I-87 traffic does.

White Plains should be used instead.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Roadgeekteen on March 02, 2023, 02:36:54 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on March 02, 2023, 02:09:30 PM
Quote from: jmacswimmer on March 01, 2023, 05:21:38 PM
^

Personally I think it's moreso for the benefit of I-287 traffic, which merged in at exit 15 just upstream of this sign and is (presumably) using the MCB to bypass New York versus continue towards it as I-87 traffic does.

White Plains should be used instead.
The bridge is on both I-87 and I-287 though. White Plains is only on I-287.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on April 11, 2023, 05:38:38 PM
An interesting development for the Thruway rest area reconstruction project:
now state (or toll) money are needed to complete the project. Not a lot, just mere quarter billion:
https://buffalonews.com/news/local/govt-and-politics/new-york-state-thruway-rest-stops-bailout-taxpayers/article_e33d4a6a-d48e-11ed-aeb9-8b215c14e25d.html

Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: machias on April 13, 2023, 01:12:09 AM
Quote from: kalvado on April 11, 2023, 05:38:38 PM
An interesting development for the Thruway rest area reconstruction project:
now state (or toll) money are needed to complete the project. Not a lot, just mere quarter billion:
https://buffalonews.com/news/local/govt-and-politics/new-york-state-thruway-rest-stops-bailout-taxpayers/article_e33d4a6a-d48e-11ed-aeb9-8b215c14e25d.html



It still blows my mind that the larger facilities that were built from scratch in the early 1990s were ripped down at barely 30 years old. I can see the few old facilities from the 50s being replaced, but the ones from the 90s? Complete waste of money.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Plutonic Panda on April 13, 2023, 02:30:33 AM
If they really cared about user experience then they'd widen the damned thing to six lanes.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on April 13, 2023, 06:32:14 AM
Quote from: machias on April 13, 2023, 01:12:09 AM
Quote from: kalvado on April 11, 2023, 05:38:38 PM
An interesting development for the Thruway rest area reconstruction project:
now state (or toll) money are needed to complete the project. Not a lot, just mere quarter billion:
https://buffalonews.com/news/local/govt-and-politics/new-york-state-thruway-rest-stops-bailout-taxpayers/article_e33d4a6a-d48e-11ed-aeb9-8b215c14e25d.html



It still blows my mind that the larger facilities that were built from scratch in the early 1990s were ripped down at barely 30 years old. I can see the few old facilities from the 50s being replaced, but the ones from the 90s? Complete waste of money.
There is some backstage information, and if that is true - things are very ... Newyorkish.
https://twitter.com/scotvega18/status/1639614250204254208?s=21&t=y732DGKg3Dk5dv5QCjflOQ
https://twitter.com/scotvega18/status/1639614282882064385?s=21&t=fM5R_Rble2S1Y8VKrk8uDA
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: MASTERNC on April 13, 2023, 08:14:20 AM
Quote from: kalvado on April 13, 2023, 06:32:14 AM
Quote from: machias on April 13, 2023, 01:12:09 AM
Quote from: kalvado on April 11, 2023, 05:38:38 PM
An interesting development for the Thruway rest area reconstruction project:
now state (or toll) money are needed to complete the project. Not a lot, just mere quarter billion:
https://buffalonews.com/news/local/govt-and-politics/new-york-state-thruway-rest-stops-bailout-taxpayers/article_e33d4a6a-d48e-11ed-aeb9-8b215c14e25d.html



It still blows my mind that the larger facilities that were built from scratch in the early 1990s were ripped down at barely 30 years old. I can see the few old facilities from the 50s being replaced, but the ones from the 90s? Complete waste of money.
There is some backstage information, and if that is true - things are very ... Newyorkish.
https://twitter.com/scotvega18/status/1639614250204254208?s=21&t=y732DGKg3Dk5dv5QCjflOQ
https://twitter.com/scotvega18/status/1639614282882064385?s=21&t=fM5R_Rble2S1Y8VKrk8uDA


I'm not sure what the PTC did on the Turnpike for its renovations but nearly all of them were much smaller than the Thruway locations (either they were 1940s buildings or modeled after them).  In the case of the Thruway, it sounds like they weren't making them all uniform in size but keeping different size ones, so remodeling might have made some sense.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on April 13, 2023, 10:03:36 AM
Quote from: MASTERNC on April 13, 2023, 08:14:20 AM
Quote from: kalvado on April 13, 2023, 06:32:14 AM
Quote from: machias on April 13, 2023, 01:12:09 AM
Quote from: kalvado on April 11, 2023, 05:38:38 PM
An interesting development for the Thruway rest area reconstruction project:
now state (or toll) money are needed to complete the project. Not a lot, just mere quarter billion:
https://buffalonews.com/news/local/govt-and-politics/new-york-state-thruway-rest-stops-bailout-taxpayers/article_e33d4a6a-d48e-11ed-aeb9-8b215c14e25d.html



It still blows my mind that the larger facilities that were built from scratch in the early 1990s were ripped down at barely 30 years old. I can see the few old facilities from the 50s being replaced, but the ones from the 90s? Complete waste of money.
There is some backstage information, and if that is true - things are very ... Newyorkish.
https://twitter.com/scotvega18/status/1639614250204254208?s=21&t=y732DGKg3Dk5dv5QCjflOQ
https://twitter.com/scotvega18/status/1639614282882064385?s=21&t=fM5R_Rble2S1Y8VKrk8uDA


I'm not sure what the PTC did on the Turnpike for its renovations but nearly all of them were much smaller than the Thruway locations (either they were 1940s buildings or modeled after them).  In the case of the Thruway, it sounds like they weren't making them all uniform in size but keeping different size ones, so remodeling might have made some sense.
Thruway did have several different building designs and sizes. Not all of them were best fit, obviously, and they could use a facelift (show me the building which doesn't need one!).
Yet, many people thought those buildings were in reasonable shape. Now a professional hired to do evaluations says that buildings were in reasonable shape - but someone above was hell bent on total rebuild.  It could make some sense for a new contractor to start things from scratch, though...
Now, it sounds like new builds are not adequate for the purpose; were  deliberately designed in expensive way; and contractor runs out of money and wants state bailout, despite contractually responsible for the scenario.
I, for one, doubt that operational profit is the driving force for the new plaza operator. For one, previous operator terminated operations when contract expired  at the end of 2022. Kitchen equipment was removed at areas which were slated to close later, and cold wraps are available now. Not that McD serves great food,  but those McDs were still running full steam.
ANd now government bailout - and no services as an alternative, I assume.

Pure speculation, of course,  but looks like they made enough campaign donations to ensure they get the contract they wanted - but not (yet) enough to  secure bailout...
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: TheDon102 on April 21, 2023, 09:31:33 PM
 $61.8 million pavement improvement project on a four-mile stretch of the New England Thruway (I-95) in the Bronx and Westchester County is underway. It includes the rehabilitation of 11 bridges and the replacement of the superstructures of two pedestrian bridges.

https://www.governor.ny.gov/news/governor-hochul-announces-start-618-million-pavement-improvement-and-bridge-rehabilitation?fbclid=IwAR3Q8IgsSBPVzKDb2a16-xjnkTloLgs7riH6ztZMRStlredbzdD7bWTol8M (https://www.governor.ny.gov/news/governor-hochul-announces-start-618-million-pavement-improvement-and-bridge-rehabilitation?fbclid=IwAR3Q8IgsSBPVzKDb2a16-xjnkTloLgs7riH6ztZMRStlredbzdD7bWTol8M)

Awesome.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on May 09, 2023, 01:54:06 PM
A fairly interesting overview of Thruway engineering conditions and financial situation:
https://tripnet.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/TRIP_New_York_Thruway_Report_May_2023.pdf

I wonder if more toll hikes are in the plans. Debt service exceeding maintenance spending isn't a very healthy situation when almost half of the pavement is in "poor" condition, and original bridges coming close to life expectancy.... 
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: lstone19 on May 09, 2023, 03:01:23 PM
Quote from: kalvado on May 09, 2023, 01:54:06 PM
A fairly interesting overview of Thruway engineering conditions and financial situation:
https://tripnet.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/TRIP_New_York_Thruway_Report_May_2023.pdf

I wonder if more toll hikes are in the plans. Debt service exceeding maintenance spending isn't a very healthy situation when almost half of the pavement is in "poor" condition, and original bridges coming close to life expectancy....

Errors (or lack of understanding) are immediately apparent. Chart 2 lists the six busiest "interchanges" from 2019 yet three of them are end points of the ticket systems (15-Woodbury, 50-Williamsville, and 55-Lackawanna and they are listed in that table with those names which are the plaza names the Thruway used then, not the names of the exits (interchanges) of those numbers.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: lstone19 on June 22, 2023, 11:21:48 AM
Are trips between 24 and 25A supposed to show up on your EZ-Pass history or do they not show up since there's no toll? I was recently in the East and had my EZ-Pass in a rental car. A trip from 27 to 34A showed up as expected three days later (so I know I it was reading correctly in the rental car) but a trip 11 days ago from 25A to 24 has not shown up.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on June 22, 2023, 01:07:19 PM
^ Tolls involving anywhere from 24-26 take a REALLY long time to post due to how they placed the gantries in the area; NYSTA has to guess whether you used exit 25A or not.  It should show up as a $0.00 charge from 25A to 24 within the next few days.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: lstone19 on June 26, 2023, 03:25:36 PM
Quote from: vdeane on June 22, 2023, 01:07:19 PM
^ Tolls involving anywhere from 24-26 take a REALLY long time to post due to how they placed the gantries in the area; NYSTA has to guess whether you used exit 25A or not.  It should show up as a $0.00 charge from 25A to 24 within the next few days.

When I used my Illinois EZ-Pass, it seemed tolls from other agencies took a long time to process (mostly Thruway, occasionally others). So now that I also have a NYSTA EZ-Pass for my NY trips (for the discount - and yes, I got an "on-the-go" pass so I could get an NYSTA one rather than the PANYNJ transponders they mail to out-of-state residents), I used it in Illinois this weekend to spend down the balance (it will be pay per toll once it's spent down) and was really surprised to see everything post in under 24 hours. Meanwhile, still waiting to see that 25A to 24 trip from 15 days ago post. So now I realize that it's NYSTA that is the slow down, not the inter-agency reconciliation.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: mariethefoxy on July 04, 2023, 01:14:36 PM
Quote from: kalvado on April 13, 2023, 10:03:36 AM
Quote from: MASTERNC on April 13, 2023, 08:14:20 AM
Quote from: kalvado on April 13, 2023, 06:32:14 AM
Quote from: machias on April 13, 2023, 01:12:09 AM
Quote from: kalvado on April 11, 2023, 05:38:38 PM
An interesting development for the Thruway rest area reconstruction project:
now state (or toll) money are needed to complete the project. Not a lot, just mere quarter billion:
https://buffalonews.com/news/local/govt-and-politics/new-york-state-thruway-rest-stops-bailout-taxpayers/article_e33d4a6a-d48e-11ed-aeb9-8b215c14e25d.html



It still blows my mind that the larger facilities that were built from scratch in the early 1990s were ripped down at barely 30 years old. I can see the few old facilities from the 50s being replaced, but the ones from the 90s? Complete waste of money.
There is some backstage information, and if that is true - things are very ... Newyorkish.
https://twitter.com/scotvega18/status/1639614250204254208?s=21&t=y732DGKg3Dk5dv5QCjflOQ
https://twitter.com/scotvega18/status/1639614282882064385?s=21&t=fM5R_Rble2S1Y8VKrk8uDA


I'm not sure what the PTC did on the Turnpike for its renovations but nearly all of them were much smaller than the Thruway locations (either they were 1940s buildings or modeled after them).  In the case of the Thruway, it sounds like they weren't making them all uniform in size but keeping different size ones, so remodeling might have made some sense.
Thruway did have several different building designs and sizes. Not all of them were best fit, obviously, and they could use a facelift (show me the building which doesn't need one!).
Yet, many people thought those buildings were in reasonable shape. Now a professional hired to do evaluations says that buildings were in reasonable shape - but someone above was hell bent on total rebuild.  It could make some sense for a new contractor to start things from scratch, though...
Now, it sounds like new builds are not adequate for the purpose; were  deliberately designed in expensive way; and contractor runs out of money and wants state bailout, despite contractually responsible for the scenario.
I, for one, doubt that operational profit is the driving force for the new plaza operator. For one, previous operator terminated operations when contract expired  at the end of 2022. Kitchen equipment was removed at areas which were slated to close later, and cold wraps are available now. Not that McD serves great food,  but those McDs were still running full steam.
ANd now government bailout - and no services as an alternative, I assume.

Pure speculation, of course,  but looks like they made enough campaign donations to ensure they get the contract they wanted - but not (yet) enough to  secure bailout...

Say what you will about McDonalds, they are at least open all seven days a week. This rest stop project is unnecessary especially since some of them were not even that old.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: roadman65 on July 04, 2023, 01:24:14 PM
I see the NYSTA didn’t waste time removing the toll barrier at Woodbury.  Considering that FTE in Florida has been cash less a while, they still have the plazas still remaining at least until the next major construction project to include its removal, especially on the Polk Parkway.

Some removed the booths but the canopy remains. Of course,  the booths can be lifted using a forklift and hauled away on a flatbed truck, but the canopy requires major construction. Plus the booths removal don’t need a construction permit either.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on July 04, 2023, 03:32:45 PM
Then there's exit 17, where the barriers remain because the canopy is used as a pedestrian bridge.  About all they did was install guiderail and remove one booth (two of the lanes are the old express E-ZPass lanes).  Even the old lane dividers remain.
https://goo.gl/maps/qAybPSSyxsMpzexWA

Maybe one reason the Thruway doesn't want to change the exit numbers is because then they'd have to change the number on the booths...
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: roadman65 on July 04, 2023, 07:11:42 PM
https://goo.gl/maps/WkNQ1fonL1gcf9Ee6
Surprised to see a Freeway Entrance sign. I thought they would use Thruway Entrance as Freeway is not in a New Yorkers vocabulary.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: seicer on July 04, 2023, 07:41:08 PM
Quote from: mariethefoxy on July 04, 2023, 01:14:36 PM
Quote from: kalvado on April 13, 2023, 10:03:36 AM
Quote from: MASTERNC on April 13, 2023, 08:14:20 AM
Quote from: kalvado on April 13, 2023, 06:32:14 AM
Quote from: machias on April 13, 2023, 01:12:09 AM
Quote from: kalvado on April 11, 2023, 05:38:38 PM
An interesting development for the Thruway rest area reconstruction project:
now state (or toll) money are needed to complete the project. Not a lot, just mere quarter billion:
https://buffalonews.com/news/local/govt-and-politics/new-york-state-thruway-rest-stops-bailout-taxpayers/article_e33d4a6a-d48e-11ed-aeb9-8b215c14e25d.html



It still blows my mind that the larger facilities that were built from scratch in the early 1990s were ripped down at barely 30 years old. I can see the few old facilities from the 50s being replaced, but the ones from the 90s? Complete waste of money.
There is some backstage information, and if that is true - things are very ... Newyorkish.
https://twitter.com/scotvega18/status/1639614250204254208?s=21&t=y732DGKg3Dk5dv5QCjflOQ
https://twitter.com/scotvega18/status/1639614282882064385?s=21&t=fM5R_Rble2S1Y8VKrk8uDA


I'm not sure what the PTC did on the Turnpike for its renovations but nearly all of them were much smaller than the Thruway locations (either they were 1940s buildings or modeled after them).  In the case of the Thruway, it sounds like they weren't making them all uniform in size but keeping different size ones, so remodeling might have made some sense.
Thruway did have several different building designs and sizes. Not all of them were best fit, obviously, and they could use a facelift (show me the building which doesn't need one!).
Yet, many people thought those buildings were in reasonable shape. Now a professional hired to do evaluations says that buildings were in reasonable shape - but someone above was hell bent on total rebuild.  It could make some sense for a new contractor to start things from scratch, though...
Now, it sounds like new builds are not adequate for the purpose; were  deliberately designed in expensive way; and contractor runs out of money and wants state bailout, despite contractually responsible for the scenario.
I, for one, doubt that operational profit is the driving force for the new plaza operator. For one, previous operator terminated operations when contract expired  at the end of 2022. Kitchen equipment was removed at areas which were slated to close later, and cold wraps are available now. Not that McD serves great food,  but those McDs were still running full steam.
ANd now government bailout - and no services as an alternative, I assume.

Pure speculation, of course,  but looks like they made enough campaign donations to ensure they get the contract they wanted - but not (yet) enough to  secure bailout...

Say what you will about McDonalds, they are at least open all seven days a week. This rest stop project is unnecessary especially since some of them were not even that old.

The earliest Thruway segment opened in 1954, and by the time most were replaced (1990-94), they were approaching 40 years of age. Now they are being replaced after 30 years of use. I don't recall if it was just cheaper to rebuild versus a full rehabilitation.

For the West Virginia Turnpike, the "Glass House" buildings were from around the same era and were replaced when the Turnpike was widened in the late 1970s-1980s. Two were demolished this year for a full plaza rebuild. This includes a brand new (and larger) structure with more amenities, new gas pumps and storage tanks, and larger, redesigned parking areas. This differs a bit from the Thruway as the Turnpike's rebuilds seem to be more extensive.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on July 04, 2023, 07:48:34 PM
Quote from: seicer on July 04, 2023, 07:41:08 PM
The earliest Thruway segment opened in 1954, and by the time most were replaced (1990-94), they were approaching 40 years of age. Now they are being replaced after 30 years of use. I don't recall if it was just cheaper to rebuild versus a full rehabilitation.

For the West Virginia Turnpike, the "Glass House" buildings were from around the same era and were replaced when the Turnpike was widened in the late 1970s-1980s. Two were demolished this year for a full plaza rebuild. This includes a brand new (and larger) structure with more amenities, new gas pumps and storage tanks, and larger, redesigned parking areas. This differs a bit from the Thruway as the Turnpike's rebuilds seem to be more extensive.
If you look at those tweets above (if they are still available), the guy who was doing the assessment basically says the scheme was strongly tilted towards building replacement regardless of the actual condition.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: lstone19 on July 04, 2023, 11:14:42 PM
Quote from: mariethefoxy on July 04, 2023, 01:14:36 PM
Say what you will about McDonalds, they are at least open all seven days a week.

Completely agree. There should be contractual hours of operation seven days a week. Saying "we're closed on Sundays" should be disqualifying for any bidder.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Ted$8roadFan on July 05, 2023, 06:05:46 AM
Agree about Chick-Fil-A being closed on Sundays as less than ideal, but there are other available options.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on July 05, 2023, 11:03:14 AM
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on July 05, 2023, 06:05:46 AM
Agree about Chick-Fil-A being closed on Sundays as less than ideal, but there are other available options.
Not at Chittenango there aren't.  The only other "restaurant" there is Starbucks.  And even in the bigger ones, the line for CFA was nearly out the door at 2 PM Saturday.  I can't imagine the impact of adding that line to Burger King on the busiest travel day of the week.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: lstone19 on July 06, 2023, 05:12:10 PM
Quote from: lstone19 on June 26, 2023, 03:25:36 PM
Meanwhile, still waiting to see that 25A to 24 trip from 15 days ago post.

For closure, it finally posted 24 days after we traveled.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on July 06, 2023, 08:54:25 PM
My Memorial Day travels through there took similarly long to post.  I wonder what's going on.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Flyer78 on July 07, 2023, 10:08:23 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on July 04, 2023, 07:11:42 PM
https://goo.gl/maps/WkNQ1fonL1gcf9Ee6
Surprised to see a Freeway Entrance sign. I thought they would use Thruway Entrance as Freeway is not in a New Yorkers vocabulary.

Those signs have become quite common, at least in region 3.

That said, I haven't seen them here for the Thruway interchanges. For some reason using Freeway signage on a toll road bothers me.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Ted$8roadFan on July 07, 2023, 01:21:39 PM
Quote from: Flyer78 on July 07, 2023, 10:08:23 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on July 04, 2023, 07:11:42 PM
https://goo.gl/maps/WkNQ1fonL1gcf9Ee6
Surprised to see a Freeway Entrance sign. I thought they would use Thruway Entrance as Freeway is not in a New Yorkers vocabulary.

Those signs have become quite common, at least in region 3.

That said, I haven't seen them here for the Thruway interchanges. For some reason using Freeway signage on a toll road bothers me.

There's a Thruway sign next to the Freeway sign, so I'd imagine many drivers would understand that it's a toll road. But not everybody.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: SignBridge on July 07, 2023, 08:29:40 PM
Quote from: Flyer78 on July 07, 2023, 10:08:23 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on July 04, 2023, 07:11:42 PM
https://goo.gl/maps/WkNQ1fonL1gcf9Ee6
Surprised to see a Freeway Entrance sign. I thought they would use Thruway Entrance as Freeway is not in a New Yorkers vocabulary.

Those signs have become quite common, at least in region 3.

That said, I haven't seen them here for the Thruway interchanges. For some reason using Freeway signage on a toll road bothers me.

Interesting conflict there. For better or worse the MUTCD defines Freeway differently than most drivers who might assume it means a toll-free highway. The Manual definition is: a divided highway with full control of access. As compared to an expressway which they define as a divided highway with partial control of access.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on July 07, 2023, 08:51:04 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on July 07, 2023, 08:29:40 PM
Quote from: Flyer78 on July 07, 2023, 10:08:23 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on July 04, 2023, 07:11:42 PM
https://goo.gl/maps/WkNQ1fonL1gcf9Ee6
Surprised to see a Freeway Entrance sign. I thought they would use Thruway Entrance as Freeway is not in a New Yorkers vocabulary.

Those signs have become quite common, at least in region 3.

That said, I haven't seen them here for the Thruway interchanges. For some reason using Freeway signage on a toll road bothers me.

Interesting conflict there. For better or worse the MUTCD defines Freeway differently than most drivers who might assume it means a toll-free highway. The Manual definition is: a divided highway with full control of access. As compared to an expressway which they define as a divided highway with partial control of access.
Yeah, that definition has been kicking around and never seems to stick...see NY expressways...
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: froggie on July 07, 2023, 09:33:12 PM
Quote from: Rothman on July 07, 2023, 08:51:04 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on July 07, 2023, 08:29:40 PM
Quote from: Flyer78 on July 07, 2023, 10:08:23 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on July 04, 2023, 07:11:42 PM
https://goo.gl/maps/WkNQ1fonL1gcf9Ee6
Surprised to see a Freeway Entrance sign. I thought they would use Thruway Entrance as Freeway is not in a New Yorkers vocabulary.

Those signs have become quite common, at least in region 3.

That said, I haven't seen them here for the Thruway interchanges. For some reason using Freeway signage on a toll road bothers me.

Interesting conflict there. For better or worse the MUTCD defines Freeway differently than most drivers who might assume it means a toll-free highway. The Manual definition is: a divided highway with full control of access. As compared to an expressway which they define as a divided highway with partial control of access.
Yeah, that definition has been kicking around and never seems to stick...see NY expressways...

Shouldn't be a surprise to anyone....New York's dragged their feet on several aspects of the MUTCD for years...
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: J N Winkler on July 07, 2023, 10:38:56 PM
The "free" in freeway means free of frontage access and crossings on the level, not necessarily free of charge.  It is therefore not incorrect to use "Freeway Entrance" at entry points to toll roads that are also freeways, though I personally wouldn't cavil about "Tollway Entrance" being used instead.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: ixnay on July 08, 2023, 07:50:35 AM
Quote from: machias on April 13, 2023, 01:12:09 AM
Quote from: kalvado on April 11, 2023, 05:38:38 PM
An interesting development for the Thruway rest area reconstruction project:
now state (or toll) money are needed to complete the project. Not a lot, just mere quarter billion:
https://buffalonews.com/news/local/govt-and-politics/new-york-state-thruway-rest-stops-bailout-taxpayers/article_e33d4a6a-d48e-11ed-aeb9-8b215c14e25d.html



It still blows my mind that the larger facilities that were built from scratch in the early 1990s were ripped down at barely 30 years old. I can see the few old facilities from the 50s being replaced, but the ones from the 90s? Complete waste of money.

Well, if the Atlanta Braves could tire of Turner Field after only 20 years (21 if you count the Ted's gig as the Olympic track venue)...
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: lstone19 on July 08, 2023, 11:30:50 AM
Quote from: Rothman on July 07, 2023, 08:51:04 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on July 07, 2023, 08:29:40 PM
Quote from: Flyer78 on July 07, 2023, 10:08:23 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on July 04, 2023, 07:11:42 PM
https://goo.gl/maps/WkNQ1fonL1gcf9Ee6
Surprised to see a Freeway Entrance sign. I thought they would use Thruway Entrance as Freeway is not in a New Yorkers vocabulary.

Those signs have become quite common, at least in region 3.

That said, I haven't seen them here for the Thruway interchanges. For some reason using Freeway signage on a toll road bothers me.

Interesting conflict there. For better or worse the MUTCD defines Freeway differently than most drivers who might assume it means a toll-free highway. The Manual definition is: a divided highway with full control of access. As compared to an expressway which they define as a divided highway with partial control of access.
Yeah, that definition has been kicking around and never seems to stick...see NY expressways...

Yep. In the east, roads with "expressway" in their name are freeways by definition. In the west, "freeway" is used in road names. In the Bay Area, there are a few named "expressways" (e.g. Lawrence, Oregon) that meet the MUTCD definition of expressway. California is a stickler about letting you know where freeways begin and end (just drove down 101 from San Jose to Santa Barbara last night) which is a mix of freeway and non-freeway (much of what meets that definition of expressway) and common to have a "End Freeway" sign just before an intersection at grade followed by a "Begin Freeway" just after.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: SignBridge on July 08, 2023, 07:54:25 PM
In the East, not all roads with Expressway in their name are freeways though most are.

In the Five-Towns area of Long Island's Nassau County there is a divided boulevard named Nassau Expressway, because originally it was supposed to be a freeway, but plans changed and it was built as a boulevard but retained the original name.

And in Queens, N.Y. the service roads on both sides of the Long Island Expwy (I-495) are named Horace Harding Expressway even though they are boulevard type roads with traffic lights. Don't know why they're not called Horace Harding Blvd. since that was the original road name before it was rebuilt as a freeway (with service roads) in the 1950's.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: mariethefoxy on July 08, 2023, 10:46:28 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on July 08, 2023, 07:54:25 PM
In the East, not all roads with Expressway in their name are freeways though most are.

In the Five-Towns area of Long Island's Nassau County there is a divided boulevard named Nassau Expressway, because originally it was supposed to be a freeway, but plans changed and it was built as a boulevard but retained the original name.

And in Queens, N.Y. the service roads on both sides of the Long Island Expwy (I-495) are named Horace Harding Expressway even though they are boulevard type roads with traffic lights. Don't know why they're not called Horace Harding Blvd. since that was the original road name before it was rebuilt as a freeway (with service roads) in the 1950's.

Service Roads in NYC tend to keep the name of the road they parallel, at some point or another 495 thru the city was called Horace Harding Expwy but they kept the name Long Island Expressway for continuity with Nassau and Suffolk most likely.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: jeffandnicole on July 09, 2023, 12:08:43 AM
Quote from: ixnay on July 08, 2023, 07:50:35 AM
Quote from: machias on April 13, 2023, 01:12:09 AM
Quote from: kalvado on April 11, 2023, 05:38:38 PM
An interesting development for the Thruway rest area reconstruction project:
now state (or toll) money are needed to complete the project. Not a lot, just mere quarter billion:
https://buffalonews.com/news/local/govt-and-politics/new-york-state-thruway-rest-stops-bailout-taxpayers/article_e33d4a6a-d48e-11ed-aeb9-8b215c14e25d.html



It still blows my mind that the larger facilities that were built from scratch in the early 1990s were ripped down at barely 30 years old. I can see the few old facilities from the 50s being replaced, but the ones from the 90s? Complete waste of money.

Well, if the Atlanta Braves could tire of Turner Field after only 20 years (21 if you count the Ted's gig as the Olympic track venue)...

A lot of vagueness in that article.  Why the delay?  "Supply Chain Issues".  Which supplies?  The media didn't ask.

This one's even more shocking...

"Democratic Assemblyman William Magnarelli, who chairs the Assembly Transportation Committee, said he was approached by a partner involved in the project — he could not recall the name — about securing 'a couple hundred million' dollars in the budget."

It's one thing when the transportation department says they need hundreds of millions of dollars to fund their projects.  It's another when a single person asks for that money...for a project the State isn't even funding.  He doesn't remember the name?  He probably ate dinner with him the night before.

Unfortunately, that's the media today.  They don't ask any questions, for fear of retribution and being restricted from future events (even though media should have constitutional rights for free access to such events).  They just take what's given to them.  Someone asks for a $260 million bailout; no name, and no specific reasons why.  Good enough for a story that drags on with no answers.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: SignBridge on July 09, 2023, 08:25:58 PM
Quote from: mariethefoxy on July 08, 2023, 10:46:28 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on July 08, 2023, 07:54:25 PM
In the East, not all roads with Expressway in their name are freeways though most are.

In the Five-Towns area of Long Island's Nassau County there is a divided boulevard named Nassau Expressway, because originally it was supposed to be a freeway, but plans changed and it was built as a boulevard but retained the original name.

And in Queens, N.Y. the service roads on both sides of the Long Island Expwy (I-495) are named Horace Harding Expressway even though they are boulevard type roads with traffic lights. Don't know why they're not called Horace Harding Blvd. since that was the original road name before it was rebuilt as a freeway (with service roads) in the 1950's.

Service Roads in NYC tend to keep the name of the road they parallel, at some point or another 495 thru the city was called Horace Harding Expwy but they kept the name Long Island Expressway for continuity with Nassau and Suffolk most likely.

You are correct. When Horace Harding Blvd. in Queens was rebuilt as a freeway in the mid 1950's it was originally called Horace harding Expwy. but the name was presumably changed for continuity.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on July 15, 2023, 08:46:18 PM
New Baltimore Travel Plaza was busy today.  Problem seemed to be that the restaurant spaces were too small.  There were enough staff, but it was like they needed more cook space.  Plenty of seating space available.

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53047902467_eb2402ca9c_k.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2oPEnf4)Crowded New Rest Area at New Baltimore Travel Plaza on Thruway (https://flic.kr/p/2oPEnf4)
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: NoGoodNamesAvailable on July 16, 2023, 02:40:33 PM
Quote from: Rothman on July 15, 2023, 08:46:18 PM
New Baltimore Travel Plaza was busy today.  Problem seemed to be that the restaurant spaces were too small.  There were enough staff, but it was like they needed more cook space.  Plenty of seating space available.

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53047902467_eb2402ca9c_k.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2oPEnf4)Crowded New Rest Area at New Baltimore Travel Plaza on Thruway (https://flic.kr/p/2oPEnf4)

And you caught in on the day when one of the restaurants isn't closed...
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Mr. Matté on August 23, 2023, 10:49:00 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/BBVcjF9.png)

Is this the smallest toll possible, anywhere in the country? I have a NY E-ZPass and the length of this segment is under a mile. I don't fully get why they went with the transponder readers spanning the mainline in the cities which were previously part of the ticket system instead of just installing them over the shared ramp areas where the booths used to be, but there it is.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on August 23, 2023, 10:59:59 PM
Exits 36-39 were definitely a talking point during the Thruway's conversion to AET. Elsewhere, the choice of mainline gantries vs. exit ramp gantries made sense, but I never understood why they kept the exit ramp gantries at 37 and 38. A single mainline gantry could have replaced the exit gantries at both 37 and 38, and the exit ramp gantries restrict NYSTA's ability to change anything at those interchanges in the future.

36-37 is an extraordinarily short segment, most likely correct that it is the lowest possible toll in the country (only with EZPass though, as Tolls by Mail have a $2 surcharge). If not for the surcharge, it's probably more in administrative costs to charge tolls on that segment than they're making on the tolls.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on August 24, 2023, 01:01:07 PM
The Thruway looked at three options when they switched: all mainline, all ramp, and a mix of the two.  They went with the latter to minimize the number of mainline gantries while still avoiding causing traffic disruptions at the busier exits.  It's a pity they didn't think to rethink some aspects of toll collection when they went AET.  It would have been nice if Syracuse and Albany could get free zones where the virtual ticket systems break up.  Especially around exit 25A, the way it's implemented now causes no end of problems.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: roadman65 on August 24, 2023, 01:18:16 PM
Why was the Thruway given free zones especially in Rockland County?

In NJ the Parkway had free zones only caused they represented the original sections built with state taxes and up until 1986 were even maintained by NJDOT. However in New York I doubt that was the case like the GSP.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on August 24, 2023, 01:56:27 PM
Quote from: vdeane on August 24, 2023, 01:01:07 PM
The Thruway looked at three options when they switched: all mainline, all ramp, and a mix of the two.  They went with the latter to minimize the number of mainline gantries while still avoiding causing traffic disruptions at the busier exits.  It's a pity they didn't think to rethink some aspects of toll collection when they went AET.  It would have been nice if Syracuse and Albany could get free zones where the virtual ticket systems break up.  Especially around exit 25A, the way it's implemented now causes no end of problems.
I wonder if later adjustments are possible, or Daddy's Bridge debt eats up all free money at NYSTA?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on August 24, 2023, 08:03:55 PM
Quote from: kalvado on August 24, 2023, 01:56:27 PM
Quote from: vdeane on August 24, 2023, 01:01:07 PM
The Thruway looked at three options when they switched: all mainline, all ramp, and a mix of the two.  They went with the latter to minimize the number of mainline gantries while still avoiding causing traffic disruptions at the busier exits.  It's a pity they didn't think to rethink some aspects of toll collection when they went AET.  It would have been nice if Syracuse and Albany could get free zones where the virtual ticket systems break up.  Especially around exit 25A, the way it's implemented now causes no end of problems.
I wonder if later adjustments are possible, or Daddy's Bridge debt eats up all free money at NYSTA?
I doubt they would want to rip out gantries that they had just put in a couple years ago.  I do wish they would reprogram their toll processing to aggregate trips together like MassDOT does.  Probably not much they can do to speed up the processing of tolls involving exit 25A without moving gantries, however, even though that's the worst part.  Even going from one line to eight for each direction of my Rochester/Albany trips would be a lot less annoying if all the charges would post at the same time, not varying times ranging from a day to a month.  As it is now, it's basically a jigsaw puzzle where I have to keep track of what posted for each trip.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on August 24, 2023, 08:39:43 PM
Quote from: vdeane on August 24, 2023, 08:03:55 PM
Quote from: kalvado on August 24, 2023, 01:56:27 PM
Quote from: vdeane on August 24, 2023, 01:01:07 PM
The Thruway looked at three options when they switched: all mainline, all ramp, and a mix of the two.  They went with the latter to minimize the number of mainline gantries while still avoiding causing traffic disruptions at the busier exits.  It's a pity they didn't think to rethink some aspects of toll collection when they went AET.  It would have been nice if Syracuse and Albany could get free zones where the virtual ticket systems break up.  Especially around exit 25A, the way it's implemented now causes no end of problems.
I wonder if later adjustments are possible, or Daddy's Bridge debt eats up all free money at NYSTA?
I doubt they would want to rip out gantries that they had just put in a couple years ago.  I do wish they would reprogram their toll processing to aggregate trips together like MassDOT does.  Probably not much they can do to speed up the processing of tolls involving exit 25A without moving gantries, however, even though that's the worst part.  Even going from one line to eight for each direction of my Rochester/Albany trips would be a lot less annoying if all the charges would post at the same time, not varying times ranging from a day to a month.  As it is now, it's basically a jigsaw puzzle where I have to keep track of what posted for each trip.
Which really makes me wonder if they are using carrier pigeon in data transfers.... I can understand I-88 uncertainty giving the realization ( although low-volume exit 25A setup may be not that expensive to add)
But taking more than 10 seconds to post everything else for their own ezpass?? 
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on August 24, 2023, 09:07:02 PM


Quote from: vdeane on August 24, 2023, 08:03:55 PM
I do wish they would reprogram their toll processing to aggregate trips together like MassDOT does.

Sing it, sister.  I had a statement recently where I swore I was overcharged.  Called them up and they put the tetris together for me to show how I wasn't.

The struggle is real.

Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Jim on August 24, 2023, 09:22:16 PM
From my most recent trip, tolls from NJ, DE, MD, and FL, all posted to my NYSTA E-Z Pass account well before the NY ones. 

Looks like the Florida's Turnpike tolls are also not aggregated.  I see 9 separate entries on that ride which was really just 2 entries and 2 exits.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: astralentity on August 28, 2023, 11:40:55 AM
I'm still waiting for the tolls on the Will Rogers Turnpike to post to the PlusPass app I used for my trip to Oklahoma last month.  They should really look into using EZPass.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: jmacswimmer on August 28, 2023, 11:58:39 AM
Quote from: webny99 on August 23, 2023, 10:59:59 PM
Exits 36-39 were definitely a talking point during the Thruway's conversion to AET. Elsewhere, the choice of mainline gantries vs. exit ramp gantries made sense, but I never understood why they kept the exit ramp gantries at 37 and 38. A single mainline gantry could have replaced the exit gantries at both 37 and 38, and the exit ramp gantries restrict NYSTA's ability to change anything at those interchanges in the future.

36-37 is an extraordinarily short segment, most likely correct that it is the lowest possible toll in the country (only with EZPass though, as Tolls by Mail have a $2 surcharge). If not for the surcharge, it's probably more in administrative costs to charge tolls on that segment than they're making on the tolls.

The other thing that seems odd here to me is that 36-39 is a separate entry-exit segment from the one that begins right on the other side of 39 - if I'm not mistaken, it's the only spot on the entire Thruway where 2 entry-exit segments exist without either a free segment or flat-rate gantries in between?

One thought: It looks like the Thruway is currently under construction from east of 39 (immediately past the gantry) to 37 per recent GSV, so could it be possible that NYSTA knew this project was in the works and didn't want to install gantries that would soon have to be reinstalled anyway?

Re NYSTA's toll processing: It does seem like the turnaround time is all over the place. From a trip in May where I drove 15 to 24 and then B1 to B3 2 days later, the 23-24 flat-rate gantry took 2 days, the 15-23 segment took 3 days, and the B1-B3 segment took 1 day.

Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: lstone19 on August 28, 2023, 12:51:51 PM
Quote from: vdeane on August 24, 2023, 01:01:07 PM
The Thruway looked at three options when they switched: all mainline, all ramp, and a mix of the two.  They went with the latter to minimize the number of mainline gantries while still avoiding causing traffic disruptions at the busier exits.  It's a pity they didn't think to rethink some aspects of toll collection when they went AET.  Especially around exit 25A, the way it's implemented now causes no end of problems.

The "avoid causing traffic disruptions" at the busier exits doesn't make a lot of sense to me. Why? Because the gantry would be located in what can be a weaving section? Then why not put the gantries on the individual ramps in the trumpet part of interchange which are almost all single lane. Instead, they push the same issues out on to the mainline. Back in June, I was exiting westbound at 34A for the first time in years. Even knowing there was mainline gantry before the exit, I wasn't thinking about it and then got caught by surprise to find it 1/10 mile before the exit as I'm trying to get over to the right lane (last second pass due to a slow vehicle). They have 15 miles between 34 and 34A and they stick it hard to the end with the busier interchange.

The slow posting is very frustrating. I was shocked when I used my NY EZ-Pass in Illinois and saw ISTHA tolls post faster (seemed to be six to 12 hours) than NYSTA tolls. And the whole 25A mess: my guess is all those tolls are held in suspense until they time out (three plus weeks) meaning traffic must have entered/exited at 25A or until another scan makes it clear that they didn't. So for my recent 25A to 24 trip, I was scanned at the 25/25A gantry and the 24/25 gantry. Those two then sat for three plus weeks waiting to see if a scan at the 25A VTS exit gantry occurred (which would have also required an entry somewhere between 34A and 26) before concluding no I didn't so process them as 25A to 24 free trip.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on August 28, 2023, 12:56:39 PM
Quote from: lstone19 on August 28, 2023, 12:51:51 PM
Quote from: vdeane on August 24, 2023, 01:01:07 PM
The Thruway looked at three options when they switched: all mainline, all ramp, and a mix of the two.  They went with the latter to minimize the number of mainline gantries while still avoiding causing traffic disruptions at the busier exits.  It's a pity they didn't think to rethink some aspects of toll collection when they went AET.  Especially around exit 25A, the way it's implemented now causes no end of problems.

The "avoid causing traffic disruptions" at the busier exits doesn't make a lot of sense to me. Why? Because the gantry would be located in what can be a weaving section? Then why not put the gantries on the individual ramps in the trumpet part of interchange which are almost all single lane. Instead, they push the same issues out on to the mainline. Back in June, I was exiting westbound at 34A for the first time in years. Even knowing there was mainline gantry before the exit, I wasn't thinking about it and then got caught by surprise to find it 1/10 mile before the exit as I'm trying to get over to the right lane (last second pass due to a slow vehicle). They have 15 miles between 34 and 34A and they stick it hard to the end with the busier interchange.

The slow posting is very frustrating. I was shocked when I used my NY EZ-Pass in Illinois and saw ISTHA tolls post faster (seemed to be six to 12 hours) than NYSTA tolls. And the whole 25A mess: my guess is all those tolls are held in suspense until they time out (three plus weeks) meaning traffic must have entered/exited at 25A or until another scan makes it clear that they didn't. So for my recent 25A to 24 trip, I was scanned at the 25/25A gantry and the 24/25 gantry. Those two then sat for three plus weeks waiting to see if a scan at the 25A VTS exit gantry occurred (which would have also required an entry somewhere between 34A and 26) before concluding no I didn't so process them as 25A to 24 free trip.
I don't think it's the weave (otherwise they would have broken up exit 17, where they re-used the existing barrier) so much as traffic would have had to construct down to four lanes (two each way) when they were put up.  Many of those high-volume exits have large toll barriers with many more lanes than that, so it would have cut into the queuing capacity.  Placing gantries on individual ramps doesn't seem to be something the Thruway considered aside from exit 20 (although it would have saved a ton of processing problems at exit 25A).

The time it takes to process tolls around exit 25A has definitely lengthened.  I remember when it was just a week or two.  It takes just as long if you do travel west of there and have to pay, too.

Quote from: jmacswimmer on August 28, 2023, 11:58:39 AM
Quote from: webny99 on August 23, 2023, 10:59:59 PM
Exits 36-39 were definitely a talking point during the Thruway's conversion to AET. Elsewhere, the choice of mainline gantries vs. exit ramp gantries made sense, but I never understood why they kept the exit ramp gantries at 37 and 38. A single mainline gantry could have replaced the exit gantries at both 37 and 38, and the exit ramp gantries restrict NYSTA's ability to change anything at those interchanges in the future.

36-37 is an extraordinarily short segment, most likely correct that it is the lowest possible toll in the country (only with EZPass though, as Tolls by Mail have a $2 surcharge). If not for the surcharge, it's probably more in administrative costs to charge tolls on that segment than they're making on the tolls.

The other thing that seems odd here to me is that 36-39 is a separate entry-exit segment from the one that begins right on the other side of 39 - if I'm not mistaken, it's the only spot on the entire Thruway where 2 entry-exit segments exist without either a free segment or flat-rate gantries in between?

One thought: It looks like the Thruway is currently under construction from east of 39 (immediately past the gantry) to 37 per recent GSV, so could it be possible that NYSTA knew this project was in the works and didn't want to install gantries that would soon have to be reinstalled anyway?

Re NYSTA's toll processing: It does seem like the turnaround time is all over the place. From a trip in May where I drove 15 to 24 and then B1 to B3 2 days later, the 23-24 flat-rate gantry took 2 days, the 15-23 segment took 3 days, and the B1-B3 segment took 1 day.


The west end of the 36-39 segment is in the construction zone, so somehow they're able to make it work.  It's more like they didn't want to have to put mainline gantries anywhere where traffic counts on the exits didn't force them to.  Exits 23, 24, 25, 25A, 34A, 36, 39, 44, 45, 46, and 47 were deemed to have enough traffic to warrant not having exit gantries.  Just so happens that nothing else near exit 39 was deemed to warrant mainline gantries.

That said, this project was in the works for a decade (at one time, it was scheduled to begin after the 39-40 project finished), so they definitely knew it was coming.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: lstone19 on August 28, 2023, 01:22:50 PM
Quote from: vdeane on August 28, 2023, 12:56:39 PM
Quote from: lstone19 on August 28, 2023, 12:51:51 PM
The "avoid causing traffic disruptions" at the busier exits doesn't make a lot of sense to me. Why? Because the gantry would be located in what can be a weaving section? Then why not put the gantries on the individual ramps in the trumpet part of interchange which are almost all single lane. Instead, they push the same issues out on to the mainline. Back in June, I was exiting westbound at 34A for the first time in years. Even knowing there was mainline gantry before the exit, I wasn't thinking about it and then got caught by surprise to find it 1/10 mile before the exit as I'm trying to get over to the right lane (last second pass due to a slow vehicle). They have 15 miles between 34 and 34A and they stick it hard to the end with the busier interchange.
I don't think it's the weave (otherwise they would have broken up exit 17, where they re-used the existing barrier) so much as traffic would have had to construct down to four lanes (two each way) when they were put up.  Many of those high-volume exits have large toll barriers with many more lanes than that, so it would have cut into the queuing capacity.  Placing gantries on individual ramps doesn't seem to be something the Thruway considered aside from exit 20 (although it would have saved a ton of processing problems at exit 25A).

Why should there be any queuing? Certainly not for the toll gantries since they're highway speed. Backups from beyond the gantry? Other agencies seem to have no problem processing tolls even when a backup extends through a toll plaza/gantry.

Regarding individual ramp gantries, they did it at 16 moving the 16 south entry gantry to the ramp to get rid of the old pay cash, then get a ticket at the next plaza that traffic entering northbound at 16 used to do.

Part of this strikes me as they got so fixated on fixing what they perceived as a problem that they came up with a solution but then didn't go to the next step of thinking about what new problems the solution introduced that could be an even bigger problem.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on August 28, 2023, 03:40:20 PM
In current news, the Thruway westbound is backed up for over 10 miles between Exits 40 and 39 (for those unfamiliar with the area, a 15-mile stretch between exits) due to an apparent accident, no doubt compounded by State Fair traffic. Google is currently showing it as a 1h 58min delay (!!). Per the live VMS feature on the Thruway Traveler Map (https://www.thruway.ny.gov/travelers/map/index.html), the VMS west of Exit 35 is recommending that traffic use the Emergency Detour Route. Not sure I've ever seen this before outside of a full closure:

LONG DELAYS
BEYOND
EXIT 39

USE EXIT 39
TO FOLLOW
DETOUR ROUTE "E"

It appears that EDR "E" follows NY 690 NB to NY 31 WB. Local traffic and those using Google Maps/GPS will likely identify that Brickyard Rd to NY 173 cuts considerable mileage off of EDR "E", but isn't as high-quality of a route, including an all-way stop (https://goo.gl/maps/zvUFXxVvAq9dTspF7) that's bound to be gnarly. (Then again, the ramp from NY 690 NB to NY 31 isn't signalized, so that's bound to cause problems too.)
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on August 28, 2023, 08:40:30 PM
Quote from: lstone19 on August 28, 2023, 01:22:50 PM
Quote from: vdeane on August 28, 2023, 12:56:39 PM
Quote from: lstone19 on August 28, 2023, 12:51:51 PM
The "avoid causing traffic disruptions" at the busier exits doesn't make a lot of sense to me. Why? Because the gantry would be located in what can be a weaving section? Then why not put the gantries on the individual ramps in the trumpet part of interchange which are almost all single lane. Instead, they push the same issues out on to the mainline. Back in June, I was exiting westbound at 34A for the first time in years. Even knowing there was mainline gantry before the exit, I wasn't thinking about it and then got caught by surprise to find it 1/10 mile before the exit as I'm trying to get over to the right lane (last second pass due to a slow vehicle). They have 15 miles between 34 and 34A and they stick it hard to the end with the busier interchange.
I don't think it's the weave (otherwise they would have broken up exit 17, where they re-used the existing barrier) so much as traffic would have had to construct down to four lanes (two each way) when they were put up.  Many of those high-volume exits have large toll barriers with many more lanes than that, so it would have cut into the queuing capacity.  Placing gantries on individual ramps doesn't seem to be something the Thruway considered aside from exit 20 (although it would have saved a ton of processing problems at exit 25A).

Why should there be any queuing? Certainly not for the toll gantries since they're highway speed. Backups from beyond the gantry? Other agencies seem to have no problem processing tolls even when a backup extends through a toll plaza/gantry.

Regarding individual ramp gantries, they did it at 16 moving the 16 south entry gantry to the ramp to get rid of the old pay cash, then get a ticket at the next plaza that traffic entering northbound at 16 used to do.

Part of this strikes me as they got so fixated on fixing what they perceived as a problem that they came up with a solution but then didn't go to the next step of thinking about what new problems the solution introduced that could be an even bigger problem.

The Thruway was not AET prior to the gantries being activated.  Aside from a couple months during COVID, cash toll collection was maintained all the way to the switch.  Thus, the toll barriers themselves needed queuing space.  With the larger barriers, this takes up practically the entire distance between the barrier and the ramps.

I can't speak for why they had different methodologies when they converted Harriman/New Rochelle/Yonkers/Spring Valley than when they converted the ticket system.  Different contractor, maybe?  IIRC the AET project was design-build.

As for getting fixated, while I can't know for certain, I suspect that it was rather the reverse.  As far as I can tell, the Thruway Authority itself had little/no interest in going AET, and had the conversion thrust upon it by Governor Cuomo (who set a 2020 deadline for that and many other things announced in one year's State of the State address).  It's not surprising that they made odd choices when doing it, if they never wanted to do it in the first place.

(personal opinion)
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on August 28, 2023, 10:11:26 PM
Quote from: jmacswimmer on August 28, 2023, 11:58:39 AM
Quote from: webny99 on August 23, 2023, 10:59:59 PM
Exits 36-39 were definitely a talking point during the Thruway's conversion to AET. ...

The other thing that seems odd here to me is that 36-39 is a separate entry-exit segment from the one that begins right on the other side of 39 - if I'm not mistaken, it's the only spot on the entire Thruway where 2 entry-exit segments exist without either a free segment or flat-rate gantries in between?

Whoops, missed this earlier. Yes, that is correct that 36-39 is the only such segment. In other words, a single flat-rate gantry between 37 and 38 would eliminate the entry-exit segment (and the need for any ramp gantries in the entire Syracuse area).


Quote from: jmacswimmer on August 28, 2023, 11:58:39 AM
One thought: It looks like the Thruway is currently under construction from east of 39 (immediately past the gantry) to 37 per recent GSV, so could it be possible that NYSTA knew this project was in the works and didn't want to install gantries that would soon have to be reinstalled anyway?

Come to think of it, this seems very possible, maybe even likely. Especially considering how the gantry between 38-39 was placed so close to Exit 39 that it almost seems strategically placed to be past the construction zone.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on August 28, 2023, 10:38:33 PM
Quote from: lstone19 on August 28, 2023, 01:22:50 PM
Part of this strikes me as they got so fixated on fixing what they perceived as a problem that they came up with a solution but then didn't go to the next step of thinking about what new problems the solution introduced that could be an even bigger problem.

This is certainly true of Exit 45, probably the only location on the entire Thruway system where traffic conditions got worse due to the implementation of AET*. The toll booths at the end of I-490 used to split the traffic up, slow everyone down, and allow for 90% of the traffic to shift into a single lane relatively smoothly. Now that it's free-flowing, the true problem is exposed: It's way too much volume for a single lane ramp to handle, and often backs up for a mile plus on Thursday/Friday evenings. I've sent multiple emails to NYSTA inquiring if/when they plan to address the bottleneck (i.e. replace the bridge over the Thruway and widen the ramp), to no avail so far.

*I'm referring primarily to traffic entering the Thruway at Exit 45, but exiting and navigating this weave (https://goo.gl/maps/HEbYDuYQdLqcCR4r8) at high speeds is rather disorienting too (first-time users beware!). Fortunately the weave movement (I-90 EB to NY 96) isn't busy enough to create any major traffic problems aside from the occasional confused driver making last-second decisions.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: lstone19 on August 29, 2023, 10:40:12 AM
Quote from: vdeane on August 28, 2023, 08:40:30 PM
The Thruway was not AET prior to the gantries being activated.  Aside from a couple months during COVID, cash toll collection was maintained all the way to the switch.  Thus, the toll barriers themselves needed queuing space.  With the larger barriers, this takes up practically the entire distance between the barrier and the ramps.

I can't speak for why they had different methodologies when they converted Harriman/New Rochelle/Yonkers/Spring Valley than when they converted the ticket system.  Different contractor, maybe?  IIRC the AET project was design-build.

As for getting fixated, while I can't know for certain, I suspect that it was rather the reverse.  As far as I can tell, the Thruway Authority itself had little/no interest in going AET, and had the conversion thrust upon it by Governor Cuomo (who set a 2020 deadline for that and many other things announced in one year's State of the State address).  It's not surprising that they made odd choices when doing it, if they never wanted to do it in the first place.

(personal opinion)

Interesting. I think you're saying your opinion is that having some interchanges with no gantries was needed not for today but for during the construction period - that they could not build gantries (at least in the place and size they wanted) while maintaining ticket distribution and cash collection. Or at least do so in the time allowed.

If so, then nothing to stop them today (other than money) to going back and doing all those interchanges right since the former wide plaza areas are no longer needed.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on August 29, 2023, 12:44:24 PM
Quote from: webny99 on August 28, 2023, 10:11:26 PM
Come to think of it, this seems very possible, maybe even likely. Especially considering how the gantry between 38-39 was placed so close to Exit 39 that it almost seems strategically placed to be past the construction zone.
Last time I drove through there, there was a lane shift through the gantry with construction on either side.

Quote from: lstone19 on August 29, 2023, 10:40:12 AM
Quote from: vdeane on August 28, 2023, 08:40:30 PM
The Thruway was not AET prior to the gantries being activated.  Aside from a couple months during COVID, cash toll collection was maintained all the way to the switch.  Thus, the toll barriers themselves needed queuing space.  With the larger barriers, this takes up practically the entire distance between the barrier and the ramps.

I can't speak for why they had different methodologies when they converted Harriman/New Rochelle/Yonkers/Spring Valley than when they converted the ticket system.  Different contractor, maybe?  IIRC the AET project was design-build.

As for getting fixated, while I can't know for certain, I suspect that it was rather the reverse.  As far as I can tell, the Thruway Authority itself had little/no interest in going AET, and had the conversion thrust upon it by Governor Cuomo (who set a 2020 deadline for that and many other things announced in one year's State of the State address).  It's not surprising that they made odd choices when doing it, if they never wanted to do it in the first place.

(personal opinion)

Interesting. I think you're saying your opinion is that having some interchanges with no gantries was needed not for today but for during the construction period - that they could not build gantries (at least in the place and size they wanted) while maintaining ticket distribution and cash collection. Or at least do so in the time allowed.

If so, then nothing to stop them today (other than money) to going back and doing all those interchanges right since the former wide plaza areas are no longer needed.
Correct.  The project took a while given the size of the ticket system, so some of those gantries were up for months before it was activated.

I don't see them rearranging things in the near term.  Maybe the next time things need to be replaced.  The gantries installed during the Tappan Zee replacement project were meant to be temporary, but it was decided that it wasn't worth it to build a new gantry near exit 9 when the ones at exit 10 worked just fine.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: lstone19 on August 29, 2023, 01:20:58 PM
Quote from: vdeane on August 29, 2023, 12:44:24 PM
Quote from: lstone19 on August 29, 2023, 10:40:12 AM
Interesting. I think you're saying your opinion is that having some interchanges with no gantries was needed not for today but for during the construction period - that they could not build gantries (at least in the place and size they wanted) while maintaining ticket distribution and cash collection. Or at least do so in the time allowed.

If so, then nothing to stop them today (other than money) to going back and doing all those interchanges right since the former wide plaza areas are no longer needed.
Correct.  The project took a while given the size of the ticket system, so some of those gantries were up for months before it was activated.

I don't see them rearranging things in the near term.  Maybe the next time things need to be replaced.  The gantries installed during the Tappan Zee replacement project were meant to be temporary, but it was decided that it wasn't worth it to build a new gantry near exit 9 when the ones at exit 10 worked just fine.

Except that what they have today is a pain, as you have posted, when your single trip ends up being multiple lines on your EZ-Pass statement (although some behind the scenes programming could fix that).

I'm always fascinated when I see a road or other feature that is a vestige of a construction requirement to keep the old in service as the new is built - things that would never be there if building from scratch (as an example, the s-curve between the SF-Oakland Bay Bridge toll plaza and the bridge due to needing to build the new bridge on a different alignment than the old). And with this line of thinking, how the NYSTA did it falls into this category.

Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: jmacswimmer on August 30, 2023, 01:17:42 PM
The service area project "important message" box on NYSTA's homepage was recently updated to note that Pattersonville, Malden, Sloatsburg and Ontario will close after Labor Day. Couple thoughts here:

-I thought Sloatsburg had already closed when Ardsley reopened (in conjunction with Plattekill reopening about a month prior) - rereading the press release from Ardsley's official reopening seems to confirm this, but the service area page shows Sloatsburg as currently open?
-Seneca is still closed, so it's either about to reopen (the current projected opening is Q3 2023) or NYSTA would break their own rule about not closing 2 consecutive stops with Ontario
-The closure of these 4 will leave DeWitt, Mohawk and Modena as the last 3 awaiting reconstruction, and it looks like all 3 currently just have the Applegreen C-Store due to previously being McDonald's locations

I checked out Plattekill back in mid-May a week or 2 after it reopened - I thought it seemed fine, but I can definitely see where the complaints come from with some of the smaller stops. The CFA line was 20ish minutes IIRC (and didn't allow mobile ordering, we checked as we were getting close), so in peak efficiency my wife & I took turns hitting the bathroom while we waited.

(https://i.imgur.com/7MUDPrb.jpg)

(https://i.imgur.com/1q7QAPs.jpg)
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on August 30, 2023, 08:57:51 PM
^ Seneca looked quite close to reopening when I was last through there (about a month ago), so I would not at all be surprised if it reopens soon.  Assuming it hasn't already; sometimes they take a while to update the map.

Sloatsburg was reopened for some reason after it closed, without fanfare.  Not really sure why.  I suspect it's one of the four that will be renovated rather than replaced, as the reopening target listed is the same as Ramapo, which has been closed all year.

Given the reopening targets, I expect that DeWitt and Mohawk will close late this year and/or early next year.  After that, Modena will be the last older service area standing for a while.

Fun fact: after Labor Day, there will no longer be any older service areas open heading north/westbound.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on September 03, 2023, 04:22:52 PM
Quote from: J N Winkler on February 28, 2023, 09:16:28 PM
Notwithstanding the Thruway being a public benefit corporation, I will be shocked if they are exempt from FOIL.  Now, whether one actually wants to pay to have a request fulfilled . . .

Thanks for the tip about FOIL: It ending up paying off, and without me having to pay anything. :D  I'll explain more below.





Quote from: Rothman on February 02, 2023, 05:46:43 PM
Quote from: webny99 on February 02, 2023, 02:20:44 PM
Another Thruway question that vdeane or Rothman may be able to answer: does NYSTA perform regular AADT counts? I'm curious because the Statewide Traffic Data Viewer is lacking data for much of the Thruway, and segments it does have are often outdated, estimates only, and/or lacking the full datasets that you can get from NYSDOT counts.
I'd be surprised if they don't.  Keep in mind the Statewide Traffic Data Viewer is NYSDOT, so of course it doesn't have NYSTA's data in it, other than what pieces have been shared over the years.

If you want NYSTA's data, go to NYSTA.

Quote from: webny99 on February 02, 2023, 11:21:40 PM
Quote from: froggie on February 02, 2023, 11:13:00 PM
It may not be NYSDOT that performs traffic counts on the Thruway, but IINM the state is still required to submit that data to FHWA every year.  Finding those volumes, though, is the trick.

Yup, exactly. Going to NYSTA seems to be easier said than done - I'm not sure they have anything publicly available other than what's been shared to NYSDOT.


So, pursuant to this discussion, I did some Google searching and fairly extensive browsing on the Thruway's site to see if I could find anything for current AADT volumes. With no success, I decided FOIL was worth a shot, so I emailed them to request 2022 traffic count data for segments 39 (I-690) to 50 (I-290). I received a response back a week later, and what do you know? the table included in the reply cited "2022 Estimated AADT" and the source for each data point was NYSDOT TDS/TDV, just the same old data rebranded as an estimate. :-|

Not satisfied, I decided to start another request, much more pointed this time:

  Does NYSTA operate any continuous traffic counts, and/or is continuous count or similar traffic volume information obtainable from the electronic toll barriers? If so, please provide the raw data from January 2022 through July 2023 (or the most current data available) for each toll barrier or continuous count location.

A week later (Aug 4th) I received a reply that they were working on my request and reviewing for FOIL exemptions, and that I would receive an update on September 1st. So, I waited it out and sure enough, there in my inbox on Friday afternoon was an Excel link to the raw traffic count data for every mainline gantry on the Thruway system from Jan 1, 2022 to July 31, 2023. The data for each gantry is organized in a single column by lane, so parsing through and converting it to a more usable format takes some doing, but is manageable now that I've got the hang of it.

So far, I've copied everything onto my own spreadsheets (since the FOIL link expires after 72 hours), and compiled the data for the mainline gantries east of Exits 44 and 45 to obtain the following raw 365-day averages:

MM 340.5   2022 AADT (actual): 43,031
MM 348.0   2022 AADT (actual): 59,875

In addition, the highest daily counts were 66,300 and 87,098, respectively, both occurring on July 1st.

I'll update this list as I compile the data for more segments, but in the meantime, feel free to ask if there's anything in particular you'd like me to find/share from this data and I'll do my best. Cheers!

Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on September 03, 2023, 10:42:48 PM
Seneca looks ready to open.  The barriers around the parking area are gone and the tenants are moved in.

Incidentally, I was reading that the four service areas to close soon are all renovations rather than reconstructions.  That's interesting, given that Guilderland is still standing, and it's due to reopen on a fairly short timetable.  I could have sworn that they were only going to renovate four, not five, unless maybe Sloatsburg was to be a reconstruction but then they found that it only needed renovations.  Could explain why that one temporarily reopened after a week to little fanfare.

Quote from: webny99 on September 03, 2023, 04:22:52 PM
So, pursuant to this discussion, I did some Google searching and fairly extensive browsing on the Thruway's site to see if I could find anything for current AADT volumes. With no success, I decided FOIL was worth a shot, so I emailed them to request 2022 traffic count data for segments 39 (I-690) to 50 (I-290). I received a response back a week later, and what do you know? the table included in the reply cited "2022 Estimated AADT" and the source for each data point was NYSDOT TDS/TDV, just the same old data rebranded as an estimate. :-|
Given that TDV is still using 2019 estimates and is missing huge chunks of the Thruway, that's probably still better than what's publicly available (incidentally, most counts in TDV are estimates because NYSDOT doesn't count every site every year; the aim is once every three years*, but it can go longer since we live in an imperfect world).

*Some sections of roads are on even longer cycles.  Most notably, ramps are every six years.  Low volume local roads that are only getting counted due to bridges or RR crossings also had longer cycles last I heard.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on September 04, 2023, 05:16:28 AM
Quote from: vdeane on September 03, 2023, 10:42:48 PM
Seneca looks ready to open.  The barriers around the parking area are gone and the tenants are moved in.

Incidentally, I was reading that the four service areas to close soon are all renovations rather than reconstructions.  That's interesting, given that Guilderland is still standing, and it's due to reopen on a fairly short timetable.  I could have sworn that they were only going to renovate four, not five, unless maybe Sloatsburg was to be a reconstruction but then they found that it only needed renovations.  Could explain why that one temporarily reopened after a week to little fanfare.

Quote from: webny99 on September 03, 2023, 04:22:52 PM
So, pursuant to this discussion, I did some Google searching and fairly extensive browsing on the Thruway's site to see if I could find anything for current AADT volumes. With no success, I decided FOIL was worth a shot, so I emailed them to request 2022 traffic count data for segments 39 (I-690) to 50 (I-290). I received a response back a week later, and what do you know? the table included in the reply cited "2022 Estimated AADT" and the source for each data point was NYSDOT TDS/TDV, just the same old data rebranded as an estimate. :-|
Given that TDV is still using 2019 estimates and is missing huge chunks of the Thruway, that's probably still better than what's publicly available (incidentally, most counts in TDV are estimates because NYSDOT doesn't count every site every year; the aim is once every three years*, but it can go longer since we live in an imperfect world).

*Some sections of roads are on even longer cycles.  Most notably, ramps are every six years.  Low volume local roads that are only getting counted due to bridges or RR crossings also had longer cycles last I heard.
Maybe they run out of free cash and now try to work on a budget? I wouldn't be surprised if at least some demolitions are regretted by now
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on September 04, 2023, 06:35:28 AM
vdeane, are you working with the new "Drakewell" or however it's spelled/called?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on September 04, 2023, 08:10:01 PM
Quote from: Rothman on September 04, 2023, 06:35:28 AM
vdeane, are you working with the new "Drakewell" or however it's spelled/called?
I'm not familiar with it.  My bookmark is for the web viewer (https://gisportalny.dot.ny.gov/portalny/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=28537cbc8b5941e19cf8e959b16797b4) they came out with a few years ago; is that link out of date?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on September 04, 2023, 08:25:52 PM
Quote from: vdeane on September 03, 2023, 10:42:48 PM
Quote from: webny99 on September 03, 2023, 04:22:52 PM
So, pursuant to this discussion, I did some Google searching and fairly extensive browsing on the Thruway's site to see if I could find anything for current AADT volumes. With no success, I decided FOIL was worth a shot, so I emailed them to request 2022 traffic count data for segments 39 (I-690) to 50 (I-290). I received a response back a week later, and what do you know? the table included in the reply cited "2022 Estimated AADT" and the source for each data point was NYSDOT TDS/TDV, just the same old data rebranded as an estimate. :-|
Given that TDV is still using 2019 estimates and is missing huge chunks of the Thruway, that's probably still better than what's publicly available (incidentally, most counts in TDV are estimates because NYSDOT doesn't count every site every year; the aim is once every three years*, but it can go longer since we live in an imperfect world).

*Some sections of roads are on even longer cycles.  Most notably, ramps are every six years.  Low volume local roads that are only getting counted due to bridges or RR crossings also had longer cycles last I heard.

To be clear, the AADT's I received in response to my first FOIL request were the exact same counts currently in TDV (or in the 2019 TDR, for those missing from TDV). It wasn't any new data at all, just 2019 or older counts labeled as "2022 estimates".

This happened around the same time I'd started to dive into NYSDOT's continuous count data, which inspired my second inquiry about the gantries.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on September 04, 2023, 11:00:19 PM
Quote from: vdeane on September 04, 2023, 08:10:01 PM
Quote from: Rothman on September 04, 2023, 06:35:28 AM
vdeane, are you working with the new "Drakewell" or however it's spelled/called?
I'm not familiar with it.  My bookmark is for the web viewer (https://gisportalny.dot.ny.gov/portalny/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=28537cbc8b5941e19cf8e959b16797b4) they came out with a few years ago; is that link out of date?
Nope.  This "Drakewell" software seems to be the new and upcoming way HDS will be analyzing count and other traffic data...but the bugs are still being worked out.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: roadman65 on September 04, 2023, 11:57:00 PM
https://goo.gl/maps/ZpY3e1xKjsBFnFtFA
Is there a reason why the center jersey barrier divider is not used on Thruway underpasses or river bridges?

I noticed that the wall stops at the bridges and resumes on the other side. My guess is expansion issues of the bridge deck, but is that the reason?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on September 05, 2023, 10:31:48 AM
Quote from: Rothman on September 04, 2023, 11:00:19 PM
Quote from: vdeane on September 04, 2023, 08:10:01 PM
Quote from: Rothman on September 04, 2023, 06:35:28 AM
vdeane, are you working with the new "Drakewell" or however it's spelled/called?
I'm not familiar with it.  My bookmark is for the web viewer (https://gisportalny.dot.ny.gov/portalny/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=28537cbc8b5941e19cf8e959b16797b4) they came out with a few years ago; is that link out of date?
Nope.  This "Drakewell" software seems to be the new and upcoming way HDS will be analyzing count and other traffic data...but the bugs are still being worked out.
Ah, the TRADIS replacement.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: jmacswimmer on September 05, 2023, 03:14:46 PM
Quote from: vdeane on September 03, 2023, 10:42:48 PM
Seneca looks ready to open.  The barriers around the parking area are gone and the tenants are moved in.

Incidentally, I was reading that the four service areas to close soon are all renovations rather than reconstructions.  That's interesting, given that Guilderland is still standing, and it's due to reopen on a fairly short timetable.  I could have sworn that they were only going to renovate four, not five, unless maybe Sloatsburg was to be a reconstruction but then they found that it only needed renovations.  Could explain why that one temporarily reopened after a week to little fanfare.

I think I saw the same article - if accurate, it'd be interesting that all 4 areas are in the same direction of travel, and that 3 of the 4 areas are relatively close together and would "alternate" with reconstructed areas throughout that stretch.

NYSTA's homepage updated this afternoon noting that Sloatsburg, Malden & Pattersonville are now closed - but not Ontario as of yet, likely because it is waiting for Seneca for reopen as you noted.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: SignBridge on September 05, 2023, 07:34:32 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on September 04, 2023, 11:57:00 PM
https://goo.gl/maps/ZpY3e1xKjsBFnFtFA
Is there a reason why the center jersey barrier divider is not used on Thruway underpasses or river bridges?

I noticed that the wall stops at the bridges and resumes on the other side. My guess is expansion issues of the bridge deck, but is that the reason?

Possibly a weight issue? The concrete wall may exceed the bridge's design load?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Alps on September 05, 2023, 08:41:28 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on September 05, 2023, 07:34:32 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on September 04, 2023, 11:57:00 PM
https://goo.gl/maps/ZpY3e1xKjsBFnFtFA
Is there a reason why the center jersey barrier divider is not used on Thruway underpasses or river bridges?

I noticed that the wall stops at the bridges and resumes on the other side. My guess is expansion issues of the bridge deck, but is that the reason?

Possibly a weight issue? The concrete wall may exceed the bridge's design load?
The one shown is an original bridge. The original median was guide rail. Adding concrete median barrier not only adds dead load, but because it is fixed and poured onto the bridge, it changes the reactions of the bridge under live loading and how the bridge wears over time. Once this one is replaced it'll get continuous barrier, I'm sure.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Plutonic Panda on September 09, 2023, 02:58:51 AM
I know social media usually has a lot of negativity but I mean these new rest stops seem to be universally hated by almost every comment I've read on them. Are they really that bad?

Lots of of complaints of small restrooms and little seating areas.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Jim on September 09, 2023, 07:50:38 AM
They're really that bad. At least the small ones on the CNY I-90 stretch I've been to.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on September 09, 2023, 04:20:31 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on September 09, 2023, 02:58:51 AM
I know social media usually has a lot of negativity but I mean these new rest stops seem to be universally hated by almost every comment I've read on them. Are they really that bad?

Lots of of complaints of small restrooms and little seating areas.
The smaller ones (level 2 according to the size chart on the project page (https://www.thruway.ny.gov/travelers/travelplazas/service-area-project/index.html)) that are all over I-90 are TINY.  The women's room only has six stalls, and that's split between two areas to boot.  Only one restaurant plus a Starbucks or Dunkin and the convenience store (one of them even has their one restaurant as Chick-fil-A, so that one doesn't have a restaurant at all on Sundays).  The only seating at these is one row along the wall, especially now that they had to remove the second row to provide a place to walk (apparently they didn't realize that food lines where something they'd need to accommodate until after they built these things).  And these are technically medium-sized for the Thruway; there are two even smaller ones (level 1 - one under construction, one yet to begin) that won't have a restaurant and might not have seating (not sure about the bathrooms).

The larger ones (levels 2A, 2B, 3, and 3B) aren't as bad.  These have normal-sized restrooms and a proper seating area, but they still feel smaller than the old service areas did.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Roadgeek Adam on September 09, 2023, 08:58:39 PM
I liked the Clarence one when I was in it.....I have no beef, or expectations. It's a service area, I'm not expecting to be given hors d'oeuvres and butler service. It's a place to park, use the restroom, get a snack.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: LilianaUwU on September 09, 2023, 09:07:36 PM
I'm used to Québec's dreadful rest areas with barely anything, so in comparison the service areas on the Thruway seem godlike.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: SignBridge on September 09, 2023, 09:13:08 PM
I'm old enough to remember when the Thruway service areas had Howard Johnsons style restaurants in the 1960's. They were run by other companies. I remember the one at Modena was a Hot Shoppes. The service areas on the Turnpikes in the adjacent states had similar facilities. Back then you would stop there for a sit-down lunch or dinner.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on September 09, 2023, 09:26:29 PM
Quote from: LilianaUwU on September 09, 2023, 09:07:36 PM
I'm used to Québec's dreadful rest areas with barely anything, so in comparison the service areas on the Thruway seem godlike.
most interstates in US have rest areas with little more than a restroom and a vending machine.
Thruway had pretty luxurious arrangement - and now there is a noticeable cutback. Which is still much much better than, say I-88 running nearby - but we do remember how things worked 5-10 years ago. I hope there will be a Pilot or two coming soon by the Thruway, looks like  they created a market for them...
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: SignBridge on September 09, 2023, 09:35:07 PM
Virtually all the toll roads in the Northeast were originally designed for a very high level of customer service. This was in an era (1950's) where I guess you couldn't find many off highway services in rural areas. And the authorities that ran these roads wanted to encourage drivers to use these new roads and pay lots of toll revenue. It's a shame that the customer-service philosophy has been lost to some extent in the 21st Century.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Roadgeek Adam on September 09, 2023, 10:21:18 PM
My father drove from Ardsley to RIT in Henrietta for 4 years for college. He talks about the old style ones all the time. Things change in society. We shouldn't be basing our expectations on 1950s and 1960s designs of customer service. There are 70-something exits on the mainline Thruway if you want better service.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: SignBridge on September 09, 2023, 10:31:13 PM
You are correct that things change and expectations change over time. But it seems to me that if the T'way Authority is going to continue to collect tolls, they should maintain a high level of customer service. But I guess it all depends on how we currently define a high level of service. Most of the posters on here seem to feel that the level of service is deteriorating with the current rebuilding of many of the Thruway service areas.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on September 10, 2023, 12:41:27 AM
I stopped at the last service plaza on the Indiana Toll Road today (eastbound). 

They closed the restrooms for cleaning...at noon.  The Popeye's had two people working -- a cook and a person at the register.

Toll roads are now all about maximizing profit and minimizing the service given.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Alps on September 10, 2023, 02:16:14 AM
Quote from: Roadgeek Adam on September 09, 2023, 10:21:18 PM
My father drove from Ardsley to RIT in Henrietta for 4 years for college. He talks about the old style ones all the time. Things change in society. We shouldn't be basing our expectations on 1950s and 1960s designs of customer service. There are 70-something exits on the mainline Thruway if you want better service.
Toll roads then: the only high speed roads you'd find, much higher design standards, stop to pay the toll, friendly conversations as you go. Toll roads now - charges are automatic, other roads are freeways also, no one worth talking to.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on September 10, 2023, 03:04:09 AM
Quote from: Roadgeek Adam on September 09, 2023, 10:21:18 PM
My father drove from Ardsley to RIT in Henrietta for 4 years for college. He talks about the old style ones all the time. Things change in society. We shouldn't be basing our expectations on 1950s and 1960s designs of customer service. There are 70-something exits on the mainline Thruway if you want better service.
Think about it in such a way: a lot of service providers ended up near regular highway exits to take advantage of that traffic. Nothing like that happened along Thruway as service plazas are very competitive in terms of convenience. There are no off-Thruway facilities to handle that traffic by the exit, and finding something may end up pretty time consuming. No automatic assumption for a gas station or two and something like a McD right next to the exit.
Of course, that will change eventually.... AET makes things easier as well.  I wonder if Thruway would be willing to post services signs, those may help...
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on September 10, 2023, 08:01:18 AM
Quote from: kalvado on September 10, 2023, 03:04:09 AM
Quote from: Roadgeek Adam on September 09, 2023, 10:21:18 PM
My father drove from Ardsley to RIT in Henrietta for 4 years for college. He talks about the old style ones all the time. Things change in society. We shouldn't be basing our expectations on 1950s and 1960s designs of customer service. There are 70-something exits on the mainline Thruway if you want better service.
Think about it in such a way: a lot of service providers ended up near regular highway exits to take advantage of that traffic. Nothing like that happened along Thruway as service plazas are very competitive in terms of convenience. There are no off-Thruway facilities to handle that traffic by the exit, and finding something may end up pretty time consuming. No automatic assumption for a gas station or two and something like a McD right next to the exit.
Of course, that will change eventually.... AET makes things easier as well.  I wonder if Thruway would be willing to post services signs, those may help...
Wonder if that would violate agreements made with the service plaza vendors...
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on September 10, 2023, 08:40:16 AM
Quote from: Rothman on September 10, 2023, 08:01:18 AM
Quote from: kalvado on September 10, 2023, 03:04:09 AM
Quote from: Roadgeek Adam on September 09, 2023, 10:21:18 PM
My father drove from Ardsley to RIT in Henrietta for 4 years for college. He talks about the old style ones all the time. Things change in society. We shouldn't be basing our expectations on 1950s and 1960s designs of customer service. There are 70-something exits on the mainline Thruway if you want better service.
Think about it in such a way: a lot of service providers ended up near regular highway exits to take advantage of that traffic. Nothing like that happened along Thruway as service plazas are very competitive in terms of convenience. There are no off-Thruway facilities to handle that traffic by the exit, and finding something may end up pretty time consuming. No automatic assumption for a gas station or two and something like a McD right next to the exit.
Of course, that will change eventually.... AET makes things easier as well.  I wonder if Thruway would be willing to post services signs, those may help...
Wonder if that would violate agreements made with the service plaza vendors...
Posting signs? Likely yes. Construction of alternative services? NYSTA has limited jurisdiction.
As a matter of fact, there are Pilots in Batavia and in Duanesburg. Ads on high elevation points way outside of ROW seem a fair game as well
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Roadgeek Adam on September 10, 2023, 08:40:51 AM
Thruway Authority is gonna collect tolls no matter what level of service. I accept that. All I ask is the roads be maintained with them. I take the Thruway east often from exit 49. I more commonly use off exit facilities such as the Flying J at 48A or the Fastrac at 40.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on September 10, 2023, 09:59:31 AM
Quote from: Roadgeek Adam on September 10, 2023, 08:40:51 AM
Thruway Authority is gonna collect tolls no matter what level of service. I accept that. All I ask is the roads be maintained with them. I take the Thruway east often from exit 49. I more commonly use off exit facilities such as the Flying J at 48A or the Fastrac at 40.
Something's weird with NYSTA in recent years.  Botched concrete pavement installation and the rest area fiasco.  Makes me wonder if, despite their higher salaries compared to NYSDOT, they're having the same engineer shortage.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on September 10, 2023, 10:03:51 AM
Quote from: Rothman on September 10, 2023, 09:59:31 AM
Quote from: Roadgeek Adam on September 10, 2023, 08:40:51 AM
Thruway Authority is gonna collect tolls no matter what level of service. I accept that. All I ask is the roads be maintained with them. I take the Thruway east often from exit 49. I more commonly use off exit facilities such as the Flying J at 48A or the Fastrac at 40.
Something's weird with NYSTA in recent years.  Botched concrete pavement installation and the rest area fiasco.  Makes me wonder if, despite their higher salaries compared to NYSDOT, they're having the same engineer shortage.

I would say a shortage of quality and quantity across the board. Baby boomers going out of business are a big factor as well.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: seicer on September 10, 2023, 11:24:02 AM
Which portion was botched Rothman? There is that segment west of Syracuse that I thought wasn't that old (10 years old or so) but it was not in the great of condition on my last drive. There were a lot of patches. I was looking at some GSV's and it looks like there is some extensive cracking on some of the slabs (https://maps.app.goo.gl/DsvWwNzLiXnU9Djr6). I know that the state loves its salt and brine, but other concrete pavements across the state have lasted decades longer without that much issue so soon.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Snappyjack on September 10, 2023, 11:31:29 AM
Quote from: Rothman on September 10, 2023, 08:01:18 AM
Quote from: kalvado on September 10, 2023, 03:04:09 AM
Quote from: Roadgeek Adam on September 09, 2023, 10:21:18 PM
My father drove from Ardsley to RIT in Henrietta for 4 years for college. He talks about the old style ones all the time. Things change in society. We shouldn't be basing our expectations on 1950s and 1960s designs of customer service. There are 70-something exits on the mainline Thruway if you want better service.
Think about it in such a way: a lot of service providers ended up near regular highway exits to take advantage of that traffic. Nothing like that happened along Thruway as service plazas are very competitive in terms of convenience. There are no off-Thruway facilities to handle that traffic by the exit, and finding something may end up pretty time consuming. No automatic assumption for a gas station or two and something like a McD right next to the exit.
Of course, that will change eventually.... AET makes things easier as well.  I wonder if Thruway would be willing to post services signs, those may help...
Wonder if that would violate agreements made with the service plaza vendors...

There have been more truck stops popping up along the Thruway over the last year or so. A brand new Pilot in Fultonville, and a Loves at Waterloo and Ripley respectively.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on September 10, 2023, 03:10:56 PM
Quote from: Snappyjack on September 10, 2023, 11:31:29 AM
Quote from: Rothman on September 10, 2023, 08:01:18 AM
Quote from: kalvado on September 10, 2023, 03:04:09 AM
Quote from: Roadgeek Adam on September 09, 2023, 10:21:18 PM
My father drove from Ardsley to RIT in Henrietta for 4 years for college. He talks about the old style ones all the time. Things change in society. We shouldn't be basing our expectations on 1950s and 1960s designs of customer service. There are 70-something exits on the mainline Thruway if you want better service.
Think about it in such a way: a lot of service providers ended up near regular highway exits to take advantage of that traffic. Nothing like that happened along Thruway as service plazas are very competitive in terms of convenience. There are no off-Thruway facilities to handle that traffic by the exit, and finding something may end up pretty time consuming. No automatic assumption for a gas station or two and something like a McD right next to the exit.
Of course, that will change eventually.... AET makes things easier as well.  I wonder if Thruway would be willing to post services signs, those may help...
Wonder if that would violate agreements made with the service plaza vendors...

There have been more truck stops popping up along the Thruway over the last year or so. A brand new Pilot in Fultonville, and a Loves at Waterloo and Ripley respectively.
There are no logo signs for them on the Thruway, however.  The Thruway has logo signs for camping/attractions/lodging, but not food/gas.

Incidentally, I find it interesting that so many people say that AET makes stopping off the exits "so much easier".  Maybe compared to cash, but not for E-ZPass (which is what the majority of people used even before AET).  You're still driving through a cumbersome trumpet interchange and potentially driving a little ways off the road (depending on the exit).  Not to mention breaking up your E-ZPass statement into even more lines (which I'm even less likely to do now that they've made it like piecing together a jigsaw puzzle).  Granted, being a roadgeek means that the Thruway still feels very much like it's own thing to me, since I recognized all the little differences between NYSTA and NYSDOT very easily, but the interchanges are still cumbersome and you don't need to be a roadgeek to notice that.  IMO AET had the biggest convenience increase for the highway interchanges like exit 24 where you wouldn't have services directly at the exit anyways.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on September 10, 2023, 10:27:12 PM
Quote from: webny99 on September 03, 2023, 04:22:52 PM
there in my inbox on Friday afternoon was an Excel link to the raw traffic count data for every mainline gantry on the Thruway system from Jan 1, 2022 to July 31, 2023. The data for each gantry is organized in a single column by lane, so parsing through and converting it to a more usable format takes some doing, but is manageable now that I've got the hang of it. ...

Update: I'm finished with the initial AADT data compilation for all Thruway gantries between the PA line at Ripley and the MA line at Canaan. This includes all mainline gantries on I-90, plus the two gantries on I-87 that serve as an east-west Thruway alternate via the Berkshire Spur. The data from the gantry at MM 431.2 (former Lackawanna Toll Barrier) was missing several hundred data points, so I've submitted a follow-up FOIL request and marked it "Pending" below until I can obtain complete data.


RouteMile MarkerSegment Description2022 AADT*High ValueHigh Value Date
I-90488.4Exit 61 (Ripley) to 60 (NY394)2024834913Fri, July 1
I-90431.2Exit 56 (NY179) to 55 (US219)PendingPendingPending
I-90418.2Exit 50 (I-290) to 49 (NY78)5385176194Fri, Aug 12
I-90379.1Exit 48 (NY98) to 47 (I-490)3998261040Fri, Aug 12
I-90369.3Exit 47 (I-490) to 46 (I-390)2933847649Fri, July 1
I-90358.2Exit 46 (I-390) to 45 (I-490)3147949357Fri, July 1
I-90348.0Exit 45 (I-490) to 44 (NY332)6020187098Fri, July 1
I-90340.5Exit 44 (NY332) to 43 (NY21)4326566300Fri, July 1
I-90294.6Exit 40 (NY34) to 39 (I-690)3760260703Fri, July 1
I-90288.8Exit 39 (I-690) to 38 (CR57)3200949927Fri, July 1
I-90283.4Exit 37 (ElecPkwy) to 36 (I-81)3520253106Fri, July 1
I-90281.3Exit 36 (I-81) to 35 (NY298)2875742811Fri, Oct 7
I-90277.5Exit 35 (NY298) to 34A (I-481)2600139619Fri, July 1
I-90276.1Exit 34A (I-481) to 34 (NY13)3823659912Fri, Sept 2
I-90161.0Exit 26 (I-890) to 25A (I-88)3023345577Fri, July 1
I-90157.8Exit 25A (I-88) to 25 (I-890)4364864374Fri, Oct 7
I-90149.6Exit 25 (I-890) to 24 (I-87/I-90)76517103210Fri, Oct 7
I-87145.6Exit 24 (I-90/I-87) to 23 (I-787)4822471674Fri, July 1
I-87139.7Exit 23 (I-787) to 22 (NY144)4956176145Fri, July 1
I-90B17.7Exit B2 (TacPkwy) to B3 (NY22)2490342867Sun, Aug 14

*2022 AADT values are raw 365-day averages with exceptions for Thruway closures and extreme weather events. Only full and complete days of data were used. Further details available upon request.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: jeffandnicole on September 10, 2023, 11:15:56 PM
Quote from: webny99 on September 10, 2023, 10:27:12 PM
Quote from: webny99 on September 03, 2023, 04:22:52 PM
there in my inbox on Friday afternoon was an Excel link to the raw traffic count data for every mainline gantry on the Thruway system from Jan 1, 2022 to July 31, 2023. The data for each gantry is organized in a single column by lane, so parsing through and converting it to a more usable format takes some doing, but is manageable now that I've got the hang of it. ...

Update: I'm finished with the initial AADT data compilation for all Thruway gantries between the PA line at Ripley and the MA line at Canaan. This includes all mainline gantries on I-90, plus the two gantries on I-87 that serve as an east-west Thruway alternate via the Berkshire Spur. The data from the gantry at MM 431.2 (former Lackawanna Toll Barrier) was missing several hundred data points, so I've submitted a follow-up FOIL request and marked it "Pending" below until I can obtain complete data.


RouteMile MarkerSegment Description2022 AADT*High ValueHigh Value Date
I-90488.4Exit 61 (Ripley) to 60 (NY394)2024834913Fri, July 1
I-90431.2Exit 56 (NY179) to 55 (US219)PendingPendingPending
I-90418.2Exit 50 (I-290) to 49 (NY78)5385176194Fri, Aug 12
I-90379.1Exit 48 (NY98) to 47 (I-490)3998261040Fri, Aug 12
I-90369.3Exit 47 (I-490) to 46 (I-390)2933847649Fri, July 1
I-90358.2Exit 46 (I-390) to 45 (I-490)3147949357Fri, July 1
I-90348.0Exit 45 (I-490) to 44 (NY332)6020187098Fri, July 1
I-90340.5Exit 44 (NY332) to 43 (NY21)4326566300Fri, July 1
I-90294.6Exit 40 (NY34) to 39 (I-690)3760260703Fri, July 1
I-90288.8Exit 39 (I-690) to 38 (CR57)3200949927Fri, July 1
I-90283.4Exit 37 (ElecPkwy) to 36 (I-81)3520253106Fri, July 1
I-90281.3Exit 36 (I-81) to 35 (NY298)2875742811Fri, Oct 7
I-90277.5Exit 35 (NY298) to 34A (I-481)2600139619Fri, July 1
I-90276.1Exit 34A (I-481) to 34 (NY13)3823659912Fri, Sept 2
I-90161.0Exit 26 (I-890) to 25A (I-88)3023345577Fri, July 1
I-90157.8Exit 25A (I-88) to 25 (I-890)4364864374Fri, Oct 7
I-90149.6Exit 25 (I-890) to 24 (I-87/I-90)76517103210Fri, Oct 7
I-87145.6Exit 24 (I-90/I-87) to 23 (I-787)4822471674Fri, July 1
I-87139.7Exit 23 (I-787) to 22 (NY144)4956176145Fri, July 1
I-90B17.7Exit B2 (TacPkwy) to B3 (NY22)2490342867Sun, Aug 14

*2022 AADT values are raw 365-day averages with exceptions for Thruway closures and extreme weather events. Only full and complete days of data were used. Further details available upon request.

So what are the events on and around the weekends of August 12 and October 7 that attributes to the spikes in those areas?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: froggie on September 10, 2023, 11:24:46 PM
10/7 could arguably coincide with the leaf peepers...
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on September 10, 2023, 11:32:41 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on September 10, 2023, 11:15:56 PM
So what are the events on and around the weekends of August 12 and October 7 that attributes to the spikes in those areas?

Aug 12th was a Bills preseason game weekend, and Oct 7th ranks highly across the board as Columbus Day weekend is increasingly a defacto holiday weekend in leaf peeping territory, and it's no surprise that it ranked higher further east, as the Adirondacks and Vermont are prime destinations for such. (Edit: froggie beat me to this one.  :cool:)

The Berkshire Spur high value being Sun Aug 14 is the one that threw me. Saratoga Races, perhaps?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: jeffandnicole on September 11, 2023, 12:16:57 AM
Quote from: webny99 on September 10, 2023, 11:32:41 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on September 10, 2023, 11:15:56 PM
So what are the events on and around the weekends of August 12 and October 7 that attributes to the spikes in those areas?

Aug 12th was a Bills preseason game weekend, and Oct 7th ranks highly across the board as Columbus Day weekend is increasingly a defacto holiday weekend in leaf peeping territory, and it's no surprise that it ranked higher further east, as the Adirondacks and Vermont are prime destinations for such. (Edit: froggie beat me to this one.  :cool:)

The Berkshire Spur high value being Sun Aug 14 is the one that threw me. Saratoga Races, perhaps?


I see the Bills preseason game was on Aug 13. Unless Bills fans come in a day early on a Friday and spend the night for a meaningless preseason game the following late afternoon, I don't think that can really attribute to that day's jump, at least on its own. I would think Bills regular season games would generate much higher traffic volume, especially their Monday night game on Sept. 19 in combination with regular workday traffic. Preseason football rarely will fill stadiums, even if technically "sold out". Just using my experience from Philly, season ticket holders are required to purchase tickets to all games, including preseason games. However actual attendance of those preseason games is barely half the stadium.

Columbus Day weekend and turning leaves make sense.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on September 11, 2023, 10:39:43 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on September 11, 2023, 12:16:57 AM
Quote from: webny99 on September 10, 2023, 11:32:41 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on September 10, 2023, 11:15:56 PM
So what are the events on and around the weekends of August 12 and October 7 that attributes to the spikes in those areas?

Aug 12th was a Bills preseason game weekend ...


I see the Bills preseason game was on Aug 13. Unless Bills fans come in a day early on a Friday and spend the night for a meaningless preseason game the following late afternoon, I don't think that can really attribute to that day's jump, at least on its own. I would think Bills regular season games would generate much higher traffic volume, especially their Monday night game on Sept. 19 in combination with regular workday traffic. Preseason football rarely will fill stadiums, even if technically "sold out". Just using my experience from Philly, season ticket holders are required to purchase tickets to all games, including preseason games. However actual attendance of those preseason games is barely half the stadium.

I don't disagree with that, but a few points: first, that day was not much higher than July 1st at either location - slightly higher, but within 2-3k. Second, day of week has to be considered, and summer Fridays are typically the busiest travel days of the year. But it was also not a holiday weekend, so commuter traffic was probably a bit higher than you might get the Friday before July 4th/Labor Day.
As for the regular season, most games are on Sunday, so anyone arriving early would more likely arrive on Saturday, a lower travel day, plus those games occur outside of peak summer travel season. I'll have to dig into the Sept 19th game later. Likely a heavy day for WB traffic, but EB (postgame) would have spilled into Tuesday AM.

I could be missing something, but I can't think of anything else that might have contributed to traffic that weekend. The huge events in August are the State Fair in Syracuse which doesn't start until later, and summer airshows at Buffalo/Niagara and/or Rochester, but I couldn't find any that occurred that weekend.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: lstone19 on September 11, 2023, 11:07:15 AM
Quote from: vdeane on September 10, 2023, 03:10:56 PM
Incidentally, I find it interesting that so many people say that AET makes stopping off the exits "so much easier".  Maybe compared to cash, but not for E-ZPass (which is what the majority of people used even before AET).  You're still driving through a cumbersome trumpet interchange and potentially driving a little ways off the road (depending on the exit).  Not to mention breaking up your E-ZPass statement into even more lines (which I'm even less likely to do now that they've made it like piecing together a jigsaw puzzle).

One difference now is there no longer any penalty (other than a penny some places) for exiting and then re-entering. Tolls are strictly mileage with no rounding up or minimums. I looked at the toll table for the Erie section and you can go straight 55 to 61 or exit and re-enter at every interchange and pay the same amount.

Yes, trumpets can be a pain, particularly double-trumpets. Choose where to make your off-Thruway stop carefully so you're on the non-trumpet side. I was unexpectedly in eastern Mass. last week and was somewhat frustrated by the over one mile slow slog going from WB MA 9 to WB I-90 (trumpet side of both but at least the ramps are in the correct quadrant of the crossing for that move).

And while I understand your pain about the statements, we're probably a very small minority that actually checks (I do because I'm always in a rental car now with EZ-Pass and I want to make sure they post. I was also glad to see that as I thought I had read, the Mass Pike does consolidate multiple gantries in one trip and compared to the slow posting of Thruway tolls, my Mass Pike tolls all posted to my IL I-Pass (EZ-Pass) account overnight two days later (Tuesday tolls posted late Thursday night).

But checking is a good thing. I recently discovered one of my California FastTrak tags died (less than two years old so should not be a dead battery). But unlike some of the eastern roads, they quickly refunded the tolls by plate (posted to the FastTrak account for using HOV/Express lanes (tolled for SOV, free for 2+ vehicles with an appropriate tag)) and they do not charge extra when having to post to a FastTrak account by license plate due to no read (I know some of the eastern road policies are when their equipment fails, you still pay extra for it).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on September 11, 2023, 12:19:24 PM
Quote from: lstone19 on September 11, 2023, 11:07:15 AM
Yes, trumpets can be a pain, particularly double-trumpets. Choose where to make your off-Thruway stop carefully so you're on the non-trumpet side. I was unexpectedly in eastern Mass. last week and was somewhat frustrated by the over one mile slow slog going from WB MA 9 to WB I-90 (trumpet side of both but at least the ramps are in the correct quadrant of the crossing for that move).

Definitely agreed, getting off the Thruway at I-390 is a pain for this reason. Once you factor in the double trumpet to get off the Thruway and then having to exit from I-390, it takes at least five minutes to get to even the closest travel stops.

For worst trumpets, if you think double is bad, how about a triple? The Mass Pike at I-91/US 5 (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.1588361,-72.6348268,1548m/data=!3m1!1e3?entry=ttu) is technically a quadruple trumpet, but I'm calling it a triple as you'd never use all four in one shot. Unsurprisingly, it seems to go on forever as you pass through it, especially connecting to I-91.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: lstone19 on September 11, 2023, 12:32:23 PM
Quote from: webny99 on September 11, 2023, 12:19:24 PM
Quote from: lstone19 on September 11, 2023, 11:07:15 AM
Yes, trumpets can be a pain, particularly double-trumpets. Choose where to make your off-Thruway stop carefully so you're on the non-trumpet side. I was unexpectedly in eastern Mass. last week and was somewhat frustrated by the over one mile slow slog going from WB MA 9 to WB I-90 (trumpet side of both but at least the ramps are in the correct quadrant of the crossing for that move).

Definitely agreed, getting off the Thruway at I-390 is a pain for this reason. Once you factor in the double trumpet to get off the Thruway and then having to exit from I-390, it takes at least five minutes to get to even the closest travel stops.

For worst trumpets, if you think double is bad, how about a triple? The Mass Pike at I-91/US 5 (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.1588361,-72.6348268,1548m/data=!3m1!1e3?entry=ttu) is technically a quadruple trumpet, but I'm calling it a triple as you'd never use all four in one shot. Unsurprisingly, it seems to go on forever as you pass through it, especially connecting to I-91.

Agree. And the trumpet on I-91 is so far north. I've wondered if to go EB Mass Pike to SB I-91 if it wouldn't be faster to use US 5. I think it's a couple of miles shorter although some traffic lights to deal with. Other direction (NB I-91 to WB Mass Pike) is also a pain but at least it's all on the non-trumpet side.

Another triple trumpet (and I've done all three on the trumpet sides) is I-81/PA Tpk/US-6/11 north of Scranton.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: jeffandnicole on September 11, 2023, 01:34:07 PM
Quote from: webny99 on September 11, 2023, 10:39:43 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on September 11, 2023, 12:16:57 AM
Quote from: webny99 on September 10, 2023, 11:32:41 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on September 10, 2023, 11:15:56 PM
So what are the events on and around the weekends of August 12 and October 7 that attributes to the spikes in those areas?

Aug 12th was a Bills preseason game weekend ...


I see the Bills preseason game was on Aug 13. Unless Bills fans come in a day early on a Friday and spend the night for a meaningless preseason game the following late afternoon, I don't think that can really attribute to that day's jump, at least on its own. I would think Bills regular season games would generate much higher traffic volume, especially their Monday night game on Sept. 19 in combination with regular workday traffic. Preseason football rarely will fill stadiums, even if technically "sold out". Just using my experience from Philly, season ticket holders are required to purchase tickets to all games, including preseason games. However actual attendance of those preseason games is barely half the stadium.

I don't disagree with that, but a few points: first, that day was not much higher than July 1st at either location - slightly higher, but within 2-3k. Second, day of week has to be considered, and summer Fridays are typically the busiest travel days of the year. But it was also not a holiday weekend, so commuter traffic was probably a bit higher than you might get the Friday before July 4th/Labor Day.
As for the regular season, most games are on Sunday, so anyone arriving early would more likely arrive on Saturday, a lower travel day, plus those games occur outside of peak summer travel season. I'll have to dig into the Sept 19th game later. Likely a heavy day for WB traffic, but EB (postgame) would have spilled into Tuesday AM.

I could be missing something, but I can't think of anything else that might have contributed to traffic that weekend. The huge events in August are the State Fair in Syracuse which doesn't start until later, and summer airshows at Buffalo/Niagara and/or Rochester, but I couldn't find any that occurred that weekend.


Yeah, I was doing a quick search and didn't see anything of interest either.  If it's just a few thousand higher than a normal Friday volume that happened to see its peak, it could be a bunch of various things during the day in and around the greater Buffalo area.





Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on September 11, 2023, 06:13:32 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on September 11, 2023, 01:34:07 PM
Yeah, I was doing a quick search and didn't see anything of interest either.  If it's just a few thousand higher than a normal Friday volume that happened to see its peak, it could be a bunch of various things during the day in and around the greater Buffalo area.

2211 higher than July 1 at MM418.2 and only 257 higher at MM379.1, to be exact. Definitely a small enough of a bump to attribute to just about anything, and no doubt the Bills game was one of those things, even despite it being preseason.

Regarding the Bills night game on Sept 19th, data from MM418.2 shows that WB was about 3k higher than normal on Monday, and EB was about 3k higher than normal on Tuesday. Still, the ADT values for those days were only 58k and 60k respectively, not enough to touch the 70k+ values common on summer Fridays.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Alps on September 11, 2023, 06:35:26 PM
Two things.
1) Quick note: the "pending" row may never get resolved. Sometimes a counter goes down. It may be charging tolls but not recording transactions enough to spit back volumes to you. I wish you luck though.
2) Traffic engineers would sort this by season (Summer, spring/fall, winter) based on average daily volumes. Summer tends to be highest. We would then use summer as our peak season and determine the average summer ADT (not AADT, taking out the word "annual) for the purpose of traffic analysis. While it's good to know the peak-of-the-peak volumes, you do not design a road for July 1. You design a road to handle traffic 95%+ of the time, acknowledging that exceptional circumstances may cause backup, but you don't build a road for 5 lanes if it can do the job with 3 lanes other than that one day.

Happy to chat with anyone here about #2 since that's kinda what I do for a living, so shoot me an email, no need to bog down this thread.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on September 11, 2023, 07:57:59 PM
Yup, I'm not expecting to hear anything on the missing data for at least a week, given the previous response times. And even then, my expectations are not high. However, the missing data is sporadic enough (approx. 2-5 WB values per day; EB was perfectly fine) that I'm hoping there was an issue with data transfer and not the collection site itself.

And totally understood on #2. I wasn't sharing those values as some sort of be-all end-all by any means. Just sorting the data highest ADT to lowest happened to be the first thing I did, and I found the results interesting. And in fact, sorting by season was the next thing I was going to do.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: NoGoodNamesAvailable on September 11, 2023, 08:00:15 PM
I'm surprised summer is the busiest, I always notice an uptick in traffic during the school year (ie not summer)  :confused:
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on September 11, 2023, 08:25:10 PM
Quote from: webny99 on September 11, 2023, 12:19:24 PM
Quote from: lstone19 on September 11, 2023, 11:07:15 AM
Yes, trumpets can be a pain, particularly double-trumpets. Choose where to make your off-Thruway stop carefully so you're on the non-trumpet side. I was unexpectedly in eastern Mass. last week and was somewhat frustrated by the over one mile slow slog going from WB MA 9 to WB I-90 (trumpet side of both but at least the ramps are in the correct quadrant of the crossing for that move).

Definitely agreed, getting off the Thruway at I-390 is a pain for this reason. Once you factor in the double trumpet to get off the Thruway and then having to exit from I-390, it takes at least five minutes to get to even the closest travel stops.

For worst trumpets, if you think double is bad, how about a triple? The Mass Pike at I-91/US 5 (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.1588361,-72.6348268,1548m/data=!3m1!1e3?entry=ttu) is technically a quadruple trumpet, but I'm calling it a triple as you'd never use all four in one shot. Unsurprisingly, it seems to go on forever as you pass through it, especially connecting to I-91.
Yeah, that one's annoying.  Still, whatever this (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.2099145,-71.7868504,16.05z?entry=ttu) is called is worse... that traffic light is really long, and no turn on red to boot.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on September 11, 2023, 09:34:52 PM
Quote from: NoGoodNamesAvailable on September 11, 2023, 08:00:15 PM
I'm surprised summer is the busiest, I always notice an uptick in traffic during the school year (ie not summer)  :confused:

That's true of urban/suburban areas, especially on local roads and near schools. But for a rural highway or interstate like the Thruway that connects cities and carries long-distance traffic, summer is the busiest season precisely because those same schools that generate traffic in the fall, winter and spring are closed for the summer, the weather is nice, and families take the opportunity to travel and go on vacation.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on September 11, 2023, 09:37:53 PM
Quote from: vdeane on September 11, 2023, 08:25:10 PM
Quote from: webny99 on September 11, 2023, 12:19:24 PM
Definitely agreed, getting off the Thruway at I-390 is a pain for this reason. Once you factor in the double trumpet to get off the Thruway and then having to exit from I-390, it takes at least five minutes to get to even the closest travel stops.

For worst trumpets, if you think double is bad, how about a triple? The Mass Pike at I-91/US 5 (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.1588361,-72.6348268,1548m/data=!3m1!1e3?entry=ttu) is technically a quadruple trumpet, but I'm calling it a triple as you'd never use all four in one shot. Unsurprisingly, it seems to go on forever as you pass through it, especially connecting to I-91.
Yeah, that one's annoying.  Still, whatever this (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.2099145,-71.7868504,16.05z?entry=ttu) is called is worse... that traffic light is really long, and no turn on red to boot.

Indeed, I traveled through that one myself a few summers back and found it very odd. I guess we could call it Breezewood, MA (although it has more in common with PA's other non-connections than Breezewood itself).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on September 11, 2023, 10:00:37 PM
Quote from: vdeane on September 11, 2023, 08:25:10 PM
Quote from: webny99 on September 11, 2023, 12:19:24 PM
Quote from: lstone19 on September 11, 2023, 11:07:15 AM
Yes, trumpets can be a pain, particularly double-trumpets. Choose where to make your off-Thruway stop carefully so you're on the non-trumpet side. I was unexpectedly in eastern Mass. last week and was somewhat frustrated by the over one mile slow slog going from WB MA 9 to WB I-90 (trumpet side of both but at least the ramps are in the correct quadrant of the crossing for that move).

Definitely agreed, getting off the Thruway at I-390 is a pain for this reason. Once you factor in the double trumpet to get off the Thruway and then having to exit from I-390, it takes at least five minutes to get to even the closest travel stops.

For worst trumpets, if you think double is bad, how about a triple? The Mass Pike at I-91/US 5 (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.1588361,-72.6348268,1548m/data=!3m1!1e3?entry=ttu) is technically a quadruple trumpet, but I'm calling it a triple as you'd never use all four in one shot. Unsurprisingly, it seems to go on forever as you pass through it, especially connecting to I-91.
Yeah, that one's annoying.  Still, whatever this (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.2099145,-71.7868504,16.05z?entry=ttu) is called is worse... that traffic light is really long, and no turn on red to boot.
You should have seen the lack of connection to MA 146 before the improved interchange you linked to!  An old family friend was a Captain in the Navy and had to head to Newport, RI from western MA from time to time.  He cursed the heavens with the nonsense you had to go through to find MA 146...as did my family when we followed him down there one year. :D

See the rail lines and other constraints to see how the current ramps ended up the way they did.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on September 12, 2023, 01:00:26 PM
Quote from: Rothman on September 11, 2023, 10:00:37 PM
Quote from: vdeane on September 11, 2023, 08:25:10 PM
Quote from: webny99 on September 11, 2023, 12:19:24 PM
Quote from: lstone19 on September 11, 2023, 11:07:15 AM
Yes, trumpets can be a pain, particularly double-trumpets. Choose where to make your off-Thruway stop carefully so you're on the non-trumpet side. I was unexpectedly in eastern Mass. last week and was somewhat frustrated by the over one mile slow slog going from WB MA 9 to WB I-90 (trumpet side of both but at least the ramps are in the correct quadrant of the crossing for that move).

Definitely agreed, getting off the Thruway at I-390 is a pain for this reason. Once you factor in the double trumpet to get off the Thruway and then having to exit from I-390, it takes at least five minutes to get to even the closest travel stops.

For worst trumpets, if you think double is bad, how about a triple? The Mass Pike at I-91/US 5 (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.1588361,-72.6348268,1548m/data=!3m1!1e3?entry=ttu) is technically a quadruple trumpet, but I'm calling it a triple as you'd never use all four in one shot. Unsurprisingly, it seems to go on forever as you pass through it, especially connecting to I-91.
Yeah, that one's annoying.  Still, whatever this (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.2099145,-71.7868504,16.05z?entry=ttu) is called is worse... that traffic light is really long, and no turn on red to boot.
You should have seen the lack of connection to MA 146 before the improved interchange you linked to!  An old family friend was a Captain in the Navy and had to head to Newport, RI from western MA from time to time.  He cursed the heavens with the nonsense you had to go through to find MA 146...as did my family when we followed him down there one year. :D

See the rail lines and other constraints to see how the current ramps ended up the way they did.
Honestly, if the interchange wasn't there I'd probably just use I-495 for that route.  It's not even 15 minutes longer now, much less back before exit 94 was built and local streets were needed for that connection.  I wonder what would have happened if they had instead improved the connections around on Park Hill and Millbury and foregone direct local access to US 20 entirely.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on September 12, 2023, 06:07:37 PM
One of my priorities with obtaining the Thruway count data was to run a comparative analysis between Exit 45-46 and 46-47 (the segments east and west of I-390, between I-490's endpoints).

The reason being, it surprised me that 45-46 has a higher AADT because that segment wouldn't get much Rochester-Syracuse traffic relative to the Rochester-Buffalo traffic on 46-47. While that's true, it turns out my own interaction with 46-47, primarily using it on weekend trips to/from Buffalo and Canada, was affecting my perception. In fact, the reason 45-46 is a bit busier isn't because of long-distance or metro-to-metro traffic at all, but a wave of Victor to Henrietta commuter traffic evidenced by spikes in traffic at 7-8AM and 4-5PM that aren't present on 46-47, plus slightly higher sustained weekday volumes due to suburb-to-suburb traffic between Victor and Henrietta. (Obviously, there is little to no commuter traffic on 46-47, while it's only increased on 45-46 in recent decades as Rochester suburbia/exurbia continues to grow near exits 44 and 45.)

I then sorted the daily counts into a side-by-side comparison of the 45-46 count next to the 46-47 count, then calculated the difference between the two values for each day. The result: 46-47 was busier on exactly 28 of 360 days in 2022 (and was closed for all or part of the remaining 5 days, so those days weren't included in the data). The dates are shown below sorted by date, headlined by Thanksgiving Day at -1884. All of the other 27 days on which 46-47 was busier were a Saturday or Sunday, 18 of them occurred between June and August, and 6 of them were Buffalo Bills game days (shown in blue). (Technically, Thanksgiving was also a Bills game day, but it was an away game as they played the Lions in Detroit.)

(https://imgur.com/4sP8KIX.jpg)
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on September 12, 2023, 06:18:59 PM
I wish I could find it now, but there was a discussion a while back about a potential Thruway widening from Exit 21A to 23 and there was some debate as to whether it was busier than Exit 23-24 and whether Exit 23 was an appropriate location for a lane drop. So I ran a detailed comparison of 23-24 (which was widened a few years ago) to 22-23 (which is still four lanes). Results were interesting, shown below.


DayADT 22-23ADT 23-24Difference
Sun524754625322-23 +6223
Mon479634784622-23 +116
Tues445594637423-24 (-1815)
Wed455394720223-24 (-1663)
Thurs505505086223-24 (-312)
Fri581195578222-23 +2337
Sat462734212522-23 +4148
TOTAL495614822422-23 +1337

It's clear that 23-24 has more commuter traffic, while 22-23 has more long-distance/weekend traffic between Albany and NYC. The two counteract to some degree, resulting in 23-24 generally being busier on weekdays and 22-23 being busier Fri-Sun and slightly busier overall. Either way, there's a pretty strong case that 23 is not an ideal location for a SB lane drop (especially Sat-Sun) and that 21A-23 should also be widened.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on September 12, 2023, 07:23:24 PM
Quote from: webny99 on September 12, 2023, 06:18:59 PM
I wish I could find it now, but there was a discussion a while back about a potential Thruway widening from Exit 21A to 23 and there was some debate as to whether it was busier than Exit 23-24 and whether Exit 23 was an appropriate location for a lane drop. So I ran a detailed comparison of 23-24 (which was widened a few years ago) to 22-23 (which is still four lanes). Results were interesting, shown below.


DayADT 22-23ADT 23-24Difference
Sun524754625322-23 +6223
Mon479634784622-23 +116
Tues445594637423-24 (-1815)
Wed455394720223-24 (-1663)
Thurs505505086223-24 (-312)
Fri581195578222-23 +2337
Sat462734212522-23 +4148
TOTAL495614822422-23 +1337

It's clear that 23-24 has more commuter traffic, while 22-23 has more long-distance/weekend traffic between Albany and NYC. The two counteract to some degree, resulting in 23-24 generally being busier on weekdays and 22-23 being busier Fri-Sun and slightly busier overall. Either way, there's a pretty strong case that 23 is not an ideal location for a SB lane drop (especially Sat-Sun) and that 21A-23 should also be widened.

If you are talking about NYC traffic being the thing, can you also show say 18-19? If that weekend traffic is indeed from NYC, weekends should be similary busy down there.
Alternative explanation may be, for example, more local Albany to Catskill; and that may go in a different direction compared to NYC traffic - reducing per-lane load.
Yet again 21A-B1-B2 may be another traffic source/sink
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on September 12, 2023, 07:32:47 PM
Quote from: kalvado on September 12, 2023, 07:23:24 PM
Quote from: webny99 on September 12, 2023, 06:18:59 PM
...
It's clear that 23-24 has more commuter traffic, while 22-23 has more long-distance/weekend traffic between Albany and NYC. The two counteract to some degree, resulting in 23-24 generally being busier on weekdays and 22-23 being busier Fri-Sun and slightly busier overall. Either way, there's a pretty strong case that 23 is not an ideal location for a SB lane drop (especially Sat-Sun) and that 21A-23 should also be widened.

If you are talking about NYC traffic being the thing, can you also show say 18-19? If that weekend traffic is indeed from NYC, weekends should be similary busy down there.

Yes, I have no doubt that NYC traffic to/from Albany and beyond contributes to the traffic on Fri-Sun. Unfortunately, there's no mainline gantries between 22 and Harriman, so the only data for 18-19 would be whatever is in the TDV, which is rather outdated (2019 or older).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: lstone19 on September 12, 2023, 07:47:24 PM
Quote from: webny99 on September 12, 2023, 07:32:47 PM
Yes, I have no doubt that NYC traffic to/from Albany and beyond contributes to the traffic on Fri-Sun. Unfortunately, there's no mainline gantries between 22 and Harriman, so the only data for 18-19 would be whatever is in the TDV, which is rather outdated (2019 or older).

Years ago, when we were regularly driving up the Thruway to the Northway, once NY 7 was completed between I-787 and the Northway, we frequently went Thruway to I-787 to NY 7 to the Northway to avoid the backup at Exit 24. 24 wasn't as bad southbound (ticket distribution is never as slow as paying) so did not go 787/7 SB as much as we did NB.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on September 12, 2023, 08:33:07 PM
Quote from: lstone19 on September 12, 2023, 07:47:24 PM
Quote from: webny99 on September 12, 2023, 07:32:47 PM
Yes, I have no doubt that NYC traffic to/from Albany and beyond contributes to the traffic on Fri-Sun. Unfortunately, there's no mainline gantries between 22 and Harriman, so the only data for 18-19 would be whatever is in the TDV, which is rather outdated (2019 or older).

Years ago, when we were regularly driving up the Thruway to the Northway, once NY 7 was completed between I-787 and the Northway, we frequently went Thruway to I-787 to NY 7 to the Northway to avoid the backup at Exit 24. 24 wasn't as bad southbound (ticket distribution is never as slow as paying) so did not go 787/7 SB as much as we did NB.

NB at I-787 drops off by an average of 2-3k on summer Fridays, so I have to think there's at least some traffic still doing that, even with AET in place. Nowadays, NY 7 to I-87 NB is a persistent bottleneck, but you have to deal with that on either route.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: MASTERNC on September 13, 2023, 11:20:13 AM
Sounds like the toll increase is being voted on next week.  Unfortunately, the non-NY E-ZPass rate is still the same as the toll-by-plate rate, which makes no sense.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: lstone19 on September 13, 2023, 11:48:19 AM
Quote from: MASTERNC on September 13, 2023, 11:20:13 AM
Sounds like the toll increase is being voted on next week.  Unfortunately, the non-NY E-ZPass rate is still the same as the toll-by-plate rate, which makes no sense.

It makes sense as only NYS residents can get a New York EZ-Pass without a monthly fee unless they get an "On the Go" one so it lets them stick it to non-NY residents who don't vote in NY. So much of the promise of EZ-Pass has been lost once politicians realized they could stick it to non-residents. And it's silly for me that now living in Nevada and I have two separate EZ-Pass accounts - the Illinois one I've had since living there and now a NY one with a NYSTA On-the-Go transponder for what will be a few NY trips in the next couple of years (I'd drop the Illinois one but I'm sure if I did, Illinois would join the "charge other agencies more" club and Illinois will always be where most of my use is.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: jmacswimmer on September 13, 2023, 12:18:03 PM
Quote from: lstone19 on September 13, 2023, 11:48:19 AM
Quote from: MASTERNC on September 13, 2023, 11:20:13 AM
Sounds like the toll increase is being voted on next week.  Unfortunately, the non-NY E-ZPass rate is still the same as the toll-by-plate rate, which makes no sense.

It makes sense as only NYS residents can get a New York EZ-Pass without a monthly fee unless they get an "On the Go" one so it lets them stick it to non-NY residents who don't vote in NY. So much of the promise of EZ-Pass has been lost once politicians realized they could stick it to non-residents. And it's silly for me that now living in Nevada and I have two separate EZ-Pass accounts - the Illinois one I've had since living there and now a NY one with a NYSTA On-the-Go transponder for what will be a few NY trips in the next couple of years (I'd drop the Illinois one but I'm sure if I did, Illinois would join the "charge other agencies more" club and Illinois will always be where most of my use is.

I intend to pick up a NYSTA on-the-go tag whenever I'm next in Upstate New York for these exact reasons - even just crossing the Tappan Zee periodically (which is my most frequent toll point within NYS) will make it worth it as the out-of-state/toll-by-mail rate jumps to almost double the in-state rate. Agreed that it feels somewhat silly to open a 2nd E-ZPass account (for me the NY account would be on top of my primary MD one) but it also seems oddly satisfying as a way of, to borrow your words, sticking it back to NYSTA for trying to stick it to non-NY residents  :sombrero:

But overall it is a shame that almost every toll agency has adopted this model and, when questioned about it, give the same canned response of "well anyone can get our transponder regardless of address."
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: MASTERNC on September 13, 2023, 12:21:04 PM
Quote from: lstone19 on September 13, 2023, 11:48:19 AM
Quote from: MASTERNC on September 13, 2023, 11:20:13 AM
Sounds like the toll increase is being voted on next week.  Unfortunately, the non-NY E-ZPass rate is still the same as the toll-by-plate rate, which makes no sense.

It makes sense as only NYS residents can get a New York EZ-Pass without a monthly fee unless they get an "On the Go" one so it lets them stick it to non-NY residents who don't vote in NY. So much of the promise of EZ-Pass has been lost once politicians realized they could stick it to non-residents. And it's silly for me that now living in Nevada and I have two separate EZ-Pass accounts - the Illinois one I've had since living there and now a NY one with a NYSTA On-the-Go transponder for what will be a few NY trips in the next couple of years (I'd drop the Illinois one but I'm sure if I did, Illinois would join the "charge other agencies more" club and Illinois will always be where most of my use is.

My wife's car has a NY transponder (with a spare one sitting in the house) and I have an NC one for the Flex capability in case of travel through the DC area.  It's a pain but it gives us the flexibility.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on September 13, 2023, 12:32:15 PM
Quote from: jmacswimmer on September 13, 2023, 12:18:03 PMNYSTA for trying to stick it to non-NY residents  :sombrero:

But overall it is a shame that almost every toll agency has adopted this model and, when questioned about it, give the same canned response of "well anyone can get our transponder regardless of address."
That's the way court precedent is set...
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on September 13, 2023, 12:49:27 PM
Perhaps we should start a campaign (not just here, also in the real world) to petition our congressional representatives to make this practice illegal.  And maybe give the interoperability mandate some teeth while they're at it, too.  I believe one of our forum members has been fond of the "remove tax exempt status from the bonds if they don't comply" idea for forcing the toll agencies to play ball...
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: jeffandnicole on September 13, 2023, 01:20:44 PM
Because honestly, any such mandate will not be tollpayer-friendly. The toll agencies will just say, ok, we'll eliminate the discount for everyone and make everyone pay the maximum fare.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: RobbieL2415 on September 14, 2023, 07:53:37 AM
Quote from: lstone19 on September 13, 2023, 11:48:19 AM
Quote from: MASTERNC on September 13, 2023, 11:20:13 AM
Sounds like the toll increase is being voted on next week.  Unfortunately, the non-NY E-ZPass rate is still the same as the toll-by-plate rate, which makes no sense.

It makes sense as only NYS residents can get a New York EZ-Pass without a monthly fee unless they get an "On the Go" one so it lets them stick it to non-NY residents who don't vote in NY. So much of the promise of EZ-Pass has been lost once politicians realized they could stick it to non-residents. And it's silly for me that now living in Nevada and I have two separate EZ-Pass accounts - the Illinois one I've had since living there and now a NY one with a NYSTA On-the-Go transponder for what will be a few NY trips in the next couple of years (I'd drop the Illinois one but I'm sure if I did, Illinois would join the "charge other agencies more" club and Illinois will always be where most of my use is.
I'm not a NYS resident and I have a MTA B&T issued EZPass. Does it have to be one issued by the Thruway Authority?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: MASTERNC on September 14, 2023, 08:44:51 AM
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on September 14, 2023, 07:53:37 AM
Quote from: lstone19 on September 13, 2023, 11:48:19 AM
Quote from: MASTERNC on September 13, 2023, 11:20:13 AM
Sounds like the toll increase is being voted on next week.  Unfortunately, the non-NY E-ZPass rate is still the same as the toll-by-plate rate, which makes no sense.

It makes sense as only NYS residents can get a New York EZ-Pass without a monthly fee unless they get an "On the Go" one so it lets them stick it to non-NY residents who don't vote in NY. So much of the promise of EZ-Pass has been lost once politicians realized they could stick it to non-residents. And it's silly for me that now living in Nevada and I have two separate EZ-Pass accounts - the Illinois one I've had since living there and now a NY one with a NYSTA On-the-Go transponder for what will be a few NY trips in the next couple of years (I'd drop the Illinois one but I'm sure if I did, Illinois would join the "charge other agencies more" club and Illinois will always be where most of my use is.
I'm not a NYS resident and I have a MTA B&T issued EZPass. Does it have to be one issued by the Thruway Authority?

MTA, NYSTA, and the Port Authority all use the same E-ZPass system, so any of those qualifies for the lower tolls.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: storm2k on September 14, 2023, 03:33:49 PM
Quote from: MASTERNC on September 13, 2023, 11:20:13 AM
Sounds like the toll increase is being voted on next week.  Unfortunately, the non-NY E-ZPass rate is still the same as the toll-by-plate rate, which makes no sense.

It's a quick and easy way for the agencies to make increased revenue without in-state constituents feeling as much pain. Plenty of out of state drivers use their toll roads and they can collect much more revenue from them this way. Really is making me consider if I should get a NY issued tag and just forgo the useless discounts from the NJ Turnpike Authority.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on September 14, 2023, 08:36:41 PM
I just went by the Ulster service area today.  First time since it closed several months ago.  They only just got around to beginning demolition.  Not sure what they were doing all that time (if anything), but it seems that a lot of the closed sites just sit dormant without work going on.  Makes me wonder about Guilderland, now, but I'm not sure how that could reopen on time if it needs to be rebuilt.

On the other discussion, "soak the strangers" styles of taxes/fees/tolls should be illegal.  For a country that was supposedly founded on "no taxation without representation", we sure seem to be huge fans of it, at least when we're taxing others without representation.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on September 14, 2023, 09:10:09 PM
Quote from: vdeane on September 14, 2023, 08:36:41 PM
I just went by the Ulster service area today.  First time since it closed several months ago.  They only just got around to beginning demolition.  Not sure what they were doing all that time (if anything), but it seems that a lot of the closed sites just sit dormant without work going on.  Makes me wonder about Guilderland, now, but I'm not sure how that could reopen on time if it needs to be rebuilt.

On the other discussion, "soak the strangers" styles of taxes/fees/tolls should be illegal.  For a country that was supposedly founded on "no taxation without representation", we sure seem to be huge fans of it, at least when we're taxing others without representation.
Do as I say, not as I do!
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: NoGoodNamesAvailable on September 14, 2023, 09:58:35 PM
Quote from: storm2k on September 14, 2023, 03:33:49 PM
Quote from: MASTERNC on September 13, 2023, 11:20:13 AM
Sounds like the toll increase is being voted on next week.  Unfortunately, the non-NY E-ZPass rate is still the same as the toll-by-plate rate, which makes no sense.

It's a quick and easy way for the agencies to make increased revenue without in-state constituents feeling as much pain. Plenty of out of state drivers use their toll roads and they can collect much more revenue from them this way. Really is making me consider if I should get a NY issued tag and just forgo the useless discounts from the NJ Turnpike Authority.

The NJ EZ-Pass seems almost useless to me, the off-peak discounts are too small and limited to matter. I only drive in NYC like once a month and it's enough to make the NY tag a no-brainer.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on September 14, 2023, 10:03:50 PM
Quote from: vdeane on September 14, 2023, 08:36:41 PM
I just went by the Ulster service area today.  First time since it closed several months ago.  They only just got around to beginning demolition.  Not sure what they were doing all that time (if anything), but it seems that a lot of the closed sites just sit dormant without work going on.  Makes me wonder about Guilderland, now, but I'm not sure how that could reopen on time if it needs to be rebuilt.

On the other discussion, "soak the strangers" styles of taxes/fees/tolls should be illegal.  For a country that was supposedly founded on "no taxation without representation", we sure seem to be huge fans of it, at least when we're taxing others without representation.
Remember that the asking for more money to cover cost overages debacle stalled construction.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: jeffandnicole on September 15, 2023, 01:35:21 AM
Quote from: vdeane on September 14, 2023, 08:36:41 PM
I just went by the Ulster service area today.  First time since it closed several months ago.  They only just got around to beginning demolition.  Not sure what they were doing all that time (if anything), but it seems that a lot of the closed sites just sit dormant without work going on.  Makes me wonder about Guilderland, now, but I'm not sure how that could reopen on time if it needs to be rebuilt.

How old were these buildings?  Did they have asbestos that needed to be removed first?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Flyer78 on September 15, 2023, 12:12:36 PM
If I recall correctly Ulster was one that was fully rebuilt in the early 90s to the "Adirondack Lodge" style building, so I would doubt asbestos was the issue.

Even facilities that were not total tear-downs the last time most likely were fully abated as part of that renovation cycle.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on September 15, 2023, 12:46:42 PM
Quote from: Rothman on September 14, 2023, 10:03:50 PM
Quote from: vdeane on September 14, 2023, 08:36:41 PM
I just went by the Ulster service area today.  First time since it closed several months ago.  They only just got around to beginning demolition.  Not sure what they were doing all that time (if anything), but it seems that a lot of the closed sites just sit dormant without work going on.  Makes me wonder about Guilderland, now, but I'm not sure how that could reopen on time if it needs to be rebuilt.

On the other discussion, "soak the strangers" styles of taxes/fees/tolls should be illegal.  For a country that was supposedly founded on "no taxation without representation", we sure seem to be huge fans of it, at least when we're taxing others without representation.
Remember that the asking for more money to cover cost overages debacle stalled construction.
I recall them asking for it and the state saying no, but I hadn't heard anything since on what, if any, impacts it had.  Also note that I'm not referencing the original schedule (long since taken down), but the dates listed on the online map, which were recently changed from "TBD" for most phase 2 locations, so they should be reasonably current.  Plus, wouldn't it be financially better to operate buildings they aren't ready to rebuild for the convenience store sales than to let them sit unused?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: The Nature Boy on September 15, 2023, 03:31:20 PM
We're way past the point of needing a national interoperable transponder program. The eastern half of the country does fine with EZPass (though there are issues, like what is outlined here) but once you go west of the Mississippi, it's a fucking checkerboard.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on September 15, 2023, 04:04:52 PM
Quote from: webny99 on September 11, 2023, 07:57:59 PM
Quote from: Alps on September 11, 2023, 06:35:26 PM
Two things.
1) Quick note: the "pending" row may never get resolved. Sometimes a counter goes down. It may be charging tolls but not recording transactions enough to spit back volumes to you. I wish you luck though.


Yup, I'm not expecting to hear anything on the missing data for at least a week, given the previous response times. And even then, my expectations are not high. However, the missing data is sporadic enough (approx. 2-5 WB values per day; EB was perfectly fine) that I'm hoping there was an issue with data transfer and not the collection site itself.

I heard back today regarding the missing data, but no luck obtaining it. I'll have to live with just the EB data, as finding and estimating the missing values isn't worth the time sink.

Quote from: Thruway FOIL Department
Per our internal databases that contain this information, this data is listed as "unaudited" . All of the missing data indicates values of 0 (zero). Staff believes there may have been an issue with the counting mechanism.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Alps on September 15, 2023, 04:16:22 PM
Quote from: NoGoodNamesAvailable on September 14, 2023, 09:58:35 PM
Quote from: storm2k on September 14, 2023, 03:33:49 PM
Quote from: MASTERNC on September 13, 2023, 11:20:13 AM
Sounds like the toll increase is being voted on next week.  Unfortunately, the non-NY E-ZPass rate is still the same as the toll-by-plate rate, which makes no sense.

It's a quick and easy way for the agencies to make increased revenue without in-state constituents feeling as much pain. Plenty of out of state drivers use their toll roads and they can collect much more revenue from them this way. Really is making me consider if I should get a NY issued tag and just forgo the useless discounts from the NJ Turnpike Authority.

The NJ EZ-Pass seems almost useless to me, the off-peak discounts are too small and limited to matter. I only drive in NYC like once a month and it's enough to make the NY tag a no-brainer.
Does NJ have a monthly fee? The big draw to MTA or NYSTA is no fee.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Ted$8roadFan on September 15, 2023, 05:32:24 PM
Quote from: Alps on September 15, 2023, 04:16:22 PM
Quote from: NoGoodNamesAvailable on September 14, 2023, 09:58:35 PM
Quote from: storm2k on September 14, 2023, 03:33:49 PM
Quote from: MASTERNC on September 13, 2023, 11:20:13 AM
Sounds like the toll increase is being voted on next week.  Unfortunately, the non-NY E-ZPass rate is still the same as the toll-by-plate rate, which makes no sense.

It's a quick and easy way for the agencies to make increased revenue without in-state constituents feeling as much pain. Plenty of out of state drivers use their toll roads and they can collect much more revenue from them this way. Really is making me consider if I should get a NY issued tag and just forgo the useless discounts from the NJ Turnpike Authority.

The NJ EZ-Pass seems almost useless to me, the off-peak discounts are too small and limited to matter. I only drive in NYC like once a month and it's enough to make the NY tag a no-brainer.
Does NJ have a monthly fee? The big draw to MTA or NYSTA is no fee.

NJ does have a service fee of $1 (per month?).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: 02 Park Ave on September 15, 2023, 07:33:19 PM
It also has a bimonthly fee set at $1.00.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: NoGoodNamesAvailable on September 15, 2023, 11:24:35 PM
Quote from: Alps on September 15, 2023, 04:16:22 PM
Quote from: NoGoodNamesAvailable on September 14, 2023, 09:58:35 PM
Quote from: storm2k on September 14, 2023, 03:33:49 PM
Quote from: MASTERNC on September 13, 2023, 11:20:13 AM
Sounds like the toll increase is being voted on next week.  Unfortunately, the non-NY E-ZPass rate is still the same as the toll-by-plate rate, which makes no sense.

It's a quick and easy way for the agencies to make increased revenue without in-state constituents feeling as much pain. Plenty of out of state drivers use their toll roads and they can collect much more revenue from them this way. Really is making me consider if I should get a NY issued tag and just forgo the useless discounts from the NJ Turnpike Authority.

The NJ EZ-Pass seems almost useless to me, the off-peak discounts are too small and limited to matter. I only drive in NYC like once a month and it's enough to make the NY tag a no-brainer.
Does NJ have a monthly fee? The big draw to MTA or NYSTA is no fee.

NJ has a fee ($1 a month I think). If you order a NY ezpass with an NJ registered address they will send you a PANYNJ tag which also has a $1 a month fee. So it's a wash.

In my opinion $1 a month is irrelevant. Especially when you compare it to the toll savings that you only get with a NY tag.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Mr. Matté on September 16, 2023, 06:51:04 AM
Quote from: NoGoodNamesAvailable on September 15, 2023, 11:24:35 PM
Quote from: Alps on September 15, 2023, 04:16:22 PM
Does NJ have a monthly fee? The big draw to MTA or NYSTA is no fee.

NJ has a fee ($1 a month I think). If you order a NY ezpass with an NJ registered address they will send you a PANYNJ tag which also has a $1 a month fee. So it's a wash.

In my opinion $1 a month is irrelevant. Especially when you compare it to the toll savings that you only get with a NY tag.

Eh, I'd rather just wait until I happen to get on the Thruway, then buy it at a service area, and save the $12 a year. Oh wait, I did do that.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Jim on September 16, 2023, 10:07:09 AM
Regarding transponder discrimination, in my experience as a NYSTA tagholder pretty much from the day they came into existence here, Maryland is about as bad as it gets with the rates charged to all non-MD tags the same as the no-transponder charges.  The Massachusetts approach seems much more fair and reasonable.  MA tagholders get the lowest rate, rates for other E-ZPass tags is not much higher, then the toll-by-plate is significantly higher.  Wouldn't this reflect the reality that the processing costs for the toll are lowest when it's their own tag, just incrementally more when it's a different tag, and significantly higher to deal with toll by plate?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: jmacswimmer on September 16, 2023, 11:46:19 AM
^

MDTA does actually have a 3-tier rate structure now, although for whatever reason they don't post the out-of-state E-ZPass rate on their toll signage (https://maps.app.goo.gl/yC6t4rhPKQwVtqESA?g_st=ic) unlike MassDOT (https://maps.app.goo.gl/8fxPXtvqEJMbc4M78?g_st=ic) and NYSTA (https://maps.app.goo.gl/2gmuMCpKeFnoDk3N8?g_st=ic) (for now). Using that I-95 sign I linked as an example, the out-of-state E-ZPass rate is in between at $8.00 - this was previously the base cash rate as well, but with the conversion to AET the toll-by-mail base rate was hiked to $12.00 while the out-of-state E-ZPass rate was surprisingly left alone.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Jim on September 16, 2023, 04:44:22 PM
Well how about that, my Maryland tolls from last month did come in at $8 each, not the $12 I expected.  OK, so Maryland can't be the poster child for the worst treatment of foreign E-ZPass.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on September 16, 2023, 09:36:08 PM
Changing the subject to bring up something odd I noticed when digging through Thruway traffic count data for 49 (NY 78) to 50 (I-290).

WB AADT is consistently about 1200-1500 vpd higher than EB AADT over expected. Normally when there's a big directional split, I can figure out why (usually a ramp oddity where using the freeway makes sense for one direction but not another), but this one has me stumped. There are no unusual ramp configurations in the area, and airport traffic patterns would seem to favor EB I-90, if anything. Using ramp volume data from the TDV suggests that the higher volumes of WB traffic are coming from Exit 49, as the WB entrance ramp is similarly busier than the EB exit ramp. And the extra traffic seems to be evenly distributed throughout the day, not concentrated at a specific time of day. But why that's the case, I haven't figured out yet. But there could be something obvious I'm overlooking, so comments or suggestions are appreciated!
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Alps on September 16, 2023, 09:38:31 PM
Quote from: NoGoodNamesAvailable on September 15, 2023, 11:24:35 PM
Quote from: Alps on September 15, 2023, 04:16:22 PM
Quote from: NoGoodNamesAvailable on September 14, 2023, 09:58:35 PM
Quote from: storm2k on September 14, 2023, 03:33:49 PM
Quote from: MASTERNC on September 13, 2023, 11:20:13 AM
Sounds like the toll increase is being voted on next week.  Unfortunately, the non-NY E-ZPass rate is still the same as the toll-by-plate rate, which makes no sense.

It's a quick and easy way for the agencies to make increased revenue without in-state constituents feeling as much pain. Plenty of out of state drivers use their toll roads and they can collect much more revenue from them this way. Really is making me consider if I should get a NY issued tag and just forgo the useless discounts from the NJ Turnpike Authority.

The NJ EZ-Pass seems almost useless to me, the off-peak discounts are too small and limited to matter. I only drive in NYC like once a month and it's enough to make the NY tag a no-brainer.
Does NJ have a monthly fee? The big draw to MTA or NYSTA is no fee.

NJ has a fee ($1 a month I think). If you order a NY ezpass with an NJ registered address they will send you a PANYNJ tag which also has a $1 a month fee. So it's a wash.

In my opinion $1 a month is irrelevant. Especially when you compare it to the toll savings that you only get with a NY tag.
It's not a wash. If you're using NY facilities, go buy a tag in person and save the $1.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: storm2k on September 17, 2023, 02:02:29 PM
Quote from: 02 Park Ave on September 15, 2023, 07:33:19 PM
It also has a bimonthly fee set at $1.00.

The NJ $1 fee is monthly. The more I think about this, the more I realize I need to take a ride to Ardsley and just pick up a couple of NY tags and probably close out my NJ account.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on September 17, 2023, 02:18:44 PM
I don't see why anyone would get a tag with a monthly fee.  I'm not totally happy with NY's demand for a minimum amount to be held in account, but that's better than a monthly fee.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: storm2k on September 17, 2023, 02:21:27 PM
Quote from: Rothman on September 17, 2023, 02:18:44 PM
I don't see why anyone would get a tag with a monthly fee.  I'm not totally happy with NY's demand for a minimum amount to be held in account, but that's better than a monthly fee.

That's pretty common for most states though. NJ will replenish your account as soon as it dips under a certain level (and it fluctuates depending on how much you use your tags. When I had frequent travel to work I was getting hit for like 150 every so often to keep them happy).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: MASTERNC on September 17, 2023, 02:25:17 PM
Quote from: storm2k on September 17, 2023, 02:21:27 PM
Quote from: Rothman on September 17, 2023, 02:18:44 PM
I don't see why anyone would get a tag with a monthly fee.  I'm not totally happy with NY's demand for a minimum amount to be held in account, but that's better than a monthly fee.

That's pretty common for most states though. NJ will replenish your account as soon as it dips under a certain level (and it fluctuates depending on how much you use your tags. When I had frequent travel to work I was getting hit for like 150 every so often to keep them happy).

The adjustments are the only thing I don't like. If you have one or two big trips in one quarter and then fewer the next, you could have to tie up a lot more money (and at an earlier point if the replenishment threshold changes) than necessary until they review your account again. You can sometimes get customer service to adjust again but it can be a pain.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on September 17, 2023, 03:02:37 PM


Quote from: MASTERNC on September 17, 2023, 02:25:17 PM
Quote from: storm2k on September 17, 2023, 02:21:27 PM
Quote from: Rothman on September 17, 2023, 02:18:44 PM
I don't see why anyone would get a tag with a monthly fee.  I'm not totally happy with NY's demand for a minimum amount to be held in account, but that's better than a monthly fee.

That's pretty common for most states though. NJ will replenish your account as soon as it dips under a certain level (and it fluctuates depending on how much you use your tags. When I had frequent travel to work I was getting hit for like 150 every so often to keep them happy).

The adjustments are the only thing I don't like. If you have one or two big trips in one quarter and then fewer the next, you could have to tie up a lot more money (and at an earlier point if the replenishment threshold changes) than necessary until they review your account again. You can sometimes get customer service to adjust again but it can be a pain.

I've never had an issue immediately reducing the amount after they've raised it to cover a high month in NY.  Simple enough to do online without calling anyone; they e-mail to let you know they needed to raise it.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: MASTERNC on September 17, 2023, 07:27:29 PM
Quote from: Rothman on September 17, 2023, 03:02:37 PM


Quote from: MASTERNC on September 17, 2023, 02:25:17 PM
Quote from: storm2k on September 17, 2023, 02:21:27 PM
Quote from: Rothman on September 17, 2023, 02:18:44 PM
I don't see why anyone would get a tag with a monthly fee.  I'm not totally happy with NY's demand for a minimum amount to be held in account, but that's better than a monthly fee.

That's pretty common for most states though. NJ will replenish your account as soon as it dips under a certain level (and it fluctuates depending on how much you use your tags. When I had frequent travel to work I was getting hit for like 150 every so often to keep them happy).

The adjustments are the only thing I don't like. If you have one or two big trips in one quarter and then fewer the next, you could have to tie up a lot more money (and at an earlier point if the replenishment threshold changes) than necessary until they review your account again. You can sometimes get customer service to adjust again but it can be a pain.

I've never had an issue immediately reducing the amount after they've raised it to cover a high month in NY.  Simple enough to do online without calling anyone; they e-mail to let you know they needed to raise it.

Only way I've been able to do online is to submit a service request.  Would be nice if you could just adjust yourself from your account.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: jeffandnicole on September 17, 2023, 08:25:58 PM
Quote from: MASTERNC on September 17, 2023, 07:27:29 PM
Quote from: Rothman on September 17, 2023, 03:02:37 PM


Quote from: MASTERNC on September 17, 2023, 02:25:17 PM
Quote from: storm2k on September 17, 2023, 02:21:27 PM
Quote from: Rothman on September 17, 2023, 02:18:44 PM
I don't see why anyone would get a tag with a monthly fee.  I'm not totally happy with NY's demand for a minimum amount to be held in account, but that's better than a monthly fee.

That's pretty common for most states though. NJ will replenish your account as soon as it dips under a certain level (and it fluctuates depending on how much you use your tags. When I had frequent travel to work I was getting hit for like 150 every so often to keep them happy).

The adjustments are the only thing I don't like. If you have one or two big trips in one quarter and then fewer the next, you could have to tie up a lot more money (and at an earlier point if the replenishment threshold changes) than necessary until they review your account again. You can sometimes get customer service to adjust again but it can be a pain.

I've never had an issue immediately reducing the amount after they've raised it to cover a high month in NY.  Simple enough to do online without calling anyone; they e-mail to let you know they needed to raise it.

Only way I've been able to do online is to submit a service request.  Would be nice if you could just adjust yourself from your account.

The goal is to replenish the account once a month. So a month with heavy usage where they hsd to replinish an account bumps up the replinished amount. After a few months where usage has gone down, it should bring the replenishment amount down.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on September 17, 2023, 08:44:39 PM
^ There's also the goal to keep the account from going negative.  It's allowed when automatic replenishment is enabled, but they don't like it.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on September 17, 2023, 09:28:20 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on September 17, 2023, 08:25:58 PM
Quote from: MASTERNC on September 17, 2023, 07:27:29 PM
Quote from: Rothman on September 17, 2023, 03:02:37 PM


Quote from: MASTERNC on September 17, 2023, 02:25:17 PM
Quote from: storm2k on September 17, 2023, 02:21:27 PM
Quote from: Rothman on September 17, 2023, 02:18:44 PM
I don't see why anyone would get a tag with a monthly fee.  I'm not totally happy with NY's demand for a minimum amount to be held in account, but that's better than a monthly fee.

That's pretty common for most states though. NJ will replenish your account as soon as it dips under a certain level (and it fluctuates depending on how much you use your tags. When I had frequent travel to work I was getting hit for like 150 every so often to keep them happy).

The adjustments are the only thing I don't like. If you have one or two big trips in one quarter and then fewer the next, you could have to tie up a lot more money (and at an earlier point if the replenishment threshold changes) than necessary until they review your account again. You can sometimes get customer service to adjust again but it can be a pain.

I've never had an issue immediately reducing the amount after they've raised it to cover a high month in NY.  Simple enough to do online without calling anyone; they e-mail to let you know they needed to raise it.

Only way I've been able to do online is to submit a service request.  Would be nice if you could just adjust yourself from your account.

The goal is to replenish the account once a month. So a month with heavy usage where they hsd to replinish an account bumps up the replinished amount. After a few months where usage has gone down, it should bring the replenishment amount down.

I've always had to tell them to reduce the amount, which is an admitted annoyance.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: lstone19 on September 17, 2023, 09:47:43 PM
Quote from: vdeane on September 17, 2023, 08:44:39 PM
^ There's also the goal to keep the account from going negative.  It's allowed when automatic replenishment is enabled, but they don't like it.

I have my NY EZ-Pass on "Pay Per Trip." Balance sits at zero, usage sends it negative, and then once per day, they charge my checking account for that day's usage.  Only disadvantage is pay per trip must use a checking account, not a credit card.

OTOH, my Illinois I-(EZ-)Pass auto replenishes. You can change the amount online and while they say they will auto-adjust it, that never happened when we lived in Illinois and were racking up well more than the $40 auto-replenish amount every month. Now, no longer living in Illinois, I set the replenish amount to $10.

One thing I've never liked about Illinois' system is while they give you dire warnings about not letting it go negative, they don't say what happens if a single toll sends it negative (entirely possible with out of state usage given a fixed auto-replenish $10 point) . While the auto-replenish happens usually within an hour or so, for some minutes you're negative. At least with NY Pay Per Trip, being intra-day negative is normal and it is clear that's not a problem so long as their charge clears.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: jeffandnicole on September 17, 2023, 11:06:13 PM
Quote from: Rothman on September 17, 2023, 09:28:20 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on September 17, 2023, 08:25:58 PM
Quote from: MASTERNC on September 17, 2023, 07:27:29 PM
Quote from: Rothman on September 17, 2023, 03:02:37 PM


Quote from: MASTERNC on September 17, 2023, 02:25:17 PM
Quote from: storm2k on September 17, 2023, 02:21:27 PM
Quote from: Rothman on September 17, 2023, 02:18:44 PM
I don't see why anyone would get a tag with a monthly fee.  I'm not totally happy with NY's demand for a minimum amount to be held in account, but that's better than a monthly fee.

That's pretty common for most states though. NJ will replenish your account as soon as it dips under a certain level (and it fluctuates depending on how much you use your tags. When I had frequent travel to work I was getting hit for like 150 every so often to keep them happy).

The adjustments are the only thing I don't like. If you have one or two big trips in one quarter and then fewer the next, you could have to tie up a lot more money (and at an earlier point if the replenishment threshold changes) than necessary until they review your account again. You can sometimes get customer service to adjust again but it can be a pain.

I've never had an issue immediately reducing the amount after they've raised it to cover a high month in NY.  Simple enough to do online without calling anyone; they e-mail to let you know they needed to raise it.

Only way I've been able to do online is to submit a service request.  Would be nice if you could just adjust yourself from your account.

The goal is to replenish the account once a month. So a month with heavy usage where they hsd to replinish an account bumps up the replinished amount. After a few months where usage has gone down, it should bring the replenishment amount down.

I've always had to tell them to reduce the amount, which is an admitted annoyance.

Did you wait 3 months?  That seems to be the time it takes for them to readjust the replenishment amount.

Quote from: vdeane on September 17, 2023, 08:44:39 PM
^ There's also the goal to keep the account from going negative.  It's allowed when automatic replenishment is enabled, but they don't like it.
Quote from: lstone19 on September 17, 2023, 09:47:43 PM
One thing I've never liked about Illinois' system is while they give you dire warnings about not letting it go negative, they don't say what happens if a single toll sends it negative (entirely possible with out of state usage given a fixed auto-replenish $10 point).

In both cases, there's really not much the user can do about it.  The agreement between EZ Pass and the User should say that the account will be auto-replenished after the account falls below a set amount (usually $10 or $15).  If it falls below $0, there's no penalty since you chose the auto-replenish option.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on September 18, 2023, 12:44:04 PM
They adjusted my replenishment amount and/or threshold after one particularly large trip that sent my account balance negative a couple times.  It went back to normal at some future point, but it is something they prefer to avoid, even if there's no penalty (obviously doesn't apply to pay per trip, but I'm not sure if that option even existed at the time).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: jwags on September 18, 2023, 01:59:26 PM
Quote from: lstone19 on September 17, 2023, 09:47:43 PM
Quote from: vdeane on September 17, 2023, 08:44:39 PM
^ There's also the goal to keep the account from going negative.  It's allowed when automatic replenishment is enabled, but they don't like it.

I have my NY EZ-Pass on "Pay Per Trip." Balance sits at zero, usage sends it negative, and then once per day, they charge my checking account for that day's usage.  Only disadvantage is pay per trip must use a checking account, not a credit card.

OTOH, my Illinois I-(EZ-)Pass auto replenishes. You can change the amount online and while they say they will auto-adjust it, that never happened when we lived in Illinois and were racking up well more than the $40 auto-replenish amount every month. Now, no longer living in Illinois, I set the replenish amount to $10.

One thing I've never liked about Illinois' system is while they give you dire warnings about not letting it go negative, they don't say what happens if a single toll sends it negative (entirely possible with out of state usage given a fixed auto-replenish $10 point) . While the auto-replenish happens usually within an hour or so, for some minutes you're negative. At least with NY Pay Per Trip, being intra-day negative is normal and it is clear that's not a problem so long as their charge clears.

I live in WI but I've had a NY tag on PPT since back when it was only available on MTA TBTA tags and those don't have monthly fees. I almost exclusively use it in Illinois and pay the same rate as IL I-Pass tagholders. It really is the best deal out there if you can get a NYSTA or TBTA tag. I haven't had to pay any fee or tag deposit and when one of my tags died they sent me a new one for free w/ a free return envelope.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: jmacswimmer on September 19, 2023, 09:47:04 AM
Quote from: MASTERNC on September 13, 2023, 11:20:13 AM
Sounds like the toll increase is being voted on next week.  Unfortunately, the non-NY E-ZPass rate is still the same as the toll-by-plate rate, which makes no sense.

As expected, looks like the increase was officially approved yesterday.

https://twitter.com/NYSThruway/status/1703862339840180610?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Etweet
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Jim on September 19, 2023, 10:11:12 AM
Quote from: jmacswimmer on September 19, 2023, 09:47:04 AM
Quote from: MASTERNC on September 13, 2023, 11:20:13 AM
Sounds like the toll increase is being voted on next week.  Unfortunately, the non-NY E-ZPass rate is still the same as the toll-by-plate rate, which makes no sense.

As expected, looks like the increase was officially approved yesterday.

https://twitter.com/NYSThruway/status/1703862339840180610?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Etweet

We don't want to offend the NY Thruway Authority by not using the right term: they're clearly and consistently calling this an "adjustment" rather than any kind of word that indicates that it's an increase... 

Come on, whether the increase is justified or not, can't they at least call it what it is.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: jeffandnicole on September 19, 2023, 11:43:49 AM
After all the blah-blah-blahing about how old the bridges and subbase is, the increases don't seem high enough to be able to fund much in the way of replacing those bridges and subbase.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on September 19, 2023, 12:11:58 PM
Quote from: vdeane on September 05, 2023, 10:31:48 AM
Quote from: Rothman on September 04, 2023, 11:00:19 PM
Quote from: vdeane on September 04, 2023, 08:10:01 PM
Quote from: Rothman on September 04, 2023, 06:35:28 AM
vdeane, are you working with the new "Drakewell" or however it's spelled/called?
I'm not familiar with it.  My bookmark is for the web viewer (https://gisportalny.dot.ny.gov/portalny/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=28537cbc8b5941e19cf8e959b16797b4) they came out with a few years ago; is that link out of date?
Nope.  This "Drakewell" software seems to be the new and upcoming way HDS will be analyzing count and other traffic data...but the bugs are still being worked out.
Ah, the TRADIS replacement.


In light of this, I feel out of place to be the one announcing NYSDOT's new TDV, but I just happened to be emailing NYSDOT about some traffic counts earlier this week and received this response, in part:

Quote from: NYSDOT Office of Technical Services Traffic Monitoring Section
The data for 2022 and what is currently available of 2023 are available on our new, soft-launched Traffic Data Viewer. We are seeking public feedback.
...

This system is live and up-to-date. Feel free to use it and share it, but we are hoping to get feedback from folks like you and make a few more updates before we do our official release.

And here is the link: https://nysdottrafficdata.drakewell.com/publicmultinodemap.asp

It's the same system that Georgia (GDOT) and possibly other states are already using. I've been browsing around a bit, and have found that it's great for continuous counts (huge upgrade over the GIS TDV) but way overdone for short counts. Counts that occur once every few years do not need anything close to a full site dashboard and separate site data page with a 99% blank calendar.

From my reply to NYSDOT: "The new Traffic Data Viewer is well set up to handle large volumes of information and very well designed for continuous counts. There is great potential for NYSDOT to expand continuous counts to more locations, and reduce the burden of operating short counts, if feasible due to other factors."

That being said, I know very little about what goes in to the construction, operation, and maintenance of continuous count sites, but if this new platform is any indication, I would 100% support eliminating short counts on freeways and switching to continuous only. The framework is now there to handle it, and it's is already done in many other states, so it's definitely feasible, and may even reduce the costs of carrying out short counts in the long term.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on September 19, 2023, 12:25:59 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on September 19, 2023, 11:43:49 AM
After all the blah-blah-blahing about how old the bridges and subbase is, the increases don't seem high enough to be able to fund much in the way of replacing those bridges and subbase.
The increase to the NY E-ZPass rate is modest.  Not mentioned on the recent social media posts but presumably not changed are that the increase to the bill by mail rate is large, with the out of state E-ZPass rate being eliminated with those travelers to be charged the bill by mail rate.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on September 19, 2023, 12:50:34 PM
Quote from: webny99 on September 19, 2023, 12:11:58 PM
Quote from: vdeane on September 05, 2023, 10:31:48 AM
Quote from: Rothman on September 04, 2023, 11:00:19 PM
Quote from: vdeane on September 04, 2023, 08:10:01 PM
Quote from: Rothman on September 04, 2023, 06:35:28 AM
vdeane, are you working with the new "Drakewell" or however it's spelled/called?
I'm not familiar with it.  My bookmark is for the web viewer (https://gisportalny.dot.ny.gov/portalny/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=28537cbc8b5941e19cf8e959b16797b4) they came out with a few years ago; is that link out of date?
Nope.  This "Drakewell" software seems to be the new and upcoming way HDS will be analyzing count and other traffic data...but the bugs are still being worked out.
Ah, the TRADIS replacement.


In light of this, I feel out of place to be the one announcing NYSDOT's new TDV, but I just happened to be emailing NYSDOT about some traffic counts earlier this week and received this response, in part:

Quote from: NYSDOT Office of Technical Services Traffic Monitoring Section
The data for 2022 and what is currently available of 2023 are available on our new, soft-launched Traffic Data Viewer. We are seeking public feedback.
...

This system is live and up-to-date. Feel free to use it and share it, but we are hoping to get feedback from folks like you and make a few more updates before we do our official release.

And here is the link: https://nysdottrafficdata.drakewell.com/publicmultinodemap.asp

It's the same system that Georgia (GDOT) and possibly other states are already using. I've been browsing around a bit, and have found that it's great for continuous counts (huge upgrade over the GIS TDV) but way overdone for short counts. Counts that occur once every few years do not need anything close to a full site dashboard and separate site data page with a 99% blank calendar.

From my reply to NYSDOT: "The new Traffic Data Viewer is well set up to handle large volumes of information and very well designed for continuous counts. There is great potential for NYSDOT to expand continuous counts to more locations, and reduce the burden of operating short counts, if feasible due to other factors."

That being said, I know very little about what goes in to the construction, operation, and maintenance of continuous count sites, but if this new platform is any indication, I would 100% support eliminating short counts on freeways and switching to continuous only. The framework is now there to handle it, and it's is already done in many other states, so it's definitely feasible, and may even reduce the costs of carrying out short counts in the long term.
Heh.  New TDV wasn't what we were talking about.  And they'll be tinkering around with that for a while to come.

The installation of true, old-style continuous count stations isn't cost effective from NYSDOT's perspective, but the ability to quickly set up camera counts is something NYSDOT wants to do more of. 

Makes me wonder who exactly responded to your inquiry.  I've got a guess...
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on September 19, 2023, 01:31:25 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on September 19, 2023, 11:43:49 AM
After all the blah-blah-blahing about how old the bridges and subbase is, the increases don't seem high enough to be able to fund much in the way of replacing those bridges and subbase.
5% over 14 years isn't an increase, not even an inflation adjustment.
Daddy's bridge,  aka Tappan Zee bridge - and its associated debt - is the elephant in the room.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on September 19, 2023, 02:00:39 PM
Quote from: Rothman on September 19, 2023, 12:50:34 PM
Heh.  New TDV wasn't what we were talking about.  And they'll be tinkering around with that for a while to come.

The installation of true, old-style continuous count stations isn't cost effective from NYSDOT's perspective, but the ability to quickly set up camera counts is something NYSDOT wants to do more of. 

Makes me wonder who exactly responded to your inquiry.  I've got a guess...

But it is related, no? It is called Drakewell...

Your guess is as good as mine as to who responded. It was signed with a generic signature, "NYSDOT Office of Technical Services Traffic Monitoring Section".
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on September 19, 2023, 02:20:08 PM
Quote from: webny99 on September 19, 2023, 02:00:39 PM
Quote from: Rothman on September 19, 2023, 12:50:34 PM
Heh.  New TDV wasn't what we were talking about.  And they'll be tinkering around with that for a while to come.

The installation of true, old-style continuous count stations isn't cost effective from NYSDOT's perspective, but the ability to quickly set up camera counts is something NYSDOT wants to do more of. 

Makes me wonder who exactly responded to your inquiry.  I've got a guess...

But it is related, no? It is called Drakewell...

Your guess is as good as mine as to who responded. It was signed with a generic signature, "NYSDOT Office of Technical Services Traffic Monitoring Section".
Yep, related.  TDV is the outward viewer of the Drakewell-assembled data...for the time being.  Like we were saying, concerns are still being resolved regarding their data.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on September 19, 2023, 04:27:01 PM
I do have concerns regarding the short count data, which I addressed in my reply. The data visible when hovering over the count location does not match the raw data. Not necessarily a big problem, but clarification is definitely needed if/when estimates are being used.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on September 19, 2023, 05:06:45 PM
Quote from: webny99 on September 19, 2023, 04:27:01 PM
I do have concerns regarding the short count data, which I addressed in my reply. The data visible when hovering over the count location does not match the raw data. Not necessarily a big problem, but clarification is definitely needed if/when estimates are being used.
You should bug them again.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on September 19, 2023, 08:53:23 PM
Quote from: Rothman on September 19, 2023, 05:06:45 PM
Quote from: webny99 on September 19, 2023, 04:27:01 PM
I do have concerns regarding the short count data, which I addressed in my reply. The data visible when hovering over the count location does not match the raw data. Not necessarily a big problem, but clarification is definitely needed if/when estimates are being used.
You should bug them again.

Yup, already did. That's what I meant by "addressed in my reply". I gave some general feedback as well.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Alps on September 19, 2023, 09:28:50 PM
Not pictured in the NYSTA release is what rates will be applied to the Tappan Zee.


https://www.thruway.ny.gov/travelers/tolls/schedules/2024-2027-toll-schedules/gmmcb-toll-charts.pdf
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: jmacswimmer on September 20, 2023, 08:30:35 AM
^

NYSTA really made sure to use the phrasing "first system-wide toll adjustment for NY E-ZPass customers in 14 years" presumably because of the Tappan Zee - they already hiked rates there in 2021 & 2022 and now will do so again each year for the next 4 years. Like kalvado said:

Quote from: kalvado on September 19, 2023, 01:31:25 PM
Daddy's bridge,  aka Tappan Zee bridge - and its associated debt - is the elephant in the room.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: MASTERNC on September 20, 2023, 12:05:17 PM
I did read the report that addressed public comments.  Despite multiple comments questioning the justification, did not explain the rationale behind the 60% hike on non-NY E-ZPass holders, only saying they can just get a NY transponder (without mentioning the fee charged for non-NY addresses that open an account online).  Talk about tone deaf and implying this as a revenue grab ("taxation without representation")
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on September 20, 2023, 12:30:26 PM
Quote from: jmacswimmer on September 20, 2023, 08:30:35 AM
^

NYSTA really made sure to use the phrasing "first system-wide toll adjustment for NY E-ZPass customers in 14 years" presumably because of the Tappan Zee - they already hiked rates there in 2021 & 2022 and now will do so again each year for the next 4 years. Like kalvado said:

Quote from: kalvado on September 19, 2023, 01:31:25 PM
Daddy's bridge,  aka Tappan Zee bridge - and its associated debt - is the elephant in the room.
FTFY.  Not just Tappan Zee, tolls on out of state E-ZPass and cash/bill by mail have been raised in the last few years as well.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on September 20, 2023, 01:14:40 PM
Quote from: vdeane on September 20, 2023, 12:30:26 PM
Quote from: jmacswimmer on September 20, 2023, 08:30:35 AM
^

NYSTA really made sure to use the phrasing "first system-wide toll adjustment for NY E-ZPass customers in 14 years" presumably because of the Tappan Zee - they already hiked rates there in 2021 & 2022 and now will do so again each year for the next 4 years. Like kalvado said:

Quote from: kalvado on September 19, 2023, 01:31:25 PM
Daddy's bridge,  aka Tappan Zee bridge - and its associated debt - is the elephant in the room.
FTFY.  Not just Tappan Zee, tolls on out of state E-ZPass and cash/bill by mail have been raised in the last few years as well.
I am not talking about increases; I am talking about NYSTA financial state in general.

Simple breakdown of 2023 budget: operating expenses: $466M; capital program $413M (and more is needed!); Debt Service $356M; total revenue $889M;  planned borrowing in 2023 $320M.
Revenue covers operational and capital program, but they have to borrow almost full amount of debt service - and debt is mostly for the bridge.

In short: Thruway would be in a reasonable shape financially if not for the debt, and they are unable to pay off bridge debt with existing rates and that gap will need to be closed. 5% rate hike isn't doing much for that, 25-30% at least.   

Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on September 20, 2023, 07:50:46 PM
Quote from: kalvado on September 20, 2023, 01:14:40 PM
Quote from: vdeane on September 20, 2023, 12:30:26 PM
Quote from: jmacswimmer on September 20, 2023, 08:30:35 AM
^

NYSTA really made sure to use the phrasing "first system-wide toll adjustment for NY E-ZPass customers in 14 years" presumably because of the Tappan Zee - they already hiked rates there in 2021 & 2022 and now will do so again each year for the next 4 years. Like kalvado said:

Quote from: kalvado on September 19, 2023, 01:31:25 PM
Daddy's bridge,  aka Tappan Zee bridge - and its associated debt - is the elephant in the room.
FTFY.  Not just Tappan Zee, tolls on out of state E-ZPass and cash/bill by mail have been raised in the last few years as well.
I am not talking about increases; I am talking about NYSTA financial state in general.

Simple breakdown of 2023 budget: operating expenses: $466M; capital program $413M (and more is needed!); Debt Service $356M; total revenue $889M;  planned borrowing in 2023 $320M.
Revenue covers operational and capital program, but they have to borrow almost full amount of debt service - and debt is mostly for the bridge.

In short: Thruway would be in a reasonable shape financially if not for the debt, and they are unable to pay off bridge debt with existing rates and that gap will need to be closed. 5% rate hike isn't doing much for that, 25-30% at least.   


I was responding to jmacswimmer's post, not your's.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Jim on September 21, 2023, 10:44:33 AM
From my ride in this morning: there is more activity at the Pattersonville SA than I've seen since it closed with some equipment and a lot of people around, and the building demolition at the Guilderland SA is in progress.  The front half was a pile of rubble, the back half being torn down as I drove by.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: seicer on September 25, 2023, 11:46:28 PM
The new Pembroke Travel Plaza is pretty nice, with a Burger King, Dunkin Donuts, Popeye's, and a Panera Bread (under construction). The central area contains lots of comfortable seats and this location has a professional driver's area with desks, electricity and charging ports, 2 showers, and laundry machines. The showers do not contain hooks and do not come with any amenities, so bring a towel, washcloth, and toiletries.

The showers are advertised inside the building at Applegreen but not on any service area signs. It's a hidden gem - for $10/shower, it's cheaper than Pilot/Flying J at Pembroke which are now $17/shower and without a line. Pilot/Flying J had a 3-hour wait yesterday whereas the travel plaza had no wait. Ditto tonight.

Photos: https://maps.app.goo.gl/2YQsXyKd3SkqZ34z5 and https://maps.app.goo.gl/38HjiEe3HcC3wQdn6
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on October 01, 2023, 03:48:53 PM
From my drive to/from the Peoria meet, I noticed that the Guilderland plaza was finally demolished, while Scottsville and Angola still stand.  On the other side of reconstruction, Schuyler looks like it's close to reopening.  They had the business logos on the building and everything.  It will be interesting to see what a "level 1" service area looks like in reality.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: jmacswimmer on October 31, 2023, 11:40:24 AM
Quote from: vdeane on October 01, 2023, 03:48:53 PM
From my drive to/from the Peoria meet, I noticed that the Guilderland plaza was finally demolished, while Scottsville and Angola still stand.  On the other side of reconstruction, Schuyler looks like it's close to reopening.  They had the business logos on the building and everything.  It will be interesting to see what a "level 1" service area looks like in reality.

Looks like Schuyler quietly reopened yesterday - I only realized because the red service area message on NYSTA's homepage was updated from "13 service areas CLOSED" to 12, and upon further digging found the press release.

I was also curious to see what the level 1 looked like compared to the already-small level 2 - the picture in the press release makes it look generally the same as a level 2 but shorter in length (the difference presumably being the need to only squeeze in a coffee chain versus a coffee chain + chicken/burger).

https://www.thruway.ny.gov/news/pressrel/2023/10/2023-10-30-schuyler-opens.html
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cu2010 on November 03, 2023, 05:51:34 AM
Are there known issues with the tolling system right now? I took four trips a month ago (three to Rochester, one downstate) and most of the tolls have still not hit my EZPass account yet...

Hell, we just got a bill for a work vehicle for a trip to NYC in August and that is missing most of the tolls too!
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on November 03, 2023, 06:15:14 AM
Quote from: cu2010 on November 03, 2023, 05:51:34 AM
Are there known issues with the tolling system right now? I took four trips a month ago (three to Rochester, one downstate) and most of the tolls have still not hit my EZPass account yet...

Hell, we just got a bill for a work vehicle for a trip to NYC in August and that is missing most of the tolls too!
Looks like 2 weeks is the baseline, with things sometimes getting a bit slow. Those messenger pigeons really struggle with the weather right now....
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: lstone19 on November 03, 2023, 12:06:45 PM
Quote from: kalvado on November 03, 2023, 06:15:14 AM
Quote from: cu2010 on November 03, 2023, 05:51:34 AM
Are there known issues with the tolling system right now? I took four trips a month ago (three to Rochester, one downstate) and most of the tolls have still not hit my EZPass account yet...

Hell, we just got a bill for a work vehicle for a trip to NYC in August and that is missing most of the tolls too!
Looks like 2 weeks is the baseline, with things sometimes getting a bit slow. Those messenger pigeons really struggle with the weather right now....

24 days was my experience back in June. Meanwhile, Illinois tolls on my NYSTA EZ-Pass were posting in 12 to 24 hours.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: deathtopumpkins on November 03, 2023, 12:12:09 PM
Most of my tolls from a round trip across the Thruway back in mid-September have never shown up. Starting to think there should be a legal maximum time limit for them to process tolls within...

Also in July I got double charged for the Tappan Zee Bridge, as both an E-ZPass toll and a video toll, with the exact same timestamp. That was fun to get resolved. I miss when tolls were relatively straightforward.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on November 03, 2023, 12:50:54 PM
Quote from: kalvado on November 03, 2023, 06:15:14 AM
Quote from: cu2010 on November 03, 2023, 05:51:34 AM
Are there known issues with the tolling system right now? I took four trips a month ago (three to Rochester, one downstate) and most of the tolls have still not hit my EZPass account yet...

Hell, we just got a bill for a work vehicle for a trip to NYC in August and that is missing most of the tolls too!
Looks like 2 weeks is the baseline, with things sometimes getting a bit slow. Those messenger pigeons really struggle with the weather right now....
Most of mine process in less.  Usually.  I am also noticing the issue.  It seems like virtual ticket system tolls stopped processing around Labor Day and only restarted a couple weeks ago.  Still haven't seen most of them from no less than three Thruway trips.  Most of the fixed-price tolls were working normally, however (the exception being 24-25 and 25-25A).

Normally I find that the fixed price tolls (except the two exceptions above) process next day, the virtual ticket system tolls (with the exception of 25A-34A) a day or few later, and the exceptions mentioned a week or two after.

I put in an inquiry last night.  They called me today and left a voicemail that said to call back to a number that doesn't work (it's just a dial tone).  Sent another inquiry, no response yet.

Quote from: lstone19 on November 03, 2023, 12:06:45 PM
Quote from: kalvado on November 03, 2023, 06:15:14 AM
Quote from: cu2010 on November 03, 2023, 05:51:34 AM
Are there known issues with the tolling system right now? I took four trips a month ago (three to Rochester, one downstate) and most of the tolls have still not hit my EZPass account yet...

Hell, we just got a bill for a work vehicle for a trip to NYC in August and that is missing most of the tolls too!
Looks like 2 weeks is the baseline, with things sometimes getting a bit slow. Those messenger pigeons really struggle with the weather right now....

24 days was my experience back in June. Meanwhile, Illinois tolls on my NYSTA EZ-Pass were posting in 12 to 24 hours.
Yeah, it got long for a while for the 24-25A ones.  Then they fixed it, and then everything broke even worse.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: 02 Park Ave on November 06, 2023, 02:54:02 PM
My travel on the Thruway is generally limited to Exits 15 to and from 16.  The Harriman toll is usually posted the next day.

As my toll is not excessive I am undecided regarding getting a Thruway E-ZPass.  However, since both Slothburg and Ramapo will be closed for quite awhile it is a moot question as there is no way i could pick one up currently.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: seicer on November 06, 2023, 03:37:25 PM
Could be worse. RiverLink in Louisville KY keeps delaying transactions, even with a new provider. Bills keep being paused. People receiving erroneous bills or no bills at all. Registration holds because of a lack of payment (because of errors like that). They have gone through three toll operators in less than 10 years. Now there are lawsuits being filed because of this.

I've not had an issue with NYSTA tags but I don't travel on it that often anymore. Customer service was atrocious and it seemed like they had outsourced it. I similarly didn't have an issue with the WVTPA tags but customer service was a bit better - and local.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Alps on November 06, 2023, 06:54:38 PM
Quote from: 02 Park Ave on November 06, 2023, 02:54:02 PM
My travel on the Thruway is generally limited to Exits 15 to and from 16.  The Harriman toll is usually posted the next day.

As my toll is not excessive I am undecided regarding getting a Thruway E-ZPass.  However, since both Slothburg and Ramapo will be closed for quite awhile it is a moot question as there is no way i could pick one up currently.
False, I got mine in Spring Valley or Nanuet along 59. Look up where to find Thruway ones.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cu2010 on November 11, 2023, 03:08:32 AM
My tolls finally hit...six weeks later. When there wasn't enough money in my account to cover them.

This is a problem. How was the AET conversion so horribly botched?

...oh, right, King Andy.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on November 11, 2023, 04:22:31 AM
Quote from: cu2010 on November 11, 2023, 03:08:32 AM
My tolls finally hit...six weeks later. When there wasn't enough money in my account to cover them.

This is a problem. How was the AET conversion so horribly botched?

...oh, right, King Andy.
Give 5he credit where it belongs. General degradation of engineering skills.
Glitches in early stages of such project deployment are to be expected and can be blamed on poor organization. 2 years later that is not an excuse any more.
The only fault of Cuomo is pushing for the new bridge which kills NYSTA finances. But that bridge seems to be the least of possible evils. There are way too many bridges in trouble with massive consequences all over the place
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on November 11, 2023, 10:38:01 AM
Quote from: kalvado on November 11, 2023, 04:22:31 AM
Quote from: cu2010 on November 11, 2023, 03:08:32 AM
My tolls finally hit...six weeks later. When there wasn't enough money in my account to cover them.

This is a problem. How was the AET conversion so horribly botched?

...oh, right, King Andy.
Give 5he credit where it belongs. General degradation of engineering skills.
Glitches in early stages of such project deployment are to be expected and can be blamed on poor organization. 2 years later that is not an excuse any more.
The only fault of Cuomo is pushing for the new bridge which kills NYSTA finances. But that bridge seems to be the least of possible evils. There are way too many bridges in trouble with massive consequences all over the place
The new bridge had to be built, given the state of the old one.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: lstone19 on November 11, 2023, 11:58:41 AM
Quote from: cu2010 on November 11, 2023, 03:08:32 AM
My tolls finally hit...six weeks later. When there wasn't enough money in my account to cover them.

So fox six weeks you knew these toll charges were coming yet you didn't make sure the account was funded? How is that on them?
Why don't you have the account on auto-replenish?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on November 11, 2023, 12:11:46 PM
Quote from: Rothman on November 11, 2023, 10:38:01 AM
Quote from: kalvado on November 11, 2023, 04:22:31 AM
Quote from: cu2010 on November 11, 2023, 03:08:32 AM
My tolls finally hit...six weeks later. When there wasn't enough money in my account to cover them.

This is a problem. How was the AET conversion so horribly botched?

...oh, right, King Andy.
Give 5he credit where it belongs. General degradation of engineering skills.
Glitches in early stages of such project deployment are to be expected and can be blamed on poor organization. 2 years later that is not an excuse any more.
The only fault of Cuomo is pushing for the new bridge which kills NYSTA finances. But that bridge seems to be the least of possible evils. There are way too many bridges in trouble with massive consequences all over the place
The new bridge had to be built, given the state of the old one.
That's what I actually thought. Are you privileged to any details beyond general "built during steel shortages, wood is rotting" general things?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cu2010 on November 11, 2023, 12:14:05 PM
Quote from: lstone19 on November 11, 2023, 11:58:41 AM
Quote from: cu2010 on November 11, 2023, 03:08:32 AM
My tolls finally hit...six weeks later. When there wasn't enough money in my account to cover them.

So fox six weeks you knew these toll charges were coming yet you didn't make sure the account was funded? How is that on them?
Why don't you have the account on auto-replenish?
It is on auto-replenish. My point was more it shouldn't be taking six weeks...especially when in the past it's always been a day or two.

SM-S908U

Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on November 11, 2023, 12:32:43 PM
Quote from: kalvado on November 11, 2023, 12:11:46 PM
Quote from: Rothman on November 11, 2023, 10:38:01 AM
Quote from: kalvado on November 11, 2023, 04:22:31 AM
Quote from: cu2010 on November 11, 2023, 03:08:32 AM
My tolls finally hit...six weeks later. When there wasn't enough money in my account to cover them.

This is a problem. How was the AET conversion so horribly botched?

...oh, right, King Andy.
Give 5he credit where it belongs. General degradation of engineering skills.
Glitches in early stages of such project deployment are to be expected and can be blamed on poor organization. 2 years later that is not an excuse any more.
The only fault of Cuomo is pushing for the new bridge which kills NYSTA finances. But that bridge seems to be the least of possible evils. There are way too many bridges in trouble with massive consequences all over the place
The new bridge had to be built, given the state of the old one.
That's what I actually thought. Are you privileged to any details beyond general "built during steel shortages, wood is rotting" general things?

"Wood is rotting" is a new one :D.  Sure, the steel shortages played a role, as did the fact that the political jurisdictions down there placed the bridge on one of the widest parts of the Hudson, and that the bridge did not set totally on bedrock and required 24/7 pumps to stabilize some of its piers...But, in the end, there's a good parallel here from the old Tappan Zee Bridge and the I-81 Viaduct:  After decades of patching the deck, the bridge became notorious for punch-throughs -- the concrete was deteriorating to the point where you could see the water below through the holes when they occurred.  The horrible condition of the deck, combined with the not-steel structure made the total replacement the desired alternative, rather than a deck replacement.

To be frank, at least in my little exposure to the project, the fact it progressed as quickly as it did was pretty remarkable (went faster than even some of the locally-administered projects I've been more involved with), even with all the discussions regarding how to accommodate pedestrians and transit that came to bear and whatnot.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on November 11, 2023, 12:44:03 PM
Quote from: Rothman on November 11, 2023, 12:32:43 PM
Quote from: kalvado on November 11, 2023, 12:11:46 PM
Quote from: Rothman on November 11, 2023, 10:38:01 AM
Quote from: kalvado on November 11, 2023, 04:22:31 AM
Quote from: cu2010 on November 11, 2023, 03:08:32 AM
My tolls finally hit...six weeks later. When there wasn't enough money in my account to cover them.

This is a problem. How was the AET conversion so horribly botched?

...oh, right, King Andy.
Give 5he credit where it belongs. General degradation of engineering skills.
Glitches in early stages of such project deployment are to be expected and can be blamed on poor organization. 2 years later that is not an excuse any more.
The only fault of Cuomo is pushing for the new bridge which kills NYSTA finances. But that bridge seems to be the least of possible evils. There are way too many bridges in trouble with massive consequences all over the place
The new bridge had to be built, given the state of the old one.
That's what I actually thought. Are you privileged to any details beyond general "built during steel shortages, wood is rotting" general things?

"Wood is rotting" is a new one :D.  Sure, the steel shortages played a role, as did the fact that the political jurisdictions down there placed the bridge on one of the widest parts of the Hudson, and that the bridge did not set totally on bedrock and required 24/7 pumps to stabilize some of its piers...But, in the end, there's a good parallel here from the old Tappan Zee Bridge and the I-81 Viaduct:  After decades of patching the deck, the bridge became notorious for punch-throughs -- the concrete was deteriorating to the point where you could see the water below through the holes when they occurred.  The horrible condition of the deck, combined with the not-steel structure made the total replacement the desired alternative, rather than a deck replacement.

To be frank, at least in my little exposure to the project, the fact it progressed as quickly as it did was pretty remarkable (went faster than even some of the locally-administered projects I've been more involved with), even with all the discussions regarding how to accommodate pedestrians and transit that came to bear and whatnot.
There are certainly deck replacement projects here and there, if that was the major problem full replacement seems like an overkill. I had an impression viaduct also has problems with the core structure...
ANyway, I believe there are two bad things associated with the bridge. First one is the naming situation; the second is toll freeze on top of massive spending for the bridge. Massive discussion on tolling and (up/down)state subsidizes (down/up)state is implied but not welcome. 
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on November 11, 2023, 01:35:55 PM
Quote from: kalvado on November 11, 2023, 12:44:03 PM
Quote from: Rothman on November 11, 2023, 12:32:43 PM
Quote from: kalvado on November 11, 2023, 12:11:46 PM
Quote from: Rothman on November 11, 2023, 10:38:01 AM
Quote from: kalvado on November 11, 2023, 04:22:31 AM
Quote from: cu2010 on November 11, 2023, 03:08:32 AM
My tolls finally hit...six weeks later. When there wasn't enough money in my account to cover them.

This is a problem. How was the AET conversion so horribly botched?

...oh, right, King Andy.
Give 5he credit where it belongs. General degradation of engineering skills.
Glitches in early stages of such project deployment are to be expected and can be blamed on poor organization. 2 years later that is not an excuse any more.
The only fault of Cuomo is pushing for the new bridge which kills NYSTA finances. But that bridge seems to be the least of possible evils. There are way too many bridges in trouble with massive consequences all over the place
The new bridge had to be built, given the state of the old one.
That's what I actually thought. Are you privileged to any details beyond general "built during steel shortages, wood is rotting" general things?

"Wood is rotting" is a new one :D.  Sure, the steel shortages played a role, as did the fact that the political jurisdictions down there placed the bridge on one of the widest parts of the Hudson, and that the bridge did not set totally on bedrock and required 24/7 pumps to stabilize some of its piers...But, in the end, there's a good parallel here from the old Tappan Zee Bridge and the I-81 Viaduct:  After decades of patching the deck, the bridge became notorious for punch-throughs -- the concrete was deteriorating to the point where you could see the water below through the holes when they occurred.  The horrible condition of the deck, combined with the not-steel structure made the total replacement the desired alternative, rather than a deck replacement.

To be frank, at least in my little exposure to the project, the fact it progressed as quickly as it did was pretty remarkable (went faster than even some of the locally-administered projects I've been more involved with), even with all the discussions regarding how to accommodate pedestrians and transit that came to bear and whatnot.
There are certainly deck replacement projects here and there, if that was the major problem full replacement seems like an overkill. I had an impression viaduct also has problems with the core structure...
ANyway, I believe there are two bad things associated with the bridge. First one is the naming situation; the second is toll freeze on top of massive spending for the bridge. Massive discussion on tolling and (up/down)state subsidizes (down/up)state is implied but not welcome. 

I trust the engineers that I work with and those that worked directly on the project than any armchair observer.

If the naming of the bridge and toll freeze are the worst things associated with the bridge, then it did pretty well.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on November 11, 2023, 02:22:38 PM
Quote from: Rothman on November 11, 2023, 01:35:55 PM
Quote from: kalvado on November 11, 2023, 12:44:03 PM
Quote from: Rothman on November 11, 2023, 12:32:43 PM
Quote from: kalvado on November 11, 2023, 12:11:46 PM
Quote from: Rothman on November 11, 2023, 10:38:01 AM
Quote from: kalvado on November 11, 2023, 04:22:31 AM
Quote from: cu2010 on November 11, 2023, 03:08:32 AM
My tolls finally hit...six weeks later. When there wasn't enough money in my account to cover them.

This is a problem. How was the AET conversion so horribly botched?

...oh, right, King Andy.
Give 5he credit where it belongs. General degradation of engineering skills.
Glitches in early stages of such project deployment are to be expected and can be blamed on poor organization. 2 years later that is not an excuse any more.
The only fault of Cuomo is pushing for the new bridge which kills NYSTA finances. But that bridge seems to be the least of possible evils. There are way too many bridges in trouble with massive consequences all over the place
The new bridge had to be built, given the state of the old one.
That's what I actually thought. Are you privileged to any details beyond general "built during steel shortages, wood is rotting" general things?

"Wood is rotting" is a new one :D.  Sure, the steel shortages played a role, as did the fact that the political jurisdictions down there placed the bridge on one of the widest parts of the Hudson, and that the bridge did not set totally on bedrock and required 24/7 pumps to stabilize some of its piers...But, in the end, there's a good parallel here from the old Tappan Zee Bridge and the I-81 Viaduct:  After decades of patching the deck, the bridge became notorious for punch-throughs -- the concrete was deteriorating to the point where you could see the water below through the holes when they occurred.  The horrible condition of the deck, combined with the not-steel structure made the total replacement the desired alternative, rather than a deck replacement.

To be frank, at least in my little exposure to the project, the fact it progressed as quickly as it did was pretty remarkable (went faster than even some of the locally-administered projects I've been more involved with), even with all the discussions regarding how to accommodate pedestrians and transit that came to bear and whatnot.
There are certainly deck replacement projects here and there, if that was the major problem full replacement seems like an overkill. I had an impression viaduct also has problems with the core structure...
ANyway, I believe there are two bad things associated with the bridge. First one is the naming situation; the second is toll freeze on top of massive spending for the bridge. Massive discussion on tolling and (up/down)state subsidizes (down/up)state is implied but not welcome. 

I trust the engineers that I work with and those that worked directly on the project than any armchair observer.

If the naming of the bridge and toll freeze are the worst things associated with the bridge, then it did pretty well.
As much as people dislike Cuomo, he certainly could make certain things happen on his watch.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Alps on November 11, 2023, 04:50:31 PM
Quote from: kalvado on November 11, 2023, 12:11:46 PM
Quote from: Rothman on November 11, 2023, 10:38:01 AM
Quote from: kalvado on November 11, 2023, 04:22:31 AM
Quote from: cu2010 on November 11, 2023, 03:08:32 AM
My tolls finally hit...six weeks later. When there wasn't enough money in my account to cover them.

This is a problem. How was the AET conversion so horribly botched?

...oh, right, King Andy.
Give 5he credit where it belongs. General degradation of engineering skills.
Glitches in early stages of such project deployment are to be expected and can be blamed on poor organization. 2 years later that is not an excuse any more.
The only fault of Cuomo is pushing for the new bridge which kills NYSTA finances. But that bridge seems to be the least of possible evils. There are way too many bridges in trouble with massive consequences all over the place
The new bridge had to be built, given the state of the old one.
That's what I actually thought. Are you privileged to any details beyond general "built during steel shortages, wood is rotting" general things?
I am, which means I can't share any of it here (:
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: lstone19 on November 11, 2023, 05:02:22 PM
Quote from: cu2010 on November 11, 2023, 12:14:05 PM
Quote from: lstone19 on November 11, 2023, 11:58:41 AM
Quote from: cu2010 on November 11, 2023, 03:08:32 AM
My tolls finally hit...six weeks later. When there wasn't enough money in my account to cover them.

So fox six weeks you knew these toll charges were coming yet you didn't make sure the account was funded? How is that on them?
Why don't you have the account on auto-replenish?
It is on auto-replenish. My point was more it shouldn't be taking six weeks...especially when in the past it's always been a day or two.

SM-S908U

Then what was the point of the comment about there not being enough in the account? Going negative for the few hours between toll posting and auto-replenish posting is not a problem. For those of us on "pay per trip," that's how all tolls work (think of it as a daily auto-replenish in the amount it's negative).

I agree the six weeks is wrong but the few hours of negative balance is not one of the problems.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cu2010 on November 11, 2023, 05:03:43 PM
I was referring to there not being enough in the bank account attached to it to cover it...damn overdraft fees. Yes I'm aware it's 100% my fault...still annoying!
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on November 11, 2023, 05:13:15 PM
I feel like there should be a federal law that states that all tolls not billed within two weeks for transponder tolls and a month for bill by mail are forefit by the toll agency.  That would stop surprise bills from agencies that don't have their act together like the Thruway.  Or ones that hold licence plate information to bill people years later as they expand the number of states they have agreements with.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Jim on November 11, 2023, 05:42:53 PM
How is it so hard for the Thruway and so easy for everyone else?  On my business trip November 2-5 trip to South Carolina, for which I'd like to get the tolls posted so I can submit my travel for reimbursement in one shot, no sign of my Thruway tolls on my account but NJTP, GSP, DMB, Bay Bridge, and US 301 in Delaware all posted by the next day.  You'd think the agency that issued my tag would be faster.  Looks like NYT tolls from my trip in mid-October to NYC (which I was in no rush to see posted since it wasn't business) took 29 days to post.  That's one mighty slow computer system they've got there...
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on November 11, 2023, 06:03:44 PM
Quote from: Alps on November 11, 2023, 04:50:31 PM
Quote from: kalvado on November 11, 2023, 12:11:46 PM
Quote from: Rothman on November 11, 2023, 10:38:01 AM
Quote from: kalvado on November 11, 2023, 04:22:31 AM
Quote from: cu2010 on November 11, 2023, 03:08:32 AM
My tolls finally hit...six weeks later. When there wasn't enough money in my account to cover them.

This is a problem. How was the AET conversion so horribly botched?

...oh, right, King Andy.
Give 5he credit where it belongs. General degradation of engineering skills.
Glitches in early stages of such project deployment are to be expected and can be blamed on poor organization. 2 years later that is not an excuse any more.
The only fault of Cuomo is pushing for the new bridge which kills NYSTA finances. But that bridge seems to be the least of possible evils. There are way too many bridges in trouble with massive consequences all over the place
The new bridge had to be built, given the state of the old one.
That's what I actually thought. Are you privileged to any details beyond general "built during steel shortages, wood is rotting" general things?
I am, which means I can't share any of it here (:
Pfft.  Chicken.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on November 11, 2023, 06:09:00 PM
Quote from: Jim on November 11, 2023, 05:42:53 PM
How is it so hard for the Thruway and so easy for everyone else?  On my business trip November 2-5 trip to South Carolina, for which I'd like to get the tolls posted so I can submit my travel for reimbursement in one shot, no sign of my Thruway tolls on my account but NJTP, GSP, DMB, Bay Bridge, and US 301 in Delaware all posted by the next day.  You'd think the agency that issued my tag would be faster.  Looks like NYT tolls from my trip in mid-October to NYC (which I was in no rush to see posted since it wasn't business) took 29 days to post.  That's one mighty slow computer system they've got there...
Computer... I wouldn't be surprised if there is some manual review process that slows things down. Just to keep toll-takers employed. 
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Jim on November 14, 2023, 11:13:25 AM
The frame is going up for the new building at the Guilderland Service Area, and it sure does look like another tiny one.  It's not one I visit much so I don't know how busy it typically gets.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: storm2k on November 14, 2023, 11:22:19 AM
Quote from: seicer on November 06, 2023, 03:37:25 PM
I've not had an issue with NYSTA tags but I don't travel on it that often anymore. Customer service was atrocious and it seemed like they had outsourced it. I similarly didn't have an issue with the WVTPA tags but customer service was a bit better - and local.

Pretty par for the course, unfortunately. The NJ Service Center is an absolute pain to deal with in most any regard, and they're not outsourced the last time I checked, and they are in Newark.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on November 22, 2023, 06:36:25 AM
Quote from: kalvado on November 11, 2023, 06:09:00 PM
Quote from: Jim on November 11, 2023, 05:42:53 PM
How is it so hard for the Thruway and so easy for everyone else?  On my business trip November 2-5 trip to South Carolina, for which I'd like to get the tolls posted so I can submit my travel for reimbursement in one shot, no sign of my Thruway tolls on my account but NJTP, GSP, DMB, Bay Bridge, and US 301 in Delaware all posted by the next day.  You'd think the agency that issued my tag would be faster.  Looks like NYT tolls from my trip in mid-October to NYC (which I was in no rush to see posted since it wasn't business) took 29 days to post.  That's one mighty slow computer system they've got there...
Computer... I wouldn't be surprised if there is some manual review process that slows things down. Just to keep toll-takers employed.
Just got an ezpass monthly statement with "we experienced a delay" message and a longest processing time of 39 days.
Last trip was posted next day, so maybe they worked out the issue.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on November 22, 2023, 08:22:03 PM
I was over at the Schuyler service area today (the "level 1" service area).  It's interesting.  The bathrooms are the same size as the base "level 2" service areas (the small ones), but aren't split, so all six stalls are in the same place.  There's also plenty of seating (relative to its size), which is again interesting because the convenience store has no true food items (not even subs/pizza/hot dogs like they do at the other service areas) and Dunkin doesn't have much in the way of food either.  Basically, it's a good place for a bathroom break, since the lack of food options keeps it lightly patronized while the bathrooms are the same size as at the next size up service area (and much better laid out).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on December 02, 2023, 07:59:28 PM
Quote from: vdeane on November 22, 2023, 08:22:03 PM
I was over at the Schuyler service area today (the "level 1" service area).  It's interesting.  The bathrooms are the same size as the base "level 2" service areas (the small ones), but aren't split, so all six stalls are in the same place.  There's also plenty of seating (relative to its size), which is again interesting because the convenience store has no true food items (not even subs/pizza/hot dogs like they do at the other service areas) and Dunkin doesn't have much in the way of food either.  Basically, it's a good place for a bathroom break, since the lack of food options keeps it lightly patronized while the bathrooms are the same size as at the next size up service area (and much better laid out).

Interesting. I'm still really curious about the data that was used to determine which areas got which level service area (guide here (https://www.thruway.ny.gov/travelers/travelplazas/service-area-project/twytextservicearealocations.cgi) for reference). Schuyler is one that makes sense, since Iroquois is only 17 miles away (quite close by Thruway standards) and some of the Mohawk Valley ones in general I'd expect to be more lightly used.

But I can't figure out any rhyme or reason to the levels between Rochester and Utica, especially WB. Chittenango, the only WB area between Utica and Syracuse, is only a level 2, and therefore Warners is the only service area above a level 2 between Rochester and Utica. You'd think anyone coming to/from the Syracuse area would be more likely to stop at Junius Ponds or Seneca, yet those are both only level 2. EB makes a little more sense with Clifton Springs being level 3 and Oneida being level 2A, but then after Oneida there's nothing above a level 2 until Albany; it seems like either Mohawk or Guilderland (or maybe both) should be level 2A.

I've been perusing the Google reviews on the areas that have reopened, and the difference in level 2 reviews vs. level 2A/2B/3 reviews is vast. The small ones are really not well liked, with reviews taking a big downturn after the reopenings, while the larger ones have been mixed but more positive overall. Junius Ponds and Chittenango in particular seem to be despised - but there again, Warners is the only 2A between Utica and Rochester and it's currently closed, so with those two being as small as they are, there's going to be some overcrowding issues until Warners reopens.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on December 02, 2023, 09:27:57 PM
^ And on a more meta level, the whole level scheme is kinda hokey.  I think I get where they're going with it (with the A and B referring to additional amenities with the number being the base), but 2A and 2B have more common with everything level 3 than with the base level 2 (hence why I use "level 3" to refer to everything above the base level 2).  And if we're getting technical, maybe Chittenango should actually be "level 1A" given that CFA is closed on Sundays, leaving it with just Starbucks one day out of every week.

As for the distribution, there seems to be a thought of "bigger service areas leaving a metro area, smaller ones further into the journey" for whatever reason.  It's not even a recent thought, given that Ardsley exists and has no SB counterpart.  This is visible even in NYSDOT rest areas; see Clifton Park (no SB counterpart) and the Adirondack Welcome Center (bigger and more modern than Glens Falls SB).

Just checked the project page, and they've updated the reopening dates for all of them.  Looks like they hit a MASSIVE delay at some point, as the renovations went from opening early next year to the end of next year, and Angola was pushed back to 2025 (many of the others slipped by a quarter or two as well).  So much for having the bulk of the system back online for the summer travel season next year.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on December 02, 2023, 09:37:50 PM
Quote from: vdeane on December 02, 2023, 09:27:57 PM
^ And on a more meta level, the whole level scheme is kinda hokey.  I think I get where they're going with it (with the A and B referring to additional amenities with the number being the base), but 2A and 2B have more common with everything level 3 than with the base level 2 (hence why I use "level 3" to refer to everything above the base level 2).  And if we're getting technical, maybe Chittenango should actually be "level 1A" given that CFA is closed on Sundays, leaving it with just Starbucks one day out of every week.

As for the distribution, there seems to be a thought of "bigger service areas leaving a metro area, smaller ones further into the journey" for whatever reason.  It's not even a recent thought, given that Ardsley exists and has no SB counterpart.  This is visible even in NYSDOT rest areas; see Clifton Park (no SB counterpart) and the Adirondack Welcome Center (bigger and more modern than Glens Falls SB).

Just checked the project page, and they've updated the reopening dates for all of them.  Looks like they hit a MASSIVE delay at some point, as the renovations went from opening early next year to the end of next year, and Angola was pushed back to 2025 (many of the others slipped by a quarter or two as well).  So much for having the bulk of the system back online for the summer travel season next year.
It probably makes sense if you are looking at traffic numbers only. But I am not likely to stop other than for gas if I am within an hour from the origin city. It's long haul traffic who needs these services. I can see a stop "I am finally out of NYC mess" being popular, but not for other upstate cities.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: lstone19 on December 02, 2023, 11:38:53 PM
Quote from: vdeane on December 02, 2023, 09:27:57 PM
As for the distribution, there seems to be a thought of "bigger service areas leaving a metro area, smaller ones further into the journey" for whatever reason.  It's not even a recent thought, given that Ardsley exists and has no SB counterpart.  This is visible even in NYSDOT rest areas; see Clifton Park (no SB counterpart) and the Adirondack Welcome Center (bigger and more modern than Glens Falls SB).

There used to be a SB rest area near Clifton Park but undesirable activities (at least in the eyes of NYSDOT) were happening there at night (it was a hangout of some sort) so it was bulldozed. I believe it was between exits 11 and 10 just north of MP 17 and today is marked only by the trees being father back from the road.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on December 03, 2023, 02:11:00 PM
Quote from: vdeane on December 02, 2023, 09:27:57 PM
^ And on a more meta level, the whole level scheme is kinda hokey.  I think I get where they're going with it (with the A and B referring to additional amenities with the number being the base), but 2A and 2B have more common with everything level 3 than with the base level 2 (hence why I use "level 3" to refer to everything above the base level 2).  And if we're getting technical, maybe Chittenango should actually be "level 1A" given that CFA is closed on Sundays, leaving it with just Starbucks one day out of every week.

I am fully on board with just referring to all level 2A/2B service areas as level 3. That would greatly simplify things.

And, regarding Chittenango, I think the choice of CFA plus the fact it's the only WB area between Utica and Syracuse means it's pretty clearly the worst level 2 of them all. Did they not consider traffic heading west from Utica/Rome, or that it's popular place for cross-state travelers to stop? I think I've been to Chittenango more than any other WB service area in the entire state save maybe Angola, but now it may be out of the question during busy travel periods.



Quote from: vdeane on December 02, 2023, 09:27:57 PM
Just checked the project page, and they've updated the reopening dates for all of them.  Looks like they hit a MASSIVE delay at some point, as the renovations went from opening early next year to the end of next year, and Angola was pushed back to 2025 (many of the others slipped by a quarter or two as well).  So much for having the bulk of the system back online for the summer travel season next year.

That does seem to be the case, which is a bummer. Especially for Angola, which is the only service area west of Buffalo in either direction. I'm also curious what happened to "no two consecutive areas closed" with both Mohawk and Guilderland being closed. With Modena seemingly being restrooms and fuel only while waiting for Ramapo to reopen, New Baltimore is the only full size east/southbound service area open east of Clifton Springs (which is just insane for a 300+ mile stretch of toll highway)!
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on December 03, 2023, 02:26:33 PM
Quote from: webny99 on December 03, 2023, 02:11:00 PM


Quote from: vdeane on December 02, 2023, 09:27:57 PM
Just checked the project page, and they've updated the reopening dates for all of them.  Looks like they hit a MASSIVE delay at some point, as the renovations went from opening early next year to the end of next year, and Angola was pushed back to 2025 (many of the others slipped by a quarter or two as well).  So much for having the bulk of the system back online for the summer travel season next year.

That does seem to be the case, which is a bummer. Especially for Angola, which is the only service area west of Buffalo in either direction. I'm also curious what happened to "no two consecutive areas closed" with both Mohawk and Guilderland being closed. With Modena seemingly being restrooms and fuel only while waiting for Ramapo to reopen, New Baltimore is the only full size east/southbound service area open east of Clifton Springs (which is just insane for a 300+ mile stretch of toll highway)!
Blackmailing governor for the bailout package they did not get?
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on December 03, 2023, 02:41:08 PM
Quote from: kalvado on December 02, 2023, 09:37:50 PM
Quote from: vdeane on December 02, 2023, 09:27:57 PM
As for the distribution, there seems to be a thought of "bigger service areas leaving a metro area, smaller ones further into the journey" for whatever reason.  It's not even a recent thought, given that Ardsley exists and has no SB counterpart.  This is visible even in NYSDOT rest areas; see Clifton Park (no SB counterpart) and the Adirondack Welcome Center (bigger and more modern than Glens Falls SB).

It probably makes sense if you are looking at traffic numbers only. But I am not likely to stop other than for gas if I am within an hour from the origin city. It's long haul traffic who needs these services. I can see a stop "I am finally out of NYC mess" being popular, but not for other upstate cities.

It's definitely not based on roadway traffic volume, as Seneca is only a level 2 despite being on the busiest section between Buffalo and Albany. It does make a little more sense when thinking of it in terms of travelers leaving a metro area (Clifton Springs does seem to be notably busier than Port Byron, for example) but the problem is that through traffic doesn't always tail off the further you get from a metro area, especially when you're approaching an even bigger one. I am intrigued by the line of thinking that most travelers aren't looking to make a stop as they approach a large city. While there are a number of good reasons why that could be (the upcoming city is their destination, they're making other stops in the area anyways, they're switching to a different route like I-81 or the Northway, etc.), it seems to ignore travelers on longer cross-state or multi-state trips.


With all that in mind, while I would have obviously preferred for all areas to be level 3, I think the smaller ones can be justified with the following exceptions:
1) Chittenango, as discussed in my previous post
2) The three consecutive level 2's east of Utica (ironically, if Utica got the "major city" treatment, both this and Chittenango would be solved!)
3) Junius Ponds and Seneca both being level 2. Warners is too close to Syracuse to be the only level 3 between Syracuse and Rochester. If there can only be one larger one, it should have been Junius Ponds, not Warners
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on December 03, 2023, 02:50:02 PM
Quote from: webny99 on December 03, 2023, 02:11:00 PM
That does seem to be the case, which is a bummer. Especially for Angola, which is the only service area west of Buffalo in either direction. I'm also curious what happened to "no two consecutive areas closed" with both Mohawk and Guilderland being closed. With Modena seemingly being restrooms and fuel only while waiting for Ramapo to reopen, New Baltimore is the only full size east/southbound service area open east of Clifton Springs (which is just insane for a 300+ mile stretch of toll highway)!
Mohawk isn't closed.  Are you thinking of Pattersonville on the other side?

The disparity between directions is interest.  North/westbound has 11 "level 3" service areas.  South/eastbound only has 8.  They've also been prioritizing north/westbound in terms of "upgrading", with every single one either reopened or currently closed; the three that have not yet started are all in the south/eastbound direction.  DeWitt will probably close soon, with both Oneida and Port Byron still set to reopen this winter, while Modena will be the last old one still standing.

It will be interesting to watch Reddit to see if the complaints over the new service areas spread east and south.  The Capital District and NYC have been spared the worst of it so far, but with a good chunk of the I-87 service areas now set to be closed through the next summer travel season, and Guilderland being the first "level 2" to reopen east of the Adirondacks, the crunch will be felt.

Quote from: webny99 on December 03, 2023, 02:41:08 PM
Quote from: kalvado on December 02, 2023, 09:37:50 PM
Quote from: vdeane on December 02, 2023, 09:27:57 PM
As for the distribution, there seems to be a thought of "bigger service areas leaving a metro area, smaller ones further into the journey" for whatever reason.  It's not even a recent thought, given that Ardsley exists and has no SB counterpart.  This is visible even in NYSDOT rest areas; see Clifton Park (no SB counterpart) and the Adirondack Welcome Center (bigger and more modern than Glens Falls SB).

It probably makes sense if you are looking at traffic numbers only. But I am not likely to stop other than for gas if I am within an hour from the origin city. It's long haul traffic who needs these services. I can see a stop "I am finally out of NYC mess" being popular, but not for other upstate cities.

It's definitely not based on roadway traffic volume, as Seneca is only a level 2 despite being on the busiest section between Buffalo and Albany. It does make a little more sense when thinking of it in terms of travelers leaving a metro area (Clifton Springs does seem to be notably busier than Port Byron, for example) but the problem is that through traffic doesn't always tail off the further you get from a metro area, especially when you're approaching an even bigger one. I am intrigued by the line of thinking that most travelers aren't looking to make a stop as they approach a large city. While there are a number of good reasons why that could be (the upcoming city is their destination, they're making other stops in the area anyways, they're switching to a different route like I-81 or the Northway, etc.), it seems to ignore travelers on longer cross-state or multi-state trips.


With all that in mind, while I would have obviously preferred for all areas to be level 3, I think the smaller ones can be justified with the following exceptions:
1) Chittenango, as discussed in my previous post
2) The three consecutive level 2's east of Utica (ironically, if Utica got the "major city" treatment, both this and Chittenango would be solved!)
3) Junius Ponds and Seneca both being level 2. Warners is too close to Syracuse to be the only level 3 between Syracuse and Rochester. If there can only be one larger one, it should have been Junius Ponds, not Warners
Between this and the way the AET billing works, I think it's safe to say that the Thruway doesn't care about cross-state travelers at all.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on December 03, 2023, 03:20:24 PM
Quote from: vdeane on December 03, 2023, 02:50:02 PM
Quote from: webny99 on December 03, 2023, 02:11:00 PM
That does seem to be the case, which is a bummer. Especially for Angola, which is the only service area west of Buffalo in either direction. I'm also curious what happened to "no two consecutive areas closed" with both Mohawk and Guilderland being closed. With Modena seemingly being restrooms and fuel only while waiting for Ramapo to reopen, New Baltimore is the only full size east/southbound service area open east of Clifton Springs (which is just insane for a 300+ mile stretch of toll highway)!
Mohawk isn't closed.  Are you thinking of Pattersonville on the other side?

Whoops, apparently just a misreading of the graphic. I see now that the areas still marked as "Phase 2" are the ones that haven't started yet. So much for my statistic, but it is still notable that SB has no areas with food open south of New Baltimore.


Quote from: vdeane on December 03, 2023, 02:50:02 PM
The disparity between directions is interest.  North/westbound has 11 "level 3" service areas.  South/eastbound only has 8.  They've also been prioritizing north/westbound in terms of "upgrading", with every single one either reopened or currently closed; the three that have not yet started are all in the south/eastbound direction.  DeWitt will probably close soon, with both Oneida and Port Byron still set to reopen this winter, while Modena will be the last old one still standing.

In that light, it would seem that travelers from NYC are being prioritized - which, cynically, makes sense and would be far from the only statewide issue on which that's the case.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on December 03, 2023, 03:31:25 PM
Quote from: webny99 on December 03, 2023, 03:20:24 PM
Quote from: vdeane on December 03, 2023, 02:50:02 PM
Quote from: webny99 on December 03, 2023, 02:11:00 PM
That does seem to be the case, which is a bummer. Especially for Angola, which is the only service area west of Buffalo in either direction. I'm also curious what happened to "no two consecutive areas closed" with both Mohawk and Guilderland being closed. With Modena seemingly being restrooms and fuel only while waiting for Ramapo to reopen, New Baltimore is the only full size east/southbound service area open east of Clifton Springs (which is just insane for a 300+ mile stretch of toll highway)!
Mohawk isn't closed.  Are you thinking of Pattersonville on the other side?

Whoops, apparently just a misreading of the graphic. I see now that the areas still marked as "Phase 2" are the ones that haven't started yet. So much for my statistic, but it is still notable that SB has no areas with food open south of New Baltimore.
I stopped at DeWitt last week in part to take a look at what the remaining old ones are like now and noted that the convenience store does have the same food options as the Applegreen convenience stores.  There's hot dogs and pizza in the warmers and cold subs.  What's weird is that there are also frozen breakfast sandwiches; how is anyone supposed to eat those on the road?  You'd need a microwave to reheat them!  I can't imagine what they were thinking with that choice...

Quote
Quote from: vdeane on December 03, 2023, 02:50:02 PM
The disparity between directions is interest.  North/westbound has 11 "level 3" service areas.  South/eastbound only has 8.  They've also been prioritizing north/westbound in terms of "upgrading", with every single one either reopened or currently closed; the three that have not yet started are all in the south/eastbound direction.  DeWitt will probably close soon, with both Oneida and Port Byron still set to reopen this winter, while Modena will be the last old one still standing.

In that light, it would seem that travelers from NYC are being prioritized - which, cynically, makes sense and would be far from the only statewide issue on which that's the case.
The thing is, all those travelers from NYC still have to make the return journey, so I still don't get the asymmetry.  It does explain why everything on I-87 will be "level 3" while I-90 mostly isn't except near Buffalo.  Also why they waited so long to start with many of those.  It looks like they thought they could plow through the four renovations quick this winter only to discover that they can't.

It would be interesting to see if the traffic levels utilizing each service area was driven significantly by what food options were available in addition to location.  If it was, it could meant that some of the calculations were off.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on December 03, 2023, 04:05:29 PM
Quote from: vdeane on December 03, 2023, 03:31:25 PM
I stopped at DeWitt last week in part to take a look at what the remaining old ones are like now and noted that the convenience store does have the same food options as the Applegreen convenience stores.  There's hot dogs and pizza in the warmers and cold subs.  What's weird is that there are also frozen breakfast sandwiches; how is anyone supposed to eat those on the road?  You'd need a microwave to reheat them!  I can't imagine what they were thinking with that choice...

Good to know that Applegreen has some hot food options as that could come in handy at the areas with fewer food options. Frozen breakfast sandwiches are an odd choice as it seems like a stretch that people would buy them to save for the next day (or necessarily be prepared with a cooler to store them), but truckers may have their own cold storage and/or microwave.



Quote from: vdeane on December 03, 2023, 03:31:25 PM
Quote from: webny99 on December 03, 2023, 03:20:24 PM
In that light, it would seem that travelers from NYC are being prioritized - which, cynically, makes sense and would be far from the only statewide issue on which that's the case.
The thing is, all those travelers from NYC still have to make the return journey, so I still don't get the asymmetry.  It does explain why everything on I-87 will be "level 3" while I-90 mostly isn't except near Buffalo.  Also why they waited so long to start with many of those.  It looks like they thought they could plow through the four renovations quick this winter only to discover that they can't.

It seems more like an extension of the "larger plazas heading outbound from large cities" concept, but magnified for the NYC area. One of the three extras is Ardsley, and the other two are the first two west of Albany.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on December 03, 2023, 04:08:30 PM
Quote from: webny99 on December 03, 2023, 04:05:29 PM
Quote from: vdeane on December 03, 2023, 03:31:25 PM
I stopped at DeWitt last week in part to take a look at what the remaining old ones are like now and noted that the convenience store does have the same food options as the Applegreen convenience stores.  There's hot dogs and pizza in the warmers and cold subs.  What's weird is that there are also frozen breakfast sandwiches; how is anyone supposed to eat those on the road?  You'd need a microwave to reheat them!  I can't imagine what they were thinking with that choice...

Good to know that Applegreen has some hot food options as that could come in handy at the areas with fewer food options. Frozen breakfast sandwiches are an odd choice as it seems like a stretch that people would buy them to save for the next day (or necessarily be prepared with a cooler to store them), but truckers may have their own cold storage and/or microwave.

Quote from: vdeane on December 03, 2023, 03:31:25 PM
Quote from: webny99 on December 03, 2023, 03:20:24 PM
In that light, it would seem that travelers from NYC are being prioritized - which, cynically, makes sense and would be far from the only statewide issue on which that's the case.
The thing is, all those travelers from NYC still have to make the return journey, so I still don't get the asymmetry.  It does explain why everything on I-87 will be "level 3" while I-90 mostly isn't except near Buffalo.  Also why they waited so long to start with many of those.  It looks like they thought they could plow through the four renovations quick this winter only to discover that they can't.

Most likely just an extension of the "larger plazas heading outbound from large cities" concept. One of the three extras is Ardsley, and the other two are the first two west of Albany.
I actually thought that two past Albany are for NYCers going to Adirondack, last meal before the plunge 8nto the wild.
CFA also sort of aligns with NYCers outbound on Friday and Saturday, inbound Sunday IIRC
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: seicer on December 03, 2023, 07:35:05 PM
It's interesting how many varied designs there are out there considering the rebuild was supposed to streamline the design and implementation of the new plazas. At most, two or three varieties should have been considered, but instead, we have six designs. Would it have been that difficult to implement Site Level 1 with 1-2 food concepts and C-store; Site Level 2 with 2-3 food concepts and C-store; and Site Level 3 with 6-8 food concepts, a C-store, and driver amenities (e.g. showers)? Each design could be tweaked for the region they are in.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on December 03, 2023, 07:38:49 PM
Quote from: seicer on December 03, 2023, 07:35:05 PM
It's interesting how many varied designs there are out there considering the rebuild was supposed to streamline the design and implementation of the new plazas. At most, two or three varieties should have been considered, but instead, we have six designs. Would it have been that difficult to implement Site Level 1 with 1-2 food concepts and C-store; Site Level 2 with 2-3 food concepts and C-store; and Site Level 3 with 6-8 food concepts, a C-store, and driver amenities (e.g. showers)? Each design could be tweaked for the region they are in.
Sounds like they did 4 levels as you described
(https://www.thruway.ny.gov/travelers/travelplazas/service-area-project/img/sa-levels.png)
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on December 03, 2023, 09:12:33 PM
Quote from: webny99 on December 03, 2023, 04:05:29 PM
Quote from: vdeane on December 03, 2023, 03:31:25 PM
I stopped at DeWitt last week in part to take a look at what the remaining old ones are like now and noted that the convenience store does have the same food options as the Applegreen convenience stores.  There's hot dogs and pizza in the warmers and cold subs.  What's weird is that there are also frozen breakfast sandwiches; how is anyone supposed to eat those on the road?  You'd need a microwave to reheat them!  I can't imagine what they were thinking with that choice...

Good to know that Applegreen has some hot food options as that could come in handy at the areas with fewer food options. Frozen breakfast sandwiches are an odd choice as it seems like a stretch that people would buy them to save for the next day (or necessarily be prepared with a cooler to store them), but truckers may have their own cold storage and/or microwave.



Quote from: vdeane on December 03, 2023, 03:31:25 PM
Quote from: webny99 on December 03, 2023, 03:20:24 PM
In that light, it would seem that travelers from NYC are being prioritized - which, cynically, makes sense and would be far from the only statewide issue on which that's the case.
The thing is, all those travelers from NYC still have to make the return journey, so I still don't get the asymmetry.  It does explain why everything on I-87 will be "level 3" while I-90 mostly isn't except near Buffalo.  Also why they waited so long to start with many of those.  It looks like they thought they could plow through the four renovations quick this winter only to discover that they can't.

It seems more like an extension of the "larger plazas heading outbound from large cities" concept, but magnified for the NYC area. One of the three extras is Ardsley, and the other two are the first two west of Albany.
That's a good point.  I wasn't thinking of commercial drivers.  Unfortunately, Schuyler lacks the food items at its Applegreen store (aside from the frozen breakfast sandwiches), but the others have them.

Interesting in mentioning Ardsley, since it's an outlier with no SB counterpart at all.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on December 03, 2023, 09:41:37 PM
Quote from: kalvado on December 03, 2023, 04:08:30 PM
I actually thought that two past Albany are for NYCers going to Adirondack, last meal before the plunge 8nto the wild.
CFA also sort of aligns with NYCers outbound on Friday and Saturday, inbound Sunday IIRC

That would make sense for the ones west of Albany. Less so beyond there, as most NYC<>WNY traffic wouldn't be using the Thruway the whole way.


Quote from: vdeane on December 03, 2023, 09:12:33 PM
Interesting in mentioning Ardsley, since it's an outlier with no SB counterpart at all.

Well, right. I was just looking at NB/WB "level 3" areas that don't have a SB/EB counterpart, and that definitely makes it one. :D  (It's also why NB/WB has one more overall, 15 to 14)
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: seicer on December 03, 2023, 09:43:58 PM
Quote from: kalvado on December 03, 2023, 07:38:49 PM
Quote from: seicer on December 03, 2023, 07:35:05 PM
It's interesting how many varied designs there are out there considering the rebuild was supposed to streamline the design and implementation of the new plazas. At most, two or three varieties should have been considered, but instead, we have six designs. Would it have been that difficult to implement Site Level 1 with 1-2 food concepts and C-store; Site Level 2 with 2-3 food concepts and C-store; and Site Level 3 with 6-8 food concepts, a C-store, and driver amenities (e.g. showers)? Each design could be tweaked for the region they are in.
Sounds like they did 4 levels as you described
(https://www.thruway.ny.gov/travelers/travelplazas/service-area-project/img/sa-levels.png)

The graphic you showed indicates 6 levels: 1, 2, 2A, 2B, 3, 3B
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: SignBridge on December 03, 2023, 09:48:31 PM
Four levels in terms of the number of food concept stores at the facility. 1,2,3 and 6-8. The other two categories just add commercial driver amenities to two of the basic four levels.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: seicer on December 03, 2023, 10:06:02 PM
I went to one of the new 3B service areas (I believe it was a 3B) and was impressed. The commercial driver amenities are nice but not well advertised, and I'm not sure how well they are used. I spent some time there showering and then getting work done thanks to their tables, generous charging plugs, and WiFi - but I was the only one there on a Saturday night. (In comparison, the Love's one exit over had a 3-hour wait for a shower at nearly twice the price.)
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on December 03, 2023, 10:18:47 PM
Quote from: seicer on December 03, 2023, 09:43:58 PM
Quote from: kalvado on December 03, 2023, 07:38:49 PM
Quote from: seicer on December 03, 2023, 07:35:05 PM
It's interesting how many varied designs there are out there considering the rebuild was supposed to streamline the design and implementation of the new plazas. At most, two or three varieties should have been considered, but instead, we have six designs. Would it have been that difficult to implement Site Level 1 with 1-2 food concepts and C-store; Site Level 2 with 2-3 food concepts and C-store; and Site Level 3 with 6-8 food concepts, a C-store, and driver amenities (e.g. showers)? Each design could be tweaked for the region they are in.
Sounds like they did 4 levels as you described
(https://www.thruway.ny.gov/travelers/travelplazas/service-area-project/img/sa-levels.png)

The graphic you showed indicates 6 levels: 1, 2, 2A, 2B, 3, 3B
2a and 2b happen to have same area. I bet some walls are added to redistribute footprint between different areas. Same with 3 and 3b.
> Each design could be tweaked for the region they are in.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: froggie on December 03, 2023, 10:35:53 PM
Quote from: kalvado on December 03, 2023, 04:08:30 PM
I actually thought that two past Albany are for NYCers going to Adirondack, last meal before the plunge 8nto the wild.
CFA also sort of aligns with NYCers outbound on Friday and Saturday, inbound Sunday IIRC

I doubt this is the case.  The majority of Adirondack recreational opportunities/destinations (especially winter skiing) are off the Northway.  The only noteworthy destination in the 'Dacks where folks would be taking the Thruway west of Albany instead of the Northway is Old Forge.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on December 04, 2023, 05:56:46 AM
Quote from: froggie on December 03, 2023, 10:35:53 PM
Quote from: kalvado on December 03, 2023, 04:08:30 PM
I actually thought that two past Albany are for NYCers going to Adirondack, last meal before the plunge 8nto the wild.
CFA also sort of aligns with NYCers outbound on Friday and Saturday, inbound Sunday IIRC

I doubt this is the case.  The majority of Adirondack recreational opportunities/destinations (especially winter skiing) are off the Northway.  The only noteworthy destination in the 'Dacks where folks would be taking the Thruway west of Albany instead of the Northway is Old Forge.
Skiing - I agree. In summer 30 through Amsterdam is picking up.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Jim on December 04, 2023, 07:32:39 AM
Quote from: kalvado on December 04, 2023, 05:56:46 AM
Skiing - I agree. In summer 30 through Amsterdam is picking up.

And unfortunately, the recent lane reduction on the NY 30 NB bridge has made backups much worse at busy times.  Similarly, the flyover ramp carrying NB traffic from Church St. to Market St., now striped as 1 lane instead of 2, is no longer an opportunity for cars to get around trucks that have a lot of trouble accelerating up the steep hill after the lights at the NY 5 arterial or High St.  (apologies for the diversion from the thread topic)
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on December 04, 2023, 08:06:21 AM
Quote from: Jim on December 04, 2023, 07:32:39 AM
Quote from: kalvado on December 04, 2023, 05:56:46 AM
Skiing - I agree. In summer 30 through Amsterdam is picking up.

And unfortunately, the recent lane reduction on the NY 30 NB bridge has made backups much worse at busy times.  Similarly, the flyover ramp carrying NB traffic from Church St. to Market St., now striped as 1 lane instead of 2, is no longer an opportunity for cars to get around trucks that have a lot of trouble accelerating up the steep hill after the lights at the NY 5 arterial or High St.  (apologies for the diversion from the thread topic)
I wonder if funding for that project was advocated by a prominent area politician, maybe a senator...
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on December 04, 2023, 12:45:07 PM
Quote from: webny99 on December 03, 2023, 09:41:37 PM
Quote from: kalvado on December 03, 2023, 04:08:30 PM
I actually thought that two past Albany are for NYCers going to Adirondack, last meal before the plunge 8nto the wild.
CFA also sort of aligns with NYCers outbound on Friday and Saturday, inbound Sunday IIRC

That would make sense for the ones west of Albany. Less so beyond there, as most NYC<>WNY traffic wouldn't be using the Thruway the whole way.


Quote from: vdeane on December 03, 2023, 09:12:33 PM
Interesting in mentioning Ardsley, since it's an outlier with no SB counterpart at all.

Well, right. I was just looking at NB/WB "level 3" areas that don't have a SB/EB counterpart, and that definitely makes it one. :D  (It's also why NB/WB has one more overall, 15 to 14)

It's interesting how Ardsley has no partner at all.  Guilderland is the same way (being between New Baltimore and the Iroquois/Indian Castle pair makes it obvious).  Also either Seneca or Schuyler depending on how you pair the service areas between said pair and Scottsville/Ontario, but not both.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on December 04, 2023, 04:08:08 PM
Quote from: vdeane on December 04, 2023, 12:45:07 PM
Quote from: webny99 on December 03, 2023, 09:41:37 PM

Quote from: vdeane on December 03, 2023, 09:12:33 PM
Interesting in mentioning Ardsley, since it's an outlier with no SB counterpart at all.

Well, right. I was just looking at NB/WB "level 3" areas that don't have a SB/EB counterpart, and that definitely makes it one. :D  (It's also why NB/WB has one more overall, 15 to 14)

It's interesting how Ardsley has no partner at all.  Guilderland is the same way (being between New Baltimore and the Iroquois/Indian Castle pair makes it obvious).  Also either Seneca or Schuyler depending on how you pair the service areas between said pair and Scottsville/Ontario, but not both.

Yeah, the offsets are weird between Albany and Utica, but it does even out to three per direction once you account for Guilderland and Schuyler.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: MASTERNC on December 04, 2023, 04:39:27 PM
I'm curious as to how the Angola plaza will be set up.  Will it still be in the median?  The exterior rendering looks like a single-direction building next to a parking lot, and there is going to be a drive-thru Starbucks (unless there is a smaller kiosk building on each side).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: cl94 on December 04, 2023, 05:22:15 PM
Quote from: MASTERNC on December 04, 2023, 04:39:27 PM
I'm curious as to how the Angola plaza will be set up.  Will it still be in the median?  The exterior rendering looks like a single-direction building next to a parking lot, and there is going to be a drive-thru Starbucks (unless there is a smaller kiosk building on each side).

The renderings are sample renderings. From what I could ascertain, Angola isn't even being fully demolished. It will remain in the median because major work would be required to build outside buildings.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on December 04, 2023, 09:06:13 PM
Quote from: webny99 on December 04, 2023, 04:08:08 PM
Quote from: vdeane on December 04, 2023, 12:45:07 PM
Quote from: webny99 on December 03, 2023, 09:41:37 PM

Quote from: vdeane on December 03, 2023, 09:12:33 PM
Interesting in mentioning Ardsley, since it's an outlier with no SB counterpart at all.

Well, right. I was just looking at NB/WB "level 3" areas that don't have a SB/EB counterpart, and that definitely makes it one. :D  (It's also why NB/WB has one more overall, 15 to 14)

It's interesting how Ardsley has no partner at all.  Guilderland is the same way (being between New Baltimore and the Iroquois/Indian Castle pair makes it obvious).  Also either Seneca or Schuyler depending on how you pair the service areas between said pair and Scottsville/Ontario, but not both.

Yeah, the offsets are weird between Albany and Utica, but it does even out to three per direction once you account for Guilderland and Schuyler.
I wasn't referring to differences in count but rather the oddity of the lack of counterparts for those.  Guilderland is obviously an outlier as there is no service area between New Baltimore and Mohawk/Pattersonville in the other direction.  Finding the other outlier is trickier... if you assume the pairs are Schuyler/Oneida, Chittenango/DeWitt, Warners/Port Byron, and Junius Ponds/Clifton Springs, the outlier is Seneca, but if you assume the pairs are Seneca/Clifton Springs, Junius Ponds/Port Byron, Warners/DeWitt, and Chittenango/Oneida, the outlier is Schuyler.

Thinking about it, Schuyler might be more natural than Seneca to think of as the outlier due to how unnaturally close it is to Iroquois, something Guilderland shares with Mohawk.

Quote from: cl94 on December 04, 2023, 05:22:15 PM
Quote from: MASTERNC on December 04, 2023, 04:39:27 PM
I'm curious as to how the Angola plaza will be set up.  Will it still be in the median?  The exterior rendering looks like a single-direction building next to a parking lot, and there is going to be a drive-thru Starbucks (unless there is a smaller kiosk building on each side).

The renderings are sample renderings. From what I could ascertain, Angola isn't even being fully demolished. It will remain in the median because major work would be required to build outside buildings.
Angola isn't one of the four being renovated... those are Sloatsburg, Malden, Pattersonville, and Ontario.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on December 04, 2023, 09:31:09 PM
Quote from: vdeane on December 04, 2023, 09:06:13 PM
Quote from: webny99 on December 04, 2023, 04:08:08 PM
Quote from: vdeane on December 04, 2023, 12:45:07 PM
Quote from: webny99 on December 03, 2023, 09:41:37 PM

Quote from: vdeane on December 03, 2023, 09:12:33 PM
Interesting in mentioning Ardsley, since it's an outlier with no SB counterpart at all.

Well, right. I was just looking at NB/WB "level 3" areas that don't have a SB/EB counterpart, and that definitely makes it one. :D  (It's also why NB/WB has one more overall, 15 to 14)

It's interesting how Ardsley has no partner at all.  Guilderland is the same way (being between New Baltimore and the Iroquois/Indian Castle pair makes it obvious).  Also either Seneca or Schuyler depending on how you pair the service areas between said pair and Scottsville/Ontario, but not both.

Yeah, the offsets are weird between Albany and Utica, but it does even out to three per direction once you account for Guilderland and Schuyler.
I wasn't referring to differences in count but rather the oddity of the lack of counterparts for those.  Guilderland is obviously an outlier as there is no service area between New Baltimore and Mohawk/Pattersonville in the other direction.  Finding the other outlier is trickier... if you assume the pairs are Schuyler/Oneida, Chittenango/DeWitt, Warners/Port Byron, and Junius Ponds/Clifton Springs, the outlier is Seneca, but if you assume the pairs are Seneca/Clifton Springs, Junius Ponds/Port Byron, Warners/DeWitt, and Chittenango/Oneida, the outlier is Schuyler.

Yep, I get that, and I tend to take the latter view. My point was just that Guilderland and Schuyler are a bit like counterparts to one another, even despite there being two clear pairs in between them, in that they're both the oddball in their respective directions between Albany and Utica. And, because they exist on a long stretch with no service area in the other direction, they're quite close to Mohawk and Iroquois respectively, at least by Thruway standards.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on December 10, 2023, 01:00:30 PM
Quote from: webny99 on September 10, 2023, 10:27:12 PM
Quote from: webny99 on September 03, 2023, 04:22:52 PM
there in my inbox on Friday afternoon was an Excel link to the raw traffic count data for every mainline gantry on the Thruway system from Jan 1, 2022 to July 31, 2023. The data for each gantry is organized in a single column by lane, so parsing through and converting it to a more usable format takes some doing, but is manageable now that I've got the hang of it. ...

Update: I'm finished with the initial AADT data compilation for all Thruway gantries between the PA line at Ripley and the MA line at Canaan. This includes all mainline gantries on I-90, plus the two gantries on I-87 that serve as an east-west Thruway alternate via the Berkshire Spur. The data from the gantry at MM 431.2 (former Lackawanna Toll Barrier) was missing several hundred data points, so I've submitted a follow-up FOIL request and marked it "Pending" below until I can obtain complete data.


RouteMile MarkerSegment Description2022 AADT*High ValueHigh Value Date
I-90488.4Exit 61 (Ripley) to 60 (NY394)2024834913Fri, July 1
I-90431.2Exit 56 (NY179) to 55 (US219)PendingPendingPending
I-90418.2Exit 50 (I-290) to 49 (NY78)5385176194Fri, Aug 12
I-90379.1Exit 48 (NY98) to 47 (I-490)3998261040Fri, Aug 12
I-90369.3Exit 47 (I-490) to 46 (I-390)2933847649Fri, July 1
I-90358.2Exit 46 (I-390) to 45 (I-490)3147949357Fri, July 1
I-90348.0Exit 45 (I-490) to 44 (NY332)6020187098Fri, July 1
I-90340.5Exit 44 (NY332) to 43 (NY21)4326566300Fri, July 1
I-90294.6Exit 40 (NY34) to 39 (I-690)3760260703Fri, July 1
I-90288.8Exit 39 (I-690) to 38 (CR57)3200949927Fri, July 1
I-90283.4Exit 37 (ElecPkwy) to 36 (I-81)3520253106Fri, July 1
I-90281.3Exit 36 (I-81) to 35 (NY298)2875742811Fri, Oct 7
I-90277.5Exit 35 (NY298) to 34A (I-481)2600139619Fri, July 1
I-90276.1Exit 34A (I-481) to 34 (NY13)3823659912Fri, Sept 2
I-90161.0Exit 26 (I-890) to 25A (I-88)3023345577Fri, July 1
I-90157.8Exit 25A (I-88) to 25 (I-890)4364864374Fri, Oct 7
I-90149.6Exit 25 (I-890) to 24 (I-87/I-90)76517103210Fri, Oct 7
I-87145.6Exit 24 (I-90/I-87) to 23 (I-787)4822471674Fri, July 1
I-87139.7Exit 23 (I-787) to 22 (NY144)4956176145Fri, July 1
I-90B17.7Exit B2 (TacPkwy) to B3 (NY22)2490342867Sun, Aug 14

*2022 AADT values are raw 365-day averages with exceptions for Thruway closures and extreme weather events. Only full and complete days of data were used. Further details available upon request.

Upon further reflection, I am calling into question the two data points in red. I think there's a significant chance that "free" traffic between I-88 and Exit 24 is being completely ignored by the toll gantries, or automatically deducted from the counts.

This would be consistent with both data points being considerably lower than NYSDOT's estimates of 49k and 86k respectively. There's also, as shown above, only a 14k gap between 25-25A (44k) and 25A-26 (30k), while the I-88 ramp volumes would suggest closer to a 20k gap. And finally, the 44k figure would suggest that 25-25A is almost exactly as busy as 43-44 southeast of Rochester which seems like a BIG stretch based on my experience with both segments, plus 25-25A being busy enough for six lanes and located well within the Albany/Schenectady urbanized area.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on December 10, 2023, 03:21:02 PM
24-25A isn't ignored by the gantries; I get a $0.00 charge on my E-ZPass statement whenever I travel it.  Notably it's a single line despite being two gantries, proving that the Thruway can make everyone's life easier by grouping everything, they just refuse to do so.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on December 16, 2023, 03:43:04 PM
Looks like some Assembly members are taking aim at CFA on the Thruway.  There's now a bill that would require service area restaurants to be open seven days a week.

https://www.rochesterfirst.com/news/bill-would-require-restaurants-to-open-sundays-on-new-york-state-thruway-chick-fil-a/
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: jeffandnicole on December 16, 2023, 06:02:45 PM
Quote from: vdeane on December 16, 2023, 03:43:04 PM
Looks like some Assembly members are taking aim at CFA on the Thruway.  There's now a bill that would require service area restaurants to be open seven days a week.

https://www.rochesterfirst.com/news/bill-would-require-restaurants-to-open-sundays-on-new-york-state-thruway-chick-fil-a/

Per the article:

QuoteThe change would apply to future contracts for all food concessions at facilities owned by the New York State Thruway Authority.

The current contract is with Applegreen - and that runs 33 years (until about 2050 or so).  I didn't see anything after a quick web search if they have individual contracts with Chick-fil-a that are shorter terms, but for at least the current restaurants, they're not going to be forced to open on Sundays or terminate their contract early.  So it's really a law for the next generation. 


Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on December 16, 2023, 09:01:38 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 16, 2023, 06:02:45 PM
Quote from: vdeane on December 16, 2023, 03:43:04 PM
Looks like some Assembly members are taking aim at CFA on the Thruway.  There's now a bill that would require service area restaurants to be open seven days a week.

https://www.rochesterfirst.com/news/bill-would-require-restaurants-to-open-sundays-on-new-york-state-thruway-chick-fil-a/

Per the article:

QuoteThe change would apply to future contracts for all food concessions at facilities owned by the New York State Thruway Authority.

The current contract is with Applegreen - and that runs 33 years (until about 2050 or so).  I didn't see anything after a quick web search if they have individual contracts with Chick-fil-a that are shorter terms, but for at least the current restaurants, they're not going to be forced to open on Sundays or terminate their contract early.  So it's really a law for the next generation. 



True, but the bill does mention CFA specifically and fixing what comes later is better than nothing.  Incidentally, I'm not sure what the lease terms are for the food vendors, but they've changed before, and not just with service area rebuilds.  Chittenango was Sbarro/Dunkin Donuts before it was Sbarro/Starbucks (now, of course, it's Starbucks/CFA).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: jmacswimmer on January 18, 2024, 10:15:03 AM
The Oneida service area quietly reopened last week:

https://www.thruway.ny.gov/news/pressrel/2024/01/2024-01-10-oneida-opens.html

Not noted in the press release, but another article I read (can't find it now) mentioned Warners & Port Byron being on track to reopen in the spring, at which point DeWitt (one of the 3 remaining untouched plazas) would be able to close.

On a nitpicking level, Oneida is deviating from what appeared to be the formula of burger+chicken+coffee at the 2A-level plazas - there is a BK & Starbucks, but instead of a chicken joint there will be a Panera here (which I think had only appeared at 1 or 2 3-level plazas so far).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: D-Dey65 on January 31, 2024, 01:32:26 PM
I forgot where I read this, but I recently learned that the Thruway Authority was adding crossing gates at off-ramps in case they need to close the road in case of blizzards. I guess it won't be long before we start seeing "Closed When Flashing" signs along the thruway, like in the Northern Rockies and Great Plains.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/70/I-29_US81_North_-_Exit_1_-_Richland_CR1E_%2843656595331%29.jpg/640px-I-29_US81_North_-_Exit_1_-_Richland_CR1E_%2843656595331%29.jpg (https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/70/I-29_US81_North_-_Exit_1_-_Richland_CR1E_%2843656595331%29.jpg/640px-I-29_US81_North_-_Exit_1_-_Richland_CR1E_%2843656595331%29.jpg)
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on January 31, 2024, 02:47:06 PM
Quote from: D-Dey65 on January 31, 2024, 01:32:26 PM
I forgot where I read this, but I recently learned that the Thruway Authority was adding crossing gates at off-ramps in case they need to close the road in case of blizzards. I guess it won't be long before we start seeing "Closed When Flashing" signs along the thruway, like in the Northern Rockies and Great Plains.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/70/I-29_US81_North_-_Exit_1_-_Richland_CR1E_%2843656595331%29.jpg/640px-I-29_US81_North_-_Exit_1_-_Richland_CR1E_%2843656595331%29.jpg (https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/70/I-29_US81_North_-_Exit_1_-_Richland_CR1E_%2843656595331%29.jpg/640px-I-29_US81_North_-_Exit_1_-_Richland_CR1E_%2843656595331%29.jpg)
Meh.  Typically will only be needed from Syracuse west.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: kalvado on January 31, 2024, 02:49:43 PM
Quote from: Rothman on January 31, 2024, 02:47:06 PM
Quote from: D-Dey65 on January 31, 2024, 01:32:26 PM
I forgot where I read this, but I recently learned that the Thruway Authority was adding crossing gates at off-ramps in case they need to close the road in case of blizzards. I guess it won't be long before we start seeing "Closed When Flashing" signs along the thruway, like in the Northern Rockies and Great Plains.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/70/I-29_US81_North_-_Exit_1_-_Richland_CR1E_%2843656595331%29.jpg/640px-I-29_US81_North_-_Exit_1_-_Richland_CR1E_%2843656595331%29.jpg (https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/70/I-29_US81_North_-_Exit_1_-_Richland_CR1E_%2843656595331%29.jpg/640px-I-29_US81_North_-_Exit_1_-_Richland_CR1E_%2843656595331%29.jpg)
Meh.  Typically will only be needed from Syracuse west.
I believe closer to NYC - shit can happen as well due to the ocean.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on January 31, 2024, 03:18:22 PM
Most recent closures have been west of Exit 46 (I-390) due to heavy lake effect snow off Lake Erie. Rochester to Utica gets lake effect off Lake Ontario, but rarely heavy enough for a duration that would require a full Thruway closure. It's the I-81 corridor from Pulaski to Watertown that gets the worst of it.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: froggie on January 31, 2024, 04:04:50 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 31, 2024, 03:18:22 PM
It's the I-81 corridor from Pulaski to Watertown that gets the worst of it.

I'd go all the way down to 481 on that assessment.  I've seen plenty of heavy lake-effect bands in Central Square and Cicero.  The right northwesterly wind will even drag it into Syracuse proper.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on January 31, 2024, 04:21:43 PM
Quote from: kalvado on January 31, 2024, 02:49:43 PM
Quote from: Rothman on January 31, 2024, 02:47:06 PM
Quote from: D-Dey65 on January 31, 2024, 01:32:26 PM
I forgot where I read this, but I recently learned that the Thruway Authority was adding crossing gates at off-ramps in case they need to close the road in case of blizzards. I guess it won't be long before we start seeing "Closed When Flashing" signs along the thruway, like in the Northern Rockies and Great Plains.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/70/I-29_US81_North_-_Exit_1_-_Richland_CR1E_%2843656595331%29.jpg/640px-I-29_US81_North_-_Exit_1_-_Richland_CR1E_%2843656595331%29.jpg (https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/70/I-29_US81_North_-_Exit_1_-_Richland_CR1E_%2843656595331%29.jpg/640px-I-29_US81_North_-_Exit_1_-_Richland_CR1E_%2843656595331%29.jpg)
Meh.  Typically will only be needed from Syracuse west.
I believe closer to NYC - shit can happen as well due to the ocean.
No.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on January 31, 2024, 04:22:11 PM
Quote from: froggie on January 31, 2024, 04:04:50 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 31, 2024, 03:18:22 PM
It's the I-81 corridor from Pulaski to Watertown that gets the worst of it.

I'd go all the way down to 481 on that assessment.  I've seen plenty of heavy lake-effect bands in Central Square and Cicero.  The right northwesterly wind will even drag it into Syracuse proper.
No.  Despite the fact Syracuse is, on average, the snowiest city of 100,000 people or more in the country, I-81 closures occur more north on the Tug Hill Plateau.

I concur with webny.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on January 31, 2024, 04:44:36 PM
Quote from: Rothman on January 31, 2024, 04:22:11 PM
Quote from: froggie on January 31, 2024, 04:04:50 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 31, 2024, 03:18:22 PM
It's the I-81 corridor from Pulaski to Watertown that gets the worst of it.

I'd go all the way down to 481 on that assessment.  I've seen plenty of heavy lake-effect bands in Central Square and Cicero.  The right northwesterly wind will even drag it into Syracuse proper.
No.  Despite the fact Syracuse is, on average, the snowiest city of 100,000 people or more in the country, I-81 closures occur more north on the Tug Hill Plateau.

I concur with webny.

It's fair to point out that lake effect bands can/do occur well south of Pulaski, but they are less likely to be of an intensity/duration that would cause an interstate closure.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on January 31, 2024, 04:59:27 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 31, 2024, 04:44:36 PM
Quote from: Rothman on January 31, 2024, 04:22:11 PM
Quote from: froggie on January 31, 2024, 04:04:50 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 31, 2024, 03:18:22 PM
It's the I-81 corridor from Pulaski to Watertown that gets the worst of it.

I'd go all the way down to 481 on that assessment.  I've seen plenty of heavy lake-effect bands in Central Square and Cicero.  The right northwesterly wind will even drag it into Syracuse proper.
No.  Despite the fact Syracuse is, on average, the snowiest city of 100,000 people or more in the country, I-81 closures occur more north on the Tug Hill Plateau.

I concur with webny.

It's fair to point out that lake effect bands can/do occur well south of Pulaski, but they are less likely to be of an intensity/duration that would cause an interstate closure.
No, it is not.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on January 31, 2024, 05:01:31 PM
Quote from: Rothman on January 31, 2024, 04:22:11 PM
I concur with webny.

Knew it was too good to be true.   :D
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Alps on January 31, 2024, 06:09:23 PM
Quote from: Rothman on January 31, 2024, 04:59:27 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 31, 2024, 04:44:36 PM
Quote from: Rothman on January 31, 2024, 04:22:11 PM
Quote from: froggie on January 31, 2024, 04:04:50 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 31, 2024, 03:18:22 PM
It's the I-81 corridor from Pulaski to Watertown that gets the worst of it.

I'd go all the way down to 481 on that assessment.  I've seen plenty of heavy lake-effect bands in Central Square and Cicero.  The right northwesterly wind will even drag it into Syracuse proper.
No.  Despite the fact Syracuse is, on average, the snowiest city of 100,000 people or more in the country, I-81 closures occur more north on the Tug Hill Plateau.

I concur with webny.

It's fair to point out that lake effect bands can/do occur well south of Pulaski, but they are less likely to be of an intensity/duration that would cause an interstate closure.
No, it is not.
Yes, it is.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on January 31, 2024, 08:26:10 PM
Also worth noting that lettered emergency detour routes for the Thruway only exist from Utica west.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Mr. Matté on February 01, 2024, 01:47:30 PM
Quote from: kalvado on January 31, 2024, 02:49:43 PM
Quote from: Rothman on January 31, 2024, 02:47:06 PM
Quote from: D-Dey65 on January 31, 2024, 01:32:26 PM
I forgot where I read this, but I recently learned that the Thruway Authority was adding crossing gates at off-ramps in case they need to close the road in case of blizzards. I guess it won't be long before we start seeing "Closed When Flashing" signs along the thruway, like in the Northern Rockies and Great Plains.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/70/I-29_US81_North_-_Exit_1_-_Richland_CR1E_%2843656595331%29.jpg/640px-I-29_US81_North_-_Exit_1_-_Richland_CR1E_%2843656595331%29.jpg (https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/70/I-29_US81_North_-_Exit_1_-_Richland_CR1E_%2843656595331%29.jpg/640px-I-29_US81_North_-_Exit_1_-_Richland_CR1E_%2843656595331%29.jpg)
Meh.  Typically will only be needed from Syracuse west.
I believe closer to NYC - shit can happen as well due to the ocean.

Out of curiosity, using the Wiki KML file for I-87 and Google Earth elevation profile, the lowest point along the Thruway is at about elev. 38 at the west end of the Tappan Zee. If the oceans are that high to warrant crossing gates, the whole area, NYC inclusive, is completely screwed and crossing gates would be the least of anyone's concerns.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: froggie on February 01, 2024, 02:10:03 PM
Quote from: Rothman on January 31, 2024, 04:22:11 PM
Quote from: froggie on January 31, 2024, 04:04:50 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 31, 2024, 03:18:22 PM
It's the I-81 corridor from Pulaski to Watertown that gets the worst of it.

I'd go all the way down to 481 on that assessment.  I've seen plenty of heavy lake-effect bands in Central Square and Cicero.  The right northwesterly wind will even drag it into Syracuse proper.
No.  Despite the fact Syracuse is, on average, the snowiest city of 100,000 people or more in the country, I-81 closures occur more north on the Tug Hill Plateau.

I concur with webny.


I'm not saying that Tug Hill isn't the worst.  My point was that I've seen enough south of Pulaski (especially during my wife's Syracuse days) that you could warrant installing gates at least down to Cicero, if not 481.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on February 01, 2024, 02:42:52 PM
Quote from: froggie on February 01, 2024, 02:10:03 PM
Quote from: Rothman on January 31, 2024, 04:22:11 PM
Quote from: froggie on January 31, 2024, 04:04:50 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 31, 2024, 03:18:22 PM
It's the I-81 corridor from Pulaski to Watertown that gets the worst of it.

I'd go all the way down to 481 on that assessment.  I've seen plenty of heavy lake-effect bands in Central Square and Cicero.  The right northwesterly wind will even drag it into Syracuse proper.
No.  Despite the fact Syracuse is, on average, the snowiest city of 100,000 people or more in the country, I-81 closures occur more north on the Tug Hill Plateau.

I concur with webny.


I'm not saying that Tug Hill isn't the worst.  My point was that I've seen enough south of Pulaski (especially during my wife's Syracuse days) that you could warrant installing gates at least down to Cicero, if not 481.
NYSDOT Region 3 has disagreed with you for years, then.

Also, it is appearing that the changes to the polar vortex due to climate change has lowered the amount of snow Syracuse has received over the past decade.  Snow totals have been far below average in the past bunch of years due to warmer air being sucked up futher north as the vortex wobbles.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on February 01, 2024, 03:18:59 PM
Warmer winters have definitely played a role, but I wonder how much the primary wind direction has impacted things too. Buffalo, and its Southtowns in particular, seem to have been getting worse in the last few years. A lack of northwest winds would explain both that AND the relative lack of heavy bands shifting south/east off Lake Ontario.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: shadyjay on February 01, 2024, 05:03:03 PM
I-84 in New York has gates as well and has for a few years now:
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.5084347,-73.6808073,3a,48.5y,158.12h,89.3t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sy6GvRa6rOaZtUMc-xQ6jOg!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3Dy6GvRa6rOaZtUMc-xQ6jOg%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D47.08044%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on February 01, 2024, 06:03:30 PM
Quote from: shadyjay on February 01, 2024, 05:03:03 PM
I-84 in New York has gates as well and has for a few years now:
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.5084347,-73.6808073,3a,48.5y,158.12h,89.3t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sy6GvRa6rOaZtUMc-xQ6jOg!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3Dy6GvRa6rOaZtUMc-xQ6jOg%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D47.08044%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu
Wonder if they've ever been used.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: jeffandnicole on February 01, 2024, 06:56:20 PM
Quote from: shadyjay on February 01, 2024, 05:03:03 PM
I-84 in New York has gates as well and has for a few years now:
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.5084347,-73.6808073,3a,48.5y,158.12h,89.3t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sy6GvRa6rOaZtUMc-xQ6jOg!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3Dy6GvRa6rOaZtUMc-xQ6jOg%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D47.08044%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu


That gate will stop someone driving on the shoulder, but for the other 3/4 of paved road, no one will have an issue going around it.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: shadyjay on February 01, 2024, 08:17:02 PM
Seems not every exit's got one.  This one is on the other side of the mountain and blocks the eastbound onramp. 

https://www.google.com/maps/@41.5281115,-73.8125848,3a,87.1y,192.12h,83.73t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sBnPIsd3Zv3uTPWld5uziHw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu

And... a story to go with them, from 2019:

https://www.recordonline.com/story/news/2019/10/16/gates-installed-at-entrance-ramps/2523874007/#:~:text=%E2%80%9CThe%20gates%20at%20the%20entrances,Department%20of%20Transportation%20(DOT).

(Gates were put up long after the New York Thruway shed itself of I-84 maintenance, so not entirely off-topic)
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: jeffandnicole on February 01, 2024, 09:22:41 PM
Quote from: shadyjay on February 01, 2024, 08:17:02 PM
Seems not every exit's got one.  This one is on the other side of the mountain and blocks the eastbound onramp. 

https://www.google.com/maps/@41.5281115,-73.8125848,3a,87.1y,192.12h,83.73t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sBnPIsd3Zv3uTPWld5uziHw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu

As written on the underside of the gate arm:  https://www.safe-crossings.com/
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: tmoore952 on February 01, 2024, 09:41:07 PM
Quote from: froggie on January 31, 2024, 04:04:50 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 31, 2024, 03:18:22 PM
It's the I-81 corridor from Pulaski to Watertown that gets the worst of it.

I'd go all the way down to 481 on that assessment.  I've seen plenty of heavy lake-effect bands in Central Square and Cicero.  The right northwesterly wind will even drag it into Syracuse proper.

I had to turn around one night (Dec 28th or 29th 1997) at the I-81 Cortland exit (NY 13) because of snow. I-81 was closed north of there. Was forced to go onto NY 13. I nearly got stuck trying to make a U-turn to get to the ramp for I-81 south. Silly me was trying to go to Ottawa (from Philadelphia), It got really bad very quickly going north from Binghamton.

So I drove back to Philadelphia. Got back there about 10 PM. That night the 11 PM Philadelphia local news showed footage of the snow in Syracuse-Cortland area.

I did eventually go to Ottawa a couple years later. This time in October.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: steviep24 on March 14, 2024, 04:28:41 PM
A major accident occurred this morning on the eastbound lanes between exits 46 and 45. A tandem tractor trailer struck a disabled car and then went off the bridge that carries the Thruway over Pittsford Mendon Center Rd. in the Rochester area.

https://www.whec.com/local/expect-delays-due-to-thruway-crash-on-i-90-eastbound/

Pittsford Mendon Center Rd is closed and the right eastbound lane on the Truway is closed at this time.

EDIT TO ADD: According to the NYS Thruway website the eastbound right lane between exits 46 and 45 is closed until further notice.

Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: Rothman on March 14, 2024, 04:55:39 PM
No more CDL for that driver.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on March 14, 2024, 08:57:09 PM
Quote from: steviep24 on March 14, 2024, 04:28:41 PM
A major accident occurred this morning on the eastbound lanes between exits 46 and 45. A tandem tractor trailer struck a disabled car and then went off the bridge that carries the Thruway over Pittsford Mendon Center Rd. in the Rochester area.

https://www.whec.com/local/expect-delays-due-to-thruway-crash-on-i-90-eastbound/

Pittsford Mendon Center Rd is closed and the right eastbound lane on the Truway is closed at this time.

EDIT TO ADD: According to the NYS Thruway website the eastbound right lane between exits 46 and 45 is closed until further notice.

Wow, those pictures are something. Hopefully it's not a long term closure because it's not going to be good if it's still closed during the eclipse. Hopefully the DOT recognizes that in time to do a traffic shift to the shoulder or something. The effects were already evident today with long backups on the Thruway and even some slowdowns entering the Thruway at Exit 45 (common during summer travel season but unusual this time of year).
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: webny99 on March 15, 2024, 05:16:10 PM
^ Seems to have been resolved at least temporarily. No backups today so presumably the lanes have been shifted or otherwise cleared for reopening.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: steviep24 on March 15, 2024, 06:34:32 PM
Quote from: webny99 on March 15, 2024, 05:16:10 PM
^ Seems to have been resolved at least temporarily. No backups today so presumably the lanes have been shifted or otherwise cleared for reopening.
Bridge railings were badly damaged from that. They may have installed a jersey barrier for now.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: vdeane on March 25, 2024, 09:32:23 PM
The Warners Service Area just reopened today.  Looking at the project map (https://www.thruway.ny.gov/travelers/travelplazas/service-area-project/locations.html), the contrast between I-90 (especially between Rochester and Amsterdam) and I-87 in terms of service availability is more stark.
Title: Re: New York State Thruway
Post by: deathtopumpkins on March 26, 2024, 02:40:11 PM
It seems NYSTA still hasn't gotten its act together re: toll processing.

Just had more tolls from my 9/20/23 drive finally post. Over 6 months later.

And there are overlapping/duplicate charges.

Between this mess and the toll hikes, no more Thruway for me.