News:

The AARoads Wiki is live! Come check it out!

Main Menu

New York

Started by Alex, August 18, 2009, 12:34:57 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

cl94

#650
Quote from: Buffaboy on December 05, 2014, 11:08:06 PM
Quote from: Bumppoman on December 05, 2014, 03:50:38 PM
The mile marker is temporary.  Similar permanent ones have gone up on I-81 just south of this location, but they look less cheap and better overall.

Additionally, regarding the cantilever, these have really come into vogue here in the Binghamton area over the last several months.  Nearly every sign in Broome County was replaced (sign bridge and all) over the summer, and quite a few full overhead gantries were replaced by these cantilever assemblies.  In a couple locations, it seems ill fitting, because the overhead gantry provided additional information that is now either absent or present only on locally installed ground mounted signs.

Are there any going up like these?

[Pic snipped]


Please tell me that's in Pennsylvania
Please note: All posts represent my personal opinions and do not represent those of my employer or any of its partner agencies.

Travel Mapping (updated weekly)


Buffaboy


Quote from: cl94 on December 05, 2014, 11:23:38 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on December 05, 2014, 11:08:06 PM
Quote from: Bumppoman on December 05, 2014, 03:50:38 PM
The mile marker is temporary.  Similar permanent ones have gone up on I-81 just south of this location, but they look less cheap and better overall.

Additionally, regarding the cantilever, these have really come into vogue here in the Binghamton area over the last several months.  Nearly every sign in Broome County was replaced (sign bridge and all) over the summer, and quite a few full overhead gantries were replaced by these cantilever assemblies.  In a couple locations, it seems ill fitting, because the overhead gantry provided additional information that is now either absent or present only on locally installed ground mounted signs.

Are there any going up like these?

[Pic snipped]


Please tell me that's in Pennsylvania

Actually it's in the UK, I found it on Google.
What's not to like about highways and bridges, intersections and interchanges, rails and planes?

My Wikipedia county SVG maps: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Buffaboy

Zeffy

Out of curiosity, does anyone here know if NYSDOT / NYSTA used to use Series E for their state route shields on overhead guide signs, or Series F? I've been toying around with some NYSDOT-style signs, and looking at pictures of older signs, part of me wants to think they used F, but it seems more likely that they would've used E. I can't find anything in the state supplement of the MUTCD either.
Life would be boring if we didn't take an offramp every once in a while

A weird combination of a weather geek, roadgeek, car enthusiast and furry mixed with many anxiety related disorders

J N Winkler

Quote from: Zeffy on December 06, 2014, 12:37:40 PMOut of curiosity, does anyone here know if NYSDOT / NYSTA used to use Series E for their state route shields on overhead guide signs, or Series F? I've been toying around with some NYSDOT-style signs, and looking at pictures of older signs, part of me wants to think they used F, but it seems more likely that they would've used E. I can't find anything in the state supplement of the MUTCD either.

NYSDOT used straight Series F in the past.  I don't think you would find anything in the state supplement because New York stopped being an own-manual state around the time it changed to Series D for guide-sign state route marker digits and stopped putting street names in boxed all-uppercase Series D.  You would have to go to the NYSMUTCD (last full revision in 1984, with updates available by subscription until the supplement was introduced) for illustrations showing that New York-specific stuff.

NYSDOT should also have had a companion volume similar to Standard Highway Signs, but I do not remember ever seeing it advertised for sale or anyone on any of the roadgeek forums bragging about having a copy.  My guess is that it is either a "secret" manual, like Missouri DOT's, or a collection of drawings kept in an office somewhere, like Nebraska DOR's.
"It is necessary to spend a hundred lire now to save a thousand lire later."--Piero Puricelli, explaining the need for a first-class road system to Benito Mussolini

vdeane

Quote from: Bumppoman on December 05, 2014, 03:50:38 PM
Additionally, regarding the cantilever, these have really come into vogue here in the Binghamton area over the last several months.  Nearly every sign in Broome County was replaced (sign bridge and all) over the summer, and quite a few full overhead gantries were replaced by these cantilever assemblies.  In a couple locations, it seems ill fitting, because the overhead gantry provided additional information that is now either absent or present only on locally installed ground mounted signs.
Did they finally fix the missing gantries on I-88 between exits 1 and 2?
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position of NYSDOT or its affiliates.

Bumppoman

Quote from: vdeane on December 06, 2014, 05:34:42 PM
Did they finally fix the missing gantries on I-88 between exits 1 and 2?

Nope, I was very surprised to see that they didn't, and didn't even build mounting brackets to possibly put them up next year.  The gantries have been missing for nearly ten years, since they were taken out by a couple of trucks.  A gantry on the expressway portion of NY-26 in Vestal had been missing just as long for the same reason, but was replaced this summer.

The gantries at exit 2 westbound and exit 1 westbound were both replaced, with some good and some bad signs.  Again, if I can ever get my girlfriend to agree to drive me around, I'll snag some pictures.

machias

Quote from: Bumppoman on December 06, 2014, 06:36:06 PM
Quote from: vdeane on December 06, 2014, 05:34:42 PM
Did they finally fix the missing gantries on I-88 between exits 1 and 2?

Nope, I was very surprised to see that they didn't, and didn't even build mounting brackets to possibly put them up next year.  The gantries have been missing for nearly ten years, since they were taken out by a couple of trucks.  A gantry on the expressway portion of NY-26 in Vestal had been missing just as long for the same reason, but was replaced this summer.

The gantries at exit 2 westbound and exit 1 westbound were both replaced, with some good and some bad signs.  Again, if I can ever get my girlfriend to agree to drive me around, I'll snag some pictures.

I just drove under the new gantries today and while I couldn't snap any photos, I didn't see anything alarming with the design of the sign panels.  I did notice that the up arrow on the Exit 1 panel was in the upper right hand corner of the sign (like Connecticut does) over the word "Binghamton". I always appreciate that because it reduces the size of the panel without really compromising legibility.

As mentioned before the two other overhead signs are still missing but the nifty temporary signs are still there.

I did notice that the Exit 2 WB overhead sign at the gore now has markers for both NY 12 A and To NY 12.

Bumppoman

Quote from: upstatenyroads on December 07, 2014, 05:25:26 PM
I just drove under the new gantries today and while I couldn't snap any photos, I didn't see anything alarming with the design of the sign panels.  I did notice that the up arrow on the Exit 1 panel was in the upper right hand corner of the sign (like Connecticut does) over the word "Binghamton". I always appreciate that because it reduces the size of the panel without really compromising legibility.

As mentioned before the two other overhead signs are still missing but the nifty temporary signs are still there.

I did notice that the Exit 2 WB overhead sign at the gore now has markers for both NY 12 A and To NY 12.

Nothing horribly off-putting, just strange alignment of shields and weird use of space.  The sign that says "To 81/To 17" is tiny compared to the one it replaced, and the shields are at the farthest edges with a large space in between.  Something was strange about the Exit 2 sign but I haven't been to Oneonta lately so I can't remember exactly what.

vdeane

That sign is probably meant to say "To 81/To 86/To 17" in the near future ;)
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position of NYSDOT or its affiliates.

Bumppoman

I foolishly hadn't considered that, but the custom in this area so far has been to have it on the sign and green it out, or just put a 17 shield and worry about it later.  Hopefully that's indeed the case because another shield would make it look much better.

machias

Quote from: Bumppoman on December 09, 2014, 06:52:46 AM
I foolishly hadn't considered that, but the custom in this area so far has been to have it on the sign and green it out, or just put a 17 shield and worry about it later.  Hopefully that's indeed the case because another shield would make it look much better.

There's quite a few signs in R2 with that awful spacing. I firmly believe that there are some in NYSDOT who have no idea how to use GuidSIGN, but in this case I agree that it's probably extra space for To 86. On the bright side, at least the space for 86 is in the right place, because R9 seems uneven with deciding of it's going to be 86-17 or 17-86, the former being correct, of course.

Bumppoman

In Tioga County it appears that Region 9 has decided on I-86 as a lone wolf.  All of the NY-17 shields, by ramps and on the road itself, have been removed and then replaced directly on top of I-86 shields to be popped off once the extension is approved.  It's an interesting approach, instead of having I-86 mounted on a separate assembly à la Region 6.

vdeane

Makes one wonder if there are plans to officially decommission NY 17 on the Southern Tier Expressway once we get a Grand Unified I-86 all the way from I-90 through Binghamton to NY 79.
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position of NYSDOT or its affiliates.

cl94

Wouldn't shock me if they're planning to decommission. No reason for the duplication and it's more signs to maintain. The newer BGSes in Regions 5 and 6 don't show NY 17, either.
Please note: All posts represent my personal opinions and do not represent those of my employer or any of its partner agencies.

Travel Mapping (updated weekly)

Duke87

The elimination of NY 17 everywhere west of Harriman is a known plan. It is simply a question of waiting for the I-86 designation to be extended enough that you no longer need the NY 17 designation to maintain continuity.

I don't expect any truncation to be reflected in the logbook until after I-86 is 100% complete, though.
If you always take the same road, you will never see anything new.

cl94

The logbook is different from signage. While it isn't typical practice for a non-reference route to be unsigned, US 11's north end, I-478 and I-878 tell us that it can happen here in the Empire State. I-86 won't be complete until they get rid of the at-grade section between Deposit and Hancock, which hasn't even started construction.
Please note: All posts represent my personal opinions and do not represent those of my employer or any of its partner agencies.

Travel Mapping (updated weekly)

Alps

Quote from: Bumppoman on December 10, 2014, 07:21:07 AM
In Tioga County it appears that Region 9 has decided on I-86 as a lone wolf.  All of the NY-17 shields, by ramps and on the road itself, have been removed and then replaced directly on top of I-86 shields to be popped off once the extension is approved.  It's an interesting approach, instead of having I-86 mounted on a separate assembly à la Region 6.
Paging CapHwys (though he apparently hasn't posted here).

ixnay

Have any Clearview signs turned up on the Clearview Expressway (I-295 in Queens) yet?  Clearview on the Clearview IOW? (Hopefully motorists have a clear view thereof)

ixnay
The Washington/Baltimore/Arlington CSA has two Key Bridges, a Minnesota Avenue, and a Mannasota Avenue.

cl94

Quote from: ixnay on December 10, 2014, 08:47:58 PM
Have any Clearview signs turned up on the Clearview Expressway (I-295 in Queens) yet?  Clearview on the Clearview IOW? (Hopefully motorists have a clear view thereof)

ixnay

Not gonna happen until NYSDOT adopts Clearview, which probably won't happen (if it ever does) before interim approval is rescinded.
Please note: All posts represent my personal opinions and do not represent those of my employer or any of its partner agencies.

Travel Mapping (updated weekly)

machias

Quote from: cl94 on December 10, 2014, 09:33:00 PM
Quote from: ixnay on December 10, 2014, 08:47:58 PM
Have any Clearview signs turned up on the Clearview Expressway (I-295 in Queens) yet?  Clearview on the Clearview IOW? (Hopefully motorists have a clear view thereof)

ixnay

Not gonna happen until NYSDOT adopts Clearview, which probably won't happen (if it ever does) before interim approval is rescinded.

I've had some conversations over the years with some of the folks that maintained the NYSMUTCD and the current NYS supplement to the National MUTCD and they said there are no plans to ever adopt Clearview (other than the CorCraft signs that CorCraft went out and switched themselves).  The only reason NYS requested interim approval for Clearview was to accommodate the Thruway signs.

cl94

Quote from: upstatenyroads on December 10, 2014, 09:55:21 PM
Quote from: cl94 on December 10, 2014, 09:33:00 PM
Quote from: ixnay on December 10, 2014, 08:47:58 PM
Have any Clearview signs turned up on the Clearview Expressway (I-295 in Queens) yet?  Clearview on the Clearview IOW? (Hopefully motorists have a clear view thereof)

ixnay

Not gonna happen until NYSDOT adopts Clearview, which probably won't happen (if it ever does) before interim approval is rescinded.

I've had some conversations over the years with some of the folks that maintained the NYSMUTCD and the current NYS supplement to the National MUTCD and they said there are no plans to ever adopt Clearview (other than the CorCraft signs that CorCraft went out and switched themselves).  The only reason NYS requested interim approval for Clearview was to accommodate the Thruway signs.

Doesn't shock me. Of course, because the interim approval is for the entire state, New York City and Westchester County decided to adopt it because it's the new hip thing.
Please note: All posts represent my personal opinions and do not represent those of my employer or any of its partner agencies.

Travel Mapping (updated weekly)

vdeane

Quote from: cl94 on December 10, 2014, 06:56:58 PM
The logbook is different from signage. While it isn't typical practice for a non-reference route to be unsigned, US 11's north end, I-478 and I-878 tell us that it can happen here in the Empire State. I-86 won't be complete until they get rid of the at-grade section between Deposit and Hancock, which hasn't even started construction.
Plus there's the numerous routes where NYSDOT internal documents and signage disagree on what path they take, such as the southern end of NY 12E.
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position of NYSDOT or its affiliates.

mtantillo

Quote from: upstatenyroads on December 10, 2014, 09:55:21 PM
Quote from: cl94 on December 10, 2014, 09:33:00 PM
Quote from: ixnay on December 10, 2014, 08:47:58 PM
Have any Clearview signs turned up on the Clearview Expressway (I-295 in Queens) yet?  Clearview on the Clearview IOW? (Hopefully motorists have a clear view thereof)

ixnay

Not gonna happen until NYSDOT adopts Clearview, which probably won't happen (if it ever does) before interim approval is rescinded.

I've had some conversations over the years with some of the folks that maintained the NYSMUTCD and the current NYS supplement to the National MUTCD and they said there are no plans to ever adopt Clearview (other than the CorCraft signs that CorCraft went out and switched themselves).  The only reason NYS requested interim approval for Clearview was to accommodate the Thruway signs.


For whatever odd reason, FHWA only seems to like to deal with state DOT's, and no one else. So the toll authorities have to go through the state DOT for FHWA matters, even though the state DOTs have no authority over the toll authorities (in NY anyway). FHWA even goes so far as to threaten to revoke the state DOT's Federal highway funding for toll roads' non-compliance with the MUTCD and other federal requirements, as if the state DOT has any control over what the toll authorities do.

SignBridge

Yeah well, the reason the NJ Turnpike Authority is finally changing to MUTCD signage had something to do with what you're talking about, though I don't know the exact details. But apparently some sort of pressure was brought to force compliance by a toll authority. 

mtantillo

They probably threatened NJDOT.



Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.