New York

[empirestate]

I actually like NY's practice of putting road/street names in a box. Makes them look like route markers vs. destinations reached by the exit.

Actually, the boxing makes the street name listing resemble a street-sign blade; which may have been the intended effect.

Yes. The hybrid is almost as good, but not quite.

[roadman65]

I was noticing something when I read Wikipedia's article on Lexington Avenue in NYC.  That not only is the avenue 110 city blocks long, but it exceeds 5 miles in length.  In fact, according to them, it is 5.5 miles in total from 131st Street to 21st Street.

If that is true then, twenty NYC blocks are equivalent to one mile, thus making Penn Station and Times Square one half mile apart.  In addition Pennsylvania Station is one tenth of a mile across the track layout.  You would never know it as a foot pedestrian as I have walked from Radio City all the way down to Herald Square and it really did not seem that far as one mile in my neighborhood seems further.

I am though interested in what the distance is between each numbered avenue?  I know all avenues (excluding Madison and Lexington for they are not part of the original 1811 street grid) are equally spaced apart. The distance between Park and both 3rd and 5th are the same as between 10th and 11th as Park is technically 4th Avenue in the 1811 grid.  Lexington and Madison are half of that away from their parallel avenues and of course Broadway cuts carelessly across the grid so it has no steady point (at least below 68th Street anyway) from numbered avenues.  Does anyone know the distance across town between avenues that is set by the 1811 street plan?

[Alps]

I was noticing something when I read Wikipedia's article on Lexington Avenue in NYC.  That not only is the avenue 110 city blocks long, but it exceeds 5 miles in length.  In fact, according to them, it is 5.5 miles in total from 131st Street to 21st Street.

If that is true then, twenty NYC blocks are equivalent to one mile, thus making Penn Station and Times Square one half mile apart.  In addition Pennsylvania Station is one tenth of a mile across the track layout.  You would never know it as a foot pedestrian as I have walked from Radio City all the way down to Herald Square and it really did not seem that far as one mile in my neighborhood seems further.

I am though interested in what the distance is between each numbered avenue?  I know all avenues (excluding Madison and Lexington for they are not part of the original 1811 street grid) are equally spaced apart. The distance between Park and both 3rd and 5th are the same as between 10th and 11th as Park is technically 4th Avenue in the 1811 grid.  Lexington and Madison are half of that away from their parallel avenues and of course Broadway cuts carelessly across the grid so it has no steady point (at least below 68th Street anyway) from numbered avenues.  Does anyone know the distance across town between avenues that is set by the 1811 street plan?

The avenues aren't on a strict spacing apart, unlike the streets. It's more apparent when you play around in Google Maps and really go from Hudson to East, rather than when you focus in on Midtown and notice that 5-6-7-8 all appear the same distance apart.

[Duke87]

The avenues aren't on a strict spacing apart, unlike the streets. It's more apparent when you play around in Google Maps and really go from Hudson to East, rather than when you focus in on Midtown and notice that 5-6-7-8 all appear the same distance apart.

Actually, if you look really closely, the streets aren't a strict spacing apart, either. The width of private property between streets is constant (210 feet), but since the width of the streets themselves is not, the centerline to centerline distance between blocks varies. Usually it's 260 feet but when you have a major cross street (23rd, 34th, etc.) it goes up to about 280 feet. So, 20 blocks = 1 mile is not precisely true from a surveying perspective, but it's more than close enough for day to day purposes (off by at most 1%).

[D-Dey65]

Unless there's a thread strictly on NY 22, I'm posting this message here:

Over on the I Ride the Harlem Line website, the webmistress posted some history of the NYCRR Upper Harlem Division and mentioned a proposal by the Harlem Valley Transportation Association to put a bridge under NY 22 and over a creek next to the road for the proposed completion of the Harlem Valley Rail Trail. Aside from the fact that it's a stupid thing to put a bridge under a road next to a waterway, the girl raised a question about the former intersection with Black Grocery Road, which had a bridge over the creek.
http://www.iridetheharlemline.com/2013/03/23/remembering-the-upper-harlem-division-part-2/#comments

She speculates that the bridge might've been washed out in a flood and never replaced. I suspect that residents along Black Grocery Road and vicinity simply didn't want to have traffic coming from NY 22 anymore and demanded that NYSDOT remove the bridge. Who's right about this?

[NE2]

The bridge was built in 1940 and still exists in the 2003 NBI, but is gone in 2007. Maybe Christie sat on it.

[PHLBOS]

The bridge was built in 1940 and still exists in the 2003 NBI, but is gone in 2007. Maybe Christie sat on it.

Christie wasn't Governor of NJ in 2007.

[NE2]

No, he was governor of NY.

[PHLBOS]

No, he was governor of NY.

I guess he had to be, since the real Gov. of NY (Spitzer) was too busy being *ahem* Client #9. 

[NE2]

And people say we're not a nation of prudes.

[WNYroadgeek]

NYSDOT's apparently going to study the feasibility of connecting I-81 to I-87:

.@NYSDOT to undertake feasibility study on connecting I-81 in Watertown to I-87 in Champlain, improving #NorthCountry access #NYSOS14

https://twitter.com/NYGovCuomo/status/421002857605648384

[PHLBOS]

NYSDOT's apparently going to study the feasibility of connecting I-81 to I-87:

Would the connection be a reroute/extension of I-81 (I-81 north of the connector would be redesignated as I-181) or designated as either I-181 or 187?

[Jim]

I'd prefer to see it as I-81, or perhaps I-98.  But my guess is that it will be a long time before this feasibility study would lead to anything.  How long has it taken to get I-86 from expressway to what we have so far?  150 or so miles of brand new interstate seems much more expensive.

[NE2]

I doubt there's enough traffic for a four-lane Rooftop Highway. Maybe a couple bypasses or widenings.

[Roadgeek Adam]

While I disagree with the governor and NYSDOT's decision to do this, exactly why reroute I-81 from the Canadian border?

On a similar note, I have to agree with NE2 on this. Is US 11 that bad between Rouses Point and Watertown?

[Brandon]

While I disagree with the governor and NYSDOT's decision to do this, exactly why reroute I-81 from the Canadian border?

On a similar note, I have to agree with NE2 on this. Is US 11 that bad between Rouses Point and Watertown?

Wouldn't a better connection to ON-401 be a better idea?

[Sam]

http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/nycode/HAY/12/340-a

Maybe this is old news, but New York law defines the Interstate highway routing in New York. It's an interesting read if you haven't seen it before. I think the section of "505" from Watertown to Plattsburgh and the connection to Prescott, Ont. are the only sections that haven't already been built. The branches from Watertown to the Canadian border and from Watertown to Plattsburgh are given as the same route. I wonder if they were expecting I-81E and I-81W designations.

(Personally, I'd flop the I-781 designation to the section north of Watertown and extend I-81 from Fort Drum to I-87.)

--
Sam

[Jim]

Wouldn't a better connection to ON-401 be a better idea?

So perhaps an interstate connection from the bridge to Cornwall over to I-87 is a more (but probably still not) feasible option?  I don't cross the border enough to know if it would be worth the trouble for a Watertown to Plattsburgh traveler to take I-81, cross the border to 401, cross back at Cornwall, for this potential new interstate the rest of the way.  I'm thinking US 11 wouldn't seem all that bad by comparison to 2 border crossings.

[Alps]

NYSDOT's apparently going to study the feasibility of connecting I-81 to I-87:

.@NYSDOT to undertake feasibility study on connecting I-81 in Watertown to I-87 in Champlain, improving #NorthCountry access #NYSOS14

https://twitter.com/NYGovCuomo/status/421002857605648384

They're really studying improvements to the US 11 corridor, not a new highway or certainly I-98.

[mtantillo]

Wouldn't a better connection to ON-401 be a better idea?

So perhaps an interstate connection from the bridge to Cornwall over to I-87 is a more (but probably still not) feasible option?  I don't cross the border enough to know if it would be worth the trouble for a Watertown to Plattsburgh traveler to take I-81, cross the border to 401, cross back at Cornwall, for this potential new interstate the rest of the way.  I'm thinking US 11 wouldn't seem all that bad by comparison to 2 border crossings.

If I were the border guard, I'd probably single anyone out who did that for secondary and searches. If you don't need to cross the border, and you choose to just for the fun of it, that would definitely come across as suspicious, and not really a valid reason for entering Canada.  In otherwords, the border guard would likely think it is odd that you choose to subject yourself to border inspections and pay tolls twice when there is a perfectly good road that avoids that hassle and cost, so they may think you wanted to come in for another reason that you aren't telling them. At any rate, the secondary inspection and interrogations would then negate any Time savings that the freeway would offer.

Only time when crossing through Canada makes sense is when you save lots of miles (Buffalo to Detroit) or have no other option ( Alaska, Point Roberts).

[empirestate]

So perhaps an interstate connection from the bridge to Cornwall over to I-87 is a more (but probably still not) feasible option?  I don't cross the border enough to know if it would be worth the trouble for a Watertown to Plattsburgh traveler to take I-81, cross the border to 401, cross back at Cornwall, for this potential new interstate the rest of the way.  I'm thinking US 11 wouldn't seem all that bad by comparison to 2 border crossings.

If I were the border guard, I'd probably single anyone out who did that for secondary and searches. If you don't need to cross the border, and you choose to just for the fun of it, that would definitely come across as suspicious, and not really a valid reason for entering Canada.  In otherwords, the border guard would likely think it is odd that you choose to subject yourself to border inspections and pay tolls twice when there is a perfectly good road that avoids that hassle and cost, so they may think you wanted to come in for another reason that you aren't telling them. At any rate, the secondary inspection and interrogations would then negate any Time savings that the freeway would offer.

Only time when crossing through Canada makes sense is when you save lots of miles (Buffalo to Detroit) or have no other option ( Alaska, Point Roberts).

Well, it seems to me that's what Jim is suggesting (but then doubting): that the double crossing would be some kind of a time savings. Ultimately, yes, we all seem to agree it wouldn't, but it wasn't put forth as an option merely for its novelty.

[Brandon]

If I were the border guard, I'd probably single anyone out who did that for secondary and searches. If you don't need to cross the border, and you choose to just for the fun of it, that would definitely come across as suspicious, and not really a valid reason for entering Canada.  In otherwords, the border guard would likely think it is odd that you choose to subject yourself to border inspections and pay tolls twice when there is a perfectly good road that avoids that hassle and cost, so they may think you wanted to come in for another reason that you aren't telling them. At any rate, the secondary inspection and interrogations would then negate any Time savings that the freeway would offer.

Only time when crossing through Canada makes sense is when you save lots of miles (Buffalo to Detroit) or have no other option ( Alaska, Point Roberts).

You're coming from the wrong direction anyway (DC).  Those of us in the northern tier of states have a different view of the border.  Many of us would like border patrol to feck off and go away.  Seriously, there's no point to having customs or border patrol between two pretty much equal (in culture and standard of living) countries.

[mtantillo]

If I were the border guard, I'd probably single anyone out who did that for secondary and searches. If you don't need to cross the border, and you choose to just for the fun of it, that would definitely come across as suspicious, and not really a valid reason for entering Canada.  In otherwords, the border guard would likely think it is odd that you choose to subject yourself to border inspections and pay tolls twice when there is a perfectly good road that avoids that hassle and cost, so they may think you wanted to come in for another reason that you aren't telling them. At any rate, the secondary inspection and interrogations would then negate any Time savings that the freeway would offer.

Only time when crossing through Canada makes sense is when you save lots of miles (Buffalo to Detroit) or have no other option ( Alaska, Point Roberts).

You're coming from the wrong direction anyway (DC).  Those of us in the northern tier of states have a different view of the border.  Many of us would like border patrol to feck off and go away.  Seriously, there's no point to having customs or border patrol between two pretty much equal (in culture and standard of living) countries.

Oh I agree. I would prefer something similar to a Schengen style agreement between the two countries, although the more liberal taxation and immigration laws in Canada make it more likely that NB smuggling of goods and SB illegal immigration could be a problem. I don't deny that the border is annoying, but for now, it is there, and the border guards will hassle you if they don't think you are crossing for a valid reason, on the most direct route, no matter how much we don't like it.

I cross more often than most people from DC, and even have a Nexus card to save some of the hassle. But I'm always asked purpose of trip, and if I said passing through from Watertown to Cornwall, I would certainly expect to be waved into secondary. Not saying I think I deserve to be sent to secondary, but I think I probably would be.

[Brandon]

^^ That's why the best answer is always "tourism".  Never ever tell the border guards anything more, and never tell them anything more than they ask.  The US customs folks don't need to know every little detail of where you've been in Canada (I find them far more obnoxious than the Canadian ones).  My grandmother made the mistake of opening her mouth at the Ambassador Bridge once (early 1970s) and got a secondary.  It was over dishes bought in Windsor.  The customs official was oblivious up until she opened her mouth.

[mtantillo]

^^ That's why the best answer is always "tourism".  Never ever tell the border guards anything more, and never tell them anything more than they ask.  The US customs folks don't need to know every little detail of where you've been in Canada (I find them far more obnoxious than the Canadian ones).  My grandmother made the mistake of opening her mouth at the Ambassador Bridge once (early 1970s) and got a secondary.  It was over dishes bought in Windsor.  The customs official was oblivious up until she opened her mouth.

Oh yes, I know that much.  The only concern is that given the timestamps between entry into Canada and re-entry into the US for a transit trip, it will be obvious that you didn't have any time to "do anything touristy" in the other country.