News:

Thanks to everyone for the feedback on what errors you encountered from the forum database changes made in Fall 2023. Let us know if you discover anymore.

Main Menu

New York

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

Previous topic - Next topic

Pete from Boston

This debate happens over and over here, and somehow this is the first time I've seen it happen where no one has mentioned the biggest likely obstacle — community opposition. I do realize that not everyone in Vermont is a hippie, but there sure are enough people dedicated to environmental preservation there that this has about as much chance of being built as Killington has of moving to Iowa.


roadman65

In a way I have to admire Vermont in their preservation of their environment.  They were the only one to take a stand against the retail giant that many people hate as much as shop at when they first expanded to Vermont.

I have seen what development can do as Orlando and especially Clermont in Florida have had on the region. 

Every day is a winding road, you just got to get used to it.

Sheryl Crowe

cl94

Quote from: roadman65 on November 08, 2014, 05:52:26 PM
In a way I have to admire Vermont in their preservation of their environment.

Certainly isn't a bad thing. That's why New York made Adirondack and Catskill Parks- protect the natural environment for generations to come. You only have to look at Pennsylvania and West Virginia with their many abandoned mines to see that it certainly paid off for New York and Vermont. Hell, you can't even build a shed in your backyard without having the Adirondack/Catskill Park Commission approve it if you live inside one of the New York parks. If the environment went down the drain, so would the economies of Vermont and New York north of I-90.
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)

roadman65

Quote from: cl94 on November 08, 2014, 06:22:54 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on November 08, 2014, 05:52:26 PM
In a way I have to admire Vermont in their preservation of their environment.

Certainly isn't a bad thing. That's why New York made Adirondack and Catskill Parks- protect the natural environment for generations to come. You only have to look at Pennsylvania and West Virginia with their many abandoned mines to see that it certainly paid off for New York and Vermont. Hell, you can't even build a shed in your backyard without having the Adirondack/Catskill Park Commission approve it if you live inside one of the New York parks. If the environment went down the drain, so would the economies of Vermont and New York north of I-90.
Absolutely, that is why Vermont did not want WalMart to come in as it would have killed the Downtown Shopping that is a big part of the state's economy. 
Every day is a winding road, you just got to get used to it.

Sheryl Crowe

shadyjay

Quote from: cl94 on November 08, 2014, 10:44:44 AMAt least get a freeway from I-87 to past Rutland (I-187?). Much of the Vermont section is already built and there's support in that part of New York for a NY 149 / US 4 bypass.

Agree there should be a connector between the end of the US 4 expressway on the VT/NY border and the Northway.  As far as extending it east of Rutland, I don't really see that need.  Rutland is a good stopping point for an expressway.  It would serve Rutland and during winter, ski traffic tends to split in the Rutland area, with some going south towards Okemo and others going east or north. 

A north/south bypass of Rutland would be nice, perhaps starting at the end of the present US 4 expressway, and heading east then north.  That would be enough for now. 

As far as extending the expressway into New York, how would it go?  A straight shot west towards the Northway, or a route roughly following US 4/NY 149 down to Glens Falls? 

vdeane

Following US 4 and NY 149 would be easier due to the Adirondack Park boundaries and Lake George.
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position of NYSDOT or its affiliates.

cl94

Quote from: shadyjay on November 09, 2014, 03:56:57 PM
Quote from: cl94 on November 08, 2014, 10:44:44 AMAt least get a freeway from I-87 to past Rutland (I-187?). Much of the Vermont section is already built and there's support in that part of New York for a NY 149 / US 4 bypass.

Agree there should be a connector between the end of the US 4 expressway on the VT/NY border and the Northway.  As far as extending it east of Rutland, I don't really see that need.  Rutland is a good stopping point for an expressway.  It would serve Rutland and during winter, ski traffic tends to split in the Rutland area, with some going south towards Okemo and others going east or north. 

A north/south bypass of Rutland would be nice, perhaps starting at the end of the present US 4 expressway, and heading east then north.  That would be enough for now. 

As far as extending the expressway into New York, how would it go?  A straight shot west towards the Northway, or a route roughly following US 4/NY 149 down to Glens Falls?

Given what the Town of Queensbury and Warren County want, it would probably be best if it paralleled NY 149 to the Northway. Run it on the south side and there could be very little impact to residences or protected land. Being from the town, I'd have it break off just south of current Exit 20, parallel Glen Lake Road on undeveloped land up to NY 149, and stay far enough away from NY 149 to avoid entering Adirondack Park. Once it hits Washington County, it's a pretty straight shot up US 4 to Vermont. Exits at US 9 (to/from east), Warren CR 7 or 63, NY 9L, current US 4 just north of Fort Ann, NY 22, Washington CR 12 or
18, and VT 4A

You'd never be able to build it straight over. Not only would the expressway run straight into the Adirondacks and Lake George, but it would avoid population centers entirely. Part of the reason for a bypass is to get some of the medium-distance traffic off of NY 149, which is at/above capacity west of US 4, in addition to bypassing US 4 north of Fort Ann.
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)

cu2010

Quote from: cl94 on November 08, 2014, 06:22:54 PM
Hell, you can't even build a shed in your backyard without having the Adirondack/Catskill Park Commission approve it if you live inside one of the New York parks.

Which is bullshit. It's your land, that you own...why should a government agency have the right to dictate what you can and can not build on it?
This is cu2010, reminding you, help control the ugly sign population, don't have your shields spayed or neutered.

cl94

Quote from: cu2010 on November 09, 2014, 08:06:57 PM
Quote from: cl94 on November 08, 2014, 06:22:54 PM
Hell, you can't even build a shed in your backyard without having the Adirondack/Catskill Park Commission approve it if you live inside one of the New York parks.

Which is bullshit. It's your land, that you own...why should a government agency have the right to dictate what you can and can not build on it?

That's an ongoing issue. The original purpose of the Adirondack Park Agency was to prevent large-scale housing development that nearly occurred after I-87 was built. Their main concern is land outside of already-developed areas, but everything has to go through them. Controversial? Yes. Has it stopped a LOT of large housing projects and golf courses? Yes.
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)

The Nature Boy

What is the process for getting an improvement approved? Is it a rubber stamp (as long as it's something like a shed) or is it common for the government to not allow you to build a shed in your backyard?

And for my money, I'd say that the stretch from the Adirondacks in New York across to the White Mountains in New Hampshire is the most beautiful area in the country.

cl94

Quote from: The Nature Boy on November 09, 2014, 11:19:01 PM
What is the process for getting an improvement approved? Is it a rubber stamp (as long as it's something like a shed) or is it common for the government to not allow you to build a shed in your backyard?

And for my money, I'd say that the stretch from the Adirondacks in New York across to the White Mountains in New Hampshire is the most beautiful area in the country.

Stuff like that is usually approved, but it still has to go through APA. A property owner actually has to submit plans to the APA's office near Saranac Lake for approval. They don't care much about what happens in the incorporated villages or built-up areas, but once you get away from civilization, they'll pretty much decline new construction unless it's replacing something else or there's a darn good reason to build it (read: recreation and tourist facilities).
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)

roadman65

Hey here in Florida we have homeowners groups that you need permission from just to paint your house a different color.  Also sheds are forbidden and even satellite dishes were originally banned from being set up on the side of your house until the technology war won out.  Then there are some where you cannot even fly a large flag of the US on your own property and in one case a guy, who was a proud veteran, received a notice from his association to kindly not fly it or face a fine.

If homeowners groups down here can do it, I would bet they can do it in New York as well.  Even more so being that its at a state level that the bans are made.  With homeowner groups its not and yet they managed to stop a man with his own flag which is your First Amendment right to do so and, of course, the flag is one of the most important freedom emblems around and has been respected by our law since George Washington's time.
Every day is a winding road, you just got to get used to it.

Sheryl Crowe

Pete from Boston


Quote from: cu2010 on November 09, 2014, 08:06:57 PM
Quote from: cl94 on November 08, 2014, 06:22:54 PM
Hell, you can't even build a shed in your backyard without having the Adirondack/Catskill Park Commission approve it if you live inside one of the New York parks.

Which is bullshit. It's your land, that you own...why should a government agency have the right to dictate what you can and can not build on it?

How is this any different from zoning?  Just because you own your house, you should be able to knock it down and put up a 24-hour gas station/strip club/liquor store right in the middle of your residential street?

froggie

QuoteAs far as extending the expressway into New York, how would it go?  A straight shot west towards the Northway, or a route roughly following US 4/NY 149 down to Glens Falls?

Personally, I'd take a different approach.  Continue south from Fort Ann along or near the canal, then cut west near Fort Edward parallel to NY 197, meeting I-87 in the vicinity of Exit 17.  More direct for Rutland-bound traffic and it's easier terrain.

roadman65

Quote from: Pete from Boston on November 10, 2014, 07:42:54 AM

Quote from: cu2010 on November 09, 2014, 08:06:57 PM
Quote from: cl94 on November 08, 2014, 06:22:54 PM
Hell, you can't even build a shed in your backyard without having the Adirondack/Catskill Park Commission approve it if you live inside one of the New York parks.

Which is bullshit. It's your land, that you own...why should a government agency have the right to dictate what you can and can not build on it?

How is this any different from zoning?  Just because you own your house, you should be able to knock it down and put up a 24-hour gas station/strip club/liquor store right in the middle of your residential street?
This is not a free nation as many of us want it to be.  Even our founding fathers realized that we have to give up some of our own personal liberties for the overall good of our fellow man.

True our nation got more controlled over time as at one time you could build anything on your own land without applying for a building permit and have the building department (which never existed in the 18th and 19th centuries) tell you when, how, and if you could build it like now.  If you owned land and wanted to put up a log cabin on it you could do it and build it yourself.  Now you have to apply for permits.  Be subject to inspection along the way.  Even have them tell you when you can occupy it when completed.

However, this is all for control for not just to be a communist nation as some would say, but for safety and to protect our resources at the same time.  Just like the FCC only gives out X amount of radio station licenses per area.  This is to control frequencies not to put caps on the amount of radio stations, but so each one has its own frequency that no one else can take and it controls the amount of stuff on the dial to keep things sort of uniform.

Freedom comes with a price tag.  There is no such thing as FREE remember. We are a free nation, but not completely.
Every day is a winding road, you just got to get used to it.

Sheryl Crowe

Pete from Boston


Quote from: roadman65 on November 10, 2014, 09:07:22 AM
Quote from: Pete from Boston on November 10, 2014, 07:42:54 AM

Quote from: cu2010 on November 09, 2014, 08:06:57 PM
Quote from: cl94 on November 08, 2014, 06:22:54 PM
Hell, you can't even build a shed in your backyard without having the Adirondack/Catskill Park Commission approve it if you live inside one of the New York parks.

Which is bullshit. It's your land, that you own...why should a government agency have the right to dictate what you can and can not build on it?

How is this any different from zoning?  Just because you own your house, you should be able to knock it down and put up a 24-hour gas station/strip club/liquor store right in the middle of your residential street?
This is not a free nation as many of us want it to be.  Even our founding fathers realized that we have to give up some of our own personal liberties for the overall good of our fellow man.

True our nation got more controlled over time as at one time you could build anything on your own land without applying for a building permit and have the building department (which never existed in the 18th and 19th centuries) tell you when, how, and if you could build it like now.  If you owned land and wanted to put up a log cabin on it you could do it and build it yourself.  Now you have to apply for permits.  Be subject to inspection along the way.  Even have them tell you when you can occupy it when completed.

However, this is all for control for not just to be a communist nation as some would say, but for safety and to protect our resources at the same time.  Just like the FCC only gives out X amount of radio station licenses per area.  This is to control frequencies not to put caps on the amount of radio stations, but so each one has its own frequency that no one else can take and it controls the amount of stuff on the dial to keep things sort of uniform.

Freedom comes with a price tag.  There is no such thing as FREE remember. We are a free nation, but not completely.

Well yes, you can have 100% freedom, or any amount of government.  The thing is, this is only theoretical, because it implies "freedom" is only freedom from the state.  As history bears out well, your neighbors can use their freedom to limit or eliminate yours. 

Funny thing is, one of the impetuses for the creation of Adirondack Park was the protection of commercial shipping in the Erie Canal from sediment runoff from denuded slopes in the Adirondacks.  You might say it was the constraint on some private interests for the protection of others.  However, there are other places to get timber, and not another place to transship via water across the Appalachians.

cl94

Quote from: froggie on November 10, 2014, 07:49:46 AM
QuoteAs far as extending the expressway into New York, how would it go?  A straight shot west towards the Northway, or a route roughly following US 4/NY 149 down to Glens Falls?

Personally, I'd take a different approach.  Continue south from Fort Ann along or near the canal, then cut west near Fort Edward parallel to NY 197, meeting I-87 in the vicinity of Exit 17.  More direct for Rutland-bound traffic and it's easier terrain.

Easier terrain, but the business area along US 9 between Exits 19 and 20 is a big draw for Vermont-bound travelers. You'd still have to upgrade US 9 and NY 149 quite a bit. The NY 149 route would kill 2 birds with one stone and it's relatively undeveloped as well. Buy the area between the Great Escape and Glen Lake Rd from Six Flags and that pretty much bypasses the development. *Might* have to take away 10 homes and rebuild a small amount of wetlands.

A southerly route would have to break away from the Northway south of Exit 17, head due east to avoid Fort Edward and Hudson Falls, and make a sharp turn north to avoid running into Vermont. There's a Hudson River bridge you'd have to build in there (current one on I-87 has more than enough capacity) and you'd have to do major upgrades to the roads for exits (unless you limit them to only existing state routes, which would leave the Fort Ann issue unsolved). Hudson Falls and Fort Edward don't want a bypass. Queensbury does and they have the congestion to warrant it. Fort Ann-Northway section is twice as long, which might outweigh the cost of building through 3 miles of mountains (only rough part you'd have to build through is between I-87 and NY 9L).
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)

roadman65

Is not the Pine Barrens in South Jersey sort of like the Parks in New York?  Is not development limited there to preserve what is left of rural New Jersey that is the state with the most people per square mile.

If it is how is Ocean County growing at an astronomical rate as it is one of New Jersey's fastest growing counties?  Separate question here.
Every day is a winding road, you just got to get used to it.

Sheryl Crowe

cl94

Quote from: roadman65 on November 10, 2014, 10:47:09 PM
Is not the Pine Barrens in South Jersey sort of like the Parks in New York?  Is not development limited there to preserve what is left of rural New Jersey that is the state with the most people per square mile.

If it is how is Ocean County growing at an astronomical rate as it is one of New Jersey's fastest growing counties?  Separate question here.

Eh, kind of. The Pine Barrens Preserve is not being developed, but other areas of Ocean County are, even if they reside in the colloquial "pine barrens" area.

For example, in the Adirondacks, Warren County is mostly within Adirondack Park. The city of Glens Falls and most of the Town of Queensbury are not, the latter housing many commuters working in Albany or southern Saratoga Counties. The entire county is in the Adirondacks and the terrain is uneven, yet the two municipalities with territory outside of Adirondack Park are fully developed in said areas, except for state- or town-owned protected land within Queensbury. Lake George, Lake Placid, and Saranac Lake, in particular, were vacation towns long before the park came into existence and were allowed to continue expansion and redevelopment within the village borders.

The main purpose of Adirondack Park was to limit mining and lumber operations in the mountain range, effectively preventing what happened to Pennsylvania and West Virginia. Such operations already in existence were allowed to continue (especially for defense purposes).
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)

The Nature Boy

Would it be impossible to just upgrade US 7 to interstate standards south of Rutland and run that south to Bennington and then construct a connector that runs from Bennington to Albany?

Not as direct and you'd be skirting to the outside of the Green Mountain National Forest so it wouldn't likely happen but it would serve a dual purpose, providing a decent north-south highway in Vermont and connecting Rutland to Albany via what I assume would be a 3di for I-87.

It would probably also help the Manchester, VT outlet mall as well as it'll make it more accessible to NYC traffic.

froggie

In short, yes it would be impossible.  The economics aren't there.  The traffic isn't there (enough to warrant improvements but not enough to justify a freeway).  The local/political support isn't there, especially in Vermont.  Plus, 7 runs just fine as-is between Bennington and Rutland, though signal timing through Clarendon and south Rutland leaves something to be desired.

An improved NY 7 would be nice, but a freeway-grade facility is probably asking too much.  Plus it would be very difficult to tie it into I-87 or I-90 due to city/suburban development in and around Troy and Rennselaer.

vdeane

Yeah, Super 7 ends right in downtown Troy and there's no good way to extend it.  The only way you'd get a freeway anywhere near that corridor is to bypass it a few miles to the north.  Granted, that would have a nice side effect of significantly lowering the amount of traffic at the Twin Bridges and separate the two largest merges onto the Northway if it were tied into an extension of 787, but it's pretty much not happening.
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position of NYSDOT or its affiliates.

xcellntbuy

The possibility of making NY 7/VT 9 a 37-mile expressway has been debated intermittently since 1966.  The only section ever built is the current NY 7 from Interstate 87 to the Collar City Bridge into Troy.  It took 20 years to finally build and open after years of lawsuits by homeowners in the Maplewood section of the Town of Colonie, Albany County, when they were finally persuaded to give up and take the offers from the State of New York.

cl94

Quote from: xcellntbuy on November 11, 2014, 01:15:11 PM
The possibility of making NY 7/VT 9 a 37-mile expressway has been debated intermittently since 1966.  The only section ever built is the current NY 7 from Interstate 87 to the Collar City Bridge into Troy.  It took 20 years to finally build and open after years of lawsuits by homeowners in the Maplewood section of the Town of Colonie, Albany County, when they were finally persuaded to give up and take the offers from the State of New York.

Yeah. Entire thing was supposed to be I-88. Glad it exists, though, as it provides a nice bypass of the Exit 1/24 clusterf***. I *think* the NY 7 surface expressway in Schenectady is part of the routing, as well, but it was not built to Interstate standards.
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)

roadman65

I was just recently looking at Arkansastravelguy's FB photos of his NYC road trip, and saw that NYCDOT now conforms to MUTCD standards on Park Avenue between 57th and 45th Streets where in the past one four way tower signal existed at all intersections without even pedestrian signals.

I guess that story about the fact the MTA Metro North Tunnels are beneath Park Avenue preventing normal installations was hogwash as his photos show regular NYC assemblies on mast arms.  The usual double guy but painted green both the poles and the signal heads now grace Park Avenue in that 12 block section.
Every day is a winding road, you just got to get used to it.

Sheryl Crowe



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.