AARoads Forum

Regional Boards => Northeast => Topic started by: froggie on October 05, 2009, 06:48:16 AM

Title: I-781 requested in New York
Post by: froggie on October 05, 2009, 06:48:16 AM
New York has requested (http://cms.transportation.org/sites/route/docs/NewYork_I-781%20Binder.pdf) that the under-construction connector between I-81 and the Fort Drum main gate be designated as I-781.  They already have preliminary approval from FHWA.  This is the request to AASHTO.
Title: Re: I-781 requested in New York
Post by: Mergingtraffic on October 05, 2009, 07:28:53 PM
I saw the plans on the web and I'm surprised the interchange with I-81 is a trumpet not flyovers...I thought trumpet were frowned upon nowadays.
Title: Re: I-781 requested in New York
Post by: vdeane on October 05, 2009, 09:19:12 PM
If the designation actually extends to Fort Drum (rather than just to US 11), I see difficulties in clinching it.
Title: Re: I-781 requested in New York
Post by: FLRoads on October 05, 2009, 09:38:45 PM
Perhaps the interstate designation will end at U.S. 11 with the state route continuing into Fort Drum, or not be signed at all. Either way its nice to see a new interstate number on the books  :clap:  :clap:  :clap:
Title: Re: I-781 requested in New York
Post by: agentsteel53 on October 05, 2009, 09:43:51 PM
Quote from: deanej on October 05, 2009, 09:19:12 PM
If the designation actually extends into Fort Drum (rather than just to US 11), I see difficulties in clinching it.

Is that even legally allowed, to have an interstate with such access restrictions?

H-3 in Hawaii ends at the gates of the Marine base.  I clinched it with an "I'm sorry, sir, I seem to be lost.  Can you please direct me to Honolulu?"
Title: Re: I-781 requested in New York
Post by: Alps on October 05, 2009, 10:25:09 PM
I've clinched a few routes (especially in MD) just by U-turning at the gates.  The only route I know of that extends into the establishment itself is NJ 68 and Fort Dix.
Title: Re: I-781 requested in New York
Post by: Duke87 on October 05, 2009, 10:55:20 PM
From the report:

QuoteIt is proposed that Interstate 781 would end at the Fort Drum boundary at the location of the North Gate (main
gate).

So, yup, another U-turner.
Title: Re: I-781 requested in New York
Post by: froggie on October 06, 2009, 07:02:07 AM
QuoteI saw the plans on the web and I'm surprised the interchange with I-81 is a trumpet not flyovers...I thought trumpet were frowned upon nowadays.

Most of the traffic is expected to be to/from the south, hence why the trumpet was considered acceptable.


QuoteIs that even legally allowed, to have an interstate with such access restrictions?

Yes it's allowed.  Consider, in part, that Defense was an integral part of the Interstate's creation.
Title: Re: I-781 requested in New York
Post by: mgk920 on October 06, 2009, 10:59:53 AM
Quote from: froggie on October 06, 2009, 07:02:07 AM
QuoteIs that even legally allowed, to have an interstate with such access restrictions?

Yes it's allowed.  Consider, in part, that Defense was an integral part of the Interstate's creation.

Also, I-564 in VA.

Mike
Title: Re: I-781 requested in New York
Post by: Alex on October 06, 2009, 09:50:10 PM
The rest of the topic has been moved to General Highway Talk under the heading "Restricted Highways".

https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=1751.0 (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=1751.0)

Figured this has migrated away from the scope of just future Interstate 781 and deserved its own thread.
Title: Re: I-781 requested in New York
Post by: Roadgeek Adam on October 07, 2009, 06:22:29 AM
I really don't know why NY 781 (which it was designated originally) should be an interstate. If it was interstate for a short point, and an NY state touring route for the rest (to the gate), maybe it would make more sense.
Title: Re: I-781 requested in New York
Post by: froggie on October 07, 2009, 07:04:00 AM
Why not?  After all, it's the National System of Interstate and Defense Highways, and 781 directly connects the main gate at Fort Drum (which has seen a lot of expansion in recent years) to a major Interstate.

Makes perfect sense to me...
Title: Re: I-781 requested in New York
Post by: agentsteel53 on October 07, 2009, 12:19:32 PM
it certainly beats having some commuter lemming path being upgraded to yet another generic three-digit interstate!  :ded:
Title: Re: I-781 requested in New York
Post by: yakra on October 27, 2009, 08:14:05 PM
Quote from: froggie on October 06, 2009, 07:02:07 AM
QuoteIs that even legally allowed, to have an interstate with such access restrictions?

Yes it's allowed.  Consider, in part, that Defense was an integral part of the Interstate's creation.

Isn't there a requirement to terminate at other NHS routes?
Title: Re: I-781 requested in New York
Post by: froggie on October 27, 2009, 09:07:47 PM
Not outright.  Again, this is a major military base.  Thus, quite allowed and makes a lot of sense.

'Sides, US 11 through there is on the NHS... :pan:
Title: Re: I-781 requested in New York
Post by: vdeane on October 28, 2009, 04:45:29 PM
It won't be ending at US 11; it's planned to end at the main gate to Fort Drum, last I heard.
Title: Re: I-781 requested in New York
Post by: Roadgeek Adam on October 28, 2009, 05:39:27 PM
Yes it is and will be. I don't agree with the interstate designation, but I won't win that fight.
Title: Re: I-781 requested in New York
Post by: njroadhorse on October 29, 2009, 07:19:08 PM
Hey, if I-564 can be signed as such, I suppose I-781 can too.  After all, they both serve major defensive areas for this country.  I believe I-564 is also signed to the main gate of Norfolk Naval Station too, no?
Title: Re: I-781 requested in New York
Post by: froggie on October 29, 2009, 08:43:28 PM
No.  Ties into the at-grade part of Taussig Blvd (outside the base boundary) just west of the Gate 3/3A interchange, and officially becomes VA 337 at that point.