Work is now underway on the new Northway "Exit 3" airport connector in Colonie. Lots of trees have been cleared on both sides of the road, and yesterday I saw lots of coarse gravel being moved around just off the shoulder on the southbound side, south of the Desmond. I think it was Monday afternoon that a lane closure spilled into afternoon rush and caused some backups southbound through the area, but otherwise my commutes have not been adversely affected by the work so far.
Here's a Daily Gazette article from last month with some information about it: https://dailygazette.com/article/2018/12/03/contract-awarded-for-50-million-airport-northway-exit
When completed, I'm hoping this will have a significant positive impact on my commute, as I normally exit the NB Northway at 4 to get on Albany-Shaker east toward Maxwell Road. I return the opposite way, entering the Northway SB from WB Albany-Shaker through what is currently a pretty dysfunctional mess when busy. Getting the traffic between the Northway and the airport area out of that picture should make a big difference.
You understand that the new exit is a replacement, not an addition, do you? You would still have to deal with the airport traffic being in your way.
And airport traffic, with 1 million pax a year, is not that huge even at the most generous assumption.
Besides airport traffic has a different distribution within the day ( e.g. many departures around 6 AM) than commute..
My understanding is that the current Exit 4 NB ramp stays as is, but I could be misremembering. I know the existing configuration of Albany Shaker crossing the Northway and entering the Northway SB is changing.
As far as traffic heading toward the airport, in my experience, only a small fraction of the traffic that heads that way on Albany Shaker is destined for the airport, so I wouldn't use airport passenger counts as much of an estimate for how many vehicles take Albany Shaker in that direction.
Here are some images:
(https://s.hdnux.com/photos/26/52/34/5941035/3/rawImage.jpg)
(https://media.bizj.us/view/img/11009164/screen-shot-2018-08-14-at-14521-pm*750xx1653-930-3-0.png)
Basically,
-ramp to I-87 NB stays the same;
-ramp to I-87 SB moves a bit.
- A new proper ramp from I-87 NB and
-a flyover ramp from I-87 SB are built, and these 3 ramps converge at a single point
I've seen old exit 4 NB to Wolf road shown both ways - stay as-is or removed. It makes sense to keep that ramp, but I am not sure whats the final plan.
The final plan is to keep the existing Exit 4 ramp, but traffic using it will only be allowed to turn right (south) onto Wolf Rd. To get to Albany-Shaker Rd will require using the new flyover ramp.
Quote from: froggie on January 16, 2019, 11:45:23 AM
The final plan is to keep the existing Exit 4 ramp, but traffic using it will only be allowed to turn right (south) onto Wolf Rd. To get to Albany-Shaker Rd will require using the new flyover ramp.
Which likely means it will be the least used ramp in the area (or on par with exit 5A on I-90).
Whenever I do that right turn, I am usually the only one going right - with 10 other cars turning left.
What about the old SB exit, will that remain or be removed?
In fact, the entire southbound C/D setup between exits 4 and 5 could be removed.
The entire southbound C/D setup is being removed as part of the project. The new southbound Exit 4 ramp will be a loop ramp south of Albany-Shaker similar to the graphic kalvado posted upthread.
Quote from: froggie on January 16, 2019, 01:37:35 PM
The entire southbound C/D setup is being removed as part of the project. The new southbound Exit 4 ramp will be a loop ramp south of Albany-Shaker similar to the graphic kalvado posted upthread.
I didn't see any renderings of exit 5 - removing CD would make exit 5 incomplete as SB on-ramp is through CD. Building another on ramp seems straightforward, but I don't think I saw that mentioned.
The SB on-ramp at Exit 5 will be replaced with a normal diamond-interchange-style on-ramp. The Times-Union image is incomplete in this regard, but it's in the EIS and other NYSDOT documentation.
Quote from: froggie on January 16, 2019, 02:17:00 PM
The SB on-ramp at Exit 5 will be replaced with a normal diamond-interchange-style on-ramp. The Times-Union image is incomplete in this regard, but it's in the EIS and other NYSDOT documentation.
I took exit 5 many times... Maybe a total of 6 or 7 times over the years. So I didn't really paid attention to that part, shame on me.
Quote from: froggie on January 16, 2019, 01:37:35 PM
The entire southbound C/D setup is being removed as part of the project. The new southbound Exit 4 ramp will be a loop ramp south of Albany-Shaker similar to the graphic kalvado posted upthread.
Good to hear!
Now, if we could just get auxiliary lanes between exits 4 and 5, and a fourth lane in each direction over the Twin Bridges, I-87 should be set for a while! :-P
Maybe the new exit 3 can be designated SR-687, as a way of reminding people what the original exit 3 was to be.
Quote from: webny99 on January 16, 2019, 02:42:50 PM
Quote from: froggie on January 16, 2019, 01:37:35 PM
The entire southbound C/D setup is being removed as part of the project. The new southbound Exit 4 ramp will be a loop ramp south of Albany-Shaker similar to the graphic kalvado posted upthread.
Good to hear!
Now, if we could just get auxiliary lanes between exits 4 and 5, and a fourth lane in each direction over the Twin Bridges, I-87 should be set for a while! :-P
This project does add an auxiliary lane NB from exit 4 to exit 5, which will hopefully reduce the congestion from the merge with that ramp (and people jockeying for position between the two exits).
Quote from: Jim on January 16, 2019, 08:19:31 AM
I think it was Monday afternoon that a lane closure spilled into afternoon rush and caused some backups southbound through the area, but otherwise my commutes have not been adversely affected by the work so far.
There are small backups in the morning rush (even without the lane closure) as people slow down to gawk. You'd think people would be used to the idea of construction in the area from the NB tree clearing, which was done for a while now (at least for the flyover... the clearing for the auxiliary lane is more recent).
Some time between Monday afternoon and this morning, the first part of the overpass structure was placed over the southbound lanes. Here's my SB view from a couple hours ago:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.teresco.org%2F%7Eterescoj%2Fexit4overpasspartial.jpg&hash=8576e83c35d75a0ac8a9e6dabfd67f8a7f359642)
They should just number it Exit 158. :)
Quote from: Jim on June 19, 2019, 04:47:22 PM
Some time between Monday afternoon and this morning, the first part of the overpass structure was placed over the southbound lanes. Here's my SB view from a couple hours ago:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.teresco.org%2F%7Eterescoj%2Fexit4overpasspartial.jpg&hash=8576e83c35d75a0ac8a9e6dabfd67f8a7f359642)
4 beams on a central pylon were mounted Monday night, and 2 out of 4 beams over southbound lane were mounted Tuesday night.
Interestingly enough, yet-to-be-paved ramp on east side of highway, which is used as a staging area, is not big enough - so a secondary staging on rest area past exit 9 is used. 2 beams were sitting there this morning, down from 4 the day before and I believe 6 before weekend.
Quote from: machias on June 19, 2019, 07:04:50 PM
They should just number it Exit 158. :)
You're two miles off.... you're at about MP 160 there :)
So the governor did an announcement on this at the airport today. They actually are going with exit 3 for the new flyover, but what's interesting is that they decided to "add" a new ramp. Now instead of completely removing current SB exit 4, it will instead be re-aligned to exit directly off the Northway. Given that the existing ramp tends to back up significantly in the morning rush hour, sometimes even into the mainline, I'm wondering how this is going to affect my commute, especially since the vast majority of traffic using exit 4 SB in the morning are going to Wolf Road or eastbound on Albany Shaker. It's interesting that it was decided to retain the ramp, as it would seem to me like traffic that would use that ramp would also be well-served by exits 3 and 5.
Article, map, and renderings (including sign structures) below.
https://cbs6albany.com/news/local/exit-3-once-a-mystery-could-soon-be-complated-by-the-end-of-2019
(personal opinion)
EDIT: bigger versions of the graphics: https://www.governor.ny.gov/sites/governor.ny.gov/files/atoms/files/AlbanyAirport_Exit3.pdf
Quote from: vdeane on July 09, 2019, 08:14:50 PMEDIT: bigger versions of the graphics: https://www.governor.ny.gov/sites/governor.ny.gov/files/atoms/files/AlbanyAirport_Exit3.pdf
Regarding those signs; I personally hope that the sign fabricator/contractor
doesn't take the shown-spacing between the control city/point legends too literally. The letters appear too close together.
And before somebody dismisses such with a
"Oh, it's only a graphical representation." statement; please feel free to look at the new supplemental signage along I-90/Mass Pike. Such also features Series E(M) lettering that's too close together.
If we could just get I-87 marked from the start in the Bronx, then the whole Exit 3 thing will be moot.
Quote from: astralentity on July 10, 2019, 09:46:51 AM
If we could just get I-87 marked from the start in the Bronx, then the whole Exit 3 thing will be moot.
It's an entirely new interchange, so vdeane's concerns are hardly moot.
Plus it wasn't regarding the numbering (which is interesting mainly because the plan was to use 4A/4B for a while), but about configuration. Part of me wonders if they thought the queue would be too much for a single interchange and wanted redundancy to split the queue.
(personal opinion)
Quote from: vdeane on July 10, 2019, 01:04:09 PM
Plus it wasn't regarding the numbering (which is interesting mainly because the plan was to use 4A/4B for a while), but about configuration. Part of me wonders if they thought the queue would be too much for a single interchange and wanted redundancy to split the queue.
(personal opinion)
Makes sense. Didn't the original drawings that included I-687 showed Wolf Road still having its own interchange?
Quote from: vdeane on July 10, 2019, 01:04:09 PM
Plus it wasn't regarding the numbering (which is interesting mainly because the plan was to use 4A/4B for a while), but about configuration. Part of me wonders if they thought the queue would be too much for a single interchange and wanted redundancy to split the queue.
Judging by the signs, they want westbound (airport) traffic to use Exit 3. The weird thing is that the new Exit 3 will likely be faster for those heading to
eastbound Albany-Shaker, since the new loop will allow for one right turn instead of the current two left turns using Exit 4.
The only reason I can see to use Exit 4 is as a "shortcut" to the airport and points west, and for those with destinations
between 155 and the airport. I don't know what traffic is usually like, so hard for me to say if people making those two movements are enough to justify the extra ramp. I guess either way there is no harm done in keeping it; probably just as cheap to tie it in to the Northway as remove it.
Quote from: webny99 on July 11, 2019, 10:39:14 AM
Quote from: vdeane on July 10, 2019, 01:04:09 PM
Plus it wasn't regarding the numbering (which is interesting mainly because the plan was to use 4A/4B for a while), but about configuration. Part of me wonders if they thought the queue would be too much for a single interchange and wanted redundancy to split the queue.
Judging by the signs, they want westbound (airport) traffic to use Exit 3. The weird thing is that the new Exit 3 will likely be faster for those heading to eastbound Albany-Shaker, since the new loop will allow for one right turn instead of the current two left turns using Exit 4.
The only reason I can see to use Exit 4 is as a "shortcut" to the airport and points west, and for those with destinations between 155 and the airport. I don't know what traffic is usually like, so hard for me to say if people making those two movements are enough to justify the extra ramp. I guess either way there is no harm done in keeping it; probably just as cheap to tie it in to the Northway as remove it.
Exit 4 will still be easier for those of us who use Park & Fly
I would presume they're retaining a southbound Exit 4 in order to serve that industrial area between the south end of the airport and the Northway without overloading the southbound Exit 5 ramp.
QuoteMakes sense. Didn't the original drawings that included I-687 showed Wolf Road still having its own interchange?
I've never seen these. Do they exist somewhere?
Quote from: froggie on July 11, 2019, 10:50:19 AM
I would presume they're retaining a southbound Exit 4 in order to serve that industrial area between the south end of the airport and the Northway without overloading the southbound Exit 5 ramp.
QuoteMakes sense. Didn't the original drawings that included I-687 showed Wolf Road still having its own interchange?
I've never seen these. Do they exist somewhere?
Can't remember where I saw them, it was quite a while ago.
Quote from: webny99 on July 11, 2019, 10:39:14 AM
Quote from: vdeane on July 10, 2019, 01:04:09 PM
Plus it wasn't regarding the numbering (which is interesting mainly because the plan was to use 4A/4B for a while), but about configuration. Part of me wonders if they thought the queue would be too much for a single interchange and wanted redundancy to split the queue.
Judging by the signs, they want westbound (airport) traffic to use Exit 3. The weird thing is that the new Exit 3 will likely be faster for those heading to eastbound Albany-Shaker, since the new loop will allow for one right turn instead of the current two left turns using Exit 4.
The only reason I can see to use Exit 4 is as a "shortcut" to the airport and points west, and for those with destinations between 155 and the airport. I don't know what traffic is usually like, so hard for me to say if people making those two movements are enough to justify the extra ramp. I guess either way there is no harm done in keeping it; probably just as cheap to tie it in to the Northway as remove it.
Quote from: froggie on January 16, 2019, 11:45:23 AM
The final plan is to keep the existing Exit 4 ramp, but traffic using it will only be allowed to turn right (south) onto Wolf Rd. To get to Albany-Shaker Rd will require using the new flyover ramp.
Quote from: kalvado on July 11, 2019, 02:51:33 PM
Quote from: webny99 on July 11, 2019, 10:39:14 AM
Quote from: vdeane on July 10, 2019, 01:04:09 PM
Plus it wasn't regarding the numbering (which is interesting mainly because the plan was to use 4A/4B for a while), but about configuration. Part of me wonders if they thought the queue would be too much for a single interchange and wanted redundancy to split the queue.
Judging by the signs, they want westbound (airport) traffic to use Exit 3. The weird thing is that the new Exit 3 will likely be faster for those heading to eastbound Albany-Shaker, since the new loop will allow for one right turn instead of the current two left turns using Exit 4.
The only reason I can see to use Exit 4 is as a "shortcut" to the airport and points west, and for those with destinations between 155 and the airport. I don't know what traffic is usually like, so hard for me to say if people making those two movements are enough to justify the extra ramp. I guess either way there is no harm done in keeping it; probably just as cheap to tie it in to the Northway as remove it.
Quote from: froggie on January 16, 2019, 11:45:23 AM
The final plan is to keep the existing Exit 4 ramp, but traffic using it will only be allowed to turn right (south) onto Wolf Rd. To get to Albany-Shaker Rd will require using the new flyover ramp.
The exit 4
SB ramp to Old Wolf Road (current end of the c/d roadway) is also being preserved.
Quote from: kalvado on July 11, 2019, 02:51:33 PM
Quote from: webny99 on July 11, 2019, 10:39:14 AM
Quote from: vdeane on July 10, 2019, 01:04:09 PM
Plus it wasn't regarding the numbering (which is interesting mainly because the plan was to use 4A/4B for a while), but about configuration. Part of me wonders if they thought the queue would be too much for a single interchange and wanted redundancy to split the queue.
Judging by the signs, they want westbound (airport) traffic to use Exit 3. The weird thing is that the new Exit 3 will likely be faster for those heading to eastbound Albany-Shaker, since the new loop will allow for one right turn instead of the current two left turns using Exit 4.
The only reason I can see to use Exit 4 is as a "shortcut" to the airport and points west, and for those with destinations between 155 and the airport. I don't know what traffic is usually like, so hard for me to say if people making those two movements are enough to justify the extra ramp. I guess either way there is no harm done in keeping it; probably just as cheap to tie it in to the Northway as remove it.
Quote from: froggie on January 16, 2019, 11:45:23 AM
The final plan is to keep the existing Exit 4 ramp, but traffic using it will only be allowed to turn right (south) onto Wolf Rd. To get to Albany-Shaker Rd will require using the new flyover ramp.
As noted, I was talking about southbound, while the quote from Froggie refers to northbound.
Also worth noting that the decision to keep the existing southbound Exit 4 ramp to Old Wolf Rd is a recent decision, made well after my January post.
As someone that has worked directly on this project, I can confirm that the change to make it Exit 3 and alter, rather than remove, the existing Exit 4 SB ramp is very recent and was done purely due to the Governor wanting an Exit 3. There was no engineering logic behind it and it actually goes against federal guidance on interchange spacing. It also will likely be adding millions to the construction cost. The initial design had years of decision making behind it, but we're changing it due to one man's wishes.
I apologize for the rant, but seeing so many people's hard work scrapped for no reason would get to anyone.
Quote from: nysdot_employee on July 17, 2019, 10:52:49 AM
As someone that has worked directly on this project, I can confirm that the change to make it Exit 3 and alter, rather than remove, the existing Exit 4 SB ramp is very recent and was done purely due to the Governor wanting an Exit 3. There was no engineering logic behind it and it actually goes against federal guidance on interchange spacing. It also will likely be adding millions to the construction cost. The initial design had years of decision making behind it, but we're changing it due to one man's wishes.
I apologize for the rant, but seeing so many people's hard work scrapped for no reason would get to anyone.
Typical with the Princess. He thinks he's the Emperor or something, and subsequently thinks he owns the state and the subjects and objects within.
Yes, but think of the children! According to the governor, generations of kids have learned to count "1, 2, 4" because there's been no Exit 3 all this time. Yes, he really said that. See around 15:30 of the video linked on his office's page about this:
https://www.governor.ny.gov/news/after-50-years-delay-governor-cuomo-announces-new-exit-3-improve-accessibility-albany (https://www.governor.ny.gov/news/after-50-years-delay-governor-cuomo-announces-new-exit-3-improve-accessibility-albany)
Quote from: Jim on July 17, 2019, 01:14:06 PM
Yes, but think of the children! According to the governor, generations of kids have learned to count "1, 2, 4" because there's been no Exit 3 all this time. Yes, he really said that. See around 15:30 of the video linked on his office's page about this:
https://www.governor.ny.gov/news/after-50-years-delay-governor-cuomo-announces-new-exit-3-improve-accessibility-albany (https://www.governor.ny.gov/news/after-50-years-delay-governor-cuomo-announces-new-exit-3-improve-accessibility-albany)
Which is bunk.... I certainly didn't learn how to count by the exits on the Northway.
If he wanted an exit 3 that bad, he could have just done it. The NB exit to Wolf Road that was always in the plan would have worked as exit 4. Or he could have renumbered all of the exits from 4 to 8A.
Quote from: Jim on July 17, 2019, 01:14:06 PM
Yes, but think of the children! According to the governor, generations of kids have learned to count "1, 2, 4" because there's been no Exit 3 all this time. Yes, he really said that. See around 15:30 of the video linked on his office's page about this:
https://www.governor.ny.gov/news/after-50-years-delay-governor-cuomo-announces-new-exit-3-improve-accessibility-albany (https://www.governor.ny.gov/news/after-50-years-delay-governor-cuomo-announces-new-exit-3-improve-accessibility-albany)
This is exactly why mileage-based exits are a bad idea.
:bigass:
I got to drive the first of the new ramps on my way home this afternoon. The old ramp from Albany Shaker to SB I-87 was barricaded and traffic directed to the new ramp to SB I-78, west of the Desmond. The light there was operating to give me my left arrow. The new pattern is clearly marked as a detour so is it temporary to accommodate construction work? I am a little surprised I didn't see anything about an upcoming pattern change in recent days, since I take the left from Albany Shaker WB to the Northway SB most weekdays. Driving along the new ramp, it's clear there's a lot to do before other ramps are good to go. Little else appeared to be paved.
Given that they use signs like "yield ahead" and "right lane ends" for a normal ramp acceleration lane, I'm not sure how much I'd read into this being signed as a "detour".
(personal opinion)
Christ. Y'all realize there is sarcasm in his comments, but anything to get a dig in on the governor.
Quote from: Jim on July 17, 2019, 01:14:06 PM
Yes, but think of the children! According to the governor, generations of kids have learned to count "1, 2, 4" because there's been no Exit 3 all this time. Yes, he really said that. See around 15:30 of the video linked on his office's page about this:
https://www.governor.ny.gov/news/after-50-years-delay-governor-cuomo-announces-new-exit-3-improve-accessibility-albany (https://www.governor.ny.gov/news/after-50-years-delay-governor-cuomo-announces-new-exit-3-improve-accessibility-albany)
In the 70's, WIIC in Pittsburgh, went to an ad campaign of "e11even Alive". instantly the local Utes started spelling elleven. Multitudes of parents and teachers complained.
Drove through the new exit 3 ramp for the second time this morning, as my trip down last night was when it was already starting to get dark. That's definitely not the final coat of asphalt on the ramp. NB exit 3 looks similarly paved, though guiderail is needed west of the bridge, as well as finishing the capping of the retaining wall. NB lane shifts are also gone, so there should be less panic braking from other drivers on my drives home from now on, at least.
Quote from: vdeane on September 27, 2019, 10:06:02 PM
Given that they use signs like "yield ahead" and "right lane ends" for a normal ramp acceleration lane, I'm not sure how much I'd read into this being signed as a "detour".
(personal opinion)
Found one more, and this one is a doozy: "right lane closed 1/2 mile" when the closure is regarding the acceleration lane for the original exit 4 SB on ramp. :pan:
Quote from: ARMOURERERIC on September 28, 2019, 11:07:03 AM
Quote from: Jim on July 17, 2019, 01:14:06 PM
Yes, but think of the children! According to the governor, generations of kids have learned to count "1, 2, 4" because there's been no Exit 3 all this time. Yes, he really said that. See around 15:30 of the video linked on his office's page about this:
https://www.governor.ny.gov/news/after-50-years-delay-governor-cuomo-announces-new-exit-3-improve-accessibility-albany (https://www.governor.ny.gov/news/after-50-years-delay-governor-cuomo-announces-new-exit-3-improve-accessibility-albany)
In the 70's, WIIC in Pittsburgh, went to an ad campaign of "e11even Alive". instantly the local Utes started spelling elleven. Multitudes of parents and teachers complained.
I think that was a total thing in the 70s. WPIX in NYC also started the eleven alive branding although I'm not sure if it led to kids spelling eleven wrong as a result.
For those looking for the day by day update.. What looks to be the overhead sign gantry for 1 mile advance signs for Exit 3 northbound went up since yesterday, and the one right at the exit ramp has side supports up with the rest of the structure ready to go sitting on the new ramp.
Plus it looks like they might be finishing up the installation of the sound wall posts this week. It looked like they had some up all the way to the southern end of the wall when I drove down this morning.
More work has been done on the SB exit 3 ramp. Paving has begun there, and what looks like grading for the deceleration lane (hard to tell what the precise status is there, as I tend to find myself in the left lane passing slow traffic around that spot). Once they finish paving that and have the guiderail in, we'll have another ramp open, and they'll be able to do the SB work for existing exits 4 and 5 that is currently on hold.
EDIT: That gantry was still not installed as of my drive home, but the sound wall posts are all in! I must say, that wall is going to take some getting used to - it looks really out of place relative to the rest of the tree-lined corridor.
Quote from: storm2k on September 29, 2019, 11:44:09 AMWPIX in NYC also started the eleven alive branding although I'm not sure if it led to kids spelling eleven wrong as a result.
Probably not, as the branding was spelled "11 Alive."
Quote from: Jim on October 09, 2019, 08:55:07 AM
For those looking for the day by day update.. What looks to be the overhead sign gantry for 1 mile advance signs for Exit 3 northbound went up since yesterday, and the one right at the exit ramp has side supports up with the rest of the structure ready to go sitting on the new ramp.
And now there are signs hanging on them.
First northbound advance signs:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.teresco.org%2Fpics%2Fexit3-20191015%2FP1020504-800.jpg&hash=27ee3898e14715cf8173106453e369103376ae0e)
and at the new exit ramp:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.teresco.org%2Fpics%2Fexit3-20191015%2FP1020508-800.jpg&hash=9076da040dd3367f2381351a75a04ba3daf9b6ac)
Also barely visible in the second photo, parked on the ramp, is a collection of additional sign panels ready to mount.
The other northbound gantries were put up last week. I would imagine those signs will appear on them shortly. There were also a few panels placed in the sound wall when I drove down this morning.
One lane was paved northbound early in the month, but neither of the others were as of Sunday. Southbound, part of the right lane was done near the exit 3 ramp (which looks like they're putting guiderail in right now) as of this morning. There was also paving work on Albany-Shaker Road done over the weekend.
EDIT: As of today, all NB overhead signs are up, more of the sound wall panels are in, and all the main SB lanes are paved from the Albany-Shaker underpass through the end of the work zone (as is the exit 3 off ramp; the on ramp still needs a final course). The off ramp has its guiderail in, so it looks like we're close there. NB, it looks like they're extending the retaining wall.
The new SB Exit 3 ramp opened this morning:
https://www.governor.ny.gov/news/governor-cuomo-announces-new-albany-airport-connector-exit-3-southbound-will-open-morning
Something weird was going on along Albany-Shaker this morning. Both ramps to and from I-87 SB were closed at 9:30. By noon, they were open.
I'm looking forward to using that new SB ramp. Getting to the airport from the Northway could be an absolute biatch.
I really didn't find it that problematic and think the money could have been better used elsewhere.
(personal opinion emphasized)
Quote from: Rothman on October 21, 2019, 06:02:27 PM
I really didn't find it that problematic and think the money could have been better used elsewhere.
(personal opinion emphasized)
I prefer the airport exit to a handful of roundabouts, thank you.
As I was waiting this afternoon at the light on the west side of the Albany-Shaker Road underpass, I looked up to my left to see this for the first time:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.teresco.org%2F%7Eterescoj%2FIMG_4074.jpg&hash=5217aa9adea4879a15e45ccb69c99d319408ff2f)
Sorry about the poor quality, I only had my iPad handy and the sun was in about as bad a position as it could be.
Quote from: kalvado on October 21, 2019, 06:51:18 PM
Quote from: Rothman on October 21, 2019, 06:02:27 PM
I really didn't find it that problematic and think the money could have been better used elsewhere.
(personal opinion emphasized)
I prefer the airport exit to a handful of roundabouts, thank you.
There weren't any roundabouts as was, except one on NY 155 that no one needed to take to get to the airport from I-87.
Quote from: Rothman on October 21, 2019, 08:35:00 PM
Quote from: kalvado on October 21, 2019, 06:51:18 PM
Quote from: Rothman on October 21, 2019, 06:02:27 PM
I really didn't find it that problematic and think the money could have been better used elsewhere.
(personal opinion emphasized)
I prefer the airport exit to a handful of roundabouts, thank you.
There weren't any roundabouts as was, except one on NY 155 that no one needed to take to get to the airport from I-87.
I think the point was that this project is a good use of funds compared to the Malta roundabouts.
(Presumably you had something else in mind for how the funds should be better used...)
Heh. I heard NYSDOT's Operations head complain in a presentation at a conference about the Malta roundabouts as they were being built (he was something of a character).
I wasn't really in tune to what got the Malta roundabouts done back then, so I really don't know if they were a good use of money or not. However, given the pavement and bridge needs in the area, I do wonder about the use of funds for Exit 3.
(personal opinion expressed)
Quote from: Rothman on October 22, 2019, 09:56:08 AM
Heh. I heard NYSDOT's Operations head complain in a presentation at a conference about the Malta roundabouts as they were being built (he was something of a character).
I wasn't really in tune to what got the Malta roundabouts done back then, so I really don't know if they were a good use of money or not. However, given the pavement and bridge needs in the area, I do wonder about the use of funds for Exit 3.
(personal opinion expressed)
You assume those money would otherwise be used for maintenance. I suspect that those money are new construction, and would buy just a few more circular holes on a map Choosing between exit 3 and new roundabouts, choice is crystal clear. And since Malta lost appetite for those, now one is being slammed onto Cliffton park. Judging from traffic counts, it would quickly become a hot spot... Lets complain about those funds first!
That's not how funding at NYSDOT works. The money that went towards Exit 3 could have been used for MbCs, bridge rehabs/repairs -- any number of capital projects. "Maintenance" projects that are not considered capital represent a smaller, much more narrow set of work types at NYSDOT. Although Maintenance has sucked some capital funding its way, the fact of the matter is that these Exit 3 funds could have been used for any other project on the NHS or NHPP eligible facilities in Region 1.
Quote from: Rothman on October 22, 2019, 02:38:09 PM
That's not how funding at NYSDOT works. The money that went towards Exit 3 could have been used for MbCs, bridge rehabs/repairs -- any number of capital projects. "Maintenance" projects that are not considered capital represent a smaller, much more narrow set of work types at NYSDOT. Although Maintenance has sucked some capital funding its way, the fact of the matter is that these Exit 3 funds could have been used for any other project on the NHS or NHPP eligible facilities in Region 1.
Do you think those funds would be allocated to R1, to begin with, if not for the exit?
My impression is that exit is a consolation prize to upstate for big downstate projects - Daddy's Bridge (although here main beneficiary can be disputed), LGA, promised bus station, planned train station upgrade. Possibly another high visibility project would be OK, but it had to be something for the governor to brag about.
Quote from: kalvado on October 22, 2019, 02:50:12 PM
Quote from: Rothman on October 22, 2019, 02:38:09 PM
That's not how funding at NYSDOT works. The money that went towards Exit 3 could have been used for MbCs, bridge rehabs/repairs -- any number of capital projects. "Maintenance" projects that are not considered capital represent a smaller, much more narrow set of work types at NYSDOT. Although Maintenance has sucked some capital funding its way, the fact of the matter is that these Exit 3 funds could have been used for any other project on the NHS or NHPP eligible facilities in Region 1.
Do you think those funds would be allocated to R1, to begin with, if not for the exit?
My impression is that exit is a consolation prize to upstate for big downstate projects - Daddy's Bridge (although here main beneficiary can be disputed), LGA, promised bus station, planned train station upgrade. Possibly another high visibility project would be OK, but it had to be something for the governor to brag about.
Heh. Fair enough.
Even if the funds flowed back into the Main Office's purview, there are plenty of worthwhile projects that fall into this kind of category (Kosciuszko Bridge replacement, I-690 at Teall in Syracuse, etc.). Doesn't change the fact that the money spent on Exit 3 could have gone towards pressing needs in just preserving the system -- rather than a not-very-urgent reconfiguration.
(personal opinion emphasized)
Quote from: Rothman on October 22, 2019, 03:36:29 PM
Quote from: kalvado on October 22, 2019, 02:50:12 PM
Quote from: Rothman on October 22, 2019, 02:38:09 PM
That's not how funding at NYSDOT works. The money that went towards Exit 3 could have been used for MbCs, bridge rehabs/repairs -- any number of capital projects. "Maintenance" projects that are not considered capital represent a smaller, much more narrow set of work types at NYSDOT. Although Maintenance has sucked some capital funding its way, the fact of the matter is that these Exit 3 funds could have been used for any other project on the NHS or NHPP eligible facilities in Region 1.
Do you think those funds would be allocated to R1, to begin with, if not for the exit?
My impression is that exit is a consolation prize to upstate for big downstate projects - Daddy's Bridge (although here main beneficiary can be disputed), LGA, promised bus station, planned train station upgrade. Possibly another high visibility project would be OK, but it had to be something for the governor to brag about.
Heh. Fair enough.
Even if the funds flowed back into the Main Office's purview, there are plenty of worthwhile projects that fall into this kind of category (Kosciuszko Bridge replacement, I-690 at Teall in Syracuse, etc.). Doesn't change the fact that the money spent on Exit 3 could have gone towards pressing needs in just preserving the system -- rather than a not-very-urgent reconfiguration.
(personal opinion emphasized)
Is Kosciuszko bridge replacement even on the horizon? There was a significant amount of deck work a few years back, I assume that means bridge will be kept as-is for a while.
I think he means the NYC Kosciuszko bridge (you know, that one that's actually called that by regular people), which was recently replaced. The other project mentioned (I-690 over Teall) is also recent construction.
Quote from: vdeane on October 22, 2019, 08:13:56 PM
I think he means the NYC Kosciuszko bridge (you know, that one that's actually called that by regular people), which was recently replaced. The other project mentioned (I-690 over Teall) is also recent construction.
NYC bridge wouldn't fit into "consolation prize for upstate" category...
He was talking about the Main Office funding of regional projects category, not "consolation prize for upstate". NYSDOT's project budget is split by region, with some money skimmed off the top and put in a Main Office pool to be given out for large projects that would otherwise be difficult for the regions to fund (like the Patroon Island Bridge project, which otherwise would have been about an entire year's budget for R1).
I was not even aware until now that the Twin Bridges have an official name.
I can't speak as being from the area, but my preference would be for 8-laning those bridges ahead of the current Exit 3 project.
I think the curves are more of a problem than the bridges, but we're getting off track.
Not to mention the huge merge NB at exit 7 and SB at exits 8, 8A, and 9. The fact that the bridge has narrow shoulders and arch structures doesn't help. I don't understand curve issues (they can be taken at 60 mph easily enough), but something similar happens on I-590/NY 590 at the can of worms, so it seems like people can be intimidated by them.
Regarding exit 3, there was more paving done by yesterday, a couple more signs installed, and the retaining wall looks more finished.
Quote from: vdeane on October 23, 2019, 01:12:05 PM
Not to mention the huge merge NB at exit 7 and SB at exits 8, 8A, and 9. The fact that the bridge has narrow shoulders and arch structures doesn't help. I don't understand curve issues (they can be taken at 60 mph easily enough), but something similar happens on I-590/NY 590 at the can of worms, so it seems like people can be intimidated by them.
Regarding exit 3, there was more paving done by yesterday, a couple more signs installed, and the retaining wall looks more finished.
Thinking about it, looks like widening to 2x4 lanes is assumed by the recent projects - overpass replacement at exit 4, SPUI.. It makes total sense to widen up to exit 9 or so, widening up to the bridge will only make things worse. Bridge is a strong bottleneck, apparently.
I don't think curves are the issue; 80 is pretty easy in a car. Exit merges are what kills it.
As far as I am aware, the bridges are exactly what is blocking a widening. There have been talks about it for years, but it's never gone through with due to the cost of replacing them. As far as Region 1 is concerned, it's not an issue they are willing to tackle any time soon.
In other news, more SB signage for exit 4 has been installed (it's currently covered up, and likely will be for a little while). Grading is underway for the new SB exit 5 on ramp. Meanwhile, the retaining wall by the flyover is looking more complete, and the mound of dirt next to it is looking less like a mound and more like a soon to be landscaped slope.
The wow starts now.
https://www.timesunion.com/news/article/Work-on-Northway-Exit-3-nearly-complete-14814062.php
I can say that the this morning's rush hour NB lane closure around the new Exit 3 ramp was not fun. I'm glad it was for final prep to open the ramp.
The lane markings around the end of the new ramps at Albany-Shaker are much more clear as of yesterday. It was nearly impossible to figure out where you were supposed to be going with the temp markings that were out there. No matter what, it will be a dangerous free-for-all when those markings become snow-covered (possibly within the next 48 hours) and no one's used to the new traffic pattern yet.
I am a little concerned that the left turn lane for Albany-Shaker WB to Northway SB is pretty small and will frequently back up into the left through lane on Albany-Shaker WB.
I feel like my evening commute has been revolutionized. Today's drive home was the smoothest I've ever had, not including days where I left work early. Everything was flowing freely south of exit 6.
My first experience through the area after the new ramp's opening nearly left me to be its first casualty. What I thought was going to be a temporary lane shift of Albany-Shaker WB just after passing under the Northway seems to be permanent. Or at least it looks permanently striped. The two through lanes make a hard shift left, using the real estate that was old left turn lane for the left through lane, leaving a short, new right turn lane onto 155 EB. Then just across the intersection, traffic makes a hard shift back right. In the left lane, I observed two left-lane cars a few seconds in front of me completely ignore the shift and drive in a straight line, fortunately when no one was in the right lane. I came to the intersection and did the shift, but to oncoming left turn traffic it apparently still looks I was moving over to turn left (which would be onto the now nonexistent ramp). A driver turned left right in front of me and I am convinced he thought I was in the wrong for going straight through my green light. Hard braking on my part narrowly avoided a crash.
Further ahead, driver confusion was apparent as I saw an SUV make a U-Turn just before the light at the new ramps.
Uncovered NB signs and my first ride across the new flyover:
http://www.teresco.org/pics/exit3-20191108/
Quote from: Jim on November 08, 2019, 04:24:11 PM
Uncovered NB signs and my first ride across the new flyover:
http://www.teresco.org/pics/exit3-20191108/
Went there on Wednesday, the day ramp opened.
"To I-87 north" at the end of ramp is a cute thingie - you can only see it while coming off I-87..
On a separate note, there is a Times Union report on Cuomo II ceremony at the exit: https://www.timesunion.com/news/article/Work-on-Northway-Exit-3-nearly-complete-14814062.php
Other than driving the wrong way for whatever reason, since governor's car carries general issue license plate - should it have a validation sticker either on a plate or on a windshield? What about inspection sticker?
Quote from: Jim on November 08, 2019, 04:24:11 PM
Uncovered NB signs and my first ride across the new flyover:
http://www.teresco.org/pics/exit3-20191108/
Weird there's no guidance arrow under the I-87 marker. Going with that approach you shouldn't have a guidance arrow under the Airport symbol either.
My drives home on Thursday and Friday weren't as magical as Wednesday. It seemed everyone was paying attention while Cuomo was touting the fact that children can now learn to count on the Northway, but afterwards promptly forgot about the new auxiliary lane between exits 4 and 5 and resumed their early merging behavior.
Quote from: Jim on November 06, 2019, 08:51:34 PM
My first experience through the area after the new ramp's opening nearly left me to be its first casualty. What I thought was going to be a temporary lane shift of Albany-Shaker WB just after passing under the Northway seems to be permanent. Or at least it looks permanently striped. The two through lanes make a hard shift left, using the real estate that was old left turn lane for the left through lane, leaving a short, new right turn lane onto 155 EB. Then just across the intersection, traffic makes a hard shift back right. In the left lane, I observed two left-lane cars a few seconds in front of me completely ignore the shift and drive in a straight line, fortunately when no one was in the right lane. I came to the intersection and did the shift, but to oncoming left turn traffic it apparently still looks I was moving over to turn left (which would be onto the now nonexistent ramp). A driver turned left right in front of me and I am convinced he thought I was in the wrong for going straight through my green light. Hard braking on my part narrowly avoided a crash.
Further ahead, driver confusion was apparent as I saw an SUV make a U-Turn just before the light at the new ramps.
It looks like they haven't finished paving in the area (the EB lanes are uneven), and there's a LOT of extra space on the north side of the road. I also recall reading that they were going to add a second left turn lane onto I-87 north, which hasn't happened yet. I'm guessing they're still not done yet.
Drivers are having lane confusion on Albany Shaker EB through the lights. The striping and signage don't line up well. Right lane also seems to dump you in the right turn only lane for the time being, causing cars to jump left.
Driving through a few more times this week, WB Albany Shaker to get on I-87 South, I can confidently say that driver confusion is high. Cars sitting at what used to be the left turn lane with a directional signal waiting to turn left into a barricade. Others not following the crazy lane shift and shift back. Others pulling U-Turns thinking they missed the ramp, I expect because their GPS is yelling at them. If nothing else, the lane shifting needs to be signed better, and some clear signage indicating where to find the new SB I-87 onramp. I'm tempted to avoid the area on my way home this afternoon. Fridays tend to have more people unfamiliar with the area anyway, so it seems like a recipe for delays and accidents.
I've observed a few cars getting on the Northway who don't seem to know that there's an auxiliary lane and still try to merge as early as they can, whether there's space for them without others stopping to let them in or not.
The EB issue on Albany Shaker is unacceptable, as it seems they are declaring the striping done. The left lane is not aligned with any lane under the bridge and the right lane causes confusion as people think they're in a right turn only lane.
Honestly, it seems like the contractor just packed up and left after Cuomo's ribbon cutting. I haven't seen any additional work happen since, despite the fact that paving is obviously not finished on Albany-Shaker and most tenth mile markers on the Northway are still missing.
Winter? Not exactly easy to pave when temps are below 50F.
Quote from: froggie on November 17, 2019, 10:27:07 PM
Winter? Not exactly easy to pave when temps are below 50F.
Asphalt generally is doable, just find a reasonably above-freezing day.
Quote from: Jim on November 08, 2019, 04:24:11 PM
Uncovered NB signs and my first ride across the new flyover:
http://www.teresco.org/pics/exit3-20191108/
Interesting that they don't use the MUTCD airport symbol on the signs. I thought that was the general guidance these days.
Quote from: Alps on November 18, 2019, 12:11:31 AM
Quote from: froggie on November 17, 2019, 10:27:07 PM
Winter? Not exactly easy to pave when temps are below 50F.
Asphalt generally is doable, just find a reasonably above-freezing day.
Those have been in short supply up here the past couple weeks, which has made repairs from the Halloween night flooding difficult.
Granted, Albany's been warmer with less snow than up here....but even there, they've only had one day above 38F in the past week.
It appears the contractor did come back. I saw them this morning working on the removal of the former c/d lanes. Still no tenth mile markers on the Northway, which one would think would be easy enough to do. I would have thought they could have worked in the days and weekend immediately following the ribbon cutting, but maybe the governor didn't want an active work zone after his celebrations.
This project has always struck me as a little odd in terms of what they do when. They often would appear to start a task, leaving it unfinished for several days/weeks, and then come back, repeat, etc. Take the NB paving: they did the milling around the bridges, waited a while, paved the left lane, waited a very long while (during which the paving on the left lane had visibly started to erode), and then finally finished the job.
(personal opinion)
I was surprised by another new configuration this afternoon when I did the WB Albany-Shaker to SB I-87 part of my ride home. The lane jog left and right on the west side of the underpass is gone (though the pavement markings still exist), with the old left turn lane now barricaded off and looks to be in preparation to become a left turn lane again. What used to be the entrance ramp to I-87 SB has been replaced with a not-yet-open driveway into the Desmond. I had no idea that was in the works, but it seems to makes sense to have traffic in and out of the Desmond use the light that's already there.
Edit: if I had looked more carefully at the document vdeane posted months ago, I'd have seen that the driveway to the Desmond was in the plan: https://www.governor.ny.gov/sites/governor.ny.gov/files/atoms/files/AlbanyAirport_Exit3.pdf
And here comes re-stripping of a problematic spot:
https://www.timesunion.com/news/article/Lane-striping-makes-traffic-mess-of-Northway-s-14848652.php
During the morning commute, of course.
Yes, I just went through, but fortunately in the opposite direction to all of the traffic. Never seen Maxwell backed all the way up to Old Niskayuna. Apparently 35 degrees is good enough to try paving, but it doesn't work out well. Here's a screen shot I grabbed at 8:50 AM.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.teresco.org%2F%7Eterescoj%2Fasr.jpg&hash=fe64552d43c35c0725ef5097fc421d16be47fdcb)
I will be through there on Sunday at the latest.
Striping has been corrected -- thank goodness. Minor issue still remains right at Albany-Shaker and Wolf Road heading eastbound. Cars in the rightmost straight lane may still accidentally head into the left lane on the other side due to a slight misalignment. Dashed line would help out.
However, coming westbound yesterday, the currently operating two traffic signals are way to the left at Albany-Shaker and NY 155. On Sunday, they were over closed lanes. Hopefully, the new signals will be operational in short order.
Now that the final configuration has been in place for a little while and people have had a chance to get used to it, I'll throw out my observations.
Not surprisingly, the Exit 4 NB ramp no longer backs up onto the mainline and usually I find just a few cars waiting at the light at Wolf Rd. It's nice to know I never need to wait two or more (long) cycles there like could be the case previously.
My rides home from Albany Shaker WB to Northway SB have improved quite a bit. Nothing stacks up as badly as it used to, and the light timings usually have been working pretty well. I haven't see the left turn lane to the SB onramp stacked up too far and have yet to wait multiple cycles like I used to.
I'm still seeing some cars end up in what used to be the left turn lane onto the Northway SB which is now the left turn into the Desmond, and then they try to get back in.
So it's overall more of an improvement for my specific commute than I expected.
I am just happy they sorted out the lame striping on Albany-Shaker under the overpass.
Not sure if it's an improvement, since I usually drive E-W on Albany-Shaker, but I suppose not having a back up is a good thing.
Quote from: storm2k on November 18, 2019, 09:00:33 AM
Quote from: Jim on November 08, 2019, 04:24:11 PM
Uncovered NB signs and my first ride across the new flyover:
http://www.teresco.org/pics/exit3-20191108/
Interesting that they don't use the MUTCD airport symbol on the signs. I thought that was the general guidance these days.
Looks like there's even space for it next to the NY 155 shields.