Bill would match N.Y. highway exits with mile numbers

[vdeane]

This surprises me.  If someone put me on the spot for a guess, I would have said 70-75% of Thruway transactions take place through E-ZPass at this point.  I guess my view is skewed by the fact that I'm on the road most frequently at rush hour with other commuters who are much more likely to have a tag.  Are the actual numbers out there somewhere?

I'm the opposite; I'm on the Thruway mainly on the weekends when most of the traffic is tourists.

I know there have been local news stories about long-term plans to upgrade Exit 24 with direct E-ZPass only ramps connecting the Northway and I-90 to the Thruway, but that was a while back and I don't have any specifics handy.  I'm definitely not holding my breath.

Seems to be dead, given that there's nothing on it on the Thruway site.  The logical time would have been during the current widening project anyways.

[SignBridge]

Well I'm happy to hear (belatedly) that I-84 is back to DOT and not the T'way. I always thought it was a dopey move when the T'way Auth. took over that road, since it's not a toll road.

On the other hand, I completely approved of the Cross Westchester Expwy.(I-287) being part of the Thruway, since it directly connects the New England Section to the Mainline, so it makes sense for one agency to handle all of it. I never understood the original arrangement of having one section of the Thruway not connected to the other. And a different State Police Troop (K) patrolling the C.W. Expwy. So that "merger" connected everything more efficiently.

[SignBridge]

While we're discussing the N.Y. Thruway..............

I've been looking at their website and their printed brochure and I see there is a toll-free section in the Buffalo vicinity. I've never been to that area so I'm not familiar with the history. Why is that section toll-free? And I further notice that after the ticket-controlled system ends at Williamsville, it then begins again as you're going west from Lackawanna to Ripley. It seems to me years ago that western section from Buffalo to Pennsylvania only had barrier tolls like on the New England Section. If my memory is right, what made them convert that to ticket-controlled and when was it done? Seems like a lot of complication..........

[machias]

While we're discussing the N.Y. Thruway..............

I've been looking at their website and their printed brochure and I see there is a toll-free section in the Buffalo vicinity. I've never been to that area so I'm not familiar with the history. Why is that section toll-free? And I further notice that after the ticket-controlled system ends at Williamsville, it then begins again as you're going west from Lackawanna to Ripley. It seems to me years ago that western section from Buffalo to Pennsylvania only had barrier tolls like on the New England Section. If my memory is right, what made them convert that to ticket-controlled and when was it done? Seems like a lot of complication..........

I believe the Erie Section of the Thruway (Lackawanna to Ripley) has always been ticket controlled since it's completion in 1957.  It was opened in two sections: Pa. Line to Silver Creek in August and then Silver Creek to Lackawanna in December 1957.

[SignBridge]

Hmmm.............I thought I remembered seeing in a very old Thruway brochure from the 1960's that even back then the ticket-toll system ended at the Williamsville Barrier. I could be mistaken, but I don't remember seeing anything about Ripley back then. Too bad (chuckle!) I threw out that old brochure years ago. Should have kept it forever........

[swbrotha100]

If the Thruway keeps its own set of exit numbers, regardless of whether it's I-87 portion or I-90 stretch, there is precedent. See the Kansas Turnpike, especially the I-70 section. Or I-76 on the Ohio Turnpike.

[vdeane]

Hmmm.............I thought I remembered seeing in a very old Thruway brochure from the 1960's that even back then the ticket-toll system ended at the Williamsville Barrier. I could be mistaken, but I don't remember seeing anything about Ripley back then. Too bad (chuckle!) I threw out that old brochure years ago. Should have kept it forever........

Woodbury - Williamsville (formerly Spring Valley to Williamsville) and Lackawanna - Ripley have always been two separate ticket systems.  Buffalo is free because the Thruway doesn't have ticket systems in metropolitan areas (note that NYC and Buffalo are the only metropolitan areas the Thruway enters, though it comes close to Albany and Syracuse).  It has to do with traffic counts and exit density.

[kphoger]

If the Thruway keeps its own set of exit numbers, regardless of whether it's I-87 portion or I-90 stretch, there is precedent. See the Kansas Turnpike, especially the I-70 section. Or I-76 on the Ohio Turnpike.

Frankly, I don't like it that the Turnpike is one set of exit numbers, precisely because of what it does to the exit numbers on I-70.  I would rather the Interstates had consistent exit numbers, not worrying about the Turnpike.

[SignBridge]

Deanej, thanks for that toll info. I'm surprised they don't have a barrier toll in the Buffalo area. They do have one on the New England Section in New Rochelle which is an urban/suburban area with dense traffic and frequent exits and entrances. Probably too much revenue would be lost if that section was free. Lots of interstate traffic going up and down the east coast corridor.

[machias]

Deanej, thanks for that toll info. I'm surprised they don't have a barrier toll in the Buffalo area. They do have one on the New England Section in New Rochelle which is an urban/suburban area with dense traffic and frequent exits and entrances. Probably too much revenue would be lost if that section was free. Lots of interstate traffic going up and down the east coast corridor.

Back in the mid 80s there was talk of making the Syracuse area free by putting barriers before the Collamer (I-481) and State Fair (I-690) interchanges, much like the arrangement in Buffalo.

[vdeane]

Deanej, thanks for that toll info. I'm surprised they don't have a barrier toll in the Buffalo area. They do have one on the New England Section in New Rochelle which is an urban/suburban area with dense traffic and frequent exits and entrances. Probably too much revenue would be lost if that section was free. Lots of interstate traffic going up and down the east coast corridor.

Well, I was referring to the criteria for a ticket system... most likely they didn't think the gap was large enough to warrant a barrier, since all the NYC gaps are much larger.  I-190 had barriers in Buffalo until a few years ago though (and still does on the Grand Island Bridges).

[Duke87]

If the Thruway keeps its own set of exit numbers, regardless of whether it's I-87 portion or I-90 stretch, there is precedent. See the Kansas Turnpike, especially the I-70 section. Or I-76 on the Ohio Turnpike.

Frankly, I don't like it that the Turnpike is one set of exit numbers, precisely because of what it does to the exit numbers on I-70.  I would rather the Interstates had consistent exit numbers, not worrying about the Turnpike.

Especially considering that one could simply bump the numbers on the I-70 portion up to I-70 mileage and not interfere with anything else. 335 still wouldn't start from zero, and 470 would still have a jump, but it'd be a huge improvement.

One thing I noticed when I was through there a few days ago: east of exit 224, there are a couple of mile markers for I-70 using turnpike mileage that do not have the turnpike shield. That certainly has huge potential to create confusion in an emergency!

[froggie]

I'm the opposite; I'm on the Thruway mainly on the weekends when most of the traffic is tourists.

I could see that further west, but my weekend experience between Newburgh and Albany is that, while most traffic appears to be recreational, most of them have EZ-Passes...probably because they're largely NYC-area commuters.

[vdeane]

Probably... I'm almost always on the section between I-490 and I-81, so travelers out there don't have any toll roads other than the Thruway (the Peace Bridge is the only toll bridge in NY to accept E-ZPass that isn't in the jurisdiction of NYSTA, MTA, or PANYNJ).  Most Thruway commuters in this area would most likely be in the Buffalo or Syracuse suburbs or traveling between Rochester and Canandaigua.

[empirestate]

Probably... I'm almost always on the section between I-490 and I-81, so travelers out there don't have any toll roads other than the Thruway (the Peace Bridge is the only toll bridge in NY to accept E-ZPass that isn't in the jurisdiction of NYSTA, MTA, or PANYNJ).  Most Thruway commuters in this area would most likely be in the Buffalo or Syracuse suburbs or traveling between Rochester and Canandaigua.

All the NYSBA bridges accept E-ZPass (Rip Van Winkle thru Hamilton Fish), but you're right that none of the other international bridges do.

[vdeane]

Knew I was missing an agency in there... we have too many toll agencies!

[amroad17]

As far as the Thruway goes, I would just use the current milemarkers as exit numbers.  This also includes the Berkshire section (exit B3 would become exit B23, for example).  I consider the Thruway its own entity.  Drivers have been used to increasing exit numbers from Albany to Ripley for 55+ years.  Why change now?   As far as "free 90",  just use the current milemarkers there also.  NYC is its own world.  For I-87, keep the same exit numbers on the Major Deegan.  Restart at the Thruway (clarification helps) to where I-87 exits the Thruway (148) and continue the numbers onto the Northway to Canada.  For some of the 3dis, sequential could be used where there are many exits closely spaced (I-690 in Syracuse) instead of having exits such as 14A-B-C-D in the downtown area (also known as the x64-Virginia way ).

[empirestate]

I guess I'll just add this: if re-numbering exits to mileage-based is in fact worth doing (an assertion whose veracity I doubt), then it's worth doing fully and correctly. That is, I-87 from south to north, I-90 from west to east, each in a single sequence. Mileage-based numbering is supposed to reduce confusion and impose greater order, so if there's enough doubt already because of the Thruway system's conventions, and if that doubt isn't completely eradicated with a new system, then it won't much matter in the end whether the exits are numbered sequentially or by miles. It will still be slightly wonky, and the initiative won't have achieved its goal of eliminating that, making it a less useful venture than I already consider it to be, even if done full out.

[vdeane]

I'm starting to think that this has stalled out.  Two months and nothing's moved.

[machias]

As far as the Thruway goes, I would just use the current milemarkers as exit numbers.  This also includes the Berkshire section (exit B3 would become exit B23, for example).  I consider the Thruway its own entity.  Drivers have been used to increasing exit numbers from Albany to Ripley for 55+ years.  Why change now?   As far as "free 90",  just use the current milemarkers there also.  NYC is its own world.  For I-87, keep the same exit numbers on the Major Deegan.  Restart at the Thruway (clarification helps) to where I-87 exits the Thruway (148) and continue the numbers onto the Northway to Canada.  For some of the 3dis, sequential could be used where there are many exits closely spaced (I-690 in Syracuse) instead of having exits such as 14A-B-C-D in the downtown area (also known as the x64-Virginia way ).

I had an interesting e-mail conversation with NYSDOT last week regarding the new mileposts they put on the NY 5 freeway near Syracuse. They started the mileposts at mile "0" where the NY 5 freeway begins at NY 174. Technically, they should start around 215, since NY 5 begins at the NY-Pa. Line near Ripley. NYSDOT completely agreed and even quoted the supplement to the 2009 MUTCD, whereas NYS changed a "should" to "shall". They said they made the region aware.

When NYSDOT switches to distance-based interchange numbers, I get the impression that they're going to do it "all the way". I would not be surprised if "free 90" gets new mileposts based on the entire length of I-90 in the state and ditto for the Northway. What the Thruway does technically should fall under the 2009 MUTCD, but the Thruway does their own thing most of the time.

[vdeane]

I would suspect that too.  I've noticed a trend towards more consistency in NY over the last few years.  I would hope they number I-781 with distance-based numbers from the start; why number them sequential just to renumber them later?

[Duke87]

Considering that I-781 will only have one exit, I'd assume it just wouldn't be numbered. Rather silly otherwise.

[vdeane]

The plans I saw at the Watertown meet said the I-81 terminus is exit 1, US 11 is exit 2, and the Fort Drum terminus is exit 3.

The only other example of a freeway terminus getting an exit number in NY is exit 27 on NY 390.

[WrkHrse]

I had never really noticed the oddity on the NYST until after I had left and started driving trucks. I would love to see the exits re-numbered on a mileage system. My personal preference would be to have continuity across each major Interstate (90 and 87). That way there would only have to be one major expense in signage spending when (if ever) the NYSTA is dissolved and the whole system goes Free.

That being said I think it may be unwise to reverse the mileage to match the standard West-to-East progression. The reason being the major confusion potentially caused by switching exits -and- mileposts in an emergency situation. Continuity, however, may require conformity.

Since NYSDOT and NYSTA don't see eye-to-eye on a lot of things it would be very interesting to see how events would pan out if something like this goes through.

[SignBridge]

WrkHrse, what kinds of things do NYSDOT and NYSTA not agree on, besides exit signing formats. NYSDOT mostly adheres to the Manual, but T'way Auth. has their own variations, some of them antiquated.