Truck I-278 Photos

[dgolub]

I uploaded some photos of Astoria Boulevard (Truck I-278) to my site at http://www.greaternyroads.info/roads/nyinter/i278.  This is one of the few places where an interstate has a truck route.  Maybe the only one.

[NE2]

This is one of the few places where an interstate has a truck route.  Maybe the only one.

California has a few - most are essentially braided C/D roads to keep trucks to the right at heavy merges/splits, but I-5 Truck at SR 14 is a separate freeway (built as US 99 before current I-5 bypassed it).
https://maps.google.com/maps?ll=34.313276,-118.488171&spn=0.014445,0.028346&gl=us&t=m&z=16&layer=c&cbll=34.313142,-118.488075&panoid=dy6ZwKsbgI_z3MVrzs60bg&cbp=12,332.72,,1,-6.64
https://maps.google.com/maps?ll=34.331636,-118.504393&spn=0.014441,0.028346&gl=us&t=m&z=16&layer=c&cbll=34.331774,-118.504434&panoid=SrZah5jeSP8ftHiKg8gZbg&cbp=12,352.74,,0,-2.3
https://maps.google.com/maps?ll=34.335498,-118.507676&spn=0.028881,0.056691&gl=us&t=m&z=15&layer=c&cbll=34.33527,-118.507957&panoid=BX_Z_fuL281fFV1FfCAJnQ&cbp=12,148.41,,0,13.58 (trucks on the left, cars on the right, surface road and railroad in the middle)


from http://www.gbcnet.com/ushighways/US99/US99f_contents.html

[dgolub]

This is one of the few places where an interstate has a truck route.  Maybe the only one.

California has a few - most are essentially braided C/D roads to keep trucks to the right at heavy merges/splits, but I-5 Truck at SR 14 is a separate freeway (built as US 99 before current I-5 bypassed it).
https://maps.google.com/maps?ll=34.313276,-118.488171&spn=0.014445,0.028346&gl=us&t=m&z=16&layer=c&cbll=34.313142,-118.488075&panoid=dy6ZwKsbgI_z3MVrzs60bg&cbp=12,332.72,,1,-6.64
https://maps.google.com/maps?ll=34.331636,-118.504393&spn=0.014441,0.028346&gl=us&t=m&z=16&layer=c&cbll=34.331774,-118.504434&panoid=SrZah5jeSP8ftHiKg8gZbg&cbp=12,352.74,,0,-2.3
https://maps.google.com/maps?ll=34.335498,-118.507676&spn=0.028881,0.056691&gl=us&t=m&z=15&layer=c&cbll=34.33527,-118.507957&panoid=BX_Z_fuL281fFV1FfCAJnQ&cbp=12,148.41,,0,13.58 (trucks on the left, cars on the right, surface road and railroad in the middle)


from http://www.gbcnet.com/ushighways/US99/US99f_contents.html

I guess it's not the only one, then.  It could be the only one with traffic lights, then.  Also, I suppose you could arguably count the truck lanes of the New Jersey Turnpike (I-95), even though they're not signed as Truck I-95.

[Duke87]

The screwy thing about I-278 truck is that the clearance under the el at 31st Street is the same as the posted max height for the freeway. So if you're taller than 12'6" you have to do something more convoluted than simply taking the signed truck route (which is just the service road) to get through there.

[NE2]

The screwy thing about I-278 truck is that the clearance under the el at 31st Street is the same as the posted max height for the freeway. So if you're taller than 12'6" you have to do something more convoluted than simply taking the signed truck route (which is just the service road) to get through there.

That's pretty weird - but (at least eastbound) signs require trucks under 12'6" with more than 3 axles to use the truck route. And I-278 to the west/south is 12'9" or 12'10", so not too many trucks will be forced onto a longer route.

Coming off the Triborfk signs do point all trucks over 12'6" right on 29th. There's no signage beyond that, but it looks like you can simply turn left on Astoria and merge back into the frontage road after the el. I see no signs on Astoria westbound pointing oversize trucks around the overpass, and the roadway splits in two just before the el, with a clearance sign on only the right side despite both having the same apparent clearance. Oops?

Also this part of I-278 should really be signed north-south.

[dgolub]

Also this part of I-278 should really be signed north-south.

Yeah, the multiplex of I-278 east and GCP west is completely counterintuitive.  When I was uploading the Truck I-278 photos, I at first swapped east and west and then realized that I had goofed.  Since it's S-shaped, I-278 is difficult to sign consistently without confusing people.

[vdeane]

I'd just sign I-278 north-south.  The only place where it travels east-west for a sustained distance is on Staten Island anyways.

[Alps]

If you follow I-278 from end to end, you are heading from Central NJ to SE CT. Yes, you're bypassing a N-S road in I-95 (though calling that a "bypass" is highly questionable), but for those of us in NJ, CT is more "east" than "north". North would be NY state.

[NE2]

If you're lost in Queens and see reassurance for East Truck I-278 you'll get even more lost.

[dgolub]

If you follow I-278 from end to end, you are heading from Central NJ to SE CT. Yes, you're bypassing a N-S road in I-95 (though calling that a "bypass" is highly questionable), but for those of us in NJ, CT is more "east" than "north". North would be NY state.

I-278 ends in the Bronx.  You have to travel another 15 miles or so north on I-95 to reach Connecticut.  You might be confusing it with I-287, which does end right by the New York-Connecticut border.

[vdeane]

Yeah, last I checked I-278 neither goes anywhere close to CT, nor does it bypass any part of I-95 except the Cross-Bronx and the George Washington Bridge.

[Alps]

If you follow I-278 from end to end, you are heading from Central NJ to SE CT. Yes, you're bypassing a N-S road in I-95 (though calling that a "bypass" is highly questionable), but for those of us in NJ, CT is more "east" than "north". North would be NY state.

I-278 ends in the Bronx.  You have to travel another 15 miles or so north on I-95 to reach Connecticut.  You might be confusing it with I-287, which does end right by the New York-Connecticut border.

*SW CT, but my point stands. No one's going to Rye or Port Chester. (No one's following I-278, either, though.) It's amusing that you think i'm confusing an Interstate in my very backyard. No, I'm just speaking in generalities to explain why it's east-west and not north-south.

[mrsman]

I-278 basically starts and ends at I-95.  (I'm ignoring the small portion in Linden between US 1/9).  So the two highways both go from Linden to the Bruckner Interchange in the Bronx.  Two different pathways that are all expressway (and not too much backtracking).

I-278 via Staten Island, Brooklyn, and Queens.
I-95 via Newark Airport, Fort Lee, and Upper Manhattan.

So yes, I-278 is a "bypass" of I-95, since I-278 bypasses Manhattan.  But both go through some very congested city driving.  It's like I-405 technically being a bypass of I-5 in the L.A. area, but often I-405 is busier.

When I'm in NY, I usually use I-278 between NJTP and the LIE, so I tend to think of the road as being N-S and would find a N-S orientation easier to follow, especially in Brooklyn.

[dgolub]

It's amusing that you think i'm confusing an Interstate in my very backyard.

It wouldn't be entirely surprising considering that the NYCDOT did it once.  When the new Willis Avenue Bridge was installed, the signs on it originally marked the Bruckner as I-287 instead of I-278.

[Alps]

When I'm in NY, I usually use I-278 between NJTP and the LIE, so I tend to think of the road as being N-S and would find a N-S orientation easier to follow, especially in Brooklyn.

SIE = east-west
Gowanus = north-south
BQE = north-south
GCP/Triboro = north-south
Bruckner = east-west

[NE2]

The Verrazano would be the perfect place to change direction. A second change at the Triborfk is optional, since it is all slightly north of east in the Bronx. As it is, you make a hard right to get from I-95 north to I-278 west. (I'd support extending I-80 into New York to make Cross-Bronx directions more logical; it would probably end at I-495 with I-295 remaining south of there.)

[Duke87]

I see no signs on Astoria westbound pointing oversize trucks around the overpass, and the roadway splits in two just before the el, with a clearance sign on only the right side despite both having the same apparent clearance. Oops?

Pan back a bit and look at the image from the intersection with 32nd Street, which dates to September 2011 rather than February 2013. You will see in that picture that the left side of the overpass had its own clearance sign as well as signs showing left turn only/straight only for the lanes there. Seems that Van Wagner removed those signs and didn't replace them when they upgraded their billboard there (which the signs were attached to the base of) from a traditional static advertisement to a dynamic LED billboard.

[NE2]

Interesting. If any trucker hits the el, they should have a good case against Van Wagner, if it is indeed them who removed the sign.

[mrsman]

The Verrazano would be the perfect place to change direction. A second change at the Triborfk is optional, since it is all slightly north of east in the Bronx. As it is, you make a hard right to get from I-95 north to I-278 west. (I'd support extending I-80 into New York to make Cross-Bronx directions more logical; it would probably end at I-495 with I-295 remaining south of there.)

I like the idea of multiplexing I-80 onto the GWB so that the highway can extend from SF to NYC, not SF to Teaneck, NJ.  Plus it also makes it easier to travel east-west on an east-west highway.

The I-80 designation should be on the entire Cross-Bronx Expwy from the GWB until the Throgs Neck Bridge.  I-295 can be rerouted over the I-695 highway and the I-695 designation can be retired in NY.

As I mentioned in another thread, it's confusing having I-278 and I-287 in the same metro area.  Let I-87 continue from the Triboro Bridge along the BQE, Gowanus, and SIE to I-95.  Renumber the Bruckner Expy between the Triboro and the Bruckner Interchange as I-487.  And now we can retire the I-=278 designation.

[Alps]

The Verrazano would be the perfect place to change direction. A second change at the Triborfk is optional, since it is all slightly north of east in the Bronx. As it is, you make a hard right to get from I-95 north to I-278 west. (I'd support extending I-80 into New York to make Cross-Bronx directions more logical; it would probably end at I-495 with I-295 remaining south of there.)

I like the idea of multiplexing I-80 onto the GWB so that the highway can extend from SF to NYC, not SF to Teaneck, NJ.  Plus it also makes it easier to travel east-west on an east-west highway.

The I-80 designation should be on the entire Cross-Bronx Expwy from the GWB until the Throgs Neck Bridge.  I-295 can be rerouted over the I-695 highway and the I-695 designation can be retired in NY.

As I mentioned in another thread, it's confusing having I-278 and I-287 in the same metro area.  Let I-87 continue from the Triboro Bridge along the BQE, Gowanus, and SIE to I-95.  Renumber the Bruckner Expy between the Triboro and the Bruckner Interchange as I-487.  And now we can retire the I-=278 designation.

FICTIONAL HIGHWAYS ALERT