New York

[baugh17]

This is outside the scope of this study, but is Utica ever going to convert the Oswego St. and Noyes St. intersections into grade-separations on NY 5/8/12?

No.

If they were going to, they would have done it with the (relatively) recent full reconstruction. There's no real need.

It was in the original plans to upgrade Oswego and Noyes with the rebuild to the north, only to be shot down when residents and businesses were concerned an upgrade would sever the neighborhood and traffic would bypass any businesses along 5/8/12 in the area (Developers have also been heavily marketing this area the last several years).  Suffice it to say, it won't be happening anytime soon.

[kalvado]

I'm one of those referenced by Val in being intrigued by the concept of moving the Dunn Bridge a mile south for more direct port access. But I feel that even with a new bridge there, some sort of local/non-motorized crossing should remain at/near the existing Dunn Bridge.

There is a plan to replace (very old) rail crossing in some not too distant future. The old one had pedestrian access until it was deemed unsafe due to structure condition, and new one would probably get that.
One thing to remember, though - Hudson is a navigable river, and bridges must allow significant clearance for boat traffic. Rail bridge is low to water, so it's a drawbridge. If you ever walked Dunn bridge, it's a pretty significant climb. Add another steep climb on a hill on Albany side, and all that non motorized traffic quickly becomes feel-good useless idea. Electric bike is not out of question, though, but I thought hate to those is a new concept needed to unite the fractured nation.

[froggie]

I'm one of those referenced by Val in being intrigued by the concept of moving the Dunn Bridge a mile south for more direct port access. But I feel that even with a new bridge there, some sort of local/non-motorized crossing should remain at/near the existing Dunn Bridge.

There is a plan to replace (very old) rail crossing in some not too distant future. The old one had pedestrian access until it was deemed unsafe due to structure condition, and new one would probably get that.
One thing to remember, though - Hudson is a navigable river, and bridges must allow significant clearance for boat traffic. Rail bridge is low to water, so it's a drawbridge. If you ever walked Dunn bridge, it's a pretty significant climb. Add another steep climb on a hill on Albany side, and all that non motorized traffic quickly becomes feel-good useless idea. Electric bike is not out of question, though, but I thought hate to those is a new concept needed to unite the fractured nation.

I don't see it as a "feel good".  Despite the "climbs", I've hiked from the train station to downtown, and I wasn't the only one.  With an improved connection in that general vicinity, I'm pretty sure more people would do it.

[kalvado]

I'm one of those referenced by Val in being intrigued by the concept of moving the Dunn Bridge a mile south for more direct port access. But I feel that even with a new bridge there, some sort of local/non-motorized crossing should remain at/near the existing Dunn Bridge.

There is a plan to replace (very old) rail crossing in some not too distant future. The old one had pedestrian access until it was deemed unsafe due to structure condition, and new one would probably get that.
One thing to remember, though - Hudson is a navigable river, and bridges must allow significant clearance for boat traffic. Rail bridge is low to water, so it's a drawbridge. If you ever walked Dunn bridge, it's a pretty significant climb. Add another steep climb on a hill on Albany side, and all that non motorized traffic quickly becomes feel-good useless idea. Electric bike is not out of question, though, but I thought hate to those is a new concept needed to unite the fractured nation.

I don't see it as a "feel good".  Despite the "climbs", I've hiked from the train station to downtown, and I wasn't the only one.  With an improved connection in that general vicinity, I'm pretty sure more people would do it.

Was that trip before Uber days?
Connectivity to train station is still awful, they could at least pretend that the bus connection is actually important. Before Uber, your options of getting anywhere from Amtrak station were pretty tough without a car.

[froggie]

Post-Uber.  With a carry-on bag.

More people would walk that trek if it wasn't a Jersey-wall width from what is effectively a freeway.  Something wider than sidewalk-width would be a plus too.

[machias]

This is outside the scope of this study, but is Utica ever going to convert the Oswego St. and Noyes St. intersections into grade-separations on NY 5/8/12?

No.

If they were going to, they would have done it with the (relatively) recent full reconstruction. There's no real need.

Back when they were designing the Court Street interchange, I had a rather lengthy in person chat with NYSDOT Region 2 on the entire project. It was right after that project was moved to two phases, phase one being Court Street and phase 2 being the remaining traffic lights at Noyes and Oswego.

The original design was (north to south), if I recall correctly, go over Court Street, block off Noyes Street, and go under Oswego Street. I remember saying, "that will be a bit of a roller coaster" and they agreed. One of the concerns was the underground stream in the area; the water table is fairly high and Nail(?) Creek passes underground in front of Utica Cutlery.

When the entire project was still being discussed, the community became involved and worried about the west side being cut off from the east side, that's one of the reasons for the pedestrian bridge near Sunset Ave. There is that phase two in a drawer somewhere, I won't see it in my lifetime.

The two interchanges handling the entire area would have been Court Street and Burrstone Road, with Oswego Street just carrying traffic from the east side to the west side over NY 5/8/12.  I don't know if I'm remembering correctly, but I think they wanted to extend I-790 down to French Rd as part of the project, which would explain the "EAST 790" pull thru signs at French Rd and Burrstone Rd headed north.

[vdeane]

I'm one of those referenced by Val in being intrigued by the concept of moving the Dunn Bridge a mile south for more direct port access. But I feel that even with a new bridge there, some sort of local/non-motorized crossing should remain at/near the existing Dunn Bridge.

There is a plan to replace (very old) rail crossing in some not too distant future. The old one had pedestrian access until it was deemed unsafe due to structure condition, and new one would probably get that.
One thing to remember, though - Hudson is a navigable river, and bridges must allow significant clearance for boat traffic. Rail bridge is low to water, so it's a drawbridge. If you ever walked Dunn bridge, it's a pretty significant climb. Add another steep climb on a hill on Albany side, and all that non motorized traffic quickly becomes feel-good useless idea. Electric bike is not out of question, though, but I thought hate to those is a new concept needed to unite the fractured nation.

Construction has begun, to be completed in 2028.  The new bridge will have a multi-use path on the side, connecting from the Albany Skyway to Rensselaer.

The walkway over the Dunn does see use, enough that NYSDOT got numerous complaints when it was closed due to the emergency removal of part over a ramp to I-787.  The status of "hardening" the detour down the ramp to Quay Street near Jennings Landing is something that we get asked periodically.  So it gets used a lot more than one would initially think.

[webny99]

This is outside the scope of this study, but is Utica ever going to convert the Oswego St. and Noyes St. intersections into grade-separations on NY 5/8/12?

No.

If they were going to, they would have done it with the (relatively) recent full reconstruction. There's no real need.

Providing a continuous freeway through the Utica area is a pretty decent reason, but that's beside the point.

[webny99]

I-490 west of Rochester is currently closed in both directions due to a major crash, with reports that a tour bus may have overturned:
https://www.rochesterfirst.com/weather/traffic/rt-490-near-chili-closed-due-to-reports-of-bus-flipped-over/

Backups are present eastbound at Exits 2 and 3, westbound at Exit 4 (while Exit 5 seems to be holding up OK so far; it's more likely that traffic would use Exit 7 to avoid the backup at Exit 4), and multiple surface street locations in Churchville, North Chili, and West Chili. Most traffic that would normally use I-490 to get to the Thruway will now be recommended to use I-390, NY 33A, or NY 19 instead.

[cu2010]

Drove up I-81 northbound from Syracuse today, mile markers north of the current I-481 are being relocated to reflect the new mileage once 81 is rerouted. The existing mile markers are just being moved south to their new locations.

What is surprising is that it is being done in coordination with R7. The project is complete to just north of current Exit 48A; work to complete the remainder is in progress.

Does this mean exit number conversion is coming soon to R7? A lot of the signs on 81 in Jefferson County could use replacement...of course, I have little faith that any new signage in R7 will actually look good, their sign shops have been producing some utter garbage lately.

[Rothman]

Does this mean exit number conversion is coming soon to R7?

Yes.  I thought some of the conversions have already happened up there (Jefferson County north).

[vdeane]

Meanwhile Google Maps still shows the sequential exit numbers on NY 481 and the ground mounted sign replacement project the conversion is part of still shows as under construction (even though it was due to be finished on 10/1), implying that those numbers have yet to be changed.  I wonder what the hold-up is.

A lot of the signs on 81 in Jefferson County could use replacement...of course, I have little faith that any new signage in R7 will actually look good, their sign shops have been producing some utter garbage lately.

If they actually did replace every guide sign on I-81, I would figure that would be done via contract rather than from in-house maintenance forces.  Of course, that's not a guarantee of quality either, since those are only as good as the person who does the sign layouts.

Does this mean exit number conversion is coming soon to R7?

Yes.  I thought some of the conversions have already happened up there (Jefferson County north).

They hadn't changed as of Labor Day, but I haven't been up there since.

[Rothman]

Does this mean exit number conversion is coming soon to R7?

Yes.  I thought some of the conversions have already happened up there (Jefferson County north).

They hadn't changed as of Labor Day, but I haven't been up there since.

I might be thinking of far northern Oswego County; I went up to Thousand Islands in mid-October.

And the exit numbering conversion is definitely contracted out and not done by in-house forces.

[vdeane]

I might be thinking of far northern Oswego County; I went up to Thousand Islands in mid-October.

That part is definitely done.  When I was up there, it was complete through exit 37 (Sandy Creek).

[cu2010]

The exit numbers themselves are unchanged north of Exit 37. Just the mile markers are being relocated, and only northbound for now.

[Rothman]

NYSDOT issued an Engineering Bulletin yesterday (EB) about seven months after a Traffic and Safety & Mobility Instruction (TSMI) announced the adoption of the 11th Edition of the MUTCD, stating that interim guidance for compliance pertains to projects to be let on or after May 1, 2025.

[vdeane]

NYSDOT issued an Engineering Bulletin yesterday (EB) about seven months after a Traffic and Safety & Mobility Instruction (TSMI) announced the adoption of the 11th Edition of the MUTCD, stating that interim guidance for compliance pertains to projects to be let on or after May 1, 2025.

The meat of all that is the significant changes spreadsheet.  Looks like our sexy guide signs with the offset exit tabs are going away.

[SGwithADD]

The meat of all that is the significant changes spreadsheet.  Looks like our sexy guide signs with the offset exit tabs are going away.

indeed. Is there any other state that does this? Growing up, I always thought it was the "right" way to sign an exit, and hated what other states had.

[vdeane]

The meat of all that is the significant changes spreadsheet.  Looks like our sexy guide signs with the offset exit tabs are going away.

indeed. Is there any other state that does this? Growing up, I always thought it was the "right" way to sign an exit, and hated what other states had.

Definitely.  Classic PennDOT signs have charm, and I like modern MassDOT signs, but by and large I agree.  Not to mention that NY's rounded corners will just make this style of signage look even worse.

[webny99]

Does this mean they're switching to no rounded corners on exit tabs, or all four rounded? You can't really have rounded corners and not inset the exit tab, unless you have just one corner square and the other three round, which is also tacky. Definitely disappointing either way.

[vdeane]

Does this mean they're switching to no rounded corners on exit tabs, or all four rounded? You can't really have rounded corners and not inset the exit tab, unless you have just one corner square and the other three round, which is also tacky. Definitely disappointing either way.

I presume it will look like this except fully right-justified.

[webny99]

Does this mean they're switching to no rounded corners on exit tabs, or all four rounded? You can't really have rounded corners and not inset the exit tab, unless you have just one corner square and the other three round, which is also tacky. Definitely disappointing either way.

I presume it will look like this except fully right-justified.

That would leave an odd-sized corner of open/floating space beneath the exit tab, so they'd have to square off the top right corner of the main sign panel and have a corner of green space. That might look OK, but if they're going that route I'd rather if all four corners on the exit tab were rounded.

[vdeane]

That would leave an odd-sized corner of open/floating space beneath the exit tab, so they'd have to square off the top right corner of the main sign panel and have a corner of green space. That might look OK, but if they're going that route I'd rather if all four corners on the exit tab were rounded.

The corners are rounded on the sign I linked.  Increasing it further results in Region 10 style.  Leaving the green corners with the modern tab results in Maine Turnpike style.

Speaking of Region 10, it appears that they are already doing this even on fully modern signs.

[webny99]

Of those, the Region 10 style with the fully rounded corners is the best of the bunch.

I'm against anything with green corners as a matter of principle, and as suspected the almost-square corners do look tacky when right justified.

[vdeane]

Of those, the Region 10 style with the fully rounded corners is the best of the bunch.

I'm against anything with green corners as a matter of principle, and as suspected the almost-square corners do look tacky when right justified.

Meanwhile, I'm not a fan of the Region 10 style.