Thruway Authority begins project that will widen stretch of road near Albany

[Dougtone]

The view along the northbound lanes of the Thruway between exits 23 and 24 currently consists of heavy construction equipment pulling up trees and bulldozers pushing mounds of earth.

But in three years, $99.1 million dollars and thousands of hours of labor will have rebuilt and expanded that 7-mile stretch of highway into three lanes in each direction, according to the Thruway Authority.

Read the entire article at...
http://www.timesunion.com/local/article/Lane-change-and-more-1347953.php

[vdeane]

It's great to see a project mentioned on the Thruway website for years finally begin construction.  Now if they could just get going with the Williamsville toll barrier move...

[xcellntbuy]

The project has been overdue for 25 years!

[cu2010]

Now if only they could widen the entire Thruway to six lanes...

[xcellntbuy]

I would agree with expansion to six lanes.  The section I usually traveled to work from Catskill (Exit 21) to New Paltz (Exit 18) in the 1990's was extensively repaved 15 years ago.  Friday afternoon and all weekend traffic was very heavy, justifying six lanes would have been easy in the Hudson Valley.  But could you imagine what it would cost?  Billions and a hefty toll increase.

[Dougtone]

I would agree with expansion to six lanes.  The section I usually traveled to work from Catskill (Exit 21) to New Paltz (Exit 18) in the 1990's was extensively repaved 15 years ago.  Friday afternoon and all weekend traffic was very heavy, justifying six lanes would have been easy in the Hudson Valley.  But could you imagine what it would cost?  Billions and a hefty toll increase.

I'll agree with expansion to 6 lanes, but not for the entire Thruway.  Widening the Thruway to 6 lanes between Harriman and Albany is necessary, but for some of the more rural sections between Syracuse and Schenectady (and also west of Hamburg), the Thruway could stay at 4 lanes for the most part.  I'd also widen the Thruway to 8 lanes between Exits 24 and 25, along with adding a climbing lane for a hill just east of Herkimer.

[Jim]

Agreed about the senitiments that 6 or more lanes are needed Albany and south, but that 4 is sufficient west of Schenectady for quite a distance.

I'd also widen the Thruway to 8 lanes between Exits 24 and 25

For sure.  Let the two lanes coming in from I-890 at 25 remain and have two exit only lanes at 24.

I think some of the current problems EB to 24 could easily be reduced with a restriping.  The current configuration has three lanes, which expands to 4 a half mile or so before the exit with 2 lanes exiting and 2 lanes for those continuing on the mainline Thruway.  When traffic is heavy, cars queue up in the left lane, often behind a single slow truck or bus or other vehicle unwilling or unable to keep its speed.  They do this because the left lane splits into 2 before the exit.  If you're in the center, you never know if the car to your left will move over and let you in or do their best to force you to stay on the Thruway.  That, and you never know if the real situation is the usual one described above where it's usually easy to merge left after the expansion to 4 lanes, or if there is really a backup that would cause you to be a hazard sitting in the lane that does not exit, trying to find a place to cut in.

Wouldn't it be better to keep the left lane exit-only, but stripe that one to become the leftmost of the 4 lanes before the exit?  Then the middle lane could split into 2 before the ramp instead of the left lane.  Since being in the middle would guarantee an option to take the exit, fewer people would need to queue up.  And I think it can all be accomplished with a little paint and maybe updating a couple signs.  Or am I missing something?

[vdeane]

Buffalo-Rochester could also use 6 lanes.  Can't speak for the Erie section.

[rickmastfan67]

Can't speak for the Erie section.

When I've been on the Erie section, 4 lanes seemed to be just fine.  But, IMO, a widening between Exit #57 (NY-75) and Exit #55 (US-219) might be a good idea.  Every time I've been on that segment, it seems that it's more crowded with commuters.

[froggie]

IMO, the Tappan Zee replacement should be the top priority before any of the additional widenings mentioned here by others.

From west to east/south, here's where you can justify widening based on the traffic volumes:

- Exit 56/NY 179 to US 219
- Exit 50/I-290 to Exit 49/NY 78
- Exit 24/I-87/I-90 to Exit 21A/Berkshire Spur
- Exit 19/NY 28 to Exit 16/NY 17 (with the priority naturally going from south to north)
- Exit 14/GSPkwy to Exit 8/I-287 for a consistent 4 lanes in each direction...with this one requiring the Tappan Zee replacement.

While traffic is thick on summer weekends between Kingston and Albany, I've never encountered a slowdown that was strictly traffic-induced (crashes and construction are another story).  The slowdowns have always begun around/past Kingston heading south.

[vdeane]

I agree that the Tappan Zee Bridge replacement should be a top priority but so should the Williamsville toll barrier project.  I've seen traffic backups up to a mile long a couple times when I've been through there.

IMO summer traffic volumes do justify a widening between Buffalo and Syracuse.  There have been time where I've seen packs of practically bumper to bumper traffic (though still moving at speed) longer than the distance I can see.

[froggie]

Summer traffic moving at-speed is really not enough justification to prioritize a widening, especially when such traffic causes backups on other segments of the Thruway...Harriman to Kingston in particular.

You can make a stronger argument for widening Kingston to Albany than you can for Buffalo to Syracuse.  And Rochester-Syracuse is even weaker than Buffalo-Rochester.

[vdeane]

Actually, it's very difficult to move at speed with that traffic due to the speed differentials between the lanes.  In heavy traffic, the right moves around 50-60, and the left moves 75-80.  There is no lane for those of us that go the speed limit, and the traffic prevents passing the slower drivers in the right lane.

I suggest widenings for what I know.  I've only been on the Thruway south of the Berkshire spur once, in March no less.  Btw, the Thruway does get rush hour traffic even in rural areas.

It's easy to write off an area as having "not enough traffic" when you rarely drive there.

[xcellntbuy]

There are some moderately hilly sections of the Thruway in the Hudson Valley that could easily need six lanes, with the assistance of climbing lanes, if nothing else, mostly between Exits 17 (Newburgh) and 19 (Kingston), in particular.

A new (or second) Tappan Zee Bridge would make 6-laning the Thruway look cheap.  A new Tappan Zee Bridge would have to have a minimum of 10 lanes and would most likely cost well over $20 billion to configure and build.

[yakra]

While they're upgrading things and we're dreaming, I'd love to see a sensible tie-in of the southern stub of the Northway. Even if traffic conditions don't warrant it, I don't care -- it bothers me!

[vdeane]

At one point there were plans to build ex-pass only ramps to do just that.  I don't know what happened to them, though.

[froggie]

A new (or second) Tappan Zee Bridge would make 6-laning the Thruway look cheap.  A new Tappan Zee Bridge would have to have a minimum of 10 lanes and would most likely cost well over $20 billion to configure and build.

$8.3 billion according to a report that came out last fall (on page 61).

[xcellntbuy]

A LOT of money, whatever the cost!

[Jim]

I drove through the construction zone today.  Lots of excavation and tree removal is ongoing on both sides.  Today's focus seemed to be on the northbound side.  The southbound side didn't appear to have a work zone limit but northbound was at 55 with plenty of activity on the other side of a jersey barrier for a few miles.

[Buummu]

If they could have widened to 6 lanes when the thruway is being built, this wouldn't happened today.

[froggie]

There was no need for 6 lanes back in the early 1950s.  Why would they waste toll bond money on something that would be unnecessary for several decades?

[vdeane]

And something that nobody could have foreseen.  This section was supposed to be four carriageways, with I-90 on the Thruway to the Berkshire spur and I-87 paralleling it until I-787 and then multiplexing.

[mightyace]

^^^

Do you have access to any plans/maps of that proposed but never implemented configuration?

[vdeane]

I don't know if anyone does.  I've never seen any.

[D-Dey65]

I still prefer a revival of the Southern Albany Expressway(I-787).