Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Beltway]

I remain convinced that Rochester-Buffalo is absolutely the largest migration between cities in the US for a pro sports game. You have to see it to believe it. Volumes must be double or more what they usually are on that Williamsville to LeRoy segment. It is crazy.

Lots of Bills fans in Canada as well, mainly from around Toronto.

[webny99]

I remain convinced that Rochester-Buffalo is absolutely the largest migration between cities in the US for a pro sports game. You have to see it to believe it. Volumes must be double or more what they usually are on that Williamsville to LeRoy segment. It is crazy.

Lots of Bills fans in Canada as well, mainly from around Toronto.

That's true, but in terms of sheer volume (at least attending the actual games), Rochester wins. The border is a pretty big deterrent from attending in person.

[Rothman]

Actually, per multiple meetings I attended with NITTEC, border travel spikes as well for sporting events on the American side.

(personal opinion expressed)

[webny99]

Actually, per multiple meetings I attended with NITTEC, border travel spikes as well for sporting events on the American side.
(personal opinion expressed)

Right, and that was certainly the case last night - I could tell even from Google Maps traffic data that the border crossings back into Canada were backed up after the game.

I guess what I meant was: even though there may be a greater number of fans in Canada, the border is enough of a deterrent - especially for those that would have to travel 1+ hours plus the border - that the number of actual game attendees from Canada is lower than what you might expect based on fan volumes alone, such that Buffalo-Canada game traffic is less than Buffalo-Rochester game traffic.

[Beltway]

Lots of Bills fans in Canada as well, mainly from around Toronto.

That's true, but in terms of sheer volume (at least attending the actual games), Rochester wins. The border is a pretty big deterrent from attending in person.

Why is that?  I have friends in the Buffalo area, and they have friends in Toronto who regularly visit them.  The ones from Toronto say that crossing the border is no hinderance at all to doing things in the U.S.

[cl94]

Actually, per multiple meetings I attended with NITTEC, border travel spikes as well for sporting events on the American side.

Correct. It's not uncommon to see border waits in excess of 2-3 hours in advance of a football or hockey game. When the Leafs are in town, the stands at the F'n Center are mostly Toronto fans. Close to half of Bills season ticket holders are Canadian.

I guess what I meant was: even though there may be a greater number of fans in Canada, the border is enough of a deterrent - especially for those that would have to travel 1+ hours plus the border - that the number of actual game attendees from Canada is lower than what you might expect based on fan volumes alone, such that Buffalo-Canada game traffic is less than Buffalo-Rochester game traffic.

Eh...I'm not certain I'd say that.

I have friends in the Buffalo area, and they have friends in Toronto who regularly visit them.  The ones from Toronto say that crossing the border is no hinderance at all to doing things in the U.S.

Yes and no. Depends on several factors and how the CBP guy is feeling. If you have NEXUS, you're probably getting waved through the border. But CBP can also hold you there all day if the guy feels like flexing muscle, traffic be damned. And on a busy weekend, you'll spend more time waiting in the border control line than actually driving. Crossing the border has been consistently getting harder and the crossing numbers certainly are down in recent years.

[Beltway]

I have friends in the Buffalo area, and they have friends in Toronto who regularly visit them.  The ones from Toronto say that crossing the border is no hinderance at all to doing things in the U.S.

Yes and no. Depends on several factors and how the CBP guy is feeling. If you have NEXUS, you're probably getting waved through the border. But CBP can also hold you there all day if the guy feels like flexing muscle, traffic be damned. And on a busy weekend, you'll spend more time waiting in the border control line than actually driving. Crossing the border has been consistently getting harder and the crossing numbers certainly are down in recent years.

How often does that happen?  These people have made hundreds of trips over the last 10 years and they say they have not had a major delay yet, that usually you get waved thru within 5 minutes.

[RestrictOnTheHanger]

Here is a map of the cashless tolling system and where each gantry will be located once it gets done at the end of 2020.
http://www.thruway.ny.gov/cashless/locations.html
As you can see, some of them will be on the highway (especially going through major cities like Albany and Syracuse) and some of them will be off the local exits between major cities.

Wait a second.

So the interchanges slated for full toll booth removal aren't going to have gantries, and the gantries for those interchanges will instead be located between exits along the Thruway itself?

That seems like kind of a funny system. I would think either all the gantries would at the interchanges (near where the toll booths currently are), or there would be one gantry between every exit. Not a mix of both systems.

One advantage of having the gantries between interchanges is that it leaves the door open to future redesign of the interchanges.
But again, I would think that would be system-wide instead of only at the freeway-freeway interchanges.

According to this article that seems to be the case

https://amp.whec.com/articles/local-i-90-cashless-toll-readers-to-be-on-highway-not-exits-5507237.html

[Alps]

In other news, the Thruway was terrible yesterday afternoon (thanks to the Bills game...)

I remain convinced that Rochester-Buffalo is absolutely the largest migration between cities in the US for a pro sports game. You have to see it to believe it. Volumes must be double or more what they usually are on that Williamsville to LeRoy segment. It is crazy.

I'm thinking Milwaukee-Green Bay could rival it.

[webny99]

I guess what I meant was: even though there may be a greater number of fans in Canada, the border is enough of a deterrent - especially for those that would have to travel 1+ hours plus the border - that the number of actual game attendees from Canada is lower than what you might expect based on fan volumes alone, such that Buffalo-Canada game traffic is less than Buffalo-Rochester game traffic.

Eh...I'm not certain I'd say that.

I say that not based on hard data (though I'd be interested to see some if it's available), but based on my own experiences. My travels to/from Canada align with the Bills games usually about 4 or so times per season, and the uptick in traffic on the Thruway always exceeds the uptick on I-190/I-290/at the border, though all of the above are noteworthy.

I remain convinced that Rochester-Buffalo is absolutely the largest migration between cities in the US for a pro sports game. You have to see it to believe it. Volumes must be double or more what they usually are on that Williamsville to LeRoy segment. It is crazy.

I'm thinking Milwaukee-Green Bay could rival it.

That would be real competition if they were a little closer to each other.. they're almost double the distance of ROC-BUF.

[MNHighwayMan]

I remain convinced that Rochester-Buffalo is absolutely the largest migration between cities in the US for a pro sports game. You have to see it to believe it. Volumes must be double or more what they usually are on that Williamsville to LeRoy segment. It is crazy.

I'm thinking Milwaukee-Green Bay could rival it.

That would be real competition if they were a little closer to each other.. they're almost double the distance of ROC-BUF.

And maybe Milwaukee fans are twice as good of fans as Rochester fans. I'm gonna need some real data here.

[Rothman]

I guess what I meant was: even though there may be a greater number of fans in Canada, the border is enough of a deterrent - especially for those that would have to travel 1+ hours plus the border - that the number of actual game attendees from Canada is lower than what you might expect based on fan volumes alone, such that Buffalo-Canada game traffic is less than Buffalo-Rochester game traffic.

Eh...I'm not certain I'd say that.

I say that not based on hard data (though I'd be interested to see some if it's available), but based on my own experiences. My travels to/from Canada align with the Bills games usually about 4 or so times per season, and the uptick in traffic on the Thruway always exceeds the uptick on I-190/I-290/at the border, though all of the above are noteworthy.

Based on your experience going in two opposite directions from the sporting events?

[webny99]

I say that not based on hard data (though I'd be interested to see some if it's available), but based on my own experiences. My travels to/from Canada align with the Bills games usually about 4 or so times per season, and the uptick in traffic on the Thruway always exceeds the uptick on I-190/I-290/at the border, though all of the above are noteworthy.

Based on your experience going in two opposite directions from the sporting events?

Other side of the road between whichever border crossing and Williamsville. Close enough. 

[webny99]

Here is a map of the cashless tolling system and where each gantry will be located once it gets done at the end of 2020.
http://www.thruway.ny.gov/cashless/locations.html
As you can see, some of them will be on the highway (especially going through major cities like Albany and Syracuse) and some of them will be off the local exits between major cities.

Wait a second.
So the interchanges slated for full toll booth removal aren't going to have gantries, and the gantries for those interchanges will instead be located between exits along the Thruway itself?
That seems like kind of a funny system. I would think either all the gantries would at the interchanges (near where the toll booths currently are), or there would be one gantry between every exit. Not a mix of both systems.
One advantage of having the gantries between interchanges is that it leaves the door open to future redesign of the interchanges.
But again, I would think that would be system-wide instead of only at the freeway-freeway interchanges.

According to this article that seems to be the case
https://amp.whec.com/articles/local-i-90-cashless-toll-readers-to-be-on-highway-not-exits-5507237.html

This discussion got a bit lost in the shuffle; I wanted to bring it back up, and see if any of the DOT employees, etc. could offer any further insight?

The conclusion previously had been that all gantries would be at the exits rather than on the mainline. Very interested to know when and why that changed!

[seicer]

There isn't any reason to have the toll gantries at interchanges when the ticketing system is eliminated. It's far easier to just charge a flat rate for a section of highway traveled, with the more expensive sections to maintain being charged higher fares.

[kalvado]

There isn't any reason to have the toll gantries at interchanges when the ticketing system is eliminated. It's far easier to just charge a flat rate for a section of highway traveled, with the more expensive sections to maintain being charged higher fares.

Well... I-88 to Albany, just to start the discussion?

[Revive 755]

There isn't any reason to have the toll gantries at interchanges when the ticketing system is eliminated. It's far easier to just charge a flat rate for a section of highway traveled, with the more expensive sections to maintain being charged higher fares.

IL 390 around Chicago may be the best example of the system it sounds like the Thruway is going for.  Only one ramp toll, with the rest being mainline gantries.  https://www.bensenville.il.us/803/Route-390-Tolling-Plan

[Jim]

Unless I'm missing something, I believe they can do everything they need with either ramp or mainline scanning or a combination of the two.  As long as they have enough of them that they can always tell from which ones you passed through where you got on and where you got off, the correct toll can be computed and charged.

[kalvado]

Unless I'm missing something, I believe they can do everything they need with either ramp or mainline scanning or a combination of the two.  As long as they have enough of them that they can always tell from which ones you passed through where you got on and where you got off, the correct toll can be computed and charged.

Moreover, number of readers doesn't really depend on pattern.
Number of reads, on the other hand, does - and it may easily turn out IT savings are not insignificant.
If it was up to me, I would link the new pattern to the expectations of exit reconfiguration. For example, exit 24 is an eyesore, and I would expect reconfiguration will happen at some point. Gantries on remote approaches make sense. Exit 29, I believe, has no expectations for reconfiguration, so using existing infrastructure makes more sense.

[SignBridge]

If I remember right from my last trip to Boston, I think the Masspike (I-90) also abolished their controlled system and just has gantries across the mainline, much like the tolls the Connecticut Turnpike (I-95) used to have years ago.

[Alps]

Unless I'm missing something, I believe they can do everything they need with either ramp or mainline scanning or a combination of the two.  As long as they have enough of them that they can always tell from which ones you passed through where you got on and where you got off, the correct toll can be computed and charged.

For tolling, yes. But to get the best quality traffic volume and vehicle classification data, they should have gantries between every interchange. There's more that you can use detectors for than just tolling.

[ixnay]

I remain convinced that Rochester-Buffalo is absolutely the largest migration between cities in the US for a pro sports game. You have to see it to believe it. Volumes must be double or more what they usually are on that Williamsville to LeRoy segment. It is crazy.

I'm thinking Milwaukee-Green Bay could rival it.

That would be real competition if they were a little closer to each other.. they're almost double the distance of ROC-BUF.

And maybe Milwaukee fans are twice as good of fans as Rochester fans. I'm gonna need some real data here.

Per Google Maps

Milwaukee city hall to Lambeau - 116 miles via I-43/125 miles via east shore of Lake Winnebago/136 miles via I-41
Main and State Streets in Rochester to New Era Field - 78.4 miles via I-490 and the Thruway

GB to Milwaukee is close enough to twice the distance as Rochester to Orchard Park, it appears.  Of course, each fan's mileage may vary depending on where in the metro they live, side trips, etc.

ixnay

[webny99]

I remain convinced that Rochester-Buffalo is absolutely the largest migration between cities in the US for a pro sports game. You have to see it to believe it. Volumes must be double or more what they usually are on that Williamsville to LeRoy segment. It is crazy.

I'm thinking Milwaukee-Green Bay could rival it.

That would be real competition if they were a little closer to each other.. they're almost double the distance of ROC-BUF.

And maybe Milwaukee fans are twice as good of fans as Rochester fans. I'm gonna need some real data here.

Per Google Maps
Milwaukee city hall to Lambeau - 116 miles via I-43/125 miles via east shore of Lake Winnebago/136 miles via I-41
Main and State Streets in Rochester to New Era Field - 78.4 miles via I-490 and the Thruway
GB to Milwaukee is close enough to twice the distance as Rochester to Orchard Park, it appears.  Of course, each fan's mileage may vary depending on where in the metro they live, side trips, etc.
ixnay

136 miles is a long distance to travel to a home game, but that's nothing for Bill's fans: They're even filling up the stadiums on their away games! 

[jp the roadgeek]

If I remember right from my last trip to Boston, I think the Masspike (I-90) also abolished their controlled system and just has gantries across the mainline, much like the tolls the Connecticut Turnpike (I-95) used to have years ago.

True.  Plus there are no gantries between Exits 4-7 and from 10-11, which allows toll free movement in the Springfield and Worcester areas.  If NYTA implements such a system, I could see no gantries between 24 and 25A as an option.  Granted, it would add an extra toll-free option for traffic from the Northway/Free 90 to 890, but MassDOT extended the toll-free area in Springfield to Exit 7 in comparison to when tolls were waived for cars only west of Exit 6.

[cl94]

True.  Plus there are no gantries between Exits 4-7 and from 10-11, which allows toll free movement in the Springfield and Worcester areas.  If NYTA implements such a system, I could see no gantries between 24 and 25A as an option.  Granted, it would add an extra toll-free option for traffic from the Northway/Free 90 to 890, but MassDOT extended the toll-free area in Springfield to Exit 7 in comparison to when tolls were waived for cars only west of Exit 6.

I want to say that the current plan is to make 23-25A toll-free.