AARoads Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

Author Topic: New York  (Read 624269 times)

WNYroadgeek

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 367
  • Age: 28
  • Last Login: Today at 12:12:02 AM
Re: New York
« Reply #3600 on: May 16, 2018, 12:00:59 AM »

Complete topic switch, but with the Grand Island Bridges going AET, I wonder if I-190's Exit 17 is in for a full overhaul. It's got to be substandard as heck in both directions.

Looking at that interchange, I don't really see much room to do anything to it, especially on the southbound side.
« Last Edit: May 16, 2018, 12:03:11 AM by WNYroadgeek »
Logged

Buffaboy

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1039
  • Make I-90 thru Buffalo 8 lanes NOW!

  • Age: 22
  • Location: Buffalo and Utica, New York
  • Last Login: Today at 05:15:39 PM
Re: New York
« Reply #3601 on: May 16, 2018, 02:58:53 AM »

As far as that interchange is concerned, I've seen worse.
Logged
What's not to like about highways and bridges, intersections and interchanges, rails and planes?

My Wikipedia county SVG maps: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Buffaboy

kalvado

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2171
  • Location: upstate NY
  • Last Login: Today at 03:51:36 PM
Re: New York
« Reply #3602 on: May 16, 2018, 07:27:51 AM »

So on a trip to Saratoga Springs last week for work, I had the privilege (?) of driving through Malta.

Roundabouts officially need to go die in a fire.
I even heard NYSDOT's COO say "Good luck with that!" when they were being built in a speech at ITS-NY.  The US 9 one was terrible last I was there.
There are a few more on the way to global which backup during commute. Overall Malta is exhibit 1 in the case  against roundabouts.
Logged

cu2010

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 473
  • Age: 30
  • Location: Almost Canada
  • Last Login: Today at 12:26:21 PM
Re: New York
« Reply #3603 on: May 16, 2018, 12:55:13 PM »

So on a trip to Saratoga Springs last week for work, I had the privilege (?) of driving through Malta.

Roundabouts officially need to go die in a fire.
I even heard NYSDOT's COO say "Good luck with that!" when they were being built in a speech at ITS-NY.  The US 9 one was terrible last I was there.
There are a few more on the way to global which backup during commute. Overall Malta is exhibit 1 in the case  against roundabouts.
I sat for several minutes just trying to get off the Northway waiting for an opening. Eventually I just had to floor it and go for it... getting honked at in the process.

On the way back the other direction, I told Google to send me another way...just so I wouldn't have to drive through those damn things again.

I fail to see how this is an improvement over well timed stoplights.
« Last Edit: May 16, 2018, 12:57:27 PM by cu2010 »
Logged
This is cu2010, reminding you, help control the ugly sign population, don't have your shields spayed or neutered.

vdeane

  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 9273
  • Age: 27
  • Location: Latham, NY
  • Last Login: August 16, 2018, 08:47:40 PM
    • New York State Roads
Re: New York
« Reply #3604 on: May 16, 2018, 01:14:49 PM »

The reason for the roundabouts at exit 12 was actually because turning lanes would have added significant extra width to the bridge.
Logged
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position of NYSDOT or its affiliates.

kalvado

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2171
  • Location: upstate NY
  • Last Login: Today at 03:51:36 PM
Re: New York
« Reply #3605 on: May 16, 2018, 03:09:18 PM »

The reason for the roundabouts at exit 12 was actually because turning lanes would have added significant extra width to the bridge.
Is that for all 7 of those roundabouts?
Logged

MNHighwayMan

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2819
  • Blue and gold forever!

  • Age: 26
  • Location: Des Moines
  • Last Login: Today at 03:05:56 PM
Re: New York
« Reply #3606 on: May 16, 2018, 04:15:42 PM »

The reason for the roundabouts at exit 12 was actually because turning lanes would have added significant extra width to the bridge.
Is that for all 7 of those roundabouts?

No. The others were built specifically to annoy people.
Logged

kalvado

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2171
  • Location: upstate NY
  • Last Login: Today at 03:51:36 PM
Re: New York
« Reply #3607 on: May 16, 2018, 04:21:39 PM »

The reason for the roundabouts at exit 12 was actually because turning lanes would have added significant extra width to the bridge.
Is that for all 7 of those roundabouts?

No. The others were built specifically to annoy people.
You may be more correct than you expect.
Logged

Rothman

  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3928
  • Last Login: Today at 03:57:06 PM
Re: New York
« Reply #3608 on: May 16, 2018, 08:03:23 PM »

The reason for the roundabouts at exit 12 was actually because turning lanes would have added significant extra width to the bridge.
Is that for all 7 of those roundabouts?

No. The others were built specifically to annoy people.
You may be more correct than you expect.
Pfft.  No.
Logged
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position(s) of NYSDOT.

SignBridge

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 1134
  • Location: Long Island, New York
  • Last Login: Today at 10:06:30 PM
Re: New York
« Reply #3609 on: May 16, 2018, 08:18:42 PM »

I agree that roundabouts are bad idea. I have had bad experiences with them too, especially in Massachusetts where they call them rotaries. I would much prefer a well designed signalized intersection, anytime.
Logged

vdeane

  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 9273
  • Age: 27
  • Location: Latham, NY
  • Last Login: August 16, 2018, 08:47:40 PM
    • New York State Roads
Re: New York
« Reply #3610 on: May 16, 2018, 08:23:08 PM »

Rotaries and roundabouts are two importantly different things.  Rotaries are those death traps that have drivers going in a circle at high speeds.  Roundabouts are smaller and always require entering traffic to yield to traffic already in the circle, making them considerably safer and less confusing.
Logged
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position of NYSDOT or its affiliates.

kalvado

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2171
  • Location: upstate NY
  • Last Login: Today at 03:51:36 PM
Re: New York
« Reply #3611 on: May 16, 2018, 08:28:21 PM »

Rotaries and roundabouts are two importantly different things.  Rotaries are those death traps that have drivers going in a circle at high speeds.  Roundabouts are smaller and always require entering traffic to yield to traffic already in the circle, making them considerably safer and less confusing.
Relax, it is 8.30 pm and you're off the clock. You don't have to quote those memos...
Logged

SignBridge

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 1134
  • Location: Long Island, New York
  • Last Login: Today at 10:06:30 PM
Re: New York
« Reply #3612 on: May 16, 2018, 08:41:40 PM »

I believe the right-of-way law is the same for both rotaries and roundabouts. Traffic entering must yield to traffic already circling. So if Vdeane's definition is correct, the only real difference between the two is the size of the circle and traffic speeds. And they're both terrible IMO.
« Last Edit: May 16, 2018, 08:52:38 PM by SignBridge »
Logged

vdeane

  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 9273
  • Age: 27
  • Location: Latham, NY
  • Last Login: August 16, 2018, 08:47:40 PM
    • New York State Roads
Re: New York
« Reply #3613 on: May 16, 2018, 08:46:26 PM »

There are circles that have different yielding requirements, though I'm not familiar with all the distinctions between all the non-roundabout ones.

Regarding Malta, I've never had issues with the roundabouts there, though I'll admit that I've never driven on them in rush hour, and it can be annothing to drive through one after another after a while.
Logged
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position of NYSDOT or its affiliates.

seicer

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1034
  • Last Login: Today at 09:48:08 PM
Re: New York
« Reply #3614 on: May 16, 2018, 08:46:49 PM »

Except it's true. Why not just drive slower, especially in urban environments? And drive with regard to other motorists and other users of the roadway and space?

And no, rotaries and roundabouts are not the same, especially for yielding purposes. Here is a useful diagram. It's even codified as such in several states, so no, they are not the same.
Logged

kalvado

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2171
  • Location: upstate NY
  • Last Login: Today at 03:51:36 PM
Re: New York
« Reply #3615 on: May 16, 2018, 08:48:25 PM »

I believe the right-of-way law is the same for both rotaries and roundabouts. Traffic entering must yield to traffic already circling. So if V-deane's definition is correct, the only real difference between the two is the size of the circle and traffic speeds. And they're both terrible IMO.
We do have a separate thread for beating up roundabouts, feel free to join: https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=15546.0
Problems of Malta are somewhat unique, though: some engineer had his head spinning and ended up drawing a bunch of circles instead of straight lines. Or maybe that was DUI (Designing Under Influence)?
Logged

kalvado

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2171
  • Location: upstate NY
  • Last Login: Today at 03:51:36 PM
Re: New York
« Reply #3616 on: May 16, 2018, 08:56:41 PM »

There are circles that have different yielding requirements, though I'm not familiar with all the distinctions between all the non-roundabout ones.
You mentioned rotary vs roundabout.
Quote from: NYS V&T law
Sec. 1145. Vehicle approaching rotary traffic circle or island.  Except where a traffic control device directs otherwise, the driver of a
vehicle approaching or about to enter a rotary traffic circle or island shall yield the right of way to any vehicle already traveling on such circle or around such island.
There is no separate requirement for roundabouts in NYS V&T law you mentioned except the one I quoted above.
Roundabouts are smaller and always require entering traffic to yield to traffic already in the circle
Logged

kalvado

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2171
  • Location: upstate NY
  • Last Login: Today at 03:51:36 PM
Re: New York
« Reply #3617 on: May 16, 2018, 09:01:10 PM »

Except it's true. Why not just drive slower, especially in urban environments? And drive with regard to other motorists and other users of the roadway and space?

And no, rotaries and roundabouts are not the same, especially for yielding purposes. Here is a useful diagram. It's even codified as such in several states, so no, they are not the same.
Just another quote of the same old story. No, it is just high quality data massage.
Logged

SignBridge

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 1134
  • Location: Long Island, New York
  • Last Login: Today at 10:06:30 PM
Re: New York
« Reply #3618 on: May 16, 2018, 09:04:42 PM »

Seicer's useful diagram made me dizzy as did the the fine print re: all the technical differences between a rotary and a roundabout. And if even I had trouble comprehending all that fine detail, you can be sure most drivers will never know or appreciate all those technical differences.

I can buy the idea that there are fewer serious accidents than with signalized intersections. Probably mostly sideswipes and low-speed rear-end collisions but the fact remains: rotaries and roundabouts are a friggin' nuisance to drive through.
Logged

kalvado

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2171
  • Location: upstate NY
  • Last Login: Today at 03:51:36 PM
Re: New York
« Reply #3619 on: May 16, 2018, 09:14:54 PM »

Seicer's useful diagram made me dizzy as did the the fine print re: all the technical differences between a rotary and a roundabout. And if even I had trouble comprehending all that fine detail, you can be sure most drivers will never know or appreciate all those technical differences.

I can buy the idea that there are fewer serious accidents than with signalized intersections. Probably mostly sideswipes and low-speed rear-end collisions but the fact remains: rotaries and roundabouts are a friggin' nuisance to drive through.
ANd for the sake of everyone's convenience:
Roundabout, or "modern roundabout", does NOT have a continious circulating lane. Think about bunch of threads, 1/4 to 3/4 turn long, spooled around a central island. Driver enters the lane which is usually a continuation of approach lane, stays in the same lane, and usually exits when lane ends. Example:
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.9692402,-73.7929088,193a,35y,45t/data=!3m1!1e3
Think about regular intersection with dedicted turn lanes and slip ramps where a central point is inflated to 50 feet and signals are lost in process.
Rotary usually refers to a circular lane, where drivers are required to merge into the circulating lane on entry and leave that circulating lane on exit.  I don't have a good example handy.
Logged

1

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 5593
  • UMass Lowell student

  • Age: 19
  • Location: MA/NH border
  • Last Login: Today at 10:09:35 PM
    • Flickr account
Re: New York
« Reply #3620 on: May 16, 2018, 09:19:31 PM »

I don't have a good example handy.

I-95/MA 128, exit 35: MA 38.
Logged
Clinched, plus MA 108

Traveled, plus:
US ⒉⒔50
MA ⒐⒙22.40.99.10⒎10⒏1⒒1⒚127.141.15⒐286
NH 27,111A
NY 366
GA 42,140
FL A1A
CT 32

Flickr

seicer

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1034
  • Last Login: Today at 09:48:08 PM
Re: New York
« Reply #3621 on: May 16, 2018, 09:25:58 PM »

Seicer's useful diagram made me dizzy as did the the fine print re: all the technical differences between a rotary and a roundabout. And if even I had trouble comprehending all that fine detail, you can be sure most drivers will never know or appreciate all those technical differences.

I can buy the idea that there are fewer serious accidents than with signalized intersections. Probably mostly sideswipes and low-speed rear-end collisions but the fact remains: rotaries and roundabouts are a friggin' nuisance to drive through.

To the motorist, there is no reason why they should care if it's a roundabout or a rotary. The message is in the roadway design and adequate signs. If they see a yield sign, then they should yield; if not, they should proceed (with caution). Tapering the road down and removing ambiguities also help contribute to a safer roadway.

To each their own on what defines nuisances, though. I find the awful number of traffic signals in Ithaca, New York to be unpleasant to drive through, especially near rush hour.

Except it's true. Why not just drive slower, especially in urban environments? And drive with regard to other motorists and other users of the roadway and space?

And no, rotaries and roundabouts are not the same, especially for yielding purposes. Here is a useful diagram. It's even codified as such in several states, so no, they are not the same.
Just another quote of the same old story. No, it is just high quality data massage.

I can cite more studies, if you'd like. But you would refute them, just as you've refuted pretty much any analytical or scientific message that's come through on this forum. I won't bother.
Logged

kalvado

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2171
  • Location: upstate NY
  • Last Login: Today at 03:51:36 PM
Re: New York
« Reply #3622 on: May 16, 2018, 09:35:28 PM »


Except it's true. Why not just drive slower, especially in urban environments? And drive with regard to other motorists and other users of the roadway and space?

And no, rotaries and roundabouts are not the same, especially for yielding purposes. Here is a useful diagram. It's even codified as such in several states, so no, they are not the same.
Just another quote of the same old story. No, it is just high quality data massage.

I can cite more studies, if you'd like. But you would refute them, just as you've refuted pretty much any analytical or scientific message that's come through on this forum. I won't bother.
OK, let me show where the flaw is in your reference.
We're  talking about a set of intersections which handle up to 50k vehicles per day. Your reference talks about
Quote
Roundabouts reduced injury crashes by 75 percent at intersections where stop signs or signals were previously used for traffic control
I am not sure about exact numbers, but if I remember correctly stop signs can handle something like 5k/day traffic(if that), 10 times less than what we're talking about.
As a result, we have one of those circles making into top 10 of regional most dangerous intersections.
There is a great discussion about 1x1 vs 1x2 vs 2x2 vs 2x3 roundaabouts and related hazards. Basically 1x1 work OK, but have throughput of stop signs. 2x3 are death traps.
« Last Edit: May 17, 2018, 12:22:29 AM by Alps »
Logged

froggie

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 9529
  • Location: Greensboro, VT
  • Last Login: Today at 09:10:12 PM
    • Froggie's Place
Re: New York
« Reply #3623 on: May 17, 2018, 08:06:07 AM »

Quote from: kalvado
2x3 are death crash traps.

FTFY.  While there are indications that multi-lane roundabouts see more crashes in some cases, they are rarely deadly because of the slower speeds involved.  And even their fatality rate is less than signalized intersections.

BTW, since you mentioned capacity, a 1x1 roundabout has about 4 times the throughput of an all-stop-sign intersection.  They are not one and the same.
Logged

kalvado

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2171
  • Location: upstate NY
  • Last Login: Today at 03:51:36 PM
Re: New York
« Reply #3624 on: May 17, 2018, 08:43:21 AM »

Quote from: kalvado
2x3 are death crash traps.

FTFY.  While there are indications that multi-lane roundabouts see more crashes in some cases, they are rarely deadly because of the slower speeds involved.  And even their fatality rate is less than signalized intersections.

BTW, since you mentioned capacity, a 1x1 roundabout has about 4 times the throughput of an all-stop-sign intersection.  They are not one and the same.
Let me copy my own post from the other dreaded post:
What is the role of roundabouts in a grand scheme of things in terms of throughput? Where would you put roundabout in a list of intersection designs with increasing throughput - that is: 4-way stop, traffic light, grade separated?
I would say that roundabouts belong to busy 4-way stop/not-so-busy traffic light interval. We had some european guidelines here showing a 30K/daily limit for complex roundabout, which seems reasonable to slightly optimistic; and I know a (very busy) traffic light controlled intersection with 50k+ daily traffic.
Now you can increase traffic light throughput quite a bit by adding components, such as dedicated turn lanes or slip ramps - of course at a cost of footprint. And those upgrades can be fairly seamless, you don't have to bulldoze entire thing for an extra lane (although imminent domain of land is a pain..)
You can also upgrade stop signals to a traffic light.
Roundabout, however, is a solution with limited throughput which can NOT be easily upgraded to next tier - which is complex traffic light.
And that can easily become a problem: no upgrade short of increasing complexity beyond the reason OR total rebuild.... Or continue funneling traffic through intersection above design limit - and pretend problem doesn't exist.

And that is Malta's trap right now.
Logged

 


Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.