AARoads Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length

Author Topic: NY 17/"I-86"  (Read 40565 times)

TheDon102

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 10
  • Age: 20
  • Location: Westchester County, New York
  • Last Login: February 10, 2020, 07:08:59 PM
Re: NY 17/"I-86"
« Reply #225 on: February 10, 2020, 07:02:18 PM »

Will we see the full conversion to I-86 in our lifetimes?  :D
Logged

Rothman

  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 5532
  • Last Login: Today at 12:06:35 AM
Re: NY 17/"I-86"
« Reply #226 on: February 10, 2020, 09:54:43 PM »

Will we see the full conversion to I-86 in our lifetimes?  :D
No.
Logged
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position(s) of NYSDOT.

Roadgeek Adam

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1086
  • Warren CR 14 - Warrensburg, NY

  • Age: 28
  • Location: East Amherst, New York
  • Last Login: February 21, 2020, 03:59:19 PM
    • My Flickr Photostream
Re: NY 17/"I-86"
« Reply #227 on: February 12, 2020, 08:32:04 PM »

I'd rather just take the I-86 shields down.
Logged
Adam Seth Moss
M.A. History, Western Illinois University '17
B.A. History, Montclair State University '15
A.A. History & Education - Middlesex County College '13

seicer

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1381
  • Last Login: February 21, 2020, 10:44:36 PM
Re: NY 17/"I-86"
« Reply #228 on: February 13, 2020, 07:46:02 AM »

https://nyshistoricnewspapers.org/lccn/sn83031330/1956-12-06/ed-1/seq-1/
The grand opening of the 11 mile Wurtsboro bypass in December 1956.
Logged

jp the roadgeek

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3172
  • Age: 44
  • Location: Outside the I-291 beltway
  • Last Login: February 21, 2020, 06:45:16 PM
Re: NY 17/"I-86"
« Reply #229 on: February 13, 2020, 11:23:46 AM »

I'd rather just take the I-86 shields down.

The Alleganys would fully endorse this.
Logged
Interstates I've clinched: 97, 290 (MA), 291 (CT), 291 (MA), 293, 295 (DE-NJ-PA), 295 (RI-MA), 384, 391, 395 (CT-MA), 395 (MD), 495 (DE), 610 (LA), 684, 691, 695 (MD), 695 (NY), 795 (MD)

machias

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 707
  • Age: 51
  • Location: Chicago, IL
  • Last Login: February 20, 2020, 09:47:45 PM
Re: NY 17/"I-86"
« Reply #230 on: February 14, 2020, 08:08:08 AM »

I'd rather just take the I-86 shields down.

The Alleganys would fully endorse this.

I thought the I-86 markers were fine as long as they weren't on the mile markers or reference markers (which honestly, didn't make a lot of sense to me).
Logged

vdeane

  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 10798
  • Age: 28
  • Location: Latham, NY
  • Last Login: February 21, 2020, 09:08:12 PM
    • New York State Roads
Re: NY 17/"I-86"
« Reply #231 on: February 14, 2020, 12:56:47 PM »

My understanding is that the complaint boils down to the fact that the agreement to build NY 17 though Seneca lands specifically says "NY 17" and not "I-86", and therefore they're claiming the I-86 signs are illegal.  Apparently they only noticed the mile markers for some reason?  Personally, I don't get the point of the complaint, but it was apparently enough to get Region 5 to take the mile markers down.
Logged
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position of NYSDOT or its affiliates.

amroad17

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1146
  • Now, KTC, let's deal with the Brent Spence Bridge!

  • Age: 58
  • Location: Northern Kentucky
  • Last Login: February 21, 2020, 07:35:58 AM
Re: NY 17/"I-86"
« Reply #232 on: February 15, 2020, 07:55:06 AM »

https://nyshistoricnewspapers.org/lccn/sn83031330/1956-12-06/ed-1/seq-1/
The grand opening of the 11 mile Wurtsboro bypass in December 1956.
"hundreds of cards poised to speed..."?

^ The Seneca Nation has been fighting the NY 17/I-86 freeway since its inception--but maybe not hard enough so as to build a casino next to it in Salamanca.
Logged
I don't need a GPS.  I AM the GPS! (for family and friends)

amroad17

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1146
  • Now, KTC, let's deal with the Brent Spence Bridge!

  • Age: 58
  • Location: Northern Kentucky
  • Last Login: February 21, 2020, 07:35:58 AM
Re: NY 17/"I-86"
« Reply #233 on: February 15, 2020, 08:01:57 AM »

I'd rather just take the I-86 shields down.
I can see having I-86 shields from I-90 near Erie to I-81 in Binghamton.  The section from Binghamton to Harriman is a completely different animal, being that much of this section was built in the 1950's and early 1960's.  Yes, there are some sections (east of Binghamton, Parksville, near I-84, and maybe Liberty) that have been upgraded to Interstate standards, however, there is still a lot of work that needs to be done to get this section signed as I-86--something many of us may not see in our lifetime.
Logged
I don't need a GPS.  I AM the GPS! (for family and friends)

jp the roadgeek

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3172
  • Age: 44
  • Location: Outside the I-291 beltway
  • Last Login: February 21, 2020, 06:45:16 PM
Re: NY 17/"I-86"
« Reply #234 on: February 15, 2020, 10:01:12 AM »

I can see having I-86 shields from I-90 near Erie to I-81 in Binghamton. 

In that case, I would just extend I-88 west via a 2-mile concurrency with I-81 and be done with 86.
Logged
Interstates I've clinched: 97, 290 (MA), 291 (CT), 291 (MA), 293, 295 (DE-NJ-PA), 295 (RI-MA), 384, 391, 395 (CT-MA), 395 (MD), 495 (DE), 610 (LA), 684, 691, 695 (MD), 695 (NY), 795 (MD)

Alps

  • Everybody Obeys the Octagon
  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 13069
  • Elimitante the truck trarffic,

  • Age: 37
  • Location: New Jersey
  • Last Login: February 21, 2020, 09:59:45 PM
    • Alps' Roads
Re: NY 17/"I-86"
« Reply #235 on: February 15, 2020, 10:50:58 AM »

I can see having I-86 shields from I-90 near Erie to I-81 in Binghamton. 

In that case, I would just extend I-88 west via a 2-mile concurrency with I-81 and be done with 86.
You would... 86 it. :)
I would do the opposite - call everything 86 and get rid of the western 86. Now you've sunk two duplicate numbering battleships. But there are already I-86 shields up in Orange County and I do believe we will see I-86 done in my lifetime.

Rothman

  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 5532
  • Last Login: Today at 12:06:35 AM
Re: NY 17/"I-86"
« Reply #236 on: February 16, 2020, 10:00:07 AM »

I can see having I-86 shields from I-90 near Erie to I-81 in Binghamton. 

In that case, I would just extend I-88 west via a 2-mile concurrency with I-81 and be done with 86.
You would... 86 it. :)
I would do the opposite - call everything 86 and get rid of the western 86. Now you've sunk two duplicate numbering battleships. But there are already I-86 shields up in Orange County and I do believe we will see I-86 done in my lifetime.
And what do you base your optimism on?

The last seriously programmed conversion projects are done and there is no impetus or motivation to program the rest at this point.

NYSDOT federal funding has remained essentially flat with state bonding supporting current megaprojects.  Conditions across the state are still declining.  Conversion for I-86 has been viewed as a luxury.

NYSDOT commissioners since Parksvile have not seen the point of the conversion, insofar as I am aware.

I don't see I-86 conversion happening over at least the next 10 years.  It will only happen after that with a strong politician pushing for it, so it goes from a hard no over the next decade to simply "unlikely" after that.

(personal opinion empashized)
Logged
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position(s) of NYSDOT.

vdeane

  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 10798
  • Age: 28
  • Location: Latham, NY
  • Last Login: February 21, 2020, 09:08:12 PM
    • New York State Roads
Re: NY 17/"I-86"
« Reply #237 on: February 16, 2020, 07:37:12 PM »

Well, 10 years is less than the time most of us will live for, so there's that.  As for projects, the 17 forward 86 coalition keeps pushing hard for a widening from Monticello east, and if that actually happened, most/all of the work needed east of Parksville.  Much of the rest looks like the type of safety improvement project that I could see trickling through the pipeline over time as Main Office issues its periodic calls for beyond preservation projects to fund.  And the, eventually, that would leave just Hale Eddy... and then whatever governor is in power then will be able to claim that they finished I-86 if the push the project through.  Remember the fanfare over Cuomo building exit 3?  A whole new interstate east of Binghamton would be even bigger than that.

(personal opinion)
Logged
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position of NYSDOT or its affiliates.

Hwy 61 Revisited

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 87
  • Location: Northeast PA
  • Last Login: February 21, 2020, 03:21:04 PM
Re: NY 17/"I-86"
« Reply #238 on: February 16, 2020, 08:06:28 PM »

Well, 10 years is less than the time most of us will live for, so there's that.  As for projects, the 17 forward 86 coalition keeps pushing hard for a widening from Monticello east, and if that actually happened, most/all of the work needed east of Parksville.  Much of the rest looks like the type of safety improvement project that I could see trickling through the pipeline over time as Main Office issues its periodic calls for beyond preservation projects to fund.  And the, eventually, that would leave just Hale Eddy... and then whatever governor is in power then will be able to claim that they finished I-86 if the push the project through.  Remember the fanfare over Cuomo building exit 3?  A whole new interstate east of Binghamton would be even bigger than that.

(personal opinion)

Maybe for now, we should just switch the freeway section of NY 17 to NY 86 (or just cosign them), then extend 32 along the surface portions.
Logged

Roadgeek Adam

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1086
  • Warren CR 14 - Warrensburg, NY

  • Age: 28
  • Location: East Amherst, New York
  • Last Login: February 21, 2020, 03:59:19 PM
    • My Flickr Photostream
Re: NY 17/"I-86"
« Reply #239 on: February 16, 2020, 08:30:16 PM »

The problem is NY 17 doesn't need to be a full fledged interstate. It never has had to be. There isn't the traffic numbers to justify more than basic work. It may be convenient, which is fine, but we didn't need to drop all this money into it.

We live in an era where people are more reliant on GPS technology rather than the road signs. At the same time, the concept of the route designation is almost meaningless because of it. I don't think a general driver cares that it's NY 17 versus Interstate 86. The marketing strength of the 380 mile road is not big enough to say that the value of an interstate designation is enough to change things.

When this project was started (1999), no one really  could see this kind of thing coming. Now it's 2020. The parts that needed to be worked on (Prospect Mtn, Parksville, east of 84) are being worked on. It has served fine as NY 17 and should remain NY 17. 
Logged
Adam Seth Moss
M.A. History, Western Illinois University '17
B.A. History, Montclair State University '15
A.A. History & Education - Middlesex County College '13

vdeane

  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 10798
  • Age: 28
  • Location: Latham, NY
  • Last Login: February 21, 2020, 09:08:12 PM
    • New York State Roads
Re: NY 17/"I-86"
« Reply #240 on: February 16, 2020, 08:32:51 PM »

Maybe for now, we should just switch the freeway section of NY 17 to NY 86 (or just cosign them), then extend 32 along the surface portions.
NY 86 already exists in the Adirondacks.
Logged
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position of NYSDOT or its affiliates.

empirestate

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 4175
  • Last Login: February 21, 2020, 11:41:30 PM
    • Empire State Roads
Re: NY 17/"I-86"
« Reply #241 on: February 21, 2020, 05:14:19 PM »

The problem is NY 17 doesn't need to be a full fledged interstate. It never has had to be. There isn't the traffic numbers to justify more than basic work. It may be convenient, which is fine, but we didn't need to drop all this money into it.

[]

When this project was started (1999), no one really  could see this kind of thing coming. Now it's 2020. The parts that needed to be worked on (Prospect Mtn, Parksville, east of 84) are being worked on. It has served fine as NY 17 and should remain NY 17. 

And I don't know that Parksville belongs in the "needed" category. That was some intensive roadworks that got done there, and all it did was bypass a single traffic signal that served as a convenient waypoint. Stopping at Parksville for ice cream was always assumed to be a part of any trip I took through the area.
Logged

Rothman

  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 5532
  • Last Login: Today at 12:06:35 AM
Re: NY 17/"I-86"
« Reply #242 on: February 21, 2020, 11:23:12 PM »

The problem is NY 17 doesn't need to be a full fledged interstate. It never has had to be. There isn't the traffic numbers to justify more than basic work. It may be convenient, which is fine, but we didn't need to drop all this money into it.

[]

When this project was started (1999), no one really  could see this kind of thing coming. Now it's 2020. The parts that needed to be worked on (Prospect Mtn, Parksville, east of 84) are being worked on. It has served fine as NY 17 and should remain NY 17. 

And I don't know that Parksville belongs in the "needed" category. That was some intensive roadworks that got done there, and all it did was bypass a single traffic signal that served as a convenient waypoint. Stopping at Parksville for ice cream was always assumed to be a part of any trip I took through the area.
Nothing prevents you from stopping for ice cream now.
Logged
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position(s) of NYSDOT.

empirestate

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 4175
  • Last Login: February 21, 2020, 11:41:30 PM
    • Empire State Roads
Re: NY 17/"I-86"
« Reply #243 on: February 21, 2020, 11:33:02 PM »

The problem is NY 17 doesn't need to be a full fledged interstate. It never has had to be. There isn't the traffic numbers to justify more than basic work. It may be convenient, which is fine, but we didn't need to drop all this money into it.

[]

When this project was started (1999), no one really  could see this kind of thing coming. Now it's 2020. The parts that needed to be worked on (Prospect Mtn, Parksville, east of 84) are being worked on. It has served fine as NY 17 and should remain NY 17. 

And I don't know that Parksville belongs in the "needed" category. That was some intensive roadworks that got done there, and all it did was bypass a single traffic signal that served as a convenient waypoint. Stopping at Parksville for ice cream was always assumed to be a part of any trip I took through the area.
Nothing prevents you from stopping for ice cream now.

There's no longer an ice cream shop.
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.