NY 17/"I-86"

[Alps]

TBH, if they're never going to do Hale Eddy (why bother?), just designate what gets upgraded on the east end as I-387 (987 if you want to minimize duplication) or I-584 if people insist on a signed I-designation and call it a day.

hello ncdot

[dlainhart]

Shoot, even Congress made portions of I-278 ineligible for Interstate Maintenance funding a long time ago due to using the system as defined by a particular date a long time ago.  I believe those sections are still ineligible for 90/10 funding because of that (i.e., since IM was absorbed into NHPP in MAP-21).

Congress should probably rethink cutting funding to the only Interstate truck corridor in Brooklyn. These people are delusional.

[dzheng35]

Hi. I'm new to the AARoads Forum because I've been curious about highways that I've known and the NY 17/I-86 corridor is one of them I've known for a few years. Anyways, to anyone who's been wondering why the I-86 signs in Orange County between I-84 and NY 17K never got uncovered for years, here's why.

The following was from an attached document in the Route 17 Widening PEL Study: https://www.dot.ny.gov/portal/page/portal/content/delivery/region8/projects/806509-Home/806509-Repository/8065.09_PEL%20Report%20Final_Attachment%205_Public%20Involvement%20Documents.pdf

In Orange County the reconstruction project from I-84 to NY 17K was anticipated by NYSDOT to
meet all FHWA requirements for Interstate designation. In the ensuing years when this segment
had a draft Interstate designation request submitted to FHWA and FHWA performed field
inspections, there were a few outstanding issues identified. The outstanding needs that need to be
addresses are mainly related to right-of-way issues and access control at ramp terminals, the
remainder were minor routine maintenance needs. Routine maintenance is always ongoing and the
other issues are not critical to the day-to-day operation and safety of Route 17, so until a longer,
continuous segment is ready for designation, likely requiring the segment between I-84 and I-87,
FHWA requested that all I-86 signs be covered.

[MASTERNC]

Just drove on 86/17 from Binghamton to Sayre and back.  What a mess, especially the "Future 86" section.  The pavement desperately needs rehabilitation.

[dzheng35]

TBH, if they're never going to do Hale Eddy (why bother?), just designate what gets upgraded on the east end as I-387 (987 if you want to minimize duplication) or I-584 if people insist on a signed I-designation and call it a day.

Actually, you might want to think twice about whether they will do Hale Eddy or not because I've been looking at region 9's monthly STIP Projects update on the DOT website since last July and they did talk about building a new diamond interchange there since then. It's not necessarily going to happen in the upcoming years but it is mentioned on the page.

https://www.dot.ny.gov/programs/stip/files/R9.pdf (Page 12)

[Roadgeek Adam]

$50-85MM to overbuild a junction because of a silly interstate designation.....it's a waste of funds. As is, Route 17 being bypassed basically sank Parksville into nothing

[dzheng35]

$50-85MM to overbuild a junction because of a silly interstate designation.....it's a waste of funds. As if, Route 17 being bypass basically sank Parksville into nothing

I mean, what are the accident rates in those areas, it the accidents rates are unusual then doing something about it may still be worth it just as a safety issue. Also, are they ever going to get the remainder of the southern tier portion designated? I feel like they should at the very least get on their toes and get the southern tier expressway section done so you can have a nice interstate connecting to an interstate on both ends since the southern tier expressway is almost entirely up to standards.

[Roadgeek Adam]

The traffic rates don't justify the upgrades, let alone the accident rates. Route 17 at Hale Eddy is wide enough for visibility in all directions. The only time there would be concern is snow, and that would still be a problem with a new interchange.

Also, the interstate highway system designations are useless in modern America. We don't need to be adding on to a flawed system when people just blindly follow their GPSes anyway. Route 17 is perfectly fine.

There are flawed bridges that could use that money even more. Hell, there's a chance a part of 17 could cave in if the former New York, Ontario and Western Railroad tunnel gives way. That needs more money than Hale Eddy does.

[dzheng35]

At least Orange and part of Sullivan County may receive an I-86 designation sometimes soon.

[Roadgeek Adam]

But again, why does it matter? if it's Route 17 or Interstate Eleventy-Threeve, it's still going to be the same damn road no one cares about beyond traveling and following their GPS.

[webny99]

Here's the quote regarding a potential new interchange:

RT 17 WILL BE RE-ALIGNED TO THE
NORTH, AND A NEW DIAMOND INTERCHANGE WILL BE CONSTRUCTED
AT HALE EDDY. THIS INTERCHANGE WILL INCLUDE A NEW BRIDGE
OVER RT 17, CONNECTING HALE-EDDY ROAD — BROOME COUNTY LINE
ROAD, SOUTH OF RT 17 TO THE PROPOSED NORTH SERVICE ROAD, ON
THE NORTH SIDE OF RT 17. THE PROPOSED NORTH SERVICE ROAD WILL
CONNECT TO HUNGRY HOLLOW ROAD ON THE WEST END, AND TO
LOWER HALE-EDDY ROAD ON THE EAST END. TOWN OF DEPOSIT,
DELAWARE COUNTY.

So essentially, this project would address this segment, which is by far the biggest remaining issue. That would leave just Bush Hill Road and a few driveways as the only things preventing it from being fully limited access.

[Roadgeek Adam]

It is not an issue though. It has never been an issue. The only reason it's an "issue" is because of a linear designation that means nothing anymore. There's no safety hazards.

[webny99]

It is not an issue though. It has never been an issue. The only reason it's an "issue" is because of a linear designation that means nothing anymore. There's no safety hazards.

It's not a safety issue, but it's close enough to finished that it just doesn't make any sense to abandon it now. For starters you'd have to undesignate the signed section east of Binghamton, which would be a total waste. If 2/3 of the route wasn't already designated and signed and about 99% of it already to interstate standards, I might think differently about it.

[vdeane]

Also, the interstate highway system designations are useless in modern America. We don't need to be adding on to a flawed system when people just blindly follow their GPSes anyway. Route 17 is perfectly fine.

What's wrong with the interstate system (beyond the slow build and roundabout nature of newer proposals like I-14 and the Southway, since they're being done by local interests rather than federal planning)?  The interstate system is what got me into roadgeeking in the first place.  Even as I think things like I-14 are pork and hate the suffix nonsense that seems to be becoming more and more prolific in Texas (first I-35 and then I-69, now there's possibilities for I-14 and I-27 doing that too...), I do believe the gaps in the system should be filled in.

[Roadgeek Adam]

It is not an issue though. It has never been an issue. The only reason it's an "issue" is because of a linear designation that means nothing anymore. There's no safety hazards.

It's not a safety issue, but it's close enough to finished that it just doesn't make any sense to abandon it now. For starters you'd have to undesignate the signed section east of Binghamton, which would be a total waste. If 2/3 of the route wasn't already designated and signed and about 99% of it already to interstate standards, I might think differently about it.

That takes literally a stroke of the pen. I'm good with taking down all 86 shields period from Erie County PA to Binghamton too.

These designations mean almost nothing anymore. If anything. NC has proven that. TX has proven that.

[webny99]

That takes literally a stroke of the pen.

... yeah, the same plus one drop-in-the-bucket project could be said of just finishing I-86.

[Roadgeek Adam]

I'll remember that when a bridge needing repair crumbles and wasting our money on a pointless project that benefits no one and might ruin what little remains of Hale Eddy, New York.

[Anthony_JK]

Just build a tight urban diamond interchange, some frontage roads, and buy some property. Done deal.

Bridge repair and road maintenance is covered under separate funding sources.

A major highway which has been fully upgraded to Interstate standards elsewhere shouldn't be left uncompleted based on trivialities such as this that can easily be resolved. Plus, it's seriously dangerous for drivers expecting a freeway to run all of a sudden into someone's direct driveway connection. Whether it's NY 17, I-86, or whatever, if it's 98% a freeway, go ahead and complete the remaining 2%.

[Roadgeek Adam]

The Appalachian corridors do just fine with having freeway standard roads with turn offs and such. US 24 in Ohio does just fine west of Toledo.

The concept of straightening out the Hale Eddy mess involves cutting and bombing a significant portion of the hill and taking all properties north of the road.

Besides, ruining a perfectly good Hale Eddy isn't going to magically make it interstate highway quality. There are significantly more problematic issues on 17 east of there (exit 111 for example) that need to be taken care of that are more serious.

You can just make the 86 shields "vanish" through that stretch.

[Rothman]

Makes me wonder if R9 put it in there as illustrative rather than an actual project.

[dzheng35]

Just wondering once they do the potential improvements in Sullivan and Orange County, from where to where would the I-86 designation be applied?

[Anthony_JK]

The Appalachian corridors do just fine with having freeway standard roads with turn offs and such. US 24 in Ohio does just fine west of Toledo.

The concept of straightening out the Hale Eddy mess involves cutting and bombing a significant portion of the hill and taking all properties north of the road.

Besides, ruining a perfectly good Hale Eddy isn't going to magically make it interstate highway quality. There are significantly more problematic issues on 17 east of there (exit 111 for example) that need to be taken care of that are more serious.

You can just make the 86 shields "vanish" through that stretch.

The Appalachian Corridors are not designated Interstate-grade freeways. I-86 is.

There aren't that many properties to be taken; less than usual.

You don't simply "hide" an Interstate shield in a non-interstate section. The expectation of an Interstate highway is FULL control of access with NO direct at-grade connections and NO driveway connections. Hale Eddy as it stands now violates this premise. Either fix that brief section to meet the same standards, or junk the I-86 designation everywhere else, for it's no longer an Interstate-grade freeway.

[MATraveler128]

Just wondering once they do the potential improvements in Sullivan and Orange County, from where to where would the I-86 designation be applied?

Once improvements are complete, NY 17 will be up to Interstate standards from Exit 103 (old route 17) to the New York Thruway. At that point, the I-86 designation can be applied. Of course, NYSDOT will have to seek approval to sign it and uncover the shields at the I-84 interchange.

[Roadgeek Adam]

Then junk the I-86 designation east of Binghamton. There's no reason for it east of Binghamton anyway. It's a waste of money on a system that no longer serves any purpose.

[Duke87]

You don't simply "hide" an Interstate shield in a non-interstate section.

It's not hidden. That section simply is not part of I-86 because it hasn't been completed yet. This has been done many many times before, and not just recently - lots of such similar situations existed as the original interstate system was under construction.

And yes you can call Hale Eddy "not completed yet" and put it off indefinitely. It took over 60 years to finish I-95, so...