Bill would match N.Y. highway exits with mile numbers

[PHLBOS]

What's wrong with numbering the thruway continuing the Deegan numbers?

The Northeast Extension of the PA Turnpike (I-476) exit numbers and mileage include the free section south of the east-west mainline (I-276).  I don't see this as any different.

Not to mention I-276 continuing the numbers from I-76 after it leaves the Turnpike at Valley Forge

It's worth noting that the section of I-276 that will utlimately become I-95 following the interchange completion will have its exit numbers east of that point changed to follow those of I-95; which only impacts 2 interchanges.

[roadman]

Then why not have a duo-numbered exit numbers on the Thruway segments?

It could get a little confusing doing that, especially if a mile-based exit number happens to match a current exit number. Just number it with the mile-based number, and add a tab or banner that denotes the old exit number. Kind of like this:

I would put the "Formerly Exit XX" information with one of the advance guide signs (preferably the 1/2 mile sign), and not the exit direction sign.

This is one of my peeves with the 2009 MUTCD.  While mandating that states eventually change to reference-based exit numbers, they give absolutely no guidance regarding the design or placement of signing indicating the former exit number.  I pointed this out in my comments on the 2007 NPA for the new MUTCD, but they obviously ignored me.

[SignBridge]

I wonder if this means that all the expwy's and parkways on Long Island will be renumbered and how soon it might happen. I've had most exit numbers in Nassau County memorized for many years. I'll have to start over again from scratch.............

[NE2]

I wonder if this means that all the expwy's and parkways on Long Island will be renumbered and how soon it might happen. I've had most exit numbers in Nassau County memorized for many years. I'll have to start over again from scratch.............

I wonder if you read the text of the bill?
http://open.nysenate.gov/legislation/bill/S2466B-2011

[SignBridge]

So what's your point? That it only applies to Interstate highways? Well that would include the L.I. Expwy, I-495.

[Duke87]

Most of the parkways it wouldn't make much sense to mess with, anyway, given the exit spacing and relative shortness. Taconic is the exception. Though, it currently has exit numbers signed at all (they definitely existed on paper at one point, but I don't know if they've ever been signed).

Once I-86 is complete there aren't going to be too many freeways of significant length left in New York left that aren't interstates, anyway. NY 27 and US 219 will be the only two longer than 20 miles (parkways notwithstanding).

The question then is, what of the state route extensions of interstates such as 390 and 481? One would presumably want to keep the numbers continuous.

[kkt]

from a chronological system to a mileage-based system.

Chronological?! Not enough roadgeeks working at newspapers anymore.

Not enough copy editors working at newspapers anymore.

[roadman]

NYSTA/NYSDOT should take advantage of the opportunity and reroute I-90 to follow the Thruway between Exits 24 & 21A (multiplexed with I-87), and assign the entire Berkshire Spur as I-90.  Then, I-90 would only have two sets of exit numbers. 

This is what MaineDOT did a few years back when they went to mile-based exits.  Instead of having I-95 exit the turnpike and then reenter it further north, they made the whole turnpike I-95, and simplified the exit numbers.


For I-87, if mileposts are not adjusted on the Northway, then you're still gonna have 3 sets of exit numbers:  Deegan, Thruway, and Northway.  It wouldn't make sense to change out every mile marker on the 400-mile route if the Thruway MP 0 at the NYC/Westchester line was eliminated and mileposts were made an extension of the Deegan. 

If this passes, it'll be interesting to see what they come up with.

Considering how awful the ramp from "free" I-90 onto the Berkshire Extension eastbound is, I'd go for that.

[MrDisco99]

Wasn't there a plan a while back to number the Thruway and Berkshire extension as I-90 and make the current "free" I-90 an extension of I-88?  I thought this was why there's no toll between Thruway exits 24 and 25A.

This makes the most sense to me, anyway, considering how awkward it is to follow I-90 through NY today.  I guess ideally they'd make the current free I-90 a TDI, but they seem to have run out of those.

[NE2]

Wasn't there a plan a while back to number the Thruway and Berkshire extension as I-90 and make the current "free" I-90 an extension of I-88?  I thought this was why there's no toll between Thruway exits 24 and 25A.

There's no toll because federal funds were used to build all of the east end of I-88.

[kkt]

When they're finished, they can start numbering them all over, this time in kilometers.

[machias]

With discussions I've had with NYSDOT and NYSTA over the years regarding this, I think this is the plan:

1.  The Thruway will be one set of exit numbers starting in Ripley and going down to New York.  They originally wanted to include I-190 in the mileage but that was a while ago and they're not going to do that now (I-190 would continue where I-90's exits left off).  I had proposed I-87 and I-90 get their own exit numbers because I-90's Exit 100 would be nowhere near I-87's Exit 100 (hypothetical exit numbers, I know there wouldn't be two exit 100s) but they said it would be confusing for motorists (because three Exit 12s along I-87 isn't confusing).  Last I knew, Exit 1 would be Ripley, Exit 496 would be Hall Place.  This was discussed during the days I had renumbernewyork.com

2.  I-87 (Northway) Exit numbers would start at Exit 150 for NY 5 Albany / Schenectady.  The last official listing I saw had the missing Exit 3 as Exit 152.  This accounts for the Thruway's current milepost 0 and does not include the Major Deegan.  I pointed out that proposed Exit 152 should actually be Exit 161 but I don't know if they took me seriously or not.

3.  I-90 (Free 90 in Albany) would continue I-90's exit numbers from the Thruway.  Washington Ave. would become Exit 349.  Exit B3 would be Exit 385.

4.  The state route extensions of the 3-dis would continue the 3-di interchange numbers.  The new mile markers on I-690/NY 690 and NY 481 (there's no mile markers on I-481 yet) indicate this.  I think the Rochester counterparts do the same.

5.  US 219 will get exit numbers.  Not sure about NY 49 because they're still trying to determine if it's going to become I-790.


I had proposed that they gradually do this with sign rehabs (say over 10 years - hey if California can do it, so can we) and they were actually thinking about doing an EXIT  4 / NEW EXIT 352 configuration but I don't know if that's fallen to the wayside or not.  It's been a few years since the conversation.

[KEVIN_224]

Is I-86 sequential now? Does it continue from the numbering that starts in PA? (This would assume when I-86 is 100% finished, of course.)

Also, if the Thruway does get renumbered, would I-84 get done at the same time? I know Exit 1 near the PA and NJ state lines would remain exit 1 (PA already does mileage-based exiting on their portion of I-84.) Perhaps the current Exit 20 for I-684 South could become Exit 68? Exit 21 in Southeast could become Exit 69 (westbound off/eastbound on).

[mapman1071]

Long Island

Southern State Parkway Exit 1 (Formally Exit 13) Central Avenue - Linden Blvd
LIE I-495 Exit 2 (Formally Exit 13)  Borden Avenue

Sunrise Highway?

[Dougtone]

I support the bill to be honest, but besides the Thruway, I'd love to see what they want do with the Sunken Meadow, Sagtikos, Robert Moses, Bethpage, Meadowbrook and Wantagh Parkways, if they get affected at all.

I wouldn't be surprised if the exit numbering on the New York parkways stays the same.  The example of this that I'm thinking of is from when Pennsylvania switched to mile-based exit numbering, but some non-Interstate freeways were able to maintain sequential-based exit numbering, such as PA 28 near Pittsburgh.

[Dougtone]

4.  The state route extensions of the 3-dis would continue the 3-di interchange numbers.  The new mile markers on I-690/NY 690 and NY 481 (there's no mile markers on I-481 yet) indicate this.  I think the Rochester counterparts do the same.

As I-690/NY 690 goes, the new mile markers install actually count south/east from where NY 690 begins at NY 48 and NY 631 and does not reset at the Thruway.  I'm assuming that mile-based exit numbers for I-690/NY 690 will be doing the same.  Any other Interstate/New York state touring route couplets should have seamless transitions as well.

[machias]

4.  The state route extensions of the 3-dis would continue the 3-di interchange numbers.  The new mile markers on I-690/NY 690 and NY 481 (there's no mile markers on I-481 yet) indicate this.  I think the Rochester counterparts do the same.

As I-690/NY 690 goes, the new mile markers install actually count south/east from where NY 690 begins at NY 48 and NY 631 and does not reset at the Thruway.  I'm assuming that mile-based exit numbers for I-690/NY 690 will be doing the same.  Any other Interstate/New York state touring route couplets should have seamless transitions as well.

Yeah, off the top of my head I think that's the only instance of that in the state. The others fit the southern or western starting point scenario just fine.

I have to admit that I've always found it strange that if you come down NY Route 690, you encounter Exit 1 after you have already passed three interchanges.  I was surprised that they didn't include the NY Route 690 interchanges in the numbering scheme when they renumbered everything in the mid 1980s.

[vdeane]

Wasn't there a plan a while back to number the Thruway and Berkshire extension as I-90 and make the current "free" I-90 an extension of I-88?  I thought this was why there's no toll between Thruway exits 24 and 25A.

There's no toll because federal funds were used to build all of the east end of I-88.

Actually, the reason there are no tolls is because I-88 was to be built straddling the thruway (as NY 49 does now in Utica); this plan was cancelled in favor of widening the Thruway and removing tolls for I-88 traffic.

Is I-86 sequential now? Does it continue from the numbering that starts in PA? (This would assume when I-86 is 100% finished, of course.)

Also, if the Thruway does get renumbered, would I-84 get done at the same time? I know Exit 1 near the PA and NJ state lines would remain exit 1 (PA already does mileage-based exiting on their portion of I-84.) Perhaps the current Exit 20 for I-684 South could become Exit 68? Exit 21 in Southeast could become Exit 69 (westbound off/eastbound on).

I-86 is sequential and does continue from PA (ironically it does this better than when PA had sequential numbers), but the mile posts reset at the border so the new numbers likely would as well.

I-84 is no longer part of the Thruway, so it would be up to NYSDOT.

With discussions I've had with NYSDOT and NYSTA over the years regarding this, I think this is the plan:

1.  The Thruway will be one set of exit numbers starting in Ripley and going down to New York.  They originally wanted to include I-190 in the mileage but that was a while ago and they're not going to do that now (I-190 would continue where I-90's exits left off).  I had proposed I-87 and I-90 get their own exit numbers because I-90's Exit 100 would be nowhere near I-87's Exit 100 (hypothetical exit numbers, I know there wouldn't be two exit 100s) but they said it would be confusing for motorists (because three Exit 12s along I-87 isn't confusing).  Last I knew, Exit 1 would be Ripley, Exit 496 would be Hall Place.  This was discussed during the days I had renumbernewyork.com

I can see their point, given that the majority of Thruway traffic still pays cash and the Thruway has no present plans to change the cash/E-ZPass situation beyond adding open-road-tolling lanes at Williamsville sometime in the distant future (other barriers have no plans to ever be changed from their present configuration).

[Jim]

I can see their point, given that the majority of Thruway traffic still pays cash and the Thruway has no present plans to change the cash/E-ZPass situation beyond adding open-road-tolling lanes at Williamsville sometime in the distant future (other barriers have no plans to ever be changed from their present configuration).

This surprises me.  If someone put me on the spot for a guess, I would have said 70-75% of Thruway transactions take place through E-ZPass at this point.  I guess my view is skewed by the fact that I'm on the road most frequently at rush hour with other commuters who are much more likely to have a tag.  Are the actual numbers out there somewhere?

I know there have been local news stories about long-term plans to upgrade Exit 24 with direct E-ZPass only ramps connecting the Northway and I-90 to the Thruway, but that was a while back and I don't have any specifics handy.  I'm definitely not holding my breath.

[Mr_Northside]

I wouldn't be surprised if the exit numbering on the New York parkways stays the same.  The example of this that I'm thinking of is from when Pennsylvania switched to mile-based exit numbering, but some non-Interstate freeways were able to maintain sequential-based exit numbering, such as PA 28 near Pittsburgh.

I still consider that to be one of the more dumb things that PennDOT has done in recent years; leaving non-interstate highways with a different exit #-ing scheme. 
Either exit numbers in PA (regardless of the shape/color(s) of the shields along the highway) should be either all one, or all the other.

And I suppose my feelings of consistency on the subject would extend into NY (and other states) as well.

[SignBridge]

Deanej, since when is I-84 no longer part of the Thruway system?

[Brandon]

The Thruway could maintain its current exit numbers for the exits while using proper mile-based exit numbers.  The current exit number could be used as a toll plaza number instead of the exit number for reference.  ISTHA gives each and every toll plaza a separate plaza number, even on the section of I-88 that currently has mile-based exit numbers (for example, I went through Plazas 73 and 89 tonight - Army Trail Road (MP29) and Boughton Road Mainline (MP14)).  "Exit 24" on the Thruway could become "Plaza 24" (as an example) to maintain the current reference points for the ticket system and to eliminate confusion across the road.

It's just an idea, but it might work given the two different interstates on the route.

[Jim]

Deanej, since when is I-84 no longer part of the Thruway system?

2010.  One article: http://hudsonvalley.ynn.com/content/all_news/508855/state-dot-takes-over-i-84/

[SignBridge]

Well, well; this is the first I'd heard about this. Funny thing is 20 years ago it was big news when T'way Auth. took over I-84, which I always thought was a dumb move. I'm surprised this latest development didn't make the NYC area news. What was the reason for changing it back?

I have a 2009 Thruway brochure still showing I-84 in their system. Did this change take effect fairly recently? I sometimes listen to the Thruway Auth. radio freq. on my scanner, and it seemed like not long ago I was still hearing them dispatch activity on I-84.

[empirestate]

I'm surprised at everyone's surprise.  I feel as though there was a fair amount of chatter among roadgeeks about this when it happened. Anyway, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstate_84_in_New_York .