NEW Interchange of the Week - Kew Gardens Interchange
N.W.Perry
interchange construction, plus there's a trumpet hidden inside it; see if
you can find it!
http://www.empirestateroads.com/week/
Next week: I-390, I-490 and NY 390 in Rochester, most likely.
stéphane dumas
"N.W.Perry" <per...@frontiernet.net> a écrit dans le message news:
9d9g09$kgg$1...@node21.cwnet.roc.gblx.net...
> Here it is, it's a beaut! This tangle features at least three generations
of
> interchange construction, plus there's a trumpet hidden inside it; see if
> you can find it!
>
> http://www.empirestateroads.com/week/
Very good pic you founded Nathan keep up your good work :-)
>
> Next week: I-390, I-490 and NY 390 in Rochester, most likely.
>
Cool :)
Also I suggest for future additions
the LIE/Northern state Pkwy "half-interchange" just at the east of NY135
when there exits ramps going from the Northern State Pkwy to go to the LIE
(but no ramps from the LIE to the Northern state pkwy)
Stéphane Dumas steph...@videotron.ca
Steve Anderson
>
> Here it is, it's a beaut! This tangle features at least three generations of
> interchange construction, plus there's a trumpet hidden inside it; see if
> you can find it!
>
> http://www.empirestateroads.com/week/
>
It's not a place you want to be driving at a speed of much more than 40
MPH. Acceleration and deceleration lanes are noticeably absent, and
consequently, accidents are a frequent occurrence here.
Just west of the interchange on the Jackie Robinson Parkway, there is a
"dead man's curve" tunneling under Queens Boulevard (NY 25) with narrow
lanes (perhaps 10 feet wide) and an advisory speed of 25 MPH. Many round
this curve at higher speeds, often resulting in accidents.
-- Steve Anderson
http://www.nycroads.com
http://www.phillyroads.com
http://www.bostonroads.com (coming soon)
SPUI
"N.W.Perry" <per...@frontiernet.net> wrote in message
news:9d9g09$kgg$1...@node21.cwnet.roc.gblx.net...
> Here it is, it's a beaut! This tangle features at least three generations
of
> interchange construction, plus there's a trumpet hidden inside it; see if
> you can find it!
>
> http://www.empirestateroads.com/week/
You may want to note some of the old exit numbers (listed at
http://web.mit.edu/spui/www/boston/nycexitnumbers.html ). Specifically, the
Interboro and Grand Central were one continuous system.
"Note that in Steve's photo this connector splits, to intersect either the
Van Wyck connector to the left, and the Grand Central Parkway proper, to the
right. This is redundant, as the two roadways merge soon afterward."
This was likely for traffic from the Interboro to exit 15.
--
Daniel Moraseski - from Orlando FL, originally from Manalapan NJ
Now attending MIT (Cambridge MA (near Boston))
http://spui.cjb.net - FL NJ and Boston roads, and a list of SPUIs
Editor of http://roadlinks.cjb.net (highway cat of Open Directory Project)
N.W.Perry
"SPUI" <sp...@mit.NOSPDAMMedu> wrote in message
news:3af90f3f$0$1912$b45e...@senator-bedfellow.mit.edu...
> "Note that in Steve's photo this connector splits, to intersect either the
> Van Wyck connector to the left, and the Grand Central Parkway proper, to
the
> right. This is redundant, as the two roadways merge soon afterward."
> This was likely for traffic from the Interboro to exit 15.
You mean to Union Turnpike/NY 25?
David J. Greenberger
> Just west of the interchange on the Jackie Robinson Parkway, there is
> a "dead man's curve" tunneling under Queens Boulevard (NY 25) with
> narrow lanes (perhaps 10 feet wide) and an advisory speed of 25
> MPH. Many round this curve at higher speeds, often resulting in
> accidents.
This is the "extremely narrow underpass of Queens Boulevard" in Nathan's
description.
I'm not familiar with traffic patterns on Union Turnpike. Might it be
possible to rearrange UT so it has only one lane each way through the
underpass and two each way intersecting QB? That would allow widening
the JRP to four standard lanes plus narrow shoulders.
--
David J. Greenberger
Steve Anderson
Robinson Parkway-E/B Jackie Robinson Parkway-E/B Union Turnpike lanes.
Each roadway has two lanes in each direction.
What should be done: relocate the columns so that there are two lanes
and a narrow shoulder in each direction for the Jackie Robinson Parkway
lanes under the tunnel. The Union Turnpike roadways (which have less
traffic) should be narrowed to one lane and a small shoulder in each
direction.
The Jackie Robinson Parkway alone carries 70,000 AADT through the area,
according to the NYSDOT logs.
SPUI
Whatever you say exit 15 on GCP WB is.
Ralph Herman
"Steve Anderson" <nycr...@erols.com> wrote in message
news:3AF9ACFE...@erols.com...
the Queens Blvd. underpass very well.
First off, the Queens Blvd. subway line runs directly below the underpass,
and I believe any modifications to the overpass supports and footings would
have to take into account the subway tunnels (IIRC, two levels due to the
subway yard connector).... very expensive to modify.
But, if money was no object, my first choice would "fly" the JR Pkwy over
Queens Blvd. (with a gentle horizontal curve), and keep Union Tpke where it
is. The current parkway lanes could be used for the flyover supports.
My second option would be to "eliminate" Union Tpke. through the underpass.
I would rebuild the overpass so that the supports are only on the center
median... with three lanes through the underpass in each direction.....the
third lane being an auxiliary lane which would connect to slip ramps for
Union Tpke. The "deadman's curve" could not be eliminated on the Parkway,
but the radius could be improved a bit... since a traffic lane in each
direction is eliminated... and the remaining lanes could be widened to 12
feet each.
But due to the NIMBY's, neither proposal would pass the local community
boards.
Ralph
N.W.Perry
"SPUI" <sp...@mit.NOSPDAMMedu> wrote in message
> > > This was likely for traffic from the Interboro to exit 15.
> >
> > You mean to Union Turnpike/NY 25?
>
> Whatever you say exit 15 on GCP WB is.
That's what I say it is, but Exit 15 is some distance behind the viewpoint
of Steve's photo. Perhaps there was a cloverleaf ramp at this point for
Union Turnpike?
Steve Anderson
>
> I used to live about two blocks from the KGI and I know the limitations of
> the Queens Blvd. underpass very well.
>
> First off, the Queens Blvd. subway line runs directly below the underpass,
> and I believe any modifications to the overpass supports and footings would
> have to take into account the subway tunnels (IIRC, two levels due to the
> subway yard connector).... very expensive to modify.
>
> But, if money was no object, my first choice would "fly" the JR Pkwy over
> Queens Blvd. (with a gentle horizontal curve), and keep Union Tpke where it
> is. The current parkway lanes could be used for the flyover supports.
>
> My second option would be to "eliminate" Union Tpke. through the underpass.
> I would rebuild the overpass so that the supports are only on the center
> median... with three lanes through the underpass in each direction.....the
> third lane being an auxiliary lane which would connect to slip ramps for
> Union Tpke. The "deadman's curve" could not be eliminated on the Parkway,
> but the radius could be improved a bit... since a traffic lane in each
> direction is eliminated... and the remaining lanes could be widened to 12
> feet each.
>
> But due to the NIMBY's, neither proposal would pass the local community
> boards.
>
a presentation on a proposed "Tappan Zee Tunnel"), I thought about what
I wrote in my earlier post. Another possibility would be to continue
Union Turnpike through Queens Boulevard as an at-grade intersection with
appropriate traffic controls. The existing at-grade intersection would
have to be reconfigured, of course (this is where the express and local
lanes of Queens Boulevard converge/diverge; and where Kew Gardens Road
begins). As Ralph mentioned, this idea may not pass muster with
Community Board 6.
(However, nearby on Queens Boulevard, the NYCDOT is preparing to install
parking meters along the *left* side of the local carriageways/service
roads on Queens Boulevard, allowing only one traffic lane to use the
service roads... what if there is an emergency and/or someone
double-parks? Now *this* defies logic!)
AKirsc5653
can tell you the trumpet is between the Grand Central and the Jackie
Robinson--with the Jackie Robinson behaving as if it is the continuous mainline
road (from the GCP to/from the east) and the western CGP behaving as if it were
the exit.
:-) Andrew "MisterK" Kirschner
AKirsc5653
to a street on the north side of it, just like it is for the rest of the way.
BUT that would be difficult, and would pretty much mean rebulding the whole
kittenkaboodle. It might work by reconfiguring the lanes under Queens Blvd,
but that would solve none of the problems of the interchange. It would also
create a problem further east on eastbound Union Tpke since it would no longer
connect to the side streets coming from Briarwood.
:-) Andrew
David J. Greenberger
> (However, nearby on Queens Boulevard, the NYCDOT is preparing to
> install parking meters along the *left* side of the local
> carriageways/service roads on Queens Boulevard, allowing only one
> traffic lane to use the service roads... what if there is an emergency
> and/or someone double-parks? Now *this* defies logic!)
Are the service roads much narrower than the city's side streets?
Getting by a double-parked car on a side street is no problem, even for
an ambulance, as long as no idiot decides to double-park right across
the street.
My greater concern is with the slip ramps. With cars parked on the left
side of the service road, traffic merging from the main roadway into the
service road has no view of the traffic it's about to merge with and
must make an abrupt rightward maneuver to avoid the parked cars. If
NYCDOT (a) bans parking a short distance behind the slip ramp (to
provide the view), (b) bans parking a short distance ahead of the slip
ramp (to provide an auxiliary merging lane), and (c) properly stripes
the merging lane and no-parking zones, I suppose I'll be satisfied.
--
David J. Greenberger
Ralph Herman
"David J. Greenberger" <gren...@uiuc.edu> wrote in message
news:wkeltwr...@uiuc.edu...
The parking plan for Queens Blvd. will go the way of the Ed Koch dedicated
bike lanes in Manhattan.. they will be removed by the end of the year, IMO.
The parking plan will do NOTHING to alleviate the main problems which plague
Queens Blvd... speeding (40 MPH+) on the main roadways, illegal pedestrian
activities (i.e., jaywalking) and motorists who run red signals. Remove the
cops currently stationed with summons books on every corner and the
conditions will return to NYC normal... double parking, running red lights,
parking in bus stops, jaywalking, etc.
What the parking meter plan WILL do is increase road rage along the Blvd of
Death, due to increased congestion along the corridor. When the battalion
of NYPD is re-deployed (as we all know they eventually will be)... the
ridiculous main roadway 30 MPH speed limit will again be ignored, jaywalking
will resume to previous levels, and the body count will resume.
Commissioner Weinshall hasn't a clue, she is a bureaucrat, not a traffic
engineer. Removing a traffic lane from service on one of the busiest streets
is just plain stupid. Placing more local traffic on the main roadways is
not the answer, enforcement of existing NYC traffic laws is.
Ralph
(Who's apartment window overlooked Queens Blvd 15 years ago)
David J. Greenberger
> The parking plan for Queens Blvd. will go the way of the Ed Koch
> dedicated bike lanes in Manhattan.. they will be removed by the end of
> the year, IMO. The parking plan will do NOTHING to alleviate the main
> problems which plague Queens Blvd... speeding (40 MPH+) on the main
> roadways, illegal pedestrian activities (i.e., jaywalking) and
> motorists who run red signals. Remove the cops currently stationed
> with summons books on every corner and the conditions will return to
> NYC normal... double parking, running red lights, parking in bus
> stops, jaywalking, etc.
I agree.
It's too late now, but the street was simply designed all wrong. Rather
than a wide two-way boulevard, it should have been built as a pair of
wide one-way streets with progressive signals. That would have
automatically enforced the speed limit and it would provide the
opportunity for more pedestrian crossings without delaying traffic.
--
David J. Greenberger