News:

Thank you for your patience during the Forum downtime while we upgraded the software. Welcome back and see this thread for some new features and other changes to the forum.

Main Menu

I-95/Penna Turnpike Interchange

Started by Zeffy, February 25, 2014, 11:08:43 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

jeffandnicole



cpzilliacus

Quote from: jeffandnicole on May 22, 2017, 08:16:53 AM
This is the sign PennDOT designed to deal with such situations: https://goo.gl/maps/fDix1kQcuJ22 . Mostly used by just PennDOT, there is one on 322 in DRPA's jurisdiction as well: https://goo.gl/maps/mqZ5oLmWZSK2

I think I have seen one of those someplace else, perhaps along that horrible section of I-70 in either Westmoreland County or Washington County in southwest Pennsylvania - or possibly someplace along I-83 in Penn's Woods.
Opinions expressed here on AAROADS are strictly personal and mine alone, and do not reflect policies or positions of MWCOG, NCRTPB or their member federal, state, county and municipal governments or any other agency.

vdeane

Quote from: Beltway on May 22, 2017, 12:13:27 AM
Quote from: cpzilliacus on May 21, 2017, 08:36:55 PM
Quote from: Mr_Northside on April 14, 2017, 12:30:08 PM
Even when they built the new (at the time) interchange with their own expansion road (Beaver Valley Expy, current I-376) they had to sneak in a new local connection to PA-351 (making it not full freeway-freeway - you have to stop to complete some movements between the highways)
Yes, PTC and PennDOT really want to keep to their old ways.  There is a similar situation at the junction of U.S. 222 and I-76 (Turnpike E-W Mainline, Exit 286) near Denver,  Lancaster County, Pennsylvania.  Access to and from U.S. 222 is via a diamond interchange, and requires driving down arterial Colonel Howard Boulevard to reach the trumpet interchange with the Turnpike.

That Turnpike interchange was rebuilt when the US-222 freeway was built in the early 1970s, so it was built at a time when no one envisioned electronic tolling.

That diamond interchange could have a loop or two added, that would help.

That interchange should be a model of the benefits of connecting the Turnpike to freeways where there are missing links.

Check it out on Google Maps ... the connector highway has limited access connections to several roads that obviously were built to provide for industrial development, and a number of businesses have been built there since the 1970s, and benefit from excellent access to the Turnpike and the US-222 freeway, so it is a hub for industrial development and can draw employees from a wide area including Lancaster and Reading, and trucks from the two superhighways.  Looks like plenty of land still undeveloped.

This could be a model for filling in other missing Turnpike interchanges such as I-81 at Carlisle, I-70 at Breezewood, US-219 at Somerset, and I-99 at Bedford. 
What a waste.  Instead of building a double trumpet with US 222, they made yet another Breezewood.  It's one thing when they just don't bother, but to build something and do it wrong anyways, that's just ridiculous, even by Pennsylvania standards (I-76/I-376 has similar problems, and is even worse because the PTC maintains both roads!).
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position of NYSDOT or its affiliates.

Beltway

Quote from: vdeane on May 22, 2017, 01:49:12 PM
Quote from: Beltway on May 22, 2017, 12:13:27 AM
Quote from: cpzilliacus on May 21, 2017, 08:36:55 PM
Yes, PTC and PennDOT really want to keep to their old ways.  There is a similar situation at the junction of U.S. 222 and I-76 (Turnpike E-W Mainline, Exit 286) near Denver,  Lancaster County, Pennsylvania.  Access to and from U.S. 222 is via a diamond interchange, and requires driving down arterial Colonel Howard Boulevard to reach the trumpet interchange with the Turnpike.
That Turnpike interchange was rebuilt when the US-222 freeway was built in the early 1970s, so it was built at a time when no one envisioned electronic tolling.

That diamond interchange could have a loop or two added, that would help.

That interchange should be a model of the benefits of connecting the Turnpike to freeways where there are missing links.

Check it out on Google Maps ... the connector highway has limited access connections to several roads that obviously were built to provide for industrial development, and a number of businesses have been built there since the 1970s, and benefit from excellent access to the Turnpike and the US-222 freeway, so it is a hub for industrial development and can draw employees from a wide area including Lancaster and Reading, and trucks from the two superhighways.  Looks like plenty of land still undeveloped.

This could be a model for filling in other missing Turnpike interchanges such as I-81 at Carlisle, I-70 at Breezewood, US-219 at Somerset, and I-99 at Bedford. 
What a waste.  Instead of building a double trumpet with US 222, they made yet another Breezewood.  It's one thing when they just don't bother, but to build something and do it wrong anyways, that's just ridiculous, even by Pennsylvania standards (I-76/I-376 has similar problems, and is even worse because the PTC maintains both roads!).

????  The link at the top is Google Maps for that area.  The connector highway between the Turnpike and US-222 is a 4-lane limited access highway, and it contains the toll plaza, and there are no median crossings between the US-222 ramps and the Turnpike, and there is space to make the US-222 interchange a cloverleaf if they want to eliminate those ramp terminal intersections.

The connector highway does not trumpet into US-222 because the connector highway continues to PA-272 (old US-222).  So the 4-way interchange is appropriate, and it can be argued that in the 40 years since it was built that it today needs at least two loops added.
http://www.roadstothefuture.com
http://www.capital-beltway.com

Baloney is a reserved word on the Internet
    (Robert Coté, 2002)

jemacedo9

Quote from: Beltway on May 22, 2017, 02:24:09 PM
Quote from: vdeane on May 22, 2017, 01:49:12 PM
Quote from: Beltway on May 22, 2017, 12:13:27 AM
Quote from: cpzilliacus on May 21, 2017, 08:36:55 PM
Yes, PTC and PennDOT really want to keep to their old ways.  There is a similar situation at the junction of U.S. 222 and I-76 (Turnpike E-W Mainline, Exit 286) near Denver,  Lancaster County, Pennsylvania.  Access to and from U.S. 222 is via a diamond interchange, and requires driving down arterial Colonel Howard Boulevard to reach the trumpet interchange with the Turnpike.
That Turnpike interchange was rebuilt when the US-222 freeway was built in the early 1970s, so it was built at a time when no one envisioned electronic tolling.

That diamond interchange could have a loop or two added, that would help.

That interchange should be a model of the benefits of connecting the Turnpike to freeways where there are missing links.

Check it out on Google Maps ... the connector highway has limited access connections to several roads that obviously were built to provide for industrial development, and a number of businesses have been built there since the 1970s, and benefit from excellent access to the Turnpike and the US-222 freeway, so it is a hub for industrial development and can draw employees from a wide area including Lancaster and Reading, and trucks from the two superhighways.  Looks like plenty of land still undeveloped.

This could be a model for filling in other missing Turnpike interchanges such as I-81 at Carlisle, I-70 at Breezewood, US-219 at Somerset, and I-99 at Bedford. 
What a waste.  Instead of building a double trumpet with US 222, they made yet another Breezewood.  It's one thing when they just don't bother, but to build something and do it wrong anyways, that's just ridiculous, even by Pennsylvania standards (I-76/I-376 has similar problems, and is even worse because the PTC maintains both roads!).

????  The link at the top is Google Maps for that area.  The connector highway between the Turnpike and US-222 is a 4-lane limited access highway, and it contains the toll plaza, and there are no median crossings between the US-222 ramps and the Turnpike, and there is space to make the US-222 interchange a cloverleaf if they want to eliminate those ramp terminal intersections.

The connector highway does not trumpet into US-222 because the connector highway continues to PA-272 (old US-222).  So the 4-way interchange is appropriate, and it can be argued that in the 40 years since it was built that it today needs at least two loops added.

PA has far worse problems than this interchange. Money not withstanding, yes, it would be nice to convert the US 222-Col Howard Blvd interchange into a cloverleaf...but...I wouldn't put that in the top 5 priorities for Lancaster County, never mind the rest of the state. 

Beltway

Quote from: jemacedo9 on May 22, 2017, 02:32:15 PM
Quote from: Beltway on May 22, 2017, 02:24:09 PM
The link at the top is Google Maps for that area.  The connector highway between the Turnpike and US-222 is a 4-lane limited access highway, and it contains the toll plaza, and there are no median crossings between the US-222 ramps and the Turnpike, and there is space to make the US-222 interchange a cloverleaf if they want to eliminate those ramp terminal intersections.

The connector highway does not trumpet into US-222 because the connector highway continues to PA-272 (old US-222).  So the 4-way interchange is appropriate, and it can be argued that in the 40 years since it was built that it today needs at least two loops added.
PA has far worse problems than this interchange. Money not withstanding, yes, it would be nice to convert the US 222-Col Howard Blvd interchange into a cloverleaf...but...I wouldn't put that in the top 5 priorities for Lancaster County, never mind the rest of the state. 

Yep ... I mentioned the missing Turnpike interchanges at I-81 at Carlisle, I-70 at Breezewood, US-219 freeway at Somerset, and I-99 at Bedford.
http://www.roadstothefuture.com
http://www.capital-beltway.com

Baloney is a reserved word on the Internet
    (Robert Coté, 2002)

Flyer78

Quote from: ixnay on May 22, 2017, 07:45:39 AM
Quote from: Alps on May 22, 2017, 12:18:22 AM
Quote from: yakra on May 22, 2017, 12:08:51 AM
Quote from: ixnay on May 21, 2017, 08:55:43 PM
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.4825351,-75.6803723,3a,37.5y,257.61h,87.52t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sazrC41gc9TrLYJ2ejbxgUQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
:pan:  :banghead:
Not with 50 feet of auxiliary lane you don't.

Yes, that is a short weave area, IMO, and probably the reason for the stop signs.

ixnay

There was a time it was just a yield, probably until the early 90s. Allegedly, direct ORT connection will be built... some day.

vdeane

Quote from: Beltway on May 22, 2017, 02:24:09 PM
Quote from: vdeane on May 22, 2017, 01:49:12 PM
Quote from: Beltway on May 22, 2017, 12:13:27 AM
Quote from: cpzilliacus on May 21, 2017, 08:36:55 PM
Yes, PTC and PennDOT really want to keep to their old ways.  There is a similar situation at the junction of U.S. 222 and I-76 (Turnpike E-W Mainline, Exit 286) near Denver,  Lancaster County, Pennsylvania.  Access to and from U.S. 222 is via a diamond interchange, and requires driving down arterial Colonel Howard Boulevard to reach the trumpet interchange with the Turnpike.
That Turnpike interchange was rebuilt when the US-222 freeway was built in the early 1970s, so it was built at a time when no one envisioned electronic tolling.

That diamond interchange could have a loop or two added, that would help.

That interchange should be a model of the benefits of connecting the Turnpike to freeways where there are missing links.

Check it out on Google Maps ... the connector highway has limited access connections to several roads that obviously were built to provide for industrial development, and a number of businesses have been built there since the 1970s, and benefit from excellent access to the Turnpike and the US-222 freeway, so it is a hub for industrial development and can draw employees from a wide area including Lancaster and Reading, and trucks from the two superhighways.  Looks like plenty of land still undeveloped.

This could be a model for filling in other missing Turnpike interchanges such as I-81 at Carlisle, I-70 at Breezewood, US-219 at Somerset, and I-99 at Bedford. 
What a waste.  Instead of building a double trumpet with US 222, they made yet another Breezewood.  It's one thing when they just don't bother, but to build something and do it wrong anyways, that's just ridiculous, even by Pennsylvania standards (I-76/I-376 has similar problems, and is even worse because the PTC maintains both roads!).

????  The link at the top is Google Maps for that area.  The connector highway between the Turnpike and US-222 is a 4-lane limited access highway, and it contains the toll plaza, and there are no median crossings between the US-222 ramps and the Turnpike, and there is space to make the US-222 interchange a cloverleaf if they want to eliminate those ramp terminal intersections.

The connector highway does not trumpet into US-222 because the connector highway continues to PA-272 (old US-222).  So the 4-way interchange is appropriate, and it can be argued that in the 40 years since it was built that it today needs at least two loops added.
There are median crossings (and traffic lights!) AT the US 222 ramps, and as far as I'm concerned, that is enough.  The last time I went through that interchange, it was quite backed up.  Freeway-freeway interchanges are supposed to be freeflow  Now, I get that PA has worse, but this is relatively recent construction, and not the original interchange.  They could have easily made a double trumpet and had local access from another interchange or found another solution.  They did not.  As far as I'm concerned, do something right or don't do it at all.
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position of NYSDOT or its affiliates.

Beltway

Quote from: vdeane on May 22, 2017, 09:59:06 PM
Quote from: Beltway on May 22, 2017, 02:24:09 PM
The link at the top is Google Maps for that area.  The connector highway between the Turnpike and US-222 is a 4-lane limited access highway, and it contains the toll plaza, and there are no median crossings between the US-222 ramps and the Turnpike, and there is space to make the US-222 interchange a cloverleaf if they want to eliminate those ramp terminal intersections.

The connector highway does not trumpet into US-222 because the connector highway continues to PA-272 (old US-222).  So the 4-way interchange is appropriate, and it can be argued that in the 40 years since it was built that it today needs at least two loops added.
There are median crossings (and traffic lights!) AT the US 222 ramps, and as far as I'm concerned, that is enough.  The last time I went through that interchange, it was quite backed up.  Freeway-freeway interchanges are supposed to be freeflow  Now, I get that PA has worse, but this is relatively recent construction, and not the original interchange.  They could have easily made a double trumpet and had local access from another interchange or found another solution.  They did not.  As far as I'm concerned, do something right or don't do it at all.

The interchange was opened about 1976, I drove it afterward a number of times.  The US-222 freeway connected US-30 Lancaster Bypass to Adamstown and ended there merging into the 2-lane US-222 nonlimited-access highway.  Traffic volumes were low and those diamond ramps did not back up.

The US-222 freeway was completed between Adamstown and the Reading freeway system in 2002, and that led to a big increase in traffic.

Nowadays US-222 freeway traffic is in the mid-40,000 AADT range Lancaster to Reading, very heavy.

It is over 40 years old and the design worked well for probably at least 20 years.
http://www.roadstothefuture.com
http://www.capital-beltway.com

Baloney is a reserved word on the Internet
    (Robert Coté, 2002)

Alps

Quote from: Beltway on May 22, 2017, 11:03:16 PM
Quote from: vdeane on May 22, 2017, 09:59:06 PM
Quote from: Beltway on May 22, 2017, 02:24:09 PM
The link at the top is Google Maps for that area.  The connector highway between the Turnpike and US-222 is a 4-lane limited access highway, and it contains the toll plaza, and there are no median crossings between the US-222 ramps and the Turnpike, and there is space to make the US-222 interchange a cloverleaf if they want to eliminate those ramp terminal intersections.

The connector highway does not trumpet into US-222 because the connector highway continues to PA-272 (old US-222).  So the 4-way interchange is appropriate, and it can be argued that in the 40 years since it was built that it today needs at least two loops added.
There are median crossings (and traffic lights!) AT the US 222 ramps, and as far as I'm concerned, that is enough.  The last time I went through that interchange, it was quite backed up.  Freeway-freeway interchanges are supposed to be freeflow  Now, I get that PA has worse, but this is relatively recent construction, and not the original interchange.  They could have easily made a double trumpet and had local access from another interchange or found another solution.  They did not.  As far as I'm concerned, do something right or don't do it at all.

The interchange was opened about 1976, I drove it afterward a number of times.  The US-222 freeway connected US-30 Lancaster Bypass to Adamstown and ended there merging into the 2-lane US-222 nonlimited-access highway.  Traffic volumes were low and those diamond ramps did not back up.

The US-222 freeway was completed between Adamstown and the Reading freeway system in 2002, and that led to a big increase in traffic.

Nowadays US-222 freeway traffic is in the mid-40,000 AADT range Lancaster to Reading, very heavy.

It is over 40 years old and the design worked well for probably at least 20 years.
We knew better by the 1970s to construct full interchanges. I don't understand why you're posting excuses for agencies in states that don't even adjoin yours, unless it's some weird Commonwealth love thing. Freeway to freeway should always be uninterrupted, period.

Beltway

Quote from: Alps on May 22, 2017, 11:19:34 PM
Quote from: Beltway on May 22, 2017, 11:03:16 PM
The interchange was opened about 1976, I drove it afterward a number of times.  The US-222 freeway connected US-30 Lancaster Bypass to Adamstown and ended there merging into the 2-lane US-222 nonlimited-access highway.  Traffic volumes were low and those diamond ramps did not back up.

The US-222 freeway was completed between Adamstown and the Reading freeway system in 2002, and that led to a big increase in traffic.

Nowadays US-222 freeway traffic is in the mid-40,000 AADT range Lancaster to Reading, very heavy.

It is over 40 years old and the design worked well for probably at least 20 years.
We knew better by the 1970s to construct full interchanges. I don't understand why you're posting excuses for agencies in states that don't even adjoin yours, unless it's some weird Commonwealth love thing. Freeway to freeway should always be uninterrupted, period.

Attention needs to be focused on where the real problems are --  the missing Turnpike interchanges at I-81 at Carlisle, I-70 at Breezewood, US-219 freeway at Somerset, and I-99 at Bedford.  As I have already said.  Rants should be targeted wisely, not shotgunned all over the place.     :colorful:
http://www.roadstothefuture.com
http://www.capital-beltway.com

Baloney is a reserved word on the Internet
    (Robert Coté, 2002)

wanderer2575

Quote from: Beltway on May 22, 2017, 11:26:45 PM
Attention needs to be focused on where the real problems are --  the missing Turnpike interchanges at I-81 at Carlisle, I-70 at Breezewood, US-219 freeway at Somerset, and I-99 at Bedford.  As I have already said.  Rants should be targeted wisely, not shotgunned all over the place.     :colorful:

Then the focus further narrowed on where there's a realistic chance something might get done.  An I-70 interchange at Breezewood ain't happening.  See reply #616 on page 25 of this thread (sorry, I don't know the HTML code to link there directly).

Beltway

Quote from: wanderer2575 on May 23, 2017, 12:09:04 AM
Quote from: Beltway on May 22, 2017, 11:26:45 PM
Attention needs to be focused on where the real problems are --  the missing Turnpike interchanges at I-81 at Carlisle, I-70 at Breezewood, US-219 freeway at Somerset, and I-99 at Bedford.  As I have already said.  Rants should be targeted wisely, not shotgunned all over the place.   
Then the focus further narrowed on where there's a realistic chance something might get done.  An I-70 interchange at Breezewood ain't happening.  See reply #616 on page 25 of this thread (sorry, I don't know the HTML code to link there directly).

All that would take is two ramps connecting I-70 to the Turnpike connector highway.  A large-radius loop for WB I-70 and a finger ramp for EB I-70.
http://www.roadstothefuture.com
http://www.capital-beltway.com

Baloney is a reserved word on the Internet
    (Robert Coté, 2002)

wanderer2575

Quote from: Beltway on May 23, 2017, 05:51:11 AM
Quote from: wanderer2575 on May 23, 2017, 12:09:04 AM
Quote from: Beltway on May 22, 2017, 11:26:45 PM
Attention needs to be focused on where the real problems are --  the missing Turnpike interchanges at I-81 at Carlisle, I-70 at Breezewood, US-219 freeway at Somerset, and I-99 at Bedford.  As I have already said.  Rants should be targeted wisely, not shotgunned all over the place.   
Then the focus further narrowed on where there's a realistic chance something might get done.  An I-70 interchange at Breezewood ain't happening.  See reply #616 on page 25 of this thread (sorry, I don't know the HTML code to link there directly).

All that would take is two ramps connecting I-70 to the Turnpike connector highway.  A large-radius loop for WB I-70 and a finger ramp for EB I-70.

I won't disagree about what it would take.  But the political game says it's not happening.  End of debate.

jemacedo9

#689
Should these PA Turnpike interchanges be freeway-to-freeway?  Of course...hindsight is 20/20. It was a serious lack-of-foresight or misguided priorities (local business vs traffic management), or both, whichever you prefer. 

But in terms of fixing all that now...?  PA (both PennDOT and PTC) has a LOT of issues from it's decades of early design, under-design and questionable spending that need to be fixed first in my opinion.  What doesn't help is - for every poorly-designed freeway connection, there are massive interchanges in smaller areas that are probably well designed but I'd personally question the priority; such as I-99/US 220 and US 322 in both State College and Port Matilda, or US 22/US 322/US 522 in Lewistown in PennDOT's case.  in PTCs case, I question the spending done on the PA 66 and PA 43 extensions. 

But all that said - I'd still put these interchanges lower in priority vs many other widening/reconstruction needs.

jeffandnicole


Beltway

#691
Quote from: jemacedo9 on May 23, 2017, 07:53:14 AM
Should these PA Turnpike interchanges be freeway-to-freeway?  Of course...hindsight is 20/20. It was a serious lack-of-foresight or misguided priorities (local business vs traffic management), or both, whichever you prefer. 

But in terms of fixing all that now...?  PA (both PennDOT and PTC) has a LOT of issues from it's decades of early design, under-design and questionable spending that need to be fixed first in my opinion.  What doesn't help is - for every poorly-designed freeway connection, there are massive interchanges in smaller areas that are probably well designed but I'd personally question the priority; such as I-99/US 220 and US 322 in both State College and Port Matilda, or US 22/US 322/US 522 in Lewistown in PennDOT's case.  in PTCs case, I question the spending done on the PA 66 and PA 43 extensions. 

But all that said - I'd still put these interchanges lower in priority vs many other widening/reconstruction needs.

The PTC has built about 150 miles of new turnpike (sorry, I'm to lazy today to compute the exact figure!).  The 20 miles of Beaver Valley Expressway (I-376 and old PA-60) was a logical turnpike extension as it filled a missing link in that highway, and it connects directly to the east-west mainline turnpike.

I give PTC credit for the 6-lane reconstruction projects which may reach about 150 miles in the next 5 to 8 years.  Of course that leaves a lot of work remaining as the original turnpike is 470 miles.  But it does address the busiest sections, New Stanton to Ohio, Morgantown to Bristol, and NE Extension from east-west turnpike to Quakertown.

I too question PTC funding the PA-66 and PA-43 extensions, given the major needs on the original turnpike.  PA-66 could be called a turnpike spur from the east-west turnpike, but PA-43 will not connect to the original turnpike, nor will the Southern Beltway which is another PTC expansion project.  Why should the whole Turnpike system have to support these extensions?

Having lived in the Philadelphia area in the 1970s, I complained years ago on m.t.r about the fact that the Pittsburgh area is getting all the turnpike extension projects and the Philadelphia area is getting none.  I was told by someone from the Pittsburgh area that many people there don't really want them because of the high tolls, and resent having these new highways being PTC toll roads instead of PennDOT toll-free roads.  So it is all a matter of perspective.

These turnpike extension projects are a large part of the reason why the tolls are so high on the original turnpike, about 10 cents per mile, to support the toll revenue bonds that were issued to build the turnpike extension projects.  Plus they have taken large amounts of funding that could have been spent to upgrade the original turnpike.
http://www.roadstothefuture.com
http://www.capital-beltway.com

Baloney is a reserved word on the Internet
    (Robert Coté, 2002)

Beltway

Quote from: wanderer2575 on May 23, 2017, 12:09:04 AM
Quote from: Beltway on May 22, 2017, 11:26:45 PM
Attention needs to be focused on where the real problems are --  the missing Turnpike interchanges at I-81 at Carlisle, I-70 at Breezewood, US-219 freeway at Somerset, and I-99 at Bedford.  As I have already said.  Rants should be targeted wisely, not shotgunned all over the place.     :colorful:
Then the focus further narrowed on where there's a realistic chance something might get done.  An I-70 interchange at Breezewood ain't happening.  See reply #616 on page 25 of this thread (sorry, I don't know the HTML code to link there directly).

Local politics!   :hmmm:
http://www.roadstothefuture.com
http://www.capital-beltway.com

Baloney is a reserved word on the Internet
    (Robert Coté, 2002)

02 Park Ave

"But it does address the busiest sections, New Stanton to Ohio, Morgantown to Bristol, and NE Extension from east-west turnpike to Quakertown."

But the section of the Turnpike which needs the most improvement is from Breezewood to the Allegheny Tunnel.
C-o-H

vdeane

Quote from: Beltway on May 22, 2017, 11:26:45 PM
Quote from: Alps on May 22, 2017, 11:19:34 PM
Quote from: Beltway on May 22, 2017, 11:03:16 PM
The interchange was opened about 1976, I drove it afterward a number of times.  The US-222 freeway connected US-30 Lancaster Bypass to Adamstown and ended there merging into the 2-lane US-222 nonlimited-access highway.  Traffic volumes were low and those diamond ramps did not back up.

The US-222 freeway was completed between Adamstown and the Reading freeway system in 2002, and that led to a big increase in traffic.

Nowadays US-222 freeway traffic is in the mid-40,000 AADT range Lancaster to Reading, very heavy.

It is over 40 years old and the design worked well for probably at least 20 years.
We knew better by the 1970s to construct full interchanges. I don't understand why you're posting excuses for agencies in states that don't even adjoin yours, unless it's some weird Commonwealth love thing. Freeway to freeway should always be uninterrupted, period.

Attention needs to be focused on where the real problems are --  the missing Turnpike interchanges at I-81 at Carlisle, I-70 at Breezewood, US-219 freeway at Somerset, and I-99 at Bedford.  As I have already said.  Rants should be targeted wisely, not shotgunned all over the place.     :colorful:

I certainly don't disagree that these non-interchanges are problems, but there's a difference between "there's no direct connection because we never redesigned the interchange" and "we redesigned the interchange but didn't make it freeway-freeway because we're Pennsylvania".
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position of NYSDOT or its affiliates.

Beltway

#695
Quote from: 02 Park Ave on May 23, 2017, 01:17:54 PM
"But it does address the busiest sections, New Stanton to Ohio, Morgantown to Bristol, and NE Extension from east-west turnpike to Quakertown."

But the section of the Turnpike which needs the most improvement is from Breezewood to the Allegheny Tunnel.

By what standard?  The whole I-70/I-76 overlap section has traffic in the 30,000 to 32,000 AADT range.  It can survive without 6 lanes, although given its age (77 years), on any total reconstruction project they IMO should build with 6 lanes.

The priority after 6-laneing in the large metro areas, IMO should be to reconstruct the whole I-70/I-76 overlap section to 6 lanes.

I see on the PA Tpk website construction map that these are under design in Bedford and Somerset counties --
-- 15 miles of 6-lane total reconstruction
-- an overpass replacement
-- Allegheny Tunnel Transportation Improvement Project

https://www.paturnpike.com/travel/major_design_construction_projects.aspx
http://www.roadstothefuture.com
http://www.capital-beltway.com

Baloney is a reserved word on the Internet
    (Robert Coté, 2002)

Beltway

Quote from: vdeane on May 23, 2017, 03:10:52 PM
Quote from: Beltway on May 22, 2017, 11:26:45 PM
Attention needs to be focused on where the real problems are --  the missing Turnpike interchanges at I-81 at Carlisle, I-70 at Breezewood, US-219 freeway at Somerset, and I-99 at Bedford.  As I have already said.  Rants should be targeted wisely, not shotgunned all over the place.     
I certainly don't disagree that these non-interchanges are problems, but there's a difference between "there's no direct connection because we never redesigned the interchange" and "we redesigned the interchange but didn't make it freeway-freeway because we're Pennsylvania".

It is a limited access connection, and they could make it freeway-to-freeway by adding 4 loops at the interchange between US-222 and the connector highway and moving the finger ramps in order to provide space for the loops.  If there are congestion issues as you posted, then PennDOT needs to pursue that project.  Like I said the current design probably worked fine for at least until 2002 when the US-222 freeway missing link Adamstown-Reading was completed, and the normal design year that highway engineers use is 20 years.

Keep in mind that this interchange not only connects US-222 to the Turnpike, but also connects both highways to the local road system via PA-272.
http://www.roadstothefuture.com
http://www.capital-beltway.com

Baloney is a reserved word on the Internet
    (Robert Coté, 2002)

theroadwayone

GMSV went through I-95 at the interchange construction site around this time last year, and here is what it looked like. One can only wonder what it looks like now, being this much closer to completion.

Alps

Quote from: theroadwayone on October 13, 2017, 11:10:36 PM
GMSV went through I-95 at the interchange construction site around this time last year, and here is what it looked like. One can only wonder what it looks like now, being this much closer to completion.

The same. :-D

ekt8750

Quote from: Alps on October 14, 2017, 12:15:52 AM
Quote from: theroadwayone on October 13, 2017, 11:10:36 PM
GMSV went through I-95 at the interchange construction site around this time last year, and here is what it looked like. One can only wonder what it looks like now, being this much closer to completion.

The same. :-D

Nah I was through there about a month ago and they were deep into the construction of the flyover ramps. Beams for the decking were being put into place.



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.