Improvements Planned for I-70 in SW PA

[PAHighways]

PennDOT is looking to improve a notoriously antiquated section of I-70, originally built as Alternate PA 71.  The plan would cost $300 million to widen portions of the highway from four to six lanes, reconstruct four interchanges, and replace bridges.

State eyes $300M in work on I-70 - Washington Observer-Reporter

[rickmastfan67]

It's about time!  I've only been on that segment of I-70 once (going WB) and it's definitely needed.  PennDOT really needs to get I-70 fully upgraded to at least 1990's Interstate standards. lol.

Now, the major question is, how are they going to deal with the US-19 (Exit #19) cloverleaf interchange with it being so close to Exit #20 (PA-136).  Are they going to make the third lane in that area a "C/D lane", or are they going to make the mainline 3 lanes and add a 4th as a C/D?

[Mr_Northside]

Like most big highway projects PennDOT talks about, I'll believe it when I see it.  
Not saying nothing will ever get done, but if they're talking this "big" while still just planning this far out, when it comes time to actually construct stuff (and pay for it), I wouldn't be surprised if the big plans get scaled back (I hope not, but figure that's how it will be)

The "The plan is expected to focus through 2017 on maintenance and forwarding projects listed in the current four-year transportation improvement plan in an era of cutbacks in spending." and ""It's a living, breathing document," Bugaile said." lines especially temper my optimism.

Kind of thinking about the PA-51/88 intersection here.  For years there was talk about fixing it with an interchange, then a fly-over... and now they're about to start actual work on reconfiguring the intersection (everything "at-grade") with something that will certainly be better, but a ways from what was envisioned.


As for in between the south I-79 junction and the Washington County line, I suppose the replaced The McIlvaine Road bridge, @ the Kammerer interchange, will indicate just how wide the highway will eventually be in that area.  I saw on the news, and read, that the replacement was open... but none of those sources had any pics/video of the new bridge.

[MASTERNC]

I saw these on the Transportation plan site.  It's about time.

On a related note, the I-79/I-70 South Junction plans are now online for review.  Looks like the loop ramp will be replaced with a two-lane flyover that exits from the right when coming north on I-79.

The fun part will be when the speed limit on I-79 is reduced to 30 MPH during construction.

[ShawnP]

Bout d@mn time as that section of I-70 makes Missouri's seem like a lesirely summer stroll. At best 45-50 mph is the top safe speed. Now how are they going to pay for it?

[rickmastfan67]

I saw these on the Transportation plan site.  It's about time.

On a related note, the I-79/I-70 South Junction plans are now online for review.  Looks like the loop ramp will be replaced with a two-lane flyover that exits from the right when coming north on I-79.

Have some links that you are willing to share?

[J N Winkler]

I think he's talking about ECMS.

http://www.dot14.state.pa.us/ECMS/

The South Junction Interchange contract, which indeed has been advertised, has ECMS project number 31182.

[PAHighways]

At best 45-50 mph is the top safe speed.

As someone who used to drive it often, 60-70 was the range you needed to stay within.  The only place 45-50 was acceptable was in Belle Vernon because the PSP and Belle Vernon PD liked to hide in that section.

Now how are they going to pay for it?

The next 12-Year transportation plan is being devised now, so currently it is a game of shifting around the money in the budget.

[njroadhorse]

My question is, why is this being planned but still nothing is being done about the Belle Vernon - New Stanton stretch? Now my memory is a little fuzzy of the area, but it seems like an overhaul would be possible. I guess it's just a matter of feasibility.

[rickmastfan67]

I think he's talking about ECMS.

http://www.dot14.state.pa.us/ECMS/

The South Junction Interchange contract, which indeed has been advertised, has ECMS project number 31182.

Tried to access that as a "Guest".  Got the following message: "You are not authorized to perform the operation you requested. Please contact your security administrator if you require the appropriate authorization."  Grrrr.  I just want to see the plans on how the interchange will look once completed.

My question is, why is this being planned but still nothing is being done about the Belle Vernon - New Stanton stretch? Now my memory is a little fuzzy of the area, but it seems like an overhaul would be possible. I guess it's just a matter of feasibility.

I think it might have something to do with the new expressway access to the Mon-Fayette Expressway that they are doing the segment West of Belle Vernon first.  Also you have the crossing over the Monongahela River to deal with that has interchanges on each side of it.  With them upgrading the West section first, if they need to, they could divert truck traffic that normally stays on I-70 to go Maryland down the Mon-Fayette Expressway to I-68.  That way, it will make the PA Turnpike a little bit happier since they still will get some tolls from the trucks.

[PAHighways]

My question is, why is this being planned but still nothing is being done about the Belle Vernon - New Stanton stretch? Now my memory is a little fuzzy of the area, but it seems like an overhaul would be possible. I guess it's just a matter of feasibility.

It's also a matter of money and what gets approved for the 12-Year Plan, but even if it makes it there, it doesn't necessarily mean it will see construction (example: Susquehanna Beltway).

[J N Winkler]

Tried to access that as a "Guest".  Got the following message: "You are not authorized to perform the operation you requested. Please contact your security administrator if you require the appropriate authorization."  Grrrr.  I just want to see the plans on how the interchange will look once completed.

You do have access to the plans, but it can be a little tricky because in the contract listing view that comes up in most variants of the ECMS contract search results page, you have to click on the letting date (left-hand column) rather than the project number to access the bid package, which has the plans.  ECMS also isn't really designed for use with any browser other than Internet Explorer, but no longer does user agent checks, so you can use Firefox or another browser of your preference if you are willing to put up with some limitations.

Bread crumb trail:  Login as guest (dismiss disclaimer dialog) --> "Solicitation" in top menu bar --> "Contractors" --> "Bid Packages" (click) --> "Advanced Search" link on Bid Packages Portal page --> "31182" in "Project" field, then click "Search" (top menu) --> click on letting date (not project number) in results page --> you are now in the Bid Package page for project 31182.

The direct link is actually

http://www.dot14.state.pa.us/ECMS/SVBSLBidPackage?action=Show&ECMS_PROJECT_NUM=31,182&BID_PACKAGE_NUM=1

but in order to load this page, you need to be logged in to ECMS.  Also, ECMS will automatically log you out if you have a browser window or tab which has been open to a page behind the ECMS login wall for more than 30 minutes.

Project documentation links on the Bid Package page come in two types.  The arrow-on-paper links go to the Project Development Checklist, which allows you to drill down to individual plan sheets (or individual sections of the special provisions in the case of the bidding proposal).  Personally I have found Project Development Checklist useful mainly for finding out what is actually covered in functional discipline groups identified only as "Other."  (For the big projects, often the structural signing is identified as "Other" while "Signing and Pavement Marking" covers just pavement marking.)  The file cabinet icons go to pages where you can download premerged PDF sheet sets, which are identified by functional discipline group.  Each sheet set contains up to 17 sheets.  (Older bid packages often have one sheet set per functional discipline, or up to 13 sheets per sheet set.)

In any case, I can absolutely promise the signing plans for 31182 are there for the viewing, since I have managed to get hold of them.  ECMS is a cantankerous and unintuitive system, but it has a very good project archive and it beats the hell out of trying to get the information out of PennDOT through RTKL requests.

[MASTERNC]

I think he's talking about ECMS.

http://www.dot14.state.pa.us/ECMS/

The South Junction Interchange contract, which indeed has been advertised, has ECMS project number 31182.

That is correct.  Unfortunately it is a protected site so I could not directly link.  However, there is a guest login ability.

[rickmastfan67]

Tried to access that as a "Guest".  Got the following message: "You are not authorized to perform the operation you requested. Please contact your security administrator if you require the appropriate authorization."  Grrrr.  I just want to see the plans on how the interchange will look once completed.

Bread crumb trail:  Login as guest (dismiss disclaimer dialog) --> "Solicitation" in top menu bar --> "Contractors" --> "Bid Packages" (click) --> "Advanced Search" link on Bid Packages Portal page --> "31182" in "Project" field, then click "Search" (top menu) --> click on letting date (not project number) in results page --> you are now in the Bid Package page for project 31182.

That worked, thanks.

=====

On a side note, I downloaded the signing plans and noticed a few mistakes of what will be removed.

In CSM0013OF21.PDF, they mention a pair of "State" named I-70/I-79 shields will be removed.  Too late, they've already "replaced" them. lol.

In CSM0014OF21.PDF, they mention the removal of the old "Gore" sign on I-79 NB for I-70's EB exit.  They have the wrong exit number listed (33 instead of 34).

This shows that even DOT's screw up their own plans on what needs to be removed.

=

One more thing, I hope they do put the "LEFT" exit tab above the new Exit #34 signage for I-70 EB.  I can easily see people who were use to the old configuration accidentally taking the left exit thinking the loop is still there.  So that "LEFT" tab IMO is necessary here.

[MASTERNC]

The project was supposedly bid on September 8 for $35 million.

[MASTERNC]

And construction is beginning shortly

http://www.observer-reporter.com/or/story11/10-26-2011-south-junction

Drivers traveling at the south junction of Interstates 70 and 79 are now seeing signs that the long-promised updates to the interchange will become a reality.

Traffic on Vance Station Road between Lakeview Drive and the entrance to the KOA Campground will be detoured starting Nov. 7 so a bridge can be replaced with a longer and wider structure over I-79. Work is expected to be done by Jan. 31.

It is the first phase of a project that calls for the construction of a two-lane flyover ramp at the south junction that will take traffic from I-79 north to I-70 west. Golden Triangle Construction was awarded the $35.2 million contract.

Work also will include replacing the bridge in the westbound lanes over the Allegheny Valley Railroad and rehabilitating the eastbound span over the railroad. Work also will include refurbishing the spans carrying I-70 over I-79.

Work on Vance Station could have been done anytime during the three-year project, but it was decided to do it now because it could be done in the winter, said Roxanne Rossi, project manager for the state Department of Transportation. Site-clearing work also will be done over the winter.

Construction at the junction will begin in the spring.

"I do not anticipate there being an impact on the interstates," Rossi said. "Crossovers will be built to maintain traffic."

Some short-term closures may be needed during bridge demolition and placing of beams. Rossi said that work will be done at night.

An estimated 56,000 vehicles use I-70 in that area, and 33,000 use I-79.

A revamped interchange has been debated for decades. Local officials, particularly the late Washington County coroner Farrell Jackson, championed the elimination of the "killer curve," a 360-degree bend that takes vehicles from I-79 north to I-70 west.

Improvements such as a higher wall between the northbound and southbound lanes as well as rumble strips to alert drivers of the sharp bend have reduced the number of serious crashes.

[surferdude]

ECMS is very clunky and hard to get around I do have access to ECMS(password and ID).  Need anything let me know.  J N Winkler  is correct about getting around when you do not have a password.

[MASTERNC]

PennDOT has created a website for current and future I-70 websites

http://www.i-70projects.com/default.html

[PAHighways]

Major Renovation Project Planned for I-70 around New Stanton - Pittsburgh Tribune-Review

[surferdude]

The project was supposedly bid on September 8 for $35 million.

it was let on September 8th....but the contract wasn't signed until September 22, 2011

[qguy]

PennDOT has created a website for current and future I-70 websites

http://www.i-70projects.com/default.html

Thanks for the heads-up.

Ironically, for the one project that everyone has perhaps been waiting for the most–the reconfiguration of the I-70/79 south junction–neither the planned configuration nor the projected completion date is provided.

The "detailed mapping" is anything but. It's simply a scan of the PennDOT county map. And the construction is simply described as "in progress."

PennDOT's project websites are so hit-and-miss with the information they provide. Some are great, some are abysmal (which I guess is true for most state DOTs).

What I found while working for PennDOT is that for most non-roadgeek members of the traveling public, when people look at project information they want to know one thing: "How will it affect me?" This breaks down into the following pieces of information they want:

     1. What will it look like when it's done? (Final configuation.)
     2. When will it begin?
     3. What kind of pain will I have to endure while it's under construction?
     4. When will it finish? (When will the pain end?)

Qualitatively, people want pictures (diagrams, renderings, before-and-after comparisons, etc.), not just endless text.

It amazes me how often information is provided about a project without some or all of these four items.  Or a site contains paragraphs of text describing in detail what the planned configuation will be, but doesn't contain a single diagram. As if the average viewer is supposed to reconstruct the thing in his or her head.

Worse still are the sites which provide little snippets that don't contain most of the necessary information, but do contain details like who the contractor is, who the DOT's project team members are, what legislative district the project is in, etc. In other words, some DOT employee is simply dumping the details of his or her world onto the screen without translating the information into the world of general public. It breaks one of the most basic rules of effective communication: always communicate in the language of the target audience, not your own language.

Don't get me wrong; providing all that additional information is OK, even great. But when they're included and the most basic of basics are not, it just frustrates the public, which presumably is the very opposite of what is intended.

Secondarily, in my experience people generally only care obliquely about things like cost, financing packages, and the like. More out of curiosity than anything else. Unless they are opposed to a project; then they care about the cost so they can use it as a weapon to defeat it.

Of course, I'm speaking generally here. There are always exceptions.

Thus endeth my rant for the day. As you were; carry on.

[rickmastfan67]

PennDOT has created a website for current and future I-70 websites

http://www.i-70projects.com/default.html

http://www.i-70projects.com/about.html

This stretch of I-70 connects with three other Pennsylvania Interstate routes: I-79, I-43 (PA Turnpike Extension) and I-76 (PA Turnpike Mainline) and West Virginia's I-70.

I didn't know that we got approval to sign PA-Turnpike-43 as an Interstate.

[MASTERNC]

As part of the rehabilitation and widening in Washington, PennDOT is proposing the diverging diamond interchange for US 19 at the I-70 junction.  This is probably the first interchange of this type in PA

http://www.postgazette.com/pg/12005/1201397-55.stm

An innovative design for highway interchanges that switches traffic to the left side of the road is being planned along Interstate 70 in Washington County.

A "diverging diamond interchange" will be built to replace the conventional cloverleaf at I-70 and Route 19 in South Strabane, the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation announced this week.

In a diverging diamond, both directions of traffic on a main road (in this case, Route 19) are crossed over to the left side on the approach to the highway. That allows left turns onto highway entrance ramps without crossing oncoming traffic. Right turns to entrance ramps are made before the crossover.

The new design will eliminate the existing conflicts between vehicles trying to enter and exit I-70 and provide much longer acceleration and deceleration lanes.

As PennDOT planned a widening project for I-70 in that area, the Federal Highway Administration suggested that it consider the design. "The more we dug into it, the more it seemed like something that would work out there," project manager Barry Lyons said.

The plans will be on display for the public from 5 p.m. to 7 p.m. Wednesday at South Strabane Fire Station No. 2, 172 Oak Spring Road.

As part of the same project, PennDOT plans to widen I-70 to three lanes between Beau Street and the north junction with I-79 and add a second exit lane from westbound I-70 to northbound I-79 at the north junction. The estimated project cost is $65 million and the tentative schedule calls for a contract award in 2014, Mr. Lyons said.

The first diverging diamond interchange in the U.S. opened in Springfield, Mo., in June 2009 and has received overwhelming support from the driving public, according to the Federal Highway Administration. It reduced crashes, improved traffic flow and cost less to build than a more traditional reconstruction.

In a survey by the Missouri Department of Transportation, 97 percent of respondents said they felt safer in the new interchange and a 60 percent reduction in crashes was reported.

Mr. Lyons said 10 more have been built in Missouri, Tennessee, Kentucky and Utah and at least 40 are under design in 19 states and Canada. There are no diverging diamond interchanges in Pennsylvania.

Although having traffic drive on the left side of the road sounds scary, the design of the diverging diamond "makes it pretty much impossible for you to go the wrong way on it," he said.

Another benefit of the design is that the I-70 bridge over Route 19 can be preserved rather than replaced, at a substantial savings, he said.

The I-70 interchange at Route 19 was built in the 1960s. Its traditional cloverleaf design has fallen out of favor with traffic planners because it does not efficiently and safely move heavy traffic. The principal flaw is the conflict with exiting and entering vehicles -- those leaving the highway must merge left from the exit lane in the same area as traffic entering the highway has to merge right.

The on-ramps are very short, giving drivers entering I-70 almost no time to accelerate to the pace of vehicles already on the highway.

The project is one of several major improvements planned or under way on I-70 in Washington and Westmoreland counties. PennDOT District 12 has established a website with project information at www.I-70Projects.com.

[rickmastfan67]

I think a DDI would work perfectly for that interchange.  It's that or a SPUI.  But that cloverleaf needs to go!  Very hard to get up to speed AND merge onto I-70 EB/I-79 SB from US-19 NB in that area.

[mgk920]

I think a DDI would work perfectly for that interchange.  It's that or a SPUI.  But that cloverleaf needs to go!  Very hard to get up to speed AND merge onto I-70 EB/I-79 SB from US-19 NB in that area.

How well would 'dogbone' roundabouts work there as an option?

Mike