PA Turnpike News

[machias]

According to the PTC website, the only publicaly announced widening on the NE extension is up to Quakertown

I'll take it!  The improvement on the one section that's complete between I-276 and Lansdale is pretty dramatic.

On a side note, why is Exit 31 (Pa. 63) signed Lansdale when it is in Kulpsville?

According to the PTC website, the only publicaly announced widening on the NE extension is up to Quakertown

I'll take it!  The improvement on the one section that's complete between I-276 and Lansdale is pretty dramatic.

On a side note, why is Exit 31 (Pa. 63) signed Lansdale when it is in Kulpsville?

Better question how come there is only one control city for PA 63?  Remember there is a space included in the sign for two cities or places, yet it uses the redundant "Landsdale" for both the name and destination.  If there is no other being used or planned to be used, then make a smaller sign.

That extra line has been on three generations of that sign.  I keep waiting for someone to add something.

[PHLBOS]

It should be noted that there are plans to split/reconfigure the Lansdale interchange into 2 separate exit ramps: one for EZ-Pass only (proposed Exit 31A), the other for the conventional cash/ticket booths (existing Exit 31/proposed Exit 31B).  The signage plans I saw (from a couple of years ago) do indeed include Kulpsville as well as Lansdale (interchange name/listed destination redundancy will be retained) and Harleysville on the main BGS boards.  Harleysville will be listed above Kulpsville.  The Lansdale interchange name banner will remain but it will be the same height (16", 5-W Clearview font) as the destination listings and will also be in mixed-case lettering.

They provided this image as what the new ramps will look like, no indication of exit numbers though...

auxiliary ramps
Three auxiliary ramps are being constructed:
one ramp from Towamencin
and two E-ZPass-only ramps
(one entering southbound I-476 from
Old Forty Foot Road and one exiting
I-476 northbound to Sumneytown Pike).

Project newsletter: https://www.patpconstruction.com/mpA20toA31/lib/pdf/Winter_2015_Newsletter.pdf

If they do opt for suffixes, it will be the first ones since Mid-County (Exit 20) was Exit 25A, numbered as a main-line exit when it opened.

Ramp F-1 in that diagram will be the new Exit 31A.  The PTC signage plans I saw (on PTC Construction Plan format) shows such (note: upon re-examining the plans, I made an error in terms of the destination listings and modifed my earlier post per above).  Given that this new ramp is close to the existing interchange; assigning it, and redesignating the existing ramp as Exit 31B, seems to be a no-brainer.  Note: based in the above-graphic, there will still be only one exit ramp from I-476 southbound.

PTC will probably release the new exit number information on its public website when the work gets closer to completion.

[noelbotevera]

So, as everyone knows, 30 years have passed since PTC rehabbed their service plazas. Now it's time to decide the new vendors when Valley Forge and North Midway reopen. I'm gonna laugh if they all came crawiling back to HoJo's.... if they do....

[CentralPAGal]

The MP 242 to 245 widening project has started. Looks like crews have been clearing  the ROW on both sides for about a week now.
http://www.witf.org/news/2015/05/turnpike-widening-project-in-midstate-kicks-off-this-morning.php

[noelbotevera]

The highest actual speeds between Harrisburg and the Delaware River Bridge are between the Valley Forge and Bensalem interchanges. With the law restricting the higher limit to so-called rural areas only being no longer in effect, the PTC and PennDOT have both said they will consider 70 mph for non-rural stretches, specifically this stretch.

When did PennDOT do that? I hope it was recently, because there are some Interstate segments in Pennsylvania that have heinously underposted speed limits. They include, but might not be limited to:


I-70 between Breezewood and the Maryland state line
I-79 between Washington and Cranberry Township
I-90
I-99 between State College and I-80


Quite frankly, the only Interstates that should have 55 MPH limits are the substandard ones in urban areas. Pennsylvania reminds me a lot of the Carolinas, with widely variable speed limits. At least the Interstates in Pennsylvania aren't as heavily patrolled as they are in the Carolinas.

Nah, towards the end of months, there will be 5 million police officers strolling the interstates to fulfill their quotas. It basically turns the PA Turnpike and the rest of the state into speed traps every inch.

[The Ghostbuster]

Is Highway 43 ever going to be extended further north, or will it permanently dead-end at Exit 54?

[DeaconG]

Is Highway 43 ever going to be extended further north, or will it permanently dead-end at Exit 54?

I wouldn't expect that road to be built any time soon; at one time the state was considering a PPP to build the road and that the cost was probably going to be north of a billion dollars (which the state doesn't have), it was mentioned on their old website but the new one just says that it will continue to work on it as funding is available, which most likely means never. I sure would like to see it happen.

[Gnutella]

Is Highway 43 ever going to be extended further north, or will it permanently dead-end at Exit 54?

I think they'll start moving forward with it once the South Beltway is completed. They're currently building the segment from U.S. 22 to I-79, which should be finished in 2018, I believe. After that, they'll still need to build the segment from I-79 to the Mon-Fayette Expressway. In other words, it'll probably be at least 10 years before anything is done about the Mon-Fayette Expressway.

Speaking of the Mon-Fayette Expressway, one thing I'd change is to have the Monroeville spur end at the Pennsylvania Turnpike instead of I-376. That way, eastbound Turnpike traffic and northbound Mon-Fayette traffic won't have to use I-376. Besides, there's very little development near Thompson Run, so extending the Mon-Fayette Expressway farther north wouldn't impact many people.

[ARMOURERERIC]

With as long as it looks like it will take to wrap up 43 into the city, I almost wish they would propose and start the enviro process on extending the SoBeltway to the PA Turnpike/Irwin exit. Such a facility, along with the rest of the So Beltway would give even more beneficial relief to the Parkways.

[Mr_Northside]

Is Highway 43 ever going to be extended further north, or will it permanently dead-end at Exit 54?

Personally, I'd say the odds favor it never making it north of Exit 54, though I wouldn't be that surprised if it were to make it somewhere north.  I could see the eastern leg heading to Monroeville actually getting built at some point in the future, or maybe even just extending it to the Duquesne / West Mifflin area.

As for the spur into the City, I feel seeing that built in my lifetime (if ever) is more likely than seeing the sun rise in the west, but a little less likely than seeing true peace in the Middle East.

[JawnwoodS96]

Is Highway 43 ever going to be extended further north, or will it permanently dead-end at Exit 54?

Probably in 3001.

[SteveG1988]

North midway is reopened.

[qguy]

The PTC has announced a public meeting regarding the Great Valley (PA 29) to Valley Forge widening project. From an e-mail from the project manager:

One of the last remaining pieces of getting this job to construction is permitting.  DEP will be holding a public hearing for the MP 320-326 project on July 14 from 7 pm to 9 pm at the Tredyffrin Township Bldg.  Plans will be available for review beginning at 6:30 pm.

It's interesting to note that the DEP (Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection) is hosting the meeting, not the PTC.

[iBallasticwolf2]

Is Highway 43 ever going to be extended further north, or will it permanently dead-end at Exit 54?

Personally, I'd say the odds favor it never making it north of Exit 54, though I wouldn't be that surprised if it were to make it somewhere north.  I could see the eastern leg heading to Monroeville actually getting built at some point in the future, or maybe even just extending it to the Duquesne / West Mifflin area.

As for the spur into the City, I feel seeing that built in my lifetime (if ever) is more likely than seeing the sun rise in the west, but a little less likely than seeing true peace in the Middle East.

If it ever is extended the most it probably will ever get to is somewhere near the Allegheny county regional airport. That is more likely then it actually reaching the city but even it going to the Allegheny county regional airport is sketchy

[cpzilliacus]

Who in Sam Hill sets the priorities of the Pennsylvania Turnpike?

Seems to be that some of its projects (like a new E-ZPass interchange in the middle of nowhere in the Poconos on I-476) have little merit but get quickly built.  At the same time, it takes decades for projects like the I-95/I-276 interchange to get s-l-o-w-l-y planned, designed and engineered and very s-l-o-w-l-y built.

Similarly, extending Pa. 43 north to the downtown area of Pittsburgh would seem to make loads of sense, in spite of what I think is some NIMBY-type opposition.

And the  PTC will not even talk about eliminating Breezewood.

[The Nature Boy]

Are there monied interests in Breezewood that insist on the status quo? How does that even still exist?

[noelbotevera]

Local opposition keeps killing projects to fill the gap, so PennDOT and PTC gave up and just left Breezewood as is.

[jeffandnicole]

The Breezewood issue isn't just PTC; it's also PennDOT. 

Which agency is going to spend the money to fix it? By rights, both should.

But, how many people from the motoring public get upset about this issue?  Overall, probably very few.  They're probably more upset about routine congestion on an otherwise free-flowing highway.  There's probably more people here in this group that get upset just the principle of it than have actually been thru it. 

It should be fixed, because Interstates shouldn't have traffic lights on them.  But then again we have another thread going regarding intersections on interstates in Texas, which is also not supposed to occur.

There are imperfections in the system, but at least they are isolated instances.  It's not like the Feds are bowing to pressure to create more at-grade intersections on the Interstate system.

[cpzilliacus]

The Breezewood issue isn't just PTC; it's also PennDOT. 

Which agency is going to spend the money to fix it? By rights, both should.

But, how many people from the motoring public get upset about this issue?  Overall, probably very few.  They're probably more upset about routine congestion on an otherwise free-flowing highway.  There's probably more people here in this group that get upset just the principle of it than have actually been thru it. 

It should be fixed, because Interstates shouldn't have traffic lights on them.  But then again we have another thread going regarding intersections on interstates in Texas, which is also not supposed to occur.

There are imperfections in the system, but at least they are isolated instances.  It's not like the Feds are bowing to pressure to create more at-grade intersections on the Interstate system.

Agreed that it is a PennDOT and PTC problem.  But Congress could mandate a fix by telling the PTC that the interest on Turnpike bonds will become fully taxable if it fails remediate all of those non-connections between the Turnpike and crossing freeways and expressways.  PTC would have them all (Allegheny Valley, Somerset, Bedford, Breezewood, Carlisle, Pocono, Wyoming Valley, and the badly substandard interchange at Clark's Summit)  fixed in a year or two!

In spite of my hatred of Breezewood, I do not go that way all that frequently.  But I have seen several wrecks there, especially on westbound I-70 (running north as it approaches U.S. 30) when people not familiar with that abomination run up on stopped traffic and rear-end another vehicle, sometimes hard. 

One heavy travel days, the queues to get through Breezewood either way (but especially the eastbound movement) can be long, backing-up out onto the mainline of the eastbound Turnpike. 

[jeffandnicole]

I don't think they can change terms of existing bonds without shareholder approval.  And since the bonds are really subjected to Internal Revenue Service codes regarding tax-free bonds, which generally are separate from Federal Highway Rules, you would have to get the FHWA and IRS to talk to each other about that.

It's also a very slippery slope we don't want to get rolling.  Let's say the Feds do say those bonds become taxable, because we want that interchange fixed.  What's not to say some legislature down the road says "I want the intersection of Main & Broad to be widened in Anytown, USA.  We'll make Anytown's municipal bonds taxable unless they fix that intersection".  It sets up the potential of harming anyone someone can think of to get their way.

The bonds are issued under IRS rules, which apply to a broad spectrum of funding mechanisms for investors of all types across the US, from individuals to large public and private companies and institutions.  It's not just PA or the PA Turnpike that would feel the impact of taxing previously non-taxable bonds; it's your everyday investors that would feel the pain as well.

In the past, the feds have already restricted funding when they wanted their way, such as the 55 NMSL.  We saw how well that worked out.

Of course - I get what you're saying...do something to highly encourage PA/PA Turnpike to fix those interchange areas.  It could be done under existing rules - easily.  Hell, they could throw in money into any federal spending budget specifically for those items.  But overall, when it comes down to it, the Feds seem to be OK with the situation as it is.

[Gnutella]

The Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission is currently doing preparatory work for the reconstruction and widening of MP 124 to MP 134, and design work for the reconstruction and widening of MP 149 to MP 155. These are two non-contiguous segments of Turnpike. In between is MP 134 to MP 149, which also includes the Bedford interchange (Exit 146). Considering direct, limited-access highway connections have been built with I-376 (Beaver Valley and Monroeville), I-79, I-70 (New Stanton) I-83, I-283, I-176, I-476 and I-78, and a direct, limited-access connection with I-95 is already underway, I wouldn't be surprised if a direct, limited-access connection with I-99 will be in play once they get to reconstructing and widening MP 134 to MP 149. The only Interstate junctions lacking direct, limited-access connections right now are I-99, I-70 (Breezewood), I-81 (Carlisle and Moosic) and I-80. That means 11 of the Turnpike's 17 Interstate junctions are direct with limited access. One by one, they're getting done, so instead of bitching about it every three months, as if it only takes three months to do such a project, maybe people should just shut up and let it happen.

[Mr_Northside]

Agreed that it is a PennDOT and PTC problem.  But Congress could mandate a fix by telling the PTC that the interest on Turnpike bonds will become fully taxable if it fails remediate all of those non-connections between the Turnpike and crossing freeways and expressways.  PTC would have them all (Allegheny Valley, Somerset, Bedford, Breezewood, Carlisle, Pocono, Wyoming Valley, and the badly substandard interchange at Clark's Summit)  fixed in a year or two!

Or they'd just raise the tolls to cover the tax.  A lot of those potential interchanges would be very expensive, and very difficult to get done.  Really, Breezewood is probably the easiest of all those connections to make.  All that's really needed is 2 fairly simple ramps and modifications to bypass US-30.  (Of course, I've seen some interesting more elaborate ideas elsewhere in these forums)

Hell, they could throw in money into any federal spending budget specifically for those items.  But overall, when it comes down to it, the Feds seem to be OK with the situation as it is.

Quite true.

Considering direct, limited-access highway connections have been built with I-376 (Beaver Valley and Monroeville)

Even the Beaver Valley interchange isn't optimal (and it was totally built by the PTC), as traffic from I-76 wanting to go on I-376 WB (north) has a stop sign to contend with, and a left turn across traffic to get there, to accommodate local access to PA-351

[Stephane Dumas]

Even the Beaver Valley interchange isn't optimal (and it was totally built by the PTC), as traffic from I-76 wanting to go on I-376 WB (north) has a stop sign to contend with, and a left turn across traffic to get there, to accommodate local access to PA-351

I wonder, could be possible to replace that stop sign with a roundabout?

[jeffandnicole]

Even the Beaver Valley interchange isn't optimal (and it was totally built by the PTC), as traffic from I-76 wanting to go on I-376 WB (north) has a stop sign to contend with, and a left turn across traffic to get there, to accommodate local access to PA-351

I wonder, could be possible to replace that stop sign with a roundabout?

It's PA we're dealing with. They'll put a roundabout in, and stick a traffic light above it.

[ARMOURERERIC]

Depending on terrain a PTP to NB 376 lop ramp would be more optimal.