AARoads Forum

Regional Boards => Northeast => Topic started by: Alex on March 07, 2009, 07:01:05 PM

Title: Pennsylvania
Post by: Alex on March 07, 2009, 07:01:05 PM
Has anyone seen a map that shows Interstate 178 in Allentown besides the New Jersey page of the Rand McNally atlases in the 1960s?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: PAHighways on March 07, 2009, 11:16:14 PM
PennDOT/PennDOH maps never showed the alignment, even the mid-1960s editions where they showed all future alignments.  However, it did have an exit list in the margins, but of course it was blank.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: PAHighways on May 08, 2009, 12:56:10 AM
My apologies for my responses to Alex's questions being too dull.

Since I didn't see them listed, I guess 95 and 99 would stay put.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Alex on September 24, 2009, 12:02:57 AM
Express E-ZPass coming to I-80, I-78 bridges

Associated Press - September 23, 2009

PHILLIPSBURG, N.J. – Express E-ZPass lanes will be constructed on the I-80 and I-78 bridges over the Delaware River.

E-ZPass motorists can pay tolls at higher speeds on their way to Pennsylvania's Pocono Mountains and Lehigh Valley.

The I-80 bridge carried an average of 53,900 vehicles per day last year. There were an average of 56,100 vehicles a day last year on the I-78 span.

Western New Jersey and eastern Pennsylvania are among the fastest-growing areas in the region. Traffic at the toll plazas can come to a standstill in the summer.

The express lanes are expected to be in place by Memorial Day next year.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: PAHighways on January 24, 2010, 05:59:50 PM
PennDOT Reduces Number of Deteriorating Bridges (http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/westmoreland/s_663720.html)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: froggie on January 24, 2010, 09:05:35 PM
What's not mentioned is that it was done largely on the backs of Turnpike users, with some stimulus money thrown in...(the stimulus money was mentioned...PTC's "rent payments" weren't)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: PAHighways on June 28, 2010, 05:43:41 PM
DRJTBC Awards Construction Contract for Delaware Water Gap Toll Bridge ORT Project (http://www.drjtbc.org/default.aspx?pageid=1884)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadgeek Adam on June 29, 2010, 11:40:58 AM
Quote from: PAHighways on June 28, 2010, 05:43:41 PM
DRJTBC Awards Construction Contract for Delaware Water Gap Toll Bridge ORT Project (http://www.drjtbc.org/default.aspx?pageid=1884)

Yay, more tolls with EZ Pass - Its nice to see the work the guy I am working with in action. For anyone who's curious, I am working on a dedicated plaque at the Portland-Columbia Pedestrian Bridge in honor of its 50+ year bridge tender (during the covered bridge era). Plans are in the works with the Delaware River Joint Toll Bridge Commission.
Title: 1963 article on the removal of U.S. 122
Post by: Alex on July 15, 2010, 04:57:55 PM
Found this on Google's Timeline, it indicates that signage for U.S. 122 was taken down on May 13, 1963:

"State Plans to Start Removal of Route 122 Signs (http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=MhcrAAAAIBAJ&sjid=6pwFAAAAIBAJ&dq=interstate%20180%20reading&pg=4789%2C5166038)"

QuoteWinkler listed several reasons for the changes. He said one reason is that traffic numbers can be assigned to the interchanges of Interstate 180 from Morgantown to Reading. Another is that the state desires to eliminate dual signing of nunbered routes and to consolidate traffic routes.

In addition, Winkler said, the state desires to eliminate any U.S. numbered routes that lie wholly within the state and are under 300 miles in length. This elimination is in line with federal policy, and the federal government granted the state permission to make the changes, he added.

Two sign crews consisting of 12 men will make the changes.


Title: Re: 1963 article on the removal of U.S. 122
Post by: agentsteel53 on July 15, 2010, 05:06:39 PM
alas, no picture.  but hey, cash when I need it!  :-D
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jemacedo9 on September 14, 2010, 10:13:02 PM
US 15 / I-99 Steam Valley upgrade is complete...
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Michael in Philly on September 18, 2010, 10:53:23 PM
Quote from: jemacedo9 on September 14, 2010, 10:13:02 PM
US 15 / I-99 Steam Valley upgrade is complete...

I don't know where Steam Valley is.  But does this mean that 99 is now signed north of Williamsport?  If so, must check it out some time....
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: froggie on September 18, 2010, 11:08:34 PM
Steam Valley is north of Williamsport.  I don't think it means I-99 is signed.  Just that one of the checklist items preventing PennDOT from signing it is done.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: PAHighways on September 18, 2010, 11:22:28 PM
Quote from: Michael in Philly on September 18, 2010, 10:53:23 PM
Quote from: jemacedo9 on September 14, 2010, 10:13:02 PM
US 15 / I-99 Steam Valley upgrade is complete...

I don't know where Steam Valley is.  But does this mean that 99 is now signed north of Williamsport?  If so, must check it out some time....

It's basically where PA 184 and US 15 intersect (http://maps.google.com/maps?q=Steam+Valley,+PA&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Steam+Valley,+Lycoming,+Pennsylvania&z=14) in Lycoming County and no, it is not signed as I-99.

I was just on a piece of US 15 in Tioga County a few weeks back, and the assemblies just have US 15 shields.  There are no spaces for an I-99 shield as there were on the US 220 and US 322 assemblies in Centre County before it was extended to Musser Lane.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: LeftyJR on September 19, 2010, 07:23:23 AM
Quote from: PAHighways on September 18, 2010, 11:22:28 PM
Quote from: Michael in Philly on September 18, 2010, 10:53:23 PM
Quote from: jemacedo9 on September 14, 2010, 10:13:02 PM
US 15 / I-99 Steam Valley upgrade is complete...

I don't know where Steam Valley is.  But does this mean that 99 is now signed north of Williamsport?  If so, must check it out some time....

It's basically where PA 184 and US 15 intersect (http://maps.google.com/maps?q=Steam+Valley,+PA&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Steam+Valley,+Lycoming,+Pennsylvania&z=14) in Lycoming County and no, it is not signed as I-99.

I was just on a piece of US 15 in Tioga County a few weeks back, and the assemblies just have US 15 shields.  There are no spaces for an I-99 shield as there were on the US 220 and US 322 assemblies in Centre County before it was extended to Musser Lane.

Are they still holding out hope of finishing the three short "missing links" first?  Who knows...

- Fixed quote. -- rmf67
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Alps on January 23, 2012, 07:05:53 PM
From Jeff Kitsko:

http://www.mcall.com/news/local/warrior/mc-road-warrior-roundabouts-20120122,0,7159622.column
PennDOT turns to roundabouts on Route 222 in Berks

... This will make me all the more anxious to avoid ever following US 222. The road really needs to be four lanes divided continuously from Reading to Allentown, instead of in pieces with 2-lane road between. There's no way a roundabout will improve traffic because it's already so miserable, and with a high percentage of trucks. At least PA 73 wasn't chosen, but I fear this will lock down the other two intersections. When volumes are above a certain level, you're supposed to go to signals and not roundabouts.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on May 28, 2012, 05:29:56 PM
I am anxious to know if anyone ever clinched US 6 in Pennsylvania?  I have only been on it between the Delaware River and Clark's Summit before the freeway was constructed between Carbondale and Scranton, so it was the current Business US 6 I have been on there.  Anyway, always thought that someday I would clinch the rest of the route in PA.  My dad told me that in the pre I-80 days he drove it to get to Ohio and said it was a good road to use then.

He especially bragged about some straight sections of highway with long hills in where you see where you are going to be in five minuets and when you get there you see in the rear view where you just were type of thing.  I encountered that on GA 17 from Wrens to I-20 in Georgia where you have a long dip down and another returning upward lasting well over a couple of miles, so I know what he meant.

We do not have many threads where people talk too much about roads clinched lately except when someone here needs traveling advice and want to know if he is choosing the right road to take for convenience. I was just curious to know if anyone has ended up driving all of US 6 as whole or in sections that added up withing the Keystone State.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Alps on May 29, 2012, 08:26:17 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on May 28, 2012, 05:29:56 PM
I am anxious to know if anyone ever clinched US 6 in Pennsylvania?  I have only been on it between the Delaware River and Clark's Summit before the freeway was constructed between Carbondale and Scranton, so it was the current Business US 6 I have been on there.  Anyway, always thought that someday I would clinch the rest of the route in PA.  My dad told me that in the pre I-80 days he drove it to get to Ohio and said it was a good road to use then.

He especially bragged about some straight sections of highway with long hills in where you see where you are going to be in five minuets and when you get there you see in the rear view where you just were type of thing.  I encountered that on GA 17 from Wrens to I-20 in Georgia where you have a long dip down and another returning upward lasting well over a couple of miles, so I know what he meant.

We do not have many threads where people talk too much about roads clinched lately except when someone here needs traveling advice and want to know if he is choosing the right road to take for convenience. I was just curious to know if anyone has ended up driving all of US 6 as whole or in sections that added up withing the Keystone State.
I've been on all of US 6. It's fucking dreadful. Never again. I don't know that there's anywhere you can see 5 minutes forward/back. You can on US 30, the other dreadfully slow road in PA. I'm never heading west anywhere between I-80 and I-86 again.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: empirestate on May 30, 2012, 08:13:56 AM
By contrast, I find US 6 delightful across PA, and I've done many sections of it, though not quite the whole thing, probably.

There used to be a website, Discovering the 6, about clinching the highway nationwide, but I think it's gone now.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: hbelkins on May 30, 2012, 09:25:42 AM
Quote from: Steve on May 29, 2012, 08:26:17 PM
I've been on all of US 6. It's fucking dreadful. Never again. I don't know that there's anywhere you can see 5 minutes forward/back. You can on US 30, the other dreadfully slow road in PA. I'm never heading west anywhere between I-80 and I-86 again.

I've driven portions of US 6 in Pennsylvania. Towanda to Wellsboro is a lot like parts of central or northeastern Kentucky. From Wellsboro west to Coudersport is a neat drive with some long straight, flat stretches. I think this is the "Grand Canyon of the North" section. Port Allegany to Kane is like the portion from Towanda to Wellsboro, rolling to hilly.

In retrospect, I guess I've driven most of US 6 in Pennsylvania. I don't have anything west of Kane, and I lack the sections between Port Allegany and Coudersport, Towanda and Dickson City, and Honesdale to Milford. It's an OK road, not really a through route, but I wouldn't be as critical of it as Steve was. It's not dissimilar to a lot of roads in my neck of the woods.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: qguy on May 30, 2012, 02:23:51 PM
I grew up in Honesdale, so I'm a little biased (OK, a lot biased I guess), but I've always enjoyed the stretch from Carbondale to Honesdale to Hawley. Tons of history (the gravity railroad alignment criss-crossing the road between Carbondale and Honesdale and the D&H canal winding along parts of the road between Honesdale and Hawley, for example), rolling, twisting roadway (perhaps too twisting), many stretches of old alignment diverging and converging, great little mom-and-pop stores and cafés in town when you want to stretch the legs...
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Alps on May 30, 2012, 06:19:31 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on May 30, 2012, 09:25:42 AM

In retrospect, I guess I've driven most of US 6 in Pennsylvania. I don't have anything west of Kane, and I lack the sections between Port Allegany and Coudersport, Towanda and Dickson City, and Honesdale to Milford. It's an OK road, not really a through route, but I wouldn't be as critical of it as Steve was. It's not dissimilar to a lot of roads in my neck of the woods.
My main problem with it is that I was lucky to go 45 mph most of the time on open stretches thanks to the amount of slow cars and trucks that use the road, especially 18-wheelers who think they've discovered some wonderful secret to stay off of the relatively free-flowing I-80 and I-86. You say it's "not really a through route," I say "you will need an entire day to go 300 miles."
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: empirestate on May 31, 2012, 02:11:37 PM
Quote from: Steve on May 30, 2012, 06:19:31 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on May 30, 2012, 09:25:42 AM

In retrospect, I guess I've driven most of US 6 in Pennsylvania. I don't have anything west of Kane, and I lack the sections between Port Allegany and Coudersport, Towanda and Dickson City, and Honesdale to Milford. It's an OK road, not really a through route, but I wouldn't be as critical of it as Steve was. It's not dissimilar to a lot of roads in my neck of the woods.
My main problem with it is that I was lucky to go 45 mph most of the time on open stretches thanks to the amount of slow cars and trucks that use the road, especially 18-wheelers who think they've discovered some wonderful secret to stay off of the relatively free-flowing I-80 and I-86. You say it's "not really a through route," I say "you will need an entire day to go 300 miles."

No, you definitely wouldn't use it to get across the state quickly. You'd use it to see that part of Pennsylvania. As for pre-Interstate days, I'm sure it was as good a way across as anything else, but that's relative to the fact that one didn't just cross entire states in a matter of hours then.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Alps on May 31, 2012, 09:57:17 PM
Quote from: empirestate on May 31, 2012, 02:11:37 PM
Quote from: Steve on May 30, 2012, 06:19:31 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on May 30, 2012, 09:25:42 AM

In retrospect, I guess I've driven most of US 6 in Pennsylvania. I don't have anything west of Kane, and I lack the sections between Port Allegany and Coudersport, Towanda and Dickson City, and Honesdale to Milford. It's an OK road, not really a through route, but I wouldn't be as critical of it as Steve was. It's not dissimilar to a lot of roads in my neck of the woods.
My main problem with it is that I was lucky to go 45 mph most of the time on open stretches thanks to the amount of slow cars and trucks that use the road, especially 18-wheelers who think they've discovered some wonderful secret to stay off of the relatively free-flowing I-80 and I-86. You say it's "not really a through route," I say "you will need an entire day to go 300 miles."

No, you definitely wouldn't use it to get across the state quickly. You'd use it to see that part of Pennsylvania. As for pre-Interstate days, I'm sure it was as good a way across as anything else, but that's relative to the fact that one didn't just cross entire states in a matter of hours then.
I'd recommend any number of parallel state routes then - can't be much slower, definitely more scenic because YOU'RE IN FRONT.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: empirestate on June 01, 2012, 03:10:45 PM
Quote from: Steve on May 31, 2012, 09:57:17 PM
Quote from: empirestate on May 31, 2012, 02:11:37 PM
No, you definitely wouldn't use it to get across the state quickly. You'd use it to see that part of Pennsylvania. As for pre-Interstate days, I'm sure it was as good a way across as anything else, but that's relative to the fact that one didn't just cross entire states in a matter of hours then.
I'd recommend any number of parallel state routes then - can't be much slower, definitely more scenic because YOU'RE IN FRONT.

Not a whole lot of those to choose from, but I agree they're worth looking into for scenic purposes. In fact, I'm fond of quadrant routes because they interfere the least with the landscape, have little traffic, and are lots of fun to drive!

That said, I guess I've just had better luck with US 6...some slow traffic, sure, but at least as much of that is RV's and powder-blue Mercury Sables (geezermobiles) as big-rigs, and what truck traffic there is seems mostly of the local variety, hauling loads of gravel or milk from the crusher or dairy farm, so it eventually turns off. (Only to be replaced by a lumbering tractor...)

I'd put it this way: US 6 across PA is mostly an un-upgraded US highway (unlike most of US 22, for example), so while it doesn't move traffic as efficiently as an upgraded highway, it offers a more appealing experience of the landscape it traverses as a result. And while it's far enough from both I-80 and I-86 to attract its share of local traffic, it's close enough to them that it doesn't get much long-haul use. So given all that, I'd say conditions are about what you'd expect them to be.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: PAHighways on June 01, 2012, 06:47:52 PM
Quote from: empirestate on May 31, 2012, 02:11:37 PMAs for pre-Interstate days, I'm sure it was as good a way across as anything else, but that's relative to the fact that one didn't just cross entire states in a matter of hours then.

In the pre-Turnpike days, some truckers would use it to cross the state because it didn't have the steep grades of US 22 and 30.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Alps on June 01, 2012, 07:24:37 PM
I-80 was at one point considered to follow the US 6 corridor instead of its current combination of nothing and US 322. That would have a) resulted in NY 17's continued existence across all of NY, as opposed to the advent of I-86, and b) resulted in US 6 being a pleasant drive with only local traffic using it. Instead, US 6 is a through highway located just far enough between two Interstates that it's not adequately served by either one.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Beltway on June 01, 2012, 11:06:05 PM
Quote from: Steve on June 01, 2012, 07:24:37 PM
I-80 was at one point considered to follow the US 6 corridor instead of its current combination of nothing and US 322. That would have a) resulted in NY 17's continued existence across all of NY, as opposed to the advent of I-86, and b) resulted in US 6 being a pleasant drive with only local traffic using it. Instead, US 6 is a through highway located just far enough between two Interstates that it's not adequately served by either one.

I-80 follows the "Keystone Shortway" route which cut about 100 miles off of the pre-existing all-turnpike route between New York City and Youngstown OH and west.

The US-6 route would have been at least 50 miles longer than the route chosen.

Segments of US-6 can be upgraded to 4-lane divided where needed.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: mightyace on June 01, 2012, 11:47:03 PM
Despite growing up in PA, I've never been on more than  about 50-60 miles of it in the state!

Of course, I-80 was complete by the time I could remember road trips and my parent's house is less than 2 miles from the I-80/US 11 interchange.

I did once, back in 2006, take the stretch from the end of freeway to a few miles east of Honesdale.  That part is typical rural, mountain 2 lane in PA.  Very scenic, not necessarily good for making time.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Alps on June 02, 2012, 04:11:38 AM
Which segments of US 6 can be upgraded? Even where it bypasses towns, it remains a 2-lane with at-grade intersections. I don't trust PennDOT to do anything right. And I'm not complaining about I-80 where it is - I'm just stating history.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: qguy on June 02, 2012, 11:43:45 AM
Quote from: mightyace on June 01, 2012, 11:47:03 PM
...the stretch from the end of freeway to a few miles east of Honesdale.  That part is typical rural, mountain 2 lane in PA.  Very scenic, not necessarily good for making time.

That's where I grew up. From where I currently live in Philadelphia I often travel to Honesdale to visit friends. I love the stretch from Carbondale to Honesdale. Definitely scenic. Definitely not good for making time!
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on June 02, 2012, 02:42:11 PM
Here is something I ran across while surfing.  Something that many of us may find interesting.  Maybe someone else posted this someplace on this forum already, but I figure that I will do it just in case.  It refers to relief in the congestion along US 22 in Allentown.
http://www.22lv.com/
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Beltway on June 02, 2012, 08:32:10 PM
Quote from: Steve on June 02, 2012, 04:11:38 AM
Which segments of US 6 can be upgraded? Even where it bypasses towns, it remains a 2-lane with at-grade intersections. I don't trust PennDOT to do anything right. And I'm not complaining about I-80 where it is - I'm just stating history.

Upgrade US-6 wherever may be needed.  No need to bewail the fact that I-80 did not follow that corridor.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on June 03, 2012, 12:05:55 PM
So basically, from everything said here is that it is more of a road than a highway.  Just like many roads in Vermont, where it takes a while just to drive a mile.  However, it sounds like a good scenic road, but much longer than even US 22 or US 30 is to cross the 300 plus miles.

It sounds like something I would try sometime, but only if I have an extra day.  When my dad traveled it back in his day, the PA Turnpike was the only cross state freeway then.  I-80 had no preceding US route in its path, so once you got to the end of US 46, you had to got north on the defunct US 611 to Scranton and go west on US 6 to reach Ohio. If not, you could pay the tolls on PA Turnpike (and before 1956 you had to go miles to the south to  pick it up) or use US 22.  In those days it was acceptable to reach Chicago from NYC in over two days.  Being from Florida where most two lane US routes can almost match the time of the nearby interstates compared to the North-East two lane roads.  Most FL rural roads are two 12 feet wide lanes, straight, and mostly flat surfaced, so using US 90 over I-10 across the northern part of the state would only result in a few hours more rather than a half a day longer.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Alps on August 11, 2012, 12:29:48 PM
http://ruins.files.wordpress.com/2008/08/scranton_easton.jpg

Anyone know if this is still in Philly? Google still has it! Bristol WB at Broad

UPDATE: Yes, indeedy, very much still there, and with reflective cats'-eyes!
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Alps on September 14, 2013, 05:28:39 AM
Another neat find: Going through my photos, a small hillside development off US 209 north of I-80, Green Mountain Rd., crosses what by all appearances is an old stone bridge.

https://maps.google.com/?ll=41.016489,-75.129833&spn=0.000847,0.001668&t=k&z=20

Thanks to Historic Aerials, I've figured out that this was actually the original US 209 Marshall's Creek crossing. Of course, early bridges crossed water at 90 degrees instead of on a slant. It curved here and then went around the back of the hotel property to the south before rejoining its current alignment. Because Green Mountain Rd. was aligned to curve onto the old bridge, this is the last trace of the original route.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: NE2 on September 14, 2013, 06:02:21 AM
Actually it was never US 209 - that was moved directly from US 209 Business to the current bypass in the 1960s. It was, however, part of PA 402 until the new bridge was built in 1930 (http://uglybridges.com/1470085).

Supposedly the stone bridge dates back only to 1910: http://bridgehunter.com/pa/monroe/457213053900020/

It appears that the original Seven Bridges Road went from Marshalls Creek (the community on US 209) to Paper Mill Road (original US 611) north of Delaware Water Gap. From south to north, the seven bridges are (all but the first over Marshall Creek):
*removed over Brodhead Creek
*1912 stone (http://uglybridges.com/1470292)
*1932 replacement (http://uglybridges.com/1470189) on Gap View Drive
*1910 stone (http://uglybridges.com/1470291) (bypassed 1930 (http://uglybridges.com/1470085))
*1990 replacement (http://uglybridges.com/1470289) on County Bridge Road
*possible old stone bridge on private driveway north from County Bridge Road
*probably removed, just north of the latter

The old alignment past the last two bridges can be seen on a 1943 topo (http://historical.mytopo.com/getImage.asp?fname=bshl43sw.jpg&state=PA) (but, strangely, neither the 1910 bridge you saw nor the one on County Bridge Road are shown).
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Alps on September 15, 2013, 01:41:00 AM
Quote from: NE2 on September 14, 2013, 06:02:21 AM
Actually it was never US 209 - that was moved directly from US 209 Business to the current bypass in the 1960s. It was, however, part of PA 402 until the new bridge was built in 1930 (http://uglybridges.com/1470085).

Supposedly the stone bridge dates back only to 1910: http://bridgehunter.com/pa/monroe/457213053900020/

It appears that the original Seven Bridges Road went from Marshalls Creek (the community on US 209) to Paper Mill Road (original US 611) north of Delaware Water Gap. From south to north, the seven bridges are (all but the first over Marshall Creek):
*removed over Brodhead Creek
*1912 stone (http://uglybridges.com/1470292)
*1932 replacement (http://uglybridges.com/1470189) on Gap View Drive
*1910 stone (http://uglybridges.com/1470291) (bypassed 1930 (http://uglybridges.com/1470085))
*1990 replacement (http://uglybridges.com/1470289) on County Bridge Road
*possible old stone bridge on private driveway north from County Bridge Road
*probably removed, just north of the latter

The old alignment past the last two bridges can be seen on a 1943 topo (http://historical.mytopo.com/getImage.asp?fname=bshl43sw.jpg&state=PA) (but, strangely, neither the 1910 bridge you saw nor the one on County Bridge Road are shown).
Yeah, as I continued captioning I figured out what I was looking at better. So now that I know the date was 1930, adding it to the file.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jeffandnicole on October 11, 2013, 12:01:39 PM
http://www.philly.com/philly/news/politics/20131011_ap_884ec8b314e04a05b1b21a369b29fb01.html

QuoteA leading Pennsylvania state senator says it's time to increase the state's maximum allowable speed limit from 65 mph to 70 mph.

Senate President Pro Tempore Joe Scarnati said Friday he will introduce legislation soon to allow the higher maximum speeds on interstates.

Somewhat related - is there any northeast state at this point where someone hasn't at least mentioned the idea of going to 70 mph or above?  I can't recall hearing from Delaware, but in every other state, at least one pol has at least talked about raising the 65 mph limit to 70 or 75.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: PHLBOS on October 11, 2013, 02:26:06 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on October 11, 2013, 12:01:39 PM
http://www.philly.com/philly/news/politics/20131011_ap_884ec8b314e04a05b1b21a369b29fb01.html

QuoteA leading Pennsylvania state senator says it's time to increase the state's maximum allowable speed limit from 65 mph to 70 mph.

Senate President Pro Tempore Joe Scarnati said Friday he will introduce legislation soon to allow the higher maximum speeds on interstates.

Somewhat related - is there any northeast state at this point where someone hasn't at least mentioned the idea of going to 70 mph or above?  I can't recall hearing from Delaware, but in every other state, at least one pol has at least talked about raising the 65 mph limit to 70 or 75.

Assuming that Gov. Corbett is supportive of the above and is up for re-election next year; this could be used as a campaign issue.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: vdeane on October 11, 2013, 08:00:29 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on October 11, 2013, 12:01:39 PM
http://www.philly.com/philly/news/politics/20131011_ap_884ec8b314e04a05b1b21a369b29fb01.html

QuoteA leading Pennsylvania state senator says it's time to increase the state's maximum allowable speed limit from 65 mph to 70 mph.

Senate President Pro Tempore Joe Scarnati said Friday he will introduce legislation soon to allow the higher maximum speeds on interstates.

Somewhat related - is there any northeast state at this point where someone hasn't at least mentioned the idea of going to 70 mph or above?  I can't recall hearing from Delaware, but in every other state, at least one pol has at least talked about raising the 65 mph limit to 70 or 75.
New York, to the best of my knowledge.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Snappyjack on November 19, 2013, 12:48:56 PM
Quote from: vdeane on October 11, 2013, 08:00:29 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on October 11, 2013, 12:01:39 PM
http://www.philly.com/philly/news/politics/20131011_ap_884ec8b314e04a05b1b21a369b29fb01.html

QuoteA leading Pennsylvania state senator says it's time to increase the state's maximum allowable speed limit from 65 mph to 70 mph.

Senate President Pro Tempore Joe Scarnati said Friday he will introduce legislation soon to allow the higher maximum speeds on interstates.

Somewhat related - is there any northeast state at this point where someone hasn't at least mentioned the idea of going to 70 mph or above?  I can't recall hearing from Delaware, but in every other state, at least one pol has at least talked about raising the 65 mph limit to 70 or 75.
New York, to the best of my knowledge.

Actually, a bill was recently announced to raise the speed limit to 75 in New York. Here's the details: http://www.autoblog.com/2013/11/01/new-york-may-raise-maximum-speed-limit-75-mph/

I doubt it has any chance in hell of passing.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: cpzilliacus on November 19, 2013, 12:50:08 PM
Philly.com: Roadblock: PA House votes down transportation spending measure (http://www.philly.com/philly/news/232451171.html)

QuoteHARRISBURG - After months of debate, the state House failed to pass legislation Monday night that would have provided $2.3 billion to complete long-overdue repairs to the state's aging transportation infrastructure.

QuoteIn a stunning 103-98 vote that teetered between passage and defeat until the last moment of the roll call, lawmakers shot down an amendment to fix thousands of substandard bridges, repave hundreds of miles of crumbling roads, and pump hundreds of millions into modernizing mass transit systems across the state.

QuoteTo pay for the improvements, the bill would have lifted the cap on the oil-franchise tax - which could increase prices at the gas pump by roughly 27 cents a gallon. The measure also would have increased driver's-license and vehicle-registration fees beginning in 2015, and put a surcharge on speeders and others who violate traffic laws.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: vdeane on November 19, 2013, 01:02:00 PM
Quote from: Snappyjack on November 19, 2013, 12:48:56 PM
Quote from: vdeane on October 11, 2013, 08:00:29 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on October 11, 2013, 12:01:39 PM
http://www.philly.com/philly/news/politics/20131011_ap_884ec8b314e04a05b1b21a369b29fb01.html

QuoteA leading Pennsylvania state senator says it's time to increase the state's maximum allowable speed limit from 65 mph to 70 mph.

Senate President Pro Tempore Joe Scarnati said Friday he will introduce legislation soon to allow the higher maximum speeds on interstates.

Somewhat related - is there any northeast state at this point where someone hasn't at least mentioned the idea of going to 70 mph or above?  I can't recall hearing from Delaware, but in every other state, at least one pol has at least talked about raising the 65 mph limit to 70 or 75.
New York, to the best of my knowledge.

Actually, a bill was recently announced to raise the speed limit to 75 in New York. Here's the details: http://www.autoblog.com/2013/11/01/new-york-may-raise-maximum-speed-limit-75-mph/

I doubt it has any chance in hell of passing.
Said bill was proposed after I made that post.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: oscar on November 19, 2013, 01:05:38 PM
Quote from: Flyer78 on November 19, 2013, 12:21:00 PM
Kelly Drive, in Philly; new signs are up warning speeders that a signal ahead will change. Will be interesting to see if there is any positive effect, or as some of the comments indicate; cars already speeding will speed-up to try to beat the cycle.

My home county in Virginia tried that, on a downhill section of Wilson Blvd. where people had trouble sticking to the 30mph limit.  For whatever reason, the county gave up on that silly idea.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Snappyjack on November 19, 2013, 01:11:21 PM
I need to learn to read dates. Sorry, vdeane!
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: froggie on November 20, 2013, 10:10:38 AM
QuoteSomewhat related - is there any northeast state at this point where someone hasn't at least mentioned the idea of going to 70 mph or above?  I can't recall hearing from Delaware, but in every other state, at least one pol has at least talked about raising the 65 mph limit to 70 or 75.

Vermont.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on November 21, 2013, 08:14:26 PM
https://maps.google.com/maps?q=Camp+Hill,+PA&hl=en&ll=40.273403,-77.011242&spn=0.01444,0.027595&sll=27.698638,-83.804601&sspn=7.407541,11.645508&oq=camp+h&t=h&hnear=Camp+Hill,+Cumberland,+Pennsylvania&z=15&layer=c&cbll=40.273376,-77.011481&panoid=prl4OHwU9fJ3shXngD4_1g&cbp=12,87.49,,0,0

I was noticing this assembly along NB I-81 that struck me odd.  It has the pull through sign for I-81 Northbound for Harrisburg instead of considering PA 581 for it.  PA 581 is actually the best route into the city itself.  In addition the control city on US 11/15 in Enola is the same where Harrisburg is located several miles to the South-East of that particular interchange better served by the Walnut Street Bridge from Wormleysburg, yet the control city for this ramp to I-81 NB is also signed "Harrisburg."

I have noticed this in many places in PA where the directional controls are not the best or direct way to the place.  In Oxford Valley at the US 1/ I-95 interchange, you have "Trenton, NJ" or "Trenton" signed via I-95 instead of US 1 as well where US 1 is the route (all freeway as well) into New Jersey's capital.  I-95 does not come near the city center or even the city limits of Trenton.  Then at I-476's northern terminus at Clarks Summit you have guide signs to Scranton signed via US 11 and not I-81. I-81 is the direct route (and all freeway) into Scranton.  Instead it has  the next SB I-81 city already signed for Wilkes- Barre where the first Scranton exit has not been reached. The first exit is actually for US 11 after it becomes a freeway where the arterial section of US 11 would be bypassed as well as some traffic lights. In actuality this one here being  sort of the opposite of this depicted in the above photo.

Does anyone in PennDOT seem to be oriented into locations of places that they sign?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: briantroutman on November 21, 2013, 11:38:14 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on November 21, 2013, 08:14:26 PM
I was noticing this assembly along NB I-81 that struck me odd.  It has the pull through sign for I-81 Northbound for Harrisburg instead of considering PA 581 for it.

Both routes do pass through the city limits, and either may be more appropriate depending on your specific destination–evena destination close to the center of the city. If PennDOT was being consistent, they would mirror the setup they have on southbound I-81 at I-83 (http://bit.ly/1aUOSWV). There, they list I-83 South as "South Harrisburg" and I-81 South as "North Harrisburg".

As to the others, I can think of reasons that the control cities might have been signed that way, even if the result is less than logical. In the case of US 1 and I-95 in Trenton, I would have to guess that signing "Trenton" on 95 results from the tendency to prefer the Interstate route for interstate city-to-city travel, even through I-95 doesn't really serve the "city" itself, but the metro. I don't know if any now-cancelled freeway plans in NJ would have made I-95 a better choice.

At Clarks Summit, I'd imagine that "Scranton" is signed on US 11 because the first and primary exit from I-81 is to US 11 anyway. And perhaps its a side effect of needing to sign a destination for US 11 (after all, what else would sign as a control for southbound US 11) and not being able to duplicate cities between the signs.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: NE2 on November 22, 2013, 12:08:02 AM
Trenton via I-95 (specifically signed on US 1 north) is probably due to the US 1 freeway not being finished east of Oxford Valley Road until the 1980s. NJ 29 is almost freeway all the way from I-95 to downtown, so it was probably a better route in those days.

Interestingly at the PA 332 interchange most signs say Princeton but one has Trenton (and from there I-95 north to NJ 29 is the shorter way to Trenton). I can't tell which are older on the Goog. On Taylorsville Road are Clearview and older Trenton signs (at that interchange I-95 north is the clear winner).

Then once you get into NJ (and Trenton is signed off the NJ 29 exit) the control city is very inconsistent. I see signs for New York, Camden, TO US 1, and TO I-295 south. Once you get on I-95, New York doesn't appear, at least on the primary signs, at either of the two logical exits (US 1 is New Brunswick and I-195 has nothing).

Personally I'd use Princeton (with Trenton also signed at the PA 332 and Taylorsville Road interchanges), and then change signs on I-95 to have Princeton traffic get off at US 1 rather than US 206. I-95 around Trenton is a beltway and should be signed like one, with the control city of the next major radial.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: NJRoadfan on November 22, 2013, 01:16:44 AM
"New York" is from the days the Somerset Freeway was supposed to be completed. Before the last sign replacement a few years ago, the pull through at the beginning of I-295 South/Exit 67 used to say "SOUTH I-295 TO I-195-NORTH I-95/Bordentown/New York" with no NJTP shield.

As for PA, they were in an awkward position where I-95 wasn't finished and really couldn't use a control city north of Trenton. They likely weren't keen on using Princeton since an Interstate doesn't actually go there.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: NE2 on November 22, 2013, 01:25:15 AM
Quote from: NJRoadfan on November 22, 2013, 01:16:44 AM
As for PA, they were in an awkward position where I-95 wasn't finished and really couldn't use a control city north of Trenton. They likely weren't keen on using Princeton since an Interstate doesn't actually go there.
But an Interstate goes to Trenton?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on November 22, 2013, 08:28:17 AM
Actually the signage at the US 1/ I-95 Interchange at Oxford Valley was erected sometime in late 90 or early 91.  They were going up prior to my move to Central Florida and the first time seeing them in place was May 90.  I had moved to Florida from New Jersey in August 1990 when just the supports were up, but no sign bridge truss.

The US 1 Freeway opened up in 1987 sometime around, and all the signs at that particular interchange read Yardley for I-95 NB and one sign in particular (it may still be there today) had New York for a control heading SB on US 1.  On I-95 itself, it did not even have a route number for US 1.  US 1 Business was actually signed as US 1 up until this project completed after I moved despite the freeway being completed to Morrisville.  Even near Neshaminy just north of the PA Turnpike on US 1, had US 1 exit at US 1 Business after the freeway completion as well.  It took them years before PennDOT corrected their mistake as well.

Anyway, the signs on I-95 for US 1 (now US 1 Business) used "Trenton" as control city as well as "Pendell" for PA 413.  The sign was actually made so that when the US 1 freeway was to eventually be completed, all they had to do was remove a panel from those exit guides.  Hence the "US 1 Trenton" was tacked on top of the sign that read "PA 413 Pendell" in the same manner "US 202 South" was tacked onto "PA 611 North Easton" on the Doyelstown Bypass before the Parkway was completed.  They actually thought ahead, but when the time came (in case of US 1 anyway) they forgot about the fact that signs needed to be updated.  VDOT does it in Virginia, especially in Fredericksburg when US 1 Alternate was decommissioned in 1972, as many signs still show US 1 Business (and US 17 Business) as US 1 (US 17) and mainline US 1 as "ALT. US 1" as far late as the 2000's.  Alps has a picture on his website of the gantry entering Fredericksburg from US 1 Southbound of the signs that were never changed.

I wrote PennDOT about it, and the representative who wrote me back (on paper back in 97) that he agreed with Trenton needed to be signed on US 1 and Princeton for I-95.  He even assured me that he submitted a work order to change the signs and was in the works at the time.  Now 16 years later the signs still have not been changed.  Obviously PennDOT is not organized as well as oriented.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: PHLBOS on November 22, 2013, 09:20:10 AM
Quote from: NE2 on November 22, 2013, 12:08:02 AMInterestingly at the PA 332 interchange most signs say Princeton but one has Trenton (and from there I-95 north to NJ 29 is the shorter way to Trenton). I can't tell which are older on the Goog. On Taylorsville Road are Clearview and older Trenton signs (at that interchange I-95 north is the clear winner).
Looking at that interchange signage more closely and having lived in PA for 24 years; I can tell you without a doubt that the overhead BGS' (that list Princeton & Philadelphia for I-95 North & South) are indeed newer than the smaller, post-mounted LGS' that list Trenton and Central Phila. for the two respective I-95 directions.  The taller first-letter for the cardinal directions (on the BGS') are the dead give-away.  The previous 80s-vintage BGS' (that had the Trenton/Central Phila. destinations) did not have the taller single letters.  The LGS dates back to the 80s but the accompanying shields are likely newer replacements.

The newer BGS' and gantries likely date back to either the late 90s or early 2000s when PA 332 & the overpass was completely redone/redecked.  Needless to say, those BGS' predate PennDOT's using of the Clearview font (thankfully IMHO).

Quote from: NJRoadfan on November 22, 2013, 01:16:44 AM
"New York" is from the days the Somerset Freeway was supposed to be completed.
No doubt about that.

Quote from: NJRoadfan on November 22, 2013, 01:16:44 AMAs for PA, they were in an awkward position where I-95 wasn't finished and really couldn't use a control city north of Trenton. They likely weren't keen on using Princeton since an Interstate doesn't actually go there.
One could argue that had the Somerset Freeway (I-95) been built; an Interstate would've indeed gone through or by there.  :)

Apparently, PennDOT had a recent change of heart and is now using Princeton for a control destination for I-95 (future I-195).  The reasoning for such is obvious; a destination near the northerly mid-section of I-95/295/future 195 loop was needed and out-of-towners are more familiar with Princeton than Ewing, the township that the highway actually goes through.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on November 22, 2013, 09:58:58 AM
Quote from: PHLBOS on November 22, 2013, 09:20:10 AM


Apparently, PennDOT had a recent change of heart and is now using Princeton for a control destination for I-95 (future I-195).  The reasoning for such is obvious; a destination near the northerly mid-section of I-95/295/future 195 loop was needed and out-of-towners are more familiar with Princeton than Ewing, the township that the highway actually goes through.
In New Jersey, many of the mileage signs along I-295 Northbound use "Ewing" as a final control point.

Trenton will still be used on I-95 from Philadelphia.  Most likely at the new I-95/PT Interchange it will direct motorists via I-195 even though you have three NJ exits for Trenton that will be on I-95.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: akotchi on November 22, 2013, 11:07:26 AM
Some thoughts from a current resident of this part of PA, employed in that part of NJ.

Princeton is also signed for I-295 NB on the other side of the loop from the three directions in the I-195/I-295/NJ 29 interchange.    Not sure about the LGSs on the side roads off I-295, though, as I don't go that way much.
 
The New York destination for I-95 NB also developed on the LGSs on the side roads between Route 31 and U.S. 1, presumably after the Somerset Freeway was cancelled.  I noticed this when I started working in the area in 1987.  Camden was also included, presumably for I-295 SB, which this section was until about 1993.  I think some are still around, even though the U.S. 1 interchange now says New Brunswick for NB.  I pass by them every work day, but my commute is mindless enough that I don't take note much any more.  My curiosity is now piqued for a ride at lunch . . .

The mileage signs in NJ tend to show at the bottom the municipality at the end of the route, no matter how small or well known.  Ewing was probably a remnant of when I-295 was proposed all the way around the loop (taking over I-95).

The New York destination sign Roadman was referring to is no longer there -- it now says Princeton.  They all might have been replaced when the SB weave lane was constructed between Oxford Valley Road and I-95.  Business 1 is now signed for Levittown (and Penndel), while U.S. 1 was signed for Morrisville when the I-95 signing was redone, I think in the mid-1990s.

The PA 332 interchange was reconfigured again when the EB-to-NB loop was introduced and the NB off-ramp was pushed outward.  I don't remember, though, if that was part of the bridge redecking project or not.  I thought the bridge redecking occurred first because of the left turn issues on either side of the structure.

Thanks for letting me ramble a bit.  The seemingly random nature of the guide signing in this area shows its history.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: PHLBOS on November 22, 2013, 11:35:48 AM
Quote from: akotchi on November 22, 2013, 11:07:26 AMThe New York destination for I-95 NB also developed on the LGSs on the side roads between Route 31 and U.S. 1, presumably after the Somerset Freeway was cancelled.
Those were likely matching replacements for older LGS' that predated the cancellation of the Somerset Freeway. 

Quote from: akotchi on November 22, 2013, 11:07:26 AM
The mileage signs in NJ tend to show at the bottom the municipality at the end of the route, no matter how small or well known.  Ewing was probably a remnant of when I-295 was proposed all the way around the loop (taking over I-95).
I believe the mileage listing for Ewing may be in reference to where the I-95/Somerset Freeway interchange was originally planned to be; roughly mid-way of the loop between the Scudder Falls Bridge and just north of Bordentown (Exit 60).

Quote from: akotchi on November 22, 2013, 11:07:26 AMBusiness 1 is now signed for Levittown (and Penndel), while U.S. 1 was signed for Morrisville when the I-95 signing was redone, I think in the mid-1990s.
I believe those US 1 interchange BGS' along I-95 date back to the 1980s.  As a matter of fact, most of the BGS' from Exit 40 (PA 413) to the NJ state-line that weren't recently replaced date back to the mid-to-late 80s and were erected as part of a PennDOT sign-replacement project.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on November 22, 2013, 11:40:12 AM
Glad to hear that the "New York" destination has been changed going SB on US 1 and the weave adjusted. 

NE 2 did point out that from NJ 29 to US 1 various control cities for the NB I-95 ramps, and like you said the various projects do change things a bit which is why the conflicts along this stretch.  Even Bordentown for US 1 to I-295 SB was only added later as it did use Camden earlier at that location just like "New York" was used at US 1 NB from I-295 & I-95 in Lawrence before it was changed to "New Brunswick" when "TO I-95" shields were erected to direct motorists to the other segment via I-195 instead of US 1 to I-287 as it was for decades.   One thing I will give NJDOT credit, though, as usually they do not use control cities for interstate ramps from non freeway roads, but on I-95 they do manage do have them no matter how consistent or inconsistent they may be.

As far as replacement goes on I-95 in Buck's County, it was done after I moved to FL in 90 as I was hoping to see them before I made the move and did not.  It was in late 90 that it was changed as I had to wait for my first trip back to NJ in 91 to see it.  The poles went up for the Exit 40 gantries long before I moved in August 1990, and that was typical of even NJ where new sign supports for overhead signing would be put up and than several months later the rest of the gantry would be erected.  Just like traffic signals where you will see the poles go up and stand for several months as well before the wires or mast arms are erected to wait again for the next process of placing the signal heads.  Then many weeks go by before the electrician comes by to turn it on and only to flash mode for more weeks to get the motorists used to the new installation.  Signs seem to have the same pattern, although in Florida the signs do move faster, however signals take forever to install.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: PHLBOS on November 22, 2013, 01:30:34 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on November 22, 2013, 11:40:12 AMAs far as replacement goes on I-95 in Buck's County, it was done after I moved to FL in 90 as I was hoping to see them before I made the move and did not.  It was in late 90 that it was changed as I had to wait for my first trip back to NJ in 91 to see it.  The poles went up for the Exit 40 gantries long before I moved in August 1990, and that was typical of even NJ where new sign supports for overhead signing would be put up and than several months later the rest of the gantry would be erected.  Just like traffic signals where you will see the poles go up and stand for several months as well before the wires or mast arms are erected to wait again for the next process of placing the signal heads.  Then many weeks go by before the electrician comes by to turn it on and only to flash mode for more weeks to get the motorists used to the new installation.  Signs seem to have the same pattern, although in Florida the signs do move faster, however signals take forever to install.
I moved to PA in mid-July of 1990 and the now-replaced diagrametric BGS' along I-95 North to PA 413 (current Exit 40/then Exit 26) were indeed erected back then.  A week or two prior to my move (just after the 4th of July); I was in the area apartment hunting and came back that way (heading north) and saw those first-hand those BGS' already erected.

If those BGS' were erected in 1990 (as opposed to earlier); it had to have been before July.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ARMOURERERIC on November 22, 2013, 09:48:14 PM
Quote from: cpzilliacus on November 19, 2013, 12:50:08 PM
Philly.com: Roadblock: PA House votes down transportation spending measure (http://www.philly.com/philly/news/232451171.html)

QuoteHARRISBURG - After months of debate, the state House failed to pass legislation Monday night that would have provided $2.3 billion to complete long-overdue repairs to the state's aging transportation infrastructure.

QuoteIn a stunning 103-98 vote that teetered between passage and defeat until the last moment of the roll call, lawmakers shot down an amendment to fix thousands of substandard bridges, repave hundreds of miles of crumbling roads, and pump hundreds of millions into modernizing mass transit systems across the state.

QuoteTo pay for the improvements, the bill would have lifted the cap on the oil-franchise tax - which could increase prices at the gas pump by roughly 27 cents a gallon. The measure also would have increased driver's-license and vehicle-registration fees beginning in 2015, and put a surcharge on speeders and others who violate traffic laws.

I am still looking for all the details, but apparently there was a "poison pill" provision in that it would have eliminated prevailing wage aspects for projects that were funded entirely with state money. 
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on November 22, 2013, 10:42:59 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on November 22, 2013, 01:30:34 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on November 22, 2013, 11:40:12 AMAs far as replacement goes on I-95 in Buck's County, it was done after I moved to FL in 90 as I was hoping to see them before I made the move and did not.  It was in late 90 that it was changed as I had to wait for my first trip back to NJ in 91 to see it.  The poles went up for the Exit 40 gantries long before I moved in August 1990, and that was typical of even NJ where new sign supports for overhead signing would be put up and than several months later the rest of the gantry would be erected.  Just like traffic signals where you will see the poles go up and stand for several months as well before the wires or mast arms are erected to wait again for the next process of placing the signal heads.  Then many weeks go by before the electrician comes by to turn it on and only to flash mode for more weeks to get the motorists used to the new installation.  Signs seem to have the same pattern, although in Florida the signs do move faster, however signals take forever to install.
I moved to PA in mid-July of 1990 and the now-replaced diagrametric BGS' along I-95 North to PA 413 (current Exit 40/then Exit 26) were indeed erected back then.  A week or two prior to my move (just after the 4th of July); I was in the area apartment hunting and came back that way (heading north) and saw those first-hand those BGS' already erected.

If those BGS' were erected in 1990 (as opposed to earlier); it had to have been before July.
Yes those diagramical signs for PA 413 were erected earlier, but the ones in Langhorne were added later.

In fact the overhead assemblies for PA 132 and the three exit mileage signs south of PA 413 were added at the same time as the diagramical signs were as well.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ARMOURERERIC on November 23, 2013, 04:17:44 AM
Spoke to an old high school friend this evening, states that he just got a job with a firm increasing staff as to provide construction management and inspection services for the 22 to 79 section of the PTC Southern Beltway in Pittsburgh and that work is to start in June.  Interesting.

It was previously reported that the work would commence with the long bridge over 22 next year, but that plan was stopped due to funding issues.  His interview was 3 weeks ago so I cannot be certain how much was due to the new funding bill.

We shall see.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: MASTERNC on November 23, 2013, 07:57:22 PM
Quote from: ARMOURERERIC on November 23, 2013, 04:17:44 AM
Spoke to an old high school friend this evening, states that he just got a job with a firm increasing staff as to provide construction management and inspection services for the 22 to 79 section of the PTC Southern Beltway in Pittsburgh and that work is to start in June.  Interesting.

It was previously reported that the work would commence with the long bridge over 22 next year, but that plan was stopped due to funding issues.  His interview was 3 weeks ago so I cannot be certain how much was due to the new funding bill.

We shall see.

From what I read, the Turnpike was allotted $86 million for the Southern Beltway.

http://www.delcotimes.com/general-news/20131122/delco-bridge-repairs-expansion-of-septa-stations-on-tap
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ARMOURERERIC on November 23, 2013, 10:17:51 PM
According to the articles I have read thus far, the PTC is getting $86 Million PER YEAR, and i have read in a few articles now that the 22 to 79 link is supposedly now going out to bid in April, with construction starting in July.

I have not seen definite confirmation, but it looks like to $86 mil to the PTC is to return money taken via act 44.

Should I start a whole separate thread on projects that have been reported as a go sonce PA is really such a mess?

From what I have read:

Freewayization of US 322 from Milroy to Boalsburg

Reconstruction/Upgrade of Interchange Road and Kearsarge exit in Erie
Access road from I-90 to a new mutil-modal rail terminal in Erie, and connecting rail to a new east side Erie port facility

Central Susquehanna Valley Thruway, now I am confused on this one, I thought this was now to be covered 100% by ARC?

I-81 widen to 6 laned, Carlisle to PA 114

Several 6 lane widenings on I-83

Liberty and Birmingham Bridges in Pitts

Widening US 22 through Allentown

A PA 424 southern bypass expressway of Hazelton

The list should be somewhat lengthy considering the $$ involved.

Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: CentralPAGal on November 24, 2013, 03:20:54 AM
Quote from: ARMOURERERIC on November 23, 2013, 10:17:51 PM
I-81 widen to 6 laned, Carlisle to PA 114

Actually, its between 581 and 114. A continuous southbound lane will be added, but northbound will only be linking the 114 ramp with the 581 exit, not through the interchange.
http://cumberlink.com/news/local/penndot-plans-to-widen-portion-of-i--to-three/article_2dd279ac-daa7-11e2-8fb4-001a4bcf887a.html (http://cumberlink.com/news/local/penndot-plans-to-widen-portion-of-i--to-three/article_2dd279ac-daa7-11e2-8fb4-001a4bcf887a.html)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: froggie on November 24, 2013, 08:49:54 AM
QuoteCentral Susquehanna Valley Thruway, now I am confused on this one, I thought this was now to be covered 100% by ARC?

It might be, but ARC no longer has its own dedicated stream of funding....it got rolled into each state's Surface Transportation Program (STP) allocation.

QuoteA PA 424 southern bypass expressway of Hazelton

424 already serves as a limited-access bypass of Hazelton (I was on it Tuesday).  I presume you're referring to a proposed 4-laning of it...it's currently 2 lanes.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: CentralPAGal on November 24, 2013, 11:26:57 AM
Quote from: ARMOURERERIC on November 23, 2013, 10:17:51 PM

Central Susquehanna Valley Thruway, now I am confused on this one, I thought this was now to be covered 100% by ARC?

Supposedly, about $150 million of the cost will be covered by ARC money, which is somewhere between 25 and 30% of the project cost.
http://newsitem.com/news/csvt-will-produce-region-s-largest-span-1.1479675 (http://newsitem.com/news/csvt-will-produce-region-s-largest-span-1.1479675)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ARMOURERERIC on November 24, 2013, 01:07:44 PM
Quote from: froggie on November 24, 2013, 08:49:54 AM
QuoteCentral Susquehanna Valley Thruway, now I am confused on this one, I thought this was now to be covered 100% by ARC?

It might be, but ARC no longer has its own dedicated stream of funding....it got rolled into each state's Surface Transportation Program (STP) allocation.

QuoteA PA 424 southern bypass expressway of Hazelton

424 already serves as a limited-access bypass of Hazelton (I was on it Tuesday).  I presume you're referring to a proposed 4-laning of it...it's currently 2 lanes.


The article I real stated that the money would go for an extension of 424 to I-81 and the requisite interchange.  Of course, newspapers are often incorrect.

I have finally seen a comprehensive project list, and I am surprised that:

The massive number of small bridges being rebuilt
The large quantity of what should have been routine maintinance
How expensive the 322 project is for the length and traffic volume (supposedly most expensive item on list at 3/4 of a Billion)

How much goes to Harrisburg, though that is a function of just how bad 83 is.  Conversely, hoe relatively little 70 west gets, it get a decent amount, but I would have expected more.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: PHLBOS on November 25, 2013, 08:47:06 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on November 22, 2013, 10:42:59 PMYes those diagramical signs for PA 413 were erected earlier, but the ones in Langhorne were added later.
Fair enough, but the Langhorne exits are Exits 44 & 46A-B (old Exits 28 & 29A-B); not Exit 40, per your earlier reference.  That's why I chimed in with the correction in my previous post.

Quote from: roadman65 on November 22, 2013, 10:42:59 PMIn fact the overhead assemblies for PA 132 and the three exit mileage signs south of PA 413 were added at the same time as the diagramical signs were as well.
For the longest time, that BGS and the BGS' for PA 132 (Exit 37/old Exit 25); were the only newer style BGS' one would see along I-95 south from PA 413 (Bristol) to Center City.

For a very short period in the early 2000s (?); some newer BGS were erected along northbound I-95 for Exit 35/PA 63 (Woodhaven Road) that read EXIT 35 63 WEST TO 13 Bristol Pike Woodhaven Rd.  These BGS weren't even up for a year when they were replaced with the current diagramatic BGS' with the peeling green paint.  The BGS replacement coincided with the new Park-n-Ride facility at the adjacent SEPTA Cornwell Heights Station (for the (R7) Trenton line).
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on December 31, 2013, 10:05:08 PM
I was noticing that the Google Car has not yet made it on the new US 202 Parkway as of yet.  The road has been open several months, if not more than a year, already and only one cross road in Bucks County has the road shown open with a working traffic signal.

I also noticed that at New Britan Road near Doylestown, that there is a grade separation even though it is the northern terminus of the Parkway Recreation Trail.  The GSV shows the new underpass with a freeway style "US 202" sign attached to it and it looks like days of the road's (and trail's) opening as the Trail parking area is fresh asphalt with barricades blocking its entry like it was going to be opened for business real soon.

The PA 309 interchange, is shown on PA 309's view of also just ready to open with a Jersey Barrier across the connector ramp along with the Trail parking facility ready to open in addition.

Other intersections do not even show construction of the new road.  You would figure by now Google would be there already.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: PHLBOS on January 02, 2014, 09:36:58 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on December 31, 2013, 10:05:08 PM
I was noticing that the Google Car has not yet made it on the new US 202 Parkway as of yet.  The road has been open several months, if not more than a year, already and only one cross road in Bucks County has the road shown open with a working traffic signal.
The US 202 Parkway opened just over a year ago.  The primary attraction of last year's Doylestown meet was indeed riding along the new parkway.

I know Mapquest recognizes it when one seeks directions; the latest PennDOT, AAA & Rand McNally roadmaps and atlases now show the new parkway as well.

I'm not sure whether all GPS data and/or On-Star systems recognize the parkway as of yet.  A friend of mine recently purchased a left-over 2013 Chevy Equinox equipped w/the On-Star system.  When he seeked driving directions from West Chester to Plumstead Twp. (near Doylestown) via the system; it completely ignored the parkway even though using it would've been more direct route (the difference in travel time is in single-digit minutes at least according to Mapquest).

On-Star routed him to exit the PA Turnpike at Willow Grove (PA 611) where he would remain on for many miles where he could've exited off at Fort Washington (PA 309) and follow to US 202 North and pick up PA 611 North closer to Doylestown and saved some toll money.  Pre-202 parkway, picking up 611 at Willow Grove would've been my first choice as well; but this is one case where the new road is somewhat of a game-changer.  Had the parkway been a full-blown freeway as originally planned; the other way (309/202/611) would have a full advantage in both travel time & toll money.



Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on January 02, 2014, 06:11:28 PM
What is amazing about this Parkway is the third time NIMBYism has let a worthless compromise take place.

Need I remind you this:

US 30 between Lancaster and Coatsville (the Amish stopped a much needed US 30 upgrade)

I-476 between SR 3 and I-95 where traffic counts warrant 6 lanes, and PennDOT had to settle  for the 4 lanes that someday will be overcapcitated.

Both cases where community opposition stopped needed roadways.  Here you have a two lane road (not even super two) with at grade intersections bypassing a similar roadway with the same conditions.  True it is direct and you do not have to zig zag along PA 611 any more, but at least four lanes they could have done it.  Freeway or arterial is better than this!
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: PHLBOS on January 02, 2014, 06:24:53 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on January 02, 2014, 06:11:28 PMNeed I remind you this:
FYI, if you're referring to me personally in your last post; this is old news to me.  You're preaching to the choir.

Quote from: roadman65 on January 02, 2014, 06:11:28 PM
US 30 between Lancaster and Coatsville (the Amish stopped a much needed US 30 upgrade)
I wasn't aware of that one.

Quote from: roadman65 on January 02, 2014, 06:11:28 PM
I-476 between SR 3 and I-95 where traffic counts warrant 6 lanes, and PennDOT had to settle for the 4 lanes that someday will be overcapcitated.
Someday?  The 20-year projected traffic counts for I-476 was already achieved/surpassed before the highway opening was even a year old.

Quote from: roadman65 on January 02, 2014, 06:11:28 PMHere you have a two lane road (not even super two) with at grade intersections bypassing a similar roadway with the same conditions.  True it is direct and you do not have to zig zag along PA 611 any more, but at least four lanes they could have done it.  Freeway or arterial is better than this!
I agree; however, in all fairness, the parkway will at least not have any residences nor businesses lined up along it thereby making the case for more traffic lights to be added (& increased delays).  The old US 202 corridor had tons of residential & business driveways and more traffic lights.

The least PennDOT could've done was make the parkway 4-lanes all the way through.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Duke87 on January 02, 2014, 10:04:58 PM
Even without driveways, the 202 parkway is still woefully unfit to handle the traffic volumes on it. Thanks, Rendell!
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Alps on January 02, 2014, 10:57:29 PM
Quote from: Duke87 on January 02, 2014, 10:04:58 PM
Even without driveways, the 202 parkway is still woefully unfit to handle the traffic volumes on it. Thanks, Rendell!
Is it getting backed up? I haven't heard of issues.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: PHLBOS on January 03, 2014, 09:47:26 AM
I used it last Saturday to attend in New Year's Eve party in Plumstead Twp.  While the road wasn't fully gridlocked like I-476 is during rush hour; it does bunch up at the traffic lights and was congested due to a slow-poke driver going under the posted 40-mph speed limit for no visual reason.

Thankfully, for the way home, I had the road all to myself.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Duke87 on January 03, 2014, 05:11:53 PM
Quote from: Steve on January 02, 2014, 10:57:29 PM
Is it getting backed up? I haven't heard of issues.

On the couple occasions I've been on it since the Doylestown meet, it has been rather pokey. Not "backed up", but still LOS D-E.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jemacedo9 on January 03, 2014, 05:41:14 PM
I've been on this 3 times since it's opening.  Twice, it was a pleasant experience.  The third, I was stuck behind a horse truck who didn't want to go above 30...that was annoying.  That said, it is DEFINITELY an upgrade over following the old 202 through Montgomeryville, Chalfont, and New Britain.  Because there are very few access points, I think it's an OK compromise.  I get the point of some of the curves built in, as a way of reducing speeds, but I think some of the curves are a little overdone.

It seems like southbound right after the 611 ramps, the change from 4 lanes to 2 is quite abrupt and forced.  They could have extended the 4 lane at least another 1/2 mile or so IMO.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: froggie on January 05, 2014, 09:17:10 AM
PennDOT has 2012 traffic maps up for Montgomery and Bucks that show the new 202.  Looks like a range between 13K and 19K.  High-end for a 2-lane road, but not insurmountable, and as others have noted the limited-access helps.  Still not at the level of the 25K ADT slog on 222 between Reading and PA 853...
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Duke87 on January 05, 2014, 12:39:14 PM
Hmm... y'know, my perception of the road is probably more about speed than about capacity. I find it aggravating to drive because I feel like I should be doing 60 but the road is posted at 40, the locals all obey that, and there is no opportunity to pass anyone.

Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: empirestate on January 06, 2014, 09:13:25 PM
Quote from: Duke87 on January 05, 2014, 12:39:14 PM
Hmm... y'know, my perception of the road is probably more about speed than about capacity. I find it aggravating to drive because I feel like I should be doing 60 but the road is posted at 40, the locals all obey that, and there is no opportunity to pass anyone.

Sounds like the reverse of the Bronx River Parkway...the locals all zoom down the road, while there's that one guy (often me) who actually wants to go the posted 40.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: PHLBOS on January 13, 2014, 06:13:11 PM
Recent (as of 1/12/14) Article regarding the 202 Parkway.

Central Bucks' 202 Parkway remains controversial (http://www.mcall.com/news/nationworld/pennsylvania/mc-pa-central-bucks-202-parkway-20140112,0,2243924.story)

Excerpts:

The decades-long controversy that marked the Route 202 Parkway's design hasn't abated much in the year since the road from Montgomeryville to Doylestown opened.

From critics who find the $200 million road too narrow and choked with trucks, to supporters who hail it as a scenic traffic solution with a great trail system, the winding parkway continues to spur debate as it moves vehicles between Routes 611 and 309.

In November, Warrington officials called on the state's secretary of transportation to prohibit truck traffic on the 8½-mile parkway and eliminate the bike lane. Not likely, said PennDOT, reminding the municipality it was involved in the road's design.

"It was determined early on that the Parkway speed limit would be 40 mph, that it would be open to commercial vehicles and that five-foot wide paved shoulders on each side (of the road) would function as bicycle lanes," wrote Lester Toaso, PennDOT's District 6 executive.
...

"The Route 202 Parkway provides excellent access to and from Route 309 – except when 18-wheelers dominate travel, do not maintain the speed limit ... nor safely navigate curves," Allen McQuarrie of Doylestown Township wrote The Intelligencer newspaper in Doylestown.

"It's our favorite road to hate," quipped Mike Concordia, a Doylestown man who said he drives the road every day to work. While the road provides a quicker trip between Montgomeryville and Doylestown, Concordia criticized the speed limit, calling it "a recipe for disaster."

If you're not speeding, you'll be tailgated, said many drivers.
...

Should it have been the original four-lane expressway, envisioned for decades, or is a bucolic, mostly two-lane parkway with an 11-foot-wide multiuse trail more efficient?

John W. Jones of Solebury sees it this way: "As to the 202 Parkway, as it has been constructed, I can barely think of a road that cost more money and benefited fewer people," he wrote to The Intelligencer.

Others have called the road beautiful and applauded the broad trail where families can walk and ride bikes.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: rickmastfan67 on March 02, 2014, 05:51:01 PM
I-83 Southbound has been closed near the Maryland State Line because of a failure of deteriorating drainage pipe undermining the pavement that has caused a dip in the pavement because of a major void under both lanes.

http://www.dot.state.pa.us/Penndot/Districts/D8news.nsf/a2a8ee9f2c47a24b8525783a004f753a/86f284b27cd1428b85257c8e00215dde?OpenDocument
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Gnutella on March 03, 2014, 04:57:42 AM
Quote from: rickmastfan67 on March 02, 2014, 05:51:01 PM
I-83 Southbound has been closed near the Maryland State Line because of a failure of deteriorating drainage pipe undermining the pavement that has caused a dip in the pavement because of a major void under both lanes.

http://www.dot.state.pa.us/Penndot/Districts/D8news.nsf/a2a8ee9f2c47a24b8525783a004f753a/86f284b27cd1428b85257c8e00215dde?OpenDocument

That entire highway from I-81 to the Maryland state line just needs to be rebuilt.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: qguy on March 03, 2014, 08:11:41 PM
The contrast of I-83 between PA and MD is so stark that it's a complete disgrace to the state of PA. The only bright spot on the entire length of the highway within PA is the relatively new interchange with Business 83.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: cpzilliacus on March 04, 2014, 08:06:51 AM
Quote from: qguy on March 03, 2014, 08:11:41 PM
The contrast of I-83 between PA and MD is so stark that it's a complete disgrace to the state of PA. The only bright spot on the entire length of the highway within PA is the relatively new interchange with Business 83.

Agreed.

A former colleague (who once worked for the Pennsylvania Department of Highways) told me that I-83 is so bad between Harrisburg and the Maryland border because it is old U.S. 111, and was in effect "upgraded in place" to the highway that's there today. 

But I find it inexcusable that PennDOT spent a lot of money reconstructing the freeway between York and I-76 (Turnpike) in the 1990's, yet after the reconstruction was done, the same substandard interchange designs remained, effectively unchanged!
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Gnutella on March 04, 2014, 11:21:09 AM
Quote from: cpzilliacus on March 04, 2014, 08:06:51 AM
Quote from: qguy on March 03, 2014, 08:11:41 PM
The contrast of I-83 between PA and MD is so stark that it's a complete disgrace to the state of PA. The only bright spot on the entire length of the highway within PA is the relatively new interchange with Business 83.

Agreed.

A former colleague (who once worked for the Pennsylvania Department of Highways) told me that I-83 is so bad between Harrisburg and the Maryland border because it is old U.S. 111, and was in effect "upgraded in place" to the highway that's there today. 

But I find it inexcusable that PennDOT spent a lot of money reconstructing the freeway between York and I-76 (Turnpike) in the 1990's, yet after the reconstruction was done, the same substandard interchange designs remained, effectively unchanged!

I wonder if it's more of a "District 8" problem than a PennDOT problem, because I remember I-79 being reconstructed between I-70 and I-376 (nee I-279) back in the 1990's, and there are nice, long acceleration and deceleration lanes at all the interchanges along the way. The same is true of I-79 between the West Virginia state line and I-70 as well.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on March 04, 2014, 04:25:10 PM
Quote from: Gnutella on March 03, 2014, 04:57:42 AM
Quote from: rickmastfan67 on March 02, 2014, 05:51:01 PM
I-83 Southbound has been closed near the Maryland State Line because of a failure of deteriorating drainage pipe undermining the pavement that has caused a dip in the pavement because of a major void under both lanes.

http://www.dot.state.pa.us/Penndot/Districts/D8news.nsf/a2a8ee9f2c47a24b8525783a004f753a/86f284b27cd1428b85257c8e00215dde?OpenDocument

That entire highway from I-81 to the Maryland state line just needs to be rebuilt.

And six-laned all the way down to Baltimore, and eight-laned near the end where it's already six lanes. (Extra width in the median at bridges suggests MDOT's plans to do that.)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Alps on March 04, 2014, 06:36:49 PM
Quote from: Roadsguy on March 04, 2014, 04:25:10 PM
Quote from: Gnutella on March 03, 2014, 04:57:42 AM
Quote from: rickmastfan67 on March 02, 2014, 05:51:01 PM
I-83 Southbound has been closed near the Maryland State Line because of a failure of deteriorating drainage pipe undermining the pavement that has caused a dip in the pavement because of a major void under both lanes.

http://www.dot.state.pa.us/Penndot/Districts/D8news.nsf/a2a8ee9f2c47a24b8525783a004f753a/86f284b27cd1428b85257c8e00215dde?OpenDocument

That entire highway from I-81 to the Maryland state line just needs to be rebuilt.

And six-laned all the way down to Baltimore, and eight-laned near the end where it's already six lanes. (Extra width in the median at bridges suggests MDOT's plans to do that.)
I think the eight-lane near the end is overkill. The extra width would make sense if I-83 continued to I-95, in which case you'd need the extra capacity for through traffic. (How you know I'm in the middle of updating: I tried to add <a> tags to I-83 and I-95...)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Gnutella on March 04, 2014, 09:53:47 PM
Honestly, I'd like to see a full-scale Interstate renumbering in the Mid-Atlantic. It'd go like this...

I-85 would be extended north to Canada, multiplexing with I-95 between Richmond and the Capital Beltway around Washington DC. It'd then follow the western portion of the beltway, opposite of I-95, before multiplexing with I-95 again up to Baltimore. From there, it'd replace I-695 around the northwestern portion of Baltimore, the entirety of I-83 between Baltimore and Harrisburg, and I-81 from Harrisburg to the Canadian border via Syracuse. I-81 would be truncated to Harrisburg. I-83 would be realigned along I-270 and U.S. 15 between Washington DC and Harrisburg, and eventually extended north to Rochester via Williamsport. I-495 would be decommissioned around Washington DC in favor of I-95 along the eastern arc and I-85 along the western arc. This would give both Pennsylvania and New York another Interstate ending in '5' that doesn't just clip the southeastern corners of each.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: empirestate on March 05, 2014, 01:31:54 AM
Quote from: Gnutella on March 04, 2014, 09:53:47 PM
Honestly, I'd like to see a full-scale Interstate renumbering in the Mid-Atlantic. It'd go like this...

I-85 would be extended north to Canada, multiplexing with I-95 between Richmond and the Capital Beltway around Washington DC. It'd then follow the western portion of the beltway, opposite of I-95, before multiplexing with I-95 again up to Baltimore. From there, it'd replace I-695 around the northwestern portion of Baltimore, the entirety of I-83 between Baltimore and Harrisburg, and I-81 from Harrisburg to the Canadian border via Syracuse. I-81 would be truncated to Harrisburg. I-83 would be realigned along I-270 and U.S. 15 between Washington DC and Harrisburg, and eventually extended north to Rochester via Williamsport. I-495 would be decommissioned around Washington DC in favor of I-95 along the eastern arc and I-85 along the western arc. This would give both Pennsylvania and New York another Interstate ending in '5' that doesn't just clip the southeastern corners of each.

My plan for I-85 does that as well, but by bringing it up from Charleston SC and Charleston, WV (I-77) via Pittsburgh and Erie (I-79), then via Buffalo (I-90) to Niagara Falls (I-190) and Canada.

(I would also consider an I-85W from Charleston, WV to Cleveland, giving that city an I-x5, but that's beside the point.)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Gnutella on March 05, 2014, 09:40:06 AM
Personally, I'm against using suffixes for Interstate numbers except in special occasions like in Dallas/Fort Worth and Minneapolis/St. Paul.

As for routing I-85 through Pittsburgh and Buffalo, it'd make sense since they're halfway between I-75 and I-95, but practically speaking, it's unrealistic. What I'd do instead is lengthen I-79 into a long-haul Interstate. I also have plans for I-77 in this regard.

I'd keep I-79 where it is in Pennsylvania and northern West Virginia, but then I'd route it down U.S. 19 to Beckley, and then route it down I-77 via Charlotte to its terminus in Columbia, SC.

As for I-77, I'd keep it where it is in Ohio and part of West Virginia, but south of Charleston I'd route it down U.S. 119 and U.S. 23 through Pikeville, KY and Big Stone Gap, VA. After that I'd route it down I-26 from the "Tri-Cities" area of Tennessee through Asheville to its new terminus at an extended I-24 near Clinton, SC.

On that note, I'd extend I-24 east from Chattanooga into western North Carolina, and then figure out a way to route it down to Greenville, SC where it would then take the place of I-385 and I-26 to Charleston, SC.

Doing all this would make I-79 the primary "Canada to Carolinas" route, I-24 the primary "Heartland to Carolinas" route, and I-77 the primary "Heart of Appalachia" route.

I have other ideas too, like truncating I-94 to Milwaukee, renumbering the portion in Michigan and Indiana as I-92, renumbering I-43 to Green Bay as an extension of I-55, renumbering I-39 as I-53, renumbering I-45 and I-29 as I-39, renumbering U.S. 77, U.S. 59 and I-49 between Brownsville, TX and Kansas City, and I-35 from Kansas City north as I-45, and building a new I-35 alignment from Wichita up to the Canadian border via Minot, ND.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: PHLBOS on March 05, 2014, 10:08:36 AM
Quote from: Gnutella on March 05, 2014, 09:40:06 AM
If you haven't done so (or seen it), you might want to check out and/or post your fore-mentioned fictional/fantasy schemes in the Fictional Highways section of the forum (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?board=20.0)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: rickmastfan67 on March 05, 2014, 11:29:59 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on March 05, 2014, 10:08:36 AM
Quote from: Gnutella on March 05, 2014, 09:40:06 AM
If you haven't done so (or seen it), you might want to check out and/or post your fore-mentioned fictional/fantasy schemes in the Fictional Highways section of the forum (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?board=20.0)

Yep.  We try to keep the threads in this area 'fictional free'.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: empirestate on March 08, 2014, 12:44:45 AM
Quote from: Gnutella on March 05, 2014, 09:40:06 AM
Personally, I'm against using suffixes for Interstate numbers except in special occasions like in Dallas/Fort Worth and Minneapolis/St. Paul.

This would be such a special occasion: Cleveland/Pittsburgh. :-D

QuoteAs for routing I-85 through Pittsburgh and Buffalo, it'd make sense since they're halfway between I-75 and I-95, but practically speaking, it's unrealistic.

That's OK; the purpose of my scheme isn't to be realistic. Its purpose is to conform the numbering grid as nearly as possible given the roads that exist now and the cities that ought to be served.

But yes, it belongs in Fictional Highways; one day hopefully I'll post my I-85 ideas over there.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ARMOURERERIC on March 20, 2014, 12:11:57 AM
So, do we have any tangible results from the gas tax hie yet, other the the SoBeltway work?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Gnutella on March 20, 2014, 03:30:20 AM
Quote from: ARMOURERERIC on March 20, 2014, 12:11:57 AM
So, do we have any tangible results from the gas tax hie yet, other the the SoBeltway work?

I think they're going to announce new projects in April, when construction season begins.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Gnutella on March 29, 2014, 01:35:22 AM
One thing I've noticed in Pennsylvania is that there seem to be two different builders of signs. One does an excellent job, and they build those ribbed signs that can break away in small segments. The other does kind of a lousy job, and they build more plated signs that don't break away as cleanly. The good sign makers seem to be found mostly across the southern part of the state, and the lousy sign makers are found more across the northern parts of the state. I wonder if it's done by district (http://www.dot.state.pa.us/)? If it is, then Districts 1 and 4 seem to have a lot of lousy signs, and Districts 5 and 10 have a few, while the rest of the districts are mostly good signs.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ARMOURERERIC on April 03, 2014, 11:51:03 PM
A York County road improvement list has been revealed.

http://www.ydr.com/local/ci_25488712/i-83-resurfacing-is-one-six-projects-added
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jpi on April 04, 2014, 01:05:25 AM
Wow! I knew this was coming but still hits you when you used to work at said Denny's and very familiar with the interchange (I am refering to the sub link on the I-83 Mt Rose AVE exit) Looks like possibly some time late 2015 will be another road meet for me to host ;-)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Gnutella on April 08, 2014, 09:13:11 PM
Quote from: ARMOURERERIC on March 20, 2014, 12:11:57 AM
So, do we have any tangible results from the gas tax hie yet, other the the SoBeltway work?

Some of the projects that are now proceeding include, but are not limited to:


- Reconstruction and widening of a four-mile segment of U.S. 22 near Allentown.

- Upgrading 10 miles of U.S. 222 in Berks County on both sides of the Kutztown Bypass.

- Reconstruction of a seven-mile segment of the West Shore Bypass (U.S. 422) near Reading.

- Reconstruction and widening of a four-mile segment of I-80 near Stroudsburg.


And that's just in a small section of eastern Pennsylvania.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Alps on April 08, 2014, 11:07:37 PM
Quote from: Gnutella on April 08, 2014, 09:13:11 PM
Quote from: ARMOURERERIC on March 20, 2014, 12:11:57 AM
So, do we have any tangible results from the gas tax hie yet, other the the SoBeltway work?

Some of the projects that are now proceeding include, but are not limited to:


- Reconstruction and widening of a four-mile segment of U.S. 22 near Allentown.

- Upgrading 10 miles of U.S. 222 in Berks County on both sides of the Kutztown Bypass.

- Reconstruction of a seven-mile segment of the West Shore Bypass (U.S. 422) near Reading.

- Reconstruction and widening of a four-mile segment of I-80 near Stroudsburg.


And that's just in a small section of eastern Pennsylvania.
222 is still going to have roundabouts, so it's stupid.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: froggie on April 09, 2014, 09:37:04 AM
Quote222 is still going to have roundabouts, so it's stupid.

As long as it has 4 lanes, I'll take the roundabouts...
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ARMOURERERIC on April 09, 2014, 12:08:55 PM
They are also putting a roundabout at US 19 and PA 97 south of Waterford
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: briantroutman on April 09, 2014, 03:54:43 PM
Using roundabouts for a corridor with heavy truck traffic like 222 seems ludicrous.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Mr_Northside on April 09, 2014, 04:22:46 PM
Quote from: ARMOURERERIC on March 20, 2014, 12:11:57 AM
So, do we have any tangible results from the gas tax hie yet, other the the SoBeltway work?

While there may be some flashier "big-ticket" projects going on state-wide, the increases are mostly to try and keep up with the maintenance of what's already there.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: CentralPAGal on May 01, 2014, 06:50:10 PM
Work has started to repave and widen (to 6 lanes) the full length of I-283 near Harrisburg.

http://lancasteronline.com/news/local/i--roadwork-around-harrisburg-beginning-sunday/article_0378cff0-cb09-11e3-b6f8-0017a43b2370.html (http://lancasteronline.com/news/local/i--roadwork-around-harrisburg-beginning-sunday/article_0378cff0-cb09-11e3-b6f8-0017a43b2370.html)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jemacedo9 on May 01, 2014, 07:29:36 PM
I-283 is not getting widened...just repaved...  I-83 (not I-283) is eventually going to be widened to 6 lanes between the Susquehanna River and I-81 over the next 10 years.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Gnutella on May 02, 2014, 12:52:54 PM
Quote from: CentralPAguy on May 01, 2014, 06:50:10 PM
Work has started to repave and widen (to 6 lanes) the full length of I-283 near Harrisburg.

http://lancasteronline.com/news/local/i--roadwork-around-harrisburg-beginning-sunday/article_0378cff0-cb09-11e3-b6f8-0017a43b2370.html (http://lancasteronline.com/news/local/i--roadwork-around-harrisburg-beginning-sunday/article_0378cff0-cb09-11e3-b6f8-0017a43b2370.html)

Good to see at least one urban Interstate in Pennsylvania getting ready to be upgraded to modern standards (I-83).
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ARMOURERERIC on May 21, 2014, 11:14:33 PM
A lame, poorly written article about upcoming I-70 improvements.
http://triblive.com/news/allegheny/5870537-74/washington-walkush-highway#axzz32ATtK5iE
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jpi on May 21, 2014, 11:35:30 PM
And with construction on I-83 in the York-Harrisburg area to be ramping up in the next few years I am considering hosting a central PA road meet to start in York and go from there. :-)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: cpzilliacus on May 25, 2014, 10:58:27 AM
Quote from: jpi on May 21, 2014, 11:35:30 PM
And with construction on I-83 in the York-Harrisburg area to be ramping up in the next few years I am considering hosting a central PA road meet to start in York and go from there. :-)

But knowing PennDOT, after the construction is complete, the condition of I-83 will be just as substandard, just as unsafe as it is now. 
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ixnay on May 25, 2014, 10:09:03 PM
Quote from: CentralPAguy on May 01, 2014, 06:50:10 PM
Work has started to repave and widen (to 6 lanes) the full length of I-283 near Harrisburg.

http://lancasteronline.com/news/local/i--roadwork-around-harrisburg-beginning-sunday/article_0378cff0-cb09-11e3-b6f8-0017a43b2370.html (http://lancasteronline.com/news/local/i--roadwork-around-harrisburg-beginning-sunday/article_0378cff0-cb09-11e3-b6f8-0017a43b2370.html)

The article mentions a coming "Redesigning and reconstructing (of) the (I-83/I-283/U.S. 322) Eisenhower interchange" in the next decade.  I assume that will mean new ramp patterns when the project is completed, not unlike, say, the I-95/DE 1 and 7 interchange recently reconfigured in Delaware.

ixnay
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jpi on May 25, 2014, 11:49:02 PM
Yes, it is a MUCH needed projected, the interchange is still in it's original  early 70's configuration and when it goes full swing I would like to plan a road meet around this though it is at least a decade out and I am still planning a York based road meet when the Mt Rose AVE interchange reconstruction ramps up in the enxt 2 years. :-)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Gnutella on May 26, 2014, 03:22:45 PM
One thing PennDOT has been doing that I like is making Interstates the primary alignments through elaborate interchanges despite changing direction. They did it with the I-81/I-84 interchange (http://old.wikimapia.org/#lat=41.4216113&lon=-75.6090506&z=15&l=0&m=s) in Scranton, and the I-99/U.S. 322 East interchange (http://old.wikimapia.org/#lat=40.825846&lon=-77.8453075&z=15&l=0&m=s) in State College, and they appear to have designed it into the new I-83/I-283 interchange (http://www.i-83beltway.com/mp/master_plan/mp_60.html) in Harrisburg, with the northbound and southbound lanes staying next to each other even as they change direction through the interchange. This actually gives PennDOT a leg up on other states in the Northeast and Midwest that have lots (http://old.wikimapia.org/#lat=41.4402211&lon=-90.3298961&z=15&l=0&m=s) of (http://old.wikimapia.org/#lat=39.8017568&lon=-89.5951827&z=15&l=0&m=s) highways (http://old.wikimapia.org/#lat=40.5358958&lon=-89.0266832&z=15&l=0&m=s) that (http://old.wikimapia.org/#lat=39.9502674&lon=-83.0164348&z=15&l=0&m=s) exit (http://old.wikimapia.org/#lat=41.0353733&lon=-81.5657701&z=15&l=0&m=s) themselves (http://old.wikimapia.org/#lat=41.0617829&lon=-81.5048089&z=15&l=0&m=s).
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ixnay on July 12, 2014, 09:14:53 PM
Why is I-70's speed limit only 55 mph between the MD line and Breezewood?  Breezewood isn't *that* close, and it's not as dense with interchanges as is 70 between "Little Washington" and New Stanton.

ixnay
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ixnay on July 13, 2014, 08:15:57 AM
Quote from: Gnutella on May 26, 2014, 03:22:45 PM
One thing PennDOT has been doing that I like is making Interstates the primary alignments through elaborate interchanges despite changing direction. They did it with the I-81/I-84 interchange (http://old.wikimapia.org/#lat=41.4216113&lon=-75.6090506&z=15&l=0&m=s) in Scranton, and the I-99/U.S. 322 East interchange (http://old.wikimapia.org/#lat=40.825846&lon=-77.8453075&z=15&l=0&m=s) in State College, and they appear to have designed it into the new I-83/I-283 interchange (http://www.i-83beltway.com/mp/master_plan/mp_60.html) in Harrisburg, with the northbound and southbound lanes staying next to each other even as they change direction through the interchange. This actually gives PennDOT a leg up on other states in the Northeast and Midwest that have lots (http://old.wikimapia.org/#lat=41.4402211&lon=-90.3298961&z=15&l=0&m=s) of (http://old.wikimapia.org/#lat=39.8017568&lon=-89.5951827&z=15&l=0&m=s) highways (http://old.wikimapia.org/#lat=40.5358958&lon=-89.0266832&z=15&l=0&m=s) that (http://old.wikimapia.org/#lat=39.9502674&lon=-83.0164348&z=15&l=0&m=s) exit (http://old.wikimapia.org/#lat=41.0353733&lon=-81.5657701&z=15&l=0&m=s) themselves (http://old.wikimapia.org/#lat=41.0617829&lon=-81.5048089&z=15&l=0&m=s).

I had to think when guessing, but after zooming back, that looks like I-55 barely avoiding Bloomington/Normal, IL, particularly on the SW side where 55 veers left to multiplex with I-74 for a few miles.

ixnay
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: CentralPAGal on July 13, 2014, 09:46:22 PM
Quote from: ixnay on July 13, 2014, 08:15:57 AM
Quote from: Gnutella on May 26, 2014, 03:22:45 PM
One thing PennDOT has been doing that I like is making Interstates the primary alignments through elaborate interchanges despite changing direction. They did it with the I-81/I-84 interchange (http://old.wikimapia.org/#lat=41.4216113&lon=-75.6090506&z=15&l=0&m=s) in Scranton, and the I-99/U.S. 322 East interchange (http://old.wikimapia.org/#lat=40.825846&lon=-77.8453075&z=15&l=0&m=s) in State College, and they appear to have designed it into the new I-83/I-283 interchange (http://www.i-83beltway.com/mp/master_plan/mp_60.html) in Harrisburg, with the northbound and southbound lanes staying next to each other even as they change direction through the interchange. This actually gives PennDOT a leg up on other states in the Northeast and Midwest that have lots (http://old.wikimapia.org/#lat=41.4402211&lon=-90.3298961&z=15&l=0&m=s) of (http://old.wikimapia.org/#lat=39.8017568&lon=-89.5951827&z=15&l=0&m=s) highways (http://old.wikimapia.org/#lat=40.5358958&lon=-89.0266832&z=15&l=0&m=s) that (http://old.wikimapia.org/#lat=39.9502674&lon=-83.0164348&z=15&l=0&m=s) exit (http://old.wikimapia.org/#lat=41.0353733&lon=-81.5657701&z=15&l=0&m=s) themselves (http://old.wikimapia.org/#lat=41.0617829&lon=-81.5048089&z=15&l=0&m=s).

I had to think when guessing, but after zooming back, that looks like I-55 barely avoiding Bloomington/Normal, IL, particularly on the SW side where 55 veers left to multiplex with I-74 for a few miles.

ixnay

At this point though, I believe it still remains to be seen if that will be the final design for the project. And it'll be 10 years before anything happens, so there's a lot of time for things to change. The 581 project looks nothing like the initial concept (due to cost)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: froggie on July 13, 2014, 10:43:14 PM
QuoteWhy is I-70's speed limit only 55 mph between the MD line and Breezewood?  Breezewood isn't *that* close, and it's not as dense with interchanges as is 70 between "Little Washington" and New Stanton.

Substandard design, especially on the ridge climb and a couple of the interchanges.  That plus the PennDOT tendency to undersign speed limits period.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Duke87 on July 14, 2014, 12:59:21 AM
Quote from: ixnay on July 12, 2014, 09:14:53 PM
Why is I-70's speed limit only 55 mph between the MD line and Breezewood?

So it can be conveniently used for revenue enhancement.

Something which PA usually doesn't do a lot of compared to some other states, but that stretch of road is bad.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on July 17, 2014, 09:27:04 AM
Quote from: Duke87 on July 14, 2014, 12:59:21 AM
Quote from: ixnay on July 12, 2014, 09:14:53 PM
Why is I-70's speed limit only 55 mph between the MD line and Breezewood?

So it can be conveniently used for revenue enhancement.

Something which PA usually doesn't do a lot of compared to some other states, but that stretch of road is bad.
Georgia also does with US 19 only being 55 mph from Florida to Thomasville.  Where the 65 mph maximum is on all other 4 lane stretches of US 19, including Florida nearby south of the state line, this section remains at 55 for some unknown reason.

I believe it is to get speeding fines as  at 65 mph I am sure it caused many areas in that state to lose money.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Mergingtraffic on July 19, 2014, 03:04:10 PM
Anybody know if this classic is still there?

https://www.google.com/maps/@40.020606,-75.153683,3a,75y,263.95h,84.2t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sHUYrDzFv1GyGRuVnLT2Z0g!2e0

or the PA-320 signs on the ramp from US-1 SB?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Alps on July 20, 2014, 02:39:51 AM
Quote from: doofy103 on July 19, 2014, 03:04:10 PM
Anybody know if this classic is still there?

https://www.google.com/maps/@40.020606,-75.153683,3a,75y,263.95h,84.2t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sHUYrDzFv1GyGRuVnLT2Z0g!2e0

or the PA-320 signs on the ramp from US-1 SB?
Pretty sure it lives.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ixnay on July 20, 2014, 06:47:58 AM
Quote from: Alps on July 20, 2014, 02:39:51 AM
Quote from: doofy103 on July 19, 2014, 03:04:10 PM
Anybody know if this classic is still there?

https://www.google.com/maps/@40.020606,-75.153683,3a,75y,263.95h,84.2t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sHUYrDzFv1GyGRuVnLT2Z0g!2e0

or the PA-320 signs on the ramp from US-1 SB?
Pretty sure it lives.

PA 320 does have an interchange with U.S. 1 similar to what doofy linked, but it's in Delaware County.  The street view doofy linked is in North Philadelphia (notice the California-style U.S. shield on the overhead sign).

ixnay
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: DeaconG on July 20, 2014, 03:03:18 PM
Quote from: ixnay on July 20, 2014, 06:47:58 AM
Quote from: Alps on July 20, 2014, 02:39:51 AM
Quote from: doofy103 on July 19, 2014, 03:04:10 PM
Anybody know if this classic is still there?

https://www.google.com/maps/@40.020606,-75.153683,3a,75y,263.95h,84.2t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sHUYrDzFv1GyGRuVnLT2Z0g!2e0

or the PA-320 signs on the ramp from US-1 SB?
Pretty sure it lives.

PA 320 does have an interchange similar to what doofy linked, but it's in Delaware County.  The street view doofy linked is in North Philadelphia (notice the California-style U.S. shield on the overhead sign).

ixnay

That sign at the Roosevelt Expressway must be 50 years old, I remember seeing it as a little boy in the 60s...
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on July 24, 2014, 05:26:42 PM
Has anyone seen a diagram of the finished reconstructed interchange between US 222 and PA 61 in Reading, as part of the 61 widening project? They're adding lights, making it four lanes to just past Crossroads Blvd, and seem to be building a free-flowing SB 222-NB 61 ramp, but I'd like to know what else they're doing, if it's not too minor. They don't seem to be doing any huge changes like with the next interchange down on 222 at 183.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: PHLBOS on July 25, 2014, 08:18:57 AM
Quote from: Gnutella on May 26, 2014, 03:22:45 PM
One thing PennDOT has been doing that I like is making Interstates the primary alignments through elaborate interchanges despite changing direction. They did it with the I-81/I-84 interchange (http://old.wikimapia.org/#lat=41.4216113&lon=-75.6090506&z=15&l=0&m=s) in Scranton, and the I-99/U.S. 322 East interchange (http://old.wikimapia.org/#lat=40.825846&lon=-77.8453075&z=15&l=0&m=s) in State College, and they appear to have designed it into the new I-83/I-283 interchange (http://www.i-83beltway.com/mp/master_plan/mp_60.html) in Harrisburg, with the northbound and southbound lanes staying next to each other even as they change direction through the interchange. This actually gives PennDOT a leg up on other states in the Northeast and Midwest that have lots (http://old.wikimapia.org/#lat=41.4402211&lon=-90.3298961&z=15&l=0&m=s) of (http://old.wikimapia.org/#lat=39.8017568&lon=-89.5951827&z=15&l=0&m=s) highways (http://old.wikimapia.org/#lat=40.5358958&lon=-89.0266832&z=15&l=0&m=s) that (http://old.wikimapia.org/#lat=39.9502674&lon=-83.0164348&z=15&l=0&m=s) exit (http://old.wikimapia.org/#lat=41.0353733&lon=-81.5657701&z=15&l=0&m=s) themselves (http://old.wikimapia.org/#lat=41.0617829&lon=-81.5048089&z=15&l=0&m=s).
Similar was done when the I-78/US 22 split just west of Allentown (http://goo.gl/maps/mrUu7) was constructed. 

Back in the mid-90s, when a friend of mine was returning to Norristown from Macungie, she was heading east along I-78/US 22 (she wanted to pick up I-476/NE Extension and head south which can only be done by using US 22) but completely ignored the overhead BGS' and stayed straight thinking she would be still on US 22 (she was actually along I-78).  She didn't realize that she missed the turn for US 22 East until she was approaching the NJ State line (some 26-27 miles later).

Side bar: Your I-83/283 interchange link appears to be broken.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: mtantillo on July 28, 2014, 04:49:24 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on July 25, 2014, 08:18:57 AM
Quote from: Gnutella on May 26, 2014, 03:22:45 PM
One thing PennDOT has been doing that I like is making Interstates the primary alignments through elaborate interchanges despite changing direction. They did it with the I-81/I-84 interchange (http://old.wikimapia.org/#lat=41.4216113&lon=-75.6090506&z=15&l=0&m=s) in Scranton, and the I-99/U.S. 322 East interchange (http://old.wikimapia.org/#lat=40.825846&lon=-77.8453075&z=15&l=0&m=s) in State College, and they appear to have designed it into the new I-83/I-283 interchange (http://www.i-83beltway.com/mp/master_plan/mp_60.html) in Harrisburg, with the northbound and southbound lanes staying next to each other even as they change direction through the interchange. This actually gives PennDOT a leg up on other states in the Northeast and Midwest that have lots (http://old.wikimapia.org/#lat=41.4402211&lon=-90.3298961&z=15&l=0&m=s) of (http://old.wikimapia.org/#lat=39.8017568&lon=-89.5951827&z=15&l=0&m=s) highways (http://old.wikimapia.org/#lat=40.5358958&lon=-89.0266832&z=15&l=0&m=s) that (http://old.wikimapia.org/#lat=39.9502674&lon=-83.0164348&z=15&l=0&m=s) exit (http://old.wikimapia.org/#lat=41.0353733&lon=-81.5657701&z=15&l=0&m=s) themselves (http://old.wikimapia.org/#lat=41.0617829&lon=-81.5048089&z=15&l=0&m=s).
Similar was done when the I-78/US 22 split just west of Allentown (http://goo.gl/maps/mrUu7) was constructed. 

Back in the mid-90s, when a friend of mine was returning to Norristown from Macungie, she was heading east along I-78/US 22 (she wanted to pick up I-476/NE Extension and head south which can only be done by using US 22) but completely ignored the overhead BGS' and stayed straight thinking she would be still on US 22 (she was actually along I-78).  She didn't realize that she missed the turn for US 22 East until she was approaching the NJ State line (some 26-27 miles later).

Side bar: Your I-83/283 interchange link appears to be broken.

Although....the I-81/I-78 split is kind of weird. In the southbound direction, I-78's lanes are the ones that end (since I-78 ends at I-81). However in the northbound direction at the split, the new lanes forming on the left are for those staying on I-81, while the through lanes become I-78 east. This is a perfect example of an interstate exiting itself for no reason other than striping!
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Duke87 on July 28, 2014, 08:53:24 PM
Quote from: mtantillo on July 28, 2014, 04:49:24 PM
Although....the I-81/I-78 split is kind of weird. In the southbound direction, I-78's lanes are the ones that end (since I-78 ends at I-81). However in the northbound direction at the split, the new lanes forming on the left are for those staying on I-81, while the through lanes become I-78 east. This is a perfect example of an interstate exiting itself for no reason other than striping!

The northbound split striping makes sense because 81 north to 78 east is a much more popular movement than staying on 81 north.

The southbound merge striping logically should mirror it but for whatever reason it does not.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: mtantillo on July 29, 2014, 11:58:11 AM
Quote from: Duke87 on July 28, 2014, 08:53:24 PM
Quote from: mtantillo on July 28, 2014, 04:49:24 PM
Although....the I-81/I-78 split is kind of weird. In the southbound direction, I-78's lanes are the ones that end (since I-78 ends at I-81). However in the northbound direction at the split, the new lanes forming on the left are for those staying on I-81, while the through lanes become I-78 east. This is a perfect example of an interstate exiting itself for no reason other than striping!

The northbound split striping makes sense because 81 north to 78 east is a much more popular movement than staying on 81 north.

The southbound merge striping logically should mirror it but for whatever reason it does not.

I actually might disagree with that. I'd say the traffic splits fairly close to 50/50. I would personally be in favor of compromise...one lane forms on the left, one on the right.

In the southbound direction, what is interesting is that it is the left lanes that are ending, but the physical pavement (based on following the expansion joints in the concrete) has the lanes ending on the right. So basically you have left lane ending, then 3 lanes shift to the left, then left lane ending, then 2 lanes shifting to the right.

Ultimately, I hope they widen this stretch to 3 lanes (and actually all of I-78 in PA too), which would make this all somewhat of a moot point, since at least one of those lanes would be for through traffic on I-81.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on July 29, 2014, 01:21:49 PM
Quote from: mtantillo on July 29, 2014, 11:58:11 AM
Quote from: Duke87 on July 28, 2014, 08:53:24 PM
Quote from: mtantillo on July 28, 2014, 04:49:24 PM
Although....the I-81/I-78 split is kind of weird. In the southbound direction, I-78's lanes are the ones that end (since I-78 ends at I-81). However in the northbound direction at the split, the new lanes forming on the left are for those staying on I-81, while the through lanes become I-78 east. This is a perfect example of an interstate exiting itself for no reason other than striping!

The northbound split striping makes sense because 81 north to 78 east is a much more popular movement than staying on 81 north.

The southbound merge striping logically should mirror it but for whatever reason it does not.

I actually might disagree with that. I'd say the traffic splits fairly close to 50/50. I would personally be in favor of compromise...one lane forms on the left, one on the right.

In the southbound direction, what is interesting is that it is the left lanes that are ending, but the physical pavement (based on following the expansion joints in the concrete) has the lanes ending on the right. So basically you have left lane ending, then 3 lanes shift to the left, then left lane ending, then 2 lanes shifting to the right.

Ultimately, I hope they widen this stretch to 3 lanes (and actually all of I-78 in PA too), which would make this all somewhat of a moot point, since at least one of those lanes would be for through traffic on I-81.

It looks like it once did mirror the NB configuration, but they changed it at some point to treat 81 as the through route.

I agree that they should change it for the merge and the split so that a lane forms/ends on each side so that ultimately the left lane goes to 81 and the right lane goes to 78.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: froggie on July 29, 2014, 06:34:13 PM
QuoteI actually might disagree with that. I'd say the traffic splits fairly close to 50/50.

Back-calculating from 2012 traffic volumes shows 28K/day continuing on I-78 and 22K/day continuing on I-81 (two-way volumes).  So a 56/44 split...not too far from 50/50, but slightly favoring I-78.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Crazy Volvo Guy on August 02, 2014, 02:34:51 PM
Quote from: briantroutman on April 09, 2014, 03:54:43 PM
Using roundabouts for a corridor with heavy truck traffic like 222 seems ludicrous.

It is.  Even better when they are small and multi-lane.  People don't realize that my trailer cannot magically stay in my lane around a curve radius that tight.  Some of these so-called "engineers" need to be shot.  Or better yet, subject to driving ALL TYPES of vehicles through their creations.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Crazy Volvo Guy on August 02, 2014, 02:43:23 PM
Quote from: ARMOURERERIC on November 23, 2013, 10:17:51 PMFreewayization of US 322 from Milroy to Boalsburg

About goddamn time.  My company LOVES to route me this way when coming from SEPA and going to Ohio and the Midwest, and there is no good alternative that doesn't mean either a metric shit-ton of extra miles, or unauthorized tolls.  322 between  Milroy and Boalsburg is a royal PITA.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: cpzilliacus on August 03, 2014, 11:22:25 AM
Quote from: ixnay on July 12, 2014, 09:14:53 PM
Why is I-70's speed limit only 55 mph between the MD line and Breezewood?

Also, there are a lot of wrecks on I-70 westbound (really northbound at that point) approaching the signalized intersection at U.S. 30 in Breezewood.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: vdeane on August 03, 2014, 05:27:25 PM
Quote from: Crazy Volvo Guy on August 02, 2014, 02:34:51 PM
Quote from: briantroutman on April 09, 2014, 03:54:43 PM
Using roundabouts for a corridor with heavy truck traffic like 222 seems ludicrous.

It is.  Even better when they are small and multi-lane.  People don't realize that my trailer cannot magically stay in my lane around a curve radius that tight.  Some of these so-called "engineers" need to be shot.  Or better yet, subject to driving ALL TYPES of vehicles through their creations.
You're not supposed to.  What do you think that tapered island for?  Trucks/vehicles with trailers are SUPPOSED to drive on that!  Your problem is not that the roundabouts are there.  Your problem is that you don't know how to use roundabouts.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: froggie on August 03, 2014, 07:31:17 PM
Quote from: vdeane
Quote from: Crazy Volvo GuyIt is.  Even better when they are small and multi-lane.  People don't realize that my trailer cannot magically stay in my lane around a curve radius that tight.  Some of these so-called "engineers" need to be shot.  Or better yet, subject to driving ALL TYPES of vehicles through their creations.
You're not supposed to.  What do you think that tapered island for?  Trucks/vehicles with trailers are SUPPOSED to drive on that!

Hence why MnDOT calls it a Truck Apron (http://www.dot.state.mn.us/roundabouts/oversize.html)...
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Duke87 on August 03, 2014, 09:53:41 PM
Quote from: mtantillo on July 29, 2014, 11:58:11 AM
Quote from: Duke87 on July 28, 2014, 08:53:24 PM
The northbound split striping makes sense because 81 north to 78 east is a much more popular movement than staying on 81 north.

The southbound merge striping logically should mirror it but for whatever reason it does not.

I actually might disagree with that. I'd say the traffic splits fairly close to 50/50. I would personally be in favor of compromise...one lane forms on the left, one on the right.

Per PennDOT's traffic counts (http://www.dot.state.pa.us/Internet/bureaus/pdplanres.nsf/infoBPRTrafficInfoTrafficVolumeMap)...
I-81 south of the split: 50,000
I-78 east of the split: 30,000
I-81 north of the split: 24,000

So logically, we've got 2,000 making the acute angle movement, 28,000 going through to 78, and 22,000 staying on I-81.

This is a 56/44 split in favor of 78... which isn't as disparate as I had thought. Hmm.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: froggie on August 03, 2014, 10:13:18 PM
Same thing I posted a few days ago (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=2410.msg316073#msg316073)...  :cool:
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: rickmastfan67 on August 09, 2014, 08:15:31 PM
Split the I-70 reconstruction talk into the thread on the same topic in the Ohio Valley section.

https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=5062.0
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: mtantillo on August 11, 2014, 07:41:45 PM
And what if it is a multi-lane roundabout and the truck needs to be in the outside lane to get to their destination?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: vdeane on August 12, 2014, 07:04:10 PM
I believe they ignore the lane lines... might be why the signs say "yield to all lanes in circle".
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: froggie on August 12, 2014, 08:40:56 PM
QuoteAnd what if it is a multi-lane roundabout and the truck needs to be in the outside lane to get to their destination?

http://www.dot.state.mn.us/roundabouts/oversize.html
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: D-Dey65 on October 09, 2014, 10:20:54 PM
Maybe somebody from Bucks County can answer this, but I saw that the US 13-Old Bristol Pike interchange was screwed up by turning the never-built southbound bridge beneath northbound US 13 into a hiking trail, or something.

Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: J N Winkler on October 10, 2014, 01:26:17 PM
Thought I'd mention that I-78 is getting new signs:  the construction plans are under ECMS 91957 and include almost 80 pattern-accurate sign panel detail and sign elevation sheets.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: qguy on October 11, 2014, 09:29:08 PM
Quote from: D-Dey65 on October 09, 2014, 10:20:54 PM
Maybe somebody from Bucks County can answer this, but I saw that the US 13-Old Bristol Pike interchange was screwed up by turning the never-built southbound bridge beneath northbound US 13 into a hiking trail, or something.

I'm not from Bucks County, but until recently I lived in northeast Philadelphia and drove on that route semi-frequently. A blocked-off and disused ramp was removed and two tunnels were constructed under new embankment fill (one each under both the northbound and southbound carriageways) of the US 13 freeway just yards from the southern end of the freeway portion of US 13.

The tunnels allow for a gap to be filled in the Delaware Canal towpath trail, which stretches some 60 miles from Bristol at its southern end to Easton at its northern end.

The ramp hadn't been used in the 25-some years I lived in the area because of a reconfiguration to eliminate a traffic conflict caused by the ramp crossing the main line of the freeway. The ramp was dangerous and was never going to be re-used. And the trail is extremely popular. So it's just aswell.

Seeing that the canal has become extremely popular as a kayaking route in recent years, what truly puzzles me is why PennDOT went to the trouble and expense to reconstruct the carriageways for construction of tunnels for the trail but provided only conduit pipes for flow of the canal water and not tunnels for full travel on the canal. I know that the canal prism itself is discontinuous in a few other places in the immediate area, but many have been pushing to have those remedied piece by piece.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: D-Dey65 on October 22, 2014, 01:58:30 AM
Quote from: qguy on October 11, 2014, 09:29:08 PM
I'm not from Bucks County, but until recently I lived in northeast Philadelphia and drove on that route semi-frequently. A blocked-off and disused ramp was removed and two tunnels were constructed under new embankment fill (one each under both the northbound and southbound carriageways) of the US 13 freeway just yards from the southern end of the freeway portion of US 13.

The tunnels allow for a gap to be filled in the Delaware Canal towpath trail, which stretches some 60 miles from Bristol at its southern end to Easton at its northern end.

The ramp hadn't been used in the 25-some years I lived in the area because of a reconfiguration to eliminate a traffic conflict caused by the ramp crossing the main line of the freeway. The ramp was dangerous and was never going to be re-used. And the trail is extremely popular. So it's just aswell.
Okay, that makes sense. But it just seems like a waste to have that big wide median for no reason, and leave the ramps at Old Bristol Pike going only one way.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Gnutella on December 17, 2014, 02:34:55 AM
Plans unveiled for I-80 reconstruction in Monroe County (MM 303 to MM 307) (http://www.i80project.com/)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: froggie on December 17, 2014, 08:09:48 AM
I like the 2A concept at 191/611 (Exit 307), and the 2D concept west of there.  Too bad the project website doesn't have any real way to communicate that, though...didn't find a single email address on it, even though they mention email as a way to contact.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Gnutella on December 18, 2014, 03:53:07 AM
Quote from: froggie on December 17, 2014, 08:09:48 AM
I like the 2A concept at 191/611 (Exit 307), and the 2D concept west of there.  Too bad the project website doesn't have any real way to communicate that, though...didn't find a single email address on it, even though they mention email as a way to contact.

This project, along with the ongoing reconstruction of I-70 near Pittsburgh, and the upgrades of I-83 on the drawing board in Harrisburg and York, ought to put a nice dent in Pennsylvania's substandard Interstate mileage. Here's how I see it:

I-70 from I-79 to the Pennsylvania Turnpike (37 miles)
I-76 from the Pennsylvania Turnpike to the Walt Whitman Bridge (24 miles)
I-78 from I-81 to the Pennsylvania Turnpike Northeast Extension (51 miles)
I-80 from I-380 to the New Jersey state line (18 miles)
I-83 except a brief segment in York (47 miles)
I-376 from Pittsburgh International Airport to the Pennsylvania Turnpike (29 miles)

That makes 206 miles of substandard Interstate, with about 45 miles being upgraded in the near future.

As for the I-80 project, here's the PennDOT District 5 (http://www.dot.state.pa.us/penndot/districts/district5.nsf/) home page. I'm sure you can find an e-mail link there.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ARMOURERERIC on December 18, 2014, 10:20:59 AM
I thought some parts of 78 east of 81 to 476 were upgraded
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 02 Park Ave on December 18, 2014, 10:55:18 AM
I say, in which direction from the Pittsburgh airport to the Turnpike are you concerned about the I-376?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on December 18, 2014, 12:24:52 PM
Is there also a project in the works to six-lane 80 all the way to the bridge for when it's replaced? Maybe even west to 380?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: froggie on December 18, 2014, 03:29:33 PM
QuoteAs for the I-80 project, here's the PennDOT District 5 home page. I'm sure you can find an e-mail link there.

I looked...no luck without going through a whole bunch of strings.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Gnutella on December 18, 2014, 03:43:17 PM
Quote from: ARMOURERERIC on December 18, 2014, 10:20:59 AM
I thought some parts of 78 east of 81 to 476 were upgraded

I just examined I-78 via satellite images, and it appears that the first 10 miles east of I-81 have already been upgraded, as well as MM 30 to MM 35. This leaves MM 10 to MM 30 and MM 35 to MM 50 to be upgraded, so that's 35 miles of I-78 in need of upgrading, instead of 51 miles.

Quote from: 02 Park Ave on December 18, 2014, 10:55:18 AM
I say, in which direction from the Pittsburgh airport to the Turnpike are you concerned about the I-376?

Through the city of Pittsburgh. It's one of the worst examples of substandard Interstate in the United States. Honestly, I bet PennDOT is getting all the "easy" substandard Interstate upgrades (I-70, I-78, I-80, I-83) out of the way first before it tackles the two notorious segments in Pittsburgh and Philadelphia.

Quote from: Roadsguy on December 18, 2014, 12:24:52 PM
Is there also a project in the works to six-lane 80 all the way to the bridge for when it's replaced? Maybe even west to 380?

There was a study done in 2005 that recommended upgrading I-80 all the way from the New Jersey state line to I-380, and widening it to six lanes in the process. The segment in Stroudsburg that I linked to above is the first (and most difficult) step in the process. After it's done, the two remaining segments that will need upgrading are a 10-mile segment west to I-380, and a four-mile segment east to the New Jersey state line.

Also worth noting is that a segment of I-80 in western Pennsylvania (MM 90 to MM 97) is being reconstructed, though it already meets modern Interstate standards. Also, though they're not Interstates, PennDOT has hinted at reconstruction of U.S. 222 between Lancaster and Reading, and there's already upgrades for U.S. 422 in Reading on the drawing board. I also expect I-79 between the Pennsylvania Turnpike and I-80 to be reconstructed, though that probably won't happen until next decade.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: hbelkins on December 18, 2014, 08:13:15 PM
Quote from: J N Winkler on October 10, 2014, 01:26:17 PM
Thought I'd mention that I-78 is getting new signs:  the construction plans are under ECMS 91957 and include almost 80 pattern-accurate sign panel detail and sign elevation sheets.

Clearview?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: rickmastfan67 on December 18, 2014, 08:26:01 PM
Quote from: Gnutella on December 18, 2014, 03:43:17 PM
Quote from: 02 Park Ave on December 18, 2014, 10:55:18 AM
I say, in which direction from the Pittsburgh airport to the Turnpike are you concerned about the I-376?

Through the city of Pittsburgh. It's one of the worst examples of substandard Interstate in the United States. Honestly, I bet PennDOT is getting all the "easy" substandard Interstate upgrades (I-70, I-78, I-80, I-83) out of the way first before it tackles the two notorious segments in Pittsburgh and Philadelphia.

I'm pretty sure that the segment between US-22 Business (Exit 80) and the Turnpike is up to Interstate standards (or really close) since it was built using Interstate money unlike the rest of the Parkway East.

As for the segment between I-279 and Exit 71A (the bathtub segment), I don't see any way of upgrading it any farther than it has been without doing a true 'Big Dig' and routing it under the Monongahela River and bypassing the Fort Pitt Bridge & Tunnel.

Now, I could see them in the future maybe trying to add a third lane to the Fort Pitt Tunnel, but that would cost a lot of money, but at least the Fort Pitt Bridge would be ready for it already as long as they either eliminate Exit 69C (West Carson Street), or shrink the ramps for it down to one lane only and giving the other lane to the tunnel traffic (which would be an easy traffic reliever for the traffic from I-279).
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Gnutella on December 19, 2014, 01:58:40 AM
Quote from: rickmastfan67 on December 18, 2014, 08:26:01 PM
Quote from: Gnutella on December 18, 2014, 03:43:17 PM
Quote from: 02 Park Ave on December 18, 2014, 10:55:18 AM
I say, in which direction from the Pittsburgh airport to the Turnpike are you concerned about the I-376?

Through the city of Pittsburgh. It's one of the worst examples of substandard Interstate in the United States. Honestly, I bet PennDOT is getting all the "easy" substandard Interstate upgrades (I-70, I-78, I-80, I-83) out of the way first before it tackles the two notorious segments in Pittsburgh and Philadelphia.

I'm pretty sure that the segment between US-22 Business (Exit 80) and the Turnpike is up to Interstate standards (or really close) since it was built using Interstate money unlike the rest of the Parkway East.

As for the segment between I-279 and Exit 71A (the bathtub segment), I don't see any way of upgrading it any farther than it has been without doing a true 'Big Dig' and routing it under the Monongahela River and bypassing the Fort Pitt Bridge & Tunnel.

Now, I could see them in the future maybe trying to add a third lane to the Fort Pitt Tunnel, but that would cost a lot of money, but at least the Fort Pitt Bridge would be ready for it already as long as they either eliminate Exit 69C (West Carson Street), or shrink the ramps for it down to one lane only and giving the other lane to the tunnel traffic (which would be an easy traffic reliever for the traffic from I-279).

The segment of I-376 past downtown Pittsburgh would stay as is because there's no realistic way to upgrade it, but I do think the segment between Grant Street and the Boulevard of the Allies should at least be given full-width exterior shoulders, even if the number of lanes remains at four.

Basically, what I'd do is make the Parkway West six lanes with full-width interior and exterior shoulders between Pittsburgh International Airport and I-79, and eight lanes with full-width interior and exterior shoulders between I-79 and Saw Mill Run Boulevard. I'd also expand the Fort Pitt Tunnel to three lanes in each tube, and drop one lane from each of the Carson Street ramps at the (south)west end of the Fort Pitt Bridge. The Saw Mill Run Boulevard interchange would be reconfigured to a modified "directional T" with an eastbound 'EXIT ONLY' lane and a new westbound lane.

Eventually, the Parkway East would be widened to six lanes with full-width interior and exterior shoulders from the Boulevard of the Allies to the Pennsylvania Turnpike, though the Squirrel Hill Tunnel might remain "shoulderless" even with an expansion. Most interchanges along the Parkway East would be reconfigured.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ARMOURERERIC on December 19, 2014, 11:15:12 AM
I had thoughts of a Parkway west as a 3-2-3 configuration with the reversible center "2" branching off before Banksville into a whole separate alignment and tunnel.  Have it stay on the south shore with ramps to either a new Wabash Bridge, the Smilthfield Bridge and/or into a big Station Square parking garage with direct "T" access.  This reversible "2" would recross the Mon and rejoin the parkway near the J&L bend with ramps to/from 2nd Ave SB and Bates into Oakland.  I also envision a 2-3 lane HOT alignment from the Bus 22 exit goint to and along/ adjacent to the east Busway with a large parking structure around 28th and Liberty, a "T" connection to downtown via the Penn Station line.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on February 19, 2015, 09:53:59 AM
Are there still any old signs left anywhere in PA?  I always remembered even in the early 2000's seeing old signs from the 70's and before on many PA freeways.  Some were so faded that PennDOT left them there regardless of how useless they became, then there was the US 22 freeway that still had old signs or carbon copy of old signs, and even when PA 145 was extended south of US 22 to meet I-78 in the late 80's, instead of replacing the 7th Street signs to include the route number, PennDOT just added a shield to the top of the signs that were there.

Even US 1 in Chester County along the freeway, had faded old signs that they finally replaced in 02 with newer signs featuring shields instead of text, but for many years the PA 896 sign NB was so faded it was blank and I could never understand why some engineer did not replace it sooner as it gave out no vital information for a driver to read.

Are all the old text and signs gone or does PA still have some old relics that have not yet been replaced?  I am asking because I do not get to go on my yearly visit to NJ anymore where I used to also cross the Delaware River to check out PA, so I am curious if there are any historical signing left in this disposable age.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: PHLBOS on February 19, 2015, 10:24:23 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on February 19, 2015, 09:53:59 AMAre all the old text and signs gone or does PA still have some old relics that have not yet been replaced?  I am asking because I do not get to go on my yearly visit to NJ anymore where I used to also cross the Delaware River to check out PA, so I am curious if there are any historical signing left in this disposable age.
Short answer, there are still some out there (see above comments from others) but not as many as there once were. 

If you're expecting to see a stretch of older signs (pre-80s) in one location; you're probably too late for that.  The ones that might be still standing today are mostly entrance ramp signage vs. ones on the actual mainline (with an occasional exception).
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: rickmastfan67 on February 19, 2015, 10:55:52 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on February 19, 2015, 09:53:59 AM
Are all the old text and signs gone or does PA still have some old relics that have not yet been replaced?  I am asking because I do not get to go on my yearly visit to NJ anymore where I used to also cross the Delaware River to check out PA, so I am curious if there are any historical signing left in this disposable age.

We still have a 'text' sign over here in Pittsburgh on PA-28.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ARMOURERERIC on February 19, 2015, 10:47:24 PM
I was stumbling through news items about some of my favorite PA projects to be and found this:

http://www.dailyitem.com/news/m-thruway-bridge-to-be-bid-this-year/article_7047e1cc-9d1b-11e4-a96b-375f1fef4ef8.html

The new PA 147 bridge potion of the US 11/15/PA 147 freeway will go out to bid in August
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ARMOURERERIC on February 26, 2015, 09:37:28 PM
Here is a cool you tube video by the builder of the last part of the superstructure for the new Hulton Bridge being set into place.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rPdst9iZgbM
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Mr_Northside on February 27, 2015, 01:53:11 PM
I crossed the [existing] bridge 2 or so weeks ago.  It's impressive how much higher the new bridge is in the middle compared to the current Hulton Bridge.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Gnutella on March 04, 2015, 08:08:43 PM
Business groups in Franklin County are urging PennDOT to widen I-81 to six lanes (http://www.publicopiniononline.com/local/ci_26824240/business-groups-time-widen-i-81-is-now). I support this, especially since the Harrisburg area is becoming a major warehouse distribution hub.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: CentralPAGal on March 05, 2015, 06:54:16 PM
That badly needs widening. It's not in Franklin County, and is only about 2 miles, but there is apparently a project in the pipeline to widen I-81 from PA 581 to PA 114.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on March 06, 2015, 01:46:02 AM
Were the old incomplete unnumbered freeways of PA state maintained?  I often wondered before the current US 222 bypass of Reading was given the US 222 number, and referred to by locals as the "Road to nowhere" as literally it did go no place at the time and of course it had no number either.

Also the US 1 Bucks County Freeway was unnumbered from the current south business end to Oxford Valley for decades until PennDOT completed it from Oxford Valley to Morrisville in 1987.

Even PA 12 did not gets its number until US 222 was realigned to the Road to Nowhere, and the freeway was simply signed Pricetown going east and west I was not sure as I never got to see the ramps leading to it WB in those days.

I know that reference numbers are used just like NY State has for its parkways and expressways, but they are part of the state road's network.  I would imagine that future state route freeways partially completed in PA until completed fully, were also given reference numbers, however did PennDOT maintain them when they were not shielded with even temporary numbers?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: NE2 on March 06, 2015, 11:56:55 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on March 06, 2015, 01:46:02 AM
Were the old incomplete unnumbered freeways of PA state maintained?
Yes. Some freeways still have no signed number.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ixnay on March 06, 2015, 10:05:25 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on February 19, 2015, 09:53:59 AM
Are there still any old signs left anywhere in PA?  I always remembered even in the early 2000's seeing old signs from the 70's and before on many PA freeways.  Some were so faded that PennDOT left them there regardless of how useless they became, then there was the US 22 freeway that still had old signs or carbon copy of old signs, and even when PA 145 was extended south of US 22 to meet I-78 in the late 80's, instead of replacing the 7th Street signs to include the route number, PennDOT just added a shield to the top of the signs that were there.

Even US 1 in Chester County along the freeway, had faded old signs that they finally replaced in 02 with newer signs featuring shields instead of text, but for many years the PA 896 sign NB was so faded it was blank and I could never understand why some engineer did not replace it sooner as it gave out no vital information for a driver to read.

Are all the old text and signs gone or does PA still have some old relics that have not yet been replaced?  I am asking because I do not get to go on my yearly visit to NJ anymore where I used to also cross the Delaware River to check out PA, so I am curious if there are any historical signing left in this disposable age.

Elsewhere in Chester County (on WB U.S. 30 west of Coatesville), this old sign was still up in Sept. 2012...

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.992347,-75.859477,3a,24.4y,260.61h,90.36t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sCJWHNqmKrp89v_x2bNI9fA!2e0

I-95 between Philadelphia International Airport and the Delaware state line in the '70s and '80s had almost nothing but all-text, all-caps (except for numerals), non-button copy signs (interstate was the only shield used), but they all have been replaced.  The replacement actually started with the reconstruction of the Flower Street interchange in Chester into the connection with the Commodore Barry Bridge, a project that started about 8 months after the opening of the CBB in 1974.  New overhead signs with shields (some with button copy, a couple without) were erected as part of that project.  Alas, it's all reflective signs now on that part of 95.

ixnay
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Mergingtraffic on March 07, 2015, 08:59:03 PM
Are these beauties still up? 

https://www.google.com/maps/@41.312267,-74.803063,3a,75y,59.13h,86.4t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1scYJh41mXNEEkRZP3p2eWvA!2e0

and according to GSV looks like they're reconstructing I-84 but looks like no concrete is being used.

https://www.google.com/maps/@41.3592,-74.699645,3a,75y,74.06h,72.71t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1saACSF30VAYcpSqR3ti9YwQ!2e0
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: NJRoadfan on March 08, 2015, 05:14:05 PM
Are there any plans to extend the US-202 freeway east of Doylestown? I was in the area today and there looked to be some road way at the eastern stub end of the bypass. That 2-lane section of US-202 is barely adequate for the traffic in the area. Tons of rim busting potholes too, typical PA.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jemacedo9 on March 08, 2015, 06:47:41 PM
Quote from: NJRoadfan on March 08, 2015, 05:14:05 PM
Are there any plans to extend the US-202 freeway east of Doylestown? I was in the area today and there looked to be some road way at the eastern stub end of the bypass. That 2-lane section of US-202 is barely adequate for the traffic in the area. Tons of rim busting potholes too, typical PA.

No, and in fact, there is a project just starting to basically get rid of the stub ending there, make US 202 a straight-thru movement, have E State St end at US 202 as a T-intersection, and add left turn lanes at the PA 313/US 202 intersection.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Gnutella on March 08, 2015, 07:01:19 PM
Quote from: doofy103 on March 07, 2015, 08:59:03 PM
Are these beauties still up? 

https://www.google.com/maps/@41.312267,-74.803063,3a,75y,59.13h,86.4t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1scYJh41mXNEEkRZP3p2eWvA!2e0

and according to GSV looks like they're reconstructing I-84 but looks like no concrete is being used.

https://www.google.com/maps/@41.3592,-74.699645,3a,75y,74.06h,72.71t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1saACSF30VAYcpSqR3ti9YwQ!2e0

Apparently the concrete base of the existing I-84 roadbed is having a chemical reaction with the bedrock under it, which might be why the new base is asphalt. It also looks like I-84 will be completely reconstructed through Pike County (http://wnep.com/2014/03/10/ripping-up-and-replacing-an-entire-interstate/) over the next several years.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ixnay on March 08, 2015, 07:23:45 PM
Quote from: Gnutella on March 08, 2015, 07:01:19 PM
Quote from: doofy103 on March 07, 2015, 08:59:03 PM
Are these beauties still up? 

https://www.google.com/maps/@41.312267,-74.803063,3a,75y,59.13h,86.4t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1scYJh41mXNEEkRZP3p2eWvA!2e0

and according to GSV looks like they're reconstructing I-84 but looks like no concrete is being used.

https://www.google.com/maps/@41.3592,-74.699645,3a,75y,74.06h,72.71t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1saACSF30VAYcpSqR3ti9YwQ!2e0

Apparently the concrete base of the existing I-84 roadbed is having a chemical reaction with the bedrock under it, which might be why the new base is asphalt. It also looks like I-84 will be completely reconstructed through Pike County (http://wnep.com/2014/03/10/ripping-up-and-replacing-an-entire-interstate/) over the next several years.

One breakdown or accident in that westbound cattle chute and...

ixnay
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Gnutella on March 08, 2015, 09:07:53 PM
Quote from: ixnay on March 08, 2015, 07:23:45 PM
Quote from: Gnutella on March 08, 2015, 07:01:19 PM
Quote from: doofy103 on March 07, 2015, 08:59:03 PM
Are these beauties still up? 

https://www.google.com/maps/@41.312267,-74.803063,3a,75y,59.13h,86.4t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1scYJh41mXNEEkRZP3p2eWvA!2e0

and according to GSV looks like they're reconstructing I-84 but looks like no concrete is being used.

https://www.google.com/maps/@41.3592,-74.699645,3a,75y,74.06h,72.71t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1saACSF30VAYcpSqR3ti9YwQ!2e0

Apparently the concrete base of the existing I-84 roadbed is having a chemical reaction with the bedrock under it, which might be why the new base is asphalt. It also looks like I-84 will be completely reconstructed through Pike County (http://wnep.com/2014/03/10/ripping-up-and-replacing-an-entire-interstate/) over the next several years.

One breakdown or accident in that westbound cattle chute and...

ixnay

Unfortunately, reconstructing half the roadbed at a time in each direction doesn't seem to be an option due to the deterioration of the concrete base. They have to work on the entire roadbed in one direction, and then the entire roadbed in the other. My guess is that they started with the westbound roadbed because it's in worse shape than the eastbound roadbed. Hopefully the new asphalt roadbed lasts longer than 40 years. As for accidents, they probably have emergency pull-off areas in the construction zone.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: DeaconG on March 08, 2015, 09:16:10 PM
Hell, I'd be thrilled to see US 202 four laned between Norristown and Montgomeryville, but that won't happen in my lifetime...if ever.  I drove it several years ago during a visit to my family in Philly and going "nope, nope, nope y'all, you have to deal with this!"

Probably couldn't get past the NIMBYs, much less get funded.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: PHLBOS on March 09, 2015, 09:00:45 AM
Quote from: jemacedo9 on March 08, 2015, 06:47:41 PM
Quote from: NJRoadfan on March 08, 2015, 05:14:05 PM
Are there any plans to extend the US-202 freeway east of Doylestown? I was in the area today and there looked to be some road way at the eastern stub end of the bypass. That 2-lane section of US-202 is barely adequate for the traffic in the area. Tons of rim busting potholes too, typical PA.

No, and in fact, there is a project just starting to basically get rid of the stub ending there, make US 202 a straight-thru movement, have E State St end at US 202 as a T-intersection, and add left turn lanes at the PA 313/US 202 intersection.
The main reason why the originally-planned 4-lane US 202 Bypass, south of Doylestown, was scaled down to a mostly-2-lane Parkway was due to then-Gov. Rendell placating to those that lived north of Doylestown.  Their fears were had the Bypass' southern extension would've fueled pressure to build the northern extension.
Quote from: DeaconG on March 08, 2015, 09:16:10 PM
Hell, I'd be thrilled to see US 202 four laned between Norristown and Montgomeryville, but that won't happen in my lifetime...if ever.  I drove it several years ago during a visit to my family in Philly and going "nope, nope, nope y'all, you have to deal with this!"

Probably couldn't get past the NIMBYs, much less get funded.
At one time, US 202 in PA was envisioned to be a outer-bypass of Greater Philadelphia; kind of like what I-495 in MA is with respect to Greater Boston.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Mergingtraffic on March 10, 2015, 06:21:11 PM
Quote from: jemacedo9 on March 08, 2015, 06:47:41 PM
Quote from: NJRoadfan on March 08, 2015, 05:14:05 PM
Are there any plans to extend the US-202 freeway east of Doylestown? I was in the area today and there looked to be some road way at the eastern stub end of the bypass. That 2-lane section of US-202 is barely adequate for the traffic in the area. Tons of rim busting potholes too, typical PA.

No, and in fact, there is a project just starting to basically get rid of the stub ending there, make US 202 a straight-thru movement, have E State St end at US 202 as a T-intersection, and add left turn lanes at the PA 313/US 202 intersection.

Are there any plans or news articles online?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Mergingtraffic on March 10, 2015, 06:27:14 PM
Quote from: Gnutella on March 08, 2015, 07:01:19 PM
Quote from: doofy103 on March 07, 2015, 08:59:03 PM
Are these beauties still up? 

https://www.google.com/maps/@41.312267,-74.803063,3a,75y,59.13h,86.4t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1scYJh41mXNEEkRZP3p2eWvA!2e0

and according to GSV looks like they're reconstructing I-84 but looks like no concrete is being used.


https://www.google.com/maps/@41.3592,-74.699645,3a,75y,74.06h,72.71t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1saACSF30VAYcpSqR3ti9YwQ!2e0

Apparently the concrete base of the existing I-84 roadbed is having a chemical reaction with the bedrock under it, which might be why the new base is asphalt. It also looks like I-84 will be completely reconstructed through Pike County (http://wnep.com/2014/03/10/ripping-up-and-replacing-an-entire-interstate/) over the next several years.

I thought the asphalt base was bc of cheapness. New expressway sections in CT also gave asphalt base. Guaranteed it won't last 40 years.

Seems to be typical PA interstate reconstruction. 20 years ago they had the same setup redoing parts of I-80 and I-81 for miles with pull offs for breakdowns but the new road was concrete
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: froggie on March 11, 2015, 07:35:40 AM
Quote from: doofy103Are there any plans or news articles online?

http://www.doylestownpa.org/route-202-improvement-realignment/

Not much...just a basic overview.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: PHLBOS on March 11, 2015, 09:47:15 AM
Quote from: froggie on March 11, 2015, 07:35:40 AMNot much...just a basic overview.
Based on that article, most of the work seems to be focused on the US 202/PA 313 intersection located just beyond where the US 202 Bypass terminates (at State St.).  The mentioned Park-and-Ride, IMHO, will likely be located at the truncated US 202 Bypass/State St. interchange.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on March 14, 2015, 09:02:41 PM
Quote from: DeaconG on March 08, 2015, 09:16:10 PM
Hell, I'd be thrilled to see US 202 four laned between Norristown and Montgomeryville, but that won't happen in my lifetime...if ever.  I drove it several years ago during a visit to my family in Philly and going "nope, nope, nope y'all, you have to deal with this!"

Probably couldn't get past the NIMBYs, much less get funded.
I see on GSV that it only has a 40 mph maximum speed.   That is just as stupid as being two lanes there and the sudden drop south of PA 611 as the SB to SB ramp merges after the road narrows and the NB to SB exit for PA 611 on 202 is before the road widens is even more stupid.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: odditude on March 15, 2015, 11:47:02 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on March 14, 2015, 09:02:41 PM
Quote from: DeaconG on March 08, 2015, 09:16:10 PM
Hell, I'd be thrilled to see US 202 four laned between Norristown and Montgomeryville, but that won't happen in my lifetime...if ever.  I drove it several years ago during a visit to my family in Philly and going "nope, nope, nope y'all, you have to deal with this!"

Probably couldn't get past the NIMBYs, much less get funded.
I see on GSV that it only has a 40 mph maximum speed.   That is just as stupid as being two lanes there and the sudden drop south of PA 611 as the SB to SB ramp merges after the road narrows and the NB to SB exit for PA 611 on 202 is before the road widens is even more stupid.
dude, word salad. break it out to multiple sentences.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Alps on March 15, 2015, 07:30:01 PM
Quote from: odditude on March 15, 2015, 11:47:02 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on March 14, 2015, 09:02:41 PM
Quote from: DeaconG on March 08, 2015, 09:16:10 PM
Hell, I'd be thrilled to see US 202 four laned between Norristown and Montgomeryville, but that won't happen in my lifetime...if ever.  I drove it several years ago during a visit to my family in Philly and going "nope, nope, nope y'all, you have to deal with this!"

Probably couldn't get past the NIMBYs, much less get funded.
I see on GSV that it only has a 40 mph maximum speed.   That is just as stupid as being two lanes there and the sudden drop south of PA 611 as the SB to SB ramp merges after the road narrows and the NB to SB exit for PA 611 on 202 is before the road widens is even more stupid.
dude, word salad. break it out to multiple sentences.
That's like telling the Thing to use moisturizer.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Mergingtraffic on March 21, 2015, 11:37:13 PM
Heading to Milford, PA this week, I'll let you know how the I-84 traffic is and if the US-6-206-209 button copy beauties are still there.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ixnay on March 22, 2015, 08:33:29 AM
Quote from: Alps on March 15, 2015, 07:30:01 PM
Quote from: odditude on March 15, 2015, 11:47:02 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on March 14, 2015, 09:02:41 PM
Quote from: DeaconG on March 08, 2015, 09:16:10 PM
Hell, I'd be thrilled to see US 202 four laned between Norristown and Montgomeryville, but that won't happen in my lifetime...if ever.  I drove it several years ago during a visit to my family in Philly and going "nope, nope, nope y'all, you have to deal with this!"

Probably couldn't get past the NIMBYs, much less get funded.
I see on GSV that it only has a 40 mph maximum speed.   That is just as stupid as being two lanes there and the sudden drop south of PA 611 as the SB to SB ramp merges after the road narrows and the NB to SB exit for PA 611 on 202 is before the road widens is even more stupid.
dude, word salad. break it out to multiple sentences.
That's like telling the Thing to use moisturizer.

:-D :-D :-D

ixnay
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: KEVIN_224 on March 26, 2015, 11:23:21 PM
http://www.wgal.com/news/19mile-section-of-turnpike-to-be-shut-down-part-of-this-weekend/32024286

Won't the Pennsylvania Turnpike heading east out of Harrisburg be fun this weekend! Well...
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Alps on March 26, 2015, 11:32:42 PM
Quote from: KEVIN_224 on March 26, 2015, 11:23:21 PM
http://www.wgal.com/news/19mile-section-of-turnpike-to-be-shut-down-part-of-this-weekend/32024286

Won't the Pennsylvania Turnpike heading east out of Harrisburg be fun this weekend! Well...
From midnight to 6 AM, maybe. I can't see it being a problem. The detour route is silly, in the interest of not skipping any exits. PA 283 to US 222 makes far more sense than US 322 to PA 73. (Same distance, I checked.) US 15 to PA 581 also makes more sense than I-76 to I-283, if you really wanted to take 322 for some reason.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: KEVIN_224 on March 26, 2015, 11:48:34 PM
I've only been on that stretch in question once: Last June, leaving a Senators baseball game in Harrisburg and then heading east to the Bensalem exit near Philadelphia. I'll pass along your tip for the detour to a friend who already lives in that state.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Flyer78 on March 27, 2015, 02:03:33 PM
They are also closing the mainline between 28 (Cranberry) and 39 (Butler Valley) Midnight-4.

VMS on NB I-476 indicated there would also be a closure between Willow Grove (343) and Bensalem (351), but I do not see that reflected on the Turnpike homepage.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: MASTERNC on March 27, 2015, 08:33:31 PM
Quote from: Flyer78 on March 27, 2015, 02:03:33 PM
They are also closing the mainline between 28 (Cranberry) and 39 (Butler Valley) Midnight-4.

VMS on NB I-476 indicated there would also be a closure between Willow Grove (343) and Bensalem (351), but I do not see that reflected on the Turnpike homepage.

I saw Bensalem to Delaware Valley on a VMS near King of Prussia.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 02 Park Ave on March 27, 2015, 10:43:14 PM
Would taking the I-376 between Turnpike exits 10 and 57 be a suitable detour?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: rickmastfan67 on March 27, 2015, 11:55:53 PM
Quote from: 02 Park Ave on March 27, 2015, 10:43:14 PM
Would taking the I-376 between Turnpike exits 10 and 57 be a suitable detour?

No.  Especially when the Ft. Pitt Tunnel might be closed as well as between I-79 and the Greentree exit overnight.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ixnay on March 28, 2015, 08:01:24 AM
Quote from: rickmastfan67 on March 27, 2015, 11:55:53 PM
Quote from: 02 Park Ave on March 27, 2015, 10:43:14 PM
Would taking the I-376 between Turnpike exits 10 and 57 be a suitable detour?

No.  Especially when the Ft. Pitt Tunnel might be closed as well as between I-79 and the Greentree exit overnight.

For what reason?

ixnay
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ixnay on March 28, 2015, 08:03:19 AM
OK, it's Sat. 3/28, a little after 8:00a EDT.  Do you know where your PA Turnpike closures are?

IOW why is Google Maps showing the two PA Tpk stretches as being wide open?  Where are the red dots with white bars?

ixnay
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: rickmastfan67 on March 28, 2015, 09:07:28 AM
Quote from: ixnay on March 28, 2015, 08:01:24 AM
Quote from: rickmastfan67 on March 27, 2015, 11:55:53 PM
Quote from: 02 Park Ave on March 27, 2015, 10:43:14 PM
Would taking the I-376 between Turnpike exits 10 and 57 be a suitable detour?

No.  Especially when the Ft. Pitt Tunnel might be closed as well as between I-79 and the Greentree exit overnight.

For what reason?

ixnay

http://www.post-gazette.com/news/transportation/2015/03/27/Fort-Pitt-Tunnel-closing-this-weekend-pittsburgh-parkway-west/stories/201503270331
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ARMOURERERIC on March 28, 2015, 10:12:09 AM
Nothing on the PA Pike homepage about the Cranberry to BV closing either. I wonder if they were demoing the Thorn Hill Bridge?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ARMOURERERIC on March 29, 2015, 06:43:25 PM
Quote from: ARMOURERERIC on March 28, 2015, 10:12:09 AM
Nothing on the PA Pike homepage about the Cranberry to BV closing either. I wonder if they were demoing the Thorn Hill Bridge?

It was indeed the Thorn Hill Road bridge.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Mergingtraffic on April 02, 2015, 07:42:24 PM
How's the Allentown area for old signage?  I see some all text button copy around PA-309 and US-22.  Is there an upcoming signing contract for these? I'd like to take a trip out there.
https://www.google.com/maps/@40.597993,-75.564501,3a,75y,55.11h,96.13t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1s8rKkwIpfvRciN8_r4Hunpg!2e0

Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: storm2k on April 02, 2015, 08:47:08 PM
Quote from: doofy103 on April 02, 2015, 07:42:24 PM
How's the Allentown area for old signage?  I see some all text button copy around PA-309 and US-22.  Is there an upcoming signing contract for these? I'd like to take a trip out there.
https://www.google.com/maps/@40.597993,-75.564501,3a,75y,55.11h,96.13t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1s8rKkwIpfvRciN8_r4Hunpg!2e0

I was just on 22 this afternoon. Headed east from the NE Extension out to NJ. The sign you linked from GSV is still there, but a lot of other signage along that stretch has been replaced (including 22WB for 309), so I would imagine these signs' days are numbered.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Mergingtraffic on April 02, 2015, 10:48:45 PM
Quote from: storm2k on April 02, 2015, 08:47:08 PM
Quote from: doofy103 on April 02, 2015, 07:42:24 PM
How's the Allentown area for old signage?  I see some all text button copy around PA-309 and US-22.  Is there an upcoming signing contract for these? I'd like to take a trip out there.
https://www.google.com/maps/@40.597993,-75.564501,3a,75y,55.11h,96.13t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1s8rKkwIpfvRciN8_r4Hunpg!2e0

I was just on 22 this afternoon. Headed east from the NE Extension out to NJ. The sign you linked from GSV is still there, but a lot of other signage along that stretch has been replaced (including 22WB for 309), so I would imagine these signs' days are numbered.

Good to know, yeah the GSV also shows the new WB signage in Clearview and the timeline shows it there since 2008. 
I was on the PENNDOT website and didn't see any looming signing plans.  Of course I don't know if one is in the works though.  I wish there was a project look up status page.

Any other goodies around there?  I'd like to spend the day.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ARMOURERERIC on April 07, 2015, 03:37:06 PM
Since this thread is up, anyone got any good projects to report from this years round of hot Act 89 road building action?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on April 20, 2015, 09:48:37 PM
https://www.google.com/maps/@40.416407,-80.103196,3a,75y,349.09h,85.45t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1scW4TakvTGognzWGJ3f7FBg!2e0
I see PennDOT is getting to be like NM and CO with signing US and Interstate concurrencies.  No mention of either US 22 and US 30 here on NB I-79 considering that I-376 here is new.

You can see on the signs the modifications that were indeed made when I-376 took over I-279 through this interchange.  In fact the green area above I-376 WEST looks like it had individual directional headers for US 22 & 30 Westbound at one time as no interstate went west from here before the 376 extension was granted.

You would think that PennDOT would have kept signing US 22 & US 30 as that was what the road was called (at least WB) up until AASHTO decided to let I-376 continue on, so to please the area locals they would have signed all three routes together.

In addition that Eastern PA does sign US routes with interstates, such as US 6 with I-81, US 22 with I-78, US 30 with both I-76 and I-676, and closer yet US 220 with I-99 as that setup is less than 100 miles away as the crow flies.

I always thought we on the east coast kept US routes alive, but I guess some engineers in PA do not care about them at all.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: rickmastfan67 on April 20, 2015, 09:56:42 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on April 20, 2015, 09:48:37 PM
https://www.google.com/maps/@40.416407,-80.103196,3a,75y,349.09h,85.45t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1scW4TakvTGognzWGJ3f7FBg!2e0
I see PennDOT is getting to be like NM and CO with signing US and Interstate concurrencies.  No mention of either US 22 and US 30 here on NB I-79 considering that I-376 here is new.

Well, they may no longer be signed on the BGS, they are still WELL SIGNED along I-376 itself.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on April 20, 2015, 10:06:29 PM
Are you sure about that?
https://www.google.com/maps/@40.446392,-80.170373,3a,75y,96.17h,99.49t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1spkTtnmfcJTryFfn1noUmBQ!2e0
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: rickmastfan67 on April 21, 2015, 12:05:01 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on April 20, 2015, 10:06:29 PM
Are you sure about that?
https://www.google.com/maps/@40.446392,-80.170373,3a,75y,96.17h,99.49t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1spkTtnmfcJTryFfn1noUmBQ!2e0

Don't doubt a Pittsburgh'er on his own highways. ;)
http://goo.gl/maps/LYvaZ
http://goo.gl/maps/x6H4V
http://goo.gl/maps/ioZKp
http://goo.gl/maps/1M69L
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Mr_Northside on April 21, 2015, 08:25:32 PM
It also gets mentioned on most approaches of other highways, including:
I-79: http://goo.gl/maps/BVStP (http://goo.gl/maps/BVStP)
US-19/Banksville Rd: http://goo.gl/maps/4h1mh (http://goo.gl/maps/4h1mh)
Beechview Ave (Squirrel Hill): http://goo.gl/maps/G1YAj (http://goo.gl/maps/G1YAj)

I'm pretty sure both directions of PA-51/Saw Mill Run Blvd have them.  Not ALL the exits have them for every direction, but many, if not most, do.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jemacedo9 on May 18, 2015, 01:11:51 PM
From PennDOT District 8-0:  PennDOT is INCREASING (yes, INCREASING) Speed Limits on US 22 (non-freeway) east of Harrisburg through to where it joins I-78...most increasing from 45 to 50 or 50 to 55...
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: J N Winkler on May 23, 2015, 04:27:36 PM
Just a tidbit for the Pennsylvania control-city file:  PennDOT ECMS 102872 (bids opened in the last month) calls for the I-80/I-81 interchange to be fitted with signs pointing to Wilkes-Barre and New England on the one hand and Hazleton and New York City on the other.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Zeffy on May 23, 2015, 04:34:01 PM
Quote from: J N Winkler on May 23, 2015, 04:27:36 PM
Just a tidbit for the Pennsylvania control-city file:  PennDOT ECMS 102872 (bids opened in the last month) calls for the I-80/I-81 interchange to be fitted with signs pointing to Wilkes-Barre and New England on the one hand and Hazleton and New York City on the other.

Wilkes Barre and Hazleton are acceptable (for obvious reasons). New England though? Not totally a fan of that one...
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: J N Winkler on May 23, 2015, 04:56:54 PM
Current installation (newish signs) featuring just Wilkes-Barre and Hazleton (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.045418,-76.012852,3a,75y,69.21h,89.92t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sLkleBc8sA24umx7xObt8cg!2e0!6m1!1e1)

They didn't do the smart thing, which is to ask us for our opinion.  Perhaps a bit of Ohio envy going on?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: briantroutman on May 23, 2015, 05:04:17 PM
I had to look this one up–the PennDOT spec drawing for the assembly is below.

"New England"  makes a bit more sense considered in the context of the I-81 North - To I-84 shields and legend above, and previously, there had been supplemental signs "TRUCKS - USE I-81 and I-84 to New England" , but I still don't like its use as a control point.

I wonder if this signals a shift in thinking at PennDOT, and future I-80 signage will likewise include NYC as a control city.

(https://farm9.staticflickr.com/8879/18016936311_f2f38c535b_o.png)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: froggie on May 24, 2015, 09:57:04 AM
If they're going to include "TO I-84" signage, I see no problem with including New England as well.  You can't pinpoint just a single New England city from that far out.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: JakeFromNewEngland on May 24, 2015, 11:23:20 AM
Quote from: noelbotevera on May 23, 2015, 05:20:39 PM
Quote from: briantroutman on May 23, 2015, 05:04:17 PM
I had to look this one up–the PennDOT spec drawing for the assembly is below.

"New England"  makes a bit more sense considered in the context of the I-81 North - To I-84 shields and legend above, and previously, there had been supplemental signs "TRUCKS - USE I-81 and I-84 to New England" , but I still don't like its use as a control point.

I wonder if this signals a shift in thinking at PennDOT, and future I-80 signage will likewise include NYC as a control city.

(https://farm9.staticflickr.com/8879/18016936311_f2f38c535b_o.png)
Replace "New England" with Newburgh, Hartford, or Bridgeport (Bridgeport is I-84 to US 7 to I-95).

Bridgeport probably wouldn't be a good control city at all since I-84 goes nowhere near it. If you're going to use any CT city, the one that makes sense is Hartford. I agree with Froggie, simply having New England or even New York State is better than a single city.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ARMOURERERIC on May 24, 2015, 11:28:03 AM
Any chance the FHA outright asked for this signage to divert Hartford/Boston bound traffic away from NYC?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Zeffy on May 24, 2015, 11:28:26 AM
Quote from: froggie on May 24, 2015, 09:57:04 AM
If they're going to include "TO I-84" signage, I see no problem with including New England as well.  You can't pinpoint just a single New England city from that far out.

Well, now that I see they point towards I-84, then New England is fine. I thought they were just going to have I-81 NORTH, which is why I disliked the use of New England as a destination.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: KEVIN_224 on May 24, 2015, 04:50:32 PM
Instead of I-84 saying Bridgeport, why not have it say either Newburgh, NY/Hartford, CT or Newburgh, NY/Danbury, CT?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: MASTERNC on May 24, 2015, 09:17:26 PM
Another interesting item from PennDOT's ECMS.  As part of the reconstruction of I-70 in Washington, there will be a two lane ramp from WB I-70 to NB I-79 (the new third lane will exit, with the middle lane becoming an optional lane).  However, the advance BGS will not be using APL but rather the old diagram.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jeffandnicole on May 24, 2015, 10:22:01 PM
Quote from: KEVIN_224 on May 24, 2015, 04:50:32 PM
Instead of I-84 saying Bridgeport, why not have it say either Newburgh, NY/Hartford, CT or Newburgh, NY/Danbury, CT?

You can only have two destinations, and since Wilkes Barre is one, you can only choose one other.  It's a toss up at that point, and there's probably no one specific destination that the majority of the traffic heads towards.  Thus, "New England".
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: empirestate on May 24, 2015, 10:38:11 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on May 24, 2015, 10:22:01 PM
Quote from: KEVIN_224 on May 24, 2015, 04:50:32 PM
Instead of I-84 saying Bridgeport, why not have it say either Newburgh, NY/Hartford, CT or Newburgh, NY/Danbury, CT?

You can only have two destinations, and since Wilkes Barre is one, you can only choose one other.  It's a toss up at that point, and there's probably no one specific destination that the majority of the traffic heads towards.  Thus, "New England".

How about "Boston"? It's the primary city of New England, and conveys pretty well that traffic for that whole region should go this way.

Signage in the NYC area recently dropped instances of "New England" in favor of specific cities. Assuming that was a good idea, is there a reason it wouldn't be likewise in PA?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: briantroutman on May 25, 2015, 05:05:34 AM
This sign structure is already over the MUTCD limit, isn't it? I believe the guidelines are "no more than two destinations per sign–no more than three per assembly" . Not that PennDOT doesn't violate this rule as a matter of course...

I actually like "Boston"  over "New England" –taking I-84 and then I-90 to their logical ends. Unlike Danbury, Newburgh, etc., Boston is large enough and significant enough that I think regional motorists would associate a broad array of New England destinations with it. In a way, it's not entirely unlike signing "Los Angeles"  as the westbound control on I-40 in Arizona.

But I don't see the need for "Hazleton"  on this assembly. For one, you're already in the greater Hazleton area at this point, but more significantly, most Hazleton destinations are better accessed from I-81 South, not I-80 East. If PennDOT insisted on keeping a in-state control city for I-80 East here, it would be Stroudsburg. Otherwise, it should just be "New York City" .
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Gnutella on May 25, 2015, 11:06:06 AM
I honestly don't mind PennDOT using "New England" as the control city for I-84, considering it's how most people in Pennsylvania and New England get between the two.

Honestly, I'd like to see more long-distance control cities in Pennsylvania. Only IDOT is more parochial when it comes to control cities. I'd also like to see more leeway in the number of control cities if there are multiple major cities served by a highway. Here's how I'd list the control cities on the Interstates in Pennsylvania...


I-70 East

"Pittsburgh" between the West Virginia state line and I-79
"Baltimore | Washington DC" between I-79 and the Pennsylvania Turnpike (west junction)
"Harrisburg | Philadelphia | Baltimore | Washington DC" along the multiplex with the Pennsylvania Turnpike
"Baltimore | Washington DC" between the Pennsylvania Turnpike (east junction) and the Maryland state line


I-70 West

"Pittsburgh | Columbus" between the Maryland state line and the Pennsylvania Turnpike (east junction)
"Pittsburgh | Columbus" along the multiplex with the Pennsylvania Turnpike
"Wheeling | Columbus" between the Pennsylvania Turnpike (west junction) and the West Virginia state line


I-76 (PA Turnpike) East

"Pittsburgh" between the Ohio state line and I-79
"Harrisburg | Philadelphia" between I-79 and I-70 (west junction)
"Harrisburg | Philadelphia | Baltimore | Washington DC" along the multiplex with I-70
"Harrisburg | Philadelphia" between I-70 (east junction) and I-83
"Philadelphia" between I-83 and I-276
"Philadelphia" between the Pennsylvania Turnpike and downtown Philadelphia
"Camden | Atlantic City" between downtown Philadelphia and the New Jersey state line
"Trenton | New York City" on I-276 East
"Trenton | New York City" on I-95 North


I-76 (PA Turnpike) West

"Philadelphia" on I-95 South
"Harrisburg | Pittsburgh" on I-276 West
"Harrisburg | Pittsburgh" between I-276 and I-283
"Pittsburgh" between I-283 and I-70 (east junction)
"Pittsburgh | Columbus" along the multiplex with I-70
"Pittsburgh" between I-70 (west junction) and I-376 (east junction)
"Youngstown | Cleveland" between I-376 (east junction) and the Ohio state line


I-78 East

"Allentown | New York City" between I-81 and U.S. 22 (east junction)
"Newark | New York City" between U.S. 22 (east junction) and the New Jersey state line


I-78 West

"Allentown | Harrisburg" between the New Jersey state line and PA 309
"Harrisburg" between PA 309 and I-81


I-79 North

"Pittsburgh" between the West Virginia state line and I-376
"Erie" between I-376 and PA 5


I-79 South

"Pittsburgh" between PA 5 and I-279
"Morgantown" between I-279 and the West Virginia state line


I-80 East

"State College | New York City" between the Ohio state line and I-99 (future west junction)
"Williamsport | New York City" along the future multiplex with I-99
"Hazleton | New York City" between I-99 (future east junction) and I-81
"New York City" between I-81 and the New Jersey state line


I-80 West

"Hazleton | Cleveland" between the New Jersey state line and I-81
"Williamsport | Cleveland" between I-81 and I-180
"State College | Cleveland" between I-180 and I-99 (future west junction)
"DuBois | Cleveland" between I-99 (future west junction) and U.S. 219
"Clarion | Cleveland" between U.S. 219 and PA 68
"Sharon | Cleveland" between PA 68 and I-376
"Youngstown | Cleveland" between I-376 and the Ohio state line


I-81 North

"Harrisburg" between the Maryland state line and I-83
"Wilkes-Barre | Scranton" between I-83 and PA 29
"Scranton" between PA 29 and I-84/I-380
"Binghamton | Syracuse" between I-84/I-380 and the New York state line


I-81 South

"Scranton | Wilkes-Barre" between the New York state line and I-84/I-380
"Wilkes-Barre" between I-84/I-380 and PA 309
"Harrisburg" between PA 309 and I-83
"Hagerstown" between I-83 and the Maryland state line


I-83 North

"York" between the Maryland state line and I-83 Business
"Harrisburg" between I-83 Business and PA 581
"Downtown Harrisburg | STATE CAPITOL" between PA 581 and 2nd Street in Harrisburg
"Hershey" between PA 230 and U.S. 322 (south junction)
Allentown | Wilkes-Barre between U.S. 322 (south junction) and I-81


I-83 South

"Harrisburg | Harrisburg Int'l Airport" between I-81 and U.S. 322 (south junction)
"Downtown Harrisburg | STATE CAPITOL" between U.S. 322 (south junction) and 2nd Street in Harrisburg
"York | Baltimore" between 2nd Street in Harrisburg and U.S. 30
"Baltimore" between U.S. 30 and the Maryland state line


I-84 East

"New York City | New England" along the multiplex with I-380
"Milford | New England" from I-380 to U.S. 6
"Newburgh | New England" from U.S. 6 to the New York state line

I-84 West

"Scranton" from the New York state line to I-81


I-86 East

"Jamestown" from I-90 to the New York state line


I-86 West

"Erie | Cleveland" from the New York state line to I-90


I-90 East

"Erie | Buffalo" from the Ohio state line to I-79
"Buffalo" from I-79 to the New York state line


I-90 West

"Erie | Cleveland" from the New York state line to PA 290
"Cleveland" from PA 290 to the Ohio state line


I-95 North

"Philadelphia" from the Delaware state line to I-476
"Philadelphia Int'l Airport | Philadelphia" from I-476 to Philadelphia International Airport
"Philadelphia" from Philadelphia International Airport to PA 291
NONE from PA 291 to I-676
"Trenton | New York City" from I-676 to the New Jersey state line


I-95 South

"Philadelphia" from the New Jersey state line to I-676
"Philadelphia Int'l Airport | Wilmington" from I-676 to Philadelphia International Airport
"Wilmington | Baltimore" from Philadelphia International Airport to the Delaware state line


I-99 North

"Altoona" from the Pennsylvania Turnpike to U.S. 220 Business in Altoona
"State College" from U.S. 220 Business in Altoona to U.S. 322 Business
"Penn State Univ | Williamsport" from U.S. 322 Business to U.S. 322 (east junction)
"Williamsport" from U.S. 322 (east junction) to I-80 (future west junction)


I-99 South

"State College" from I-80 to U.S. 322 (east junction)
"Altoona" from U.S. 322 (east junction) to 17th Street in Altoona
"Bedford | Cumberland MD" from 17th Street in Altoona to the Pennsylvania Turnpike
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ARMOURERERIC on May 25, 2015, 11:48:51 PM
Well, I am going to take this opportunity to ask my regular question:  Anyone got any serious "decade of investment" action to report.  FWIW, I still read that the PA 147 freeway bridge across the W Branch Susquehanna is going to bid Aug 15.  And that is a real biggie.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: PHLBOS on May 26, 2015, 03:02:39 PM
Quote from: empirestate on May 24, 2015, 10:38:11 PMSignage in the NYC area recently dropped instances of "New England" in favor of specific cities. Assuming that was a good idea, is there a reason it wouldn't be likewise in PA?
Good point.  I thought the phase-out of New England as a listed I-95 northbound destination in northern NJ & NYC was in response to a FHWA (?) directive now prohibiting such general locales/regions.

If true, then either Newburgh, NY, Danbury, CT or Hartford, CT should be used instead of New England.

Quote from: Gnutella on May 25, 2015, 11:06:06 AMI-76 (PA Turnpike) East

"Harrisburg | Philadelphia" between I-70 (east junction) and I-83
Don't you mean I-81?  Signage along I-76 eastbound for the Carlisle (Exit 226/US 11 to I-81) interchange lists Harrisburg as a northbound US 11/I-81 destination.

Quote from: Gnutella on May 25, 2015, 11:06:06 AM
I-95 North

"Philadelphia" from the Delaware state line to I-476
"Philadelphia Int'l Airport | Philadelphia" from I-476 to Philadelphia International Airport
"Philadelphia" from Philadelphia International Airport to PA 291
Do keep in mind that the first exit (Exit 10) for PA 291 (eastbound) comes before the exit for the airport.

Quote from: Gnutella on May 25, 2015, 11:06:06 AM
NONE from PA 291 to I-676
Disagree, the current Central Philadelphia listing(s) work fine.

Quote from: Gnutella on May 25, 2015, 11:06:06 AM
I-95 South

"Philadelphia" from the New Jersey state line to I-676
Present convention has Central Philadelphia as a southbound I-95 destination from PA 63 (Exit 35) southward because one is actually in the City of Philadelphia limits at that point.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: empirestate on May 26, 2015, 06:51:24 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on May 26, 2015, 03:02:39 PM
Quote from: empirestate on May 24, 2015, 10:38:11 PMSignage in the NYC area recently dropped instances of "New England" in favor of specific cities. Assuming that was a good idea, is there a reason it wouldn't be likewise in PA?
Good point.  I thought the phase-out of New England as a listed I-95 northbound destination in northern NJ & NYC was in response to a FHWA (?) directive now prohibiting such general locales/regions.

If true, then either Newburgh, NY, Danbury, CT or Hartford, CT should be used instead of New England.

How come not Boston?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: noelbotevera on May 26, 2015, 07:25:03 PM
Quote from: Gnutella on May 25, 2015, 11:06:06 AM
I honestly don't mind PennDOT using "New England" as the control city for I-84, considering it's how most people in Pennsylvania and New England get between the two.

Honestly, I'd like to see more long-distance control cities in Pennsylvania. Only IDOT is more parochial when it comes to control cities. I'd also like to see more leeway in the number of control cities if there are multiple major cities served by a highway. Here's how I'd list the control cities on the Interstates in Pennsylvania...


I-70 East

"Pittsburgh" between the West Virginia state line and I-79
"Baltimore | Washington DC" between I-79 and the Pennsylvania Turnpike (west junction)
"Harrisburg | Philadelphia | Baltimore | Washington DC" along the multiplex with the Pennsylvania Turnpike
"Baltimore | Washington DC" between the Pennsylvania Turnpike (east junction) and the Maryland state line


I-70 West

"Pittsburgh | Columbus" between the Maryland state line and the Pennsylvania Turnpike (east junction)
"Pittsburgh | Columbus" along the multiplex with the Pennsylvania Turnpike
"Wheeling | Columbus" between the Pennsylvania Turnpike (west junction) and the West Virginia state line


I-76 (PA Turnpike) East

"Pittsburgh" between the Ohio state line and I-79
"Harrisburg | Philadelphia" between I-79 and I-70 (west junction)
"Harrisburg | Philadelphia | Baltimore | Washington DC" along the multiplex with I-70
"Harrisburg | Philadelphia" between I-70 (east junction) and I-83
"Philadelphia" between I-83 and I-276
"Philadelphia" between the Pennsylvania Turnpike and downtown Philadelphia
"Camden | Atlantic City" between downtown Philadelphia and the New Jersey state line
"Trenton | New York City" on I-276 East
"Trenton | New York City" on I-95 North


I-76 (PA Turnpike) West

"Philadelphia" on I-95 South
"Harrisburg | Pittsburgh" on I-276 West
"Harrisburg | Pittsburgh" between I-276 and I-283
"Pittsburgh" between I-283 and I-70 (east junction)
"Pittsburgh | Columbus" along the multiplex with I-70
"Pittsburgh" between I-70 (west junction) and I-376 (east junction)
"Youngstown | Cleveland" between I-376 (east junction) and the Ohio state line


I-78 East

"Allentown | New York City" between I-81 and U.S. 22 (east junction)
"Newark | New York City" between U.S. 22 (east junction) and the New Jersey state line


I-78 West

"Allentown | Harrisburg" between the New Jersey state line and PA 309
"Harrisburg" between PA 309 and I-81


I-79 North

"Pittsburgh" between the West Virginia state line and I-376
"Erie" between I-376 and PA 5


I-79 South

"Pittsburgh" between PA 5 and I-279
"Morgantown" between I-279 and the West Virginia state line


I-80 East

"State College | New York City" between the Ohio state line and I-99 (future west junction)
"Williamsport | New York City" along the future multiplex with I-99
"Hazleton | New York City" between I-99 (future east junction) and I-81
"New York City" between I-81 and the New Jersey state line


I-80 West

"Hazleton | Cleveland" between the New Jersey state line and I-81
"Williamsport | Cleveland" between I-81 and I-180
"State College | Cleveland" between I-180 and I-99 (future west junction)
"DuBois | Cleveland" between I-99 (future west junction) and U.S. 219
"Clarion | Cleveland" between U.S. 219 and PA 68
"Sharon | Cleveland" between PA 68 and I-376
"Youngstown | Cleveland" between I-376 and the Ohio state line


I-81 North

"Harrisburg" between the Maryland state line and I-83
"Wilkes-Barre | Scranton" between I-83 and PA 29
"Scranton" between PA 29 and I-84/I-380
"Binghamton | Syracuse" between I-84/I-380 and the New York state line


I-81 South

"Scranton | Wilkes-Barre" between the New York state line and I-84/I-380
"Wilkes-Barre" between I-84/I-380 and PA 309
"Harrisburg" between PA 309 and I-83
"Hagerstown" between I-83 and the Maryland state line


I-83 North

"York" between the Maryland state line and I-83 Business
"Harrisburg" between I-83 Business and PA 581
"Downtown Harrisburg | STATE CAPITOL" between PA 581 and 2nd Street in Harrisburg
"Hershey" between PA 230 and U.S. 322 (south junction)
Allentown | Wilkes-Barre between U.S. 322 (south junction) and I-81


I-83 South

"Harrisburg | Harrisburg Int'l Airport" between I-81 and U.S. 322 (south junction)
"Downtown Harrisburg | STATE CAPITOL" between U.S. 322 (south junction) and 2nd Street in Harrisburg
"York | Baltimore" between 2nd Street in Harrisburg and U.S. 30
"Baltimore" between U.S. 30 and the Maryland state line


I-84 East

"New York City | New England" along the multiplex with I-380
"Milford | New England" from I-380 to U.S. 6
"Newburgh | New England" from U.S. 6 to the New York state line

I-84 West

"Scranton" from the New York state line to I-81


I-86 East

"Jamestown" from I-90 to the New York state line


I-86 West

"Erie | Cleveland" from the New York state line to I-90


I-90 East

"Erie | Buffalo" from the Ohio state line to I-79
"Buffalo" from I-79 to the New York state line


I-90 West

"Erie | Cleveland" from the New York state line to PA 290
"Cleveland" from PA 290 to the Ohio state line


I-95 North

"Philadelphia" from the Delaware state line to I-476
"Philadelphia Int'l Airport | Philadelphia" from I-476 to Philadelphia International Airport
"Philadelphia" from Philadelphia International Airport to PA 291
NONE from PA 291 to I-676
"Trenton | New York City" from I-676 to the New Jersey state line


I-95 South

"Philadelphia" from the New Jersey state line to I-676
"Philadelphia Int'l Airport | Wilmington" from I-676 to Philadelphia International Airport
"Wilmington | Baltimore" from Philadelphia International Airport to the Delaware state line


I-99 North

"Altoona" from the Pennsylvania Turnpike to U.S. 220 Business in Altoona
"State College" from U.S. 220 Business in Altoona to U.S. 322 Business
"Penn State Univ | Williamsport" from U.S. 322 Business to U.S. 322 (east junction)
"Williamsport" from U.S. 322 (east junction) to I-80 (future west junction)


I-99 South

"State College" from I-80 to U.S. 322 (east junction)
"Altoona" from U.S. 322 (east junction) to 17th Street in Altoona
"Bedford | Cumberland MD" from 17th Street in Altoona to the Pennsylvania Turnpike
My attempt #2 (I failed at NJ)


I-70 EB (West of Exit 75/New Stanton int.)
Ohio State Line to Milepost 17
Pittsburgh - Breezewood

Milepost 17 to Interchange 75 (PA Tpk.)
Breezewood - Baltimore

I-70 EB - East of Breezewood
Baltimore - Washington D.C.

I-70 WB - East of Breezewood
Breezewood - Columbus

I-70 WB - West of New Stanton
New Stanton Int. to Milepost 21
Pittsburgh - Columbus

Milepost 17 to Ohio State Line
Wheeling - Columbus


I-76 EB
Ohio State Line to Milepost 31
Pittsburgh - Butler

Milepost 31.1 to Milepost 57.9
Pittsburgh - New Stanton

Milepost 58 to Milepost 76
Indianapolis - New Stanton

Milepost 76.1 to Milepost 111
Stoystown

Milepost 111.1 to Milepost 161.7
Breezewood - Baltimore

Milepost 161.8 to Milepost 227
Syracuse - Harrisburg

Milepost 227.1 to Milepost 250
Harrisburg - Hershey

Milepost 250.1 to Milepost 326.4
New York City - Philadelphia OR Valley Forge

Milepost 326.5 to New Jersey State Line
Camden - New York City

I-76 WB
NJ State Line to Milepost 326.2
Philadelphia - Harrisburg

Milepost 326.1 to Milepost 225
Harrisburg - Syracuse

Milepost 225.1 to Milepost 160.9
Breezewood - Washington D.C.

Milepost 160.8 to Milepost 109.8
Stoystown - Columbus

Milepost 109.7 to Milepost 74.5
Columbus - Pittsburgh

Milepost 74.4 to Milepost 56.7
Pittsburgh - Cleveland

Milepost 56.6 to Ohio State Line
Cleveland


I-78 EB:
Western Terminus to Milepost 50.1
Allentown - New York City

Milepost 50.2 to Milepost 66.7
Bethlehem - New York City

Milepost 66.8 to NJ State Line
Newark - New York City

I-78 WB
NJ State Line to Milepost 49.1
Allentown - Harrisburg

Milepost 49 to Western Terminus
Harrisburg - Syracuse

I-79 NB
W. VA State Line to Milepost 35.6
Columbus - Erie

Milepost 41 to Milepost 117
Cleveland - Erie

Milepost 117.1 to Northern Terminus
Buffalo - Cleveland

I-79 SB
Northern Terminus to Milepost 115
Cleveland - New York City

Milepost 114.1 to Milepost 40.9
Columbus - Pittsburgh

Milepost 35 to W. Va State Line
Charleston


I-80 EB
Ohio State Line to Milepost 19.8
Erie - Pittsburgh

Milepost 19.9 to Milepost 71
Harrisburg

Milepost 71.1 to Milepost 101.9
Ebensburgh - State College

Milepost 102 to Milepost 162
State College - Bedford

Milepost 162.1 to Milepost 211
Rochester

Milepost 211.1 to Milepost 261.5
Scranton - Williamsport

Milepost 261.6 to NJ State Line
New York City - Stroudsburg

I-80 WB:
NJ State Line to Milepost 209
Harrisburg - Williamsport

Milepost 208.9 to Milepost 159
Bedford - Lock Haven

Milepost 158.9 to Milepost 69
Cleveland

Milepost 68.9 to Milepost 17
Pittsburgh - Chicago

Milepost 16.9 to NJ State Line
Chicago - Cleveland


I-81 NB
MD State Line to Milepost 22.3
Chambersburg - Harrisburg

Milepost 22.4 to Milepost 77.2
Harrisburg - Allentown

Milepost 77.3 to Milepost 150
Allentown - Syracuse

Milepost 150.1 to New York State Line
Scranton - Syracuse

SB
NY State Line to Milepost 169
Scranton - Pittsburgh

Milepost 168.9 to Milepost 90
Allentown - Harrisburg

Milepost 89.9 to Milepost 51.2
Pittsburgh - Harrisburg

Milepost 51.1 to Milepost 8
Chambersburg - Carlisle

Milepost 7.9 to MD State Line
Baltimore - Hagerstown


I-83 NB
MD State Line to Milepost 24
York- Harrisburg

Milepost 24.1 to Milepost 41.3
Harrisburg - Philadelphia

Milepost 41.4 to Northern Terminus
Allentown

I-83 SB
Northern Terminus to Milepost 38.9
Philadelphia - Harrisburg

Milepost 38.8 to Milepost 16.8
York - Baltimore

Milepost 16.7 to MD State Line
Baltimore

I-84 EB
Hartford - Boston


I-84 WB
Syracuse - New York City


I-86 EB
New York City - Albany

I-86 WB
Buffalo - Cleveland

I-90 EB
Ohio State Line to Milepost 23
Albany - Pittsburgh

Milepost 23.1 to NY State Line
Buffalo - Rochester

I-90 WB
NY State Line to Milepost 22
Cleveland - Toledo

Milepost 21.9 to OH State Line
Cleveland - Chicago

I-95 NB
Delaware State Line to Milepost 10
Chester - Allentown

Milepost 10.1 to Milepost 39.8
Trenton - New York City

Milepost 39.9 to NJ State Line
New York City

I-95 SB
NJ State Line to Milepost 34.5
Philadelphia - Edgemoor

Milepost 34.4 to Milepost 19.2
Penns Landing - Central City

Milepost 22.1 to Milepost 12.8
Central City

Milepost 12.7 to Milepost 9.9
Philadelphia International Airport

Milepost 9.8 to Delaware State Line
Chester - Wilmington (OR Allentown)


I-99 NB
Southern Terminus to Milepost 29
Ebensburgh

Milepost 29.1 to Milepost 74
State College - New York City

Milepost 74.1 to I-80 (not using "Northern Terminus")
N.Y. City - Cleveland

I-99 SB
I-80 to Milepost 72
State College

Milepost 71.9 to Milepost 27.9
Ebensburgh

Milepost 27.8 to Southern Terminus
Bedford



Side note: Feel free to move these posts, mods!  :bigass:
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: CentralPAGal on May 26, 2015, 09:28:38 PM
Quote from: ARMOURERERIC on May 25, 2015, 11:48:51 PM
Well, I am going to take this opportunity to ask my regular question:  Anyone got any serious "decade of investment" action to report.  FWIW, I still read that the PA 147 freeway bridge across the W Branch Susquehanna is going to bid Aug 15.  And that is a real biggie.

I seem to recall hearing that the 322 Potters Mill project has started

Edit:http://www.centredaily.com/2015/03/12/4647755/work-begins-on-us-322-improvements.html (http://www.centredaily.com/2015/03/12/4647755/work-begins-on-us-322-improvements.html)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: SteveG1988 on May 27, 2015, 08:14:01 AM
On I-81 near I-78 you get Trucker Notice signs to use I-81 to connect to I-84 to get to New England instead of using I-78. I normally use I-78 to I-287 and connect to I-84 via I-684
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman on May 27, 2015, 09:08:25 AM
Quote from: briantroutman on May 23, 2015, 05:04:17 PM
I had to look this one up—the PennDOT spec drawing for the assembly is below.

“New England” makes a bit more sense considered in the context of the I-81 North - To I-84 shields and legend above, and previously, there had been supplemental signs “TRUCKS - USE I-81 and I-84 to New England”, but I still don’t like its use as a control point.

I wonder if this signals a shift in thinking at PennDOT, and future I-80 signage will likewise include NYC as a control city.

(https://farm9.staticflickr.com/8879/18016936311_f2f38c535b_o.png)
Why Wilkes-Barre and not Scranton (which is the junction of I-81 and I-84)?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: PHLBOS on May 27, 2015, 10:27:31 AM
Quote from: empirestate on May 26, 2015, 06:51:24 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on May 26, 2015, 03:02:39 PM
Quote from: empirestate on May 24, 2015, 10:38:11 PMSignage in the NYC area recently dropped instances of "New England" in favor of specific cities. Assuming that was a good idea, is there a reason it wouldn't be likewise in PA?
Good point.  I thought the phase-out of New England as a listed I-95 northbound destination in northern NJ & NYC was in response to a FHWA (?) directive now prohibiting such general locales/regions.

If true, then either Newburgh, NY, Danbury, CT or Hartford, CT should be used instead of New England.

How come not Boston?
Unlike the above-listed cities; I-84 (while carrying Boston-bound traffic) ends nowhere near Boston.  Heck, it's only just over 7 miles long in (south/central) Massachusetts.

Boston doesn't even start appearing as a listed eastbound destination along I-84 until one is actually in Hartford.  While such doesn't change the fact that I-84 itself doesn't go near Boston; having it listed as a destination in that area and further east makes more sense due to the closer proximity and the fact that MA borders CT (PA does not).
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: empirestate on May 27, 2015, 11:27:42 AM
Quote from: PHLBOS on May 27, 2015, 10:27:31 AM
Quote from: empirestate on May 26, 2015, 06:51:24 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on May 26, 2015, 03:02:39 PM
Quote from: empirestate on May 24, 2015, 10:38:11 PMSignage in the NYC area recently dropped instances of "New England" in favor of specific cities. Assuming that was a good idea, is there a reason it wouldn't be likewise in PA?
Good point.  I thought the phase-out of New England as a listed I-95 northbound destination in northern NJ & NYC was in response to a FHWA (?) directive now prohibiting such general locales/regions.

If true, then either Newburgh, NY, Danbury, CT or Hartford, CT should be used instead of New England.

How come not Boston?
Unlike the above-listed cities; I-84 (while carrying Boston-bound traffic) ends nowhere near Boston.  Heck, it's only just over 7 miles long in (south/central) Massachusetts.

True, but are control cities really supposed to be chosen based on whether they're actually located on the numbered routes? If so, we'd have to change "New York City" on these signs, and a lot of others around the country as well!

QuoteBoston doesn't even start appearing as a listed eastbound destination along I-84 until one is actually in Hartford.  While such doesn't change the fact that I-84 itself doesn't go near Boston; having it listed as a destination in that area and further east makes more sense due to the closer proximity and the fact that MA borders CT (PA does not).

I would agree that skipping over Hartford is a little unpalatable; it is another capital city, if nothing else, and it would help to show that I-84 goes through Connecticut on its way to the rest of New England. I would be fine with skipping Newburgh and Danbury as primary control cities, leaving them more as intermediate destinations.

But I think ultimately, if the wording we're trying to replace is "New England", then "Boston" comes closer, overall, to doing so. And we only get one choice on this particular sign; after Scranton, of course, we can start getting signs for "Newburgh/Boston", "Danbury/Boston" and "Hartford/Boston".
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: PHLBOS on May 27, 2015, 12:48:55 PM
Quote from: empirestate on May 27, 2015, 11:27:42 AMTrue, but are control cities really supposed to be chosen based on whether they're actually located on the numbered routes? If so, we'd have to change "New York City" on these signs, and a lot of others around the country as well!
The main difference with the NYC example(s) vs. signing I-84 for Boston west of Hartford is that (and you mentioned it) is that there is no capital city nor large metropolitan city between I-80/81 and NYC (via I-80).  Similar can be said regarding I-95 northbound being signed for NYC in MD and even as far south as Alexandria, VA.  Since one can bypass Philly (the next large metropolitan city between Baltimore & NYC) and Trenton (the nearest capital city between Baltimore & NYC) via I-295 in DE to the NJTP and head towards the Big Apple from there.

Quote from: empirestate on May 27, 2015, 11:27:42 AM
But I think ultimately, if the wording we're trying to replace is "New England", then "Boston" comes closer, overall, to doing so. And we only get one choice on this particular sign; after Scranton, of course, we can start getting signs for "Newburgh/Boston", "Danbury/Boston" and "Hartford/Boston".
One needs to realize (and this is coming from a native New Englander here) that New England is a 6-state region (for those that don't know: CT, MA, ME, NH, RI & VT).  Not every New England-bound traveler along I-84 eastbound is heading towards Boston or even eastern Massachusetts for that matter.  Using a CT city (the I-84 passes through or near like Danbury or Hartford) makes more sense because it's the first New England state one encounters via I-84.

Quote from: roadman on May 27, 2015, 09:08:25 AMWhy Wilkes-Barre and not Scranton (which is the junction of I-81 and I-84)?
Probably because one goes through Wilkes-Barre prior to Scranton (via I-81 northbound).
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: empirestate on May 27, 2015, 03:05:43 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on May 27, 2015, 12:48:55 PM
Quote from: empirestate on May 27, 2015, 11:27:42 AMTrue, but are control cities really supposed to be chosen based on whether they're actually located on the numbered routes? If so, we'd have to change "New York City" on these signs, and a lot of others around the country as well!
The main difference with the NYC example(s) vs. signing I-84 for Boston west of Hartford is that (and you mentioned it) is that there is no capital city nor large metropolitan city between I-80/81 and NYC (via I-80).  Similar can be said regarding I-95 northbound being signed for NYC in MD and even as far south as Alexandria, VA.  Since one can bypass Philly (the next large metropolitan city between Baltimore & NYC) and Trenton (the nearest capital city between Baltimore & NYC) via I-295 in DE to the NJTP and head towards the Big Apple from there.

OK. That argument makes a lot more sense to me than "the I-84 designation stops short of Boston, so Boston can't be a control city."

So, thinking along those lines, I'd be happy with Hartford, but I'd pass over Newburgh or Danbury.

Quote
Quote from: empirestate on May 27, 2015, 11:27:42 AM
But I think ultimately, if the wording we're trying to replace is "New England", then "Boston" comes closer, overall, to doing so. And we only get one choice on this particular sign; after Scranton, of course, we can start getting signs for "Newburgh/Boston", "Danbury/Boston" and "Hartford/Boston".
One needs to realize (and this is coming from a native New Englander here) that New England is a 6-state region (for those that don't know: CT, MA, ME, NH, RI & VT).  Not every New England-bound traveler along I-84 eastbound is heading towards Boston or even eastern Massachusetts for that matter.  Using a CT city (the I-84 passes through or near like Danbury or Hartford) makes more sense because it's the first New England state one encounters via I-84.

One certainly does realize this (and I personally include parts of one more state in the definition, but that's another story). But just as not every New England-bound traveler is headed for Boston, at the same time not every New England-bound traveler is not headed to Boston. So unless we have exact statistics for what people's destinations are, it's hard to choose control cities based on where people may or may not be headed.

Again, though, I'm perfectly happy with Hartford, being a capital city in the first part of New England you'd reach, as well as an important junction point where you can head north on I-91 to western and northern New England, keep going on I-84 towards Boston, or even head south for New Haven and the Sound shore.

But I think the salient point of my argument, which I don't think has been successfully refuted yet, is that if you had to replace the phrase "New England" with the name of one city to denote the region as a whole, that city would certainly be Boston. In other words, if we accept that "New England" is perfectly acceptable, except for the sole fact that it's a region and not a city (which is my supposition), then the closest possible replacement is certainly "Boston". If, on the other hand, we reject "New England" because it's too general or under-informative, then we get into a situation where "Hartford" may well be the best choice.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jeffandnicole on May 27, 2015, 03:40:23 PM
Overall, better.

Quote from: noelbotevera on May 26, 2015, 07:25:03 PM
I-76 EB...
Milepost 250.1 to Milepost 326.4
New York City - Philadelphia OR Valley Forge

Milepost 326.5 to New Jersey State Line
Camden - New York City

I'm not sure where you think New York City is located.  If one wanted to go to New York City, they would remain on the PA Turnpike, where it becomes I-276.  Once they exit the PA Turnpike and continue on I-76 towards Philly, an appropriate Control City would remain Philadelphia.  At I-676, it could become PHL Airport, Atlantic City, etc.  When you are on the Walt Whitman Bridge, the control city is Atlantic City.

Quote
I-76 WB
NJ State Line to Milepost 326.2
Philadelphia - Harrisburg

Milepost 326.1 to Milepost 225
Harrisburg - Syracuse

Milepost 225.1 to Milepost 160.9
Breezewood - Washington D.C.

You're already west of Syracuse and Washington DC by these points, and I-76 West isn't taking you anywhere near those destinations.  If one wanted to reach Syracuse, they would've used the Northeast Extension.  If one was travelling east, I-70 is fine for Washington DC, but they would be awfully out of their way if they used that same exit going west.

Quote
Milepost 160.8 to Milepost 109.8
Stoystown - Columbus

Milepost 109.7 to Milepost 74.5
Columbus - Pittsburgh

Milepost 74.4 to Milepost 56.7
Pittsburgh - Cleveland

You shouldn't drop a control city if you haven't reached the city yet.  The purpose of a control city is to guide you to that city.

Quote
I-95 NB
Delaware State Line to Milepost 10
Chester - Allentown

Milepost 10.1 to Milepost 39.8
Trenton - New York City

Milepost 39.9 to NJ State Line
New York City

You ignored PA's largest city, and arguably the entire reason why I-95 still exists in PA.

Quote
I-95 SB
NJ State Line to Milepost 34.5
Philadelphia - Edgemoor

Milepost 34.4 to Milepost 19.2
Penns Landing - Central City

Milepost 22.1 to Milepost 12.8
Central City

Milepost 12.7 to Milepost 9.9
Philadelphia International Airport

Milepost 9.8 to Delaware State Line
Chester - Wilmington (OR Allentown)

Penns Landing & Center City (Not Central City) are neighborhoods and are not appropriate for use as control city.  Simply using Philadelphia is fine.

Allentown is well north of Philadelphia, not south of it.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: PHLBOS on May 27, 2015, 04:49:20 PM
Quote from: empirestate on May 27, 2015, 03:05:43 PMBut I think the salient point of my argument, which I don't think has been successfully refuted yet, is that if you had to replace the phrase "New England" with the name of one city to denote the region as a whole, that city would certainly be Boston.
The various I-95 northbound signs in North Jersey and NYC that once used New England for a listing now use New Haven, CT.  One old-old I-287 BGS (replaced during the 1990s) at the I-87/287 split (below the Tappan Zee Bridge) that once used New England as a listing now simply use Rye (located at the CT border) as its most-distant listing. 

Quote from: empirestate on May 27, 2015, 03:05:43 PMIn other words, if we accept that "New England" is perfectly acceptable, except for the sole fact that it's a region and not a city (which is my supposition), then the closest possible replacement is certainly "Boston".
If there was absolutely nothing (in Gene Wilder/Willy Wonka voice), in terms of cities or populous areas, between the CT/NY state line and Boston; then (and only then) would that assumption be correct. 

One drive along I-84 through Danbury, Waterbury & Hartford during rush hours is proof enough that nobody would ever mistake I-84 through CT for I-80 through PA in terms of surroundings & traffic.

Quote from: empirestate on May 27, 2015, 03:05:43 PMIf, on the other hand, we reject "New England" because it's too general or under-informative, then we get into a situation where "Hartford" may well be the best choice.
See above-examples of destination listing changes that took place on I-95 (& I-287) signs.  The Feds have since frowned on using such generalities like New England or even state names.  Either the town where the highway ends (Rye for I-287) or the next city along the way (New Haven, CT for I-95) is used. 

If such were done for I-84 (though most I-84 signs actually don't list New England as a destination); Danbury could be chosen over Hartford for the simple reasons that:

1.  It's the first city one enters along I-84 from New York (state).

and

2.  FWIW, interchanges w/US 7 there; which connects to other CT cities (Norwalk), along with points along western MA and VT.  Granted, US 7's not a continuous freeway (though there probably were once plans for such) but it is the most direct route for the westernmost parts of New England from I-84.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: empirestate on May 27, 2015, 09:01:16 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on May 27, 2015, 04:49:20 PM
Quote from: empirestate on May 27, 2015, 03:05:43 PMIn other words, if we accept that "New England" is perfectly acceptable, except for the sole fact that it's a region and not a city (which is my supposition), then the closest possible replacement is certainly "Boston".
If there was absolutely nothing (in Gene Wilder/Willy Wonka voice), in terms of cities or populous areas, between the CT/NY state line and Boston; then (and only then) would that assumption be correct.

Sorry...which assumption do you mean? That "New England" is unacceptable because it's the name of a region and not of a city?

We're probably trying to find the answers to different questions here, and that's why we keep ending up with different answers. To simplify my position even more, I'm saying Boston is the principal city in New England. As such, it could readily stand in place of the term "New England" if you were obliged to use the name of an actual city and not of a region.

Now, having established that, we can find–and you've pointed out–many additional reasons why Boston shouldn't be the control city; in other words, why the term "New England" should be replaced by something not just comparable to the scope of that term, but more specific or particular. Considering those reasons, then absolutely, "Hartford" is also an excellent choice. However, the reason Hartford would be a good choice is not because it is the princpial city of, and thus semantically equivalent to, New England.

I don't know if that makes my argument any clearer; as for myself, I'm actually more confused by this point! :-P
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: spooky on May 28, 2015, 06:53:02 AM
I don't want to jump in someone else's debate, but in my opinion it's a flawed assumption that Boston can stand as representative of the region. Boston is a city and a destination, not a region.

If we agree with the MUTCD and disallow the use of a region or a state on the BGS, then Hartford would be far more appropriate than Boston. Danbury would also be appropriate for the reasons that PHLBOS already stated.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Zeffy on May 28, 2015, 09:46:56 AM
I think it's a bit folly to assume most travelers are going to Boston when they take I-84. Besides, you can't even reach Boston from I-84 alone - you have to jump on the Massachusetts Turnpike / I-90 to actually reach it from Sturbridge! Therefore, I would say Hartford, Connecticut, being a state capital and a fairly large-sized city should be signed.

Didn't New York used to have signs for New England on I-95 within New York City? Did they ever replace all of those with (I presume) New Haven?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: empirestate on May 28, 2015, 10:10:18 AM
Quote from: spooky on May 28, 2015, 06:53:02 AM
I don't want to jump in someone else's debate, but in my opinion it's a flawed assumption that Boston can stand as representative of the region. Boston is a city and a destination, not a region.

Granted, one city can never truly represent the whole region, but can you think of a better choice?

QuoteIf we agree with the MUTCD and disallow the use of a region or a state on the BGS, then Hartford would be far more appropriate than Boston. Danbury would also be appropriate for the reasons that PHLBOS already stated.

If the region being replaced were "Southern New England", then I'd certainly agree that "Hartford" is far more appropriate. But we're replacing the term "New England", meaning all six states, from the CT panhandle to the Northwoods of Maine. At this stage in my argument, I'm not yet considering whether the whole region is an appropriate control city destination; you're right that plenty of good reasons have been given for Hartford or Danbury as control cities, but you're ahead of the game if you're applying them yet.

Quote from: Zeffy on May 28, 2015, 09:46:56 AM
I think it's a bit folly to assume most travelers are going to Boston when they take I-84. Besides, you can't even reach Boston from I-84 alone - you have to jump on the Massachusetts Turnpike / I-90 to actually reach it from Sturbridge! Therefore, I would say Hartford, Connecticut, being a state capital and a fairly large-sized city should be signed.

I think it's also folly. However, I challenge anyone to find a control city that genuinely reflects where most travelers are actually headed; that's not how they're chosen, is it?

And again, I don't buy the argument of route number continuity. True, Boston isn't on I-84, but neither is Memphis on I-57, nor is Boise on I-86, nor is New York on I-80 (nor is it on I-90, as signed from Boston). However, I do buy the argument that Hartford is a state capital and a fairly large-sized city; that would be a reason to include it, not simply because it's on I-84.

QuoteDidn't New York used to have signs for New England on I-95 within New York City? Did they ever replace all of those with (I presume) New Haven?

Yes, that's why I brought it up in the first place. New Haven is as good a choice for I-95 as Hartford is for I-84, and in addition, Boston is also equally appropriate for both routes.

Keep in mind, I'm not arguing against Hartford. I'm arguing for Boston as one possibility. (Danbury or Newburgh, on the other hand, I'm definitely not sold on.)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: spooky on May 28, 2015, 03:50:17 PM
Quote from: empirestate on May 28, 2015, 10:10:18 AM
Quote from: spooky on May 28, 2015, 06:53:02 AM
I don't want to jump in someone else's debate, but in my opinion it's a flawed assumption that Boston can stand as representative of the region. Boston is a city and a destination, not a region.

Granted, one city can never truly represent the whole region, but can you think of a better choice?

QuoteIf we agree with the MUTCD and disallow the use of a region or a state on the BGS, then Hartford would be far more appropriate than Boston. Danbury would also be appropriate for the reasons that PHLBOS already stated.

If the region being replaced were "Southern New England", then I'd certainly agree that "Hartford" is far more appropriate. But we're replacing the term "New England", meaning all six states, from the CT panhandle to the Northwoods of Maine. At this stage in my argument, I'm not yet considering whether the whole region is an appropriate control city destination; you're right that plenty of good reasons have been given for Hartford or Danbury as control cities, but you're ahead of the game if you're applying them yet.

If you want the destination to represent the region, keep it as New England. If it needs to be a control city, it shouldn't be decided based upon some misguided need to have a singular city represent a region.

Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 02 Park Ave on May 28, 2015, 06:08:55 PM
I think that from this distance "New England" would be the general destination for a significant number of motorists.  So it would provide guidance to all of them not just to those heading for a particular city.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: empirestate on May 28, 2015, 08:26:31 PM
Quote from: spooky on May 28, 2015, 03:50:17 PM
If you want the destination to represent the region, keep it as New England. If it needs to be a control city, it shouldn't be decided based upon some misguided need to have a singular city represent a region.

I don't know whether anyone's actually expressed that need. But putting that aside, would you consider Boston based upon any other criteria? Being the principal city of New England may not be a reason to choose it as a control city, but is it a reason not to consider it?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: spooky on May 29, 2015, 07:49:40 AM
Quote from: empirestate on May 28, 2015, 08:26:31 PM
Quote from: spooky on May 28, 2015, 03:50:17 PM
If you want the destination to represent the region, keep it as New England. If it needs to be a control city, it shouldn't be decided based upon some misguided need to have a singular city represent a region.

I don't know whether anyone's actually expressed that need.

Quote from: empirestate on May 27, 2015, 03:05:43 PMIn other words, if we accept that "New England" is perfectly acceptable, except for the sole fact that it's a region and not a city (which is my supposition), then the closest possible replacement is certainly "Boston".

I think this is the basic flaw in your logic. If we accept that "New England" is perfectly acceptable, then why replace it? If we instead accept that "New England" needs to replaced - and why wouldn't you be starting with this assumption, if we're discussing what would replace it - then why also wouldn't we assume that it's replaced in the same manner that was used to replace "New England" with "New Haven CT" on I-95 leaving NYC, or to replace "NH-Maine" with "Portsmouth NH" on I-95 in MA? Destinations aren't supposed to be regional - that's why they're being replaced.

("supposed to be" based on MUTCD guidelines, not my own personal preference)

Quote from: empirestate on May 28, 2015, 08:26:31 PMBut putting that aside, would you consider Boston based upon any other criteria? Being the principal city of New England may not be a reason to choose it as a control city, but is it a reason not to consider it?

Quote from: PHLBOS on May 27, 2015, 04:49:20 PM
If there was absolutely nothing (in Gene Wilder/Willy Wonka voice), in terms of cities or populous areas, between the CT/NY state line and Boston; then (and only then) would that assumption be correct. 

yeah, what he said.

Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: empirestate on May 29, 2015, 09:21:05 AM
Quote from: spooky on May 29, 2015, 07:49:40 AM
Quote from: empirestate on May 28, 2015, 08:26:31 PM
Quote from: empirestate on May 27, 2015, 03:05:43 PMIn other words, if we accept that "New England" is perfectly acceptable, except for the sole fact that it's a region and not a city (which is my supposition), then the closest possible replacement is certainly "Boston".

I think this is the basic flaw in your logic. If we accept that "New England" is perfectly acceptable, then why replace it?

The flaw here is in your quote: I said more than that. We accept that we have to replace it because it's a region and not a city.

Now, why anybody would require us to do this, I don't know. I don't know whether that was FHWA's reason for doing it in NYC; I rather suspect not. But I'm not addressing that just yet. At this stage in the discussion, my entire point is this: Boston is the city that would stand in place of the region of New England to have the most similar connotation.

QuoteIf we instead accept that "New England" needs to replaced - and why wouldn't you be starting with this assumption, if we're discussing what would replace it...

I am starting with that assumption, because it happened in New York.

Quote...then why also wouldn't we assume that it's replaced in the same manner that was used to replace "New England" with "New Haven CT" on I-95 leaving NYC, or to replace "NH-Maine" with "Portsmouth NH" on I-95 in MA?

We would. And if that manner is simply to replace the name of a region with a semantically comparable city name, you'd choose Boston. Now the fact that New Haven was chosen for I-95 suggest that the manner was something else, which is where my endorsement of Hartford comes into play.

But what I think you have to know about my position is that being "yes" for Hartford doesn't equal being "no" for Boston as a control city. Remember that I'm looking at signage that reads, in different locations, "Wilkes-Barre/Boston", then "Newburgh/Boston", then "Hartford/Boston" or some such sequence.

Guys, I hope this clears up what I'm saying, because I frankly can't spend any more time explaining it. It's already taken way longer to discuss than its initial offhandedness should have warranted. :-)

Final wrap up for me: Hartford yes, Boston yes. Danbury, doubtful. Newburgh, no.

Quote from: spooky on May 29, 2015, 07:49:40 AM
Quote from: PHLBOS on May 27, 2015, 04:49:20 PM
If there was absolutely nothing (in Gene Wilder/Willy Wonka voice), in terms of cities or populous areas, between the CT/NY state line and Boston; then (and only then) would that assumption be correct. 

yeah, what he said.

I'm actually not sure what he said; I never got what "assumption" referred to in this context, but that's OK.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: KEVIN_224 on May 29, 2015, 09:29:25 AM
I still remember an on-ramp sign for I-84 West in Danbury simply reading "NY State" in the past. I think that says "NY State | Norwalk" now, assuming one makes the connection for US Route 7 South at Exit 3.

As for CT control cities, the last mileage sign in New York state gives the distances for Danbury and Hartford.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: PHLBOS on May 29, 2015, 11:20:19 AM
Quote from: KEVIN_224 on May 29, 2015, 09:29:25 AM
I still remember an on-ramp sign for I-84 West in Danbury simply reading "NY State" in the past. I think that says "NY State | Norwalk" now, assuming one makes the connection for US Route 7 South at Exit 3.
Nope, the destination listings for I-84 West BGS' in Danbury now read Newburgh.

Where US 7 South meets I-84 West (http://goo.gl/maps/7HyCL)

At US 7 South/I-84 West split (http://goo.gl/maps/FRPax).
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: mrsman on May 29, 2015, 12:20:56 PM
With regard to the proposed signage at I-80/I-81, currently it reads I-81 Wilkes-Barre and I-80 Hazleton.  By adding control cities for Hartford and New York City, you will be helping long distance traffic, especially guiding traffic from 80 to 81 to 84.

But currently, the control city on I-84 EB from I-81 and I-380 is Milford.  This is much too small of a city for control.  If Penn-DOT puts Hartford on the I-80/I-81 sign, doesn't that mean that Penn, NY, and CT would now have to change the control city on every BGS along EB I-84 to include Hartford?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman on May 29, 2015, 12:40:19 PM
Quote from: mrsman on May 29, 2015, 12:20:56 PM
But currently, the control city on I-84 EB from I-81 and I-380 is Milford.  This is much too small of a city for control.  If Penn-DOT puts Hartford on the I-80/I-81 sign, doesn't that mean that Penn, NY, and CT would now have to change the control city on every BGS along EB I-84 to include Hartford?

Yes, ideally when a major control city is changed, then all other existing signs along the affected section of roadway should be revised to have consistent control cities as well.  However, having different control cities on signs entering I-84 from secondary roads than those on the I-84 mainline at major decision points is not disallowed by FHWA.

The general trend towards disallowing states or regions as control destinations on signs notwithstanding, I agree with the use of New England as a control on the new I-80 at I-81 signs.  However, for continuity, PennDOT should also replace Milford with New England on the I-84 signs at the I-81/I-84/I-380 split and at the I-84/I-380 split.

Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Gnutella on May 29, 2015, 12:54:32 PM
If there has to be a specific control city from I-84 eastbound from Scranton, then I'd say make it Hartford, because it's a major metropolitan area (more than 1,000,000 population) and a state capital as well. Besides, I think most people realize that Hartford is near Boston, so they'd go in the direction of Hartford to get to Boston.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Pete from Boston on May 29, 2015, 01:37:00 PM
I think it's telling that when considering appropriate control "destinations" (since cities are not alone in this in practice) I have created in my mind a passive thought process that can be best summed up as "Stop thinking of what would be helpful and instead think of what fits the regulations."  The two should be the same, but often are not.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: spooky on May 29, 2015, 02:52:40 PM
Quote from: empirestate on May 29, 2015, 09:21:05 AM
At this stage in the discussion, my entire point is this: Boston is the city that would stand in place of the region of New England to have the most similar connotation.

I don't want to keep multi-quoting and rehashing the same discussion, and you can admonish me again for not quoting all of what you said, but since you boiled it down to a single point I will do the same: If you want the name to be connotative of the region, why would you change it in the first place?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: PHLBOS on May 29, 2015, 03:14:46 PM
Quote from: mrsman on May 29, 2015, 12:20:56 PM
With regard to the proposed signage at I-80/I-81, currently it reads I-81 Wilkes-Barre and I-80 Hazleton.  By adding control cities for Hartford and New York City, you will be helping long distance traffic, especially guiding traffic from 80 to 81 to 84.
IMHO, a better (& more MUTCD/FHWA-complaint) approach of doing such would be to have a separate gantry with supplemental BGS' for New England and New York (City) for I-81 & 80 respectively just prior to the interchange.  It is my understanding that listing regions on supplemental BGS' is still allowed... is it not?

Just a hunch, but the likely main problem/issue with existing ground-mounted supplemental BGS for New England (located beyond the right shoulder) is that it's more susceptible to:

1.  Being knocked down by an errant vehicle.
or
2.  Being obstructed by either vegetation or a truck in the right-lane (for left-lane drivers).

Having just these supplemental BGS' elevated (and directly above the road) is probably all that's really called for.  There's no need to place these more distant destinations/regions on every ramp and/or pull-through signs along the way.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman on May 29, 2015, 06:30:20 PM
Excellent suggestion PHLBOS.  And you are correct, destinations on supplemental guide signs (either ground-mounted or overhead), even for interchanges with major Interstates, do not have to conform to control city requirements.  The only issue I possibly see is with sign spacing, especially on I-81 northbound in Scranton.

Even if this were done, I still believe that Milford should be replaced with a more easterly control city on I-84 (IMO even Newburgh NY would suffice).
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: empirestate on May 29, 2015, 08:36:22 PM
Quote from: spooky on May 29, 2015, 02:52:40 PM
Quote from: empirestate on May 29, 2015, 09:21:05 AM
At this stage in the discussion, my entire point is this: Boston is the city that would stand in place of the region of New England to have the most similar connotation.

I don't want to keep multi-quoting and rehashing the same discussion, and you can admonish me again for not quoting all of what you said, but since you boiled it down to a single point I will do the same: If you want the name to be connotative of the region, why would you change it in the first place?

Don't know, that's a different question I wasn't attempting to answer.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: CentralPAGal on May 29, 2015, 10:47:36 PM
With regard to things NOT having to do with I-80/I-81 interchange signs, I can report that in the Harrisburg area, the I-83 project is starting to wrap up. I-83 now has 4 travel lanes (rather than 3) through the "York Split" interchange with PA 581. Additionally, in the coming weeks, an adjacent bridge carrying PA 581 is due to be replaced.

Edit:
Also, the US 220 project just north of I-80 is progressing. Driving through there last week,I saw that the new future southbound exits and the approaches to the bridge are being graded. Traffic is currently detoured onto the future northbound ramps.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: noelbotevera on May 29, 2015, 10:57:35 PM
Quote from: CentralPAguy on May 29, 2015, 10:47:36 PM
With regard to things NOT having to do with I-80/I-81 interchange signs, I can report that in the Harrisburg area, the I-83 project is starting to wrap up. I-83 now has 4 travel lanes (rather than 3) through the "York Split" interchange with PA 581. Additionally, in the coming weeks, an adjacent bridge carrying PA 581 is due to be replaced.
When my family drove through there in June 2014, between exit 41A and I-81, it was so horrid. Only the bridge crossing the Susquehanna River was smooth, but it was very fast-paced, with horrible pavement, tight weaving (in order to get to Harrisburg Mall from US 322, you have to do a weave through four lanes in 1/8 of a mile), four lanes each way (between exit 43 to exit 47), low overpasses (the 19th St. overpass is low), and people who do not know how to drive (no, the speed limit is 65!).
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: thenetwork on May 29, 2015, 11:28:42 PM
Maybe
Quote from: spooky on May 29, 2015, 07:49:40 AM
Quote from: empirestate on May 28, 2015, 08:26:31 PM
Quote from: spooky on May 28, 2015, 03:50:17 PM
If you want the destination to represent the region, keep it as New England. If it needs to be a control city, it shouldn't be decided based upon some misguided need to have a singular city represent a region.

I don't know whether anyone's actually expressed that need.

Quote from: empirestate on May 27, 2015, 03:05:43 PMIn other words, if we accept that "New England" is perfectly acceptable, except for the sole fact that it's a region and not a city (which is my supposition), then the closest possible replacement is certainly "Boston".

I think this is the basic flaw in your logic. If we accept that "New England" is perfectly acceptable, then why replace it? If we instead accept that "New England" needs to replaced - and why wouldn't you be starting with this assumption, if we're discussing what would replace it - then why also wouldn't we assume that it's replaced in the same manner that was used to replace "New England" with "New Haven CT" on I-95 leaving NYC, or to replace "NH-Maine" with "Portsmouth NH" on I-95 in MA? Destinations aren't supposed to be regional - that's why they're being replaced.

("supposed to be" based on MUTCD guidelines, not my own personal preference)

Quote from: empirestate on May 28, 2015, 08:26:31 PMBut putting that aside, would you consider Boston based upon any other criteria? Being the principal city of New England may not be a reason to choose it as a control city, but is it a reason not to consider it?

Quote from: PHLBOS on May 27, 2015, 04:49:20 PM
If there was absolutely nothing (in Gene Wilder/Willy Wonka voice), in terms of cities or populous areas, between the CT/NY state line and Boston; then (and only then) would that assumption be correct. 

yeah, what he said.



They could always take a page out of the Caltrans signing bible and use the control city of "Other New England Cities" :rofl:
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: RevZimmerman on June 04, 2015, 11:34:23 AM
A couple news articles about a bridge replacement on PA-581, just west of the I-83 York Split in the West Shore part of the Harrisburg metro area:

http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2015/05/penndot_route_581_york_split.html (http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2015/05/penndot_route_581_york_split.html)
http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2015/06/a_doozy_of_a_detour_penndot_pr.html (http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2015/06/a_doozy_of_a_detour_penndot_pr.html)

Bridge replacement begins this weekend.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on June 04, 2015, 01:29:20 PM
New England, I must admit, is too ambiguous as it covers a lot of territory.  If you travel I-287 in New Jersey heading to the New York Border you will see it as signs there for "New England" to use I-87 North to I-84 East when staying on I-287 can also get you there.  In fact going to Stamford, Bridgeport, New Haven, and Providence your better staying on I-287 across the Tappan Zee Bridge.

Only for Danbury, Waterbury, Hartford, and Boston is I-84 really going to help anyone.  Of course NH, and ME via MA freeways it will help, but VT you would have to use I-87 past Albany to reach that. 

I think cities are better used except far away. In I-80's case, its not far enough because to get to Stamford, lets say, taking I-81 to I-84 is not the way to go.  Using I-80 to I-95 or I-80 to I-287 to I-95 is your best bet even as far away as that.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: CentralPAGal on June 05, 2015, 01:23:34 PM
Tonight, eastbound PA 581 closes between US 15 and I-83 for a bridge replacement. The eastbound half of the bridge is to be removed, and replaced with a prebuilt structure by Monday (June 8) morning. If anyone is interested, the replacement f the bridge will be streaming live. http://www.purpose1.com/pa-581-reconstruction (http://www.purpose1.com/pa-581-reconstruction)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: PHLBOS on June 05, 2015, 03:04:12 PM
Quote from: CentralPAguy on June 05, 2015, 01:23:34 PM
Tonight, eastbound PA 581 closes between US 15 and I-83 for a bridge replacement. The eastbound half of the bridge is to be removed, and replaced with a prebuilt structure by Monday (June 8) morning. If anyone is interested, the replacement f the bridge will be streaming live. http://www.purpose1.com/pa-581-reconstruction (http://www.purpose1.com/pa-581-reconstruction)
Note to self: do not shunpike via PA 581 this weekend when returning from the All-Ford Nationals in Carlisle. :)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: CentralPAGal on June 05, 2015, 03:07:26 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on June 05, 2015, 03:04:12 PM
Quote from: CentralPAguy on June 05, 2015, 01:23:34 PM
Tonight, eastbound PA 581 closes between US 15 and I-83 for a bridge replacement. The eastbound half of the bridge is to be removed, and replaced with a prebuilt structure by Monday (June 8) morning. If anyone is interested, the replacement f the bridge will be streaming live. http://www.purpose1.com/pa-581-reconstruction (http://www.purpose1.com/pa-581-reconstruction)
Note to self: do not shunpike via PA 581 this weekend when returning from the All-Ford Nationals in Carlisle. :)
Yeah, with the Ford Nationals going on, that will just make the traffic situation that much worse. The contractor and/or Penndot could have definitely chosen a better time.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: CentralPAGal on June 12, 2015, 07:17:55 PM
PA 581 westbound bridge replacement starts tonight. Streaming live https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UaDDaaq_GfM&feature=youtu.be (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UaDDaaq_GfM&feature=youtu.be%20here)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on July 17, 2015, 04:41:50 PM
I was noticing that on GSV along US 22 near Grantville, PA that at the time the image was captured, that PennDOT was in the process of repaving the four lane arterial.  While at it the median was removed, not that there was much of one to begin with as if memory serves me had just a small raised concrete strip that was there for night contrast rather than safety.  Some portions of US 22 between Harrisburg and its concurrency with I-78 had a center guardrail with two back to back W rails.

I was just wondering, if anyone in the area who is a user here, knows if they re-erected some sort of median, guardrail, or even a jersey barrier since the repaving project finished there?   Judging by the amount of traffic signals added between PA 743 and Paxtonia since the early 90's, I assume that a lot of safety concerns have been made over the past 20 years which would make a paved open area between the travel lanes another safety issue.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: MASTERNC on July 18, 2015, 10:59:13 AM
I'd love to know when PA is going to raise more freeway speed limits to 70 MPH.  They were talking about doing it in the spring, and even the Turnpike talked about raising the speed limit systemwide.  Is Wolf's administration completely against the higher speed limit, or are they taking their time in doing speed studies?  With the exception of high profile accidents on I-380, I haven't heard of any negative changes in crash rates.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on July 18, 2015, 01:18:45 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on July 17, 2015, 04:41:50 PM
I was noticing that on GSV along US 22 near Grantville, PA that at the time the image was captured, that PennDOT was in the process of repaving the four lane arterial.  While at it the median was removed, not that there was much of one to begin with as if memory serves me had just a small raised concrete strip that was there for night contrast rather than safety.  Some portions of US 22 between Harrisburg and its concurrency with I-78 had a center guardrail with two back to back W rails.

I was just wondering, if anyone in the area who is a user here, knows if they re-erected some sort of median, guardrail, or even a jersey barrier since the repaving project finished there?   Judging by the amount of traffic signals added between PA 743 and Paxtonia since the early 90's, I assume that a lot of safety concerns have been made over the past 20 years which would make a paved open area between the travel lanes another safety issue.

Yes, PennDOT has reconstructed 22 from just east of PA 39 to the merge with I-78, replacing the old W-beam with a Jersey barrier, and putting in plenty of turning lanes that I don't think were there before. They also changed some of the old substandard merges at its few ancient interchanges with right-angle stop-controlled intersections. It was rebuilt between 343 (eastern end of multiplex) and 78 first, then 39 and just east of 72, and most recently the piece connecting these two sections. I don't know if they plan on reconstructing it any farther west than 39.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ixnay on July 19, 2015, 06:51:15 PM
Work in Reading?  Got your detour plans in hand?  The Buttonwood Street bridge closes on Tues. (7/21) for two years.

http://www.wfmz.com/news/news-regional-berks/travel-changes-in-place-ahead-of-buttonwood-street-bridge-closure/34167260

ixnay
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: MASTERNC on July 19, 2015, 08:17:58 PM
Quote from: MASTERNC on July 18, 2015, 10:59:13 AM
I'd love to know when PA is going to raise more freeway speed limits to 70 MPH.  They were talking about doing it in the spring, and even the Turnpike talked about raising the speed limit systemwide.  Is Wolf's administration completely against the higher speed limit, or are they taking their time in doing speed studies?  With the exception of high profile accidents on I-380, I haven't heard of any negative changes in crash rates.

Someone must have seen my question.  That said, it shouldn't be taking this long when they were first quoting spring/summer for future changes.

http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2015/07/pennsylvania_drivers_still_wai.html#incart_river
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: PHLBOS on July 20, 2015, 10:42:47 AM
Quote from: MASTERNC on July 19, 2015, 08:17:58 PM
Quote from: MASTERNC on July 18, 2015, 10:59:13 AM
I'd love to know when PA is going to raise more freeway speed limits to 70 MPH.  They were talking about doing it in the spring, and even the Turnpike talked about raising the speed limit systemwide.  Is Wolf's administration completely against the higher speed limit, or are they taking their time in doing speed studies?  With the exception of high profile accidents on I-380, I haven't heard of any negative changes in crash rates.

Someone must have seen my question.  That said, it shouldn't be taking this long when they were first quoting spring/summer for future changes.

http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2015/07/pennsylvania_drivers_still_wai.html#incart_river
IMHO, and yes such is political, with a new governor (of a different party) now in charge; all bets are off in terms of adding more 70 mph limits on PA highways.

The only way I could see Gov. Wolf doing such would be if the State Legislature (both House & Senate) voted on the matter and sustained enough votes (2/3s IIRC) to override a possible veto.  For those that don't already know; Wolf has already used his veto pen once just recently (regarding the state budget); but such is another topic for another website.  I only mention this because one could see another stand-off regarding placing more 70-mph limits on other highway stretches looming in the horizon.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jeffandnicole on July 20, 2015, 11:34:20 AM
Quote from: PHLBOS on July 20, 2015, 10:42:47 AM
Quote from: MASTERNC on July 19, 2015, 08:17:58 PM
Quote from: MASTERNC on July 18, 2015, 10:59:13 AM
I'd love to know when PA is going to raise more freeway speed limits to 70 MPH.  They were talking about doing it in the spring, and even the Turnpike talked about raising the speed limit systemwide.  Is Wolf's administration completely against the higher speed limit, or are they taking their time in doing speed studies?  With the exception of high profile accidents on I-380, I haven't heard of any negative changes in crash rates.

Someone must have seen my question.  That said, it shouldn't be taking this long when they were first quoting spring/summer for future changes.

http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2015/07/pennsylvania_drivers_still_wai.html#incart_river
IMHO, and yes such is political, with a new governor (of a different party) now in charge; all bets are off in terms of adding more 70 mph limits on PA highways.

The only way I could see Gov. Wolf doing such would be if the State Legislature (both House & Senate) voted on the matter and sustained enough votes (2/3s IIRC) to override a possible veto.  For those that don't already know; Wolf has already used his veto pen once just recently (regarding the state budget); but such is another topic for another website.  I only mention this because one could see another stand-off regarding placing more 70-mph limits on other highway stretches looming in the horizon.

What's his attitude regarding higher limits?  And at this point, does he have much of a say on the issue?  If PennDOT or the PA Turnpike commission want to expand the limit, do they have to go thru the Governor to get it done? 

Note: There's always the issue of the Governor wanting his way, so he can highly suggest to those departments not to raise the limit. Honestly though it will be a little unusual for a limit to be tested; studies showing there's no issues with those expanded limits, and then a Governor saying we're not going to expand the limits for these (lame) reasons. 
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: PHLBOS on July 20, 2015, 02:52:29 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on July 20, 2015, 11:34:20 AMWhat's his attitude regarding higher limits?
While not completely known at this point; recent history has shown that city Democrats in PA (Wolf's from York, PA) tend to not push any efforts to increase speed limits.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on July 20, 2015, 11:34:20 AMAnd at this point, does he have much of a say on the issue?
Just like any other state, the Governor can either allow a speed limit increase initiative to either continue or place a moratorium on such. 
Quote from: jeffandnicole on July 20, 2015, 11:34:20 AMIf PennDOT or the PA Turnpike commission want to expand the limit, do they have to go thru the Governor to get it done?
Absolutely.  Using your homestate of NJ as an example; did NJDOT, NJTA, NJHA and/or SJTA raise their speed limits to 65 before Gov. Whitman authorized such?  IIRC, it wasn't until NJ 101.5 FM made an issue of it and prompted listeners to call their state Representatives and Senators to get legislation rolling on such and submit such to Gov. Whitman.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on July 20, 2015, 11:34:20 AMNote: There's always the issue of the Governor wanting his way, so he can highly suggest to those departments not to raise the limit. Honestly though it will be a little unusual for a limit to be tested; studies showing there's no issues with those expanded limits, and then a Governor saying we're not going to expand the limits for these (lame) reasons.
FYI, the only reason why PA stayed at 55 from 1987 through 1995; was indeed because then-Gov. Casey (Sr.) was opposed to raising PA's maximum speed limit.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jeffandnicole on July 20, 2015, 03:15:07 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on July 20, 2015, 02:52:29 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on July 20, 2015, 11:34:20 AMIf PennDOT or the PA Turnpike commission want to expand the limit, do they have to go thru the Governor to get it done?
Absolutely.  Using your homestate of NJ as an example; did NJDOT, NJTA, NJHA and/or SJTA raise their speed limits to 65 before Gov. Whitman authorized such?  IIRC, it wasn't until NJ 101.5 FM made an issue of it and prompted listeners to call their state Representatives and Senators to get legislation rolling on such and submit such to Gov. Whitman.

These are different issues than what is going on in PA.

In PA, the law has already been passed to allow 70 mph, and now they are in a 'testing' phase.  The question was if the Governor needs to approve any additional increases.  From what I can tell, it's not really his call at this point.

In regards to NJ, yes, just like every other state, the governor had to pass a bill to allow a higher speed limit.  After a 3 year testing phase, NJDOT (and other authorities) determined what additional highways and stretches of existing 65 mph could be expanded, but the governor didn't have to sign off on those additions.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 02 Park Ave on July 20, 2015, 05:40:26 PM
There was a story in today's Courier-Post in which it was stated that it would be a year until the decision is made.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ixnay on July 20, 2015, 07:37:17 PM
Quote from: ixnay on July 19, 2015, 06:51:15 PM
Work in Reading?  Got your detour plans in hand?  The Buttonwood Street bridge closes on Tues. (7/21) for two years.

http://www.wfmz.com/news/news-regional-berks/travel-changes-in-place-ahead-of-buttonwood-street-bridge-closure/34167260

Here's U.S. 422 westbound going under it in Oct. 2011...

http://tinyurl.com/nksu77e

And here's the view of the Schuylkill from the bridge itself in September 2011...

http://tinyurl.com/qax3suw

This button copy sign will probably go by the time the project's done, if it hasn't already...

http://tinyurl.com/p5nzgcu

And here's WFMZ-69's report...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_pRywdn70qI

ixnay

Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on July 21, 2015, 02:05:36 PM
There's a lot of button copy in the mess of where 183 ends at Bus. 422.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on August 13, 2015, 03:38:58 PM
What is the purpose of the x15 routes in Northeastern PA?  The routes PA 115, PA 315, and PA 715 are all not even near US 15 to be children of it, and I find it too much of a coincidence that all those x15s are all connected to each other and assigned to the same reason.  Also PA 115 being truncated made that a much bigger highway at one time as it used to enter Easton via Sullivan Trail and connect to US 22 in Center City, so I get the feeling something bigger went on that influenced that numbering.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadgeek Adam on August 13, 2015, 03:44:17 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on August 13, 2015, 03:38:58 PM
What is the purpose of the x15 routes in Northeastern PA?  The routes PA 115, PA 315, and PA 715 are all not even near US 15 to be children of it, and I find it too much of a coincidence that all those x15s are all connected to each other and assigned to the same reason.  Also PA 115 being truncated made that a much bigger highway at one time as it used to enter Easton via Sullivan Trail and connect to US 22 in Center City, so I get the feeling something bigger went on that influenced that numbering.

PA's system is designed like this:

100s-700s: spurs of 1-99
800-831: No pattern.
832-899-900s: starting from 99 and going backwards spurs. (Hence 832->99)

215-715 are all spurs of PA 15, which was replaced by PA 115 in 1928 to eliminate redundancy. So in effect, PA 115 is the parent.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ekt8750 on August 13, 2015, 04:36:46 PM
This site is a good primer on the PA State Highway System
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on August 13, 2015, 09:27:49 PM
Quote from: Roadgeek Adam on August 13, 2015, 03:44:17 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on August 13, 2015, 03:38:58 PM
What is the purpose of the x15 routes in Northeastern PA?  The routes PA 115, PA 315, and PA 715 are all not even near US 15 to be children of it, and I find it too much of a coincidence that all those x15s are all connected to each other and assigned to the same reason.  Also PA 115 being truncated made that a much bigger highway at one time as it used to enter Easton via Sullivan Trail and connect to US 22 in Center City, so I get the feeling something bigger went on that influenced that numbering.

PA's system is designed like this:

100s-700s: spurs of 1-99
800-831: No pattern.
832-899-900s: starting from 99 and going backwards spurs. (Hence 832->99)

215-715 are all spurs of PA 15, which was replaced by PA 115 in 1928 to eliminate redundancy. So in effect, PA 115 is the parent.
So basically I sort of stumbled on to it as I had a feeling that PA 115's original routing was the key.  I just did not know how.

So just like PA 83 turned into PA 183 in Berks County, so this happened.  Interesting, as I just acquired an old PA map, however not old enough, but old enough that PA 115 came down to Easton while US 611 entered New Jersey.

  I do remember the US 22/ PA 33 interchange being built in which PA 115 still had to exist south of US 209 then as PA 33 replaced PA 115 south of Snydersville.  So anytime in the the  mid to late 50's  that map had to be published as I-83 did not exist east of the Susquehana River and there was no I-78 or I-81 even on the map as well as many other interstates.  The US 611 freeway in New Jersey was built in 1953 as that is the time of the current I-80 crossing of the Delaware opening to traffic.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadgeek Adam on August 13, 2015, 11:54:44 PM
Weird situation with 83, because 83 was replaced by multiple routes in 1960-1 due to the redundancy of interstates. There have been 2 183 as a result.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ixnay on August 14, 2015, 06:53:22 AM
Quote from: ekt8750 on August 13, 2015, 04:36:46 PM
This site is a good primer on the PA State Highway System

Are you talking about pahighways.com ?  Or aaroads.com/forum ?

ixnay
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ekt8750 on August 14, 2015, 12:05:22 PM
Quote from: ixnay on August 14, 2015, 06:53:22 AM
Quote from: ekt8750 on August 13, 2015, 04:36:46 PM
This site is a good primer on the PA State Highway System

Are you talking about pahighways.com ?  Or aaroads.com/forum ?

ixnay

Sigh. I'm and idiot and forgot to include the link to the site I was referring to:

http://www.m-plex.com/roads/paindex.html
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Alps on August 14, 2015, 06:00:12 PM
Quote from: Roadgeek Adam on August 13, 2015, 03:44:17 PM
100s-700s: spurs of 1-99
800-831: No pattern.
832-899-900s: starting from 99 and going backwards spurs. (Hence 832->99)
I have no idea what that last phrase means. Elaborate.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ekt8750 on August 14, 2015, 06:53:36 PM
Quote from: Alps on August 14, 2015, 06:00:12 PM
Quote from: Roadgeek Adam on August 13, 2015, 03:44:17 PM
100s-700s: spurs of 1-99
800-831: No pattern.
832-899-900s: starting from 99 and going backwards spurs. (Hence 832->99)
I have no idea what that last phrase means. Elaborate.

He means the parent routes of the 800-999 spur routes start at PA99 and continue in descending order. In the example he used, PA832's parent route is PA99.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadgeek Adam on August 14, 2015, 09:01:47 PM
Quote from: Alps on August 14, 2015, 06:00:12 PM
Quote from: Roadgeek Adam on August 13, 2015, 03:44:17 PM
100s-700s: spurs of 1-99
800-831: No pattern.
832-899-900s: starting from 99 and going backwards spurs. (Hence 832->99)
I have no idea what that last phrase means. Elaborate.

As noted above, starting at 832, the routes serve as spurs from a parent starting with 99, with 832 being a spur of 99, 833 with 96, 834 with 92 and so on.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Alps on August 15, 2015, 01:35:10 AM
Quote from: Roadgeek Adam on August 14, 2015, 09:01:47 PM
Quote from: Alps on August 14, 2015, 06:00:12 PM
Quote from: Roadgeek Adam on August 13, 2015, 03:44:17 PM
100s-700s: spurs of 1-99
800-831: No pattern.
832-899-900s: starting from 99 and going backwards spurs. (Hence 832->99)
I have no idea what that last phrase means. Elaborate.

As noted above, starting at 832, the routes serve as spurs from a parent starting with 99, with 832 being a spur of 99, 833 with 96, 834 with 92 and so on.
Does that pattern repeat, or does it terminate after the first go-through? I have no source to go by online (they just generically say "no pattern over 800").
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ekt8750 on August 15, 2015, 03:02:23 PM
Quote from: Alps on August 15, 2015, 01:35:10 AM
Quote from: Roadgeek Adam on August 14, 2015, 09:01:47 PM
Quote from: Alps on August 14, 2015, 06:00:12 PM
Quote from: Roadgeek Adam on August 13, 2015, 03:44:17 PM
100s-700s: spurs of 1-99
800-831: No pattern.
832-899-900s: starting from 99 and going backwards spurs. (Hence 832->99)
I have no idea what that last phrase means. Elaborate.

As noted above, starting at 832, the routes serve as spurs from a parent starting with 99, with 832 being a spur of 99, 833 with 96, 834 with 92 and so on.
Does that pattern repeat, or does it terminate after the first go-through? I have no source to go by online (they just generically say "no pattern over 800").

No the parent routes can and have multiple spurs assigned to them. A lot of the 800-999 series spur routes have been reclassified as Quadrant Routes since they were introduced in the early 80s.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: MASTERNC on September 11, 2015, 09:22:57 PM
Looks like PennDOT is unveiling a new website this weekend.  One of my bookmarked links tried to redirect me to a new site, but I then got an error.

The new address is http://www.penndot.gov/.  Trying it right now starts an endless redirect loop.

Hopefully the new site is more streamlined.  Seemed each district differed significantly in format and content.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on September 21, 2015, 11:38:02 PM
Just out of curiosity, just when did PennDOT reconstruct the current US 22 & PA 145 interchange in Whitehall from the previous cloverleaf that stood for decades before?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on September 22, 2015, 10:33:42 AM
Just recently, I think it wrapped up some time last year.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: PHLBOS on September 22, 2015, 10:52:46 AM
This just in: Long-awaited widening of Route 22 begins Monday (http://www.mcall.com/news/local/mc-route22-widening-project-starting-20150918-story.html).

Project involves the Lehigh Valley Expressway stretch of US 22 (to be widened from 4-lanes to 6-lanes).
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jemacedo9 on September 22, 2015, 12:16:50 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on September 22, 2015, 10:52:46 AM
This just in: Long-awaited widening of Route 22 begins Monday (http://www.mcall.com/news/local/mc-route22-widening-project-starting-20150918-story.html).

Project involves the Lehigh Valley Expressway stretch of US 22 (to be widened from 4-lanes to 6-lanes).

One thing I couldn't tell:  is this a true widening to 6-lanes, or is this just adding auxiliiary lanes between interchanges and across the Lehigh River Bridge (not that it wouldn't help)?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: PHLBOS on September 22, 2015, 12:34:18 PM
Quote from: jemacedo9 on September 22, 2015, 12:16:50 PMOne thing I couldn't tell:  is this a true widening to 6-lanes, or is this just adding auxiliiary lanes between interchanges and across the Lehigh River Bridge (not that it wouldn't help)?
From what I've read and can tell; it will be a true widening.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on September 22, 2015, 03:34:52 PM
Are there longer-term plans to widen more of it? It could use a widening between the NE Extension and 33, at least.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: noelbotevera on September 22, 2015, 03:59:14 PM
Quote from: Roadsguy on September 22, 2015, 03:34:52 PM
Are there longer-term plans to widen more of it? It could use a widening between the NE Extension and 33, at least.
I'd say widen it between I-78 to I-78 east of Alpha, New Jersey. It's the only part of I-78 that US 22 gets, at the very least.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: PHLBOS on September 22, 2015, 04:34:48 PM
Quote from: Roadsguy on September 22, 2015, 03:34:52 PM
Are there longer-term plans to widen more of it? It could use a widening between the NE Extension and 33, at least.

Quote from: Morning Call articleconstruction crews will be on the highway to begin a five-year project to widen the road from MacArthur Road east to the Lehigh River.
...
What's starting now is a precursor to the next phase of widening, expected to cost more than $200 million, that will expand Route 22 to six lanes from Airport Road to 15th Street in Allentown.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: cpzilliacus on September 28, 2015, 09:19:24 PM
WGAL-TV (Channel 8): PennDOT shuts down Norman Wood Bridge in York/Lancaster counties - Officials say there is a structural deficiency (http://www.wgal.com/news/norman-wood-bridge-shut-down-in-yorklancaster-counties/35535284)

QuoteThe Norman Wood Bridge that carries Route 372 over the Susquehanna River between Lancaster and York counties has been shut down.

QuotePennDOT says the closure is necessary because of the discovery of a crack in one of the steel girders.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ixnay on September 29, 2015, 07:34:09 AM
Quote from: cpzilliacus on September 28, 2015, 09:19:24 PM
WGAL-TV (Channel 8): PennDOT shuts down Norman Wood Bridge in York/Lancaster counties - Officials say there is a structural deficiency (http://www.wgal.com/news/norman-wood-bridge-shut-down-in-yorklancaster-counties/35535284)

QuoteThe Norman Wood Bridge that carries Route 372 over the Susquehanna River between Lancaster and York counties has been shut down.

QuotePennDOT says the closure is necessary because of the discovery of a crack in one of the steel girders.

*That* will be a mess for employees of the Holtwood power plant who live in York County or commuters from Lancaster County to Peach Bottom.

ixnay
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jpi on October 07, 2015, 03:19:41 PM
Quote from: ixnay on September 29, 2015, 07:34:09 AM
Quote from: cpzilliacus on September 28, 2015, 09:19:24 PM
WGAL-TV (Channel 8): PennDOT shuts down Norman Wood Bridge in York/Lancaster counties - Officials say there is a structural deficiency (http://www.wgal.com/news/norman-wood-bridge-shut-down-in-yorklancaster-counties/35535284)

QuoteThe Norman Wood Bridge that carries Route 372 over the Susquehanna River between Lancaster and York counties has been shut down.

QuotePennDOT says the closure is necessary because of the discovery of a crack in one of the steel girders.

*That* will be a mess for employees of the Holtwood power plant who live in York County or commuters from Lancaster County to Peach Bottom.

ixnay
From what I understand it will be closed for a month. Found this out when Steph and I were in central PA last week. The bridge opened in the late 60's but has been "pounded" by VERY LARGE loads over the years, not sure if this has anything to do with this crack they found or not.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: CentralPAGal on October 19, 2015, 03:04:46 PM
http://abc27.com/2015/10/16/penndot-reopens-part-of-norman-wood-bridge/ (http://abc27.com/2015/10/16/penndot-reopens-part-of-norman-wood-bridge/)

The PA 372 bridge was partially reopened a few days ago. One lane, alternating direction.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ARMOURERERIC on November 09, 2015, 08:58:08 PM
OK, so I will again ask the question I ask here on occasion:  With the end of the construction season lets have some feedback on the success and failures of "Decade of investment"
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: CentralPAGal on November 17, 2015, 06:10:37 PM
A 4 mile portion of US 30 eastbound is closed between York and Lancaster after an oversize truck hit a bridge beam. It's expected to be closed until Friday.
http://www.wgal.com/news/portion-of-route-30-closed/36492250 (http://www.wgal.com/news/portion-of-route-30-closed/36492250)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ixnay on November 18, 2015, 08:05:08 PM
Quote from: CentralPAguy on November 17, 2015, 06:10:37 PM
A 4 mile portion of US 30 eastbound is closed between York and Lancaster after an oversize truck hit a bridge beam. It's expected to be closed until Friday.
http://www.wgal.com/news/portion-of-route-30-closed/36492250 (http://www.wgal.com/news/portion-of-route-30-closed/36492250)

http://www.wgal.com/news/portion-of-route-30-closed/36492250 now says it's reopened...

ixnay
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Mergingtraffic on November 22, 2015, 08:54:09 AM
Good to see these signs at PA-309 and US-22 still there....at least at the time the GSV car went through. 
I thought for sure when I shot them last year they'd be gone by now.

https://www.google.com/maps/@40.6000258,-75.5593652,3a,75y,70.74h,71.88t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sX7QaiuS_-k23OtlR7tCreg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1

(https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7724/16860740698_7db13fd674_z.jpg)

(https://farm9.staticflickr.com/8826/17048234835_d7d80ecca8_z.jpg)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on November 23, 2015, 12:28:09 PM
Only the ones EB remain, the WB ones have been replaced with signs of the same size, though not text-only, instead with small shields. You can see the new ones in the same Street View.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: CanesFan27 on November 25, 2015, 08:22:37 PM
Great resource of aerial photos of Pennsylvania from 1930s to late 1960s:

http://www.pennpilot.psu.edu/
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ixnay on November 25, 2015, 10:14:01 PM
Quote from: CanesFan27 on November 25, 2015, 08:22:37 PM
Great resource of aerial photos of Pennsylvania from 1930s to late 1960s:

http://www.pennpilot.psu.edu/

The 1971 aerial of Chester, PA show the ferryboats plying across from the foot of Flower Street (U.S. 322) to Bridgeport, NJ before 322 resumes its trek to Atlantic City, while the ferry's replacement, the Commodore Barry Bridge, is under construction.  The hospital where I was born is in that aerial too (too bad there aren't street and landmark labels, though to be fair, the lack of same alleviates the clutter). Growing up in Chester and Boothwyn, I rode that ferry a few times on the way to the Jersey Shore, NYC, and even on an elementary school field trip.  I was 12 and a half when the CBB opened, and my dad and I drove across it the day after.  Seeing that aerial brings back memories.  Thanks, CanesFan, and RIP Dad and Chester-Bridgeport Ferry.

ixnay
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: CentralPAGal on December 17, 2015, 03:27:08 PM
http://abc27.com/2015/12/17/penndot-opens-new-route-411-bypass-around-columbia/ (http://abc27.com/2015/12/17/penndot-opens-new-route-411-bypass-around-columbia/)

The PA 441 (not 411 as the article says) bypass around Columbia, Lancaster County is now open.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: froggie on December 17, 2015, 04:51:47 PM
The town's website has a project page (http://www.columbiapa.net/route-441/) that includes construction photos and maps of the alternatives considered (Alt 4A is what they went with).
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: CentralPAGal on December 19, 2015, 06:44:34 AM
In a near repeat of the US 30 incident in York County about a month ago, yet another oversize load truck has damaged an overpass on a highway. This time, its along US 222 northbound at Landis Valley Rd, north of Lancaster. US 222 is back open, but the bridge is still closed. There must be something in the water around here...

http://www.wgal.com/news/truck-smashes-into-bridge-shuts-down-route-222/37034334 (http://www.wgal.com/news/truck-smashes-into-bridge-shuts-down-route-222/37034334)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: noelbotevera on December 19, 2015, 07:25:37 AM
Quote from: CentralPAguy on December 19, 2015, 06:44:34 AM
In a near repeat of the US 30 incident in York County about a month ago, yet another oversize load truck has damaged an overpass on a highway. This time, its along US 222 northbound at Landis Valley Rd, north of Lancaster. US 222 is back open, but the bridge is still closed. There must be something in the water around here...

http://www.wgal.com/news/truck-smashes-into-bridge-shuts-down-route-222/37034334 (http://www.wgal.com/news/truck-smashes-into-bridge-shuts-down-route-222/37034334)
The overpasses are outdated. Most of them are under 14 feet (somewhere around 12-13 feet to be exact), because PennDOT won't raise them. I know  this from personal experience.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jemacedo9 on December 19, 2015, 07:52:51 AM
Quote from: noelbotevera on December 19, 2015, 07:25:37 AM
Quote from: CentralPAguy on December 19, 2015, 06:44:34 AM
In a near repeat of the US 30 incident in York County about a month ago, yet another oversize load truck has damaged an overpass on a highway. This time, its along US 222 northbound at Landis Valley Rd, north of Lancaster. US 222 is back open, but the bridge is still closed. There must be something in the water around here...

http://www.wgal.com/news/truck-smashes-into-bridge-shuts-down-route-222/37034334 (http://www.wgal.com/news/truck-smashes-into-bridge-shuts-down-route-222/37034334)
The overpasses are outdated. Most of them are under 14 feet (somewhere around 11-12 feet to be exact), because PennDOT won't raise them. I know  this from personal experience.

The ones on US 30 and US 222 FREEWAYS are not 11-12 feet...though many of them are under 14' 5", and PennDOT is generally pretty good about signing anything 14' 5"and under on freeways.  The ones mentioned in the article are on freeways.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: noelbotevera on December 19, 2015, 08:07:52 AM
Quote from: jemacedo9 on December 19, 2015, 07:52:51 AM
Quote from: noelbotevera on December 19, 2015, 07:25:37 AM
Quote from: CentralPAguy on December 19, 2015, 06:44:34 AM
In a near repeat of the US 30 incident in York County about a month ago, yet another oversize load truck has damaged an overpass on a highway. This time, its along US 222 northbound at Landis Valley Rd, north of Lancaster. US 222 is back open, but the bridge is still closed. There must be something in the water around here...

http://www.wgal.com/news/truck-smashes-into-bridge-shuts-down-route-222/37034334 (http://www.wgal.com/news/truck-smashes-into-bridge-shuts-down-route-222/37034334)
The overpasses are outdated. Most of them are under 14 feet (somewhere around 11-12 feet to be exact), because PennDOT won't raise them. I know  this from personal experience.

The ones on US 30 and US 222 FREEWAYS are not 11-12 feet...though many of them are under 14' 5", and PennDOT is generally pretty good about signing anything 14' 5"and under on freeways.  The ones mentioned in the article are on freeways.
My mistake. Meant to type 12-13.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: CentralPAGal on December 19, 2015, 08:12:45 PM
Quote from: noelbotevera on December 19, 2015, 08:07:52 AM
Quote from: jemacedo9 on December 19, 2015, 07:52:51 AM
Quote from: noelbotevera on December 19, 2015, 07:25:37 AM
Quote from: CentralPAguy on December 19, 2015, 06:44:34 AM
In a near repeat of the US 30 incident in York County about a month ago, yet another oversize load truck has damaged an overpass on a highway. This time, its along US 222 northbound at Landis Valley Rd, north of Lancaster. US 222 is back open, but the bridge is still closed. There must be something in the water around here...

http://www.wgal.com/news/truck-smashes-into-bridge-shuts-down-route-222/37034334 (http://www.wgal.com/news/truck-smashes-into-bridge-shuts-down-route-222/37034334)
The overpasses are outdated. Most of them are under 14 feet (somewhere around 11-12 feet to be exact), because PennDOT won't raise them. I know  this from personal experience.

The ones on US 30 and US 222 FREEWAYS are not 11-12 feet...though many of them are under 14' 5", and PennDOT is generally pretty good about signing anything 14' 5"and under on freeways.  The ones mentioned in the article are on freeways.
My mistake. Meant to type 12-13.

Apparently, the bridge in question was 14' 5"
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Buffaboy on January 20, 2016, 10:14:44 PM
Why is I-90 built narrower in rural parts of PA than it is in rural parts of NY?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: noelbotevera on January 20, 2016, 10:19:53 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on January 20, 2016, 10:14:44 PM
Why is I-90 built narrower in rural parts of PA than it is in rural parts of NY?
All I-90 serves in PA is just the boonies of Erie....no need for any additional lanes. I-90's AADT in Erie County is 21,460 as of 2010.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: thenetwork on January 21, 2016, 03:23:00 AM
Quote from: noelbotevera on January 20, 2016, 10:19:53 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on January 20, 2016, 10:14:44 PM
Why is I-90 built narrower in rural parts of PA than it is in rural parts of NY?
All I-90 serves in PA is just the boonies of Erie....

Fixed!   :D
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: cpzilliacus on February 13, 2016, 05:08:59 PM
Baltimore Sun: 3 dead, scores hospitalized after Pennsylvania pileup involving 50 vehicles (http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/nation-world/ct-pennsylvania-pileup-20160213-story.html)

QuoteA pileup involving dozens of vehicles on a Pennsylvania interstate that killed three people and sent scores to hospitals appears to have been related to a passing snow squall, authorities said Saturday.

QuoteTrooper Justin Summa said three fatalities had been confirmed and an unknown number of critically injured patients were flown to hospitals. Seventy more were transported by ambulance to other facilities following the crash in Interstate 78 in Fredericksburg.

QuoteState police said more than 50 vehicles were involved in the crash, which happened around 9:45 a.m. The pileup left tractor-trailers, box trucks and cars tangled together across three traffic lanes and into the snow-covered median about 75 miles northwest of Philadelphia.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on February 13, 2016, 05:38:23 PM
Quote from: cpzilliacus on February 13, 2016, 05:08:59 PM
Baltimore Sun: 3 dead, scores hospitalized after Pennsylvania pileup involving 50 vehicles (http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/nation-world/ct-pennsylvania-pileup-20160213-story.html)

QuoteA pileup involving dozens of vehicles on a Pennsylvania interstate that killed three people and sent scores to hospitals appears to have been related to a passing snow squall, authorities said Saturday.

QuoteTrooper Justin Summa said three fatalities had been confirmed and an unknown number of critically injured patients were flown to hospitals. Seventy more were transported by ambulance to other facilities following the crash in Interstate 78 in Fredericksburg.

QuoteState police said more than 50 vehicles were involved in the crash, which happened around 9:45 a.m. The pileup left tractor-trailers, box trucks and cars tangled together across three traffic lanes and into the snow-covered median about 75 miles northwest of Philadelphia.

I am linking the PennLive (http://www.pennlive.com/news/2016/02/state_police_detail_gruesome_i.html) update on this.  This incident and the fatal crash on PA 641 at Locust Point Road (http://www.pennlive.com/news/2016/02/one_killed_several_injured_in.html#incart_article_small) west of Mechanicsburg on Tuesday involving a school bus and knocking down power lines has made it a long, sad week up here.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: cpzilliacus on February 13, 2016, 11:41:31 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on February 13, 2016, 05:38:23 PM
I am linking the PennLive (http://www.pennlive.com/news/2016/02/state_police_detail_gruesome_i.html) update on this.  This incident and the fatal crash on PA 641 at Locust Point Road (http://www.pennlive.com/news/2016/02/one_killed_several_injured_in.html#incart_article_small) west of Mechanicsburg on Tuesday involving a school bus and knocking down power lines has made it a long, sad week up here.

Agreed. That school bus crash was bad enough.

I-78 seems to have earned a lot of notoriety of late for bad crashes, and the high percentage of truck traffic (at least some of the trucks presumably shunpiking the Pennsylvania Turnpike and its high tolls) does not make matters better.

Though IMO there are Interstates in Pennsylvania that are much more of a challenge to drive when compared to I-78 - most of "free" I-70 and nearly all of I-83 in Pennsylvania are in that category.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: froggie on February 14, 2016, 06:54:52 AM
It's not just the traffic.  As I've been arguing with someone on Facebook, the topography and climate of Pennsylvania lend themselves well to snow squalls.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ixnay on February 14, 2016, 07:48:39 AM
The fact that I-78 is virtually a tangent from the I-81 junction to the U.S. 22 split near Allentown doesn't help either IMO (causes highway hypnosis).  I'm lucky to have never been in a I-78 mishap or inconvenienced by one.

ixnay
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on February 14, 2016, 09:36:09 AM
http://fox43.com/2016/02/13/update-3-people-dead-along-interstate-78-pileup-in-lebanon-county/

I take we are talking about this here.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: noelbotevera on February 14, 2016, 10:37:04 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on February 14, 2016, 09:36:09 AM
http://fox43.com/2016/02/13/update-3-people-dead-along-interstate-78-pileup-in-lebanon-county/

I take we are talking about this here.
Yep. I've been on I-78 every time we have go to NYC, there's always some bad incident that causes a ripple effect. ixnay on the other hand, is very lucky compared to me.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Alps on February 14, 2016, 10:27:29 PM
Quote from: ixnay on February 14, 2016, 07:48:39 AM
The fact that I-78 is virtually a tangent from the I-81 junction to the U.S. 22 split near Allentown doesn't help either IMO (causes highway hypnosis).  I'm lucky to have never been in a I-78 mishap or inconvenienced by one.

ixnay
See, I don't feel that way. It does have some minor horizontal bends, but vertically it keeps changing, and you're in a narrow trench (on and off) for several miles. With the constant jockeying among trucks and slow PA drivers, I've never had a dull moment on 78.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on February 15, 2016, 06:50:36 AM
Quote from: cpzilliacus on February 13, 2016, 11:41:31 PM
Though IMO there are Interstates in Pennsylvania that are much more of a challenge to drive when compared to I-78 - most of "free" I-70 and nearly all of I-83 in Pennsylvania are in that category.

Maybe it was just me, but now that I got a chance to drive the Schuylkill Expressway portion of I-76 when it was not congested, I feel that it is safer to drive on there when it is congested due to how substandard it is.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jeffandnicole on February 15, 2016, 08:58:47 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on February 15, 2016, 06:50:36 AM
Quote from: cpzilliacus on February 13, 2016, 11:41:31 PM
Though IMO there are Interstates in Pennsylvania that are much more of a challenge to drive when compared to I-78 - most of "free" I-70 and nearly all of I-83 in Pennsylvania are in that category.

Maybe it was just me, but now that I got a chance to drive the Schuylkill Expressway portion of I-76 when it was not congested, I feel that it is safer to drive on there when it is congested due to how substandard it is.

LOL

From 676 on North it's not too bad. Its a little hairy South of 676 in the tunnel and approaching Passyunk Ave. But considering I've been on it several times when it's entirely possible to go well above the speed limit, I guess I'm just used to it!
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Gnutella on February 25, 2016, 11:10:26 PM
Quote from: cpzilliacus on February 13, 2016, 11:41:31 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on February 13, 2016, 05:38:23 PM
I am linking the PennLive (http://www.pennlive.com/news/2016/02/state_police_detail_gruesome_i.html) update on this.  This incident and the fatal crash on PA 641 at Locust Point Road (http://www.pennlive.com/news/2016/02/one_killed_several_injured_in.html#incart_article_small) west of Mechanicsburg on Tuesday involving a school bus and knocking down power lines has made it a long, sad week up here.

Agreed. That school bus crash was bad enough.

I-78 seems to have earned a lot of notoriety of late for bad crashes, and the high percentage of truck traffic (at least some of the trucks presumably shunpiking the Pennsylvania Turnpike and its high tolls) does not make matters better.

Though IMO there are Interstates in Pennsylvania that are much more of a challenge to drive when compared to I-78 - most of "free" I-70 and nearly all of I-83 in Pennsylvania are in that category.

But I-70 and I-83 seem to have far fewer major accidents than I-78 does. And the crazy thing about this pileup is that it occurred on a reconstructed segment that actually exceeds Interstate standards with 12' interior and exterior shoulders despite having only four lanes. I'm beginning to think that people so lack any sense of self-preservation that they don't even think to slow down in the snow. Seriously, if I was able to drive for 53 miles in a rear-wheel-drive pickup truck during a major ice storm without even coming close to crashing, then I really don't see how these pileups can happen. You treat a snow squall the same way you treat a sudden burst of heavy rain: You can see it in advance, so slow down before you enter it. It's common sense.

Anyway, based on what I saw on Google Maps, I-78 appears to be substandard from 10 miles east of the I-81 split (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.4679294,-76.3293164,3134m/data=!3m1!1e3) to one mile west of the U.S. 22 split (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.5824666,-75.6104759,3207m/data=!3m1!1e3). That's about 40 miles of highway that needs to be reconstructed.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: briantroutman on February 25, 2016, 11:41:04 PM
Quote from: Gnutella on February 25, 2016, 11:10:26 PM
Anyway, based on what I saw on Google Maps, I-78 appears to be substandard from 10 miles east of the I-81 split (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.4679294,-76.3293164,3134m/data=!3m1!1e3) to one mile west of the U.S. 22 split (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.5824666,-75.6104759,3207m/data=!3m1!1e3). That's about 40 miles of highway that needs to be reconstructed.

Or in other words, the section that was built in the '50s as the US 22 freeway prior to its inclusion into Pennsylvania's Interstate network. It's basically the same scenario with I-83 (originally an upgraded US 111) and substandard section of I-70 (originally billed "new PA 71" ).

I wouldn't describe I-78 as being as deficient as either I-83 or I-70 between Washington (Pa) and New Stanton, however. With a few exceptions, the highway at least offers ten-foot interior shoulders and twelve feet on the exterior. There's a lot of substandard ramp geometry, but there have been some improvements (such as at Hamburg), and many of the exits are low-volume interchanges where few people get off or on (Frystown, Grimes, New Smithville, etc.)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: froggie on February 26, 2016, 08:21:53 AM
Quote from: Gnutellaon a reconstructed segment that actually exceeds meets Interstate standards with 12' interior and exterior shoulders on a heavy truck route despite having only four lanes.

FTFY, since Interstate design standards say a 12ft shoulder should be considered where truck traffic is heavy.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Mergingtraffic on April 27, 2016, 01:33:41 PM
Isn't there a huge stub here? Does this mean it will finally be used?

Bids Announced for the Route 219 Paving Contract from Somerset to Meyersdale

02/25/2016



​Hollidaysburg, PA — PennDOT today announced the bid results for the paving phase of the Route 219 Somerset to Meyersdale project that will build approximately 11 miles of new, four-lane limited-access highway from Somerset to Meyersdale in Summit, Black, Brothersvalley and Somerset townships, Somerset County.

The paving phase is the third and final phase of the project and includes final grading, paving, guiderail, drainage, and interchange work, including lighting.



The first two phases of the project were the earthwork phase and the structures phase. These phases are currently under construction.

The apparent low bidder was New Enterprise Stone & Lime Co., Inc., of New Enterprise with a bid amount of $52,124,021. They were the lowest of four bidders. PennDOT will now review the bid materials from New Enterprise Stone & Lime Co., Inc. If the information is complete and in order, the construction contract should be awarded to the company within the next month.



"We're very excited to be moving forward with the final phase of the project and expect the highway to be open to traffic by 2018. This project has been a long time coming and once complete will provide improved safety and mobility for the traveling public as well as economic growth potential for the region,"  said Thomas Prestash, PennDOT District 9-0 Executive.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: cl94 on April 27, 2016, 03:51:06 PM
That stretch has been under construction for a couple of years and yes, it does involve the stub. Once it is open, US 219 will be a continuous freeway from a few miles north of the Maryland line to Ebensburg, about 1/3 of its length in the state.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: rickmastfan67 on April 27, 2016, 08:30:53 PM
Quote from: Mergingtraffic on April 27, 2016, 01:33:41 PM
Isn't there a huge stub here? Does this mean it will finally be used?

Bids Announced for the Route 219 Paving Contract from Somerset to Meyersdale

02/25/2016



​Hollidaysburg, PA — PennDOT today announced the bid results for the paving phase of the Route 219 Somerset to Meyersdale project that will build approximately 11 miles of new, four-lane limited-access highway from Somerset to Meyersdale in Summit, Black, Brothersvalley and Somerset townships, Somerset County.

The paving phase is the third and final phase of the project and includes final grading, paving, guiderail, drainage, and interchange work, including lighting.



The first two phases of the project were the earthwork phase and the structures phase. These phases are currently under construction.

The apparent low bidder was New Enterprise Stone & Lime Co., Inc., of New Enterprise with a bid amount of $52,124,021. They were the lowest of four bidders. PennDOT will now review the bid materials from New Enterprise Stone & Lime Co., Inc. If the information is complete and in order, the construction contract should be awarded to the company within the next month.



"We're very excited to be moving forward with the final phase of the project and expect the highway to be open to traffic by 2018. This project has been a long time coming and once complete will provide improved safety and mobility for the traveling public as well as economic growth potential for the region,"  said Thomas Prestash, PennDOT District 9-0 Executive.


https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=2269.0 ;)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jemacedo9 on April 28, 2016, 03:48:44 PM
From PennDOT:  Pennsylvania Turnpike and PennDOT Announce Next Step for Planned I-81-Turnpike Beltway for Scranton Region

http://www.penndot.gov/Pages/all-news-details.aspx?newsid=218#.VyJoB3fD_IU (http://www.penndot.gov/Pages/all-news-details.aspx?newsid=218#.VyJoB3fD_IU)

QuoteThe plan calls for highway-speed connections that will enable motorists to seamlessly drive from interstate to interstate in northbound and southbound directions. It includes two separate links: one connection south of Scranton in the Borough of Dupont and Pittston Township, Luzerne County, and a second connection north of Scranton in South Abington Township, Lackawanna County.

QuoteEnvironmental studies and preliminary design for the Scranton Beltway are expected to last three to four years with a cost of up to $10 million. Final design would start at the completion of preliminary design. Following design, construction could start as soon as 2021. The construction cost is estimated at around $160 million; PennDOT will contribute $40 million, with the remaining portion funded by the Turnpike.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: vdeane on April 28, 2016, 06:56:31 PM
Given how the I-95/I-276 interchange is being handled, construction starting in 2021 is overly optimistic.  2071 seems more likely.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: cpzilliacus on May 13, 2016, 03:16:02 PM
WNEP Channel 16 (ABC in Scranton, Pennsylvania): Wrong-Way Drivers: The PennDOT Interview (http://wnep.com/2016/05/12/wrong-way-drivers-the-penndot-interview/)

QuoteThe problem of wrong-way driving in our area lately has received so much attention, and so much reaction from our viewers, that Newswatch 16 traveled to Harrisburg to talk with the head of PennDOT.

QuoteIt appears as though Pennsylvania is in the middle of elaborate research studies on an issue Newswatch 16 has been reporting on this month: wrong-way driving on interstate highways.

QuotePennsylvania is among nearly a half dozen states in the northeast taking part in research focused on wrong-way driving on highways.



Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on June 08, 2016, 06:10:21 PM
Question for those of you who live near or travel I-80 in the Poconos.  Are the Pocono Exits signs still there along the interstate from the Delaware River to Hazelton listing the next three exits by exit number?

I cannot remember for sure, but the last time I was there in 01, along that road, I could have thought I saw those particular signs amended to list the exits by mileage rather than be exit number.  I was wondering if that recollection was correct?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: briantroutman on June 09, 2016, 02:39:10 PM
I'm not sure if this is what you are talking about, but I drove from New York to central PA about a month ago and can verify that this sign is still in place: https://goo.gl/maps/9sXrmDUA37R2 (https://goo.gl/maps/9sXrmDUA37R2)

I recall an earlier, button copy version of the sign that was basically the same except in button copy and with the earlier sequential exit numbers rather than the current mileage-based ones.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on June 09, 2016, 08:07:29 PM
Nice find, but there were others like west of Stroudsburg with:

Pocono Exits
46N Bartonsville
45  Tannersvile
44  Scotrun

Then I believe there was one west of Dreher Avenue:
46S Snydersville
46N Bartonsville
45   Tannersville

They used to be button copy, but I swore that one reflective sign had it the same way with the next 3 exits but instead of using the exit number before the town it services, it was followed after the community with a mileage number.

https://www.google.com/maps/@40.986063,-75.2324126,3a,75y,173.84h,69.25t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1serE6NM6gxY8YEncW5UVZlQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1

Above is the exit list sign for EB I-80 for its two Stroudsburg Exits.  Notice how it list the distance to both Main Street and Park Avenue.  I believe before it listed the former exit numbers 48- Main St. and 50- Park Ave with no mileage to either exits.  The same goes for the Pocono list exits sign.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Flyer78 on June 10, 2016, 08:58:56 AM
Here is one off I-81 in Scranton, https://goo.gl/maps/MZJ3rxvU9zo

In the time after conversion, the sequential exit numbers were covered up, leaving just the exit destination and distance. (Both the current (2014) image and the oldest in GSV show the mile-based exists in place)

I tried to find a similar sign on I-80, I remember it, but not coming up with it.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: briantroutman on June 10, 2016, 02:06:02 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on June 09, 2016, 08:07:29 PM
Nice find, but there were others like west of Stroudsburg with:

Pocono Exits
46N Bartonsville
45  Tannersvile
44  Scotrun

My guess is that the Pocono-area signs were gone by the early 2000s, because that's when I began driving, and I don't recall having seen them. Of course I might have just overlooked them.

There are still signs around Hazleton like the ones you described (https://goo.gl/maps/4ByBsWA99mN2), although they do include mileage to the interchange, and the exit numbers (I believe two-digit sequential numbers) have since been greened out.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: CentralPAGal on June 10, 2016, 06:12:26 PM
The first step of I-83 East Shore Section 1 starts next week:

http://abc27.com/2016/06/09/major-closure-and-detour-in-dauphin-county-starts-on-june-15/ (http://abc27.com/2016/06/09/major-closure-and-detour-in-dauphin-county-starts-on-june-15/)

'Bout damn time...
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: noelbotevera on June 11, 2016, 04:21:11 AM
Quote from: CentralPAguy on June 10, 2016, 06:12:26 PM
The first step of I-83 East Shore Section 1 starts next week:

http://abc27.com/2016/06/09/major-closure-and-detour-in-dauphin-county-starts-on-june-15/ (http://abc27.com/2016/06/09/major-closure-and-detour-in-dauphin-county-starts-on-june-15/)

'Bout damn time...
FINALLY. That section is so narrow and substandard, I have no idea why it didn't stay as US 230. Now we wait for them to fix the I-83/Turnpike interchange, 83/581, and the Eisenhower.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ARMOURERERIC on June 11, 2016, 07:05:27 AM
But will they be smart enough to bridge spans to accomodate 8 lanes if it ever becomes needed.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: billpa on June 11, 2016, 07:19:19 AM
Quote from: CentralPAguy on June 10, 2016, 06:12:26 PM
The first step of I-83 East Shore Section 1 starts next week:

http://abc27.com/2016/06/09/major-closure-and-detour-in-dauphin-county-starts-on-june-15/ (http://abc27.com/2016/06/09/major-closure-and-detour-in-dauphin-county-starts-on-june-15/)

'Bout damn time...
This is my home area and I travel it daily. It'll be a mess for years but I welcome it.

SM-T230NU

Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on June 11, 2016, 10:04:30 AM
Quote from: ARMOURERERIC on June 11, 2016, 07:05:27 AM
But will they be smart enough to bridge spans to accomodate 8 lanes if it ever becomes needed.
See here for the Preliminary Design (http://www.i-83beltway.com/img/I83ES%20WEBSITE%20ROLL%20PLOT.pdf).  Practically there will be 6 lanes plus 2 auxiliary lanes between each interchange when the project is finally complete.  Ultimately the north end will tie into the current ramp configuration at the I-81/I-83 interchange. 

Also the I-81 widening to three lanes from I-83 to Linglestown/Paxtonia (Exit 72) (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=7602.msg2134752#msg2134752)(the next exit northbound) is supposed to start later this year as well.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: CentralPAGal on June 12, 2016, 07:15:07 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on June 11, 2016, 10:04:30 AM
Quote from: ARMOURERERIC on June 11, 2016, 07:05:27 AM
But will they be smart enough to bridge spans to accomodate 8 lanes if it ever becomes needed.
See here for the Preliminary Design (http://www.i-83beltway.com/img/I83ES%20WEBSITE%20ROLL%20PLOT.pdf).  Practically there will be 6 lanes plus 2 auxiliary lanes between each interchange when the project is finally complete.  Ultimately the north end will tie into the current ramp configuration at the I-81/I-83 interchange. 

Also the I-81 widening to three lanes from I-83 to Linglestown/Paxtonia (Exit 72) (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=7602.msg2134752#msg2134752)(the next exit northbound) is supposed to start later this year as well.
That, and the section from PA 114 to PA 581 as well, if I am not mistaken. Been keeping an ear out for those projects, but haven't heard anything about them lately.

Quote from: noelbotevera on June 11, 2016, 04:21:11 AM
Quote from: CentralPAguy on June 10, 2016, 06:12:26 PM
The first step of I-83 East Shore Section 1 starts next week:

http://abc27.com/2016/06/09/major-closure-and-detour-in-dauphin-county-starts-on-june-15/ (http://abc27.com/2016/06/09/major-closure-and-detour-in-dauphin-county-starts-on-june-15/)

'Bout damn time...
FINALLY. That section is so narrow and substandard, I have no idea why it didn't stay as US 230. Now we wait for them to fix the I-83/Turnpike interchange, 83/581, and the Eisenhower.

The Eisenhower is a realistic expectation. The other two, not so sure. Given that they just modified it, and the fact that further upgrades aren't in Penndot's 12 year plan, I wouldn't expect to even hear about a full reconstruction of 83/581 for another decade, at minimum. That said, looks like the Lowther st. bridge that was redone in 2012, was designed with expansion in mind. I-83/Turnpike interchange reconfiguration? That's simply not going to happen unless the PTC plans to widen the turnpike under I-83 and has to do work around there
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on June 12, 2016, 10:55:56 PM
Quote from: CentralPAguy on June 12, 2016, 07:15:07 PM
Given that they just modified it, and the fact that further upgrades aren't in Penndot's 12 year plan, I wouldn't expect to even hear about a full reconstruction of 83/581 for another decade, at minimum. That said, looks like the Lowther st. bridge that was redone in 2012, was designed with expansion in mind.

PennDOT at least had (http://www.i-83beltway.com/master_plan/mp_48.html) a much better redesign as part of the "Master Plan" for I-83. Not sure if that's been pushed to the far back burner, with the new design being mostly a quick fix, or cancelled outright in favor of the new design.

The Lowther St. bridge really does have plenty of room, and the new I-83 mainline and SB on-ramp from 581 in the original design appear to fit right into the new bridge.

Quote from: CentralPAguy on June 12, 2016, 07:15:07 PM
I-83/Turnpike interchange reconfiguration? That's simply not going to happen unless the PTC plans to widen the turnpike under I-83 and has to do work around there

The PTC has ultimate plans to widen the entire Turnpike to six lanes, except in the tunnels, so a widening under I-83 would happen eventually. As for an actual interchange redesign, though, there isn't much room to redesign it and tie in the interchange immediately north on 83, so a beefed-up double-trumpet and maybe an extra slip ramp or two are probably all that would ever happen.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: cl94 on June 14, 2016, 12:35:13 AM
I was on US 15 yesterday between the New York border and Mansfield and the speed limit is indeed 70. PennDOT must have bumped up the limit pretty quickly after it was announced. Heading north, the limit drops to 65 immediately north of the last exit in PA, but raises to 70 immediately after crossing the state line SB.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: noelbotevera on June 14, 2016, 02:20:16 AM
What about the section from the river north to the Eisenhower? There's some really old overpasses and it's really narrow. I actually get nervous at that section of I-83 because of how narrow it is. One scary overpass for me is the 19th Street overpass, it seems much lower than 14 feet. Also, that section is always congested, even outside of rush hour. That section is a problem whenever I've went to Hersheypark before, most recently last summer, and that was a slog up until the Eisenhower Interchange.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on June 14, 2016, 06:12:38 AM
Quote from: noelbotevera on June 14, 2016, 02:20:16 AM
What about the section from the river north to the Eisenhower? There's some really old overpasses and it's really narrow. I actually get nervous at that section of I-83 because of how narrow it is. One scary overpass for me is the 19th Street overpass, it seems much lower than 14 feet. Also, that section is always congested, even outside of rush hour. That section is a problem whenever I've went to Hersheypark before, most recently last summer, and that was a slog up until the Eisenhower Interchange.

From what I remember (and verified on the I-83 Master Plan (http://www.i-83beltway.com/master_plan/mp_60.html)), the Eisenhower interchange reconstruction will be after Section 1, then it will be from there to the river after that.  (basically each contract following I-83 SB)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: CentralPAGal on June 14, 2016, 05:45:47 PM
Quote from: Roadsguy on June 12, 2016, 10:55:56 PM
Quote from: CentralPAguy on June 12, 2016, 07:15:07 PM
Given that they just modified it, and the fact that further upgrades aren't in Penndot's 12 year plan, I wouldn't expect to even hear about a full reconstruction of 83/581 for another decade, at minimum. That said, looks like the Lowther st. bridge that was redone in 2012, was designed with expansion in mind.

PennDOT at least had (http://www.i-83beltway.com/master_plan/mp_48.html) a much better redesign as part of the "Master Plan" for I-83. Not sure if that's been pushed to the far back burner, with the new design being mostly a quick fix, or cancelled outright in favor of the new design.

The Lowther St. bridge really does have plenty of room, and the new I-83 mainline and SB on-ramp from 581 in the original design appear to fit right into the new bridge.
Yes, there is room for at least 2 lanes plus full shoulders in both directions, plus some assorted ramps, and that's why even though they half-assed things, I do believe that they eventually intend to do the redesign depicted in the I-83 master plan. Just a matter of funding and priorities.

Quote from: Roadsguy on June 12, 2016, 10:55:56 PM
Quote from: CentralPAguy on June 12, 2016, 07:15:07 PM
I-83/Turnpike interchange reconfiguration? That's simply not going to happen unless the PTC plans to widen the turnpike under I-83 and has to do work around there

The PTC has ultimate plans to widen the entire Turnpike to six lanes, except in the tunnels, so a widening under I-83 would happen eventually. As for an actual interchange redesign, though, there isn't much room to redesign it and tie in the interchange immediately north on 83, so a beefed-up double-trumpet and maybe an extra slip ramp or two are probably all that would ever happen.

Yes, I should have said "until". And you're right, there really isn't alot of room. Personally, I wouldn't have any issue with the Limekiln Rd. exit immediately to the north being shut down. That will not happen though. The restaurants and motels there would have a fit.

Unrelated: Does anyone know if Penndot has any intentions of eventually reconstructing the rest of the substandard sections of I-83 outside York, Harrisburg and Shrewsbury?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ARMOURERERIC on June 14, 2016, 09:30:25 PM
As I ask every so often:  How is the "Decade of investment" program going and how is the big PPP bridge replacement work going?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: mariethefoxy on July 05, 2016, 01:22:01 AM
has PennDOT been replacing a lot of signs lately? I've noticed far less forward-tilted signs than before and these are newer looking signs with highway gothic vs clearview. The gantries don't seem brand new.

I noticed this on 78 in Allentown area and in the Harrisburg area on 81


Also my car hates the mountainous terrain of central PA.
Title: 2016 Pennsylvania official state map now available
Post by: briantroutman on July 15, 2016, 02:01:55 AM
This probably isn't big enough to warrant it's own thread...

I was in Pennsylvania about a week ago and noticed that the 2016 Official Tourism and Transportation Maps have arrived–or at least they had at the I-80 welcome center near Stroudsburg. PennDOT has updated the PDF version (http://www.dot7.state.pa.us/BPR_PDF_FILES/MAPS/Statewide/otm/otmplot_web.pdf) available on their website to reflect the 2016 edition.

A few observations:

- New map is more tightly cropped on PA and cuts out OH 11; Fairmont, WV; and Reisterstown, MD which were previously visible

- Secondary road geometry is now more complex and perhaps more realistic–more sharp corners and jagged alignments

- This map shows absolutely no new roads under construction anywhere within the state–this despite work currently underway on the second segment of Pittsburgh's Southern Beltway, the US 219 freeway in Somerset County, and at least the Susquehanna River bridge of the CSVT near Northumberland

- E-ZPass-only exit at Hickory Run added

- "Old Stone House"  POI added near Slippery Rock

- Numerous hiking trail changes

- West Lawn now back on the map near Reading

- Earlier maps made it appear as if the I-99 freeway continued all the way to I-80; now there's roughly 2/3 of a mile that's shown as a non-access controlled divided highway, then an undivided highway

- PennDOT has long used a triangle in a semicircle symbol on freeways to show rest areas and a bare triangle along secondary highways to mark the NO COMFORT FACILITIES wayside picnic areas, many of which have been around since the '40s. I noticed a new one marked on William Penn Highway just of PA 33 near Easton, and thinking that odd, I pulled it up on Google Maps and noticed that it's a new and rather large park and ride lot, not a picnic or rest area. While it wasn't on earlier maps, the smaller park and ride lot at the Quakertown Interchange of the NE Extension had been. Seems odd that these two park and rides would be labeled as if they were no-bathroom rest areas. I don't see any other park and rides labeled as picnic areas elsewhere across the state
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: CentralPAGal on July 15, 2016, 09:45:57 PM
Update: I-83 East Shore Section 1 is under way. As of yesterday, the Elmerton Ave Bridge, which closed last month, is currently being dismantled. The approaches to the bridge have been dug out, and the structure over the beam has been removed. I suspect that they will be removing the beams very soon. Additionally, at least one new ramp alignment (SW quadrant) has been graded at the US 22 interchange.

Edit: Rolling closures on I-83 tonight to Monday morning to remove old bridge beams. http://fox43.com/2016/07/16/overnight-traffic-stoppages-scheduled-for-i-83-in-colonial-park-area/ (http://fox43.com/2016/07/16/overnight-traffic-stoppages-scheduled-for-i-83-in-colonial-park-area/)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jpi on August 01, 2016, 04:18:53 PM
Not to change the Philly subject but here is a link of the progress being made at I-83 and Mt Rose Ave (my road meet spot light from April)
http://www.ydr.com/story/news/2016/08/01/i-83-mt-rose-ave-project-what-you-need-know/87357322/
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: cpzilliacus on August 01, 2016, 09:34:20 PM
Quote from: jpi on August 01, 2016, 04:18:53 PM
Not to change the Philly subject but here is a link of the progress being made at I-83 and Mt Rose Ave (my road meet spot light from April)
http://www.ydr.com/story/news/2016/08/01/i-83-mt-rose-ave-project-what-you-need-know/87357322/

Yeah, I was by there in July, and it was clear that there had been  some progress since your meet. 
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jpi on August 02, 2016, 12:56:32 AM
I will be back up there for a day middle of this month, looking forward to seeing this progress.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on August 03, 2016, 05:39:14 PM
Also the new US 30 configuration in Gap (http://fox43.com/2016/08/03/new-westbound-alignment-for-route-30-to-open-at-gap-this-weekend/) should open Thursday Night.  The WB lanes will be on a new alignment with the EB lanes on the current alignment.  (and new signals at PA 41 and PA 772, PA 41 NB traffic will ultimately stay straight to go on the US 30 WB lanes)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on August 08, 2016, 05:47:12 AM
The loop ramp from US 22 WB to I-83 SB (http://abc27.com/2016/08/08/new-traffic-pattern-at-route-22-interchange-at-i-83-expected-to-cause-delays/) at Exit 50 will be closed tonight and be replaced by a left turn onto a new ramp on the south side of the interchange that connects to the existing ramp from US 22 EB to I-83 SB.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jpi on August 08, 2016, 03:35:40 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on August 08, 2016, 05:47:12 AM
The loop ramp from US 22 WB to I-83 SB (http://abc27.com/2016/08/08/new-traffic-pattern-at-route-22-interchange-at-i-83-expected-to-cause-delays/) at Exit 50 will be closed tonight and be replaced by a left turn onto a new ramp on the south side of the interchange that connects to the existing ramp from US 22 EB to I-83 SB.
Thanks for the heads up, will have to remember this since this time next week I will be in the Colonial Park area.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Tom958 on August 08, 2016, 08:11:37 PM
Looks like Series B on that overhead: https://www.google.com/maps/@40.2962303,-76.8252778,3a,75y,338.27h,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sdO01L3aDTyiysD1af9Qq3w!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: briantroutman on August 08, 2016, 09:30:31 PM
Quote from: Tom958 on August 08, 2016, 08:11:37 PM
Looks like Series B on that overhead: https://www.google.com/maps/@40.2962303,-76.8252778,3a,75y,338.27h,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sdO01L3aDTyiysD1af9Qq3w!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

If you get right under the sign on GSV and look up at it from underneath (https://goo.gl/maps/AotKEQR6FiA2), you can see that "Jonestown Rd"  is on a greenout panel covering up the previous destination, which was Progress. I think the destination names "Progress"  and "Colonial Park"  provided more useful information to motorists.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ekt8750 on August 09, 2016, 12:28:25 AM
Quote from: Tom958 on August 08, 2016, 08:11:37 PM
Looks like Series B on that overhead: https://www.google.com/maps/@40.2962303,-76.8252778,3a,75y,338.27h,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sdO01L3aDTyiysD1af9Qq3w!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

That's actually Clearview 5WR artificially compressed.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: LeftyJR on August 11, 2016, 09:03:59 AM
I like Clearview, but not compressed like that - ugh.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: DJStephens on August 21, 2016, 04:59:07 PM
Quote from: ekt8750 on August 09, 2016, 12:28:25 AM
Quote from: Tom958 on August 08, 2016, 08:11:37 PM
Looks like Series B on that overhead: https://www.google.com/maps/@40.2962303,-76.8252778,3a,75y,338.27h,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sdO01L3aDTyiysD1af9Qq3w!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

That's actually Clearview 5WR artificially compressed.

Ghastly.  The older fonts, especially with the button copy appear so much better.   
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on September 07, 2016, 09:02:30 PM
Quote from: CentralPAguy on June 12, 2016, 07:15:07 PM
That, and the section from PA 114 to PA 581 as well, if I am not mistaken. Been keeping an ear out for those projects, but haven't heard anything about them lately.
Prep work has begun for the I-81 widening (http://fox43.com/2016/09/07/prep-work-started-on-i-81-widening-project-between-exits-57-and-59-in-cumberland-county/) from PA 114 (Exit 57) to PA 581 (Exit 59).  (It seems to be the plan is to add the third lane in each direction in the current median.)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: amroad17 on September 10, 2016, 06:02:45 AM
Quote from: Roadsguy on September 07, 2016, 12:23:33 PM
PennDOT's new highway gothic APL sign (https://goo.gl/maps/cSGk8sJxYty) on I-95 seems to be fully uncovered now, as the Blue Route exit now has an option lane. Has PennDOT been using the standard FHWA fonts on any other new signs?
Still won't add Allentown or Scranton to the sign, will they?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: CentralPAGal on September 12, 2016, 05:13:19 PM
In other news, the I-81 widening project west of Harrisburg has begun:
http://abc27.com/2016/09/12/i-81-widening-project-underway/ (http://abc27.com/2016/09/12/i-81-widening-project-underway/)

Just shoulder work for now
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: KEVIN_224 on September 13, 2016, 12:30:53 AM
I have a question about I-84 in northeast PA: I haven't been in this part of the state in 5 years. I've seen and read about work being done under what the interstate sits on. How has that progressed?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Gnutella on September 13, 2016, 08:17:37 PM
Quote from: KEVIN_224 on September 13, 2016, 12:30:53 AM
I have a question about I-84 in northeast PA: I haven't been in this part of the state in 5 years. I've seen and read about work being done under what the interstate sits on. How has that progressed?

From what I can tell, based on the timetable mentioned in an article (http://www.neagle.com/article/20140702/news/140709884) from July 2014, reconstruction of the segment from Exit 46 (Milford) to the New York state line should have finished this past spring. Apparently the segment from MM 34 to MM 40 is currently (http://www.emsnp.org/News/news_PennDot_Roadwork_Schedule.pdf) being reconstructed. I'm not sure what the status is of the segment from MM 40 to Exit 46, though.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: KEVIN_224 on September 14, 2016, 10:23:16 AM
I was on the entire 54-ish miles of I-84 on Tuesday. You're pretty much correct about mile 34 to 40...or close. I have to say the following: I did NOT like that "cattle chute" effect heading back to Connecticut eastbound in the dark. The tractor trailers being so close whizzing past you is bad enough...but what if there's an accident and the vehicle can't reach on of those emergency pull-off areas?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on September 22, 2016, 06:08:29 PM
Someone here mentioned here in one thread about PennDOT using Wilkes-Barre as a control city on I-81 southbound before Scranton is reached as well as Hazleton staring to see usage from Pittston as Wilkes-Barre vanishes there long before the freeway enters its city limits.

I cannot find that post, but I thought I would say that those are unusual for PennDOT as in other signing practices they wait up until the the last exit before the actual city to sign the next control destination.  Especially that along I-81 northbound that uses Harrisburg from Carlisle on northward, where it is even signed along US 11 & 15 in Enola where having Harrisburg signed is irrelevant because US 11 & 15 come within a mile from the PA capital's city center to the south of that particular interchange.

Then who can forget Trenton being signed in Oxford Valley from US 1, a freeway that goes directly there, and really should have the next city north along I-95 signed from there. 

So whoever mentioned that fact that the Scranton area jumps the gun with control cities signed, I thought I would say that is only a regional thing as other places that should jump the gun, do not.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: KEVIN_224 on September 22, 2016, 11:55:11 PM
I couldn't help but notice that about I-81 and Wilkes-Barre! These two pictures are from the western terminus of I-84 in Dunmore, PA. Pictures taken September 13, 2016.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2Fy8I4crc.jpg&hash=402cbddfabc64013a8ec633a15549f3a936c1186)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FSQBhQ8w.jpg&hash=91387f8119dcb632c6da54de415c13e64b2065d8)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jemacedo9 on September 23, 2016, 08:54:37 AM
In the first photo above, the next sign bridge has a sign listing "Scranton Exits" - so the implication is that you are actually already in Scranton at that point...so no need to list Scranton as a control city at that point.  Also, at that point, Scranton exits are on both I-81 North and I-81 South.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Rothman on September 23, 2016, 09:31:24 AM
Quote from: jemacedo9 on September 23, 2016, 08:54:37 AM
In the first photo above, the next sign bridge has a sign listing "Scranton Exits" - so the implication is that you are actually already in Scranton at that point...so no need to list Scranton as a control city at that point.  Also, at that point, Scranton exits are on both I-81 North and I-81 South.

^This.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on September 23, 2016, 01:20:41 PM
On I-81 they need to do this at the PA 581 exit going NB.  It should list the Harrisburg exits on both roads (although it would have to be I-83's exits as PA 581 does not have exits for Harrisburg) and Hazelton should be used at the NB ramps from Wertzville Road  and US 11 & 15 as that is really after the first Harrisburg exit.

PA 581 serves the city better and should be used as a signed first Harrisburg exit along with Front Street and Cameron Street giving the reason to post a sign pre PA 581 for those three exits to be given.

The above is at Scranton so you cannot really list that city for either way on I-81.  The way they did it is perfect.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jemacedo9 on September 23, 2016, 02:20:20 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on September 23, 2016, 01:20:41 PM
On I-81 they need to do this at the PA 581 exit going NB.  It should list the Harrisburg exits on both roads (although it would have to be I-83's exits as PA 581 does not have exits for Harrisburg) and Hazelton should be used at the NB ramps from Wertzville Road  and US 11 & 15 as that is really after the first Harrisburg exit.

PA 581 serves the city better and should be used as a signed first Harrisburg exit along with Front Street and Cameron Street giving the reason to post a sign pre PA 581 for those three exits to be given.

The above is at Scranton so you cannot really list that city for either way on I-81.  The way they did it is perfect.

I don't know if I agree that 581 is a better option for Harrisburg...it kinda depends on where in Harrisburg you're going and time of day.  581/83 can get pretty backed up.  There are times where, even if you're going to Downtown Harrisburg, where I-81 to Front St may be better than PA 581 to I-83 to 2nd St.

I like what was done from the other way, on I-81 south approaching I-83...the control cities are North Harrisburg for I-81, and South Harrisburg for I-83.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: noelbotevera on September 23, 2016, 03:11:42 PM
Quote from: jemacedo9 on September 23, 2016, 02:20:20 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on September 23, 2016, 01:20:41 PM
On I-81 they need to do this at the PA 581 exit going NB.  It should list the Harrisburg exits on both roads (although it would have to be I-83's exits as PA 581 does not have exits for Harrisburg) and Hazelton should be used at the NB ramps from Wertzville Road  and US 11 & 15 as that is really after the first Harrisburg exit.

PA 581 serves the city better and should be used as a signed first Harrisburg exit along with Front Street and Cameron Street giving the reason to post a sign pre PA 581 for those three exits to be given.

The above is at Scranton so you cannot really list that city for either way on I-81.  The way they did it is perfect.

I don't know if I agree that 581 is a better option for Harrisburg...it kinda depends on where in Harrisburg you're going and time of day.  581/83 can get pretty backed up.  There are times where, even if you're going to Downtown Harrisburg, where I-81 to Front St may be better than PA 581 to I-83 to 2nd St.

I like what was done from the other way, on I-81 south approaching I-83...the control cities are North Harrisburg for I-81, and South Harrisburg for I-83.
Ditto on that. Generally if I have to go north or south on 11/15 and do things in the north side of the city, I take 81. If I'm heading to Hersheypark, or going downtown, I do 581/83. Usually I haven't had any traffic problems unless it's summer during the AM rush, where people try to head to Hersheypark. Even then the main backup was on PA 39 or US 322, and was usually on the weekends.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: noelbotevera on September 24, 2016, 01:39:54 PM
So I've been wondering about this...why is the US 322 freeway not complete from Boalsburg to State College? Not much development is in the way and I'm not sure if the forest is protected land. At most a neighborhood would be destroyed, and even then it's small.

I never heard if any proposals existed and were fought back with opposition, considering that the bypass of State College was constructed in 1981 and they had no problems.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: KEVIN_224 on September 24, 2016, 11:04:01 PM
I'm clueless with those parts of Pennsylvania. I've only been west of the Susquehanna River twice ( * ), both times in Cumberland County, PA. Both times involved City Island and the Harrisburg Senators baseball stadium...going the wrong way one time and a different friend getting towards I-83 when he should've done the Turnpike east instead. I'm from central Connecticut. I remember the drive south down I-81 being quite hilly out of Scranton/Wilkes-Barre, with the terrain flattening out almost immediately near mile marker 90 or so. That was in 2011, so I'll have to check the notes I took.

I know this picture from 2011 was likely in Chambersburg, PA. The visiting players for other Eastern League baseball teams stayed here.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FXlsZMch.jpg&hash=a800057ed0731dd01f041a188ecab87f5bf8dd8e)

* - I was once at PIT airport in Findlay, PA near Pittsburgh. It was for a stop on a Southwest Airlines flight from BWI in Maryland to MDW (Midway) in Chicago. I don't count the air space I fly over. However, I was definitely on the ground at PIT, so I count it.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: noelbotevera on September 24, 2016, 11:30:25 PM
Quote from: KEVIN_224 on September 24, 2016, 11:04:01 PM
I know this picture from 2011 was likely in Chambersburg, PA. The visiting players for other Eastern League baseball teams stayed here.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FXlsZMch.jpg&hash=a800057ed0731dd01f041a188ecab87f5bf8dd8e)
:-D :-D :-D

Nah, that's a couple miles north of Camp Hill. You were off by about 50 miles.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: KEVIN_224 on September 24, 2016, 11:38:24 PM
5401 Carlisle Pike, Mechanicsburg, PA 17050

I knew it ended in -burg though! It was from the lot of the Park Inn by Radisson - Harrisburg West. The main drag was US Route 11.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: briantroutman on September 24, 2016, 11:54:34 PM
Quote from: KEVIN_224 on September 24, 2016, 06:00:13 PM
http://www.philly.com/philly/business/20160925_Amtrak_s_slow_ride_to_Pittsburgh.html

Philly.com comparing why it takes Amtrak so long to get between Philadelphia towards Pittsburgh, comparing it to the Turnpike and a short flight.

As I read the article, I began thinking that it's ironic that driving via the Turnpike is a faster alternative considering that, had the South Penn Railroad been completed, its alignment may never have been re-used for the Turnpike, and we'd have a much straighter, lower-elevation rail route between Harrisburg and Pittsburgh.

And then I saw that, not only did the article acknowledge this fact, it went on to say that PennDOT studied the cost of building trackage along the Turnpike ROW but dismissed it out of hand as far too expensive.

Quote from: KEVIN_224 on September 24, 2016, 06:00:13 PM
I remember the drive south down I-81 being quite hilly out of Scranton/Wilkes-Barre, with the terrain flattening out almost immediately near mile marker 90 or so.

Yes–just north of Exit 90 (PA 72 - Lebanon) you pass through a gap in Blue Mountain, a continuous ridge that necessitates two separate PA Turnpike tunnels over 100 miles apart–the Blue Mountain tunnel on the main line and the Lehigh Tunnel on the Northeast Extension.

Quote from: jemacedo9 on September 23, 2016, 02:20:20 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on September 23, 2016, 01:20:41 PM
PA 581 serves the city better ...

I don't know if I agree that 581 is a better option for Harrisburg...it kinda depends on where in Harrisburg you're going and time of day.  581/83 can get pretty backed up.

Having lived in Harrisburg for a number of years, I can confirm that the decision to use PA 581 vs. I-81 does heavily depend on specifically where in the city you're headed. Even without traffic, if your destination is almost anywhere north of Market (which encompasses the majority of the city's land area), you're better off taking I-81. With heavy traffic, you're almost certainly better off to take I-81. I-83 comes much closer to the visible center of downtown, but its poor connections to the city's street grid and frequent congestion severely handicap its usefulness.

Another wrinkle you should consider with regard to I-81, I-83, and PA 581 control city selections: Though three different numbers, PennDOT considers these three routes to comprise a single beltway ("Capital Beltway" ) and the half of the beltway that's east of the Susquehanna River is surrounded by Harrisburg mailing addresses on all sides. So in a sense, all three routes can serve "Harrisburg" -bound traffic in both directions under various circumstances–for example, I'd often go west on PA 581 from Mechanicsburg to loop back to I-81 northbound to get back to my apartment that was nominally in "Harrisburg" .
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: noelbotevera on September 24, 2016, 11:58:13 PM
Quote from: KEVIN_224 on September 24, 2016, 11:38:24 PM
5401 Carlisle Pike, Mechanicsburg, PA 17050

I knew it ended in -burg though! It was from the lot of the Park Inn by Radisson - Harrisburg West. The main drag was US Route 11.
If it really was Chambersburg, the main drag is actually US 30. There's a ton of development on that road.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: KEVIN_224 on September 25, 2016, 12:03:38 AM
https://goo.gl/maps/S2vK8W7UtyF2

https://goo.gl/maps/ppNt8U2obEN2 (zoom shot from their lot on G.S.V.)

It was definitely this hotel. I took the picture of that gantry from their big parking lot, back in July of 2011.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on September 25, 2016, 08:31:35 AM
Quote from: briantroutman on September 24, 2016, 11:54:34 PM
Another wrinkle you should consider with regard to I-81, I-83, and PA 581 control city selections: Though three different numbers, PennDOT considers these three routes to comprise a single beltway ("Capital Beltway" ) and the half of the beltway that's east of the Susquehanna River is surrounded by Harrisburg mailing addresses on all sides. So in a sense, all three routes can serve "Harrisburg" -bound traffic in both directions under various circumstances–for example, I'd often go west on PA 581 from Mechanicsburg to loop back to I-81 northbound to get back to my apartment that was nominally in "Harrisburg" .

Personally, I am not a fan of the "Capital Beltway" name mainly as it confuses me with the Capital Beltway around DC being less than two hours from Harrisburg via US 15 and I-270.  Part of that can be blamed on me being from VA I guess; however, I am unsure if that would matter since I would know they both are "Capital Beltways" anyway more than likely.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: epzik8 on September 26, 2016, 07:34:54 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on September 25, 2016, 08:31:35 AM
Quote from: briantroutman on September 24, 2016, 11:54:34 PM
Another wrinkle you should consider with regard to I-81, I-83, and PA 581 control city selections: Though three different numbers, PennDOT considers these three routes to comprise a single beltway ("Capital Beltway" ) and the half of the beltway that's east of the Susquehanna River is surrounded by Harrisburg mailing addresses on all sides. So in a sense, all three routes can serve "Harrisburg" -bound traffic in both directions under various circumstances–for example, I'd often go west on PA 581 from Mechanicsburg to loop back to I-81 northbound to get back to my apartment that was nominally in "Harrisburg" .

Personally, I am not a fan of the "Capital Beltway" name mainly as it confuses me with the Capital Beltway around DC being less than two hours from Harrisburg via US 15 and I-270.  Part of that can be blamed on me being from VA I guess; however, I am unsure if that would matter since I would know they both are "Capital Beltways" anyway more than likely.
My dad, from Prince George's County, would agree with you.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: epzik8 on September 26, 2016, 07:38:00 PM
70 MPH SPEED LIMIT IN PA ALERT! 70 MPH SPEED LIMIT IN PA ALERT!
I-79 at Mount Morris at the West Virginia line.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FFlDyNyT.jpg&hash=30f7db570e0349116d3c8e52e83cfe9ffe445e3b)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: qguy on September 26, 2016, 08:19:52 PM
Quote from: noelbotevera on September 24, 2016, 01:39:54 PM
...why is the US 322 freeway not complete from Boalsburg to State College? Not much development is in the way and I'm not sure if the forest is protected land. At most a neighborhood would be destroyed, and even then it's small.

I never heard if any proposals existed and were fought back with opposition, considering that the bypass of State College was constructed in 1981 and they had no problems.

Do you mean from Potters Mills to State College? Traveling westbound on US 322, the freeway ends just east of the Potters Mills Gap and starts again at Boalsburg, continuing to State College.

In the early 00s, PennDOT had an active project in design for completing the freeway from Potters Mills to Boalsburg, called South Central Centre County Transportation Study (SCCCTS).

Here's a link to a presentation that has on the first slide after the title slide a graphic that shows the preliminary alternatives studied under the SCCCTS. The alternatives were eventually narrowed down to four or five, IIRC.
http://www.crcog.net/vertical/sites/%7B6AD7E2DC-ECE4-41CD-B8E1-BAC6A6336348%7D/uploads/COG_GF_PMG_presentation_short_version(1).pdf

You can see that some alternatives continued the freeway from Potters Mills to Boalsburg, some continued it from Potters Mills to I-99/US 220 near Bellefonte, and some extended the freeway in a Y-shape from Potters Mills to both places.

Either way if this project had gone to construction, US 322 would today be a continuous freeway from Harrisburg to State College, save for a short section near Duncannon, on the west bank of the Susquehanna River. (That section near Duncannon is four-laned but not center-medianed or grade-separated.)

In 2004, however, officials in District 2-0 were within approximately two weeks of selecting a preferred alternative when then-Governor Ed Rendell deferred the project indefinitely, citing a lack of funds. District officials were livid. (At the same time, Gov. Rendell also indefinitely deferred completion of the freeway gap of US 220 just west of Williamsport, in District 3-0, despite a preferred alternative having already been selected. Officials in that district were none too pleased either, to greatly understate it. But I digress.)

At any rate, PennDOT District 2-0 made short-term improvements along that stretch of US 322 in the meantime (like widening the roadway without adding lanes, and providing turning lanes in places). They also broke up the original project area into smaller chunks, the easier to manage improvements and (more importantly) fund them.

The first freeway extension project to reach the construction stage is the Potters Mills Gap project. The freeway will be extended through the eponymous gap and grade separation will be provided at Sand Mountain Road. The freeway will not continue all the way to the end of the State College Bypass at Boalsburg, however, but will end just west of the PA 144 intersection. Closing the freeway gap all the way will need to wait a few more years (decades?), but it is definitely the medium-to-long-term goal.

Here's a link to PennDOT's project webpage. The page features a link to a series of summary graphics that feature a good diagram/map of the project.
http://www.crcog.net/vertical/sites/%7B6AD7E2DC-ECE4-41CD-B8E1-BAC6A6336348%7D/uploads/COG_GF_PMG_presentation_short_version(1).pdf
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Bitmapped on September 27, 2016, 05:08:30 PM
Quote from: epzik8 on September 26, 2016, 07:38:00 PM
70 MPH SPEED LIMIT IN PA ALERT! 70 MPH SPEED LIMIT IN PA ALERT!
I-79 at Mount Morris at the West Virginia line.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FFlDyNyT.jpg&hash=30f7db570e0349116d3c8e52e83cfe9ffe445e3b)

This happened back in May. See https://www.paturnpike.com/press/2016/20160502143015.htm.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: vdeane on September 27, 2016, 05:29:40 PM
Also see: https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=10754.0
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jeffandnicole on September 27, 2016, 09:30:46 PM
Quote from: epzik8 on September 26, 2016, 07:38:00 PM
70 MPH SPEED LIMIT IN PA ALERT! 70 MPH SPEED LIMIT IN PA ALERT!
I-79 at Mount Morris at the West Virginia line.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FFlDyNyT.jpg&hash=30f7db570e0349116d3c8e52e83cfe9ffe445e3b)

And it's been 70 mph on the PA Turnpike for a few years now.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: VTGoose on September 29, 2016, 10:28:59 AM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on September 25, 2016, 08:31:35 AM
Personally, I am not a fan of the "Capital Beltway" name mainly as it confuses me with the Capital Beltway around DC being less than two hours from Harrisburg via US 15 and I-270.  Part of that can be blamed on me being from VA I guess; however, I am unsure if that would matter since I would know they both are "Capital Beltways" anyway more than likely.

I may be having a CRS moment, but in the old m.t.r. days didn't Scott Kozel have meltdowns over PennDOT using (usurping) "Capital Beltway" from The Only Real And True Capital Beltway?

Bruce in Blacksburg
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Rothman on September 29, 2016, 12:12:34 PM
Quote from: VTGoose on September 29, 2016, 10:28:59 AM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on September 25, 2016, 08:31:35 AM
Personally, I am not a fan of the "Capital Beltway" name mainly as it confuses me with the Capital Beltway around DC being less than two hours from Harrisburg via US 15 and I-270.  Part of that can be blamed on me being from VA I guess; however, I am unsure if that would matter since I would know they both are "Capital Beltways" anyway more than likely.

I may be having a CRS moment, but in the old m.t.r. days didn't Scott Kozel have meltdowns over PennDOT using (usurping) "Capital Beltway" from The Only Real And True Capital Beltway?

Bruce in Blacksburg


I've always thought that designation in Harrisburg was pretty silly myself.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: cl94 on September 29, 2016, 02:09:27 PM
Quote from: Rothman on September 29, 2016, 12:12:34 PM
Quote from: VTGoose on September 29, 2016, 10:28:59 AM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on September 25, 2016, 08:31:35 AM
Personally, I am not a fan of the "Capital Beltway" name mainly as it confuses me with the Capital Beltway around DC being less than two hours from Harrisburg via US 15 and I-270.  Part of that can be blamed on me being from VA I guess; however, I am unsure if that would matter since I would know they both are "Capital Beltways" anyway more than likely.

I may be having a CRS moment, but in the old m.t.r. days didn't Scott Kozel have meltdowns over PennDOT using (usurping) "Capital Beltway" from The Only Real And True Capital Beltway?

Bruce in Blacksburg


I've always thought that designation in Harrisburg was pretty silly myself.

It would be one thing if it was a continuous road. It isn't.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jemacedo9 on September 29, 2016, 02:31:03 PM
The only small credence I'll give it is - this happened not too long after the gap in PA 581 was closed, which was when the entire road was designated PA 581.  Before then, the freeway ended at US 11/Carlisle Pike, and had no posted number.  So...to encourage folks to use PA 581 instead of getting hung up on I-83 on the East Shore, this was a way to assert that the combination of I-81, I-83, and PA 581 could be considered a Beltway.  I'm OK with it.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: noelbotevera on September 29, 2016, 03:40:17 PM
Quote from: jemacedo9 on September 29, 2016, 02:31:03 PM
The only small credence I'll give it is - this happened not too long after the gap in PA 581 was closed, which was when the entire road was designated PA 581.  Before then, the freeway ended at US 11/Carlisle Pike, and had no posted number.  So...to encourage folks to use PA 581 instead of getting hung up on I-83 on the East Shore, this was a way to assert that the combination of I-81, I-83, and PA 581 could be considered a Beltway.  I'm OK with it.
Then again, if you knew what you were doing you could've used US 15 along the West Shore to avoid I-83 traffic pre-581. I believe I did that once on a trip because 581 was closed and 83 was jammed.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ixnay on September 29, 2016, 07:41:56 PM
Quote from: jemacedo9 on September 29, 2016, 02:31:03 PM
The only small credence I'll give it is - this happened not too long after the gap in PA 581 was closed, which was when the entire road was designated PA 581.  Before then, the freeway ended at US 11/Carlisle Pike, and had no posted number. So...to encourage folks to use PA 581 instead of getting hung up on I-83 on the East Shore, this was a way to assert that the combination of I-81, I-83, and PA 581 could be considered a Beltway.  I'm OK with it.

I might have been on that "unnumbered" freeway one Easter Sunday in the early '80s when when I visted my stepsister and her husband.  They lived in Camp Hill at the time.  My mom, stepdad, and I drove out the turnpike from our Philly-area home to see them (my first time in the Harrisburg area on the ground, although I'd flown over the area [spotting the capitol dome and TMI] in passenger planes previously).  [EDIT:  I'd also been to Hersheypark and Chocolate World a few years earlier [before my mom met my stepdad], and I guess Hershey counts as "the Harrisburg area".]

I'm sure PennDOT had a number for that "unnumbered" freeway somewhere in their paper work (581, maybe)?

ixnay
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on September 30, 2016, 09:53:57 PM
It was only unnumbered from US 15 to I-83.  It was US 11 where the US route is now cosigned with it.  Signs from I-83 read "TO US 11 & 15- Camp Hill- Gettysburg and from US 11 & 15 I think it was just signed TO I-83 with either Harrisburg alone or both Harrisburg and York,
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: epzik8 on October 04, 2016, 03:11:39 PM
So are they re-doing the entire southbound carriageway of I-81 between MM 96 and 106? I went through there today and the northbound carriageway is two-way with southbound traffic using the normal northbound left lane currently.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on October 04, 2016, 06:42:10 PM
Quote from: epzik8 on October 04, 2016, 03:11:39 PM
So are they re-doing the entire southbound carriageway of I-81 between MM 96 and 106? I went through there today and the northbound carriageway is two-way with southbound traffic using the normal northbound left lane currently.

Yes, ultimately they will have done both directions.  I-81 should be back to the normal four-lane configuration by May 2017 (http://www.mcall.com/news/traffic/mc-using-i-81-this-july-fourth-weekend-you-could-be-sitting-in-traffic-20160630-story.html).
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: cl94 on October 04, 2016, 06:48:00 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on October 04, 2016, 06:42:10 PM
Quote from: epzik8 on October 04, 2016, 03:11:39 PM
So are they re-doing the entire southbound carriageway of I-81 between MM 96 and 106? I went through there today and the northbound carriageway is two-way with southbound traffic using the normal northbound left lane currently.

Yes, ultimately they will have done both directions.  I-81 should be back to the normal four-lane configuration by May 2017 (http://www.mcall.com/news/traffic/mc-using-i-81-this-july-fourth-weekend-you-could-be-sitting-in-traffic-20160630-story.html).

Is traffic decent in that section? I'd rather not chance I-78 heading down to the Alabama meet on Friday, but I might cut down 209/33 if it has been bad lately.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on October 04, 2016, 07:01:13 PM
Quote from: cl94 on October 04, 2016, 06:48:00 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on October 04, 2016, 06:42:10 PM
Quote from: epzik8 on October 04, 2016, 03:11:39 PM
So are they re-doing the entire southbound carriageway of I-81 between MM 96 and 106? I went through there today and the northbound carriageway is two-way with southbound traffic using the normal northbound left lane currently.

Yes, ultimately they will have done both directions.  I-81 should be back to the normal four-lane configuration by May 2017 (http://www.mcall.com/news/traffic/mc-using-i-81-this-july-fourth-weekend-you-could-be-sitting-in-traffic-20160630-story.html).

Is traffic decent in that section? I'd rather not chance I-78 heading down to the Alabama meet on Friday, but I might cut down 209/33 if it has been bad lately.

From having seen travel times from traveling I-81 and I-78 somewhat frequently this year, I would say you may be fine in the morning or overnight (I went through there around 10 PM on the way back from the Albany meet about a week ago with no issues).  However, the worst through there is usually Friday afternoons and evenings.  Also in the morning and afternoon rush hours, there can be back ups (sometimes even as far as the exit for PA 743 (Exit 80) on Fridays) on I-81 SB from north of the Linglestown/Paxtonia Interchange (Exit 72) to where it widens leading to the I-83 interchange.

When it comes to I-78, I have never had any problems west of the US 22 merge just west of Allentown.  I will mention that you should be cautious around the PA 737 (Exit 40) Exit near Krumsville due to I-78 having no shoulders as a result of the construction there.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: cl94 on October 04, 2016, 07:07:04 PM
Alright, thanks. I'd probably be passing through there around 9 AM, so sounds like I'd be fine on I-81. I have no desire to use I-287 during rush hour due to the uncertainty and 209 adds around 20 minutes in good conditions.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: MASTERNC on October 16, 2016, 09:46:13 PM
This doesn't seem to be mentioned (also appears to have been little fanfare) but Pennsylvania's first DDI opened last month in Washington.

http://www.observer-reporter.com/20160914/officials_say_diverging_diamond_traffic_flowing_well_in_south_strabane
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jemacedo9 on November 13, 2016, 09:08:06 PM
Quote from: jemacedo9 on March 08, 2015, 06:47:41 PM
Quote from: NJRoadfan on March 08, 2015, 05:14:05 PM
Are there any plans to extend the US-202 freeway east of Doylestown? I was in the area today and there looked to be some road way at the eastern stub end of the bypass. That 2-lane section of US-202 is barely adequate for the traffic in the area. Tons of rim busting potholes too, typical PA.

No, and in fact, there is a project just starting to basically get rid of the stub ending there, make US 202 a straight-thru movement, have E State St end at US 202 as a T-intersection, and add left turn lanes at the PA 313/US 202 intersection.

The new alignment of the east end of the US202 Doylestown Bypass is open; it's a pretty seamless transition now.   Also, US 202 Business is now signed on the old US 202 alignments, including a multiplex with PA 309.  I didn't notice any references to US 202 Business on US 202 South at all, but the BGSs on PA 611 do reference US 202 Business.  I am not in this area often, so I don't know when any of this was actually completed.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on November 14, 2016, 05:57:51 PM
Quote from: CentralPAguy on July 15, 2016, 09:45:57 PM
Update: I-83 East Shore Section 1 is under way. As of yesterday, the Elmerton Ave Bridge, which closed last month, is currently being dismantled. The approaches to the bridge have been dug out, and the structure over the beam has been removed. I suspect that they will be removing the beams very soon. Additionally, at least one new ramp alignment (SW quadrant) has been graded at the US 22 interchange.

Edit: Rolling closures on I-83 tonight to Monday morning to remove old bridge beams. http://fox43.com/2016/07/16/overnight-traffic-stoppages-scheduled-for-i-83-in-colonial-park-area/ (http://fox43.com/2016/07/16/overnight-traffic-stoppages-scheduled-for-i-83-in-colonial-park-area/)


The Elmerton Ave Bridge over I-83 reopened last week on Election Day. (http://www.pennlive.com/news/2016/11/elmerton_avenue_bridge_reopens.html)  Somehow I did not realize it was open until today as I drove on it heading back to my apartment.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on November 23, 2016, 05:11:21 PM
From US 11/US 15 closure thread:
Quote from: jemacedo9 on April 24, 2016, 03:41:02 PM
On US22/US 322, there are new *temporary* 2/10 mile markers between Clarks Ferry and PA 39...in Clearview, with a not-so-normal green.  Temporary, as in, the signs are standing on the shoulder, held by sand bags like other Work Zone signage.  Seems to be, this would have been a good time to put in permanent mile markers, since there have been permanent ones east/south of PA 39 for years...

A local fire official wants permanent mile markers along this section of US 22/322. (http://abc27.com/2016/11/22/fire-official-to-penndot-install-mile-markers-to-improve-emergency-response/)  Note that these were removed shortly after the US 11/15 closure ended and the article mentions other funding priorities.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: noelbotevera on November 23, 2016, 08:22:59 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on November 23, 2016, 05:11:21 PM
From US 11/US 15 closure thread:
Quote from: jemacedo9 on April 24, 2016, 03:41:02 PM
On US22/US 322, there are new *temporary* 2/10 mile markers between Clarks Ferry and PA 39...in Clearview, with a not-so-normal green.  Temporary, as in, the signs are standing on the shoulder, held by sand bags like other Work Zone signage.  Seems to be, this would have been a good time to put in permanent mile markers, since there have been permanent ones east/south of PA 39 for years...

A local fire official wants permanent mile markers along this section of US 22/322. (http://abc27.com/2016/11/22/fire-official-to-penndot-install-mile-markers-to-improve-emergency-response/)  Note that these were removed shortly after the US 11/15 closure ended and the article mentions other funding priorities.
I feel like they also have to fix the milemarkers south of the Clarks Ferry Bridge to I-81. They're confusing because some of them list the route as US 22, but the mileage is US 322's. It hasn't been fixed for at least more than two years, as they've been the same since late 2014.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on November 23, 2016, 08:48:34 PM
Quote from: noelbotevera on November 23, 2016, 08:22:59 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on November 23, 2016, 05:11:21 PM
From US 11/US 15 closure thread:
Quote from: jemacedo9 on April 24, 2016, 03:41:02 PM
On US22/US 322, there are new *temporary* 2/10 mile markers between Clarks Ferry and PA 39...in Clearview, with a not-so-normal green.  Temporary, as in, the signs are standing on the shoulder, held by sand bags like other Work Zone signage.  Seems to be, this would have been a good time to put in permanent mile markers, since there have been permanent ones east/south of PA 39 for years...

A local fire official wants permanent mile markers along this section of US 22/322. (http://abc27.com/2016/11/22/fire-official-to-penndot-install-mile-markers-to-improve-emergency-response/)  Note that these were removed shortly after the US 11/15 closure ended and the article mentions other funding priorities.
I feel like they also have to fix the milemarkers south of the Clarks Ferry Bridge to I-81. They're confusing because some of them list the route as US 22, but the mileage is US 322's. It hasn't been fixed for at least more than two years, as they've been the same since late 2014.

Actually the permanent ones are only between PA 39 and I-81.  There are none west of PA 39 that I know of since the temporary ones were removed.  Also I believe that the mile markers should be for US 22 since it is SR 22 in RMS.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jemacedo9 on December 22, 2016, 07:53:48 PM
PA Interstate News:
I-81 returned to 4 lanes in Schuylkill County reconstruction zone (Exits 100-104):
http://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-5/pages/details.aspx?newsid=653

I-95 widening to 8 lanes completed in Philadelphia on either side of Exit 30/PA 73/Cottman Ave
http://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-6/Pages/details.aspx?newsid=980
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: epzik8 on December 25, 2016, 02:58:42 PM
Quote from: jemacedo9 on December 22, 2016, 07:53:48 PM
PA Interstate News:
I-81 returned to 4 lanes in Schuylkill County reconstruction zone (Exits 100-104):
http://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-5/pages/details.aspx?newsid=653

I went through this portion of I-81 in early October returning from the Poconos and I uploaded footage of that mess to YouTube.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on December 25, 2016, 05:06:17 PM
Quote from: epzik8 on December 25, 2016, 02:58:42 PM
Quote from: jemacedo9 on December 22, 2016, 07:53:48 PM
PA Interstate News:
I-81 returned to 4 lanes in Schuylkill County reconstruction zone (Exits 100-104):
http://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-5/pages/details.aspx?newsid=653
I went through this portion of I-81 in early October returning from the Poconos and I uploaded footage of that mess to YouTube.

This was briefly discussed  here (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=7602.msg2183550#msg2183550).
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: cpzilliacus on December 26, 2016, 10:27:59 AM
Quote from: jemacedo9 on December 22, 2016, 07:53:48 PM
PA Interstate News:
I-81 returned to 4 lanes in Schuylkill County reconstruction zone (Exits 100-104):
http://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-5/pages/details.aspx?newsid=653

I-95 widening to 8 lanes completed in Philadelphia on either side of Exit 30/PA 73/Cottman Ave
http://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-6/Pages/details.aspx?newsid=980

Good news on both, which had miserable no-shoulder work zones (the mostly cattle chute work zone on I-81 in Schuylkill County around Ravine was probably worse because of the  relatively steep grades).
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ixnay on December 28, 2016, 07:47:37 AM
Why are the ramps linking PA 51/PA 837 to the West End Bridge in Pittsburgh closed?

ixnay
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: noelbotevera on December 29, 2016, 05:43:56 PM
In other news, some progress has been done to connect the US 322 freeway gap between State College and Potters Mills. They're a little behind on the project, as no construction has been done ever since August 2016. Project website here. (http://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-2/ConstructionsProjectsAndRoadwork/Pages/Potters_Mills_Gap_Transportation_Project.aspx)

I'm not sure why this wasn't done when the freeway was extended west of Lewistown. The only places that could be affected are mostly businesses that could set up shop in State College instead of out in the boonies. There's quite a bit of land south of State College that could be developed, such as on PA 45 between Pine Grove Mills and Boalsburg.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: froggie on December 29, 2016, 08:43:35 PM
Funding, or lack thereof.  Plus, at the time, the focus was on doing something about the "Lewistown Narrows" section between Lewistown and Cuba Mills...that was finally rectified about a decade ago.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jpi on January 02, 2017, 07:09:12 PM
I am considering doing at least 2 central PA road meets in 2018 and 2019, 2018 may be focusing on this project and the Central Susquehanna Valley Expressway project near Selinsgrove, 2019 would be the diverging diamond interchange at Shrewsbury.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on January 02, 2017, 07:37:32 PM
Quote from: jpi on January 02, 2017, 07:09:12 PM
I am considering doing at least 2 central PA road meets in 2018 and 2019, 2018 may be focusing on this project and the Central Susquehanna Valley Expressway project near Selinsgrove, 2019 would be the diverging diamond interchange at Shrewsbury.

I guess the bigger question at this point would be which one includes I-83 in Harrisburg.  I would presume 2019 as the bridges for Phase 1 should be done by then.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jpi on January 02, 2017, 07:57:41 PM
Yes 2019 but I am thinking of some other options for this meet, they include checking out the re-aligned PA 214 in Loganville and possibly a rail trail that goes through one of the oldest still active railroad tunnels in the USA, stay tuned for more details but again, this all hinges on when the Shrewsbury diverging diamond interchange construction starts.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: briantroutman on January 23, 2017, 01:08:49 PM
Quote from: briantroutman on May 23, 2015, 05:04:17 PM
I had to look this one up–the PennDOT spec drawing for the assembly is below.

"New England"  makes a bit more sense considered in the context of the I-81 North - To I-84 shields and legend above, and previously, there had been supplemental signs "TRUCKS - USE I-81 and I-84 to New England" , but I still don't like its use as a control point.

I wonder if this signals a shift in thinking at PennDOT, and future I-80 signage will likewise include NYC as a control city.

(https://farm9.staticflickr.com/8879/18016936311_f2f38c535b_o.png)

Excuse me if this was already posted, but this sign has now been installed (in ugly Clearview, unfortunately):

(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/335/31673980553_4f4624252a_k.jpg)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Rothman on January 23, 2017, 01:16:06 PM
I can't remember if there are similar signs down in the Harrisburg area, directing New England-bound traffic to I-84.  If there are, it's probably ineffective since GoogleMaps has routed me across I-78 and "through" the City from that area to get to Hartford, Springfield or Boston for a few years now.  Makes sense from I-80; just not so sure about from I-81/PA Turnpike down south.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: billpa on January 23, 2017, 01:26:15 PM
Quote from: Rothman on January 23, 2017, 01:16:06 PM
I can't remember if there are similar signs down in the Harrisburg area, directing New England-bound traffic to I-84.  If there are, it's probably ineffective since GoogleMaps has routed me across I-78 and "through" the City from that area to get to Hartford, Springfield or Boston for a few years now.  Makes sense from I-80; just not so sure about from I-81/PA Turnpike down south.
There's one on 81 just before the 78 split. It's under a "TRUCK INFO" banner.


https://goo.gl/maps/qP8f4TXxCyF2


HTC6525LVW

Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: PHLBOS on January 23, 2017, 02:22:26 PM
Quote from: briantroutman on January 23, 2017, 01:08:49 PM(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/335/31673980553_4f4624252a_k.jpg)
Is it me or do those direction cardinals and the TO label next to the I-84 shield appear a bit small?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman on January 23, 2017, 02:54:33 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on January 23, 2017, 02:22:26 PM
Quote from: briantroutman on January 23, 2017, 01:08:49 PM(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/335/31673980553_4f4624252a_k.jpg)
Is it me or do those direction cardinals and the TO label next to the I-84 shield appear a bit small?
You beat me to the comment.  Yes, they are too small.  Per the sign design sheet posted above, they are 8 inches high with a 10 inch initial letter.  For the shield size (36"), they should be 12 inches high, with a 15 inch initial letter for 'NORTH' and "EAST" only  (The legend 'TO' does not require an initial letter).
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: thenetwork on January 23, 2017, 08:53:27 PM
And the "C" in New York City seems a bit too low as well.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ixnay on January 24, 2017, 07:51:16 AM
Where's the plug for Parsippany? :)

And what are the destinations on the WB ramp and pull through signs nowadays at that interchange?

ixnay
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: briantroutman on January 24, 2017, 12:29:20 PM
Quote from: ixnay on January 24, 2017, 07:51:16 AM
And what are the destinations on the WB ramp and pull through signs nowadays at that interchange?

I didn't drive through this interchange westbound on I-80 this trip, but I did a few weeks ago, and nothing registered in my mind as being novel or different, so I'd expect they're unchanged.

As I recall, the overhead sign assembly at the EB gore point had been missing for a considerable period of time, and the installation of the new New England/New York City signs pictured above wasn't part of a comprehensive resigning project...just installing the one missing assembly.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: PHLBOS on January 24, 2017, 01:18:33 PM
Quote from: briantroutman on January 24, 2017, 12:29:20 PMAs I recall, the overhead sign assembly at the EB gore point had been missing for a considerable period of time, and the installation of the new New England/New York City signs pictured above wasn't part of a comprehensive resigning project...just installing the one missing assembly.
Looking at the older GSVs from nearly 10 years ago; the older BGS' at that location only featured single-line control cities of Wilkes-Barre & Hazelton.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ixnay on January 24, 2017, 07:18:11 PM
Quote from: briantroutman on January 24, 2017, 12:29:20 PM
Quote from: ixnay on January 24, 2017, 07:51:16 AM
And what are the destinations on the WB ramp and pull through signs nowadays at that interchange?

I didn't drive through this interchange westbound on I-80 this trip, but I did a few weeks ago, and nothing registered in my mind as being novel or different, so I'd expect they're unchanged.

As I recall, the overhead sign assembly at the EB gore point had been missing for a considerable period of time, and the installation of the new New England/New York City signs pictured above wasn't part of a comprehensive resigning project...just installing the one missing assembly.

In October 2015 the overhead sign assembly was still missing at that gore point per GSV. 

GSV's latest view of the westbound exit 260B gore point was uploaded in Oct. 2011, when Bloomsburg was the pull through control city on WB 80, Harrisburg the SB 81 control city, and Wilkes-Barre the NB 81 control city.

ixnay

Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: epzik8 on January 24, 2017, 07:27:11 PM
Quote from: roadman on January 23, 2017, 02:54:33 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on January 23, 2017, 02:22:26 PM
Quote from: briantroutman on January 23, 2017, 01:08:49 PM(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/335/31673980553_4f4624252a_k.jpg)
Is it me or do those direction cardinals and the TO label next to the I-84 shield appear a bit small?
You beat me to the comment.  Yes, they are too small.  Per the sign design sheet posted above, they are 8 inches high with a 10 inch initial letter.  For the shield size (36"), they should be 12 inches high, with a 15 inch initial letter for 'NORTH' and "EAST" only  (The legend 'TO' does not require an initial letter).
New England! The city where the Patriots play! /s
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman on January 25, 2017, 02:34:19 PM
Quote from: epzik8 on January 24, 2017, 07:27:11 PM
Quote from: roadman on January 23, 2017, 02:54:33 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on January 23, 2017, 02:22:26 PM
Quote from: briantroutman on January 23, 2017, 01:08:49 PM(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/335/31673980553_4f4624252a_k.jpg)
Is it me or do those direction cardinals and the TO label next to the I-84 shield appear a bit small?
You beat me to the comment.  Yes, they are too small.  Per the sign design sheet posted above, they are 8 inches high with a 10 inch initial letter.  For the shield size (36"), they should be 12 inches high, with a 15 inch initial letter for 'NORTH' and "EAST" only  (The legend 'TO' does not require an initial letter).
New England! The city where the Patriots play! /s
Which got me thinking.  Why Wilkes-Barre and not Scranton?  As Scranton is the I-81/I-84 junction, it would make more sense to use that as the control city.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Mr_Northside on January 25, 2017, 02:54:58 PM
Quote from: roadman on January 25, 2017, 02:34:19 PM
Which got me thinking.  Why Wilkes-Barre and not Scranton?  As Scranton is the I-81/I-84 junction, it would make more sense to use that as the control city.

That's one of the first things I was thinking.  I also thought (but could very well be wrong) that Scranton was bigger as well.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: briantroutman on January 25, 2017, 05:05:07 PM
Quote from: Mr_Northside on January 25, 2017, 02:54:58 PM
Quote from: roadman on January 25, 2017, 02:34:19 PM
Which got me thinking.  Why Wilkes-Barre and not Scranton?  As Scranton is the I-81/I-84 junction, it would make more sense to use that as the control city.

That's one of the first things I was thinking.  I also thought (but could very well be wrong) that Scranton was bigger as well.

Population-wise, Scranton is nearly twice the size of Wilkes-Barre (77,000 vs. 40,000), although the cluster of municipalities that makes up greater Wilkes-Barre is even more fragmented (W-B City vs. W-B Township, plus Kingston, Forty-Fort, etc.) than that of greater Scranton, so the practical gap in city size is perhaps not as great.

But I understand that there is a certain us vs. them dynamic at work–enough that Wilkes-Barre resident and former (and disgraced) Congressman Dan Flood fought relentlessly to get the airport designated as "Wilkes-Barre/Scranton"  and not "Scranton/Wilkes-Barre" .

I grew up in Williamsport, where the local TV network affiliates are all translators of Scranton/Wilkes-Barre stations (with token coverage of Central PA), and I always thought of the two cities as a unit. But my wife, who's a native of Wilkes-Barre, says that the two cities are different worlds that rarely intermix. She grew up reading W-B newspapers, listening to W-B radio, and shopping at W-B stores–never going to Scranton.

That brings up the question of "twin city"  pairs in general. Heading east out of Abilene on I-20, does TxDOT sign the larger Dallas or the smaller Fort Worth that you encounter first? Same thing on I-94 heading west out of Wisconsin: St. Paul or Minneapolis? Perhaps the better question is: How should these pairs be signed?

In the case of I-81, I believe PennDOT signs whichever you hit first–Wilkes-Barre northbound and Scranton southbound.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: amroad17 on February 05, 2017, 12:10:06 AM
As far as your question about Wisconsin, St. Paul is signed as the control city on I-94 from Tomah on west of the I-90/I-94 split.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: cpzilliacus on February 06, 2017, 04:59:26 PM
N.Y. Times: As Trump Vows Building Splurge, Famed Traffic Choke Point Offers Warning (https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/06/us/politics/a-pennsylvania-highway-town-at-the-junction-of-politics-and-policy.html)

QuoteMillions of people who travel between the Mid-Atlantic and the Midwest each year fight through Breezewood, Pa., a strange gap in the Interstate System. A leg of Route I-70 brings drivers north from Washington and Baltimore to plug into the Pennsylvania Turnpike and the great road network that runs west to the heartland cities of Pittsburgh, Cleveland and Chicago.

QuoteBut no ramps join these two huge highways at their crossing. Instead, drivers travel an extra two-mile loop that takes them out of rural Appalachia and into several suddenly urban blocks with traffic lights and a dense bazaar of gas stations, fast-food restaurants and motels.

Quote"Things that make no sense: Breezewood, Pa. Why does the interstate turn into an interchange?"  Stephanie Wonderlick recently posted on Twitter as she and her family returned home to Washington from Milwaukee.

QuoteShe is not alone. Many other drivers vent similar – often profane – anger and confusion about this notorious choke point. As a Washingtonian from northern Indiana who transits Breezewood for family visits, I have often wondered the same thing – a question that became more galling after my younger son, jolted by our sudden deceleration into the area's stop-and-go traffic, threw up all over the back seat.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jeffandnicole on February 07, 2017, 12:10:20 AM
While it was nice that the NY Times highlighted the interchange issues, I'm still scratching my head at to how Trump's infrastructure plan has anything remotely in common with it. 

In fact, Trump's name was only mentioned  once throughout this story....and in such unrelated fashion that it offered no clue as to what his policies would do in such situations. 

If anything, why didn't they question Shuster? Well, they tried, but got no response. So they just threw together something, added Trump's name to it, and published it.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: cpzilliacus on February 07, 2017, 12:47:01 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on February 07, 2017, 12:10:20 AM
If anything, why didn't they question Shuster? Well, they tried, but got no response. So they just threw together something, added Trump's name to it, and published it.

I did not write it, but I think they were trying to point out that some of these things require more thinking and analysis than some in the administration want  to devote to such issues. 

The effective ban on a connection between "free" (90% funded by federal taxes) Interstates and the state toll roads being an example of that (fortunately it was repealed at some point).
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ixnay on February 07, 2017, 07:45:53 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on February 07, 2017, 12:10:20 AMIf anything, why didn't they question Shuster? Well, they tried, but got no response.

More like, why didn't Shuster want to be questioned?  I wonder how the Times contacted his office (phone?  Email?)?  Did the Times' request ever even get past Shuster's staff?  What goes through windbags' minds when they decide to turn down requests for comment?

ixnay
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: AlexandriaVA on February 07, 2017, 08:44:51 AM
I think it's fair to say that major media organizations like the NY Times and Washington Post have established and proven ways to reach out to various elected officials for comment.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jeffandnicole on February 07, 2017, 09:28:00 AM
I think the story was more of a rant.  Take this paragraph:

Quote...As a Washingtonian from northern Indiana who transits Breezewood for family visits, I have often wondered the same thing – a question that became more galling after my younger son, jolted by our sudden deceleration into the area's stop-and-go traffic, threw up all over the back seat.

Basically, like many of us, he doesn't like the interchange.  So he wrote a story.  And if you look up his NY Times stories, since January 21, every single one of them involves Trump.  That probably makes sense being he's the Times' White House Correspondent.  But on something like this, being that we're dealing with policies from the '60s and '70s that allowed this intersection of 2 interstates to happen, and dealing with house leaders under numerous other administrations that had nothing to do with Trump, he really had to stretch this story to involve Trump somehow. 

As far as his sick kid goes...no doubt the writer has been thru this area many times before.  And no doubt dad has gone thru traffic lights before.  Sounds like the kid has the cold/virus that has hit practically all of America.  He just chose to get sick in the car in Breezewood!

However, the story itself was informative, and this is where it moves away from politics, the presidential kind, and towards politics, the other kind.  And in many respects, when you read between and through the lines, it's how most projects get done:  You need a lead agency that commits to getting something done.  In PA's case, they decided to allow the local areas to have a great deal of say in the project (NJ is the same way).  And being that Breezewood knows they have a good thing going for them, any elected official in the area, if he wants to stay elected, is going to do whatever they can to keep Breezewood from being bypassed.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: AlexandriaVA on February 07, 2017, 11:43:50 AM
Furthermore I would wager that most people who work in Breezewood who voted were Trump voters. It would be ironic if a Trump project put them out-of-business.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jeffandnicole on February 07, 2017, 01:45:22 PM
Being that there's absolutely no talk whatsoever about converting Breezewood to a regular, sensible interchange, I don't think we have to worry about who voted for who.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: amroad17 on February 10, 2017, 07:51:09 PM
People should appreciate the novelty that is Breezewood.  Yes, there is stop-and-go traffic at times but where else on our Interstate system is something quite like this?  I never did mind driving through Breezewood--in fact, I would purposely stop there just to eat or fuel up.  Building a new interchange bypassing Breezewood would financially put a big dent in the area.  If Breezewood is such a pain to people then they should find a way not to drive through Breezewood.  There are ways to avoid it--if it is such a hassle.  I, myself, find Breezewood to be unique and a throwback to our early days of the Interstate system--and if I need to drive through there to go to a certain destination, then I will.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: sparker on February 11, 2017, 02:59:58 AM
Quote from: amroad17 on February 10, 2017, 07:51:09 PM
People should appreciate the novelty that is Breezewood.  Yes, there is stop-and-go traffic at times but where else on our Interstate system is something quite like this?  I never did mind driving through Breezewood--in fact, I would purposely stop there just to eat or fuel up.  Building a new interchange bypassing Breezewood would financially put a big dent in the area.  If Breezewood is such a pain to people then they should find a way not to drive through Breezewood.  There are ways to avoid it--if it is such a hassle.  I, myself, find Breezewood to be unique and a throwback to our early days of the Interstate system--and if I need to drive through there to go to a certain destination, then I will.

WTF?  Yeah, it's unique -- but a throwback?  First time I've heard anyone nostalgic for the times when the Interstate network was still in bits & pieces.  Sort of reminds me of that old Dana Carvey SNL sketch where the elderly gentleman waxes on about unpleasant or even cruel practices of his youth, concluding with the phrase "And we LIKED it!" :-D  Oh well, to each their own, I suppose.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: cpzilliacus on February 11, 2017, 09:55:55 AM
Quote from: amroad17 on February 10, 2017, 07:51:09 PM
People should appreciate the novelty that is Breezewood.  Yes, there is stop-and-go traffic at times but where else on our Interstate system is something quite like this?  I never did mind driving through Breezewood--in fact, I would purposely stop there just to eat or fuel up.  Building a new interchange bypassing Breezewood would financially put a big dent in the area.  If Breezewood is such a pain to people then they should find a way not to drive through Breezewood.  There are ways to avoid it--if it is such a hassle.  I, myself, find Breezewood to be unique and a throwback to our early days of the Interstate system--and if I need to drive through there to go to a certain destination, then I will.

Not that much in the way of routes to bypass Breezewood.  I suppose it is possible to exit I-70 westbound at Pennsylvania Exit 168 (Warfordsburg) onto U.S. 522 northbound, and follow 522 about 37 miles to enter the Pennsylvania Turnpike at Exit 180, Fort Littleton (means a higher toll charge, of course).

For drivers headed west on I-70 beyond Washington, Pennsylvania, taking I-68 from Hancock, Maryland into West Virginia, then north on either Toll PA-43 back to I-70 at California; or I-79 to I-70 at Washington.

I do not include routes involving U.S. 30 through Breezewood because it also involves the schlock of the place.

But for drivers wanting to take I-70 to Breezewood, then I-76 beyond New Stanton, the alternatives are not that great - I suppose U.S. 220 from I-68 east of Cumberland to Bedford is one; or U.S. 219 from I-68 at Grantsville to Somerset is another.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jeffandnicole on February 11, 2017, 10:36:12 AM
Quote from: amroad17 on February 10, 2017, 07:51:09 PM
People should appreciate the novelty that is Breezewood.  Yes, there is stop-and-go traffic at times but where else on our Interstate system is something quite like this?  I never did mind driving through Breezewood--in fact, I would purposely stop there just to eat or fuel up.  Building a new interchange bypassing Breezewood would financially put a big dent in the area.  If Breezewood is such a pain to people then they should find a way not to drive through Breezewood.  There are ways to avoid it--if it is such a hassle.  I, myself, find Breezewood to be unique and a throwback to our early days of the Interstate system--and if I need to drive through there to go to a certain destination, then I will.

If you want a throwback, take many of the US routes that parallel interstate highways.

Unfortunately, this attitude is why Breezewood exists.  The majority of the drivers show no interest in stopping here.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Rothman on February 12, 2017, 12:17:33 AM
Quote from: amroad17 on February 10, 2017, 07:51:09 PM
People should appreciate the novelty that is Breezewood.  Yes, there is stop-and-go traffic at times but where else on our Interstate system is something quite like this?  I never did mind driving through Breezewood--in fact, I would purposely stop there just to eat or fuel up.  Building a new interchange bypassing Breezewood would financially put a big dent in the area.  If Breezewood is such a pain to people then they should find a way not to drive through Breezewood.  There are ways to avoid it--if it is such a hassle.  I, myself, find Breezewood to be unique and a throwback to our early days of the Interstate system--and if I need to drive through there to go to a certain destination, then I will.

I don't think anyone has called for no access at all into Breezewood.  Just building the ramps needed so through traffic doesn't have to go through that choke point.  Let the rest of us get on with our travels; you can get off and keep going through town if you'd like.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: briantroutman on February 12, 2017, 01:28:56 AM
For all of the Times and Post articles about Breezewood–which invariably include some overwrought hyperbole along the lines of "...a blaze of Las Vegas neon piercing the inky shadows of the Appalachian countryside..." –I don't find Breezewood to be much larger, brighter, or gaudier than countless other rural Interstate interchanges that have attracted a few truck stops and some assorted gas stations, fast food joints, and hotels.

And those other Interstate exits don't force motorists off the Interstate mainline, either. They exist simply because truckers and road-trippers need to eat, sleep, and refuel. That wouldn't change if a direct connection was built, and I'm certain Breezewood would survive as a popular pit stop.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: qguy on February 12, 2017, 04:08:53 PM
Quote from: briantroutman on February 12, 2017, 01:28:56 AM
And those other Interstate exits don't force motorists off the Interstate mainline, either. They exist simply because truckers and road-trippers need to eat, sleep, and refuel. That wouldn't change if a direct connection was built, and I'm certain Breezewood would survive as a popular pit stop.

One of the things I learned during my tenure at PennDOT is that in high-congestion, high-aggravation situations like Breezewood, when through-traffic is separated from local traffic, local businesses often see an increase in patronage, not a decrease. This is because the high congestion and accompanying aggravation is so great that many drivers who might stop to patronize a local business are discouraged from doing so because it takes so long and is so annoying just getting through that they don't want to add to the time and aggravation by stopping. Once the through-traffic and local traffic is separated, stopping is much less of a hassle and more drivers then choose choose to do it.

So perhaps the most frustrating thing about Breezewood is that the whole thing is so short-sighted and unnecessary. If a direct connection with local access were constructed, the local businesses would probably see an increase in business, not a decrease. They'd be better off, not worse off.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: amroad17 on February 24, 2017, 12:58:44 AM
Couldn't the Carlisle interchange be considered a "Breezewood"?  Is there any future plans to allieviate traffic there?

Since I am in the minority (of one, apparently), I do see the need for some direct ramps for those who do not want to stop (or even drive) in Breezewood.  I just appreciate the oddities of our Interstate system and just deal with whatever is brought before me.  This is not to say there should not be progress made to improve the system in places where it is needed.
Quote from: qguy on February 12, 2017, 04:08:53 PM
Quote from: briantroutman on February 12, 2017, 01:28:56 AM
And those other Interstate exits don't force motorists off the Interstate mainline, either. They exist simply because truckers and road-trippers need to eat, sleep, and refuel. That wouldn't change if a direct connection was built, and I'm certain Breezewood would survive as a popular pit stop.

One of the things I learned during my tenure at PennDOT is that in high-congestion, high-aggravation situations like Breezewood, when through-traffic is separated from local traffic, local businesses often see an increase in patronage, not a decrease. This is because the high congestion and accompanying aggravation is so great that many drivers who might stop to patronize a local business are discouraged from doing so because it takes so long and is so annoying just getting through that they don't want to add to the time and aggravation by stopping. Once the through-traffic and local traffic is separated, stopping is much less of a hassle and more drivers then choose choose to do it.

So perhaps the most frustrating thing about Breezewood is that the whole thing is so short-sighted and unnecessary. If a direct connection with local access were constructed, the local businesses would probably see an increase in business, not a decrease. They'd be better off, not worse off.
In reality, this interchange should have been reconfigured in 1968 when the bypass around the tunnels opened.  Correct me if I am wrong, but at that time, wasn't there a law or rule that the PTC had where there could be no direct Interstate to Turnpike connection?  Or was it more the local leaders in Breezewood who forced the interchange to be built the way it was? 



Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: epzik8 on February 24, 2017, 05:31:15 AM
I personally don't mind Breezewood. It's just two traffic lights and two turns. It's also visually stimulating to me seeing the plethora of services there.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ixnay on February 24, 2017, 07:02:08 AM
Quote from: epzik8 on February 24, 2017, 05:31:15 AM
I personally don't mind Breezewood. It's just two traffic lights and two turns. It's also visually stimulating to me seeing the plethora of services there.

Morgantown, PA was Breezewood East (though not on as big a scale) when I was attending what is now Kutztown University in the early '80s and went through there frequently on my way home to Wallingford, PA.  Haven't been through there too much (for a number of reasons) since graduating, so I don't know the full effect of the direct I-176/turnpike connection on Morgantown.

ixnay
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: empirestate on February 24, 2017, 11:08:41 AM
Quote from: epzik8 on February 24, 2017, 05:31:15 AM
I personally don't mind Breezewood. It's just two traffic lights and two turns. It's also visually stimulating to me seeing the plethora of services there.

Doesn't bother me, either. To be sure, it's almost never been much on my route to anywhere, so it's not something I've ever been forced to deal with; rather, I almost had to find excuses to go there. But to me (and I'm a pretty methodical-type guy), what's most interesting about the various systems we have is that they're different from place to place, and sometimes rules are broken. That's why I don't mind NY's sequential exit numbering, either, and I-99 doesn't throw me into fits.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jeffandnicole on February 24, 2017, 12:04:34 PM
Quote from: amroad17 on February 24, 2017, 12:58:44 AM
In reality, this interchange should have been reconfigured in 1968 when the bypass around the tunnels opened.  Correct me if I am wrong, but at that time, wasn't there a law or rule that the PTC had where there could be no direct Interstate to Turnpike connection?  Or was it more the local leaders in Breezewood who forced the interchange to be built the way it was? 

In the early days of interstate highway building, no interstate (in any state, not just PA) could have an interchange with a toll road.  That rule/law is long rescinded.  Most states, if the issue existed, have rectified most such intersections to include direct connections.  PA has lagged far behind.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: thenetwork on February 24, 2017, 01:12:46 PM
Speaking for the Ohio Turnpike, the first true turnpike to interstate connection was with I-71 in 1967.

You can argue that I-280 in Toledo was the first, but it was not up to interstate standards until the 80s.  There were at-grade intersections either side of the Turnpike until then.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: vdeane on February 24, 2017, 01:15:31 PM
Pretty sure it was federal funds couldn't be used for an interchange, not that the interchange couldn't be built.  Most Thruway/Interstate interchanges were direct from the get-go, and our major breezewood (I-87/I-84) was rectified a few years ago.  However, the PTC was unwilling to spend their own money to build the interchanges, unlike other toll authorities.  Given the progress of the I-95 interchange, they still aren't.  I get the feeling they don't give a f*** about the larger picture and are happy to keep on viewing the Turnpike system as entirely separate from the rest of the state's infrastructure.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: briantroutman on February 24, 2017, 02:06:04 PM
Quote from: amroad17 on February 24, 2017, 12:58:44 AM
Correct me if I am wrong, but at that time, wasn't there a law or rule that the PTC had where there could be no direct Interstate to Turnpike connection?

You can get the full story from the FHWA's old "Rambler"  column here: https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/infrastructure/tollroad.cfm (https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/infrastructure/tollroad.cfm)

In short, laws at the time prohibited use of federal funds to pay for direct connections to toll facilities. Had the Pennsylvania Department of Highways (the forerunner of PennDOT) constructed a direct interchange back in 1968, they'd have been forced to pay the full cost rather than token 10% they would have borne otherwise.

That is...unless the toll road agency agreed to cease collecting tolls after the road's bonds had been satisfied. The Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission had no desire to agree to stop collecting tolls, nor did the agency want to spend its own revenues to build a direct connection. A quote from a PTC official at the time pretty clearly explains the commission's position on the issue:

Quote...where new interchanges would not afford an increase, great increase in revenue, we do not feel that these matters should be thrust upon the turnpike commission.

A very pragmatic and private sector business-like position, but one which unfortunately shafts the motorist:
If this investment won't bring in more dollars than it costs, we're not doing it.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jeffandnicole on February 24, 2017, 03:05:18 PM
Quote from: briantroutman on February 24, 2017, 02:06:04 PM
A very pragmatic and private sector business-like position, but one which unfortunately shafts the motorist:
If this investment won’t bring in more dollars than it costs, we’re not doing it.

But a fair position as well.  Turnpikes and toll roads don't get federal funds, so they must rely on toll revenue (along with service area revenue, billboards, etc).  If they need to spend $100 million on a new interchange, that money has to come from somewhere.  If toll revenue from the new interchange won't pay for it, then they need to postpone/cancel other projects they can't afford.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: vdeane on February 24, 2017, 05:44:42 PM
Of course, the PTC is not a business, they are a government agency.  Even though they're funded by tolls and not taxes, the public good should be their prime concern.  I could understand these days, because of Act 44, but that was long before they were being used as a cash cow.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: empirestate on February 25, 2017, 10:32:52 AM
Quote from: vdeane on February 24, 2017, 05:44:42 PM
Of course, the PTC is not a business, they are a government agency.  Even though they're funded by tolls and not taxes, the public good should be their prime concern.  I could understand these days, because of Act 44, but that was long before they were being used as a cash cow.

On the other hand, the building of turnpikes was originally a purpose for which business ventures were specifically created (and then dissolved upon completion). The agencies that built them were the forerunners of modern corporations, and that heritage doubtless imbued the PTC's mindset in its early years, if not still today.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jeffandnicole on February 25, 2017, 12:16:16 PM
It also depends on what the needs are. If the Turnpike has money available to either: A) Build a new interchange or B) widen the highway adding a lane and full shoulders, what is the best use of that money? 
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: amroad17 on February 25, 2017, 11:13:25 PM
Quote from: briantroutman on February 24, 2017, 02:06:04 PM
Quote from: amroad17 on February 24, 2017, 12:58:44 AM
Correct me if I am wrong, but at that time, wasn't there a law or rule that the PTC had where there could be no direct Interstate to Turnpike connection?

You can get the full story from the FHWA's old "Rambler"  column here: https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/infrastructure/tollroad.cfm (https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/infrastructure/tollroad.cfm)

In short, laws at the time prohibited use of federal funds to pay for direct connections to toll facilities. Had the Pennsylvania Department of Highways (the forerunner of PennDOT) constructed a direct interchange back in 1968, they'd have been forced to pay the full cost rather than token 10% they would have borne otherwise.

That is...unless the toll road agency agreed to cease collecting tolls after the road's bonds had been satisfied. The Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission had no desire to agree to stop collecting tolls, nor did the agency want to spend its own revenues to build a direct connection. A quote from a PTC official at the time pretty clearly explains the commission's position on the issue:

Quote...where new interchanges would not afford an increase, great increase in revenue, we do not feel that these matters should be thrust upon the turnpike commission.

A very pragmatic and private sector business-like position, but one which unfortunately shafts the motorist:
If this investment won't bring in more dollars than it costs, we're not doing it.
Thank you for the answer briantroutman.  I knew there was a reason that a direct connection was never built--I just didn't know the exact reason.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jpi on February 27, 2017, 07:54:37 PM
Just came across this on Pennlive.com-
http://www.pennlive.com/news/2017/02/re-building_of_i-83_beltway_to.html#incart_river_home_pop
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jemacedo9 on February 28, 2017, 02:59:29 PM
Quote from: jpi on February 27, 2017, 07:54:37 PM
Just came across this on Pennlive.com-
http://www.pennlive.com/news/2017/02/re-building_of_i-83_beltway_to.html#incart_river_home_pop

I'm quite curious to see what the plans are for the new Eisenhower Interchange, and  the new I-283/PA-283/PA Turnpike interchange...
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: briantroutman on February 28, 2017, 03:27:27 PM
Quote from: jemacedo9 on February 28, 2017, 02:59:29 PM
I'm quite curious to see what the plans are for the new Eisenhower Interchange, and  the new I-283/PA-283/PA Turnpike interchange...

This is what was included in the I-83 Master Plan (http://www.i-83beltway.com/assets/I-83-masterplan.php#p=1) PennDOT released in 2003.

(https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3693/33133179846_e7072ba487_c.jpg)

That 2003 plan didn't mention the 283/283 interchange, but based on the tepid language in the Patriot-News article ("... shifting the ramp from Route 283 to the Turnpike interchange to remove the traffic "˜weave'..." ), my expectations are low, unfortunately. It might be as simple as removing the loop ramp from PA 283 westbound to the Turnpike and replacing it with a left turn instead.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Gnutella on February 28, 2017, 06:28:08 PM
Quote from: briantroutman on February 28, 2017, 03:27:27 PM
Quote from: jemacedo9 on February 28, 2017, 02:59:29 PM
I'm quite curious to see what the plans are for the new Eisenhower Interchange, and  the new I-283/PA-283/PA Turnpike interchange...

This is what was included in the I-83 Master Plan (http://www.i-83beltway.com/assets/I-83-masterplan.php#p=1) PennDOT released in 2003.

(https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3693/33133179846_e7072ba487_c.jpg)

That 2003 plan didn't mention the 283/283 interchange, but based on the tepid language in the Patriot-News article ("... shifting the ramp from Route 283 to the Turnpike interchange to remove the traffic "˜weave'..." ), my expectations are low, unfortunately. It might be as simple as removing the loop ramp from PA 283 westbound to the Turnpike and replacing it with a left turn instead.

That's one thing PennDOT has begun to do that I wish other transportation agencies would adopt: keeping the main right-of-way intact and high-speed through an interchange even as the highway changes direction. They've done it with I-81 at its junction with I-84 in Scranton, I-78 at its junction with U.S. 22 in Allentown, I-99 at its junction with U.S. 322 in State College, and I-279 at its junction with I-579 in Pittsburgh. They're also doing it with I-95 at its junction with the Pennsylvania Turnpike. In a lot of other states, there are still lots of junctions where highways exit themselves and/or drop to one lane as they change direction.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: OracleUsr on February 28, 2017, 11:42:58 PM
Quote from: briantroutman on January 23, 2017, 01:08:49 PM
Quote from: briantroutman on May 23, 2015, 05:04:17 PM
I had to look this one up–the PennDOT spec drawing for the assembly is below.

"New England"  makes a bit more sense considered in the context of the I-81 North - To I-84 shields and legend above, and previously, there had been supplemental signs "TRUCKS - USE I-81 and I-84 to New England" , but I still don't like its use as a control point.

I wonder if this signals a shift in thinking at PennDOT, and future I-80 signage will likewise include NYC as a control city.

(https://farm9.staticflickr.com/8879/18016936311_f2f38c535b_o.png)

Excuse me if this was already posted, but this sign has now been installed (in ugly Clearview, unfortunately):

(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/335/31673980553_4f4624252a_k.jpg)

GAAAH, MY EYES!!!!

I know control cities are supposed to be important, too, but what is the point of using raised caps if the type is small (we have local signs in Statesville that use micro-type for cardinal directions, too, but not on interstate signs!!!!!)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: briantroutman on March 01, 2017, 11:56:05 AM
I looked but couldn't find where this had been mentioned:

The signage at the I-78/US 22 split west of Allentown was replaced in the past year, and the new signs replace 476's Interstate shield with one of the PTC's green PA Turnpike keystones.

https://goo.gl/maps/W7Z43KGMDpN2 (https://goo.gl/maps/W7Z43KGMDpN2)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Rothman on March 01, 2017, 12:36:40 PM
Quote from: briantroutman on March 01, 2017, 11:56:05 AM
I looked but couldn't find where this had been mentioned:

The signage at the I-78/US 22 split west of Allentown was replaced in the past year, and the new signs replace 476's Interstate shield with one of the PTC's green PA Turnpike keystones.

https://goo.gl/maps/W7Z43KGMDpN2 (https://goo.gl/maps/W7Z43KGMDpN2)
Somebody made do when they didn't have room for a bigger sign.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on March 01, 2017, 03:58:08 PM
Quote from: Rothman on March 01, 2017, 12:36:40 PM
Quote from: briantroutman on March 01, 2017, 11:56:05 AM
I looked but couldn't find where this had been mentioned:

The signage at the I-78/US 22 split west of Allentown was replaced in the past year, and the new signs replace 476's Interstate shield with one of the PTC's green PA Turnpike keystones.

https://goo.gl/maps/W7Z43KGMDpN2 (https://goo.gl/maps/W7Z43KGMDpN2)
Somebody made do when they didn't have room for a bigger sign.

See here (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=87.msg2132615#msg2132615).  Ultimately that was the same conclusion I learned especially when seeing this one at the I-78/PA 309 split (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.5756219,-75.546973,3a,75y,317.3h,75.99t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s-7qaZ4TLGlyGWdxDzep2Rw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656).  (with advance errors before that (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.5740449,-75.5433145,3a,75y,292.83h,87.37t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sJ8WVDlx9IGr87IorwITprQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656))
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: amroad17 on March 02, 2017, 01:02:04 AM
^ What the...?

Maybe New Jersey should be replaced with New York City--although, here in the Cincinnati area, Kentucky is used as a control point for I-275 east and west of the city.

As far as the new signs put up at I-81/I-80, I am impressed with Pennsylvania doing that.  Perhaps PA DOT could do something similar at the I-81/I-84 interchange.  They could replace (green over) Milford and Mt. Pocono with New England and New York City on one of the BGS's because just before the I-84/I-380 split, there is two ground-mounted LGS's advising motorists which Interstate to take for New England (USE I-84 EAST) and New York City (USE I-380 SOUTH).
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on March 02, 2017, 07:01:53 AM
QuoteMaybe New Jersey should be replaced with New York City--although, here in the Cincinnati area, Kentucky is used as a control point for I-275 east and west of the city.

The PA 33 SB ramp to I-78 EB (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.6403744,-75.2752166,3a,75y,143.49h,88.01t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1suxhoTEXKn6s6f4G-pQrctQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) is the only knowledge I know of when it comes to a reference to New York City.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: PHLBOS on March 02, 2017, 09:21:50 AM
It's worth noting that the New Jersey listing for I-78 eastbound in this area has existed for a while and long before FHWA/MUTCD got anal (IMHO) regarding using state names as control destinations.  The newer BGS' (w/the Clearview font) appear to be a match-in-kind in terms of destination listings.

For the eastbound I-78/US 22 split; the use of either Easton, Phillipsburg (NJ) or Newark (NJ) would meet the newer criteria at this location.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: sbeaver44 on March 04, 2017, 10:09:08 AM
Quote from: PHLBOS on March 02, 2017, 09:21:50 AM
It's worth noting that the New Jersey listing for I-78 eastbound in this area has existed for a while and long before FHWA/MUTCD got anal (IMHO) regarding using state names as control destinations.  The newer BGS' (w/the Clearview font) appear to be a match-in-kind in terms of destination listings.

For the eastbound I-78/US 22 split; the use of either Easton, Phillipsburg (NJ) or Newark (NJ) would meet the newer criteria at this location.
I wonder if the New Jersey thing relates to the fact that US 22 stops being freeway just into NJ and when 78 was built as the "new" bypass it was a hint that anyone going anywhere in NJ on 78 should use 78 now instead of 22.

Personally I usually take 22 going to NYC because I like the drop into Easton and always stop at Wawa in Phillipsburg for gas and food, as it is approximately halfway for me.

And I noticed the Green TPK 476 last week at Exit 51.  Interesting for sure.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ARMOURERERIC on March 05, 2017, 10:50:54 PM
Quote from: Gnutella on February 28, 2017, 06:28:08 PM
Quote from: briantroutman on February 28, 2017, 03:27:27 PM
Quote from: jemacedo9 on February 28, 2017, 02:59:29 PM
I'm quite curious to see what the plans are for the new Eisenhower Interchange, and  the new I-283/PA-283/PA Turnpike interchange...

It looks like movements from 322 to 83, Hershey to downtown are only one lane, is this problematic

This is what was included in the I-83 Master Plan (http://www.i-83beltway.com/assets/I-83-masterplan.php#p=1) PennDOT released in 2003.

(https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3693/33133179846_e7072ba487_c.jpg)

That 2003 plan didn't mention the 283/283 interchange, but based on the tepid language in the Patriot-News article ("... shifting the ramp from Route 283 to the Turnpike interchange to remove the traffic "˜weave'..." ), my expectations are low, unfortunately. It might be as simple as removing the loop ramp from PA 283 westbound to the Turnpike and replacing it with a left turn instead.

That's one thing PennDOT has begun to do that I wish other transportation agencies would adopt: keeping the main right-of-way intact and high-speed through an interchange even as the highway changes direction. They've done it with I-81 at its junction with I-84 in Scranton, I-78 at its junction with U.S. 22 in Allentown, I-99 at its junction with U.S. 322 in State College, and I-279 at its junction with I-579 in Pittsburgh. They're also doing it with I-95 at its junction with the Pennsylvania Turnpike. In a lot of other states, there are still lots of junctions where highways exit themselves and/or drop to one lane as they change direction.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: PHLBOS on March 06, 2017, 09:21:01 AM
Quote from: sbeaver44 on March 04, 2017, 10:09:08 AM
Quote from: PHLBOS on March 02, 2017, 09:21:50 AM
It's worth noting that the New Jersey listing for I-78 eastbound in this area has existed for a while and long before FHWA/MUTCD got anal (IMHO) regarding using state names as control destinations.  The newer BGS' (w/the Clearview font) appear to be a match-in-kind in terms of destination listings.

For the eastbound I-78/US 22 split; the use of either Easton, Phillipsburg (NJ) or Newark (NJ) would meet the newer criteria at this location.
I wonder if the New Jersey thing relates to the fact that US 22 stops being freeway just into NJ and when 78 was built as the "new" bypass it was a hint that anyone going anywhere in NJ on 78 should use 78 now instead of 22.
No doubt, that was the reasoning.  And, again, the original legends were approved well before FHWA/MUTCD changed their criteria regarding what can be used as control cities.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Mergingtraffic on March 06, 2017, 04:15:50 PM
Quote from: briantroutman on March 01, 2017, 11:56:05 AM
I looked but couldn’t find where this had been mentioned:

The signage at the I-78/US 22 split west of Allentown was replaced in the past year, and the new signs replace 476’s Interstate shield with one of the PTC’s green PA Turnpike keystones.

https://goo.gl/maps/W7Z43KGMDpN2 (https://goo.gl/maps/W7Z43KGMDpN2)

and exploring up to US-22 and PA-309, I see all of the original non-reflective button copy has finally been replaced with crap.

(https://c1.staticflickr.com/8/7659/16426078714_3608a88328_c.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/r2vWVG)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: sbeaver44 on March 20, 2017, 08:24:40 PM
Quote from: Mergingtraffic on March 06, 2017, 04:15:50 PM
Quote from: briantroutman on March 01, 2017, 11:56:05 AM
I looked but couldn’t find where this had been mentioned:

The signage at the I-78/US 22 split west of Allentown was replaced in the past year, and the new signs replace 476’s Interstate shield with one of the PTC’s green PA Turnpike keystones.

https://goo.gl/maps/W7Z43KGMDpN2 (https://goo.gl/maps/W7Z43KGMDpN2)

and exploring up to US-22 and PA-309, I see all of the original non-reflective button copy has finally been replaced with crap.

(https://c1.staticflickr.com/8/7659/16426078714_3608a88328_c.jpg)
(https://flic.kr/p/r2vWVG)
Speaking of Cedar Crest Blvd, did PA 29 ever terminate at US 22?  It stops at 78/309 now, but that section of highway is less than 30 yrs old.  I read the wiki page for PA 29, has an interesting history, but didn't pick up on that answer.

Also, it's funny that US 222 continues as a SR 222 at either end of itself.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jemacedo9 on March 21, 2017, 07:50:05 AM
Quote from: sbeaver44 on March 20, 2017, 08:24:40 PM

Speaking of Cedar Crest Blvd, did PA 29 ever terminate at US 22?  It stops at 78/309 now, but that section of highway is less than 30 yrs old.  I read the wiki page for PA 29, has an interesting history, but didn't pick up on that answer.

Also, it's funny that US 222 continues as a SR 222 at either end of itself.

That section of highway was PA 309 well before I-78 was there...it was reconstructed and widened ~30 years ago to be part of I-78.  The section of I-78 east of PA 309/PA 145 was new construction, as well as the small part west of US 222.

I believe the two PA 29s were once connected roughly along PA 309...back when the two routes went through Slatington along PA 873, Palmerton along PA 248, multiplexed along US 209 to Jim Thorpe, and then along PA 93 to Hazleton.  This explains the existence of PA 329.

I personally would renumber the northern PA 29 to be PA 67.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ARMOURERERIC on March 21, 2017, 09:18:23 AM
How is PA's Decade of Investment going?  I really do not hear to much about it.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jemacedo9 on March 21, 2017, 09:27:15 AM
Quote from: ARMOURERERIC on March 21, 2017, 09:18:23 AM
How is PA's Decade of Investment going?  I really do not hear to much about it.

The Road Maintenance and Preservation Program was just announced a couple of weeks ago.
http://www.penndot.gov/about-us/Pages/Act-89-Funding-Plan.aspx (http://www.penndot.gov/about-us/Pages/Act-89-Funding-Plan.aspx)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ixnay on March 21, 2017, 07:31:02 PM
Quote from: jemacedo9 on March 21, 2017, 07:50:05 AM
I believe the two PA 29s were once connected roughly along PA 309...back when the two routes went through Slatington along PA 873, Palmerton along PA 248, multiplexed along US 209 to Jim Thorpe, and then along PA 93 to Hazleton.  This explains the existence of PA 329.

Thank you.

QuoteI personally would renumber the northern PA 29 to be PA 67.

Per pahighways.com there were 2 PA 67's, in Crawford County (decommissioned 1928) and in Bradford and Susquehanna Counties (decommissioned 1930).

But what do you do with the two PA *9*7's (in Erie and Adams Counties)?

As for connecting, decommissioning, or downgrading the two U.S. 422's (relevant to this thread since both are wholly or substantially in PA)...

ixnay

Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Alps on March 21, 2017, 08:47:05 PM
Quote from: ixnay on March 21, 2017, 07:31:02 PM
Quote from: jemacedo9 on March 21, 2017, 07:50:05 AM
I believe the two PA 29s were once connected roughly along PA 309...back when the two routes went through Slatington along PA 873, Palmerton along PA 248, multiplexed along US 209 to Jim Thorpe, and then along PA 93 to Hazleton.  This explains the existence of PA 329.

Thank you.

QuoteI personally would renumber the northern PA 29 to be PA 67.

Per pahighways.com there were 2 PA 67's, in Crawford County (decommissioned 1928) and in Bradford and Susquehanna Counties (decommissioned 1930).

But what do you do with the two PA *9*7's (in Erie and Adams Counties)?

As for connecting, decommissioning, or downgrading the two U.S. 422's (relevant to this thread since both are wholly or substantially in PA)...

ixnay


Since the western one is 197 internally, sign it as that. I would say the same for any road with a different internal designation (283/300).
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: PHLBOS on April 03, 2017, 01:05:46 PM
If the info. contained in the below-article is correct & true; it looks like some of PA's gas tax is being (illegally) diverted to bolster State Police budgets.

How Harrisburg (probably illegally) mishandles road and bridge funds (http://www.philly.com/philly/news/politics/Baer-Harrisburg-roads-bridges-funds.html)

Quote from: Philadelphia Inquirer Article ExcerptsThe legislature and governors, Republican and Democrat, Tom Ridge to Tom Wolf, annually siphon off funds allocated to fix roads and bridges, and use the money for something else -- to bolster budgets of the Pennsylvania State Police.

But the way they do it looks illegal. Here's why.

The state Motor License Fund is fed by your gas taxes and license and vehicle fees. The state Constitution (Art. VIII, Sec. 11) says it shall be used "solely for construction, reconstruction, maintenance and repair of and safety on public highways and bridges."

But big chunks of the fund are not used for roads, bridges, or their safety.

How big? In just one year (fiscal 2015-16), $222 million-plus.

...

The legislative analysis shows that of the total fund money PSP got for the year examined ($755 million), $222.2 million wasn't for highway safety. It was mixed in with other money to run the PSP.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on April 15, 2017, 01:41:22 PM
Evidently US 15 isn't fully interstate-ready from Williamsport north, as there's a single at-grade intersection (https://goo.gl/maps/6bF743aDtop) with some gravel road on the northbound lanes just north of Trout Run. I suppose when/if they ever get around to completing the upgrades for I-99 on US 220, they'll also need to turn this little intersection into a proper RIRO or just block it off.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ixnay on April 15, 2017, 07:28:41 PM
Quote from: Roadsguy on April 15, 2017, 01:41:22 PM
Evidently US 15 isn't fully interstate-ready from Williamsport north, as there's a single at-grade intersection (https://goo.gl/maps/6bF743aDtop) with some gravel road on the northbound lanes just north of Trout Run. I suppose when/if they ever get around to completing the upgrades for I-99 on US 220, they'll also need to turn this little intersection into a proper RIRO or just block it off.

File with this gem on WB U.S. 50/SB U.S. 301 approaching MD 2 (Ritchie Highway)...

http://tinyurl.com/leqz4az

ixnay
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on April 15, 2017, 11:17:50 PM
Quote from: ixnay on April 15, 2017, 07:28:41 PM
Quote from: Roadsguy on April 15, 2017, 01:41:22 PM
Evidently US 15 isn't fully interstate-ready from Williamsport north, as there's a single at-grade intersection (https://goo.gl/maps/6bF743aDtop) with some gravel road on the northbound lanes just north of Trout Run. I suppose when/if they ever get around to completing the upgrades for I-99 on US 220, they'll also need to turn this little intersection into a proper RIRO or just block it off.

File with this gem on WB U.S. 50/SB U.S. 301 approaching MD 2 (Ritchie Highway)...

http://tinyurl.com/leqz4az

ixnay

Wow, and only one tiny little one-way sign to stop people from going down the wrong direction...
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Alps on April 15, 2017, 11:50:42 PM
Quote from: ixnay on April 15, 2017, 07:28:41 PM
Quote from: Roadsguy on April 15, 2017, 01:41:22 PM
Evidently US 15 isn't fully interstate-ready from Williamsport north, as there's a single at-grade intersection (https://goo.gl/maps/6bF743aDtop) with some gravel road on the northbound lanes just north of Trout Run. I suppose when/if they ever get around to completing the upgrades for I-99 on US 220, they'll also need to turn this little intersection into a proper RIRO or just block it off.

File with this gem on WB U.S. 50/SB U.S. 301 approaching MD 2 (Ritchie Highway)...

http://tinyurl.com/leqz4az

ixnay
I've driven that, in the SB direction. It's an interesting right turn at the end. Can't see why they couldn't dead end the SB direction before that point.

As for Trout Run, if Google Maps is correct then that can and should be closed off completely because there are other ways in. If Google Maps is not correct (like the sun rises in the morning) and there's no other way in, then it needs to be a simple RIRO. Meanwhile, there are some interesting solutions in that area, like an overpass at Confair Ln. to the single house in the median. With all the expense PA went through for single properties and other random small roads, they couldn't find a solution for 4 Mile Road?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on April 16, 2017, 07:16:52 AM
Work on the I-83/US 322 interchange at Union Deposit Rd (Exit 48) begins Tuesday with planned lane closures along Union Deposit Rd. (http://www.pennlive.com/news/2017/04/interstate_83_overpass_work_to.html) (PennLive)

Also an update on the I-81 widening from Exits 70-72. (http://abc27.com/2017/04/16/two-major-road-projects-kicking-off-in-dauphin-county/) (ABC27, also mentions the work on I-83)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ixnay on April 16, 2017, 07:53:37 AM
Quote from: Alps on April 15, 2017, 11:50:42 PM
Quote from: ixnay on April 15, 2017, 07:28:41 PM
Quote from: Roadsguy on April 15, 2017, 01:41:22 PM
Evidently US 15 isn't fully interstate-ready from Williamsport north, as there's a single at-grade intersection (https://goo.gl/maps/6bF743aDtop) with some gravel road on the northbound lanes just north of Trout Run. I suppose when/if they ever get around to completing the upgrades for I-99 on US 220, they'll also need to turn this little intersection into a proper RIRO or just block it off.

File with this gem on WB U.S. 50/SB U.S. 301 approaching MD 2 (Ritchie Highway)...

http://tinyurl.com/leqz4az

ixnay
I've driven that, in the SB direction. It's an interesting right turn at the end. Can't see why they couldn't dead end the SB direction before that point.

Like they did with this on the other side of 50/301.

http://tinyurl.com/kgzstlb

This is apparently the continuation of MD 648 (the next driveable segment begins here at http://tinyurl.com/lt7dsa3), which finally terminates for good at MD 450 at the Naval Academy bridge.

ixnay
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jp the roadgeek on April 16, 2017, 02:55:41 PM


QuoteI personally would renumber the northern PA 29 to be PA 67.

Why not number it PA 7 to continue the number from NY?  It's available.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on April 16, 2017, 03:26:26 PM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on April 16, 2017, 02:55:41 PM


QuoteI personally would renumber the northern PA 29 to be PA 67.

Why not number it PA 7 to continue the number from NY?  It's available.

I always thought PA 7 would be better for the mile-long unnumbered road connecting DE 7 at the state line to PA 41 in Delaware County, but this makes more sense.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ekt8750 on April 16, 2017, 04:28:16 PM
Quote from: Roadsguy on April 16, 2017, 03:26:26 PM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on April 16, 2017, 02:55:41 PM


QuoteI personally would renumber the northern PA 29 to be PA 67.

Why not number it PA 7 to continue the number from NY?  It's available.

I always thought PA 7 would be better for the mile-long unnumbered road connecting DE 7 at the state line to PA 41 in Delaware County, but this makes more sense.

They probably don't want to do it because it would violate the route numbering system. PA for some reason goes against what most of the country has adopted of north-south routes being odd numbered and east-west being even for its state routes. Here it's the other way around. So a north-south Route 7 would be a non-starter.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Alps on April 16, 2017, 10:14:46 PM
I'm sorry, you think PA actually cares about their numbering system? Ha.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on April 17, 2017, 07:08:03 AM
Quote from: Alps on April 16, 2017, 10:14:46 PM
I'm sorry, you think PA actually cares about their numbering system? Ha.

Your response makes much more sense to me.   :-D
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ekt8750 on April 17, 2017, 09:58:25 AM
Quote from: Alps on April 16, 2017, 10:14:46 PM
I'm sorry, you think PA actually cares about their numbering system? Ha.

Silly me  :-D
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on April 17, 2017, 10:09:07 AM
Quote from: Alps on April 16, 2017, 10:14:46 PM
I'm sorry, you think PA actually cares about their numbering system? Ha.

There are so many exceptions to this "rule" (PA 23, 29, 51, 33, etc.) that I didn't even realize there was a rule to begin with.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jeffandnicole on April 17, 2017, 02:45:57 PM
Quote from: Roadsguy on April 17, 2017, 10:09:07 AM
Quote from: Alps on April 16, 2017, 10:14:46 PM
I'm sorry, you think PA actually cares about their numbering system? Ha.

There are so many exceptions to this "rule" (PA 23, 29, 51, 33, etc.) that I didn't even realize there was a rule to begin with.

Is it even a rule? Or just more of a coincidence?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: vdeane on April 17, 2017, 08:57:53 PM
NY also does that with one and two digit state routes, but again, there are a zillion exceptions.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on April 17, 2017, 09:44:25 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on April 17, 2017, 02:45:57 PM
Quote from: Roadsguy on April 17, 2017, 10:09:07 AM
Quote from: Alps on April 16, 2017, 10:14:46 PM
I'm sorry, you think PA actually cares about their numbering system? Ha.

There are so many exceptions to this "rule" (PA 23, 29, 51, 33, etc.) that I didn't even realize there was a rule to begin with.

Is it even a rule? Or just more of a coincidence?

Well from my quick look at various routes to make sure, it seems most one- and two-digit state routes follow this rule, but there are so many exceptions it's difficult to see there's a rule at all.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: empirestate on April 17, 2017, 10:10:17 PM
Quote from: vdeane on April 17, 2017, 08:57:53 PM
NY also does that with one and two digit state routes, but again, there are a zillion exceptions.

I'm not sure NY has really observed that since the 1924 system.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jemacedo9 on April 18, 2017, 07:57:36 AM
PA had system which was well outlined on Tim Reichard's PA Highways site.  For 1 and 2 digits; routes ending in even # ran N-S, odd # N-S, and ending in 0 filled in gaps.  3 digit routes bet 101-799 were spurs off of related 2 digits.  820-999 were sequential spurs off of 2 digits in reverse order (832 was a spur off of 98, 999 was a spur off of 1/now US 30).

The first renumbering, when US routes were introduced, was the first of many rule violations. 
29 used to be connected as one route and used to be 22, before US 22...so it fits
33 used to be US 11 south of Harrisburg, so it fits.

Much more info here: http://www.m-plex.com/roads/numbering.html (http://www.m-plex.com/roads/numbering.html)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: vdeane on April 18, 2017, 10:16:31 PM
Quote from: empirestate on April 17, 2017, 10:10:17 PM
Quote from: vdeane on April 17, 2017, 08:57:53 PM
NY also does that with one and two digit state routes, but again, there are a zillion exceptions.

I'm not sure NY has really observed that since the 1924 system.
The pattern still holds today, so it must have been at least acknowledged in the 1930 renumbering that gave us the modern system.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: empirestate on April 19, 2017, 09:37:43 AM
Quote from: vdeane on April 18, 2017, 10:16:31 PM
Quote from: empirestate on April 17, 2017, 10:10:17 PM
Quote from: vdeane on April 17, 2017, 08:57:53 PM
NY also does that with one and two digit state routes, but again, there are a zillion exceptions.

I'm not sure NY has really observed that since the 1924 system.
The pattern still holds today, so it must have been at least acknowledged in the 1930 renumbering that gave us the modern system.

I think it probably was, and so wasn't patently destroyed. But it doesn't look like they especially paid attention to it for any of the new routes assigned at the time.
Title: I-476: “Broomall” replaced what?
Post by: briantroutman on May 03, 2017, 02:42:55 PM
Since moving back to the Philadelphia area, I've been driving I-476 quite often and just noticed that on all guide signs at the interchange with PA 3, "Broomall" is on a greenout plate that's slightly narrower than "Upper Darby"–assumably covering up a different westbound control city that was signed previously. Anyone know what that was? West Chester?

"Upper Darby" doesn't appear to have been changed.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jemacedo9 on May 03, 2017, 03:20:22 PM
Quote from: briantroutman on May 03, 2017, 02:42:55 PM
Since moving back to the Philadelphia area, I’ve been driving I-476 quite often and just noticed that on all guide signs at the interchange with PA 3, “Broomall” is on a greenout plate that’s slightly narrower than “Upper Darby”—assumably covering up a different westbound control city that was signed previously. Anyone know what that was? West Chester?

“Upper Darby” doesn’t appear to have been changed.

I vaguely remember "Newtown Sq" but I may be wrong.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: PHLBOS on May 03, 2017, 03:44:50 PM
Quote from: jemacedo9 on May 03, 2017, 03:20:22 PM
Quote from: briantroutman on May 03, 2017, 02:42:55 PM
Since moving back to the Philadelphia area, I've been driving I-476 quite often and just noticed that on all guide signs at the interchange with PA 3, "Broomall"  is on a greenout plate that's slightly narrower than "Upper Darby" –assumably covering up a different westbound control city that was signed previously. Anyone know what that was? West Chester?

"Upper Darby"  doesn't appear to have been changed.

I vaguely remember "Newtown Sq" but I may be wrong.
Correct.  When the signs were first erected & when the highway opened; it did indeed read Newtown Square (or Newtown Sq) but such was replaced with Broomall about a year later.   

At the same time, supplemental signage for the Media/Swarthmore interchange (old Exit 2, current Exit 3) indicating Baltimore Pike were also erected.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Ian on May 04, 2017, 09:49:35 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on May 03, 2017, 03:44:50 PM
Quote from: jemacedo9 on May 03, 2017, 03:20:22 PM
Quote from: briantroutman on May 03, 2017, 02:42:55 PM
Since moving back to the Philadelphia area, I've been driving I-476 quite often and just noticed that on all guide signs at the interchange with PA 3, "Broomall"  is on a greenout plate that's slightly narrower than "Upper Darby" –assumably covering up a different westbound control city that was signed previously. Anyone know what that was? West Chester?

"Upper Darby"  doesn't appear to have been changed.

I vaguely remember "Newtown Sq" but I may be wrong.
Correct.  When the signs were first erected & when the highway opened; it did indeed read Newtown Square (or Newtown Sq) but such was replaced with Broomall about a year later.   

You know, I had always wondered myself what was under that patch, seeing as it's not too far up the Blue Route from where my hometown is. Thanks for that piece of information!
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: briantroutman on May 04, 2017, 11:13:36 PM
jemacedo9, PHLBOS-

Thanks for solving the mystery.

I didn't think "West Chester"  could be the answer since it is slightly wider (spelled out) than "Upper Darby" –which itself is slightly wider than the greenout panel. And I couldn't imagine PennDOT using "W. Chester"  on a guide sign.

In some ways, I think "Newtown Sq"  is a more useful control destination than "Broomall" , and it's also what PennDOT signs for PA 3 East on US 202 in West Chester. I wonder what local political concerns were at play with regard to the change. In a similar instance: I was quite surprised to read about how resentful residents of Kulpsville were over the Turnpike interchange being signed as "Lansdale" .

Quote from: Ian on May 04, 2017, 09:49:35 PM
You know, I had always wondered myself what was under that patch, seeing as it's not too far up the Blue Route from where my hometown is.

Don't forget–Media's everybody's hometown! And now, mine as well. I enjoy living here.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Ian on May 04, 2017, 11:54:25 PM
Quote from: briantroutman on May 04, 2017, 11:13:36 PM
Don't forget–Media's everybody's hometown! And now, mine as well. I enjoy living here.

Nice, I loved growing up in Media. It's very walkable, and the trolley is pretty neat. Many late night walks to the Wawa on Baltimore Pike with my high school buddies were had (and still happen whenever I take part in the weekend bar crawls when I'm visiting home). I miss living there.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: PHLBOS on May 05, 2017, 09:05:15 AM
Quote from: briantroutman on May 04, 2017, 11:13:36 PMIn some ways, I think "Newtown Sq"  is a more useful control destination than "Broomall" , and it's also what PennDOT signs for PA 3 East on US 202 in West Chester. I wonder what local political concerns were at play with regard to the change.
I agree with you that Newtown Sq should have remained on the main signage and Broomall should've been on the supplemental signs for the following reasons:

1.  The interchange itself is located in Broomall.

2.  One can easily access Broomall from either PA 3 westbound or Lawrence Road, located just east of the interchange; the latter has the Lawrence Park Shopping Center located at its southern terminus.

Whether Marple Township (which Broomall is a part of) swayed PennDOT to do what they did on those signs is not completely known.  Personally, I'm surprised that Haverford Township, located just east of the interchange didn't push to have Havertown replace Upper Darby on the main signage; such does appear on supplemental signage.  Then again, Haverford Township may not have been too pleased about I-476 becoming reality at the time.

The sign changes along with the fore-mentioned supplemental signage came about due to complaints PennDOT received from motorists that several interchange signs along I-476 listed too little and/or vague information. 

The signage that received the largest amounts of complaints was the Baltimore Pike interchange; which only listed Media & Swarthmore and gave no hint that such can serve Springfield (only the US 1 interchange listed such at the time) or that the road was indeed Baltimore Pike.

While PennDOT followed the letter of the MUTCD law with its signage & later supplemental signage; IMHO, they should have done what other agencies (NJDOT & MassDPW/Highway/DOT) have done and listed both the street name along with the 2 control cities on the main panels. 
Title: Why doesn't PA 100 follow Graphite Mine Road around Eagle?
Post by: briantroutman on May 05, 2017, 05:02:49 PM
Another observation from driving around SEPA:

While I was a student at West Chester, PennDOT was building a short bypass of the village of Eagle, and it seemed inevitable that they would move the PA 100 designation to the bypass after its completion.

But I drove through there today, and to my surprise, PA 100 still follows Pottstown Pike through Eagle, and the bypass carries only its name: Graphite Mine Road. PennDOT does hint that Graphite Mine is a bypass, though: From the south, the lane from PA 100 to Graphite Mine Road is signed "Graphite Mine Rd to PA 100 North" . And from the north, a sign carries the corresponding message ("Graphite Mine Rd to PA 100 South" ).

Anyone have ideas as to why PennDOT wouldn't simply move the 100 shields to the bypass?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on May 05, 2017, 05:45:03 PM
Quote from: briantroutman on May 05, 2017, 05:02:49 PM
Another observation from driving around SEPA:

While I was a student at West Chester, PennDOT was building a short bypass of the village of Eagle, and it seemed inevitable that they would move the PA 100 designation to the bypass after its completion.

But I drove through there today, and to my surprise, PA 100 still follows Pottstown Pike through Eagle, and the bypass carries only its name: Graphite Mine Road. PennDOT does hint that Graphite Mine is a bypass, though: From the south, the lane from PA 100 to Graphite Mine Road is signed "Graphite Mine Rd to PA 100 North" . And from the north, a sign carries the corresponding message ("Graphite Mine Rd to PA 100 South" ).

Anyone have ideas as to why PennDOT wouldn't simply move the 100 shields to the bypass?

I noticed this via the PA 100 Wikipedia article (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pennsylvania_Route_100) and noted to myself to clinch both whenever I get to clinching what I have left of PA 100.

Also the PA 283 reconstruction from Eisenhower Blvd to PA 341 has begun. (http://abc27.com/2017/05/04/penndot-marks-start-of-route-283-construction-project/)  Note that the loop ramp from PA 283 WB to I-283 SB will become a left-turn at a new traffic light that connects to the existing ramps to the PA Turnpike from PA 283 EB and Eisenhower Blvd.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: qguy on May 05, 2017, 09:28:18 PM
Quote from: Ian on May 04, 2017, 11:54:25 PM
Quote from: briantroutman on May 04, 2017, 11:13:36 PM
Don't forget–Media's everybody's hometown! And now, mine as well. I enjoy living here.

Nice, I loved growing up in Media. It's very walkable, and the trolley is pretty neat. Many late night walks to the Wawa on Baltimore Pike with my high school buddies were had (and still happen whenever I take part in the weekend bar crawls when I'm visiting home). I miss living there.

And the food options are many and great!
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jemacedo9 on May 06, 2017, 08:33:08 AM
Quote from: briantroutman on May 05, 2017, 05:02:49 PM
Another observation from driving around SEPA:

While I was a student at West Chester, PennDOT was building a short bypass of the village of Eagle, and it seemed inevitable that they would move the PA 100 designation to the bypass after its completion.

But I drove through there today, and to my surprise, PA 100 still follows Pottstown Pike through Eagle, and the bypass carries only its name: Graphite Mine Road. PennDOT does hint that Graphite Mine is a bypass, though: From the south, the lane from PA 100 to Graphite Mine Road is signed "Graphite Mine Rd to PA 100 North" . And from the north, a sign carries the corresponding message ("Graphite Mine Rd to PA 100 South" ).

Anyone have ideas as to why PennDOT wouldn't simply move the 100 shields to the bypass?

I worked in that area when it was constructed.  Vague recall - I believe Upper Uwchlan Twp paid for part of most of the construction, and in fact, the portion north of Byers Rd is not a state road at all; it's township owned.  The portion south of Byers Rd is SR 1055.  It's either that reason, or the businesses wanted to keep PA 100's routing on the original road.

What bothers me is:  northbound, the design encourages you to take the bypass road, by making PA 100 take a left.  Southbound is the opposite...the design encourages you to NOT take the bypass road, because the bypass road is the one making a left.  At a minimum, I feel either the bypass should be labeled PA 100 By-Pass, or the old road could be designated PA 100 Business...but that's why I think the issue is, who paid for construction.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: briantroutman on May 07, 2017, 05:48:20 PM
Quote from: jemacedo9 on May 06, 2017, 08:33:08 AM
...the portion north of Byers Rd is not a state road at all; it's township owned.  The portion south of Byers Rd is SR 1055.

Looking at PennDOT's type 10 map for Chester County (http://www.dot7.state.pa.us/BPR_pdf_files/Maps/GHS/Roadnames/Chester_GHSN.PDF), that appears to be correct. Only the southern third of the bypass is a state road. Are there any instances where a PA numbered route is signed over a non-PennDOT-maintained road? I don't know of any.

Perhaps it's not so coincidental, then, that the road's geometry northbound (the PennDOT maintained portion) encourages through traffic to use the bypass, and the southbound geometry doesn't. But still, I'm baffled as to why PennDOT and the township would spend millions of dollars building a bypass that would not or perhaps could not be designated as the route number it's intended to relieve. After all, most PA 100 traffic is simply going to follow the 100 shields; people aren't looking for tiny text that says "TO PA 100 NORTH FOLLOW..."

Quote from: 74/171FAN on May 05, 2017, 05:45:03 PM
Also the PA 283 reconstruction from Eisenhower Blvd to PA 341 has begun.

I'm quite disappointed (although honestly, not very surprised) that PennDOT's reconstruction of this interchange is so unambitious. Removal of one loop (PA 283 West to I-283 South) will eliminate the minor weave there, but the plan does nothing to address the larger problem: The through movement (Harrisburg to Lancaster) is squeezed down to a single lane and through the tightest of the four loop ramps. As I sketched over a decade ago, I think a truly complete solution needs to eliminate the TOTSO.

(https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4185/34387998991_e9fbc60c44_o.jpg)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on May 07, 2017, 06:52:08 PM
Quote from: briantroutman on May 07, 2017, 05:48:20 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on May 05, 2017, 05:45:03 PM
Also the PA 283 reconstruction from Eisenhower Blvd to PA 341 has begun.

I'm quite disappointed (although honestly, not very surprised) that PennDOT's reconstruction of this interchange is so unambitious. Removal of one loop (PA 283 West to I-283 South) will eliminate the minor weave there, but the plan does nothing to address the larger problem: The through movement (Harrisburg to Lancaster) is squeezed down to a single lane and through the tightest of the four loop ramps. As I sketched over a decade ago, I think a truly complete solution needs to eliminate the TOTSO.

I think District 8 is so focused on making sure they just have funding for I-83 in Harrisburg and York that I think that pretty much any other major projects are most likely off the table for now.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: thenetwork on May 08, 2017, 09:45:52 AM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on May 07, 2017, 06:52:08 PM
Quote from: briantroutman on May 07, 2017, 05:48:20 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on May 05, 2017, 05:45:03 PM
Also the PA 283 reconstruction from Eisenhower Blvd to PA 341 has begun.

I'm quite disappointed (although honestly, not very surprised) that PennDOT's reconstruction of this interchange is so unambitious. Removal of one loop (PA 283 West to I-283 South) will eliminate the minor weave there, but the plan does nothing to address the larger problem: The through movement (Harrisburg to Lancaster) is squeezed down to a single lane and through the tightest of the four loop ramps. As I sketched over a decade ago, I think a truly complete solution needs to eliminate the TOTSO.

I think District 8 is so focused on making sure they just have funding for I-83 in Harrisburg and York that I think that pretty much any other major projects are most likely off the table for now.

They don't call 'em "Capital" Improvement Projects for nothin'..
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jemacedo9 on May 08, 2017, 01:19:31 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on May 07, 2017, 06:52:08 PM
Quote from: briantroutman on May 07, 2017, 05:48:20 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on May 05, 2017, 05:45:03 PM
Also the PA 283 reconstruction from Eisenhower Blvd to PA 341 has begun.

I’m quite disappointed (although honestly, not very surprised) that PennDOT’s reconstruction of this interchange is so unambitious. Removal of one loop (PA 283 West to I-283 South) will eliminate the minor weave there, but the plan does nothing to address the larger problem: The through movement (Harrisburg to Lancaster) is squeezed down to a single lane and through the tightest of the four loop ramps. As I sketched over a decade ago, I think a truly complete solution needs to eliminate the TOTSO.

I think District 8 is so focused on making sure they just have funding for I-83 in Harrisburg and York that I think that pretty much any other major projects are most likely off the table for now.

Agreed.  My question is - is an $89M full reconstruction really needed, as opposed to a cheaper rehabilitation?  I would rather, in this case, do a cheaper rehab of most of the 6 mile length, and then add the flyovers, then this. 
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jemacedo9 on May 08, 2017, 01:21:55 PM
Quote from: briantroutman on May 07, 2017, 05:48:20 PM
Quote from: jemacedo9 on May 06, 2017, 08:33:08 AM
...the portion north of Byers Rd is not a state road at all; it's township owned.  The portion south of Byers Rd is SR 1055.

Looking at PennDOT’s type 10 map for Chester County (http://www.dot7.state.pa.us/BPR_pdf_files/Maps/GHS/Roadnames/Chester_GHSN.PDF), that appears to be correct. Only the southern third of the bypass is a state road. Are there any instances where a PA numbered route is signed over a non-PennDOT-maintained road? I don’t know of any.

Perhaps it’s not so coincidental, then, that the road’s geometry northbound (the PennDOT maintained portion) encourages through traffic to use the bypass, and the southbound geometry doesn’t. But still, I’m baffled as to why PennDOT and the township would spend millions of dollars building a bypass that would not or perhaps could not be designated as the route number it’s intended to relieve. After all, most PA 100 traffic is simply going to follow the 100 shields; people aren’t looking for tiny text that says “TO PA 100 NORTH FOLLOW...

That baffles me also.

PA 23 in Lower Merion Twp Montgomery County has a long portion that is not an SR.  I don't know if there are many other examples in PA.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Bitmapped on May 08, 2017, 09:39:37 PM
Quote from: jemacedo9 on May 08, 2017, 01:21:55 PM
Quote from: briantroutman on May 07, 2017, 05:48:20 PM
Quote from: jemacedo9 on May 06, 2017, 08:33:08 AM
...the portion north of Byers Rd is not a state road at all; it's township owned.  The portion south of Byers Rd is SR 1055.

Looking at PennDOT’s type 10 map for Chester County (http://www.dot7.state.pa.us/BPR_pdf_files/Maps/GHS/Roadnames/Chester_GHSN.PDF), that appears to be correct. Only the southern third of the bypass is a state road. Are there any instances where a PA numbered route is signed over a non-PennDOT-maintained road? I don’t know of any.

Perhaps it’s not so coincidental, then, that the road’s geometry northbound (the PennDOT maintained portion) encourages through traffic to use the bypass, and the southbound geometry doesn’t. But still, I’m baffled as to why PennDOT and the township would spend millions of dollars building a bypass that would not or perhaps could not be designated as the route number it’s intended to relieve. After all, most PA 100 traffic is simply going to follow the 100 shields; people aren’t looking for tiny text that says “TO PA 100 NORTH FOLLOW...

That baffles me also.

PA 23 in Lower Merion Twp Montgomery County has a long portion that is not an SR.  I don't know if there are many other examples in PA.

PA 281 in Fayette County from the WV line to the Markleysburg borough limits is maintained by Henry Clay Township. As you might expect, a rural township in a poor county doesn't do the greatest job with its roads.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on May 08, 2017, 11:38:05 PM
Nothing at all inside Lebanon city limits is maintained by PennDOT. It's all city-maintained, including numbered roads.

Also, as bad a rep as PennDOT gets for road maintenance, Lebanon is even worse (https://goo.gl/maps/gyCHkvEKaL62).
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ixnay on May 09, 2017, 01:43:35 PM
Quote from: Roadsguy on May 08, 2017, 11:38:05 PMNothing at all inside Lebanon city limits is maintained by PennDOT. It's all city-maintained, including numbered roads.

Sounds similar to Baltimore city in MD, where all numbered routes are maintained by the city (including IIRC I-83 but not including I-95 and I-895, which are maintained by the MdTA).

Are there any other cities or boroughs in PA where the municipality maintains the numbered roads?  How about Bloomsburg, which is PA's only town?

ixnay
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: briantroutman on May 09, 2017, 02:32:15 PM
Quote from: ixnay on May 09, 2017, 01:43:35 PM
Are there any other cities or boroughs in PA where the municipality maintains the numbered roads?

PennDOT's type 10 county maps use a red line to mark state-maintained routes...and they also a red line to mark PA traffic routes–regardless of ownership. So unfortunately, you can't tell from the map whether a numbered PA route is state owned or not.

You can, however, see on the Lebanon County type 10 map that all of state-maintained quadrant routes stop dead at the Lebanon city boundary.

(https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4155/33715798594_1a25d330e2_z.jpg)


Quote from: ixnay on May 09, 2017, 01:43:35 PM
How about Bloomsburg, which is PA's only town?

Again, the map doesn't show whether the numbered traffic routes are state maintained or not, but unlike Lebanon, Bloomsburg has at least two state-maintained quadrant routes, state-maintained ramps at the US 11/PA 42 interchange, and a section of I-80 within its boundaries.

(https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4178/34558485415_38f6dedec0_z.jpg)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on May 09, 2017, 04:06:56 PM
The 2013 traffic count maps would show important non-PennDOT roads with a dotted line, including the numbered routes in Lebanon. All the years since then don't make this distinction, though. Numbered roads are solid no matter what, and non-PennDOT roads are given no special indication at all.

Interestingly, the little bit of 422 eastbound (Walnut St.) outside city limits is also locally-owned (township I guess).
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Bitmapped on May 09, 2017, 05:09:34 PM
According to the Type 5 map for Lebanon city, there is a small section of state-maintained US 422 (SR 0422) on the eastern edge of the city. See http://www.dot7.state.pa.us/BPR_pdf_files/Maps/Type5/38301.pdf
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on May 09, 2017, 05:27:21 PM
Quote from: Bitmapped on May 09, 2017, 05:09:34 PM
According to the Type 5 map for Lebanon city, there is a small section of state-maintained US 422 (SR 0422) on the eastern edge of the city. See http://www.dot7.state.pa.us/BPR_pdf_files/Maps/Type5/38301.pdf

The city line actually runs along 422 WB and 897 here, so the SE quadrant of the Cumberland-897 intersection isn't part of the city. Also, iTMS (http://www.dot7.state.pa.us/itms/main.htm) and the little LRS paddle signs indicate SR 0422 as stopping at 897 and not poking into the city.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: sbeaver44 on May 09, 2017, 05:45:07 PM
Quote from: Roadsguy on May 09, 2017, 05:27:21 PM
Quote from: Bitmapped on May 09, 2017, 05:09:34 PM
According to the Type 5 map for Lebanon city, there is a small section of state-maintained US 422 (SR 0422) on the eastern edge of the city. See http://www.dot7.state.pa.us/BPR_pdf_files/Maps/Type5/38301.pdf

The city line actually runs along 422 WB and 897 here, so the SE quadrant of the Cumberland-897 intersection isn't part of the city. Also, iTMS (http://www.dot7.state.pa.us/itms/main.htm) and the little LRS paddle signs indicate SR 0422 as stopping at 897 and not poking into the city.
That 422/897 intersection always looks weird to me, since 422 W is otherwise a one way street through Lebanon.

470 E Cumberland St

https://goo.gl/maps/VPWygXcrvsG2

Nexus 6P

Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on May 13, 2017, 08:58:55 AM
FOX43:  Mount Rose Avenue roadway project behind schedule, according to PennDOT (http://fox43.com/2017/05/12/mount-rose-avenue-roadway-project-behind-schedule-according-to-penndot/)

I had heard about this some while working with District 8, but the additional excavation mentioned in the article is just part of the problem.

WFMZ:  Work to fix falling rock problem closes Route 724 in Cumru (http://www.wfmz.com/news/berks/work-to-fix-falling-rock-problem-closes-route-724-in-cumru/499655000)
QuoteCUMRU TWP., Pa. - The threat of falling rocks has prompted PennDOT to close a stretch of Route 724 in Berks County for the next 10 days.

The stretch of Route 724 between Interstate 176 and Route 10 in Cumru Township was closed Monday so that crews can address an ongoing problem with rocks sliding off the adjacent hillside and onto the road.

"It's a little bit scary going through there," Joe Pichler told 69 News last week.

PennDOT will clean up rocks that have fallen onto the road and replace the fence that runs between the road and the hillside.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jemacedo9 on May 17, 2017, 02:52:49 PM
New website for the US 30 Coatesville-Downingtown Bypass reconstruction (AND WIDENING) to occur next decade (Chester County/SE PA)...

http://www.us30-chesco.com/ (http://www.us30-chesco.com/)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: PHLBOS on May 17, 2017, 05:06:52 PM
Quote from: jemacedo9 on May 17, 2017, 02:52:49 PM
New website for the US 30 Coatesville-Downingtown Bypass reconstruction (AND WIDENING) to occur next decade (Chester County/SE PA)...
http://www.us30-chesco.com/ (http://www.us30-chesco.com/)
So US 30 between PA 82 & Business US 30, east of Downingtown is being widened from 4 to 6 lanes.  Isn't such going to create a bottleneck along the newer 4-lane Exton stretch between Business US 30 & US 202?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Beltway on May 17, 2017, 05:16:49 PM
Quote from: jemacedo9 on May 17, 2017, 02:52:49 PM
New website for the US 30 Coatesville-Downingtown Bypass reconstruction (AND WIDENING) to occur next decade (Chester County/SE PA)...

http://www.us30-chesco.com/ (http://www.us30-chesco.com/)

The eastern half will be widened to 6 lanes with 12-foot right and left shoulders.  Very good!

Are there any plans to widen the US-30 Exton Bypass?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: briantroutman on May 17, 2017, 06:44:05 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on May 17, 2017, 05:06:52 PM
Isn't such going to create a bottleneck along the newer 4-lane Exton stretch between Business US 30 & US 202?

Quote from: Beltway on May 17, 2017, 05:16:49 PM
Are there any plans to widen the US-30 Exton Bypass?

I don't know if there are any widening plans farther east, but according to PennDOT's Chester County traffic volume map (http://www.dot7.state.pa.us/BPR_pdf_files/MAPS/Traffic/Traffic_Volume/County_Maps/Chester_TV.pdf), US 30 AADT peaks at 75,000 at Downingtown before declining to 61,000 west of PA 100 and then dropping to just 38,000 between PA 100 and US 202.

In other words, close to half–if not more than half–of US 30 traffic turns over at the PA 100 interchange. And as demonstrated the by long lines of vehicles stopped in the right lane or on the shoulder of eastbound US 30 approaching that interchange at peak times, the interchange itself is woefully under-designed. So arguably, widening the freeway farther west in Downingtown isn't creating a new bottleneck so much as it is moving an existing bottleneck further westward–choking traffic heading into a chokepoint.

The additional lane capacity needed between the eastern end of Downingtown and PA 100 would be in the form of dedicated lanes to and from PA 100. But more pressing is a complete reconfiguration of the interchange itself–probably to include streamlined access to an expanded park-and-ride facility at the Exton train station.

Widening the eastern half of the Exton Bypass is probably unnecessary.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: qguy on May 18, 2017, 06:40:45 PM
Until sometime in the 1970s, PennDOH/PennDOT envisioned PA 100 being upgraded to a freeway from its split with US 202 just north of West Chester to I-78/US 22. Certain features in places along this length, like interchanges and surface expressway design standards, are a legacy of that.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ixnay on May 18, 2017, 08:03:21 PM
Quote from: briantroutman on May 17, 2017, 06:44:05 PMI don't know if there are any widening plans farther east, but according to PennDOT's Chester County traffic volume map (http://www.dot7.state.pa.us/BPR_pdf_files/MAPS/Traffic/Traffic_Volume/County_Maps/Chester_TV.pdf), US 30 AADT peaks at 75,000 at Downingtown before declining to 61,000 west of PA 100 and then dropping to just 38,000 between PA 100 and US 202.

In other words, close to half–if not more than half–of US 30 traffic turns over at the PA 100 interchange.

What's in Exton and/or West Chester that causes the dropoff on 30 east of 100?

ixnay
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jemacedo9 on May 19, 2017, 08:00:13 AM
Quote from: ixnay on May 18, 2017, 08:03:21 PM
Quote from: briantroutman on May 17, 2017, 06:44:05 PMI don’t know if there are any widening plans farther east, but according to PennDOT’s Chester County traffic volume map (http://www.dot7.state.pa.us/BPR_pdf_files/MAPS/Traffic/Traffic_Volume/County_Maps/Chester_TV.pdf), US 30 AADT peaks at 75,000 at Downingtown before declining to 61,000 west of PA 100 and then dropping to just 38,000 between PA 100 and US 202.

In other words, close to half—if not more than half—of US 30 traffic turns over at the PA 100 interchange.

What's in Exton and/or West Chester that causes the dropoff on 30 east of 100?

ixnay

Commuters.  There are a lot of corporate centers and retail centers in the Exton area, along Business 30 and along 100.  With the backups at the 100 exit, I'm sure many people exit at Business 30 to get to Exton.  As far as 100 south, West Chester is the county seat, so the courthouse and county gov't are there.  Plus, many people work in the Wilmington area with those Corp HQ and commute down 202 south, or in the Newtown SQ area that take 202 South to PA 3 East.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Chris19001 on May 19, 2017, 12:41:06 PM
Quote from: jemacedo9 on May 19, 2017, 08:00:13 AM
Commuters.  There are a lot of corporate centers and retail centers in the Exton area, along Business 30 and along 100.  With the backups at the 100 exit, I'm sure many people exit at Business 30 to get to Exton.  As far as 100 south, West Chester is the county seat, so the courthouse and county gov't are there.  Plus, many people work in the Wilmington area with those Corp HQ and commute down 202 south, or in the Newtown SQ area that take 202 South to PA 3 East.
And the regional rail station is just across the street at the interchange.  It is one of the few convenient "park and ride" stations on the SEPTA network.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: briantroutman on May 19, 2017, 10:21:21 PM
^ Agreed on the suburb-to-suburb commuting patterns, and while I initially thought commuters parking at Exton might be a significant factor, SEPTA's website indicates that the parking lot has less than 650 spaces. That might make a dent in traffic volumes, but it's just a little over 1% of the AADT of US 30 west of PA 100.

In addition to the areas served directly by PA 100 (Eagle, Lionville, Exton, West Chester) and by US 202 south of West Chester (Concordville, Wilmington), this is a popular "jumping off point"  to avoid the nearly constant traffic pinch on I-76 east of King of Prussia and on I-476. Traffic makes the connection to PA 113, PA 100, and onto the Turnpike for destinations north and east–or heads south on PA 100 and disperses across PA 3, PA 352, US 1, and a number of other routes and back roads into western and southern Delaware County and South Philadelphia.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on May 31, 2017, 07:13:32 AM
Construction starts June 11th to put auxiliary lanes (or more or less extend the existing ones from the US 22 split) on I-78/US 22 from PA 100 to the US 22 split. (http://www.mcall.com/news/breaking/mc-upper-macungie-interstate-78-lanes-20170530-story.html)(The Morning Call)

I remember the merge of US 22 WB onto I-78 WB there was a bottleneck (especially on Fridays) when I went to Allentown a lot last year for work.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Mergingtraffic on June 12, 2017, 07:07:30 PM
There's an EB stub on I-176, what was that for?

https://www.google.com/maps/@40.1664994,-75.886184,749m/data=!3m1!1e3

Any update on the US-219 stub around Somerset?

Any other stubs with a future to them?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: briantroutman on June 12, 2017, 07:13:48 PM
Quote from: Mergingtraffic on June 12, 2017, 07:07:30 PM
There's an EB stub on I-176, what was that for?

The Runaway Truck Expressway–which was built in its entirety: https://goo.gl/maps/Az6hLBo5SUP2
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: rickmastfan67 on June 13, 2017, 01:14:51 AM
Quote from: Mergingtraffic on June 12, 2017, 07:07:30 PM
Any update on the US-219 stub around Somerset?

https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=2269.0
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Pete from Boston on June 13, 2017, 07:00:18 AM
Quote from: sparker on February 11, 2017, 02:59:58 AM
Quote from: amroad17 on February 10, 2017, 07:51:09 PM
People should appreciate the novelty that is Breezewood.  Yes, there is stop-and-go traffic at times but where else on our Interstate system is something quite like this?  I never did mind driving through Breezewood--in fact, I would purposely stop there just to eat or fuel up.  Building a new interchange bypassing Breezewood would financially put a big dent in the area.  If Breezewood is such a pain to people then they should find a way not to drive through Breezewood.  There are ways to avoid it--if it is such a hassle.  I, myself, find Breezewood to be unique and a throwback to our early days of the Interstate system--and if I need to drive through there to go to a certain destination, then I will.

WTF?  Yeah, it's unique -- but a throwback?  First time I've heard anyone nostalgic for the times when the Interstate network was still in bits & pieces.  Sort of reminds me of that old Dana Carvey SNL sketch where the elderly gentleman waxes on about unpleasant or even cruel practices of his youth, concluding with the phrase "And we LIKED it!" :-D  Oh well, to each their own, I suppose.

I also like Breezewood.  And I am nostalgic for those days as well.  You don't have to want something back to be nostalgic about it.  I appreciate the fascinating transition into the era of Interstates and the collision of old and new worlds.  What historically-interested person wouldn't find such a period of change remarkable?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on June 15, 2017, 04:44:12 PM
What's the current status of the US 6/11 reconstruction from Factoryville to Clarks Summit?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: empirestate on June 15, 2017, 09:24:39 PM
Quote from: Pete from Boston on June 13, 2017, 07:00:18 AM
Quote from: sparker on February 11, 2017, 02:59:58 AM
Quote from: amroad17 on February 10, 2017, 07:51:09 PM
People should appreciate the novelty that is Breezewood.  Yes, there is stop-and-go traffic at times but where else on our Interstate system is something quite like this?  I never did mind driving through Breezewood--in fact, I would purposely stop there just to eat or fuel up.  Building a new interchange bypassing Breezewood would financially put a big dent in the area.  If Breezewood is such a pain to people then they should find a way not to drive through Breezewood.  There are ways to avoid it--if it is such a hassle.  I, myself, find Breezewood to be unique and a throwback to our early days of the Interstate system--and if I need to drive through there to go to a certain destination, then I will.

WTF?  Yeah, it's unique -- but a throwback?  First time I've heard anyone nostalgic for the times when the Interstate network was still in bits & pieces.  Sort of reminds me of that old Dana Carvey SNL sketch where the elderly gentleman waxes on about unpleasant or even cruel practices of his youth, concluding with the phrase "And we LIKED it!" :-D  Oh well, to each their own, I suppose.

I also like Breezewood.  And I am nostalgic for those days as well.  You don't have to want something back to be nostalgic about it.  I appreciate the fascinating transition into the era of Interstates and the collision of old and new worlds.  What historically-interested person wouldn't find such a period of change remarkable?

I also appreciate it for what it is, and one thing I've noticed about this forum as compared to m.t.r. is that I'm even more in the minority with that opinion here than I was there!
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: mariethefoxy on June 17, 2017, 10:36:42 PM
is there any plans to connect the lancaster and downington area sections of the US 30 freeway?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Alps on June 18, 2017, 01:46:37 AM
Quote from: mariethefoxy on June 17, 2017, 10:36:42 PM
is there any plans to connect the lancaster and downington area sections of the US 30 freeway?
no
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: briantroutman on June 18, 2017, 02:11:17 AM
Quote from: Alps on June 18, 2017, 01:46:37 AM
Quote from: mariethefoxy on June 17, 2017, 10:36:42 PM
is there any plans to connect the lancaster and downington area sections of the US 30 freeway?
no

To my knowledge, it's never even been brought up as some state representative's pipe dream. At the moment, the only items on PennDOT's twelve-year plan relevant to this section are various resurfacing projects and intersection improvements. In fact, PennDOT just spent about $10 million on a slight realignment of the westbound lanes at the PA 41 intersection in Gap.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on June 18, 2017, 07:16:27 AM
Quote from: Alps on June 18, 2017, 01:46:37 AM
Quote from: mariethefoxy on June 17, 2017, 10:36:42 PM
is there any plans to connect the lancaster and downington area sections of the US 30 freeway?
no

I had actually thought about this last night.  I would have to look into this more, but I feel that if the Goat Path Expressway was ever truly brought back, it should function as mainly a US 30 bypass of that area and then at most maybe a spur to connect PA 23 to PA 10 and I-176.  Note that I am unsure how east the ROW continues for it east of PA 772.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Beltway on June 18, 2017, 07:52:13 AM
Quote from: briantroutman on June 18, 2017, 02:11:17 AM
Quote from: Alps on June 18, 2017, 01:46:37 AM
Quote from: mariethefoxy on June 17, 2017, 10:36:42 PM
is there any plans to connect the lancaster and downington area sections of the US 30 freeway?
no

To my knowledge, it's never even been brought up as some state representative's pipe dream. At the moment, the only items on PennDOT's twelve-year plan relevant to this section are various resurfacing projects and intersection improvements. In fact, PennDOT just spent about $10 million on a slight realignment of the westbound lanes at the PA 41 intersection in Gap.

Sure would be a massive improvement to the region if PennDOT and the local officials could engineer a route for a US-30 freeway that has the maximum sensitivity to the natural and human environments.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ixnay on June 18, 2017, 08:17:32 AM
Quote from: empirestate on June 15, 2017, 09:24:39 PM
Quote from: Pete from Boston on June 13, 2017, 07:00:18 AM
Quote from: sparker on February 11, 2017, 02:59:58 AM
Quote from: amroad17 on February 10, 2017, 07:51:09 PM
People should appreciate the novelty that is Breezewood.  Yes, there is stop-and-go traffic at times but where else on our Interstate system is something quite like this?  I never did mind driving through Breezewood--in fact, I would purposely stop there just to eat or fuel up.  Building a new interchange bypassing Breezewood would financially put a big dent in the area.  If Breezewood is such a pain to people then they should find a way not to drive through Breezewood.  There are ways to avoid it--if it is such a hassle.  I, myself, find Breezewood to be unique and a throwback to our early days of the Interstate system--and if I need to drive through there to go to a certain destination, then I will.

WTF?  Yeah, it's unique -- but a throwback?  First time I've heard anyone nostalgic for the times when the Interstate network was still in bits & pieces.  Sort of reminds me of that old Dana Carvey SNL sketch where the elderly gentleman waxes on about unpleasant or even cruel practices of his youth, concluding with the phrase "And we LIKED it!" :-D  Oh well, to each their own, I suppose.

I also like Breezewood.  And I am nostalgic for those days as well.  You don't have to want something back to be nostalgic about it.  I appreciate the fascinating transition into the era of Interstates and the collision of old and new worlds.  What historically-interested person wouldn't find such a period of change remarkable?

I also appreciate it for what it is, and one thing I've noticed about this forum as compared to m.t.r. is that I'm even more in the minority with that opinion here than I was there!

What's m.t.r. stand for?

ixnay
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: dgolub on June 18, 2017, 09:44:41 AM
Quote from: ixnay on June 18, 2017, 08:17:32 AM
Quote from: empirestate on June 15, 2017, 09:24:39 PM
Quote from: Pete from Boston on June 13, 2017, 07:00:18 AM
Quote from: sparker on February 11, 2017, 02:59:58 AM
Quote from: amroad17 on February 10, 2017, 07:51:09 PM
People should appreciate the novelty that is Breezewood.  Yes, there is stop-and-go traffic at times but where else on our Interstate system is something quite like this?  I never did mind driving through Breezewood--in fact, I would purposely stop there just to eat or fuel up.  Building a new interchange bypassing Breezewood would financially put a big dent in the area.  If Breezewood is such a pain to people then they should find a way not to drive through Breezewood.  There are ways to avoid it--if it is such a hassle.  I, myself, find Breezewood to be unique and a throwback to our early days of the Interstate system--and if I need to drive through there to go to a certain destination, then I will.

WTF?  Yeah, it's unique -- but a throwback?  First time I've heard anyone nostalgic for the times when the Interstate network was still in bits & pieces.  Sort of reminds me of that old Dana Carvey SNL sketch where the elderly gentleman waxes on about unpleasant or even cruel practices of his youth, concluding with the phrase "And we LIKED it!" :-D  Oh well, to each their own, I suppose.

I also like Breezewood.  And I am nostalgic for those days as well.  You don't have to want something back to be nostalgic about it.  I appreciate the fascinating transition into the era of Interstates and the collision of old and new worlds.  What historically-interested person wouldn't find such a period of change remarkable?

I also appreciate it for what it is, and one thing I've noticed about this forum as compared to m.t.r. is that I'm even more in the minority with that opinion here than I was there!

What's m.t.r. stand for?

ixnay

misc.transport.road

It was a newsgroup for roadgeeks back in the days when people actually used newsgroups.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: qguy on June 18, 2017, 10:00:54 AM
Quote from: briantroutman on June 18, 2017, 02:11:17 AM
Quote from: Alps on June 18, 2017, 01:46:37 AM
Quote from: mariethefoxy on June 17, 2017, 10:36:42 PM
is there any plans to connect the lancaster and downington area sections of the US 30 freeway?
no

To my knowledge, it's never even been brought up as some state representative's pipe dream. At the moment, the only items on PennDOT's twelve-year plan relevant to this section are various resurfacing projects and intersection improvements. In fact, PennDOT just spent about $10 million on a slight realignment of the westbound lanes at the PA 41 intersection in Gap.

I'll see your "in fact" and raise you and "indeed!"  :D

Approximately 20 years ago, that PA 41 intersection project started out as a proposed short US 30 expressway segment stretching from just west of the US 30 intersection with PA 10 to just west of the US 30 intersection with PA 772. There were various alternative alignments along the north and south sides of existing US 30 as well as various alternative treatments of the intersection with PA 41, including grade-separated alternatives.

Over the years PennDOT progressively downsized it until you have the feeble thing that was recently constructed.

When I lived in Philadelphia and worked for PennDOT District 6, I frequently traveled between there and Harrisburg. When I would get bored with the PA Turnpike, I'd use PA 283, US 30, and US 202 as an alternate on the return trip just for variety. The congestion on the non-freeway portion of US 30 between Lancaster and Coatesville would add so much time to the trip that after just a few times, I gave it up. That was in the 2000s. It's worse today. The PA 41 intersection is better, but that non-freeway stretch backs up along its entire length.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jp the roadgeek on June 18, 2017, 10:20:25 AM
Something tells me connecting the two US 30 freeway sections would involve reviving a modified form of the Goat Path expressway.  US 30 from the end of the freeway portion to PA 41 can be a nightmare from May-December with Dutch Wonderland, the shopping outlets, American Music Theater, and Millers. 
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: sbeaver44 on June 18, 2017, 12:24:03 PM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on June 18, 2017, 10:20:25 AM
Something tells me connecting the two US 30 freeway sections would involve reviving a modified form of the Goat Path expressway.  US 30 from the end of the freeway portion to PA 41 can be a nightmare from May-December with Dutch Wonderland, the shopping outlets, American Music Theater, and Millers.
Yes...we go to Bethany Beach every year from Harrisburg.  I started taking PA 741 and PA 272/MD 272 to I-95 to get to DE 1 now.  (Of course, I shunpike with MD/DE 279).  It might be longer timewise but it's way less frustrating.

I used to do 283-30-41-7. 

Nexus 6P

Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Beltway on June 18, 2017, 02:53:51 PM
Quote from: qguy on June 18, 2017, 10:00:54 AM
When I lived in Philadelphia and worked for PennDOT District 6, I frequently traveled between there and Harrisburg. When I would get bored with the PA Turnpike, I'd use PA 283, US 30, and US 202 as an alternate on the return trip just for variety. The congestion on the non-freeway portion of US 30 between Lancaster and Coatesville would add so much time to the trip that after just a few times, I gave it up. That was in the 2000s. It's worse today. The PA 41 intersection is better, but that non-freeway stretch backs up along its entire length.

A few times we used US-322 as a fairly low traffic alternative to the Turnpike.
That was in the 1970s... wonder how it is today?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: sbeaver44 on June 18, 2017, 03:06:30 PM
Quote from: Beltway on June 18, 2017, 02:53:51 PM
Quote from: qguy on June 18, 2017, 10:00:54 AM
When I lived in Philadelphia and worked for PennDOT District 6, I frequently traveled between there and Harrisburg. When I would get bored with the PA Turnpike, I'd use PA 283, US 30, and US 202 as an alternate on the return trip just for variety. The congestion on the non-freeway portion of US 30 between Lancaster and Coatesville would add so much time to the trip that after just a few times, I gave it up. That was in the 2000s. It's worse today. The PA 41 intersection is better, but that non-freeway stretch backs up along its entire length.

A few times we used US-322 as a fairly low traffic alternative to the Turnpike.
That was in the 1970s... wonder how it is today?
In some areas, not bad.  But near Hershey and Ephrata it can get trafficky.

Nexus 6P

Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: noelbotevera on June 18, 2017, 03:17:41 PM
Quote from: sbeaver44 on June 18, 2017, 03:06:30 PM
Quote from: Beltway on June 18, 2017, 02:53:51 PM
Quote from: qguy on June 18, 2017, 10:00:54 AM
When I lived in Philadelphia and worked for PennDOT District 6, I frequently traveled between there and Harrisburg. When I would get bored with the PA Turnpike, I'd use PA 283, US 30, and US 202 as an alternate on the return trip just for variety. The congestion on the non-freeway portion of US 30 between Lancaster and Coatesville would add so much time to the trip that after just a few times, I gave it up. That was in the 2000s. It's worse today. The PA 41 intersection is better, but that non-freeway stretch backs up along its entire length.

A few times we used US-322 as a fairly low traffic alternative to the Turnpike.
That was in the 1970s... wonder how it is today?
In some areas, not bad.  But near Hershey and Ephrata it can get trafficky.

Nexus 6P
I can attest to that. During summer seasons, when people go to Hersheypark, that section can become congested. Typically it gets heavier around the late morning/early afternoon (around 9 AM to 11 AM) since that's when Hersheypark opens. I'm not sure WHY they haven't upgraded the section of US 322 between the Eisenhower Interchange and US 422, because there's enough room to put at least a RIRO in for the at-grade intersections.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on June 18, 2017, 05:21:33 PM
QuoteI can attest to that. During summer seasons, when people go to Hersheypark, that section can become congested. Typically it gets heavier around the late morning/early afternoon (around 9 AM to 11 AM) since that's when Hersheypark opens. I'm not sure WHY they haven't upgraded the section of US 322 between the Eisenhower Interchange and US 422, because there's enough room to put at least a RIRO in for the at-grade intersections.

It would be a lot more complicated than that for the two signals.

The first light EB at Mushroom Hill Rd (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.2603434,-76.7743381,18z) connects to a shopping center that includes Wal-Mart and Sam's Club.  (though there is a ramp WB that directly connects to Sam's Club before the intersection)  Also there are other businesses on the south side of US 322 here. 

The second light at Chambers Hill Rd and Grayson Rd  (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.2616532,-76.7438145,3a,75y,280.05h,82.13t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sHKeqOUsaBzfnH5wCENKHrw!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo2.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DHKeqOUsaBzfnH5wCENKHrw%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D303.86868%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656) is a multiple-way intersection that causes the real congestion of the two.  Grayson Rd connects to Milroy Rd, which becomes Nyes Rd that connects to Jonestown Rd in Paxtonia, which connects to US 22 and I-81 at Exit 72.

PENNDOT's website shows a planned improvement to the latter intersection (http://www.projects.penndot.gov/projects/Reports/ProjectReport.aspx?ProjectID=92945&ReportType=Project), but I know nothing about an interchange being placed here.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: noelbotevera on June 18, 2017, 09:10:50 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on June 18, 2017, 05:21:33 PM
The first light EB at Mushroom Hill Rd (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.2603434,-76.7743381,18z) connects to a shopping center that includes Wal-Mart and Sam's Club.  (though there is a ramp WB that directly connects to Sam's Club before the intersection)  Also there are other businesses on the south side of US 322 here. 
Trying not to get into Fictional, my proposal is to use a SPUI. I'm not an engineer, so I'm not sure if depressing US 322 or elevating Mushroom Hill, but the only real effects I can see is that the Dunkin Donuts and propane company would have to be demolished (to make room for the bottom right ramp), the bottom third of the Weis and Walmart would have to be demolished (taking away the tobacco store and the Aldi respectively) to make room for the top two ramps, and the bottom left ramp is clear land.

Quote
The second light at Chambers Hill Rd and Grayson Rd  (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.2616532,-76.7438145,3a,75y,280.05h,82.13t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sHKeqOUsaBzfnH5wCENKHrw!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo2.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DHKeqOUsaBzfnH5wCENKHrw%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D303.86868%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656) is a multiple-way intersection that causes the real congestion of the two.  Grayson Rd connects to Milroy Rd, which becomes Nyes Rd that connects to Jonestown Rd in Paxtonia, which connects to US 22 and I-81 at Exit 72.
This is tougher... I'd say a modified SPUI - connect Grayson/Hilton (or Pine) to South 82nd/Chambers Hill as the bridge. However, there's less stuff to demolish - SW side is maybe 2 homes, SE and NW sides are clear, and NE would have to require a direct exit to
Pine Street, since it's impossible to build a ramp to the intersection.

I'd also cut off every road (aside from the two aforementioned interchanges), since those roads are accessible by Grayson Road (a parallel road). The only RIRO I'd leave in is the one to the water treatment plant.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: KEVIN_224 on June 22, 2017, 10:58:24 AM
It looks like I-84 in northeastern Pennsylvania still has quite a long way to go. I know they had to redo much of the roadbed underneath the interstate east of here. This was looking west. I only know the mile markers were in the 30s. Possibly MM 36 to MM 33?  :hmmm:

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FNMzQrck.jpg&hash=9a3749fe28480de4824525f08c6218b94e3a6b40)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jcn on June 22, 2017, 09:51:00 PM
Quote from: sbeaver44 on June 18, 2017, 03:06:30 PM
Quote from: Beltway on June 18, 2017, 02:53:51 PM
Quote from: qguy on June 18, 2017, 10:00:54 AM
When I lived in Philadelphia and worked for PennDOT District 6, I frequently traveled between there and Harrisburg. When I would get bored with the PA Turnpike, I'd use PA 283, US 30, and US 202 as an alternate on the return trip just for variety. The congestion on the non-freeway portion of US 30 between Lancaster and Coatesville would add so much time to the trip that after just a few times, I gave it up. That was in the 2000s. It's worse today. The PA 41 intersection is better, but that non-freeway stretch backs up along its entire length.

A few times we used US-322 as a fairly low traffic alternative to the Turnpike.
That was in the 1970s... wonder how it is today?
In some areas, not bad.  But near Hershey and Ephrata it can get trafficky.

Nexus 6P

If you think that's bad, US-322 in Delaware County between US-1 and I-95 is horrible.  Luckily, a major construction has just begun to help ease that stretch. 
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jeffandnicole on June 22, 2017, 11:01:36 PM
Quote from: jcn on June 22, 2017, 09:51:00 PM
Quote from: sbeaver44 on June 18, 2017, 03:06:30 PM
Quote from: Beltway on June 18, 2017, 02:53:51 PM
Quote from: qguy on June 18, 2017, 10:00:54 AM
When I lived in Philadelphia and worked for PennDOT District 6, I frequently traveled between there and Harrisburg. When I would get bored with the PA Turnpike, I'd use PA 283, US 30, and US 202 as an alternate on the return trip just for variety. The congestion on the non-freeway portion of US 30 between Lancaster and Coatesville would add so much time to the trip that after just a few times, I gave it up. That was in the 2000s. It's worse today. The PA 41 intersection is better, but that non-freeway stretch backs up along its entire length.

A few times we used US-322 as a fairly low traffic alternative to the Turnpike.
That was in the 1970s... wonder how it is today?
In some areas, not bad.  But near Hershey and Ephrata it can get trafficky.

Nexus 6P

If you think that's bad, US-322 in Delaware County between US-1 and I-95 is horrible.  Luckily, a major construction has just begun to help ease that stretch. 

Just a 6 year project with no improvements with the merge onto 95.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadgeek01 on June 24, 2017, 10:00:11 AM
I have a question regarding the US-322/US-422 interchange in Hershey. I noticed that while viewing said interchange on Google maps, I noticed a ramp stub.  It would be nice to have a explanation for that.  I have a link here: https://www.google.com/maps/@40.2674124,-76.6833245,19z/data=!3m1!1e3
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: davewiecking on June 24, 2017, 10:21:29 AM
Old topo maps (viewed via historicaerials.com) suggest that this is leftover asphalt from when W. Governor Rd connected with E. Main St., prior to the existing interchange being constructed in the late 60's.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Buffaboy on June 25, 2017, 11:48:22 AM
The button copy signs outside of Breezewood on I-70 are pretty stunning.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on June 25, 2017, 03:15:51 PM
I noticed some interesting things about the old signs on US 422/I-376 around New Castle in the old Street View, particularly at current Exit 12.

As late as 2009, you still had the original text-only button copy signs (https://goo.gl/maps/2eTdmHWbkXD2), with centered exit tabs as well. Interestingly, even after Toll 60 (today I-376) was built, these signs were never updated to refer to 60 as continuing south past this interchange; it's only referred to as US 422. Some signs feature blank spaces (https://goo.gl/maps/aAcQcjwzXLU2) that would presumably have held "PA 60 South" and "Pittsburgh". One sign (https://goo.gl/maps/KWBMYRz8k8J2) that used shields even had a blank keystone shield. Presumably it was this way until all the signs were replaced with the redesignation to I-376.

Also of note is that all of these old signs on then-60 feature exit tabs. Were they anticipating the 60 corridor becoming I-376 or some other Interstate even way back then, or were non-Interstate expressways often given blank exit tabs on these old signs back then?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: route17fan on June 25, 2017, 03:53:11 PM
Quote from: Roadsguy on June 25, 2017, 03:15:51 PM
Also of note is that all of these old signs on then-60 feature exit tabs. Were they anticipating the 60 corridor becoming I-376 or some other Interstate even way back then, or were non-Interstate expressways often given blank exit tabs on these old signs back then?

US 219 in Bradford and US 220 in Williamsport and west of Williamsport had blank exit tabs as well. I'm afraid I do not know about then-future plans, but quite a few expressways had them back then.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: PHLBOS on June 26, 2017, 09:00:11 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on June 22, 2017, 11:01:36 PM
Quote from: jcn on June 22, 2017, 09:51:00 PMIf you think that's bad, US-322 in Delaware County between US-1 and I-95 is horrible.  Luckily, a major construction has just begun to help ease that stretch. 

Just a 6 year project with no improvements with the merge onto 95.
The proposed I-95/US 322 interchange reconfiguration (I've seen an overall plan view of such for such) is a separate project.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jeffandnicole on June 26, 2017, 09:21:59 AM
Quote from: PHLBOS on June 26, 2017, 09:00:11 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on June 22, 2017, 11:01:36 PM
Quote from: jcn on June 22, 2017, 09:51:00 PMIf you think that's bad, US-322 in Delaware County between US-1 and I-95 is horrible.  Luckily, a major construction has just begun to help ease that stretch. 

Just a 6 year project with no improvements with the merge onto 95.
The proposed I-95/US 322 interchange reconfiguration (I've seen an overall plan view of such for such) is a separate project.

Yep. But without a proposed date for that project, this project just funnels more traffic into the short left merge area.

Did they decide on a preferred alternative for that 322/95 project?  Last time I saw anything, there were about a half-dozen alternatives they were considering.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: PHLBOS on June 26, 2017, 11:11:03 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on June 26, 2017, 09:21:59 AM
Quote from: PHLBOS on June 26, 2017, 09:00:11 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on June 22, 2017, 11:01:36 PM
Quote from: jcn on June 22, 2017, 09:51:00 PMIf you think that's bad, US-322 in Delaware County between US-1 and I-95 is horrible.  Luckily, a major construction has just begun to help ease that stretch. 

Just a 6 year project with no improvements with the merge onto 95.
The proposed I-95/US 322 interchange reconfiguration (I've seen an overall plan view of such for such) is a separate project.

Yep. But without a proposed date for that project, this project just funnels more traffic into the short left merge area.
It is my understanding that the 322 project's eastern limits end somewhere between the Cherry Tree Road intersection and the PA 452 interchange; where 322 transitions from a 4-lane divided highway to a 2-lane undivided roadway.  As long as developers don't go bonkers along the impacted corridor immediately post-construction; the eastbound traffic along the existing divided stretch of 322 to I-95 should not be impacted.  The primary objective of the 322 project is to relieve the traffic flow & choke points.

Quote from: jeffandnicole on June 26, 2017, 09:21:59 AMDid they decide on a preferred alternative for that 322/95 project?  Last time I saw anything, there were about a half-dozen alternatives they were considering.
The plan I saw, from an engineering consultant, shows the reconfigured interchange as an elaborate trumpet w/full movements (the current interchange doe not have direct access to US 322 West from I-95 North).
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jeffandnicole on June 26, 2017, 12:17:55 PM
While the current 322 construction won't affect 95 directly, the results will.  Today, the light on 322 at Cherry Tree Rd & Bethel Ave acts pretty much as a meter, preventing much traffic from flowing further downstream onto 95 (the only other significant point of access to 322 beyond this point is Rt. 452).  After the widening project is complete in that area, assuming the light timing stays the same, twice as much traffic will get thru this light...only to bottleneck at 95.  At least it'll free up the persistent congestion plaguing 322 in the Chichester area.

Looking up the DVRPC site, the 95-322 interchange is a distant dream.  It's now hidden within the 2025-2040 Long Range plan.  The website the DVRPC supposedly set up for the project doesn't work as well.  A newspaper article I came across from 2008 at the time had the project beginning in 2016!
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: LeftyJR on June 27, 2017, 05:17:00 PM
Any updates on the I-99/I-80 interchange?  PennDOT had crews at the current northern end of 99 removing acres of trees around Exit 161 on I-80.  It looks like a football field up there now - hardly recognizable.  I thought this was deferred?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: briantroutman on June 27, 2017, 05:40:27 PM
^ Are you sure they were PennDOT crews working on state right-of-way and not workers on private property abutting I-80?

The most recent news regarding an I-80/I-99 interchange I can find is this Centre Daily Times article (http://www.centredaily.com/news/article44745765.html) from late 2015. It essentially says that needed funding isn't there and the chances of the interchange being constructed in the near future are nil.

Quote from: Centre Daily Times - Officials look to build case for I-80/99 interchangesThe prospect of doing the interchange projects, Zilla said, is dismal, particularly because the $164 million price tag goes well beyond federal funds available for him to work with.

"Centre County's allocation for the current program for roads and bridges is about $60 million for four years for all road and bridge improvements,"  Zilla said. "That's what we get."
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Buffaboy on July 01, 2017, 06:31:36 PM
Breezewood button copy, picture I took

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FQ686WkK.jpg&hash=87db815817743bc459e3cb059a42c29fb45bdfc6)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on July 02, 2017, 02:25:36 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on July 01, 2017, 06:31:36 PM
Breezewood button copy, picture I took

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FQ686WkK.jpg&hash=87db815817743bc459e3cb059a42c29fb45bdfc6)

Huh, why's US 30 west signed from that exit way down there? Were you not always able to turn left at the end of the road?

----

Found two new Highway Gothic signs, one by PennDOT and the other by the Turnpike, both in the Allentown area, within 100 feet of each other too! The first (https://goo.gl/maps/KwLsVXyfNDw) by PennDOT is on US 22 westbound at the Northeast Extension exit. It was put up some time between November 2015 and August 2016. The other (https://goo.gl/maps/CtEaHur7X6C2) on the extension itself was put up between August 2011 and September 2013, and it's the final southbound sign before the Lehigh Valley exit. The sign had been missing for a while; it was there in the 2009 street view, missing in 2011, and back in 2013.

How many other new Highway Gothic signs are there around the state? The only ones I know of besides these are the APL on 95 at the Blue Route, and all the signs on I-81 at the new PA 465 interchange.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: briantroutman on July 02, 2017, 03:21:53 PM
Quote from: Roadsguy on July 02, 2017, 02:25:36 PM
Huh, why's US 30 west signed from that exit way down there? Were you not always able to turn left at the end of the road?

I had never noticed that before–although for the dozens of times I've approached Breezewood, I think only once or twice was it from the south.

Looking at the map, I can only assume that PennDOT is trying to divert as much left-turning traffic as possible to South Breezewood Road to reduce the number of needed left turn cycles (I-70 WB to US 30 WB) at that intersection so that the conflicting left turn (US 30 WB to I-70 EB–a.k.a "thru"  I-70 EB) is as unimpeded as possible.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: amroad17 on July 03, 2017, 12:55:46 AM
briantroutman is correct in his post.  US 30 WEST has always been signed for Exit 149 (old Exit 29) for as long as I remember--probably to divert as much traffic heading west on US 30 from the "interchange" at the end/beginning of I-70 on this section, as he mentioned in his post.

Nice fading/sine rot late-1970's signs, although they do need to be changed.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Mr_Northside on July 03, 2017, 03:37:05 PM
Quote from: Roadsguy on July 02, 2017, 02:25:36 PM
How many other new Highway Gothic signs are there around the state? The only ones I know of besides these are the APL on 95 at the Blue Route, and all the signs on I-81 at the new PA 465 interchange.

There were new ones put up on PA-65 (Ohio River Blvd) SB during it's final miles before ending @ 279 as part of a major rehab project.
They are doing the NB lanes this construction season, where they're supposed to replace most (if not all) of those signs.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ekt8750 on July 03, 2017, 04:45:47 PM
Quote from: Roadsguy on July 02, 2017, 02:25:36 PM
How many other new Highway Gothic signs are there around the state? The only ones I know of besides these are the APL on 95 at the Blue Route, and all the signs on I-81 at the new PA 465 interchange.

There's a sign on 95 North near the Airport (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.8746103,-75.2892004,3a,75y,59.71h,100.14t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s01f2iv5bQa_tRD2wkPyWSA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) that was hit about 5 years ago by a dump truck that was driving with its hopper fully extended; it was recently replaced with a Highway Gothic sign.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Mergingtraffic on July 04, 2017, 08:54:32 PM
so the glorious non-reflective button copy will be taken down soon near Breezewood? 
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: PHLBOS on July 05, 2017, 09:23:38 AM
Quote from: ekt8750 on July 03, 2017, 04:45:47 PM
Quote from: Roadsguy on July 02, 2017, 02:25:36 PM
How many other new Highway Gothic signs are there around the state? The only ones I know of besides these are the APL on 95 at the Blue Route, and all the signs on I-81 at the new PA 465 interchange.

There's a sign on 95 North near the Airport (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.8746103,-75.2892004,3a,75y,59.71h,100.14t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s01f2iv5bQa_tRD2wkPyWSA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) that was hit about 5 years ago by a dump truck that was driving with its hopper fully extended; it was recently replaced with a Highway Gothic sign.
Some other new Highway Gothic BGS' in PA in addition to the above-listed ones are:
One I-476 North through BGS near Exit 1 (MacDade Blvd. interchange) (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.869449,-75.344568,3a,75y,298.09h,90.65t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sJFTFk7OBpAU3gEVBduHrDg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)  Ironically, the adjacent EXIT 1 MacDade Blvd. exit BGS has Clearview lettering.

Exit BGS for PA 29 along US 202 northbound (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.0510757,-75.5447861,3a,75y,71.41h,86.15t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sFOreZaTCb7IAmUW8n2resQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)  This is probably the only post-Clearview BGS that was erected during the 202 widening project.

No photo nor updated GSV of such yet, but the replacement exit BGS along the westbound PA Turnpike (I-76) at the Carlisle interchange (Exit 226 - US 11 to I-81) exit ramp features Highway Gothic (control city lettering looks to be Series E w/EM spacing).  It also features the ugly, bloated US 11 shield that's been seen on several other BGS' in recent years.  Yuck!  :thumbdown:
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: amroad17 on July 05, 2017, 11:11:30 PM
At least most of the new Clearview signs in Pennsylvania do look nice.  Some of those erected when Clearview first started looked hideous and cartoonish.  On the other hand, some of those on I-81 north of Scranton do leave something to be desired.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ekt8750 on July 06, 2017, 10:05:50 AM
Quote from: amroad17 on July 05, 2017, 11:11:30 PM
At least most of the new Clearview signs in Pennsylvania do look nice.  Some of those erected when Clearview first started looked hideous and cartoonish.  On the other hand, some of those on I-81 north of Scranton do leave something to be desired.

You should see the ones going up on the I-95/Betsy Ross Bridge interchange project. They must have been done by a contractor, cause they look hideous. Spacing is way off, there's a few all caps Clearview situations as well.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Gnutella on July 08, 2017, 07:12:12 PM
Quote from: amroad17 on July 05, 2017, 11:11:30 PM
At least most of the new Clearview signs in Pennsylvania do look nice.  Some of those erected when Clearview first started looked hideous and cartoonish.  On the other hand, some of those on I-81 north of Scranton do leave something to be desired.

Sign quality in Pennsylvania seems to vary by district.


District 1 (Erie)

Pattern accuracy: Poor
BGS construction: Numerous increment-panel


District 2 (Bradford/Du Bois/State College)

Pattern accuracy: Excellent
BGS construction: Entirely extruded-panel


District 3 (Williamsport)

Pattern accuracy: Good
BGS construction: Mostly extruded-panel


District 4 (Scranton/Wilkes-Barre)

Pattern accuracy: Fair
BGS construction: Numerous increment-panel


District 5 (Allentown/Bethlehem)

Pattern accuracy: Fair
BGS construction: Some increment-panel


District 6 (Philadelphia)

Pattern accuracy: Good
BGS construction: Entirely extruded-panel


District 8 (Harrisburg/Lancaster/York)

Pattern accuracy: Good
BGS construction: Entirely extruded-panel


District 9 (Johnstown/Altoona)

Pattern accuracy: Poor
BGS construction: Some increment-panel


District 10 (Butler/Clarion/Indiana)

Pattern accuracy: Good
BGS construction: Mostly extruded-panel


District 11 (Pittsburgh)

Pattern accuracy: Excellent
BGS construction: Entirely extruded-panel


District 12 (Greensburg/Uniontown/Washington)

Pattern accuracy: Fair
BGS construction: Mostly extruded-panel


I'd rank the districts like this for sign quality, from best to worst:


1. District 2
2. District 11
3. District 6
4. District 8
5. District 3
6. District 10
7. District 12
8. District 5
9. District 4
10. District 9
11. District 1


Ironically, PennDOT makes cleaner-looking extruded-panel BGSs than increment-panel BGSs. Many of their increment-panel BGSs look cheap and flimsy, while their extruded-panel BGSs look sturdy and handsome. Good thing is, most BGSs in Pennsylvania are extruded-panel. District 1 and District 4 are the only ones that get carried away with increment-panel BGSs.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: amroad17 on July 08, 2017, 11:10:02 PM
Yes, some of those around Erie are awful.  They just do not look right.  Those along I-80 along the Dubois stretch are very good-looking ones.  Haven't seen the Pittsburgh ones as I have not ventured there in ten or eleven years.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ixnay on July 09, 2017, 01:32:19 PM
Quote from: Gnutella on July 08, 2017, 07:12:12 PM

District 5 (Allentown/Bethlehem)


Don't forget Reading, Kutztown, and Pocono Raceway.  (I attended Kutztown University, and years later saw Jimmie Johnson [before he began his string of championships] win under the yellow at the Tricky Triangle.)

Here's a map of the districts...

http://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/Pages/default.aspx

ixnay
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: qguy on July 09, 2017, 02:09:46 PM
Quote from: Gnutella  :-Dlink=topic=2410.msg2241553#msg2241553 date=1499555532
Quote from: amroad17 on July 05, 2017, 11:11:30 PM
At least most of the new Clearview signs in Pennsylvania do look nice.  Some of those erected when Clearview first started looked hideous and cartoonish.  On the other hand, some of those on I-81 north of Scranton do leave something to be desired.

Sign quality in Pennsylvania seems to vary by district.


District 1 (Erie)

Pattern accuracy: Poor
BGS construction: Numerous increment-panel


District 2 (Bradford/Du Bois/State College)

Pattern accuracy: Excellent
BGS construction: Entirely extruded-panel


District 3 (Williamsport)

Pattern accuracy: Good
BGS construction: Mostly extruded-panel


District 4 (Scranton/Wilkes-Barre)

Pattern accuracy: Fair
BGS construction: Numerous increment-panel


District 5 (Allentown/Bethlehem)

Pattern accuracy: Fair
BGS construction: Some increment-panel


District 6 (Philadelphia)

Pattern accuracy: Good
BGS construction: Entirely extruded-panel


District 8 (Harrisburg/Lancaster/York)

Pattern accuracy: Good
BGS construction: Entirely extruded-panel


District 9 (Johnstown/Altoona)

Pattern accuracy: Poor
BGS construction: Some increment-panel


District 10 (Butler/Clarion/Indiana)

Pattern accuracy: Good
BGS construction: Mostly extruded-panel


District 11 (Pittsburgh)

Pattern accuracy: Excellent
BGS construction: Entirely extruded-panel


District 12 (Greensburg/Uniontown/Washington)

Pattern accuracy: Fair
BGS construction: Mostly extruded-panel


I'd rank the districts like this for sign quality, from best to worst:


1. District 2
2. District 11
3. District 6
4. District 8
5. District 3
6. District 10
7. District 12
8. District 5
9. District 4
10. District 9
11. District 1


Ironically, PennDOT makes cleaner-looking extruded-panel BGSs than increment-panel BGSs. Many of their increment-panel BGSs look cheap and flimsy, while their extruded-panel BGSs look sturdy and handsome. Good thing is, most BGSs in Pennsylvania are extruded-panel. District 1 and District 4 are the only ones that get carried away with increment-panel BGSs.

You skipped District 7.  :-D
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ixnay on July 09, 2017, 04:41:07 PM
Quote from: qguy on July 09, 2017, 02:09:46 PM
[Gnutella] skipped District 7.  :-D

Either Gnutella skipped Dist. 7 or PennDOT did.  I don't see it on the map I linked.

ixnay
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: J N Winkler on July 09, 2017, 05:01:20 PM
There hasn't been a PennDOT District 7 since the 1940's or thereabouts.  When it existed, it covered the area around Harrisburg, which is currently in District 8.  (Qguy was actually making a joke.)

District 1 has historically had a problem with too-high capital letters in mixed-case legend.  Someone from that District was actually on this forum and asked why that was a problem, and I am not sure anyone came up with an explanation that made sense to him or to the person (who was not participating directly) that actually prepares the signing plans.  It can be very difficult to explain something that seems intuitively obvious to us.

In terms of signing plans (not the actual signs themselves), District 11 is reliably good, while the others are variable.  The variation started when PennDOT downloaded sign design to the districts in the early 1980's.  Before that time, PennDOT signing plans were put together by a specialist unit at headquarters in Harrisburg and were works of art.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on July 10, 2017, 05:02:20 PM
I noticed a mystery ramp from I-79 north of Mt. Morris. It appears to have been a temporary connection to Davistown Rd, with all movements except a southbound exit from 79. It even featured an at-grade left turn onto 79 south. From Historic Aerials, it appears to have been upgraded from some local driveway between 2004 and 2006. It sat there for years, blocked off at both ends from traffic, until the part directly connecting to 79 was removed in 2010 or 2011. The bulk of it still remains. What was this for?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: seicer on July 10, 2017, 05:12:08 PM
Weird. It looks like it connected Davistown Road to I-79, with a connection to and from NB I-79 and a connection to SB I-79.

Connection severed ~2011. Rebuilt 2006. Some ramp did exist before that but it looks like it was long abandoned then.

--

Edit: Looks like it was built when the US 19 bridge was rebuilt over Dunkard Creek in 2007.

Edit 2: You can see the ramps in clear detail in 2007: https://goo.gl/maps/YJJiyWjmuxA2. Streetview from 2008 indicate that it was for emergency vehicles.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Beltway on July 10, 2017, 09:08:21 PM
Quote from: J N Winkler on July 09, 2017, 05:01:20 PM
There hasn't been a PennDOT District 7 since the 1940's or thereabouts.  When it existed, it covered the area around Harrisburg, which is currently in District 8.  (Qguy was actually making a joke.)

When I worked in District 6-0 in the 1970s there was some discussion in the office about the missing District 7.  That is what I recall, that there was a Harrisburg District.  It is not obvious from the current district map as to which counties it had, and the current map has a pretty good balance of the configuration of counties in each district.

Trivia:  In many information systems at VDOT the Central Office is designated as District 0, as from a general staffing standpoint it has the size and management levels of a typical district.  Nobody but IT folks actually call it District 0 (zero) in general verbal speech.  VDOT has 9 field districts, and the number of each district is here -- http://www.virginiadot.org/about/districts.asp
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: MASTERNC on July 10, 2017, 09:10:55 PM
Quote from: Roadsguy on July 10, 2017, 05:02:20 PM
I noticed a mystery ramp from I-79 north of Mt. Morris. It appears to have been a temporary connection to Davistown Rd, with all movements except a southbound exit from 79. It even featured an at-grade left turn onto 79 south. From Historic Aerials, it appears to have been upgraded from some local driveway between 2004 and 2006. It sat there for years, blocked off at both ends from traffic, until the part directly connecting to 79 was removed in 2010 or 2011. The bulk of it still remains. What was this for?

There is a head scratching story to this.  PennDOT never bought the underground rights along the ROW for I-79, so a coal company did long wall mining underneath the roadway.  The road did sag a bit, and they had to reduce the speed limit and close a lane for the longest time.  These ramps were in case the roadway had to be closed long-term and traffic diverted onto US 19.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on July 10, 2017, 09:40:22 PM
Quote from: MASTERNC on July 10, 2017, 09:10:55 PM
Quote from: Roadsguy on July 10, 2017, 05:02:20 PM
I noticed a mystery ramp from I-79 north of Mt. Morris. It appears to have been a temporary connection to Davistown Rd, with all movements except a southbound exit from 79. It even featured an at-grade left turn onto 79 south. From Historic Aerials, it appears to have been upgraded from some local driveway between 2004 and 2006. It sat there for years, blocked off at both ends from traffic, until the part directly connecting to 79 was removed in 2010 or 2011. The bulk of it still remains. What was this for?

There is a head scratching story to this.  PennDOT never bought the underground rights along the ROW for I-79, so a coal company did long wall mining underneath the roadway.  The road did sag a bit, and they had to reduce the speed limit and close a lane for the longest time.  These ramps were in case the roadway had to be closed long-term and traffic diverted onto US 19.

So I take it that's no longer an issue? And is/was there a complementary set of ramps farther north or would an existing interchange have been used?

Also, I don't think that ramp was ever an abandoned off-ramp. It seems like it was a local driveway or something.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: seicer on July 10, 2017, 09:59:14 PM
Odd. The signs for it are unfortunately turned away in the streetview but it also looks like it was pretty temporary. Perhaps it was first built for the road settling issues and then reused for the US 19 project?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: davewiecking on July 10, 2017, 10:15:35 PM
Some of the Google Earth historical shots (9/05 thru 10/08) show patterns in the dirt as if the ramps saw significant use, especially across the median to access SOUTHBOUND I-79 (not I-91). The US-19 bridge is missing in the 8/07 one.

I like the "subsiding due to coal mining" story. About when was that?

(edited to fix incorrect interstate reference)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: VTGoose on July 11, 2017, 09:14:53 AM
Quote from: Roadsguy on July 10, 2017, 05:02:20 PM
I noticed a mystery ramp from I-79 north of Mt. Morris. It appears to have been a temporary connection to Davistown Rd, with all movements except a southbound exit from 79. It even featured an at-grade left turn onto 79 south. From Historic Aerials, it appears to have been upgraded from some local driveway between 2004 and 2006. It sat there for years, blocked off at both ends from traffic, until the part directly connecting to 79 was removed in 2010 or 2011. The bulk of it still remains. What was this for?

That was the northern end of I-79 coming out of West Virginia in the '70s (would have been mid-70s). U.S. 19 was the route to continue north but I don't remember where the interstate was regained. Waynesboro maybe? I vaguely remember using those ramps on a Pittsburgh-Blacksburg trip trying out I-79 as a better route than the I-77/I-70/I-79 route. It took a few years for it to become truly viable, as more of the highway was completed in West Virginia (at that time, neither I-77 or I-79 were completed to/through Charleston). The next "improvement" was the construction of U.S. 19, although until the New River Gorge Bridge was completed, "backroad" travel was required from the U.S. 60 junction to reach U.S. 460 at Rich Creek.

Bruce in Blacksburg (but a native of the 'Burgh)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on July 11, 2017, 05:19:41 PM
ABC 27:Pa. Senate votes for work-zone speed cameras (http://abc27.com/2017/07/11/pa-senate-votes-for-work-zone-speed-cameras/)

QuoteSenate Bill 172 would establish a three-year pilot program to determine whether automated enforcement zones deter drivers from speeding through active work zones on interstates and other limited-access highways.

The bill was sent to the House of Representatives of a vote of 45-3.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: noelbotevera on July 11, 2017, 05:33:03 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on July 11, 2017, 05:19:41 PM
ABC 27:Pa. Senate votes for work-zone speed cameras (http://abc27.com/2017/07/11/pa-senate-votes-for-work-zone-speed-cameras/)

QuoteSenate Bill 172 would establish a three-year pilot program to determine whether automated enforcement zones deter drivers from speeding through active work zones on interstates and other limited-access highways.

The bill was sent to the House of Representatives of a vote of 45-3.
I'm pretty sure that statement said by Schwank is basically "I want money". I'm just getting tired of all this crap concerning police, speed traps, red light cameras...the list goes on. Y'know, if we really do want drivers to be safer, why don't we invest in this fantastic thing named "driver's education"?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: iBallasticwolf2 on July 11, 2017, 06:54:50 PM
Quote from: noelbotevera on July 11, 2017, 05:33:03 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on July 11, 2017, 05:19:41 PM
ABC 27:Pa. Senate votes for work-zone speed cameras (http://abc27.com/2017/07/11/pa-senate-votes-for-work-zone-speed-cameras/)

QuoteSenate Bill 172 would establish a three-year pilot program to determine whether automated enforcement zones deter drivers from speeding through active work zones on interstates and other limited-access highways.

The bill was sent to the House of Representatives of a vote of 45-3.
I'm pretty sure that statement said by Schwank is basically "I want money". I'm just getting tired of all this crap concerning police, speed traps, red light cameras...the list goes on. Y'know, if we really do want drivers to be safer, why don't we invest in this fantastic thing named "driver's education"?
Re-training drivers every 5 or at least 10 years WOULD likely improve driver safety and reduce congestion, because a lot of problems are caused by senior drivers not knowing road rules.  However, the main problem would be that when people go to driver's school to get a license, they already sleep through most of the class, since most of it is very boring or watching footage of cars crashing.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: VTGoose on July 12, 2017, 09:07:50 AM
Quote from: iBallasticwolf2 on July 11, 2017, 06:54:50 PM
Re-training drivers every 5 or at least 10 years WOULD likely improve driver safety and reduce congestion, because a lot of problems are caused by senior drivers not knowing road rules.  However, the main problem would be that when people go to driver's school to get a license, they already sleep through most of the class, since most of it is very boring or watching footage of cars crashing.

Excuse me! This "senior driver" isn't the problem (I'm well aware of "road rules" thank you very much). I'd say the problem is with "younger" drivers, especially those of the "ME FIRST!" generation who are more concerned about getting to the merge point first, who drive like there isn't anyone else on the road but them, and who pretty much ignore most rules of courtesy. Especially in my town, add in the large contingent of those who are DWF (Driving While Foreign) who arrive on campus, get a car, then work on getting a license. Senior drivers indeed.

Bruce in Blacksburg
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jeffandnicole on July 12, 2017, 09:15:10 AM
Quote from: VTGoose on July 12, 2017, 09:07:50 AM
Quote from: iBallasticwolf2 on July 11, 2017, 06:54:50 PM
Re-training drivers every 5 or at least 10 years WOULD likely improve driver safety and reduce congestion, because a lot of problems are caused by senior drivers not knowing road rules.  However, the main problem would be that when people go to driver's school to get a license, they already sleep through most of the class, since most of it is very boring or watching footage of cars crashing.

Excuse me! This "senior driver" isn't the problem (I'm well aware of "road rules" thank you very much). I'd say the problem is with "younger" drivers, especially those of the "ME FIRST!" generation who are more concerned about getting to the merge point first, who drive like there isn't anyone else on the road but them, and who pretty much ignore most rules of courtesy. Especially in my town, add in the large contingent of those who are DWF (Driving While Foreign) who arrive on campus, get a car, then work on getting a license. Senior drivers indeed.

Bruce in Blacksburg


The driving population with the most accidents are the new drivers (under 25 years old, especially under 21).

The 2nd largest population with accidents are seniors.

What's funny in your quote: You say "I'M well aware of the road rules..."  Then you immediately follow that with "especially those of the ME FIRST generation.  You can't single yourself out as a great driver then criticize others for thinking of just themselves either!!!  LOL

Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: PHLBOS on July 12, 2017, 10:19:47 AM
Actually; the Baby Boomer generation, as a whole, was the first of the Me First generation.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: qguy on July 12, 2017, 10:21:29 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on July 12, 2017, 09:15:10 AM
Quote from: VTGoose on July 12, 2017, 09:07:50 AM
Quote from: iBallasticwolf2 on July 11, 2017, 06:54:50 PM
Re-training drivers every 5 or at least 10 years WOULD likely improve driver safety and reduce congestion, because a lot of problems are caused by senior drivers not knowing road rules.  However, the main problem would be that when people go to driver's school to get a license, they already sleep through most of the class, since most of it is very boring or watching footage of cars crashing.

Excuse me! This "senior driver" isn't the problem (I'm well aware of "road rules" thank you very much). I'd say the problem is with "younger" drivers, especially those of the "ME FIRST!" generation who are more concerned about getting to the merge point first, who drive like there isn't anyone else on the road but them, and who pretty much ignore most rules of courtesy. Especially in my town, add in the large contingent of those who are DWF (Driving While Foreign) who arrive on campus, get a car, then work on getting a license. Senior drivers indeed.

Bruce in Blacksburg


The driving population with the most accidents are the new drivers (under 25 years old, especially under 21).

The 2nd largest population with accidents are seniors.

What's funny in your quote: You say "I'M well aware of the road rules..."  Then you immediately follow that with "especially those of the ME FIRST generation.  You can't single yourself out as a great driver then criticize others for thinking of just themselves either!!!  LOL

I don't see any inconsistency in Bruce's statement at all. Turning the spotlight of examination on yourself ("I think I' do this well," "I think I do that well...") before pointing out the self-centeredness of another cohort is not being self-centered. It's a simple matter of comparison.

Quote from: PHLBOS on July 12, 2017, 10:19:47 AM
Actually; the Baby Boomer generation, as a whole, was the first of the Me First generation.

True that.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Bitmapped on July 12, 2017, 11:05:08 AM
Quote from: Roadsguy on July 10, 2017, 09:40:22 PM
Quote from: MASTERNC on July 10, 2017, 09:10:55 PM
Quote from: Roadsguy on July 10, 2017, 05:02:20 PM
I noticed a mystery ramp from I-79 north of Mt. Morris. It appears to have been a temporary connection to Davistown Rd, with all movements except a southbound exit from 79. It even featured an at-grade left turn onto 79 south. From Historic Aerials, it appears to have been upgraded from some local driveway between 2004 and 2006. It sat there for years, blocked off at both ends from traffic, until the part directly connecting to 79 was removed in 2010 or 2011. The bulk of it still remains. What was this for?

There is a head scratching story to this.  PennDOT never bought the underground rights along the ROW for I-79, so a coal company did long wall mining underneath the roadway.  The road did sag a bit, and they had to reduce the speed limit and close a lane for the longest time.  These ramps were in case the roadway had to be closed long-term and traffic diverted onto US 19.

So I take it that's no longer an issue? And is/was there a complementary set of ramps farther north or would an existing interchange have been used?

Also, I don't think that ramp was ever an abandoned off-ramp. It seems like it was a local driveway or something.

During the mid-2000s, there was a significant amount of longwall mining done under I-79 between roughly MM 7 and MM 12. The ground drops several feet when this happens and there were concerns that I-79 would become temporarily unusable. Emergency ramps were built at Rolling Meadows Road (SR 2026) near Waynesburg in the north and Davistown Road near Mount Morris in the south so that traffic could be funneled to US 19 if needed.

The Davistown Road ramp was built on the site of a PennDOT maintenance outpost which was demolished to make way. I don't think there was anything at the Rolling Meadows ramp before. As part of the preparation, I-79's overpasses over Tower Hill Road were removed and replaced with fill. Tower Hill Road was severed in the process.

I-79's surface dropped several feet in places, but they never had to close the highway. The ramps were barricaded and never used. The sections within the I-79 ROW were ripped out around 2010 or so, but blocked off stubs remain from the side roads.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Bitmapped on July 12, 2017, 11:11:53 AM
Quote from: VTGoose on July 11, 2017, 09:14:53 AM
Quote from: Roadsguy on July 10, 2017, 05:02:20 PM
I noticed a mystery ramp from I-79 north of Mt. Morris. It appears to have been a temporary connection to Davistown Rd, with all movements except a southbound exit from 79. It even featured an at-grade left turn onto 79 south. From Historic Aerials, it appears to have been upgraded from some local driveway between 2004 and 2006. It sat there for years, blocked off at both ends from traffic, until the part directly connecting to 79 was removed in 2010 or 2011. The bulk of it still remains. What was this for?

That was the northern end of I-79 coming out of West Virginia in the '70s (would have been mid-70s). U.S. 19 was the route to continue north but I don't remember where the interstate was regained. Waynesboro maybe? I vaguely remember using those ramps on a Pittsburgh-Blacksburg trip trying out I-79 as a better route than the I-77/I-70/I-79 route. It took a few years for it to become truly viable, as more of the highway was completed in West Virginia (at that time, neither I-77 or I-79 were completed to/through Charleston). The next "improvement" was the construction of U.S. 19, although until the New River Gorge Bridge was completed, "backroad" travel was required from the U.S. 60 junction to reach U.S. 460 at Rich Creek.

These emergency ramps weren't built until about 2004. I'm reasonably certain there weren't any temporary ramps for I-79 around the PA/WV line. There's no grading or room for them on the WV side. Exit #1 isn't too far into PA, so there'd be no reason for temporary ramps on the PA side. My understanding is that the short PA part from the state line to Exit #1 opened the same time as the WV side in 1974, and the rest from Exit #1 to Exit #14 followed about a year later in 1975.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: seicer on July 12, 2017, 11:34:17 AM
The Waynesburg ramps shown when they were intact: https://goo.gl/maps/PHkGUNvKL1B2
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: CanesFan27 on July 12, 2017, 11:45:52 AM
I stopped driving 79 from 68 to 70 around then. I remember the lower speeds and construction work in that area but never realized until now what all was involved. Thanks!

Thus reminds me of the ghost ramps on 79 further north at Moraine State Park.  A ghost on and off ramp on 79 North exists as a result of the Boy Scout Jamborees held there in the mid 70s. I have an old disposable camera photo I took of it in 1998 that was on the old gribblenation site.  I looked at Google maps satalite images of the area and the grading appears to still be there.

The exit tied into the North Shore of the park. You can see the remains from Park Road here.
498 T890

https://goo.gl/maps/JStCJxMWoBk

I'll see if there is anything else I can dig up and do a small blog entry about it. 
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: briantroutman on July 12, 2017, 11:52:35 AM
Quote from: Bitmapped on July 12, 2017, 11:05:08 AM
During the mid-2000s, there was a significant amount of longwall mining done under I-79 between roughly MM 7 and MM 12. The ground drops several feet when this happens and there were concerns that I-79 would become temporarily unusable. Emergency ramps were built at Rolling Meadows Road (SR 2026) near Waynesburg in the north and Davistown Road near Mount Morris in the south so that traffic could be funneled to US 19 if needed.

Assuming that's the case, I can kind of understand the purpose of the Davistown ramp: If an emergency closure was needed and traffic had been forced to exit at the existing Mt. Morris interchange, the volume of through traffic would have made a somewhat circuitous connection through the center of town in order to follow US 19 north–possibly causing incredible traffic tie-ups.

But the corresponding southbound ramp at Rolling Meadows Road in Waynesburg doesn't seem to make any sense at all. Rather than simply using the existing Waynesburg interchange and the fairly direct four-lane connection to US 19 afforded by PA 21, why route I-79 through traffic town a two-lane residential street that turns northward and connects to US 19 (without a signal) a mere 500 feet from where they would have connected via PA 21 (and its signalized intersection)?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: VTGoose on July 12, 2017, 12:43:33 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on July 12, 2017, 09:15:10 AM

The driving population with the most accidents are the new drivers (under 25 years old, especially under 21).

The 2nd largest population with accidents are seniors.

What's funny in your quote: You say "I'M well aware of the road rules..."  Then you immediately follow that with "especially those of the ME FIRST generation.  You can't single yourself out as a great driver then criticize others for thinking of just themselves either!!!  LOL

Sorry, but I took offense to you lumping all "senior drivers" as the problem. Yes, statistics show that as a group seniors may be a problem, but to be accurate you really need to show all the stats for accidents, like type of accident and result (property damage, injury, death). Around here, a lot of accidents that result in death involve young people who aren't wearing a seatbelt vs. a senior not wearing a seatbelt.

I'll bet you don't have to contend with these issues either (I don't recall when my cohorts in high school were getting a driver's license that there were such signs or bumper stickers in anyone's window):

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.brucebharper.info%2F20170410_LTD.jpg&hash=775d84837482a54ee52bd9e1fc394f255b4383ee)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jeffandnicole on July 12, 2017, 12:45:43 PM
Quote from: VTGoose on July 12, 2017, 12:43:33 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on July 12, 2017, 09:15:10 AM

The driving population with the most accidents are the new drivers (under 25 years old, especially under 21).

The 2nd largest population with accidents are seniors.

What's funny in your quote: You say "I'M well aware of the road rules..."  Then you immediately follow that with "especially those of the ME FIRST generation.  You can't single yourself out as a great driver then criticize others for thinking of just themselves either!!!  LOL

Sorry, but I took offense to you lumping all "senior drivers" as the problem. Yes, statistics show that as a group seniors may be a problem, but to be accurate you really need to show all the stats for accidents, like type of accident and result (property damage, injury, death). Around here, a lot of accidents that result in death involve young people who aren't wearing a seatbelt vs. a senior not wearing a seatbelt.

That's fine.  Then don't lump all new drivers as "ME FIRST" drivers either.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jp the roadgeek on July 12, 2017, 12:58:19 PM
Quote from: davewiecking on July 10, 2017, 10:15:35 PM
Some of the Google Earth historical shots (9/05 thru 10/08) show patterns in the dirt as if the ramps saw significant use, especially across the median to access SOUTHBOUND I-91. The US-19 bridge is missing in the 8/07 one.

I like the "subsiding due to coal mining" story. About when was that?

That had to be one long ramp if it led to I-91. :)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Bitmapped on July 12, 2017, 01:03:15 PM
Quote from: CanesFan27 on July 12, 2017, 11:45:52 AM
I stopped driving 79 from 68 to 70 around then. I remember the lower speeds and construction work in that area but never realized until now what all was involved. Thanks!

Thus reminds me of the ghost ramps on 79 further north at Moraine State Park.  A ghost on and off ramp on 79 North exists as a result of the Boy Scout Jamborees held there in the mid 70s. I have an old disposable camera photo I took of it in 1998 that was on the old gribblenation site.  I looked at Google maps satalite images of the area and the grading appears to still be there.

The exit tied into the North Shore of the park. You can see the remains from Park Road here.
498 T890

https://goo.gl/maps/JStCJxMWoBk

I'll see if there is anything else I can dig up and do a small blog entry about it. 


Ironically, PennDOT and DCNR just announced a project to improve access to Moraine State Park for I-79 traffic. They're going to build the missing ramps at the US 422/West Park Road interchange so traffic coming from I-79 won't have to use township roads to get to the North Shore area. http://www.post-gazette.com/news/transportation/2017/07/10/Moraine-State-Park-Butler-County-Pennsylvania-access-road-work/stories/201707100004
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Mr_Northside on July 12, 2017, 02:04:53 PM
Quote from: Bitmapped on July 12, 2017, 01:03:15 PM
Ironically, PennDOT and DCNR just announced a project to improve access to Moraine State Park for I-79 traffic. They're going to build the missing ramps at the US 422/West Park Road interchange so traffic coming from I-79 won't have to use township roads to get to the North Shore area. http://www.post-gazette.com/news/transportation/2017/07/10/Moraine-State-Park-Butler-County-Pennsylvania-access-road-work/stories/201707100004


Like many projects like this, it gets a well deserved "About F'n Time!"
I remember the first time trying to get to the North Shore area of Moraine, figuring on taking US-422, and having to cross the lake to the South Shore, and get back on just to get there (subsequent trips just involved taking the exit before (which I believe is signed that way as well).... and just thinking about the whole setup was classic PennDOT.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: CanesFan27 on July 12, 2017, 02:54:39 PM
Quote from: Bitmapped on July 12, 2017, 01:03:15 PM
Quote from: CanesFan27 on July 12, 2017, 11:45:52 AM
I stopped driving 79 from 68 to 70 around then. I remember the lower speeds and construction work in that area but never realized until now what all was involved. Thanks!

Thus reminds me of the ghost ramps on 79 further north at Moraine State Park.  A ghost on and off ramp on 79 North exists as a result of the Boy Scout Jamborees held there in the mid 70s. I have an old disposable camera photo I took of it in 1998 that was on the old gribblenation site.  I looked at Google maps satalite images of the area and the grading appears to still be there.

The exit tied into the North Shore of the park. You can see the remains from Park Road here.
498 T890

https://goo.gl/maps/JStCJxMWoBk

I'll see if there is anything else I can dig up and do a small blog entry about it. 


Ironically, PennDOT and DCNR just announced a project to improve access to Moraine State Park for I-79 traffic. They're going to build the missing ramps at the US 422/West Park Road interchange so traffic coming from I-79 won't have to use township roads to get to the North Shore area. http://www.post-gazette.com/news/transportation/2017/07/10/Moraine-State-Park-Butler-County-Pennsylvania-access-road-work/stories/201707100004

Wow talk about timing. I wonder if they considered the ramps at mile 100?  It ties right into Park Road and the North Shore drive. (Though it doesn't help traffic to or from 79 south) But, regardless this is great news.



Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: davewiecking on July 12, 2017, 07:30:08 PM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on July 12, 2017, 12:58:19 PM
Quote from: davewiecking on July 10, 2017, 10:15:35 PM
Some of the Google Earth historical shots (9/05 thru 10/08) show patterns in the dirt as if the ramps saw significant use, especially across the median to access SOUTHBOUND I-91. The US-19 bridge is missing in the 8/07 one.

I like the "subsiding due to coal mining" story. About when was that?

That had to be one long ramp if it led to I-91. :)
:clap:
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: empirestate on July 13, 2017, 09:59:47 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on July 12, 2017, 12:45:43 PM
Quote from: VTGoose on July 12, 2017, 12:43:33 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on July 12, 2017, 09:15:10 AM

The driving population with the most accidents are the new drivers (under 25 years old, especially under 21).

The 2nd largest population with accidents are seniors.

What's funny in your quote: You say "I'M well aware of the road rules..."  Then you immediately follow that with "especially those of the ME FIRST generation.  You can't single yourself out as a great driver then criticize others for thinking of just themselves either!!!  LOL

Sorry, but I took offense to you lumping all "senior drivers" as the problem. Yes, statistics show that as a group seniors may be a problem, but to be accurate you really need to show all the stats for accidents, like type of accident and result (property damage, injury, death). Around here, a lot of accidents that result in death involve young people who aren't wearing a seatbelt vs. a senior not wearing a seatbelt.

That's fine.  Then don't lump all new drivers as "ME FIRST" drivers either.

It isn't just one or the other; there are various different categories of people who cause frustration on the roads. It could be older drivers who aren't aware of newly-enacted rules of the road or familiar with newer roadway designs such as roundabouts* and DDIs; it could be younger drivers and hotheads who have a devil-may-care attitude towards driving; it may be impatient motorists, like the stereotypical New Yorker (where everyone is better than everyone else at being faster than everyone else); and it may be people who learned to drive in other places where the rules are different, or where there simply isn't an emphasis on rules at all.

But these all fall under the general heading of people not playing by the same rules–whether because they decide to ignore some of them, or just don't know what they are–and so, frustrations arise when other drivers constantly fail to meet your expectation of their behavior. Another way to say it is "driver error", which if course is the leading cause of accidents by far. So it does make sense (to the original point) that better training, more frequent retraining, and stricter application and enforcement of that training could all be tools in fixing the problem.

(It's also a reason why self-driving cars will be safer and much more efficient: because every car in the system will have the same rules and expectations as every other, and every car will communicate its intentions to every other.)

*Case in point: I had a discussion with someone about a roundabout in my area. She despised roundabouts altogether, and when she explained why, I immediately saw the problem. She was frustrated because, when the circle is empty, and there's a line of traffic approaching the circle just to her left as she's entering from another approach, that line of traffic would just stream into the circle without stopping, leaving her no opening to get in. She was unhappy because they weren't "taking their yield" and making space for her and other downstream traffic to enter. She seemed to think that a "yield" is a slowing or stopping movement, and didn't seem to realize that it only applies when there's traffic to yield to–which, when the circle is empty, of course there isn't.

So, no wonder she's always frustrated at that circle: she has an expectation of the other drivers that isn't met by their behavior; and in this case, the rules are on their side. (And she's probably doubly frustrated by all the vehicles behind her honking and gesticulating, whenever she approaches an empty circle and decides to stop anyhow!)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jemacedo9 on July 13, 2017, 10:24:33 AM
Quote from: empirestate on July 13, 2017, 09:59:47 AM
...and so, frustrations arise when other drivers constantly fail to meet your expectation of their behavior.

THIS.  All day long THIS.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: J N Winkler on July 13, 2017, 11:55:09 AM
Quote from: empirestate on July 13, 2017, 09:59:47 AM*Case in point: I had a discussion with someone about a roundabout in my area. She despised roundabouts altogether, and when she explained why, I immediately saw the problem. She was frustrated because, when the circle is empty, and there's a line of traffic approaching the circle just to her left as she's entering from another approach, that line of traffic would just stream into the circle without stopping, leaving her no opening to get in. She was unhappy because they weren't "taking their yield" and making space for her and other downstream traffic to enter. She seemed to think that a "yield" is a slowing or stopping movement, and didn't seem to realize that it only applies when there's traffic to yield to–which, when the circle is empty, of course there isn't.

So, no wonder she's always frustrated at that circle: she has an expectation of the other drivers that isn't met by their behavior; and in this case, the rules are on their side. (And she's probably doubly frustrated by all the vehicles behind her honking and gesticulating, whenever she approaches an empty circle and decides to stop anyhow!)

The other side of this story is that it is a well-known empirical finding that roundabouts are highly likely to fail when traffic on one approach is well out of balance with traffic on the others.  However, when the state in question has a policy that roundabouts will be installed unless an alternative--such as a traffic signal--can meet stringent criteria, then roundabouts will be built that are especially likely not to operate satisfactorily under high-demand conditions.  I'm presuming the roundabout in question is in New York, which does have such a roundabouts-first policy.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: empirestate on July 13, 2017, 12:28:14 PM
Quote from: J N Winkler on July 13, 2017, 11:55:09 AM
Quote from: empirestate on July 13, 2017, 09:59:47 AM*Case in point: I had a discussion with someone about a roundabout in my area. She despised roundabouts altogether, and when she explained why, I immediately saw the problem. She was frustrated because, when the circle is empty, and there's a line of traffic approaching the circle just to her left as she's entering from another approach, that line of traffic would just stream into the circle without stopping, leaving her no opening to get in. She was unhappy because they weren't "taking their yield" and making space for her and other downstream traffic to enter. She seemed to think that a "yield" is a slowing or stopping movement, and didn't seem to realize that it only applies when there's traffic to yield to–which, when the circle is empty, of course there isn't.

So, no wonder she's always frustrated at that circle: she has an expectation of the other drivers that isn't met by their behavior; and in this case, the rules are on their side. (And she's probably doubly frustrated by all the vehicles behind her honking and gesticulating, whenever she approaches an empty circle and decides to stop anyhow!)

The other side of this story is that it is a well-known empirical finding that roundabouts are highly likely to fail when traffic on one approach is well out of balance with traffic on the others.  However, when the state in question has a policy that roundabouts will be installed unless an alternative--such as a traffic signal--can meet stringent criteria, then roundabouts will be built that are especially likely not to operate satisfactorily under high-demand conditions.  I'm presuming the roundabout in question is in New York, which does have such a roundabouts-first policy.

That's precisely what I explained to her. In this case, I've never observed the lopsided traffic flow she describes, so it must be a very limited occurrence, possibly restricted to certain short periods of the day. Overall, the roundabout seems to work perfectly well.


iPhone
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jeffandnicole on July 13, 2017, 12:36:34 PM
When they look at traffic flow, they do it on an hourly or daily basis.  There are too many minute-by-minute variables.  5 cars in a row could be due to the first car going too slow, a traffic light change down the road, a caravan, minor rush-hour traffic, etc. 

Then there's the fact that some people pull up to a stop sign and freak out if they can't immediately pull out onto a road.  If they have to wait 15 seconds, it feels like they'll never be able to pull out into traffic. But put a traffic light up and they have to wait 45 seconds for the light to turn green, and they're perfectly comfortable with that.  Question them otherwise, and they'll wonder why *you* are in such a rush!
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: vdeane on July 13, 2017, 01:12:56 PM
Perhaps predictability?  Unless traffic is really backed up and blocking the box, when waiting at a light, you know you'll be able to go soon, but at a stop sign, you have no idea when or if the gap will ever come.  There are some roads where gaps are few and far in between and the traffic light provides the security of knowing that cross traffic will eventually be forced to stop.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jeffandnicole on July 13, 2017, 01:32:17 PM
Quote from: vdeane on July 13, 2017, 01:12:56 PM
Perhaps predictability?  Unless traffic is really backed up and blocking the box, when waiting at a light, you know you'll be able to go soon, but at a stop sign, you have no idea when or if the gap will ever come.  There are some roads where gaps are few and far in between and the traffic light provides the security of knowing that cross traffic will eventually be forced to stop.

That's definitely why.  But especially in the situations I encounter, there's no blocking the box or other issues.  It's simply a line of traffic flowing down the street.  You also get the people that'll say "I waited 5 minutes for traffic before I could go".  They didn't wait that long...it just felt like they waited that long.  In reality, it was probably under a minute, and most often under 30 seconds.  When engineers look at the intersection and study it, they prove out those lower figures...except people complain that they weren't looking at the right time, they weren't writing down the correct times, etc.  Typical "Do we need a traffic fatality to get a light" and "Think about the children" mentality.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Mergingtraffic on July 17, 2017, 07:13:24 PM
Taking a trip to Breezewood soon....are the button copy relics still there?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: amroad17 on July 18, 2017, 04:22:36 PM
Look two pages back.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on July 22, 2017, 04:22:21 PM
More new Highway Gothic signage: though the new signage from the I-79 North flyover at the South Junction is Clearview, all the new signage at the US 19 DDI and the North Junction is Highway Gothic. Example here (https://goo.gl/maps/btkbsAoW8H32) and here (https://goo.gl/maps/TDuPPDKPbk32).
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ixnay on July 23, 2017, 08:23:54 AM
Quote from: Roadsguy on July 22, 2017, 04:22:21 PM
More new Highway Gothic signage: though the new signage from the I-79 North flyover at the South Junction is Clearview, all the new signage at the US 19 DDI and the North Junction is Highway Gothic. Example here (https://goo.gl/maps/btkbsAoW8H32) and here (https://goo.gl/maps/TDuPPDKPbk32).


In what my stepdad (died 2 years ago today, continue to RIP) called "Little Washington".

ixnay
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: CanesFan27 on July 23, 2017, 11:21:06 AM
And I have followed up with a blog entry on the I-79 Boy Scout Ramps. 

http://surewhynotnow.blogspot.com/2017/07/the-story-of-boy-scout-ramps-on.html
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Bitmapped on July 23, 2017, 05:09:03 PM
Quote from: Roadsguy on July 22, 2017, 04:22:21 PM
More new Highway Gothic signage: though the new signage from the I-79 North flyover at the South Junction is Clearview, all the new signage at the US 19 DDI and the North Junction is Highway Gothic. Example here (https://goo.gl/maps/btkbsAoW8H32) and here (https://goo.gl/maps/TDuPPDKPbk32).

The signage at the South Junction isn't really new. It's been in place since the flyover opened in 2013, well before FHWA revoked interim approval for Clearview.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: qguy on July 23, 2017, 05:54:53 PM
Roadsguy wasn't implying the south junction was newer than the FHWA Clearview revocation; he was just contrasting signage at the south junction with that of the other projects from there through the corridor up to and including the north junction.

How do I know this for sure? 'Cause we talk. It's easy. Roadsguy is currently sitting about 25 feet from me. He lives in the same house as I do (well, for a few more weeks, anyway, until he goes off to college). In short, he's my son.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: PHLBOS on July 24, 2017, 09:09:39 AM
Quote from: Roadsguy on July 22, 2017, 04:22:21 PM
More new Highway Gothic signage: though the new signage from the I-79 North flyover at the South Junction is Clearview, all the new signage at the US 19 DDI and the North Junction is Highway Gothic. Example here (https://goo.gl/maps/btkbsAoW8H32) and here (https://goo.gl/maps/TDuPPDKPbk32).
Note to PennDOT (& PTC): Please get rid of those short, squatty US shields; they look ridiculous.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jemacedo9 on July 26, 2017, 07:01:31 PM
Sign Project Begins on Route 15 in Lycoming and Tioga Counties

QuoteThis work includes the installation of new mile marker and exit signs on the highway

Curious to see what route's mileage they are going to use:  US 15 or I-99.  I'm also curious to see if they are going to add exit numbers as they did with US 220 in Clinton County. And many of the signs on this stretch are fairly new, so with a total cost of $130K, there can't be too many BGSs being replaced. 
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: LeftyJR on July 27, 2017, 07:42:24 AM
There are two exits on 220 in Lycoming County that didn't get mile based exit signs.  Maybe district 3 is aligning with 2?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: cu2010 on July 27, 2017, 05:46:55 PM
Quote from: Roadsguy on July 22, 2017, 04:22:21 PM
More new Highway Gothic signage: though the new signage from the I-79 North flyover at the South Junction is Clearview, all the new signage at the US 19 DDI and the North Junction is Highway Gothic. Example here (https://goo.gl/maps/btkbsAoW8H32) and here (https://goo.gl/maps/TDuPPDKPbk32).

The "5/8" is still in Clearview...sneaky PennDOT, sneaky.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Bitmapped on July 27, 2017, 10:16:18 PM
Quote from: jemacedo9 on July 26, 2017, 07:01:31 PM
Sign Project Begins on Route 15 in Lycoming and Tioga Counties

QuoteThis work includes the installation of new mile marker and exit signs on the highway

Curious to see what route's mileage they are going to use:  US 15 or I-99.  I'm also curious to see if they are going to add exit numbers as they did with US 220 in Clinton County. And many of the signs on this stretch are fairly new, so with a total cost of $130K, there can't be too many BGSs being replaced. 


I would assume I-99 exit numbers. It doesn't make much sense to use US 15 numbers now. There are already Future I-99 signs on the corridor and, as far as I know, they could extend I-99 to I-180 at Williamsport now.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: LeftyJR on August 02, 2017, 08:58:43 AM
I live in the area, I'll update when I can.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: sbeaver44 on August 02, 2017, 09:14:09 AM
Quote from: Bitmapped on July 27, 2017, 10:16:18 PM
Quote from: jemacedo9 on July 26, 2017, 07:01:31 PM
Sign Project Begins on Route 15 in Lycoming and Tioga Counties

QuoteThis work includes the installation of new mile marker and exit signs on the highway

Curious to see what route's mileage they are going to use:  US 15 or I-99.  I'm also curious to see if they are going to add exit numbers as they did with US 220 in Clinton County. And many of the signs on this stretch are fairly new, so with a total cost of $130K, there can't be too many BGSs being replaced. 


I would assume I-99 exit numbers. It doesn't make much sense to use US 15 numbers now. There are already Future I-99 signs on the corridor and, as far as I know, they could extend I-99 to I-180 at Williamsport now.
Does anyone know why US 15's LRS segment numbers start at 1280 north of I-180?  Is 128.0 the mile marker on US 15 from the MD border there?  Seems too low to be I-99's (should be ~134).  Non-Interstates should use 20ths of a mile from the preceding county line or route begin, and it's definitely not 64 miles into Lycoming County there.  For reference, the preceding segment before it joins I-180 is 264.

Nexus 6P

Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: LeftyJR on August 03, 2017, 09:18:29 AM
Quote from: sbeaver44 on August 02, 2017, 09:14:09 AM
Quote from: Bitmapped on July 27, 2017, 10:16:18 PM
Quote from: jemacedo9 on July 26, 2017, 07:01:31 PM
Sign Project Begins on Route 15 in Lycoming and Tioga Counties

QuoteThis work includes the installation of new mile marker and exit signs on the highway

Curious to see what route's mileage they are going to use:  US 15 or I-99.  I'm also curious to see if they are going to add exit numbers as they did with US 220 in Clinton County. And many of the signs on this stretch are fairly new, so with a total cost of $130K, there can't be too many BGSs being replaced. 


I would assume I-99 exit numbers. It doesn't make much sense to use US 15 numbers now. There are already Future I-99 signs on the corridor and, as far as I know, they could extend I-99 to I-180 at Williamsport now.
Does anyone know why US 15's LRS segment numbers start at 1280 north of I-180?  Is 128.0 the mile marker on US 15 from the MD border there?  Seems too low to be I-99's (should be ~134).  Non-Interstates should use 20ths of a mile from the preceding county line or route begin, and it's definitely not 64 miles into Lycoming County there.  For reference, the preceding segment before it joins I-180 is 264.

Nexus 6P



I think that US 15 is more than 128 miles to that point - more like 140?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: sbeaver44 on August 03, 2017, 09:23:50 AM


Quote from: LeftyJR on August 03, 2017, 09:18:29 AM
Quote from: sbeaver44 on August 02, 2017, 09:14:09 AM
Does anyone know why US 15's LRS segment numbers start at 1280 north of I-180?  Is 128.0 the mile marker on US 15 from the MD border there?  Seems too low to be I-99's (should be ~134).  Non-Interstates should use 20ths of a mile from the preceding county line or route begin, and it's definitely not 64 miles into Lycoming County there.  For reference, the preceding segment before it joins I-180 is 264.

Nexus 6P



I think that US 15 is more than 128 miles to that point - more like 140?

The mystery deepens...
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: noelbotevera on August 03, 2017, 10:22:08 AM
Quote from: sbeaver44 on August 03, 2017, 09:23:50 AM


Quote from: LeftyJR on August 03, 2017, 09:18:29 AM
Quote from: sbeaver44 on August 02, 2017, 09:14:09 AM
Does anyone know why US 15's LRS segment numbers start at 1280 north of I-180?  Is 128.0 the mile marker on US 15 from the MD border there?  Seems too low to be I-99's (should be ~134).  Non-Interstates should use 20ths of a mile from the preceding county line or route begin, and it's definitely not 64 miles into Lycoming County there.  For reference, the preceding segment before it joins I-180 is 264.

Nexus 6P



I think that US 15 is more than 128 miles to that point - more like 140?

The mystery deepens...
I think the "1" is an error. Dividing 280/20 gives me 14, which sounds about right (14 miles into Lycoming County).
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jemacedo9 on August 03, 2017, 11:21:38 AM
Quote from: sbeaver44 on August 02, 2017, 09:14:09 AM
Quote from: Bitmapped on July 27, 2017, 10:16:18 PM
Quote from: jemacedo9 on July 26, 2017, 07:01:31 PM
Sign Project Begins on Route 15 in Lycoming and Tioga Counties

QuoteThis work includes the installation of new mile marker and exit signs on the highway

Curious to see what route's mileage they are going to use:  US 15 or I-99.  I'm also curious to see if they are going to add exit numbers as they did with US 220 in Clinton County. And many of the signs on this stretch are fairly new, so with a total cost of $130K, there can't be too many BGSs being replaced. 


I would assume I-99 exit numbers. It doesn't make much sense to use US 15 numbers now. There are already Future I-99 signs on the corridor and, as far as I know, they could extend I-99 to I-180 at Williamsport now.
Does anyone know why US 15's LRS segment numbers start at 1280 north of I-180?  Is 128.0 the mile marker on US 15 from the MD border there?  Seems too low to be I-99's (should be ~134).  Non-Interstates should use 20ths of a mile from the preceding county line or route begin, and it's definitely not 64 miles into Lycoming County there.  For reference, the preceding segment before it joins I-180 is 264.

Nexus 6P



My *guess* always has been that for some reason, when the US 15 freeway was completed just north of Foy Ave, Segment 1280 was used instead of reusing Seg 280 by adding a one.    This was early on in PAs use of SR segments.  That would leave a gap of Segment 270.

Now, when a route is relocated, or Seg numbers revised, they add 2 to the old segment number...so Seg 280 on the old route would be Seg 282 on the new route; then Seg 292, then 302, etc, until either the route rejoins the old and the old Seg numbers stay, or a county reset.  (In the opposite direction, Seg 281 becomes Seg 283, then 293, 302, etc.)  See US 15's segment numbers in Tioga County, where the new freeway segments were built later.

ALSO...it's not exactly true that 1 segment is 1/20th of a mile.  Segments are based on physical features (intersections, bridges, curves) where 10 equals roughly 1/2 mile.  But there may be segments that are significantly more or less than 1/2 mile.  Sometimes, the uses of a Segment number ending in 4 seems to realign a segment number series back to that 1/2-mail rough standard.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Gnutella on August 05, 2017, 08:12:06 PM
Now that the "Parkway West" (I-376) construction in Pittsburgh has wrapped up, I'm happy to see that PennDOT District 11 is using "Pittsburgh Intl Airport" (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.4211025,-80.0944916,3a,75y,299.8h,95.24t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sQ7XYCqkeXvRLlXQV1rG7-Q!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) as a control destination instead of just "Airport."
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on August 05, 2017, 09:29:36 PM
What exactly was the point of widening that to three lanes at the option lane split, but still having it drop to two right after despite there being all the pavement for a third lane westbound all the way through the interchange?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: LeftyJR on August 06, 2017, 08:27:03 AM
Quote from: Gnutella on August 05, 2017, 08:12:06 PM
Now that the "Parkway West" (I-376) construction in Pittsburgh has wrapped up, I'm happy to see that PennDOT District 11 is using "Pittsburgh Intl Airport" (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.4211025,-80.0944916,3a,75y,299.8h,95.24t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sQ7XYCqkeXvRLlXQV1rG7-Q!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) as a control destination instead of just "Airport."

When I traveled abroad, other countries almost always use the "plane" symbol on the signs with the airport.  I figure this is because of people who don't speak their native language, but I think it would be a welcome change here in the states.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: briantroutman on August 06, 2017, 12:21:08 PM
Quote from: Gnutella on August 05, 2017, 08:12:06 PM
Now that the "Parkway West" (I-376) construction in Pittsburgh has wrapped up, I'm happy to see that PennDOT District 11 is using "Pittsburgh Intl Airport" (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.4211025,-80.0944916,3a,75y,299.8h,95.24t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sQ7XYCqkeXvRLlXQV1rG7-Q!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) as a control destination instead of just "Airport."

While I'm not upset to see "Pittsburgh Int'l" , I don't think it's really necessary since PIT is the city's only commercial service airport. (Arnold Palmer sees less than 1/20th the traffic of PIT and is over 50 miles in the opposite direction, so I don't think there's much of a chance for confusion.)

If you're headed to Allegheny County Airport–a courier taking packages to an air cargo outfit or a chauffeur shuttling an Alcoa exec to his private jet–I don't think you should expect to have giant overhead guide signs marking the route to a general aviation airport.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: plain on August 06, 2017, 01:08:58 PM
Quote from: Gnutella on August 05, 2017, 08:12:06 PM
Now that the "Parkway West" (I-376) construction in Pittsburgh has wrapped up, I'm happy to see that PennDOT District 11 is using "Pittsburgh Intl Airport" (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.4211025,-80.0944916,3a,75y,299.8h,95.24t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sQ7XYCqkeXvRLlXQV1rG7-Q!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) as a control destination instead of just "Airport."

I kinda dig that "LANE ENDS" in yellow background plus arrow on that BGS
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jemacedo9 on August 06, 2017, 06:29:01 PM
For those tracking the new signage on US 15 N of Williamsport: nothing new after one week.  My next trip that way will be at the end of Aug.
For those tracking new FHWA signs in PA, two more new ones on a new overhead gantry on US 422 West just before the PA 23 exit in Valley Forge.

Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: seicer on August 07, 2017, 09:41:34 AM
Will they be installing the exit numbers and I-99 signage any time soon? And is there a timeline on completing I-99 between I-80 and Williamsport? I noticed most of the new signs have exit tabs but not all.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Bitmapped on August 07, 2017, 09:49:07 AM
Quote from: Roadsguy on August 05, 2017, 09:29:36 PM
What exactly was the point of widening that to three lanes at the option lane split, but still having it drop to two right after despite there being all the pavement for a third lane westbound all the way through the interchange?

The third lane functions as a climbing lane. It ends on the downhill side of the hill, allowing the ramp from I-79 NB to I-376 WB to be an add lane as the hill picks up again. Having the ramp come in as an added lane works a lot more smoothly with the uphill grade than when it used to have to merge in right away with slow traffic coming off the loop.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: cl94 on August 07, 2017, 11:29:28 AM
Quote from: seicer on August 07, 2017, 09:41:34 AM
Will they be installing the exit numbers and I-99 signage any time soon? And is there a timeline on completing I-99 between I-80 and Williamsport? I noticed most of the new signs have exit tabs but not all.

Neither is planned remotely soon. US 15 north of Williamsport is Interstate grade, it's a matter of PennDOT wanting to submit an application and change the signs. Exit tabs have been present since the last part of that opened years ago.

As far as the current NT of the PA section up to Williamsport, I'd be surprised if it's completed within the next 25 years. US 220 is horribly substandard and the cost is monumental. They haven't even built a proper interchange with I-80.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ARMOURERERIC on August 07, 2017, 11:50:27 AM
Quote from: briantroutman on August 06, 2017, 12:21:08 PM
Quote from: Gnutella on August 05, 2017, 08:12:06 PM
Now that the "Parkway West" (I-376) construction in Pittsburgh has wrapped up, I'm happy to see that PennDOT District 11 is using "Pittsburgh Intl Airport" (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.4211025,-80.0944916,3a,75y,299.8h,95.24t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sQ7XYCqkeXvRLlXQV1rG7-Q!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) as a control destination instead of just "Airport."

While I'm not upset to see "Pittsburgh Int'l" , I don't think it's really necessary since PIT is the city's only commercial service airport. (Arnold Palmer sees less than 1/20th the traffic of PIT and is over 50 miles in the opposite direction, so I don't think there's much of a chance for confusion.)

If you're headed to Allegheny County Airport–a courier taking packages to an air cargo outfit or a chauffeur shuttling an Alcoa exec to his private jet–I don't think you should expect to have giant overhead guide signs marking the route to a general aviation airport.

All the wasted blank space and ugly green out in a few years when PIT stops being an international airport.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: LeftyJR on August 07, 2017, 01:46:45 PM
Quote from: ARMOURERERIC on August 07, 2017, 11:50:27 AM
Quote from: briantroutman on August 06, 2017, 12:21:08 PM
Quote from: Gnutella on August 05, 2017, 08:12:06 PM
Now that the "Parkway West" (I-376) construction in Pittsburgh has wrapped up, I'm happy to see that PennDOT District 11 is using "Pittsburgh Intl Airport" (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.4211025,-80.0944916,3a,75y,299.8h,95.24t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sQ7XYCqkeXvRLlXQV1rG7-Q!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) as a control destination instead of just "Airport."

While I'm not upset to see "Pittsburgh Int'l" , I don't think it's really necessary since PIT is the city's only commercial service airport. (Arnold Palmer sees less than 1/20th the traffic of PIT and is over 50 miles in the opposite direction, so I don't think there's much of a chance for confusion.)

If you're headed to Allegheny County Airport–a courier taking packages to an air cargo outfit or a chauffeur shuttling an Alcoa exec to his private jet–I don't think you should expect to have giant overhead guide signs marking the route to a general aviation airport.

All the waste
Quote from: cl94 on August 07, 2017, 11:29:28 AM
Quote from: seicer on August 07, 2017, 09:41:34 AM
Will they be installing the exit numbers and I-99 signage any time soon? And is there a timeline on completing I-99 between I-80 and Williamsport? I noticed most of the new signs have exit tabs but not all.

Neither is planned remotely soon. US 15 north of Williamsport is Interstate grade, it's a matter of PennDOT wanting to submit an application and change the signs. Exit tabs have been present since the last part of that opened years ago.

As far as the current NT of the PA section up to Williamsport, I'd be surprised if it's completed within the next 25 years. US 220 is horribly substandard and the cost is monumental. They haven't even built a proper interchange with I-80.



220 near I-80 (near Exit 178 on I-80) has plenty of room to make it four lanes - its basically a "super 2" now with an interchange at Mackeyville.  That part shouldn't cost much - the I-80 interchanges here and at Exit 161 would be costly as well. 

The 7 mile section between Williamsport and Jersey Shore has all sorts of problems - and I believe that project was deferred about 5 years ago.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: seicer on August 07, 2017, 01:48:33 PM
For now, they are ripping out the small concrete bulb median and installing jersey barriers.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: billpa on August 12, 2017, 06:44:16 AM
Quote from: LeftyJR on August 06, 2017, 08:27:03 AM
Quote from: Gnutella on August 05, 2017, 08:12:06 PM
Now that the "Parkway West" (I-376) construction in Pittsburgh has wrapped up, I'm happy to see that PennDOT District 11 is using "Pittsburgh Intl Airport" (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.4211025,-80.0944916,3a,75y,299.8h,95.24t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sQ7XYCqkeXvRLlXQV1rG7-Q!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) as a control destination instead of just "Airport."

When I traveled abroad, other countries almost always use the "plane" symbol on the signs with the airport.  I figure this is because of people who don't speak their native language, but I think it would be a welcome change here in the states.
And in the rest of the world the plane "points" in the direction you're supposed to go. That's something most states here haven't quite figured out yet.

SM-T230NU

Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ixnay on August 12, 2017, 10:51:14 AM
Quote from: billpa on August 12, 2017, 06:44:16 AM
And in the rest of the world the plane "points" in the direction you're supposed to go. That's something most states here haven't quite figured out yet.

You mean the arrows on this kind of sign (from the UK) are called "planes"?

(https://qph.ec.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-3ec192033be03350c2097f10541bb2a4-c)

ixnay
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: thenetwork on August 13, 2017, 10:36:48 AM
Quote from: ixnay on August 12, 2017, 10:51:14 AM
Quote from: billpa on August 12, 2017, 06:44:16 AM
And in the rest of the world the plane "points" in the direction you're supposed to go. That's something most states here haven't quite figured out yet.

You mean the arrows on this kind of sign (from the UK) are called "planes"?

(https://qph.ec.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-3ec192033be03350c2097f10541bb2a4-c)

ixnay

Those look like Washington Monuments to me.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ixnay on August 13, 2017, 12:24:03 PM
Washington Monuments?  LOL, thenetwork!!!  :-D

ixnay
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: KEVIN_224 on August 13, 2017, 12:57:10 PM
http://www.philly.com/philly/living/travel/Pennsylvania-turnpike-Breezewood-rest-stop.html?utm_campaign=Philly.com+Facebook+Account&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_medium=social&cid=Philly.com+Facebook

Philly.com had this person's take on a recent Breezewood outing. :)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: billpa on August 14, 2017, 03:24:15 PM
Quote from: ixnay on August 12, 2017, 10:51:14 AM
Quote from: billpa on August 12, 2017, 06:44:16 AM
And in the rest of the world the plane "points" in the direction you're supposed to go. That's something most states here haven't quite figured out yet.

You mean the arrows on this kind of sign (from the UK) are called "planes"?

(https://qph.ec.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-3ec192033be03350c2097f10541bb2a4-c)

ixnay
No, the airplane symbol.

HTC6525LVW

Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Ian on August 14, 2017, 04:02:47 PM
Quote from: billpa on August 14, 2017, 03:24:15 PM
Quote from: ixnay on August 12, 2017, 10:51:14 AM
Quote from: billpa on August 12, 2017, 06:44:16 AM
And in the rest of the world the plane "points" in the direction you're supposed to go. That's something most states here haven't quite figured out yet.

You mean the arrows on this kind of sign (from the UK) are called "planes"?

[img snipped]http://
No, the airplane symbol.

I believe he's speaking more along the lines of this, where the small airplane symbol points in the direction of the airport (example from Quebec).

(https://c1.staticflickr.com/9/8321/8000818939_a0a68283ed_z.jpg)

I wish more US states did it this way...
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: billpa on August 16, 2017, 02:21:20 PM
Quote from: Ian on August 14, 2017, 04:02:47 PM
Quote from: billpa on August 14, 2017, 03:24:15 PM
Quote from: ixnay on August 12, 2017, 10:51:14 AM
Quote from: billpa on August 12, 2017, 06:44:16 AM
And in the rest of the world the plane "points" in the direction you're supposed to go. That's something most states here haven't quite figured out yet.

You mean the arrows on this kind of sign (from the UK) are called "planes"?

[img snipped]http://
No, the airplane symbol.

I believe he's speaking more along the lines of this, where the small airplane symbol points in the direction of the airport (example from Quebec).

(https://c1.staticflickr.com/9/8321/8000818939_a0a68283ed_z.jpg)

I wish more US states did it this way...
Exactly. I was on 128 this past weekend and there were signs for Logan which were done in this fashion (like that example from Quebec.) But, for the most part, our signage follows American exceptionalism rules too often.

SM-T230NU

Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jeffandnicole on August 16, 2017, 02:24:15 PM
Quote from: billpa on August 16, 2017, 02:21:20 PM
Quote from: Ian on August 14, 2017, 04:02:47 PM


I believe he's speaking more along the lines of this, where the small airplane symbol points in the direction of the airport (example from Quebec).

(https://c1.staticflickr.com/9/8321/8000818939_a0a68283ed_z.jpg)

I wish more US states did it this way...
Exactly. I was on 128 this past weekend and there were signs for Logan which were done in this fashion (like that example from Quebec.) But, for the most part, our signage follows American exceptionalism rules too often.

SM-T230NU



The bigger question - do people notice?

I certainly noticed the arrow at the bottom in the yellow more than what direction the airplane symbol was facing.  And why would the airplane symbol matter if all the other normal elements of the sign were on the sign, as they are?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: billpa on August 16, 2017, 02:29:02 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on August 16, 2017, 02:24:15 PM
Quote from: billpa on August 16, 2017, 02:21:20 PM
Quote from: Ian on August 14, 2017, 04:02:47 PM


I believe he's speaking more along the lines of this, where the small airplane symbol points in the direction of the airport (example from Quebec).

(https://c1.staticflickr.com/9/8321/8000818939_a0a68283ed_z.jpg)

I wish more US states did it this way...
Exactly. I was on 128 this past weekend and there were signs for Logan which were done in this fashion (like that example from Quebec.) But, for the most part, our signage follows American exceptionalism rules too often.

SM-T230NU



The bigger question - do people notice?

I certainly noticed the arrow at the bottom in the yellow more than what direction the airplane symbol was facing.  And why would the airplane symbol matter if all the other normal elements of the sign were on the sign, as they are?
Because it looks like an arrow and can be confusing. It can appear to point in a direction which is wrong.
You're also likely communicating with motorists who are, in many cases, from places where the airplane symbol points in the proper direction.

SM-T230NU

Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jeffandnicole on August 16, 2017, 03:00:51 PM
Quote from: billpa on August 16, 2017, 02:29:02 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on August 16, 2017, 02:24:15 PM
Quote from: billpa on August 16, 2017, 02:21:20 PM
Quote from: Ian on August 14, 2017, 04:02:47 PM


I believe he's speaking more along the lines of this, where the small airplane symbol points in the direction of the airport (example from Quebec).

(https://c1.staticflickr.com/9/8321/8000818939_a0a68283ed_z.jpg)

I wish more US states did it this way...
Exactly. I was on 128 this past weekend and there were signs for Logan which were done in this fashion (like that example from Quebec.) But, for the most part, our signage follows American exceptionalism rules too often.

SM-T230NU



The bigger question - do people notice?

I certainly noticed the arrow at the bottom in the yellow more than what direction the airplane symbol was facing.  And why would the airplane symbol matter if all the other normal elements of the sign were on the sign, as they are?
Because it looks like an arrow and can be confusing. It can appear to point in a direction which is wrong.
You're also likely communicating with motorists who are, in many cases, from places where the airplane symbol points in the proper direction.

SM-T230NU

Since it's been often noted that FHWA signage doesn't have the airplane symbol pointing in any specific direction, I'll repeat my question:

Do people notice?

This certainly doesn't come up in any list anywhere of things that confuse motorists.  And even when we're talking about international tourists that are driving vehicles (who may be accustomed to such plane pointing symbols), I can't recall anyone complaining about it.

Further to the point - I tried doing a Google search or two.  There's a million gazillion pages on the internet about everything, and I couldn't come up with anything regarding this.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: seicer on August 16, 2017, 03:01:41 PM
An airplane symbol does not look like an arrow. Good grief.

In New York state, where there are a lot of bilingual residents and visitors, symbols are used extensively to denote universities and schools, libraries, post offices, airports, train stations, information centers and more. A name is often affixed below it. Not only does that provide maximum clarity to non-English (or English as a second language) motorists, but it provides maximum clarity to native residents as well.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: briantroutman on August 16, 2017, 04:30:22 PM
As a graphic designer who frequently deals with issues involving iconography and clarity of word-less communications, I disagree with the idea of "pointing"  the airplane in the direction of travel. By rotating the plane, you're altering the icon (in a sense). The silhouette of an airplane pointing straight upward registers a certain signature in a viewer's mind, and that same plane rotated 90° registers a slightly different signature. Sure, the viewer will figure it out after a second or two, but at 60-70+ MPH, those are a few seconds that shouldn't be wasted.

And let's take that concept further: Should the knife and fork on a FOOD services sign be rotated toward the location of restaurants? Should trailblazers approaching Washington state routes have George's head rotated toward the corresponding direction of travel?

Personally, I don't think so.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: J N Winkler on August 16, 2017, 06:43:29 PM
Quote from: ixnay on August 12, 2017, 10:51:14 AMYou mean the arrows on this kind of sign (from the UK) are called "planes"?

(https://qph.ec.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-3ec192033be03350c2097f10541bb2a4-c)

Those are called stub arms in official documentation.  They were originally developed for motorway signs in 1958 and had a 60° chamfer.  When new signs for roads other than motorways were instituted in 1965 and design rules for motorway signs were adjusted to conform to the same visual language, a 90° chamfer became the norm.  The signs on which stub arms can be found are generally called map-type advance direction signs.

Quote from: briantroutman on August 16, 2017, 04:30:22 PM
As a graphic designer who frequently deals with issues involving iconography and clarity of word-less communications, I disagree with the idea of "pointing"  the airplane in the direction of travel. By rotating the plane, you're altering the icon (in a sense). The silhouette of an airplane pointing straight upward registers a certain signature in a viewer's mind, and that same plane rotated 90° registers a slightly different signature. Sure, the viewer will figure it out after a second or two, but at 60-70+ MPH, those are a few seconds that shouldn't be wasted.

This approach does not create confusion the UK, where the airplane symbol is large, distinct, not framed by a bounding box, and is easily recognizable as a plane in plan view in any orientation in which it is used (which, if memory serves, is allowed to be varied in 15° increments).  I don't know, though, that anyone actually associates nose angle with direction of travel to the airport without actually looking in TSRGD or Chapter 7 of the UK Traffic Signs Manual.

I personally find the plane symbol in plan view--however oriented--much easier to recognize than the profile view of a plane taking off, which is used in Albuquerque, Milwaukee, etc. and is so poorly articulated that from a distance it looks like a slash of white on the sign.

I don't think BillPA's generalization (plane points in direction of travel to the airport) is necessarily correct as applied to all countries other than the US.  I know it is in the UK, and I will take others' word for it that it is in Québec though I can't remember specific language to that effect in the MTQ traffic manual.  I don't think the plane symbol rotates in France, however.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: empirestate on August 16, 2017, 11:47:28 PM
Quote from: briantroutman on August 16, 2017, 04:30:22 PM
As a graphic designer who frequently deals with issues involving iconography and clarity of word-less communications, I disagree with the idea of "pointing"  the airplane in the direction of travel. By rotating the plane, you're altering the icon (in a sense). The silhouette of an airplane pointing straight upward registers a certain signature in a viewer's mind, and that same plane rotated 90° registers a slightly different signature. Sure, the viewer will figure it out after a second or two, but at 60-70+ MPH, those are a few seconds that shouldn't be wasted.

This is an important point. I was going to say rotating the symbol gives a subtle cue that can only enhance the communication, but for the reasons stated above, maybe that's not so. But the point is, whatever the answer may be, the question isn't what people will notice, but what is the best design. Indeed, a characteristic of good design is quite often that people don't notice it.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jemacedo9 on September 05, 2017, 02:11:42 PM
Quote from: Bitmapped on July 27, 2017, 10:16:18 PM
Quote from: jemacedo9 on July 26, 2017, 07:01:31 PM
Sign Project Begins on Route 15 in Lycoming and Tioga Counties

QuoteThis work includes the installation of new mile marker and exit signs on the highway

Curious to see what route's mileage they are going to use:  US 15 or I-99.  I'm also curious to see if they are going to add exit numbers as they did with US 220 in Clinton County. And many of the signs on this stretch are fairly new, so with a total cost of $130K, there can't be too many BGSs being replaced. 


I would assume I-99 exit numbers. It doesn't make much sense to use US 15 numbers now. There are already Future I-99 signs on the corridor and, as far as I know, they could extend I-99 to I-180 at Williamsport now.

SO...this sign contract DID involve assigning exit numbers from I-180 north.  So far...the mile markers are generic ones (non-enhanced/no shields) and only whole miles, no tenths.  Mile markers start at 136 and end at 196 and the NY border.

So far, all ground mounted signs (supplemental BGS and services signs) have greenout/blueout patches, including the signs with blank Exit tabs and including gore signs that had blank exit numbers.  At this point, no new gore signs have been installed, and no new exit tabs. 

The numbers, that I could see (I drove NB), are:

3rd St (NB only) - Exit 136
4th St (SB only) - couldn't tell (prob will be 136)
Foy Ave/Lycoming Creek Rd - nothing installed (prob will be 137)
Hepburnville - Exit 140
PA 973 Cogan Station/Perrryville (SB only) - Exit 143
PA 14 Trout Run / Canton - Exit 148
Cogan House - Exit 152
PA 184 Steam Valley - Exit 155
PA 284 English Center / Buttonwood - Exit 158
PA 414 Morris / Liberty - Exit 162
Sebring - no number yet (prob will be 163 or 164)
Blossburg - Exit 172
PA 660/Bus US 15 Canoe Camp / Covington - Exit 179
US 6 Mansfield / Wellsboro - Exit 182
Bus US 15 Main St (SB only) - Exit 183
PA 287 Tioga / Tioga Jct - Exit 191
PA 49 Lawrenceville / Elkland - Exit 196
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jp the roadgeek on September 10, 2017, 10:10:51 PM
Quote from: jemacedo9 on September 05, 2017, 02:11:42 PM
Quote from: Bitmapped on July 27, 2017, 10:16:18 PM
Quote from: jemacedo9 on July 26, 2017, 07:01:31 PM
Sign Project Begins on Route 15 in Lycoming and Tioga Counties

QuoteThis work includes the installation of new mile marker and exit signs on the highway

Curious to see what route's mileage they are going to use:  US 15 or I-99.  I'm also curious to see if they are going to add exit numbers as they did with US 220 in Clinton County. And many of the signs on this stretch are fairly new, so with a total cost of $130K, there can't be too many BGSs being replaced. 


I would assume I-99 exit numbers. It doesn't make much sense to use US 15 numbers now. There are already Future I-99 signs on the corridor and, as far as I know, they could extend I-99 to I-180 at Williamsport now.

SO...this sign contract DID involve assigning exit numbers from I-180 north.  So far...the mile markers are generic ones (non-enhanced/no shields) and only whole miles, no tenths.  Mile markers start at 136 and end at 196 and the NY border.

So far, all ground mounted signs (supplemental BGS and services signs) have greenout/blueout patches, including the signs with blank Exit tabs and including gore signs that had blank exit numbers.  At this point, no new gore signs have been installed, and no new exit tabs. 

The numbers, that I could see (I drove NB), are:

3rd St (NB only) - Exit 136
4th St (SB only) - couldn't tell (prob will be 136)
Foy Ave/Lycoming Creek Rd - nothing installed (prob will be 137)
Hepburnville - Exit 140
PA 973 Cogan Station/Perrryville (SB only) - Exit 143
PA 14 Trout Run / Canton - Exit 148
Cogan House - Exit 152
PA 184 Steam Valley - Exit 155
PA 284 English Center / Buttonwood - Exit 158
PA 414 Morris / Liberty - Exit 162
Sebring - no number yet (prob will be 163 or 164)
Blossburg - Exit 172
PA 660/Bus US 15 Canoe Camp / Covington - Exit 179
US 6 Mansfield / Wellsboro - Exit 182
Bus US 15 Main St (SB only) - Exit 183
PA 287 Tioga / Tioga Jct - Exit 191
PA 49 Lawrenceville / Elkland - Exit 196

I'm going to guess they are I-99 numbers.  Exit 136 would be at about MP 132 for US 15.  For I-99, it's about 86.5 miles from the beginning to I-80, 17.5 miles duplexed with I-80, then about 31 miles on US 220 from I-80 to the I-180/US 15 junction.  Those numbers seem to add up to 136
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on September 24, 2017, 01:18:34 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/fznMX70.jpg)

New FYA signal in Pennsylvania, this one at the US 422/Ramona Road intersection near Myerstown. The picture turned out surprisingly well despite me only just barely pulling out my phone to get it after seeing it. (I wasn't driving.)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: MASTERNC on September 24, 2017, 01:38:58 PM
Quote from: Roadsguy on September 24, 2017, 01:18:34 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/fznMX70.jpg)

New FYA signal in Pennsylvania, this one at the US 422/Ramona Road intersection near Myerstown. The picture turned out surprisingly well despite me only just barely pulling out my phone to get it after seeing it. (I wasn't driving.)

Was wondering when we'd start to see more than the 2 or 3 we know have been installed in the state (plus one in the York area forthcoming).
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 02 Park Ave on September 26, 2017, 08:55:20 PM
I drove half way across the Commonwealth from Ohio today on the Keystone Shortway.  The only active construction project I encountered was at Snow Shoe.  All other eastbound projects appear to have been completed or are otherwise inactive.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Alps on September 26, 2017, 11:31:00 PM
Quote from: 02 Park Ave on September 26, 2017, 08:55:20 PM
I drove half way across the Commonwealth from Ohio today on the Keystone Shortway.
My condolences.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on October 08, 2017, 08:46:46 PM
What exactly are the point of these (https://goo.gl/maps/kjHgfZzVC3G2) light-up Do Not Enter signs in Pittsburgh? They're installed above permanent signs, and there doesn't seem to be any purpose for allowing traffic to go the wrong way up that off ramp.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: thenetwork on October 08, 2017, 11:17:43 PM
Quote from: Roadsguy on October 08, 2017, 08:46:46 PM
What exactly are the point of these (https://goo.gl/maps/kjHgfZzVC3G2) light-up Do Not Enter signs in Pittsburgh? They're installed above permanent signs, and there doesn't seem to be any purpose for allowing traffic to go the wrong way up that off ramp.

My guess is there is an EXIT ONLY BGS overhead for PA-51 South right above those lit DNE signs.  That curved off-ramp looks like an on-ramp (and the angle is pretty much the same as the on-ramps on either side) and I'm sure there have been a fair share of people that mistook that wrong-way ramp for PA-51 over the years.

Chalk it up to poor intersection design.  But given the limited space, and the fact they were helping in smoothing out the left turns toward the Liberty Tunnels in order to get more traffic thru each green light cycle, they have done a pretty good job in saying "Hey dummy -- DON'T turn here".

Also looks like there are flashing red lights above the lit DNE signs as well.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: VTGoose on October 09, 2017, 11:22:21 AM
Quote from: Roadsguy on October 08, 2017, 08:46:46 PM
What exactly are the point of these (https://goo.gl/maps/kjHgfZzVC3G2) light-up Do Not Enter signs in Pittsburgh? They're installed above permanent signs, and there doesn't seem to be any purpose for allowing traffic to go the wrong way up that off ramp.

Given that the signs are in the dark under the bridge, they give an extra indication to not go that way. In an ensuing collision, the at-fault driver really can't say "I didn't see the 'Do Not Enter' sign" when it is lit up.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: rickmastfan67 on October 09, 2017, 10:17:13 PM
Quote from: VTGoose on October 09, 2017, 11:22:21 AM
Quote from: Roadsguy on October 08, 2017, 08:46:46 PM
What exactly are the point of these (https://goo.gl/maps/kjHgfZzVC3G2) light-up Do Not Enter signs in Pittsburgh? They're installed above permanent signs, and there doesn't seem to be any purpose for allowing traffic to go the wrong way up that off ramp.

Given that the signs are in the dark under the bridge, they give an extra indication to not go that way. In an ensuing collision, the at-fault driver really can't say "I didn't see the 'Do Not Enter' sign" when it is lit up.

Oh, the idiots out there will still try to say it.  But it will just make them look even stupider. lol.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on November 04, 2017, 04:10:55 PM
Got a better picture of the new FYA signal near Myerstown on US 422 at Ramona Road:

(https://i.imgur.com/WQdiGYl.jpg)

I also noticed they removed the 55 mph zone between Prescott Road/Drive and just east of this intersection. It's now all 45, but I think it could stand 50. They also didn't "center" 422 here where the directions used to split. There's now a weird jog as the whole road realigns along where the north shoulder always was.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jeffandnicole on November 04, 2017, 11:37:29 PM
Quote from: Roadsguy on November 04, 2017, 04:10:55 PM
Got a better picture of the new FYA signal near Myerstown on US 422 at Ramona Road:

(https://i.imgur.com/WQdiGYl.jpg)

I also noticed they removed the 55 mph zone between Prescott Road/Drive and just east of this intersection. It's now all 45, but I think it could stand 50. They also didn't "center" 422 here where the directions used to split. There's now a weird jog as the whole road realigns along where the north shoulder always was.

PA likes x5 speed limits. There aren't a whole lot of 50 mph limits.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: cpzilliacus on November 05, 2017, 08:03:16 PM
Quote from: Alps on October 13, 2017, 06:10:36 PM
It's PA, so I can believe it. No money for anything anywhere.

There's been some money for the PennDOT way of doing Interstate reconstruction, but not nearly enough.  There has even been some (modest) progress on remediating two of the most awful Interstates in the nation (I-70 west of New Stanton and I-83 around York).

Now, with the highest per-gallon state motor fuel tax rates (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fuel_taxes_in_the_United_States) (both gasoline (58.2¢) and Diesel fuel (74.7¢)) in the coterminous 48 states plus D.C., PennDOT does have a pretty good bridge repair, redecking or replacement program up and running (but given how many (http://www.penndot.gov/ProjectAndPrograms/p3forpa/Pages/Rapid-Bridge-Replacement-Project.aspx) structurally deficient bridges there are in Penn's Woods, that is going to consume dollars for quite a few years).
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Beltway on November 05, 2017, 08:37:02 PM
Quote from: cpzilliacus on November 05, 2017, 08:03:16 PM
Quote from: Alps on October 13, 2017, 06:10:36 PM
It's PA, so I can believe it. No money for anything anywhere.
There's been some money for the PennDOT way of doing Interstate reconstruction, but not nearly enough.  There has even been some (modest) progress on remediating two of the most awful Interstates in the nation (I-70 west of New Stanton and I-83 around York).
Now, with the highest per-gallon state motor fuel tax rates (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fuel_taxes_in_the_United_States) (both gasoline (58.2¢) and Diesel fuel (74.7¢)) in the coterminous 48 states plus D.C., PennDOT does have a pretty good bridge repair, redecking or replacement program up and running (but given how many (http://www.penndot.gov/ProjectAndPrograms/p3forpa/Pages/Rapid-Bridge-Replacement-Project.aspx) structurally deficient bridges there are in Penn's Woods, that is going to consume dollars for quite a few years).

PennDOT has a $5.7 billion annual budget for highways, including $2.9 billion for improvements and $1.7 billion for maintenance and $0.8 billion in transfers to local governments.  Their program funding is greatly improved from when I lived there in the 1970s.

They also annually allocate $2.2 billion to multimodal (transit, rail and aviation) and $1.1 billion to debt service and other agencies.

These were the figures for FY 2016.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on November 14, 2017, 09:26:02 PM
Something weird I noticed in the old Street View in Lancaster, particularly at the old US 222/Lititz Pike railroad bridge that was replaced a few years ago: https://goo.gl/maps/DdmJydPMWaF2

The sign for PA 72 North has a space missing that appears to be for an extra shield. Judging by the position of the "North" heading, it would likely also apply to the mystery route, meaning it's not a "To US 30" or "To PA 283". There's no other north-south routes in that direction, though. Did Fruitville Pike once have a number, or were they planning on giving it one? Or is this just a weird goof by whoever made the sign, which appears to be no more than 25 years old, depending on when exactly PennDOT stopped using button copy, since these signs are newer than that.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jeffandnicole on November 15, 2017, 06:21:58 AM
Quote from: Roadsguy on November 14, 2017, 09:26:02 PM
Something weird I noticed in the old Street View in Lancaster, particularly at the old US 222/Lititz Pike railroad bridge that was replaced a few years ago: https://goo.gl/maps/DdmJydPMWaF2

The sign for PA 72 North has a space missing that appears to be for an extra shield. Judging by the position of the "North" heading, it would likely also apply to the mystery route, meaning it's not a "To US 30" or "To PA 283". There's no other north-south routes in that direction, though. Did Fruitville Pike once have a number, or were they planning on giving it one? Or is this just a weird goof by whoever made the sign, which appears to be no more than 25 years old, depending on when exactly PennDOT stopped using button copy, since these signs are newer than that.

They could've simply right-justified both the shield and the city, rather than centering the shield.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on November 20, 2017, 05:43:07 PM
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.3359135,-74.8422578,3a,75y,90h,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1spPbPsENf-OSEGuCaQqm2og!2e0!7i13312!8i6656 What is up with the orange Exit 44 sign?  I know from the photo PennDOT is got the WB Lanes closed due to construction and pavement rehabilitation as per usual PennDOT style by closing a whole carriageway and placing the other one in two way mode with jerseybarrier, but why the need for a temporary orange construction sign when the permanent one right behind it is still doing its job?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: PHLBOS on November 21, 2017, 09:54:59 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on November 20, 2017, 05:43:07 PM
That's nothing.  This temporary orange sign for Exits 9A-B off I-95 (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.8685897,-75.3127571,3a,75y,102h,73.37t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sluCoTbQPDmtSCLxX2SMVvg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) (the original overhead BGS was either damaged or vandalized) has been around for nearly 4 years.  No sign (no pun intended) of a permanent replacement as of yet.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on November 21, 2017, 05:27:40 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on November 21, 2017, 09:54:59 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on November 20, 2017, 05:43:07 PM
That's nothing.  This temporary orange sign for Exits 9A-B off I-95 (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.8685897,-75.3127571,3a,75y,102h,73.37t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sluCoTbQPDmtSCLxX2SMVvg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) (the original overhead BGS was either damaged or vandalized) has been around for nearly 4 years.  No sign (no pun intended) of a permanent replacement as of yet.
Not surprising as PennDOT took almost five years to add US 1 to the Oxford Valley Cloverleaf after the freeway was completed in 1987 to Morrisville.  In the same note US 1 Business was still signed as the mainline as well.

Remember we are talking about a state that has traffic lights on interstates too, so why should this MUTCD violation stop them as the signals are non interstate standards.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jeffandnicole on November 21, 2017, 09:53:51 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on November 21, 2017, 05:27:40 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on November 21, 2017, 09:54:59 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on November 20, 2017, 05:43:07 PM
That's nothing.  This temporary orange sign for Exits 9A-B off I-95 (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.8685897,-75.3127571,3a,75y,102h,73.37t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sluCoTbQPDmtSCLxX2SMVvg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) (the original overhead BGS was either damaged or vandalized) has been around for nearly 4 years.  No sign (no pun intended) of a permanent replacement as of yet.
Not surprising as PennDOT took almost five years to add US 1 to the Oxford Valley Cloverleaf after the freeway was completed in 1987 to Morrisville.  In the same note US 1 Business was still signed as the mainline as well.

Remember we are talking about a state that has traffic lights on interstates too, so why should this MUTCD violation stop them as the signals are non interstate standards.

Since the Feds funded that project, they approved the traffic lights.  More like an exception in this case.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on November 22, 2017, 07:32:02 AM
(Link from PennLIVE) I-81 is now three lanes from PA 114 (Exit 57) to PA 581 (Exit 59) in Cumberland County. (http://www.pennlive.com/news/2017/11/traffic_now_open_to_3_lanes_fo.html#incart_river_index)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 02 Park Ave on November 22, 2017, 07:45:41 AM
In addition to Breezewood, we also have I-676 in Philadelphia.  Westbound, there are two traffic signals between the Ben Franklin Bridge and Vine Street Expressway portions of the Interstate; eastbound there is one.

A simple, albeit inadequate, solution would be to close off the local cross-streets and eliminate the traffic signals.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on November 23, 2017, 11:08:04 PM
Quote from: Roadsguy on July 10, 2017, 05:02:20 PM
I noticed a mystery ramp from I-79 north of Mt. Morris. It appears to have been a temporary connection to Davistown Rd, with all movements except a southbound exit from 79. It even featured an at-grade left turn onto 79 south. From Historic Aerials, it appears to have been upgraded from some local driveway between 2004 and 2006. It sat there for years, blocked off at both ends from traffic, until the part directly connecting to 79 was removed in 2010 or 2011. The bulk of it still remains. What was this for?

Coming back to this, apparently the abandoned northern counterparts (https://goo.gl/maps/c9ZbpD3Yw1U2) to these ramps are still in PennDOT's records as SR 9400, which can be seen on their Type 10 map for Greene County. However, while these ramps are still mostly present and striped, any of those tiny LRS markers are long gone judging by the Street View.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Mergingtraffic on November 24, 2017, 11:34:19 PM
What's the link for the PENN DOT project list where you can see upcoming plans?  I saw the "public" page where the average joe can look.


I'm taking my first trip to Breezewood sometime this month or next. I'm hoping to snap pics of the button copy signs when I go.

I'll be going I-80-I-81 to I-76 to I-70 from CT.

Any non-reflective button copy anywhere along the corridor?
Any button copy signs left on the Doylestown bypass area (a different trip I plan on taking)?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Bitmapped on November 25, 2017, 01:07:32 AM
Quote from: Roadsguy on November 23, 2017, 11:08:04 PM
Quote from: Roadsguy on July 10, 2017, 05:02:20 PM
I noticed a mystery ramp from I-79 north of Mt. Morris. It appears to have been a temporary connection to Davistown Rd, with all movements except a southbound exit from 79. It even featured an at-grade left turn onto 79 south. From Historic Aerials, it appears to have been upgraded from some local driveway between 2004 and 2006. It sat there for years, blocked off at both ends from traffic, until the part directly connecting to 79 was removed in 2010 or 2011. The bulk of it still remains. What was this for?

Coming back to this, apparently the abandoned northern counterparts (https://goo.gl/maps/c9ZbpD3Yw1U2) to these ramps are still in PennDOT's records as SR 9400, which can be seen on their Type 10 map for Greene County. However, while these ramps are still mostly present and striped, any of those tiny LRS markers are long gone judging by the Street View.

For both ramps, they removed the pavement from the ramps that was within the I-79 ROW and abandoned the rest in-place as-is. I don't recall there ever being little white signs posted along either I-79 or the side roads.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jeffandnicole on November 25, 2017, 08:44:58 AM
Quote from: Mergingtraffic on November 24, 2017, 11:34:19 PM
What's the link for the PENN DOT project list where you can see upcoming plans?  I saw the "public" page where the average joe can look.


I'm taking my first trip to Breezewood sometime this month or next. I'm hoping to snap pics of the button copy signs when I go.

I'll be going I-80-I-81 to I-76 to I-70 from CT.

Any non-reflective button copy anywhere along the corridor?
Any button copy signs left on the Doylestown bypass area (a different trip I plan on taking)?


You can look on bidx where they may have posted some plans, usually in supplemental adgenda postings, but the full plans aren't usual found online anywhere. Even contractors have to actually purchase them.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on November 25, 2017, 09:24:36 PM
When exactly did PennDOT and the PTC stop using button copy, and were they at the same time or separate dates?

Also, PennDOT seems to have decisively switched back to FHWA series from Clearview, but has the PTC shown any sign (no pun intended) of doing so?

Quote from: Mergingtraffic on November 24, 2017, 11:34:19 PM
PENN DOT
*PennDOT
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jeffandnicole on November 25, 2017, 09:40:27 PM
Quote from: Roadsguy on November 25, 2017, 09:24:36 PM
When exactly did PennDOT and the PTC stop using button copy, and were they at the same time or separate dates?

Also, PennDOT seems to have decisively switched back to FHWA series from Clearview, but has the PTC shown any sign (no pun intended) of doing so?

Quote from: Mergingtraffic on November 24, 2017, 11:34:19 PM
PENN DOT
*PennDOT

All around the 95/Tpk connection project.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: J N Winkler on November 25, 2017, 10:01:24 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on November 25, 2017, 08:44:58 AM
Quote from: Mergingtraffic on November 24, 2017, 11:34:19 PM
What's the link for the PennDOT project list where you can see upcoming plans?  I saw the "public" page where the average joe can look.

You can look on bidx where they may have posted some plans, usually in supplemental addenda postings, but the full plans aren't usually found online anywhere. Even contractors have to actually purchase them.

Nope.  Not true for PennDOT.

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

If a project has been advertised, you can view and download the construction plans through ECMS even with the guest login.  After you log in, the bread crumb trail is Solicitation (top menu) --> Contractors --> Bid Packages.  "Advanced Search" does what it says, or alternatively you can just go directly to "New Postings."  In addition to the plans, the documentation associated with a bid package that is available for viewing or download includes special provisions, attachments, reports, etc.

PennDOT also posts "Unofficial Plans and Specifications" and you can click through to see what is available, but the guest login does not have viewing or downloading rights.  These are basically advance plans for projects intended to be advertised in the near future.  When a given project is advertised, the finished plans become part of a bid package and thus can be accessed through the guest login, so basically all guests lose is the sneak preview.

What Jeffandnicole is saying is basically true for NJDOT and the NJTA.  Both agencies are backward and rely on BidX as their advertising and plan distribution vehicle.  As a result, you get addenda and supplemental documentation (including as-builts and plans for concurrent work on the same facility, which with NJDOT are typically not complete, but have been for the Pulaski Skyway and Wittpenn Bridge) for free, but have to pay $135/month for the combination of subscriptions that allows you to download as-advertised plans.

Returning to Pennsylvania, the PTC also has its own contractor portal, but plans and specifications are not on guest access and require business partner registration.  This is a complex process that includes both online signup and mailing of a hardcopy form (with attestation) that lays out the particulars of your firm.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: J N Winkler on November 25, 2017, 10:15:55 PM
In regard to PennDOT and Clearview, the last few signing plans I have extracted date back to September 2016, and show that PennDOT was starting to go back to the FHWA alphabet series.

There was a large package in connection with the I-95/Turnpike project that went to bid around June 2015 and had the PennDOT ECMS number 95444.  It had 106 pattern-accurate sign panel detail and sign elevation sheets, all of which used Clearview for primary destination legend only.  If these signs are now being erected with Series E Modified for primary destination legend, then a change order (or functional equivalent) must have been issued sometime after award.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: BigRedDog on November 25, 2017, 11:51:09 PM
Quote from: Roadsguy on November 23, 2017, 11:08:04 PM
Quote from: Roadsguy on July 10, 2017, 05:02:20 PM
I noticed a mystery ramp from I-79 north of Mt. Morris. It appears to have been a temporary connection to Davistown Rd, with all movements except a southbound exit from 79. It even featured an at-grade left turn onto 79 south. From Historic Aerials, it appears to have been upgraded from some local driveway between 2004 and 2006. It sat there for years, blocked off at both ends from traffic, until the part directly connecting to 79 was removed in 2010 or 2011. The bulk of it still remains. What was this for?

Coming back to this, apparently the abandoned northern counterparts (https://goo.gl/maps/c9ZbpD3Yw1U2) to these ramps are still in PennDOT's records as SR 9400, which can be seen on their Type 10 map for Greene County. However, while these ramps are still mostly present and striped, any of those tiny LRS markers are long gone judging by the Street View.

The link given in the reply is not Davidstown Rd, as mentioned in the first post. I say this because there are ghost ramp(s) at Davidstown Rd. (see here (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.7431242,-80.0640576,575m/data=!3m1!1e3)), as well as at Rolling Meadows Rd. (see link in reply), which is farther north, closer to Waynesburg.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: mrsman on November 26, 2017, 02:48:45 PM
Quote from: empirestate on July 13, 2017, 12:28:14 PM
Quote from: J N Winkler on July 13, 2017, 11:55:09 AM
Quote from: empirestate on July 13, 2017, 09:59:47 AM*Case in point: I had a discussion with someone about a roundabout in my area. She despised roundabouts altogether, and when she explained why, I immediately saw the problem. She was frustrated because, when the circle is empty, and there's a line of traffic approaching the circle just to her left as she's entering from another approach, that line of traffic would just stream into the circle without stopping, leaving her no opening to get in. She was unhappy because they weren't "taking their yield" and making space for her and other downstream traffic to enter. She seemed to think that a "yield" is a slowing or stopping movement, and didn't seem to realize that it only applies when there's traffic to yield to–which, when the circle is empty, of course there isn't.

So, no wonder she's always frustrated at that circle: she has an expectation of the other drivers that isn't met by their behavior; and in this case, the rules are on their side. (And she's probably doubly frustrated by all the vehicles behind her honking and gesticulating, whenever she approaches an empty circle and decides to stop anyhow!)

The other side of this story is that it is a well-known empirical finding that roundabouts are highly likely to fail when traffic on one approach is well out of balance with traffic on the others.  However, when the state in question has a policy that roundabouts will be installed unless an alternative--such as a traffic signal--can meet stringent criteria, then roundabouts will be built that are especially likely not to operate satisfactorily under high-demand conditions.  I'm presuming the roundabout in question is in New York, which does have such a roundabouts-first policy.

That's precisely what I explained to her. In this case, I've never observed the lopsided traffic flow she describes, so it must be a very limited occurrence, possibly restricted to certain short periods of the day. Overall, the roundabout seems to work perfectly well.


iPhone

With regard to roundabouts, I had always thought that metering lights, similar to what you sometimes see at busy freeway entrances, would be really helpful at making sure that there is always a steady stream of traffic entering the roundabout at heavy traffic periods.  Unfortunately, there are very few applications of this that I have seen.

Here's an example in MD that uses red lights and flashing yellow, but I think red-green lights like at most metered onramp would be superior.

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.2122182,-76.795529,3a,75y,44.99h,94.16t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sQeHysOzBFfKzkjiBcB5d_A!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jeffandnicole on November 26, 2017, 03:25:29 PM
Quote from: mrsman on November 26, 2017, 02:48:45 PM
With regard to roundabouts, I had always thought that metering lights, similar to what you sometimes see at busy freeway entrances, would be really helpful at making sure that there is always a steady stream of traffic entering the roundabout at heavy traffic periods.  Unfortunately, there are very few applications of this that I have seen.

Here's an example in MD that uses red lights and flashing yellow, but I think red-green lights like at most metered onramp would be superior.

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.2122182,-76.795529,3a,75y,44.99h,94.16t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sQeHysOzBFfKzkjiBcB5d_A!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

NJ has used regular traffic lights as meters for traffic approaching their busier traffic circles in the past. This allows a group of traffic to enter the circle at one time, or it can be left on steady green for hours at a time during lighter traffic periods.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: storm2k on November 27, 2017, 03:10:16 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on November 26, 2017, 03:25:29 PM
Quote from: mrsman on November 26, 2017, 02:48:45 PM
With regard to roundabouts, I had always thought that metering lights, similar to what you sometimes see at busy freeway entrances, would be really helpful at making sure that there is always a steady stream of traffic entering the roundabout at heavy traffic periods.  Unfortunately, there are very few applications of this that I have seen.

Here's an example in MD that uses red lights and flashing yellow, but I think red-green lights like at most metered onramp would be superior.

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.2122182,-76.795529,3a,75y,44.99h,94.16t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sQeHysOzBFfKzkjiBcB5d_A!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

NJ has used regular traffic lights as meters for traffic approaching their busier traffic circles in the past. This allows a group of traffic to enter the circle at one time, or it can be left on steady green for hours at a time during lighter traffic periods.

Or they do what they did with the Somerville Circle, and make changes that only leave lights on 3 of the 5 arms of the circle itself so traffic is no better controlled than without the lights.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: briantroutman on December 02, 2017, 02:00:05 PM
I noticed this old (but at the time, new) button copy guide sign on a 1965 PennDOT PSA about littering (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0X8ljPNZz2Q). My best guess is that this footage was taken here (https://goo.gl/maps/Q8WeCNe8kNt), on modern-day PA 581, one mile west of the I-83 interchange.

If my guess about the location is correct, "York"  would be both more correct and more informative here than "Junction" .

(https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4578/37903994275_e8ae3c1672_o.png)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: cpzilliacus on December 02, 2017, 11:07:00 PM
Quote from: briantroutman on December 02, 2017, 02:00:05 PM
I noticed this old (but at the time, new) button copy guide sign on a 1965 PennDOT PSA about littering (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0X8ljPNZz2Q). My best guess is that this footage was taken here (https://goo.gl/maps/Q8WeCNe8kNt), on modern-day PA 581, one mile west of the I-83 interchange.

If my guess about the location is correct, "York"  would be both more correct and more informative here than "Junction" .

(https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4578/37903994275_e8ae3c1672_o.png)

JUNCTION signs like this were quite common on Interstates in the 1960's, and not just in Pennsylvania either.

Maryland and other states used them too.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: PHLBOS on December 03, 2017, 05:04:13 PM
Quote from: cpzilliacus on December 02, 2017, 11:07:00 PM
Quote from: briantroutman on December 02, 2017, 02:00:05 PM
I noticed this old (but at the time, new) button copy guide sign on a 1965 PennDOT PSA about littering (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0X8ljPNZz2Q). My best guess is that this footage was taken here (https://goo.gl/maps/Q8WeCNe8kNt), on modern-day PA 581, one mile west of the I-83 interchange.

If my guess about the location is correct, "York"  would be both more correct and more informative here than "Junction" .

(https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4578/37903994275_e8ae3c1672_o.png)

JUNCTION signs like this were quite common on Interstates in the 1960's, and not just in Pennsylvania either.

Maryland and other states used them too.
Massachusetts typically had signs that read:
JUNCTION
    XXX
  1 MILE

Such was phased out in the Bay State by the 1980s.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ixnay on December 03, 2017, 05:22:30 PM
Quote from: briantroutman on December 02, 2017, 02:00:05 PM
I noticed this old (but at the time, new) button copy guide sign on a 1965 PennDOT PSA about littering (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0X8ljPNZz2Q). My best guess is that this footage was taken here (https://goo.gl/maps/Q8WeCNe8kNt), on modern-day PA 581, one mile west of the I-83 interchange.

If my guess about the location is correct, "York"  would be both more correct and more informative here than "Junction" .

(https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4578/37903994275_e8ae3c1672_o.png)

I like how the PDH put "Junction" in a control city size font.  Note the buttons too.  I imagine the first buttons (in any state) were used in the '50s.

I wonder when that sign was replaced.

ixnay
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jpi on December 03, 2017, 07:38:13 PM
I wanna say this was replaced in the early 80's and yes this is on present day PA 581, back then it was a "connecter" expressway from 83 to 11/15 I vaugly remember this sign when I was a little kid and yes this was common practice for interstate junctions in Pennsylvania, the Turnpike interchange 4 miles south of this pic was another example, it did not get an exit # until the big change over to mile marker based exit #'s in the early 2000's
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Rothman on December 03, 2017, 09:52:40 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on December 03, 2017, 05:04:13 PM
Quote from: cpzilliacus on December 02, 2017, 11:07:00 PM
Quote from: briantroutman on December 02, 2017, 02:00:05 PM
I noticed this old (but at the time, new) button copy guide sign on a 1965 PennDOT PSA about littering (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0X8ljPNZz2Q). My best guess is that this footage was taken here (https://goo.gl/maps/Q8WeCNe8kNt), on modern-day PA 581, one mile west of the I-83 interchange.

If my guess about the location is correct, "York"  would be both more correct and more informative here than "Junction" .

(https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4578/37903994275_e8ae3c1672_o.png)

JUNCTION signs like this were quite common on Interstates in the 1960's, and not just in Pennsylvania either.

Maryland and other states used them too.
Massachusetts typically had signs that read:
JUNCTION
    XXX
  1 MILE

Such was phased out in the Bay State by the 1980s.
Ayup.  I remember them.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on December 07, 2017, 10:14:50 PM
Does this sign (https://goo.gl/maps/6u1U68yz9JC2) actually date back to when current US 22 in Harrisburg was US 22 Bypass? It doesn't look old, so it might have been replaced in kind by a lazy contractor or something.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: qguy on December 08, 2017, 06:35:46 AM
Don't know about the sign, but just ahead on the left is a truly great diner. Originally called the By-Pass Diner, it's now the American Dream Diner. Original details, typical diner culture. They have a unique sandwich called The Rope, basically a length of sausage coiled in a long roll with onions, etc.

Actually, there are quite a few classic diners in the Harrisburg area: http://www.pennlive.com/food/index.ssf/2017/02/diners_harrisburg.html
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Alps on December 08, 2017, 09:18:23 PM
Quote from: Roadsguy on December 07, 2017, 10:14:50 PM
Does this sign (https://goo.gl/maps/6u1U68yz9JC2) actually date back to when current US 22 in Harrisburg was US 22 Bypass? It doesn't look old, so it might have been replaced in kind by a lazy contractor or something.
It doesn't look that new either. City job.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: sbeaver44 on December 26, 2017, 01:26:43 PM
What is going on with construction on PA 283 in Dauphin County?  Looks like they're putting random left shoulders and crossovers in, and also redoing some of the loop ramps to be wider radii?

Nexus 6P

Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jpi on December 27, 2017, 01:51:54 PM
I think it is part of a rebuild of 283 from I-283 to near Tollhouse Rd exit, they have been doing "prep" work ever since the fall, this may co-inside with some work getting done at the 283/ I-283 cloverleaf to make that interchange safer, what they need is a 2 lane fly-over from south I-283 to east PA 283 but doubt that will ever happen. (roll eyes)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on December 28, 2017, 09:16:27 PM
Is the Lafayette Street extension open to Conshohocken Road near Norristown? It looks like it was finished (albeit barricaded off) in August (https://goo.gl/maps/vJztuzV3seA2), but I can't find any news articles of it opening. Are they waiting for Phase 3 to finish before opening the new segment?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Beltway on December 28, 2017, 11:02:26 PM
Quote from: Roadsguy on December 28, 2017, 09:16:27 PM
Is the Lafayette Street extension open to Conshohocken Road near Norristown? It looks like it was finished (albeit barricaded off) in August (https://goo.gl/maps/vJztuzV3seA2), but I can't find any news articles of it opening. Are they waiting for Phase 3 to finish before opening the new segment?

What is the latest schedule for building the extension and interchange with the Turnpike?
Title: New PA Welcome Signs
Post by: Flyer78 on January 03, 2018, 03:41:32 PM
I thought it was mentioned somewhere in this thread, but PA has replaced the "State of Independence" tourism brand with "Pursue your happiness" -- Welcomes signs are being updated to match the branding. They were installed on I-81 sometime after Thanksgiving, per the linked article below goal is to have 37 installed by spring. It's a little more eye catching than the previous edition; I always liked the old banner sign -- will check soon to see if this one on US202 N is still standing (https://goo.gl/maps/Z929UG2zEn32).

Via WNEP-TV, here is an image of the new sign: (https://localtvwnep.files.wordpress.com/2017/11/pa-sign.jpeg?quality=85&strip=all&w=500)

Related article: http://wnep.com/2017/11/03/new-welcome-to-pa-signs-in-the-poconos/

Now if we could see a new license plate design (beyond the state outline where the outmoded registration stickers went)...
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: MASTERNC on January 03, 2018, 08:30:40 PM
Quote from: Flyer78 on January 03, 2018, 03:41:32 PM
I thought it was mentioned somewhere in this thread, but PA has replaced the "State of Independence" tourism brand with "Pursue your happiness" -- Welcomes signs are being updated to match the branding. They were installed on I-81 sometime after Thanksgiving, per the linked article below goal is to have 37 installed by spring. It's a little more eye catching than the previous edition; I always liked the old banner sign -- will check soon to see if this one on US202 N is still standing (https://goo.gl/maps/Z929UG2zEn32).

The one on 202 is still standing.  The signs on US 1 (and supposedly I-95) have been replaced.

Via WNEP-TV, here is an image of the new sign: (https://localtvwnep.files.wordpress.com/2017/11/pa-sign.jpeg?quality=85&strip=all&w=500)

Related article: http://wnep.com/2017/11/03/new-welcome-to-pa-signs-in-the-poconos/

Now if we could see a new license plate design (beyond the state outline where the outmoded registration stickers went)...
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Alps on January 03, 2018, 10:04:56 PM
Southbound I-95 is the brand new sign.
Title: Re: New PA Welcome Signs
Post by: ekt8750 on January 05, 2018, 10:14:01 AM
Quote from: Flyer78 on January 03, 2018, 03:41:32 PM
I thought it was mentioned somewhere in this thread, but PA has replaced the "State of Independence" tourism brand with "Pursue your happiness" -- Welcomes signs are being updated to match the branding. They were installed on I-81 sometime after Thanksgiving, per the linked article below goal is to have 37 installed by spring. It's a little more eye catching than the previous edition; I always liked the old banner sign -- will check soon to see if this one on US202 N is still standing (https://goo.gl/maps/Z929UG2zEn32).

Via WNEP-TV, here is an image of the new sign: (https://localtvwnep.files.wordpress.com/2017/11/pa-sign.jpeg?quality=85&strip=all&w=500)

Related article: http://wnep.com/2017/11/03/new-welcome-to-pa-signs-in-the-poconos/

Now if we could see a new license plate design (beyond the state outline where the outmoded registration stickers went)...

I saw that coming back from Delaware the other day. Whoever came up with that crap needs to be fired imo.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman on January 05, 2018, 10:35:23 AM
Quote from: Rothman on December 03, 2017, 09:52:40 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on December 03, 2017, 05:04:13 PM
Quote from: cpzilliacus on December 02, 2017, 11:07:00 PM
Quote from: briantroutman on December 02, 2017, 02:00:05 PM
I noticed this old (but at the time, new) button copy guide sign on a 1965 PennDOT PSA about littering (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0X8ljPNZz2Q). My best guess is that this footage was taken here (https://goo.gl/maps/Q8WeCNe8kNt), on modern-day PA 581, one mile west of the I-83 interchange.

If my guess about the location is correct, “York” would be both more correct and more informative here than “Junction”.

(https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4578/37903994275_e8ae3c1672_o.png)

JUNCTION signs like this were quite common on Interstates in the 1960's, and not just in Pennsylvania either.

Maryland and other states used them too.
Massachusetts typically had signs that read:
JUNCTION
    XXX
  1 MILE

Such was phased out in the Bay State by the 1980s.
Ayup.  I remember them.
To clarify, most of the 'junction' BGS signs on MA freeways were replaced with standard advance signs in the early to mid-1990s during sign replacement projects.  IIRC, the last holdout was the 'JUNCTION 93 2 miles" sign on I-95/128 NB in Woburn, which was actually installed as part of the 1990 Lexington to Reading sign project, and was just replaced with a conventional advance sign as part of the 2012 Lexington to Reading sign project.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: CanesFan27 on February 03, 2018, 10:56:42 PM
Quite possibly one of the most unique traffic hazard and rock feature within the entire state of Pennsylvania, Overhanging Rock along PA 320 in Gulph Mills has a story that dates back to the Revolutionary War and battles in the 20th century to save it from the dynamite stick.

http://quintessentialpa.blogspot.com/2018/02/overhanging-rock.html
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Beltway on February 03, 2018, 11:48:03 PM
Quote from: CanesFan27 on February 03, 2018, 10:56:42 PM
Quite possibly one of the most unique traffic hazard and rock feature within the entire state of Pennsylvania, Overhanging Rock along PA 320 in Gulph Mills has a story that dates back to the Revolutionary War and battles in the 20th century to save it from the dynamite stick.
http://quintessentialpa.blogspot.com/2018/02/overhanging-rock.html

PennDOT had a plan in the 1970s with a design to "resculpt" the rock back and upward, out of the traffic lane, and to retain the same basic shape as the pre-existing rock, but it never was performed.  Too much opposition.  This is only about 2 miles from where the District 6-0 office used to be in Radnor.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: MASTERNC on February 04, 2018, 02:26:09 PM
Quote from: Beltway on February 03, 2018, 11:48:03 PM
Quote from: CanesFan27 on February 03, 2018, 10:56:42 PM
Quite possibly one of the most unique traffic hazard and rock feature within the entire state of Pennsylvania, Overhanging Rock along PA 320 in Gulph Mills has a story that dates back to the Revolutionary War and battles in the 20th century to save it from the dynamite stick.
http://quintessentialpa.blogspot.com/2018/02/overhanging-rock.html

PennDOT had a plan in the 1970s with a design to "resculpt" the rock back and upward, out of the traffic lane, and to retain the same basic shape as the pre-existing rock, but it never was performed.  Too much opposition.  This is only about 2 miles from where the District 6-0 office used to be in Radnor.

They're supposed to be doing something around there in the next few years - it's listed in planned projects.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ixnay on February 13, 2018, 08:38:08 PM
The I-95/PATP thread digressed to the South St. interchange on the Surekill and its flawed design (entrances into and exits out of the left lane in both directions).

Reading has a similar interchange on U.S. 422 at Lancaster Av. (U.S. Business 222).  What's the latest on the proposed rebuild of that interchange (http://www.422westshorebypass.com/improvement-concepts/) and of the West Shore Bypass in general?

ixnay

Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Beltway on February 13, 2018, 09:36:07 PM
Quote from: ixnay on February 13, 2018, 08:38:08 PM
The I-95/PATP thread digressed to the South St. interchange on the Surekill and its flawed design (entrances into and exits out of the left lane in both directions.

Plus almost non-existent accell/decell lanes.  They ought to close all of those ramps permanently.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ekt8750 on February 14, 2018, 10:09:22 AM
Quote from: Beltway on February 13, 2018, 09:36:07 PM
Quote from: ixnay on February 13, 2018, 08:38:08 PM
The I-95/PATP thread digressed to the South St. interchange on the Surekill and its flawed design (entrances into and exits out of the left lane in both directions.

Plus almost non-existent accell/decell lanes.  They ought to close all of those ramps permanently.

I actually wouldn't be opposed to that. With the Walnut St and University City interchanges literally feet away from the South St ramps, there's really no need for direct access to it as both interchanges easily can get you to South.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Beltway on February 14, 2018, 10:44:18 AM
Quote from: ekt8750 on February 14, 2018, 10:09:22 AM
Quote from: Beltway on February 13, 2018, 09:36:07 PM
Quote from: ixnay on February 13, 2018, 08:38:08 PM
The I-95/PATP thread digressed to the South St. interchange on the Surekill and its flawed design (entrances into and exits out of the left lane in both directions.
Plus almost non-existent accell/decell lanes.  They ought to close all of those ramps permanently.
I actually wouldn't be opposed to that. With the Walnut St and University City interchanges literally feet away from the South St ramps, there's really no need for direct access to it as both interchanges easily can get you to South.

That is the problem, though, they are really not all that close to South Street, and the other routes are circuitous and low capacity, and you have to go all the way down to Vare Avenue to connect with the southerly Surekill.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on February 23, 2018, 11:37:10 AM
Somebody once told me that I-78 in Lebanon County has its own alignment awy from US 22 cause of different engineer interests.

So the fact that the western split of I-78 and US 22 take place at the county line is no coincidence then.  Berks County (along with all counties east of it) wished to just upgrade existing US 22 to interstate quality while Lebanon wanted a new freeway altogether.

My real question is was that done at the county level or is both Berks and Lebanon in two separate PennDOT districts with the politics of the district at play at why I-78 was decided separately on both sides of the line?

Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on February 23, 2018, 05:34:21 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on February 23, 2018, 11:37:10 AM
Somebody once told me that I-78 in Lebanon County has its own alignment awy from US 22 cause of different engineer interests.

So the fact that the western split of I-78 and US 22 take place at the county line is no coincidence then.  Berks County (along with all counties east of it) wished to just upgrade existing US 22 to interstate quality while Lebanon wanted a new freeway altogether.

My real question is was that done at the county level or is both Berks and Lebanon in two separate PennDOT districts with the politics of the district at play at why I-78 was decided separately on both sides of the line?

Berks is in District 5 while Lebanon is in District 8 so there are separate PennDOT districts involved in this.  For the sake of I-81 traffic, it ended up working out that both remained separate roads. 

I have wondered about this knowing that US 22 has interchanges at both PA 934 and PA 72 in Lebanon County.  US 22 has no interchanges in Dauphin County east of I-83. 
In theory, you might think that I-81 would have connected back to its current alignment somewhere between Mountain Rd (Exit 72) and PA 39 (Exit 77) had it followed US 22 west of I-78.
I am obviously just speculating since I have not done any true research on this.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: BrianP on February 23, 2018, 07:04:32 PM
It looks like after WWII US 22 was being replaced with a new location 4 lane highway from Paxtonia to the east. AFAICT Jonestown Road is the original US 22.  The 1951 historical aerial shows this new highway ending at today's exit 15.  The thing I saw to note was that at the location where US 22 and I-78 split is where the width of the ROW changes.  East of there the ROW is larger.  I think the narrow ROW west of the split is why I-78 was routed on a new alignment.  The question as to why the ROW changes still goes back to the original question.  Was that due to the change in county / district? Or was it due to something else like new highway standards? But were districts allowed to have different standards?  I would have thought the state would have standards that would be used in the construction of a state road.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: briantroutman on February 23, 2018, 08:29:15 PM
Building on what has already been observed above...

Yes, from what I can tell, US 22 followed Jonestown Road from the split with Allentown Boulevard at Paxtonia eastward through borough of Jonestown. Jonestown Road is a rather narrow two-laner with numerous homes and barns along its length–with buildings sometimes five feet from the edge (https://goo.gl/maps/JUyZPUySeaD2) of its almost shoulderless pavement. I can easily imagine it being a fairly dangerous stretch as the primary artery linking Harrisburg and Allentown–and by extension, New York and Pittsburgh.

With the Lebanon County section of US 22 having been constructed in 1946, so soon after the end of WWII, it could have been a badly needed project that had been deferred and deferred over a decade of depression and war. And it appears that the PDH, dealing with what resources it had at the time, basically aimed to satisfy the immediate need and built a divided highway with occasional grade separations–without considering that the road would eventually be part of a Interstate corridor on which complete grade separation and control of access would be mandatory.

The Berks County sections were built later–in some cases a decade or more (mostly '55-'59). The PDH was able to either plan for complete control of access and grade separation from the beginning–or–since the Berks sections were typically even more sparsely populated and less developed, have an easier task cutting off access or converting an intersection into a RIRO (at Grimes).

Aerial photos show that the Dauphin and Lebanon County sections of then-new US 22 already had a fair amount of development along their length by 1955. At that point, it made more sense to use a new alignment for I-81 (and I-78 by extension). And with the existing US 22 passing very close to the village of Fredericksburg with multiple at-grades there, that made a logical "jumping off point" .
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: qguy on February 24, 2018, 02:02:55 PM
I believe I was one of those who earlier explained the reason for the I-78 dichotomy on either side of the Lebanon/Berks County line (but I don't feel like looking through my posts).

Like others a saying, it was a PennDOT district thing, not a county thing. The difference in design approach occurred/occurs at the district level within PennDOT, not at the political county level. Local municipalities and counties have input, of course, but the two different districts made different design decisions based on (among other things) the different levels of development which had occurred up to that time in the two different areas.

The immediate vicinity along the ROW of US 22 in District 5-0 (east of the line) was not very developed, but US 22 in District 8-0 (west of the line) was even then heavily developed. I-78 could be "superimposed" upon I-22 in District 5-0, but that was out of the question in District 8-0 and it had to be located on a separate alignment to the north.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on February 24, 2018, 03:46:54 PM
One thing I will say PDH and later PennDOT did a great job in keeping signals off of Allentown Blvd for the longest time.  IT may be why PA 934 and PA 72 have interchanges as those two were major arteries intersecting.  Up until 1980 or 1981, there were absolutely no signals east of Paxtonia and Linglestown Road had a warning flasher going WB into the intersection as the previous signal was way back in New Jersey.  Then about 80 -81 a traffic signal got installed at PA 39 near Manada Hill.   Then for the longest time, that signal remained US 22's easternmost signal in PA as even PA 743 had just two flour way single section beacons suspended from a span wire, but no operational signal. 

I believe the signal at PA 743 was installed in the mid 90's, or maybe even early 90's.  The same goes for PA 343 which now has a signal.

Also most of US 22 in both Dauphin and Lebanon Counties had a posted speed limit of 55 mph.  It was at PA 39 it dropped down to 50 going toward Harrisburg, and even in Fredericksburg it was 55 when I used it in 1985.   The 40 zone could have been added anytime in the last 30 years, but when exactly I do not know.   it was basically 55 from Wilson all the way to PA 39.  The last time I drove it I saw 50 mph almost on all of it from the 40 drop to Paxtonia and then lower west into Harrisburg.

So it really was an expressway to start with built with minimal intersections and no lights east of the Harrisburg metro area.  I assume that US 22 in Berks had no signals either and that cloverleaf at PA 61 always was there as well.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on February 24, 2018, 04:12:37 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on February 24, 2018, 03:46:54 PM
Also most of US 22 in both Dauphin and Lebanon Counties had a posted speed limit of 55 mph.  It was at PA 39 it dropped down to 50 going toward Harrisburg, and even in Fredericksburg it was 55 when I used it in 1985.   The 40 zone could have been added anytime in the last 30 years, but when exactly I do not know.   it was basically 55 from Wilson all the way to PA 39.  The last time I drove it I saw 50 mph almost on all of it from the 40 drop to Paxtonia and then lower west into Harrisburg.

Actually last I remember US 22 was raised back to 50 in the Fredericksburg area.  I know that it may be reduced at the moment due to a bridge project going on at the eastern PA 343 intersection that may be complete now.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on February 26, 2018, 03:00:26 PM
I saw an old map of PA and noticed that prior to both I-78 and I-81, PA 343 went further and connected to PA 443 near Fort Indiantown Gap.  In addition PA 72 went further north of Lickdale and even used what is now PA 272 south of Lancaster. 

Also PA 183, was originally PA 83 and it went further south of Reading.   Even PA 61 and part of PA 10 was US 122 as there was plenty of route numbered differently prior to the interstate system.  Although PA 83 and I-83 both coexisted as the York- Harrisburg Expressway was both the interstate of today and US 111 concurrent.  I-83 between the Eisenhower interchange and US 22 was Bypass US 230 and through Camp Hill there was also and ALT US 11 that is no longer commissioned.

Interesting to see PA in the 1950's.
Title: PA-401
Post by: wilbur_the_goose on February 27, 2018, 02:09:23 PM
I think I've discovered the Pennsylvania state highway with the worst road surface:  PA-401 in western Chester County.

This stretch of road has a junction with PA-345.   It has many very deep potholes and the entire center/middle of the roadway is destroyed because some genius decided to carve in rumble strips 3-4 years ago.    Those rumble strips have become foot-wide linear potholes.

PennDot doesn't really do anything to maintain this road - concerns go unresolved and the road gets worse and worse.   The real issue is overgrown trees near the highway that results in a situation where little sun hits the road surface.   That results in a bad freeze/thaw cycle that destroys the road.

Any suggestion on how we can get PennDOT to actually pay attention to this dangerous highway?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: briantroutman on February 27, 2018, 02:53:47 PM
^ I'm surprised to read that assessment because PA 401–with its very low traffic volumes and occasional sudden bends and dips–was one of my reliable "fun drives"  when I lived in West Chester several years ago. It was remarkably smooth then. I was on it again last fall, and while not as smooth as it used to be, it was very far from being "the worst road surface in Pennsylvania" . Perhaps the 2017-2018 winter season has taken a considerable toll on the pavement–I'll have to check it out.

And as to "some genius"  carving rumble strips in the center–it's not as if this was the work of some over-zealous PennDOT peon with a milling machine and too much time on his hands. It's part of a concerted statewide program to mill rumble strips onto the centerlines of roads that have a history of head-on collisions. FHWA testing has demonstrated a significant reduction in serious accidents as a result of this practice–as much as a 50% reduction in serious collisions on rural roads. While I'll admit that it can be annoying on narrow roads where you're frequently rubbing against either the center or edge line, I think it's a relatively minor price to pay if lives are saved.

But as to getting action–that area is a part of District 6, and you could contact the district office in King of Prussia directly. On the District 6 website (http://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-6/Pages/default.aspx), they suggest reporting pothole and road repair issues to the statewide hotline (1-800-FIX-ROAD), and you could do that as well. I don't think it would do any harm to contact the district office directly, though.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Beltway on February 27, 2018, 02:56:20 PM
Quote from: wilbur_the_goose on February 27, 2018, 02:09:23 PM
I think I've discovered the Pennsylvania state highway with the worst road surface:  PA-401 in western Chester County.
PennDOT to actually pay attention to this dangerous highway?

That road was a disaster back when I lived in the KoP area back in the 1970s.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: vdeane on February 27, 2018, 08:17:08 PM
I imagine that the very low traffic volumes makes it a low priority for PennDOT to repair, which would explain the poor condition.  The description of the center makes it sound like PennDOT installed the CARDS without a resurfacing, which doesn't work well and can cause that kind of damage.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on February 27, 2018, 08:35:46 PM
US 22 in Lebanon County could have probably been upgraded if they really wanted to, but even if they did, that section of 22 was always narrower than the section in Berks County. The reason the median is such a good width on a road that old is because that part of 22 originally had a narrow grass median. If they had upgraded 22 in Lebanon County, it would be as bad as I-70 from Washington to New Stanton.

According to Street View, it seems the 55 mph zones were brought back with the recent reconstructions from PA 39 to I-78. It drops to 50 around Fredericksburg. It is, or at least was in 2012, still 40 mph from 343 to I-78 even after it was reconstructed a decade ago. Is this section now 50 mph as well?

Also, does anyone know of any plans to reconstruct any more of 22 west of 39? It's been upgraded well enough over the years west of Blue Ribbon Ave, but east of there it still has a narrow guard rail median, and even some places where turning lanes were added by simply removing the median and striping one in. This is definitely the worst section remaining between 83 and 78 in terms of design standards.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on March 03, 2018, 11:23:20 PM
I remember when US 22 had the old concrete rumble strip median as that was common on many PA multilane highways.  Even though its really an undivided roadway, Rand McNally and other map makers drew it all as a divided highway though.

I also remember US 22 through Fredericksburg had a concrete surface just as it did in Berks County before the stretch from the I-78/ US 22 split to the Schuykill River did before it was upgraded to interstate quality in 1978.  Of course the section east of Hamburg all the way to Easton still has many concrete surface areas, so I imagine before I-78 it was all concrete from Fredericksburg to Easton.

In fact many PA highways and even in New Jersey were concrete back in the 50's, 60's. and 70's including the PA Turnpike.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ixnay on March 04, 2018, 08:37:08 AM
Why does this pedestrian bridge stairway leading down to PA 51 have a security checkpoint?

https://www.google.com/maps/@40.4593643,-80.0469888,3a,60y,275.99h,94.66t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1stH9wzuu8cgxCk-rAFHSaNA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

Is it strictly for employees to access the power station on Brunot Island out there in the Ohio River?

ixnay


Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Mr_Northside on March 06, 2018, 03:35:50 PM
Quote from: ixnay on March 04, 2018, 08:37:08 AM
Why does this pedestrian bridge stairway leading down to PA 51 have a security checkpoint?

https://www.google.com/maps/@40.4593643,-80.0469888,3a,60y,275.99h,94.66t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1stH9wzuu8cgxCk-rAFHSaNA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

Is it strictly for employees to access the power station on Brunot Island out there in the Ohio River?

ixnay

Yup.  Walking across the railroad bridge (which is restricted), or by boat  (I know the north banks has a ramp they can use to ferry vehicles via boat to the island)  are the only way on the island (home to just a big Duquesne Light substation, and a Power generation facility that's only active during real high-demand times) - and unused land.   
I live less than a mile from the island (though on the other side of the Ohio than Rt. 51), and have wondered if being on ANY of the island would be considered trespassing (obviously the substation & plant are private property) -  but as I have no boat or raft, or plans to get one, the point seems moot.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: J N Winkler on March 06, 2018, 10:26:30 PM
Quote from: Mr_Northside on March 06, 2018, 03:35:50 PMYup.  Walking across the railroad bridge (which is restricted), or by boat  (I know the north banks has a ramp they can use to ferry vehicles via boat to the island)  are the only way on the island (home to just a big Duquesne Light substation, and a Power generation facility that's only active during real high-demand times) - and unused land.   I live less than a mile from the island (though on the other side of the Ohio than Rt. 51), and have wondered if being on ANY of the island would be considered trespassing (obviously the substation & plant are private property) -  but as I have no boat or raft, or plans to get one, the point seems moot.

A 2003 piece in a local alternative paper (https://www.pghcitypaper.com/pittsburgh/we-take-brunot-in-the-morning/Content?oid=1335250) says that it was not then posted against trespassers, but Reliant Energy owned nearly the entire island and was not interested in accommodating visitors except on an ad hoc basis.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: VTGoose on March 07, 2018, 10:22:36 AM
Quote from: Mr_Northside on March 06, 2018, 03:35:50 PM

Yup.  Walking across the railroad bridge (which is restricted), or by boat  (I know the north banks has a ramp they can use to ferry vehicles via boat to the island)  are the only way on the island (home to just a big Duquesne Light substation, and a Power generation facility that's only active during real high-demand times) - and unused land.   
I live less than a mile from the island (though on the other side of the Ohio than Rt. 51), and have wondered if being on ANY of the island would be considered trespassing (obviously the substation & plant are private property) -  but as I have no boat or raft, or plans to get one, the point seems moot.

Straying a little bit away from roads, but there used to be a major coal-fired generating plant on the island operated by Duquesne Light (companion to the one that used to exist down the river in South Heights). Both were fueled by coal delivered by river barge. If one looks in McKees Rocks at River Avenue, next to Sue's Bait is the remnant of the ramp that was used to move vehicles to the island (https://goo.gl/maps/j8WCp9ewGgD2). It's also interesting to look at the Google view of the island and see "Brunots Island Trail" tags on remnants of roads around where the power plant once stood.

Bruce in Blacksburg (but a native of the 'Burgh -- Moon Township)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Nanis on March 11, 2018, 09:53:23 PM
I wish 63 was rerouted to extend it.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Nanis on March 11, 2018, 10:42:29 PM
Quote from: Nanis on March 11, 2018, 09:53:23 PM
I wish 63 was rerouted to extend it.
Although now that I think about it, that might not be a good idea. Also on the list of shit ideas: bringing back the original alignment of PA 167 as a different state route
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: cpzilliacus on March 12, 2018, 02:43:45 PM
N.Y. Times: In Erie, One City Block Is a Trek of Disrespect - A decaying bridge has ignited a debate over how a struggling city treats some of its poorer residents. (https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/12/us/erie-mcbride-viaduct.html)

QuoteWhen the viaduct opened in the late 1930s, the city was growing. The bridge, renovated in the 1970s, was an emblem of local pride and progress. It funneled traffic through what were at the time thriving neighborhoods.

QuoteThen the factories started disappearing. The viaduct's largely German, Polish and Irish district became home to increasing numbers of blacks, Latinos and refugees from Africa and the Middle East, whose arrivals have slowed the city's population decline.

QuoteOn one level, the story of the bridge is a microcosm of America's crumbling infrastructure. Questions about where to spend the city's limited resources touch on familiar themes about the failures of urban renewal and today's widening income gap.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Alps on March 12, 2018, 06:07:59 PM
Quote from: cpzilliacus on March 12, 2018, 02:43:45 PM
N.Y. Times: In Erie, One City Block Is a Trek of Disrespect - A decaying bridge has ignited a debate over how a struggling city treats some of its poorer residents. (https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/12/us/erie-mcbride-viaduct.html)

QuoteWhen the viaduct opened in the late 1930s, the city was growing. The bridge, renovated in the 1970s, was an emblem of local pride and progress. It funneled traffic through what were at the time thriving neighborhoods.

QuoteThen the factories started disappearing. The viaduct's largely German, Polish and Irish district became home to increasing numbers of blacks, Latinos and refugees from Africa and the Middle East, whose arrivals have slowed the city's population decline.

QuoteOn one level, the story of the bridge is a microcosm of America's crumbling infrastructure. Questions about where to spend the city's limited resources touch on familiar themes about the failures of urban renewal and today's widening income gap.
Umm.. the Bayfront Connector was specifically designed to replace this viaduct. You have the same neighborhood access. even for bikes/peds, a block away. The solution here is to demolish the old bridge. It doesn't merit a story. Pure agenda.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Beltway on March 12, 2018, 07:06:54 PM
Quote from: Alps on March 12, 2018, 06:07:59 PM
Umm.. the Bayfront Connector was specifically designed to replace this viaduct. You have the same neighborhood access. even for bikes/peds, a block away. The solution here is to demolish the old bridge. It doesn't merit a story. Pure agenda.

Are there any plans to widen the Bayfront Parkway to 4 lanes divided throughout?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: seicer on March 13, 2018, 02:09:17 PM
I'm not sure there is that much demand for four lanes divided. And with recent developments along the waterfront abutting the roadway, it's not likely that any widening can realistically occur.

And I do agree with Steve. This article is fluff. A replacement was built literally to the immediate west and it was just a matter of time before this bridge would cease to exist - like countless others across the nation. These types of hit pieces is why I have grown distrustful of media. It's not news reporting but opinion pieces.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on March 14, 2018, 10:45:53 AM
But... feels!
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ixnay on March 18, 2018, 08:20:20 AM
These button copies were at the Blvd. of the Allies feeder into the Parkway East in July 2017.  Are they still there?

https://www.google.com/maps/@40.4365378,-79.9738156,3a,30y,83.4h,94.1t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sDpadbUqr9iSsok3VP4N6_g!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

ixnay
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on March 19, 2018, 12:00:41 PM
Spotted this (https://goo.gl/maps/CGoiBpLLKy52) old signage near the Lehigh Valley Airport, featuring button copy as well as an ancient, peeling PA 987 shield that likely originally sat next to an I-78 shield rather than the current, much newer "To US 22" assembly.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Nanis on March 25, 2018, 11:31:54 PM
Quote from: Roadsguy on March 19, 2018, 12:00:41 PM
Spotted this (https://goo.gl/maps/CGoiBpLLKy52) old signage near the Lehigh Valley Airport, featuring button copy as well as an ancient, peeling PA 987 shield that likely originally sat next to an I-78 shield rather than the current, much newer "To US 22" assembly.
reminds me of the old PA 132 Street road sign I always see near Roosevelt Boulevard and the turnpike.
https://www.google.com/maps/@40.1280828,-74.9693603,3a,75y,61.27h,112.01t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1so3q5czo66H6SAstFmqMOlA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
It still says racetrack.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: BrianP on March 26, 2018, 05:53:46 PM
The state no longer owns Centralia's 'Graffiti Highway.' Who does? (http://www.pennlive.com/news/2018/02/centralias_graffiti_highway_no.html)
QuoteThe pavement and graffiti are still there, but a section of what was state Route 61 in the Centralia area no longer belongs to the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation.

The agency this week vacated what is known as the "Graffiti Highway," most of which is in Conyngham Twp., allowing ownership to revert to adjacent property owners.

When PennDOT vacates a right-of-way, ownership of a property goes to owners of adjoining properties. In this case, that is mostly the Pitreal Corp., a subsidiary of Pagnotti Enterprises of Wilkes-Barre, Wenner said.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: MNHighwayMan on March 26, 2018, 06:19:53 PM
Hope that doesn't mean access to the old roadway will be closed off.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: BrianP on March 26, 2018, 06:47:12 PM
Accessing the old road was considered tresspassing:
QuotePennDOT, concerned about safety because of large cracks in the surface caused by the fire, posted no trespass signs. When they were ignored, state police last year began issuing citations and warnings.
Now it is up to the owners of the land to decide. 
QuoteWith the change in ownership, state police will no longer issue citations and warnings for trespassing, unless that's sought by the new owners, PennDOT said.
With the danger of cracks and possible collapses it would be legally foolish to allow access to the old highway.  There would probably not need to be enforcement of the no trespassing since the owner would probably not be liable if someone was injured while trespassing on the land.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: seicer on March 26, 2018, 10:27:13 PM
Eh, it's been an overblown tourist trap for years. The entire roadway isn't dangerous and is practically covered in graffiti, hence the nickname. The cracks in the roadway are decades old at this point and are no longer smoking. The underground fire has moved considerably far away and I'm not sure how much of it is burning anymore. The smoke that used to be so evident over the area is barely even noticeable anymore.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jeffandnicole on March 26, 2018, 10:39:18 PM
Quote from: seicer on March 26, 2018, 10:27:13 PM
Eh, it's been an overblown tourist trap for years. The entire roadway isn't dangerous and is practically covered in graffiti, hence the nickname. The cracks in the roadway are decades old at this point and are no longer smoking. The underground fire has moved considerably far away and I'm not sure how much of it is burning anymore. The smoke that used to be so evident over the area is barely even noticeable anymore.

Cheapest tourist trap ever. Where's the gift shop??
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: seicer on March 26, 2018, 10:39:52 PM
Look down in the crack hard enough and you'll find out :D
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Alps on March 27, 2018, 12:32:10 AM
Quote from: seicer on March 26, 2018, 10:27:13 PM
Eh, it's been an overblown tourist trap for years. The entire roadway isn't dangerous and is practically covered in graffiti, hence the nickname. The cracks in the roadway are decades old at this point and are no longer smoking. The underground fire has moved considerably far away and I'm not sure how much of it is burning anymore. The smoke that used to be so evident over the area is barely even noticeable anymore.
There are wisps of smoke, but yeah, it's moved on. In 20 years Ashland may need to relocate back up to Centralia.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jeffandnicole on March 27, 2018, 06:05:09 AM
Last time I was in Centralia - 5 years ago or so - I was amazed at how much of a forest it had became.  Unlike my first trip many years prior, there were no noticeable scents and smells.  It was like driving thru an eerie landscape of a city-like street grid system with barely any houses, cars or anything else.  The streets were narrowed a bit by the new brush.  Some were completely undriveable. The few homeowners that remained had nice lush lawns.  The fire has clearly moved on, and left in its wake an abandoned land that nature quickly reclaimed.

Anytime someone sees a story about Centralia today is being told that via an author that is taking pictures and descriptions of Centralia from 20 or 25 years ago, and who hasn't set foot out of their bedroom, much less actually visit the place on their own. 
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: KEVIN_224 on April 07, 2018, 08:13:16 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/boqNl6L.jpg)

US Route 30 (Lincoln Highway) collapsing in a landslide near East Pittsburgh & North Braddock, Pennsylvania. View from John Smallwood. (April 7, 2018)

http://pittsburgh.cbslocal.com/2018/04/07/apartment-collapses-near-route-30-landslide/
http://www.wtae.com/article/residents-being-evacuated-after-apartment-building-collapse-near-route-30/19709050
https://www.wpxi.com/news/top-stories/residents-evacuated-after-apartment-building-collapses-near-route-30/728635034
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Nanis on April 14, 2018, 11:34:39 PM
oh no
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: MNHighwayMan on April 14, 2018, 11:49:14 PM
Quote from: Nanis on April 14, 2018, 11:34:39 PM
oh no

Oh yes. Mother Nature has decided you're no longer deserving of US-30. Now go sit in the corner and think about what you've done.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Gnutella on April 15, 2018, 04:44:09 AM
What a lot of people don't realize is that many of the "hills" in the Pittsburgh area aren't actually hills. They're escarpments, which are much steeper and more unstable geologically. Landslides are a major problem in the Pittsburgh area because of them.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ixnay on April 15, 2018, 08:07:05 AM
Quote from: Gnutella on April 15, 2018, 04:44:09 AM
What a lot of people don't realize is that many of the "hills" in the Pittsburgh area aren't actually hills. They're escarpments, which are much steeper and more unstable geologically. Landslides are a major problem in the Pittsburgh area because of them.

IOW the PGH area has the North and South Escarpments, not Hills. :) As for landslides, I remember hearing about them in the wake of winter snow and rain storms this past winter, via KDKA, which I can get in my car during the winter in the region where I live, due in part to my evening commuting schedule most nights.

How frequent are Pittsburgh area landslides?  And are they a common occurrence in, say, West Virginia or anyplace else east of the Great Plains?

ixnay
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ixnay on April 15, 2018, 08:10:08 AM
Quote from: MNHighwayMan on April 14, 2018, 11:49:14 PM
Quote from: Nanis on April 14, 2018, 11:34:39 PM
oh no

Oh yes. Mother Nature has decided you're no longer deserving of US-30. Now go sit in the corner and think about what you've done.

What's the over/under on days/weeks/months before http://www.pahighways.com/us/US30.html is updated to mention this near tragedy?  That page was last updated on 11.27.2015.

ixnay
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Bitmapped on April 15, 2018, 11:32:45 AM
Quote from: ixnay on April 15, 2018, 08:07:05 AM
Quote from: Gnutella on April 15, 2018, 04:44:09 AM
What a lot of people don't realize is that many of the "hills" in the Pittsburgh area aren't actually hills. They're escarpments, which are much steeper and more unstable geologically. Landslides are a major problem in the Pittsburgh area because of them.

IOW the PGH area has the North and South Escarpments, not Hills. :) As for landslides, I remember hearing about them in the wake of winter snow and rain storms this past winter, via KDKA, which I can get in my car during the winter in the region where I live, due in part to my evening commuting schedule most nights.

How frequent are Pittsburgh area landslides?  And are they a common occurrence in, say, West Virginia or anyplace else east of the Great Plains?

ixnay

The US 30 case is much larger than normal, but slips are very common in terrain like what is found in WV or most of PA. If you get soil on a steep enough grade wet enough, it's going to want to slide.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: MNHighwayMan on April 15, 2018, 11:37:04 AM
Quote from: ixnay on April 15, 2018, 08:10:08 AM
Quote from: MNHighwayMan on April 14, 2018, 11:49:14 PM
Quote from: Nanis on April 14, 2018, 11:34:39 PM
oh no
Oh yes. Mother Nature has decided you're no longer deserving of US-30. Now go sit in the corner and think about what you've done.
What's the over/under on days/weeks/months before http://www.pahighways.com/us/US30.html is updated to mention this near tragedy?  That page was last updated on 11.27.2015.

My god, that is a webpage straight out of the late 90s. I'm surprised that its last update was only 2½ years ago.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Gnutella on April 16, 2018, 04:05:07 AM
Quote from: ixnay on April 15, 2018, 08:07:05 AM
Quote from: Gnutella on April 15, 2018, 04:44:09 AM
What a lot of people don't realize is that many of the "hills" in the Pittsburgh area aren't actually hills. They're escarpments, which are much steeper and more unstable geologically. Landslides are a major problem in the Pittsburgh area because of them.

IOW the PGH area has the North and South Escarpments, not Hills. :) As for landslides, I remember hearing about them in the wake of winter snow and rain storms this past winter, via KDKA, which I can get in my car during the winter in the region where I live, due in part to my evening commuting schedule most nights.

How frequent are Pittsburgh area landslides?  And are they a common occurrence in, say, West Virginia or anyplace else east of the Great Plains?

ixnay

They're frequent enough to be a pain in the ass. It seems like a major non-Interstate highway gets buried by them every five years or so. When I was looking up the various landslides on PA 28 over the years, these were the search results I got (https://www.bing.com/search?q=pa%2028%20pittsburgh%20landslide%20rockslide&qs=n&form=QBRE&sp=-1&pq=pa%2028%20pittsburgh%20landslide%20rockslide&sc=0-30&sk=&cvid=BDF946CE9FF84E3786DFB39298B906A1). To get another idea, here's a look at PA 28 (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.5195775,-79.8531239,3a,75y,335.53h,82.27t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sAseQMktCsc0bVoCng2Wbcw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) passing near the Allegheny River in Harmar Township. What makes the U.S. 30 landslide different is that the land fell out from under it, and the highway collapsed. That doesn't seem to happen as often as a landslide coming down on top of a highway.

I imagine that the worst-case scenario in the Pittsburgh area would be if there was a landslide that collapses the Boulevard of the Allies down onto I-376 east of downtown Pittsburgh. Getting into Pittsburgh from the east would only be possible via PA 28 or various surface streets like Penn Avenue, Liberty Avenue, Bigelow Boulevard, Fifth Avenue and Forbes Avenue. I would say that a landslide over the Fort Pitt Tunnel on the Fort Pitt Bridge side would be even worse, but the tunnel appears to protrude on that side, so it seems less susceptible.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jeffandnicole on April 16, 2018, 06:19:05 AM
Quote from: MNHighwayMan on April 15, 2018, 11:37:04 AM
Quote from: ixnay on April 15, 2018, 08:10:08 AM
Quote from: MNHighwayMan on April 14, 2018, 11:49:14 PM
Quote from: Nanis on April 14, 2018, 11:34:39 PM
oh no
Oh yes. Mother Nature has decided you're no longer deserving of US-30. Now go sit in the corner and think about what you've done.
What's the over/under on days/weeks/months before http://www.pahighways.com/us/US30.html is updated to mention this near tragedy?  That page was last updated on 11.27.2015.

My god, that is a webpage straight out of the late 90s. I'm surprised that its last update was only 2½ years ago.

Many webpages like that were started well before Facebook existed; well before this forum existed.  They are home-grown pages, done by dedicated people with their own time and money.

You want flashy, splashy and updated daily?  Build your own website.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: MNHighwayMan on April 16, 2018, 07:00:42 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on April 16, 2018, 06:19:05 AM
Quote from: MNHighwayMan on April 15, 2018, 11:37:04 AM
Quote from: ixnay on April 15, 2018, 08:10:08 AM
What's the over/under on days/weeks/months before http://www.pahighways.com/us/US30.html is updated to mention this near tragedy?  That page was last updated on 11.27.2015.
My god, that is a webpage straight out of the late 90s. I'm surprised that its last update was only 2½ years ago.
Many webpages like that were started well before Facebook existed; well before this forum existed.  They are home-grown pages, done by dedicated people with their own time and money.

You want flashy, splashy and updated daily?  Build your own website.

Oh, don't get me wrong, I'm not knocking it whatsoever. It was more just a simple observation than anything else–I know that maintaining a good-looking website is difficult. ;-)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: seicer on April 16, 2018, 01:58:57 PM
I had to drive through Pennsylvania last night and I was impressed with how the new New Stanton (I-70, Exit 57) has turned out. It hasn't killed off the business in town and Sheetz was practically overflowing at around 10 PM.

My question with that project and others is why a wider left shoulder wasn't implemented? And why a taller barrier wasn't used throughout? It was either a 4' left shoulder with a low Jersey barrier or a 4' left shoulder with a high Jersey barrier. And either asphalt or concrete - the latter only seemingly used at New Stanton.

Additionally, what will happen with the Monongahela River crossing? Will it be dualised? It's not out of the realm of possibilities - after all, the I-64 bridge over the Kanawha River near Nitro, West Virginia will be twinned and is of a similar type of facility.

I can't wait for the remainder of I-70 to be rebuilt. It was anxiety inducing in the rain, with hydroplaning an issue throughout. Being up against the left barrier, there was no margin of error.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on April 16, 2018, 02:52:44 PM
What is the connector called near Holidaysburg and Duncansville where both US 22 and I-99 are connected?  I know  tat someday US 22 is to go further east to bypass Holidaysburg so the road is left signed TO I-99 on the US 22 end where it leaves at the turnpike style exit for PA 764 and for unidirectional US 22 from I-99.  PennDOT will never assign temporary route numbers for partially built freeways, so how does the public identify these referenced number freeways or how does Altoona area residents reference this?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Mr_Northside on April 16, 2018, 02:57:21 PM
Quote from: seicer on April 16, 2018, 01:58:57 PM
My question with that project and others is why a wider left shoulder wasn't implemented? And why a taller barrier wasn't used throughout?

I'd guess right-of-way, and money to buy more of it (and possibly a genuine desire to not take/displace property as much as possible)  As for the barrier height.... I've wondered that myself, and am not sure what their guidelines are for how tall they build it in any given place.

QuoteAdditionally, what will happen with the Monongahela River crossing? Will it be dualised? It's not out of the realm of possibilities - after all, the I-64 bridge over the Kanawha River near Nitro, West Virginia will be twinned and is of a similar type of facility.

They just got done with a fairly major rehab with it just a year or so ago... so I wouldn't expect anything even more major like a dualization or complete replacement anytime soon.  What you see is what you get for probably the next 2 decades or so. 
Though if they ever want to do anything more significant, I am curious as to what solution they would come up with. In addition to the bridge itself, the freeway on either side of the river is crapped in a pretty tight, developed corridor.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Gnutella on April 16, 2018, 11:10:37 PM
Quote from: seicer on April 16, 2018, 01:58:57 PM
I had to drive through Pennsylvania last night and I was impressed with how the new New Stanton (I-70, Exit 57) has turned out. It hasn't killed off the business in town and Sheetz was practically overflowing at around 10 PM.

My question with that project and others is why a wider left shoulder wasn't implemented? And why a taller barrier wasn't used throughout? It was either a 4' left shoulder with a low Jersey barrier or a 4' left shoulder with a high Jersey barrier. And either asphalt or concrete - the latter only seemingly used at New Stanton.

Additionally, what will happen with the Monongahela River crossing? Will it be dualised? It's not out of the realm of possibilities - after all, the I-64 bridge over the Kanawha River near Nitro, West Virginia will be twinned and is of a similar type of facility.

I can't wait for the remainder of I-70 to be rebuilt. It was anxiety inducing in the rain, with hydroplaning an issue throughout. Being up against the left barrier, there was no margin of error.

PennDOT likely would have had to spend a shitload of money to buy all the properties necessary to give I-70 full interior shoulders. There's also the issue of undermining, with a lot of abandoned mines in the area, and a wider highway being a heavier highway that makes mine subsidence more likely. As for asphalt versus concrete, there could have been multiple contractors on the project, or the cost of concrete spiked, or something like that.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: briantroutman on April 24, 2018, 03:17:56 PM
Forgive me if this was already posted, but I couldn't find it anywhere.

On March 1st, The Express of Lock Haven (http://www.lockhaven.com/news/local-news/2018/03/i-99i-80-interchange-coming-to-centre/) reported that PennDOT applied for a $43 million INFRA grant to be used toward the $200 million cost of constructing a complete, high-speed interchange between I-80 and I-99. The article described PennDOT, the regional planning commission, and state and U.S. legislators as being unified in their support of allocating the resources for construction if the federal grant is approved.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: LeftyJR on April 24, 2018, 05:18:02 PM
I figured this was about to happen.  I posted last year that PennDOT had cleared several acres of trees near the I-80/99 interchange.  The article is a little vague though, it says that the plan is still being pursued - not really a confirmation?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Hot Rod Hootenanny on April 24, 2018, 10:01:06 PM
Quote from: LeftyJR on April 24, 2018, 05:18:02 PM
I figured this was about to happen.  I posted last year that PennDOT had cleared several acres of trees near the I-80/99 interchange.  The article is a little vague though, it says that the plan is still being pursued - not really a confirmation?

From what I saw, this past weekend, PennDot is still clearing trees around I-80 & US 220/PA 26 (I-99).
FWIW, I noticed plenty of trees being cleared away from I-80/79 as well. Not sure if that is harbinger of things to come.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Mr_Northside on April 25, 2018, 03:28:55 PM
Quote from: Hot Rod Hootenanny on April 24, 2018, 10:01:06 PM
Quote from: LeftyJR on April 24, 2018, 05:18:02 PM
I figured this was about to happen.  I posted last year that PennDOT had cleared several acres of trees near the I-80/99 interchange.  The article is a little vague though, it says that the plan is still being pursued - not really a confirmation?


From what I saw, this past weekend, PennDot is still clearing trees around I-80 & US 220/PA 26 (I-99).
FWIW, I noticed plenty of trees being cleared away from I-80/79 as well. Not sure if that is harbinger of things to come.

I don't think there is any actual plans to do anything, construction wise, with I-80 & 79 - so that might actually just might mean that the I-80/99/US-220 area is just maintenance clearing (especially if they haven't secured the money)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on April 25, 2018, 08:25:21 PM
Something I noticed in PennDOT's iTMS (http://www.dot7.state.pa.us/itms/main.htm) thing is that, with PennDOT using an SR 6xxx designation for under construction routes, SR 6023 is still in the system in Lancaster County on the Goat Path. It gives an error when you try to view it, though, so I guess something is set up wrong. It doesn't appear on the Type 10 maps or traffic volume maps either. What does appear in the Type 10 and traffic count maps is the bridge over Horseshoe Road, which for some reason has a separate designation of SR 1124. That too gives an error in iTMS.

Since it doesn't seem to appear in any maps, I'm not sure if the SR 6023 designation extends fully from the newer stub at US 30, or if it just exists on the part that was ever graded, from Millcross Road to just past PA 772. There doesn't seem to be an SR 8xxx or SR 9xxx designation set aside for the ramps at PA 772.

The US 219 expressway under construction in Somerset County gives a similar error in iTMS, though the CSVT sections will work, and highlight an invisible road section in the map.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: MASTERNC on July 09, 2018, 08:17:34 AM
Drove US 15 down from New York to Williamsport for the first time in a couple of years and noticed there are now exit numbers for what used to be unnumbered exits.  I assume this is another step towards signing I-99, and I also assume those mileage-based exits are from I-99 mileage and not from US 15 mileage.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Alps on July 09, 2018, 08:26:31 AM
Quote from: MASTERNC on July 09, 2018, 08:17:34 AM
Drove US 15 down from New York to Williamsport for the first time in a couple of years and noticed there are now exit numbers for what used to be unnumbered exits.  I assume this is another step towards signing I-99, and I also assume those mileage-based exits are from I-99 mileage and not from US 15 mileage.
I've heard they're from US 15 mileage.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: MASTERNC on July 09, 2018, 10:01:53 AM
Quote from: Alps on July 09, 2018, 08:26:31 AM
Quote from: MASTERNC on July 09, 2018, 08:17:34 AM
Drove US 15 down from New York to Williamsport for the first time in a couple of years and noticed there are now exit numbers for what used to be unnumbered exits.  I assume this is another step towards signing I-99, and I also assume those mileage-based exits are from I-99 mileage and not from US 15 mileage.
I've heard they're from US 15 mileage.

A little silly if they are since they will have to change again when PennDOT decides to sign I-99 (I guess the couple of driveways leading onto the NB side are one impediment from doing a partial sign like NY has).
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: SGwithADD on July 09, 2018, 11:01:55 AM
Quote from: MASTERNC on July 09, 2018, 10:01:53 AM
Quote from: Alps on July 09, 2018, 08:26:31 AM
Quote from: MASTERNC on July 09, 2018, 08:17:34 AM
Drove US 15 down from New York to Williamsport for the first time in a couple of years and noticed there are now exit numbers for what used to be unnumbered exits.  I assume this is another step towards signing I-99, and I also assume those mileage-based exits are from I-99 mileage and not from US 15 mileage.
I've heard they're from US 15 mileage.

A little silly if they are since they will have to change again when PennDOT decides to sign I-99 (I guess the couple of driveways leading onto the NB side are one impediment from doing a partial sign like NY has).

Just checked with the help of Google Maps.  The exit numbers are for I-99.  For example, the exit for PA 414 is at roughly mile 162 for (future) I-99, and mile 159 for US 15.  PA 414 is signed as Exit 162.

Of course, this is assuming that I-99 will precisely follow the US 220 routing.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ixnay on July 09, 2018, 09:18:44 PM
Quote from: MASTERNC on July 09, 2018, 10:01:53 AMA little silly if they are since they will have to change again when PennDOT decides to sign I-99 (I guess the couple of driveways leading onto the NB side are one impediment from doing a partial sign like NY has).

Are those driveways discernable on Google Satellite?  Where are they?

ixnay
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: MASTERNC on July 09, 2018, 09:26:17 PM
Quote from: ixnay on July 09, 2018, 09:18:44 PM
Quote from: MASTERNC on July 09, 2018, 10:01:53 AMA little silly if they are since they will have to change again when PennDOT decides to sign I-99 (I guess the couple of driveways leading onto the NB side are one impediment from doing a partial sign like NY has).

Are those driveways discernable on Google Satellite?  Where are they?


ixnay

Yes.  It's actually a township road, according to Google Maps

https://goo.gl/maps/7n6qzQdy63U2
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on July 09, 2018, 11:08:08 PM
Quote from: MASTERNC on July 09, 2018, 09:26:17 PM
Quote from: ixnay on July 09, 2018, 09:18:44 PM
Quote from: MASTERNC on July 09, 2018, 10:01:53 AMA little silly if they are since they will have to change again when PennDOT decides to sign I-99 (I guess the couple of driveways leading onto the NB side are one impediment from doing a partial sign like NY has).

Are those driveways discernable on Google Satellite?  Where are they?


ixnay

Yes.  It's actually a township road, according to Google Maps

https://goo.gl/maps/7n6qzQdy63U2

Doesn't seem to be a dead end. Should be easy enough to just block it off.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ixnay on July 10, 2018, 06:28:45 AM
Quote
Quote from: MASTERNC on July 09, 2018, 09:26:17 PM
Quote from: ixnay on July 09, 2018, 09:18:44 PM
Quote from: MASTERNC on July 09, 2018, 10:01:53 AMA little silly if they are since they will have to change again when PennDOT decides to sign I-99 (I guess the couple of driveways leading onto the NB side are one impediment from doing a partial sign like NY has).

Are those driveways discernable on Google Satellite?  Where are they?


ixnay

Yes.  It's actually a township road, according to Google Maps

https://goo.gl/maps/7n6qzQdy63U2

Brings back memories of my vacation in the Finger Lakes in the fall of 2012 when I went up into the region via U.S. 15, I-86, and and NY 414.

ixnay

Quote from: seicer on July 10, 2018, 07:20:11 PM
It looks to be more of a utility access road, which could remain open but gated.

seicer, you seem to be right as Google Sat shows it to access small mountaintop utilities.

ixnay
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: seicer on July 10, 2018, 07:20:11 PM
It looks to be more of a utility access road, which could remain open but gated.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: qguy on July 11, 2018, 12:42:02 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/NmvHDDL.jpg)

Took this picture about a week ago, facing westbound on Tunnel Hill Road just beyond the northwest corner of Lebanon, Pennsylvania. The cut in the bottom half of the picture is an abandoned railroad ROW that is being converted into a trail (an extension of the Lebanon Valley Rail Trail).

The rail line was abandoned sometime after it suffered severe damage from Hurricane Agnes in 1972. (Many rail lines in the region suffered the same fate.) Sometime in the late 1980s PennDOT removed the bridge over the railroad ROW and replaced it with fill. (One less bridge on which to spend money inspecting and maintaining.) PennDOT is now excavating the fill and installing a large concrete box culvert (composed of precast segments, I believe) to allow for an extension of the trail along the old rail line north from its current terminus and trailhead in town.

What's interesting about all of this is that the excavation has revealed that when PennDOT converted the bridge to fill, it did not remove the bridge abutments but merely buried them. They've now been exposed by the excavation. You can see the western abutment in the middle of the image.

The project calls for fill over the box culvert. I don't know whether the old abutments will be removed or reburied. I'll observe and re-post later.

BTW, Tunnel Hill Road is called that because the Union Canal Tunnel passes beneath it (a few hundred yards to the east of the above pic). Constructed from 1825—1827, it was part of a system of canals and a portage railroad that connected Philadelphia with Pittsburgh over the Allegheny Mountains. It's listed National Historic Landmark and National Historic Civil Engineering Landmark. It's now part of a park which includes a section of the canal. On Sundays during the summer one can take boat tours through it. Here's a pic:

(https://i.imgur.com/TUuHAMA.jpg)

Tunnel Hill Road is just over the crest of the hill atop the canal tunnel.


[Edited to remove typo.]
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jemacedo9 on July 11, 2018, 02:27:40 PM
^^ That's quite interesting on multiple levels - thanks for the post!!
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: steviep24 on July 19, 2018, 09:02:19 PM
Interesting video about the abandoned PA Turnpike tunnels

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sKGgMM9pilA
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 707 on July 26, 2018, 07:24:22 PM
I did some research on US 219 from Meyersville and Somerset. Looks like construction is winding down to a close and the US 219 freeway will be opened soon. Interesting considering it was a freeway everyone thought would be dead after no work had been done on it for several years. That and there's talks of extending the freeway to I-68 finally by planners from both Pennsylvania and Maryland.

https://www.wearecentralpa.com/news/route-219-extension-could-drive-local-economy/1132686705
https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-9/ConstructionsProjectsAndRoadwork/Pages/Route-219-Somerset-to-Meyersdale.aspx
http://www.us219md-pa.com/
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on July 26, 2018, 07:28:59 PM
I was noticing the four digit reference routes has a sequence.   There are some numbers just reserved for interchanges and rest areas alone.  Then some series are for defunct route numbers while some are numbered due to direction like former SR 2026 in Reading (now PA 12) which is in that range because of regional importance and the fact it went from SW to NE.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Bitmapped on July 26, 2018, 11:37:02 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on July 26, 2018, 07:28:59 PM
I was noticing the four digit reference routes has a sequence.   There are some numbers just reserved for interchanges and rest areas alone.  Then some series are for defunct route numbers while some are numbered due to direction like former SR 2026 in Reading (now PA 12) which is in that range because of regional importance and the fact it went from SW to NE.

The numbering pattern is discussed on Wikipedia at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pennsylvania_State_Route_System#Location_Referencing_System. SRs 1001-4999 are numbered by which quadrant of the county they are in (generally).
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on July 27, 2018, 07:39:08 PM
Quote from: Bitmapped on July 26, 2018, 11:37:02 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on July 26, 2018, 07:28:59 PM
I was noticing the four digit reference routes has a sequence.   There are some numbers just reserved for interchanges and rest areas alone.  Then some series are for defunct route numbers while some are numbered due to direction like former SR 2026 in Reading (now PA 12) which is in that range because of regional importance and the fact it went from SW to NE.

The numbering pattern is discussed on Wikipedia at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pennsylvania_State_Route_System#Location_Referencing_System. SRs 1001-4999 are numbered by which quadrant of the county they are in (generally).

Mostly defined by select N-S and E-W routes through the middle of the county, if any exist, and not hard quadrant boundaries.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on July 29, 2018, 10:11:51 AM
Quote from: Roadsguy on July 27, 2018, 07:39:08 PM
Quote from: Bitmapped on July 26, 2018, 11:37:02 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on July 26, 2018, 07:28:59 PM
I was noticing the four digit reference routes has a sequence.   There are some numbers just reserved for interchanges and rest areas alone.  Then some series are for defunct route numbers while some are numbered due to direction like former SR 2026 in Reading (now PA 12) which is in that range because of regional importance and the fact it went from SW to NE.

The numbering pattern is discussed on Wikipedia at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pennsylvania_State_Route_System#Location_Referencing_System. SRs 1001-4999 are numbered by which quadrant of the county they are in (generally).

Mostly defined by select N-S and E-W routes through the middle of the county, if any exist, and not hard quadrant boundaries.
Even rest areas and interchanges get their own numbers.  Very interesting way of doing things.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Nanis on August 06, 2018, 08:06:17 PM
Quote from: Bitmapped on July 26, 2018, 11:37:02 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on July 26, 2018, 07:28:59 PM
I was noticing the four digit reference routes has a sequence.   There are some numbers just reserved for interchanges and rest areas alone.  Then some series are for defunct route numbers while some are numbered due to direction like former SR 2026 in Reading (now PA 12) which is in that range because of regional importance and the fact it went from SW to NE.

The numbering pattern is discussed on Wikipedia at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pennsylvania_State_Route_System#Location_Referencing_System. SRs 1001-4999 are numbered by which quadrant of the county they are in (generally).
I don get why PA still has that system for roads. Its just confusing.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: tckma on August 08, 2018, 07:31:14 AM
I have noticed that sometime within the past few weeks, PennDOT has installed vertical, white on black identifier signs on VMS assemblies.  These show the route number, direction of travel, and a sequential number (for example, 422E02, 76W01, 309N06).  No VMS signs on the PA Turnpike were tagged.

Is this VMS tagging going on throughout the state, or only in the Philadelphia / Montgomery County area?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: tckma on August 08, 2018, 08:04:57 AM
US 422 in Pennsylvania.  Two sections.  The eastern section, according to Wikipedia, is 88 miles long.  The western section does not have a per-state mileage listed in the article, but is 183 miles long in total between PA and Ohio.

I've seen mileposts on the eastern section as high as 192 near King of Prussia.  What is this mileage based on?  Is it the total mileage of the two segments in PA?  The mileage in PA if the two segments were connected?  What?

It can't be eastern segment mileage alone because the milepost numbers are too high.  I have (sort of) the same pedantic, roadgeeky objection to this as I do to the mileposts on the I-276 segment of the PA Turnpike starting at 326 where I-76 splits off the Turnpike to go to Philly and NJ.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: empirestate on August 08, 2018, 09:32:42 AM
Quote from: Nanis on August 06, 2018, 08:06:17 PM
Quote from: Bitmapped on July 26, 2018, 11:37:02 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on July 26, 2018, 07:28:59 PM
I was noticing the four digit reference routes has a sequence.   There are some numbers just reserved for interchanges and rest areas alone.  Then some series are for defunct route numbers while some are numbered due to direction like former SR 2026 in Reading (now PA 12) which is in that range because of regional importance and the fact it went from SW to NE.

The numbering pattern is discussed on Wikipedia at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pennsylvania_State_Route_System#Location_Referencing_System. SRs 1001-4999 are numbered by which quadrant of the county they are in (generally).
I don get why PA still has that system for roads. Its just confusing.

What about it do you find confusing? Perhaps we can help clear it up.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ipeters61 on August 08, 2018, 09:41:35 AM
Quote from: tckma on August 08, 2018, 08:04:57 AM
It can't be eastern segment mileage alone because the milepost numbers are too high.  I have (sort of) the same pedantic, roadgeeky objection to this as I do to the mileposts on the I-276 segment of the PA Turnpike starting at 326 where I-76 splits off the Turnpike to go to Philly and NJ.
I feel like in the case of I-276's mileposts, that's more about the "Pennsylvania Turnpike" designation (let's give it a silly number like 7676) than the interstate designation.  In other words, nobody is following "76/276," they're just following the "Pennsylvania Turnpike."  I would also guess it follows from the logic of why the Northeast Extension originally started its exit numbering at 31, to attempt to alleviate confusion within the system, especially among those who are using tickets.

Then again, we could just talk about how I-476 South is "Exit 20" off I-276 (of course because it's Exit 20 off the Northeast Extension/I-476).
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: akotchi on August 08, 2018, 12:02:54 PM
Quote from: tckma on August 08, 2018, 07:31:14 AM
I have noticed that sometime within the past few weeks, PennDOT has installed vertical, white on black identifier signs on VMS assemblies.  These show the route number, direction of travel, and a sequential number (for example, 422E02, 76W01, 309N06).  No VMS signs on the PA Turnpike were tagged.

Is this VMS tagging going on throughout the state, or only in the Philadelphia / Montgomery County area?
Not sure the answer to the question, but the median VMS locations (two signs) on the Delaware Expressway between PA 332 and U.S. 1, though signing has changed the roadway to I-295, are identified by I-95 codes . . . and I think the identification signs were installed after the route conversion.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jeffandnicole on August 08, 2018, 12:11:32 PM
Quote from: akotchi on August 08, 2018, 12:02:54 PM
Quote from: tckma on August 08, 2018, 07:31:14 AM
I have noticed that sometime within the past few weeks, PennDOT has installed vertical, white on black identifier signs on VMS assemblies.  These show the route number, direction of travel, and a sequential number (for example, 422E02, 76W01, 309N06).  No VMS signs on the PA Turnpike were tagged.

Is this VMS tagging going on throughout the state, or only in the Philadelphia / Montgomery County area?
Not sure the answer to the question, but the median VMS locations (two signs) on the Delaware Expressway between PA 332 and U.S. 1, though signing has changed the roadway to I-295, are identified by I-95 codes . . . and I think the identification signs were installed after the route conversion.

Another instance of 2 sections of a DOT not knowing what the other is doing.

On the ramp from NJ 29 South to I-295 South (South of Trenton, since 29 South to 295 South also occurs north of Trenton now), the exit number changed from 60A to 1A.  However, a new construction sign went up in the past week or so stating "On or About (no date shown), Exit 60A will be closed".  The sign sits nearly directly across from the 'Exit 1A' sign.  The construction contract for this closure (a repaving project) was put out to bid long after the Exit number changing project was going on.   No reason why there shouldn't have been even a cursory review of this to realize that 60A no longer exists here.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: tckma on August 08, 2018, 04:48:08 PM
Quote from: ipeters61 on August 08, 2018, 09:41:35 AM
Then again, we could just talk about how I-476 South is "Exit 20" off I-276 (of course because it's Exit 20 off the Northeast Extension/I-476).

That confused the &^@# out of me the first time I saw it!  It took me close to a week of daily commutes both directions between Exit 339 and Exit 326 to figure it out.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: tckma on August 08, 2018, 04:54:41 PM
Quote from: akotchi on August 08, 2018, 12:02:54 PM
Quote from: tckma on August 08, 2018, 07:31:14 AM
I have noticed that sometime within the past few weeks, PennDOT has installed vertical, white on black identifier signs on VMS assemblies.  These show the route number, direction of travel, and a sequential number (for example, 422E02, 76W01, 309N06).  No VMS signs on the PA Turnpike were tagged.

Is this VMS tagging going on throughout the state, or only in the Philadelphia / Montgomery County area?
Not sure the answer to the question, but the median VMS locations (two signs) on the Delaware Expressway between PA 332 and U.S. 1, though signing has changed the roadway to I-295, are identified by I-95 codes . . . and I think the identification signs were installed after the route conversion.

Saying "I-95" versus "the Delaware Expressway" would have helped me figure out just where the heck you were talking about without going to Google Maps, to be honest.  Took me a sec to realize why they extended the I-295 designation from NJ into PA too.  "Oh yeaaaaaaah 95's gonna go onto the PA Turnpike eventually to fix that weird problem created when they cancelled construction of I-95 through NJ."

I can tell you the identification signs on PA-309, US-422, and the section of I-76 coming off the Turnpike at Exit 326 headed toward Philly were installed sometime in the past month.  I started a job in King of Prussia the last week of June, and I've only been annoying Philadelphia-area drivers with my fine Maryland- and Massachusetts- honed driving skills for about a month; previously I stayed in MD all the time.  I swear those signs weren't there when I started this job and then suddenly they were.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on August 08, 2018, 05:00:34 PM
Quote from: tckma on August 08, 2018, 04:48:08 PM
Quote from: ipeters61 on August 08, 2018, 09:41:35 AM
Then again, we could just talk about how I-476 South is "Exit 20" off I-276 (of course because it's Exit 20 off the Northeast Extension/I-476).

That confused the &^@# out of me the first time I saw it!  It took me close to a week of daily commutes both directions between Exit 339 and Exit 326 to figure it out.

I sure hope that when they eventually go AET and ditch the ticket system, which is what causes this oddity, that they rationalize the exit numbers at Mid-County, making the Turnpike itself Exit 20 for I-476, and making Exit 334 for the mainline at I-476. That would probably make too much sense, though...
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ipeters61 on August 08, 2018, 09:19:51 PM
Quote from: tckma on August 08, 2018, 04:54:41 PM
Saying "I-95" versus "the Delaware Expressway" would have helped me figure out just where the heck you were talking about without going to Google Maps, to be honest.
Common vernacular on the PA side of Philly is to refer to the expressways by their names/nicknames (Delaware Expressway (95), Schuylkill Expressway (76), PA Turnpike (276), Blue Route (476), Dekalb Pike (202)), just the way things are around there.  It even applies in northeast PA.  My grandparents always talk about the Cross Valley Expressway, not 309.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: tckma on August 09, 2018, 09:42:26 AM
Quote from: ipeters61 on August 08, 2018, 09:19:51 PM
Quote from: tckma on August 08, 2018, 04:54:41 PM
Saying "I-95" versus "the Delaware Expressway" would have helped me figure out just where the heck you were talking about without going to Google Maps, to be honest.
Common vernacular on the PA side of Philly is to refer to the expressways by their names/nicknames (Delaware Expressway (95), Schuylkill Expressway (76), PA Turnpike (276), Blue Route (476), Dekalb Pike (202)), just the way things are around there.  It even applies in northeast PA.  My grandparents always talk about the Cross Valley Expressway, not 309.

I heard "Blue Route" on the local news at my hotel last week, and I thought they were referring to some Blue Detour (a la PA's colored detours, which I've always liked).  Isn't 476 the Northeast Extension though?

I was driving around fairly randomly the other night (delivering for Uber Eats, as I do for a side job in this area at night), and I heard either Waze or the Uber GPS (I use them both when delivering, depending on how I feel) say something about "Skoo Kill" but display "Schuylkill."  How the F&%$ do you get THAT pronunciation from THOSE letters in THAT order?

Then again, I lived in Massachusetts for 8 years, so I have no right to criticize odd pronunciations of place names. :D
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ekt8750 on August 09, 2018, 10:35:44 AM
Quote from: tckma on August 09, 2018, 09:42:26 AM
I heard "Blue Route" on the local news at my hotel last week, and I thought they were referring to some Blue Detour (a la PA's colored detours, which I've always liked).  Isn't 476 the Northeast Extension though?

North of Plymouth Meeting it is. South of it, it's the "Blue Route".

QuoteI was driving around fairly randomly the other night (delivering for Uber Eats, as I do for a side job in this area at night), and I heard either Waze or the Uber GPS (I use them both when delivering, depending on how I feel) say something about "Skoo Kill" but display "Schuylkill."  How the F&%$ do you get THAT pronunciation from THOSE letters in THAT order?

Then again, I lived in Massachusetts for 8 years, so I have no right to criticize odd pronunciations of place names. :D

It's a Dutch word lol.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jeffandnicole on August 09, 2018, 10:36:32 AM
Quote from: tckma on August 09, 2018, 09:42:26 AM
Quote from: ipeters61 on August 08, 2018, 09:19:51 PM
Quote from: tckma on August 08, 2018, 04:54:41 PM
Saying "I-95" versus "the Delaware Expressway" would have helped me figure out just where the heck you were talking about without going to Google Maps, to be honest.
Common vernacular on the PA side of Philly is to refer to the expressways by their names/nicknames (Delaware Expressway (95), Schuylkill Expressway (76), PA Turnpike (276), Blue Route (476), Dekalb Pike (202)), just the way things are around there.  It even applies in northeast PA.  My grandparents always talk about the Cross Valley Expressway, not 309.

I heard "Blue Route" on the local news at my hotel last week, and I thought they were referring to some Blue Detour (a la PA's colored detours, which I've always liked).  Isn't 476 the Northeast Extension though?

I was driving around fairly randomly the other night (delivering for Uber Eats, as I do for a side job in this area at night), and I heard either Waze or the Uber GPS (I use them both when delivering, depending on how I feel) say something about "Skoo Kill" but display "Schuylkill."  How the F&%$ do you get THAT pronunciation from THOSE letters in THAT order?

Then again, I lived in Massachusetts for 8 years, so I have no right to criticize odd pronunciations of place names. :D

There's a lot of old Indian names in the area, so you get odd spellings.  Some have been 'modernized' thru the years, but others, like the Schuylkill, live on.  In NJ, the township I grew up in was Mantua, pronounced Man-choo-uh.  You know you're not dealing with a local when they try saying it as Mant-u-a.

Back to the highways: On traffic reports, you'll often hear Blue Route & Northeast Extension; rarely will you hear "476", although I think they may mention it when referring to the section between 76 & 276 (or, for locals, between the Schuylkill & Northeast Extension).

I-76 gets no love around here whatsoever.  You'll always hear the Schuylkill or Schuylkill Expressway, rarely 76.  You'll always hear the PA Turnpike; not 76 (or 276).  Sometimes they say the Walt Whitman Expressway rather than I-76 there too.  When you get into NJ, "Route 42" is spoken rather than I-76.  I-676 in Philly is usually referred to as the Vine Street Expressway, which is rarely much of an express route as it's often jammed "River-to-River". They do say 676 though, at least for NJ's portion - as in "676 is slow approaching Route 42" (which is really I-76).  Long-time Philly traffic reporters (Bob Kelly) will sometimes use "North-South Freeway" instead of saying Route 42 though. 

Delaware Expressway is rarely used on traffic reports; usually they just say 95.

And as for your confusion, with the 'Blue Detour' (and other color) signs: Never once have I ever seen them mentioned on traffic reports or newspapers. They are a complete waste of money.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ipeters61 on August 09, 2018, 10:50:44 AM
Quote from: tckma on August 09, 2018, 09:42:26 AM
I was driving around fairly randomly the other night (delivering for Uber Eats, as I do for a side job in this area at night), and I heard either Waze or the Uber GPS (I use them both when delivering, depending on how I feel) say something about "Skoo Kill" but display "Schuylkill."  How the F&%$ do you get THAT pronunciation from THOSE letters in THAT order?
I had a friend in undergrad whose last name was Henault and pronounced "Eno."

Quote from: jeffandnicole on August 09, 2018, 10:36:32 AM
And as for your confusion, with the 'Blue Detour' (and other color) signs: Never once have I ever seen them mentioned on traffic reports or newspapers. They are a complete waste of money.
The portions of my childhood not spent in CT were spent in PA and it took me until maybe my 20s to finally understand what the "Blue Detour," "Orange Detour," etc. actually were referring to.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadgeek Adam on August 09, 2018, 12:59:36 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on August 09, 2018, 10:36:32 AM


There's a lot of old Indian names in the area, so you get odd spellings.  Some have been 'modernized' thru the years, but others, like the Schuylkill, live on.  In NJ, the township I grew up in was Mantua, pronounced Man-choo-uh.  You know you're not dealing with a local when they try saying it as Mant-u-a.


With respect, Mantua, Ohio is pronounced Mant-away. I can understand confusion.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: odditude on August 09, 2018, 01:08:47 PM
Quote from: Roadgeek Adam on August 09, 2018, 12:59:36 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on August 09, 2018, 10:36:32 AM


There's a lot of old Indian names in the area, so you get odd spellings.  Some have been 'modernized' thru the years, but others, like the Schuylkill, live on.  In NJ, the township I grew up in was Mantua, pronounced Man-choo-uh.  You know you're not dealing with a local when they try saying it as Mant-u-a.


With respect, Mantua, Ohio is pronounced Mant-away. I can understand confusion.
Similarly, locals will get cranky if you mispronounce Newark - which happens all the time as Newark, NJ (think "NEWerk" or "NOerk", but spoken like a single syllable) and Newark, DE (New-ARK) are in fairly close proximity.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jeffandnicole on August 09, 2018, 01:12:15 PM
Quote from: odditude on August 09, 2018, 01:08:47 PM
Quote from: Roadgeek Adam on August 09, 2018, 12:59:36 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on August 09, 2018, 10:36:32 AM


There's a lot of old Indian names in the area, so you get odd spellings.  Some have been 'modernized' thru the years, but others, like the Schuylkill, live on.  In NJ, the township I grew up in was Mantua, pronounced Man-choo-uh.  You know you're not dealing with a local when they try saying it as Mant-u-a.


With respect, Mantua, Ohio is pronounced Mant-away. I can understand confusion.
Similarly, locals will get cranky if you mispronounce Newark - which happens all the time as Newark, NJ (think "NEWerk" or "NOerk", but spoken like a single syllable) and Newark, DE (New-ARK) are in fairly close proximity.

Ohio mis-pronuncees a lot of names! LOL

Personally, I hate Newark, NJ's pronunciation.  Just way too close to New York.

And try to specify Newark Penn Station and New York Penn Station, especially when the destination is Newark.  That almost always needs clarification!
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: PHLBOS on August 13, 2018, 08:45:48 AM
Quote from: Roadsguy on August 08, 2018, 05:00:34 PM
Quote from: tckma on August 08, 2018, 04:48:08 PM
Quote from: ipeters61 on August 08, 2018, 09:41:35 AM
Then again, we could just talk about how I-476 South is "Exit 20" off I-276 (of course because it's Exit 20 off the Northeast Extension/I-476).

That confused the &^@# out of me the first time I saw it!  It took me close to a week of daily commutes both directions between Exit 339 and Exit 326 to figure it out.

I sure hope that when they eventually go AET and ditch the ticket system, which is what causes this oddity, that they rationalize the exit numbers at Mid-County, making the Turnpike itself Exit 20 for I-476, and making Exit 334 for the mainline at I-476. That would probably make too much sense, though...
True, but it's worth noting that Exit 20 off northbound 476 currently exists at the exit for Plymouth Road/Germantown Pike westbound.

Should those interchange numbers ever be rationalized; such would likely be...
For I-476 North:
Exit 20 A (current Exit 20) Germantown Pike westbound/Plymouth Rd. (signed as TO 276 WEST Harrisburg)
Exit 20 B (not currently numbered) I-276 East

For I-476 South:
Exit 20 B (not currently numbered) I-276 West
Exit 20 A (not currently numbered) I-276 East

For I-276 East:
Exit 334 (not currently numbered) I-476 North

For I-276 West:
Exit 334 A (current Exit 20) I-476 South
Exit 334 B (not currently numbered) I-476 North
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ipeters61 on August 13, 2018, 12:06:39 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on August 13, 2018, 08:45:48 AM
Quote from: Roadsguy on August 08, 2018, 05:00:34 PM
Quote from: tckma on August 08, 2018, 04:48:08 PM
Quote from: ipeters61 on August 08, 2018, 09:41:35 AM
Then again, we could just talk about how I-476 South is "Exit 20" off I-276 (of course because it's Exit 20 off the Northeast Extension/I-476).

That confused the &^@# out of me the first time I saw it!  It took me close to a week of daily commutes both directions between Exit 339 and Exit 326 to figure it out.

I sure hope that when they eventually go AET and ditch the ticket system, which is what causes this oddity, that they rationalize the exit numbers at Mid-County, making the Turnpike itself Exit 20 for I-476, and making Exit 334 for the mainline at I-476. That would probably make too much sense, though...
True, but it's worth noting that Exit 20 off northbound 476 currently exists at the exit for Plymouth Road/Germantown Pike westbound.
Well also consider that the PTC has jurisdiction over I-476 at the Mid-County Interchange and north (and PennDOT has jurisdiction south of the interchange), so two Exit 20s can exist because they are technically on different roads (the Northeast Extension and the Blue Route - despite both being signed as I-476).  Yeah, it's dumb, but technically feasible, in my opinion.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: tckma on August 14, 2018, 06:00:05 PM
Bumping this because it was ignored in light of my previous question right above it.

Quote from: tckma on August 08, 2018, 08:04:57 AM
US 422 in Pennsylvania.  Two sections.  The eastern section, according to Wikipedia, is 88 miles long.  The western section does not have a per-state mileage listed in the article, but is 183 miles long in total between PA and Ohio.

I've seen mileposts on the eastern section as high as 192 near King of Prussia.  What is this mileage based on?  Is it the total mileage of the two segments in PA?  The mileage in PA if the two segments were connected?  What?

It can't be eastern segment mileage alone because the milepost numbers are too high.  I have (sort of) the same pedantic, roadgeeky objection to this as I do to the mileposts on the I-276 segment of the PA Turnpike starting at 326 where I-76 splits off the Turnpike to go to Philly and NJ.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: PHLBOS on August 14, 2018, 06:18:32 PM
Quote from: tckma on August 08, 2018, 08:04:57 AM
US 422 in Pennsylvania.  Two sections.  The eastern section, according to Wikipedia, is 88 miles long.  The western section does not have a per-state mileage listed in the article, but is 183 miles long in total between PA and Ohio.

I've seen mileposts on the eastern section as high as 192 near King of Prussia.  What is this mileage based on?  Is it the total mileage of the two segments in PA?  The mileage in PA if the two segments were connected?  What?

It can't be eastern segment mileage alone because the milepost numbers are too high.
IIRC, the mileage listings along the eastern portion of US 422 includes the western portion plus mileage along the secret/silent concurrency w/US 22 & 322 between both segments.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Alps on August 14, 2018, 08:01:55 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on August 14, 2018, 06:18:32 PM
Quote from: tckma on August 08, 2018, 08:04:57 AM
US 422 in Pennsylvania.  Two sections.  The eastern section, according to Wikipedia, is 88 miles long.  The western section does not have a per-state mileage listed in the article, but is 183 miles long in total between PA and Ohio.

I've seen mileposts on the eastern section as high as 192 near King of Prussia.  What is this mileage based on?  Is it the total mileage of the two segments in PA?  The mileage in PA if the two segments were connected?  What?

It can't be eastern segment mileage alone because the milepost numbers are too high.
IIRC, the mileage listings along the eastern portion of US 422 includes the western portion plus mileage along the secret/silent concurrency w/US 22 & 322 between both segments.
That would be a lot more than 192. I suspect the concurrency is ignored.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: PHLBOS on August 15, 2018, 08:19:14 AM
Quote from: Alps on August 14, 2018, 08:01:55 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on August 14, 2018, 06:18:32 PM
Quote from: tckma on August 08, 2018, 08:04:57 AM
US 422 in Pennsylvania.  Two sections.  The eastern section, according to Wikipedia, is 88 miles long.  The western section does not have a per-state mileage listed in the article, but is 183 miles long in total between PA and Ohio.

I've seen mileposts on the eastern section as high as 192 near King of Prussia.  What is this mileage based on?  Is it the total mileage of the two segments in PA?  The mileage in PA if the two segments were connected?  What?

It can't be eastern segment mileage alone because the milepost numbers are too high.
IIRC, the mileage listings along the eastern portion of US 422 includes the western portion plus mileage along the secret/silent concurrency w/US 22 & 322 between both segments.
That would be a lot more than 192. I suspect the concurrency is ignored.
With such in mind, 113 (western section - PA portion only) + 80 (eastern section) = 193 miles
The earlier-mentioned 183 included OH mileage and the fore-mentioned 88 mile listing for the eastern section was in error (one needs to scroll down to the mileage tabulation at the bottom of the Wiki page to get the 113 & 80 listings).

Nonetheless PennDOT considers the two pieces of 422 to be one route using a silent concurrency via US 22 & 322.  IIRC, there was an earlier thread on this particular subject.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: tckma on August 15, 2018, 08:32:52 AM
Quote from: PHLBOS on August 15, 2018, 08:19:14 AM
Quote from: Alps on August 14, 2018, 08:01:55 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on August 14, 2018, 06:18:32 PM
Quote from: tckma on August 08, 2018, 08:04:57 AM
US 422 in Pennsylvania.  Two sections.  The eastern section, according to Wikipedia, is 88 miles long.  The western section does not have a per-state mileage listed in the article, but is 183 miles long in total between PA and Ohio.

I've seen mileposts on the eastern section as high as 192 near King of Prussia.  What is this mileage based on?  Is it the total mileage of the two segments in PA?  The mileage in PA if the two segments were connected?  What?

It can't be eastern segment mileage alone because the milepost numbers are too high.
IIRC, the mileage listings along the eastern portion of US 422 includes the western portion plus mileage along the secret/silent concurrency w/US 22 & 322 between both segments.
That would be a lot more than 192. I suspect the concurrency is ignored.
With such in mind, 113 (western section - PA portion only) + 80 (eastern section) = 193 miles
The earlier-mentioned 183 included OH mileage and the fore-mentioned 88 mile listing for the eastern section was in error (one needs to scroll down to the mileage tabulation at the bottom of the Wiki page to get the 113 & 80 listings).

Nonetheless PennDOT considers the two pieces of 422 to be one route using a silent concurrency via US 22 & 322.  IIRC, there was an earlier thread on this particular subject.

Ta-da!  Math!  If I'd only have done it, after finding the right numbers.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: seicer on August 16, 2018, 12:05:00 PM
Not sure how old the signs are, but the first overhead sign on US 15 northbound at Williamsport leaves room for an Interstate 99 shield. It doesn't appear that the US 15 designation will cease north of Williamsport to Corning for now. I'd like to see US 15 return to the older alignment where it's still accessible, partly because its a scenic drive although it's no longer fully traversable.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Flyer78 on August 22, 2018, 10:21:48 AM
Quote from: tckma on August 08, 2018, 07:31:14 AM
I have noticed that sometime within the past few weeks, PennDOT has installed vertical, white on black identifier signs on VMS assemblies.  These show the route number, direction of travel, and a sequential number (for example, 422E02, 76W01, 309N06).  No VMS signs on the PA Turnpike were tagged.

Is this VMS tagging going on throughout the state, or only in the Philadelphia / Montgomery County area?

Appears the answer is: Non-Turnpike roadways in the greater Philly area. Signs are marked in Delco, such as the the overhead sign on the Media Bypass before the Blue Route interchange, which interestingly indicates sequence number 22. (01N22) The only other semi-permanent sign on 1 South by Cheney did not get  a sign.

I'll need to confirm it again, but I think there was a gap in sequence on the Blue Route as well. The center-location signs are signed in each direction, but the "rear" facing sign is absent.  (So signs 476N03 and 476S04 on the post)

Speaking of the reverse signs, the sign at the PA/DE Border on US 202 (edited) is truncated on the rear of the sign due to equipment box, so 202N01 on the front is simply signed N01 on the rear.

I did not see any markers on the NE Extension portion of the Turnpike, and a road trip around the Tunnel covered many highways of various classes, all of which had signs without any identification. (US22/PA33/I80/I380/I81)


Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: PHLBOS on August 22, 2018, 10:36:43 AM
Quote from: Flyer78 on August 22, 2018, 10:21:48 AMSpeaking of the reverse signs, the sign at the PA/DE Border on US 1 is truncated on the rear of the sign due to equipment box, so 202N01 on the front is simply signed N01 on the rear.
I'm assuming you meant US 202.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Flyer78 on August 22, 2018, 05:34:33 PM
Indeed. Thanks for the catch.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: storm2k on August 23, 2018, 02:15:17 PM
Quote from: Flyer78 on August 22, 2018, 10:21:48 AM
Quote from: tckma on August 08, 2018, 07:31:14 AM
I have noticed that sometime within the past few weeks, PennDOT has installed vertical, white on black identifier signs on VMS assemblies.  These show the route number, direction of travel, and a sequential number (for example, 422E02, 76W01, 309N06).  No VMS signs on the PA Turnpike were tagged.

Is this VMS tagging going on throughout the state, or only in the Philadelphia / Montgomery County area?

Appears the answer is: Non-Turnpike roadways in the greater Philly area. Signs are marked in Delco, such as the the overhead sign on the Media Bypass before the Blue Route interchange, which interestingly indicates sequence number 22. (01N22) The only other semi-permanent sign on 1 South by Cheney did not get  a sign.

I'll need to confirm it again, but I think there was a gap in sequence on the Blue Route as well. The center-location signs are signed in each direction, but the "rear" facing sign is absent.  (So signs 476N03 and 476S04 on the post)

Speaking of the reverse signs, the sign at the PA/DE Border on US 202 (edited) is truncated on the rear of the sign due to equipment box, so 202N01 on the front is simply signed N01 on the rear.

I did not see any markers on the NE Extension portion of the Turnpike, and a road trip around the Tunnel covered many highways of various classes, all of which had signs without any identification. (US22/PA33/I80/I380/I81)




Correct that these signs are not on the Turnpike VMS's. This looks like a PennDOT thing and not a PATP thing. Saw these on VMS's on 202, 1, and 295 (former 95 north of Rt 1) this past weekend when driving to KOP. They remind me a lot of the signs that the MdTA puts on the VMS' around their properties.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jemacedo9 on August 25, 2018, 10:04:52 PM
In terms of the VMS signages, even quadrant routes with VMSs are getting labeled. In Philly today, I noticed a VMS on Columbus Blvd with a 2001N04 designation, and a small VMS on the Race St ramp to I-95N with a 3032E01 designation.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Hoar_Frost on August 27, 2018, 11:30:01 AM
Hey!  I just joined this forum.  I lived in Pennsylvania (in State College) from 2012 to 2016 but now live in Florida.  When I lived there, I noticed that signs marking township/borough/city/county boundaries, rivers, and lakes are white with blue lettering instead of the green with white lettering like are seen in every other state.  Does anybody know the reason for or history behind that?   
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: akotchi on August 27, 2018, 01:45:29 PM
I don't have pictures to post, but I noticed something interesting two weekends ago.

On U.S. 30, there are two freeway sections between York and Exton -- the York/Lancaster bypass and the Coatesville Bypass.  Both are mileposted every 10th mile, but the arterial section between is not.

The interesting part is this:  The east end of the York/Lancaster bypass has a final eastbound milepost of 270.7, while the first eastbound milepost on the Coatesville Bypass is 267.4.  More interesting is that there is about 19 miles in between these points!  Mileposts also seem low, given the Turnpike's mileposts are in the 300's adjacent to the Coatesville Bypass.

Raises the question . . . what is Pennsylvania's standard for mileposting and milepost numbers on non-Interstate roadways?  Just freeways?  I should note that the U.S. 1 and U.S. 13 freeways in Bucks County are not mileposted . . .
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ekt8750 on August 27, 2018, 02:20:08 PM
Quote from: akotchi on August 27, 2018, 01:45:29 PM
I don't have pictures to post, but I noticed something interesting two weekends ago.

On U.S. 30, there are two freeway sections between York and Exton -- the York/Lancaster bypass and the Coatesville Bypass.  Both are mileposted every 10th mile, but the arterial section between is not.

The interesting part is this:  The east end of the York/Lancaster bypass has a final eastbound milepost of 270.7, while the first eastbound milepost on the Coatesville Bypass is 267.4.  More interesting is that there is about 19 miles in between these points!  Mileposts also seem low, given the Turnpike's mileposts are in the 300's adjacent to the Coatesville Bypass.

Raises the question . . . what is Pennsylvania's standard for mileposting and milepost numbers on non-Interstate roadways?  Just freeways?  I should note that the U.S. 1 and U.S. 13 freeways in Bucks County are not mileposted . . .

PA generally doesn't milepost surface roads. Also mileage for non-Interstates resets at the county line.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jemacedo9 on August 27, 2018, 02:28:00 PM
Quote from: ekt8750 on August 27, 2018, 02:20:08 PM
Quote from: akotchi on August 27, 2018, 01:45:29 PM
I don't have pictures to post, but I noticed something interesting two weekends ago.

On U.S. 30, there are two freeway sections between York and Exton -- the York/Lancaster bypass and the Coatesville Bypass.  Both are mileposted every 10th mile, but the arterial section between is not.

The interesting part is this:  The east end of the York/Lancaster bypass has a final eastbound milepost of 270.7, while the first eastbound milepost on the Coatesville Bypass is 267.4.  More interesting is that there is about 19 miles in between these points!  Mileposts also seem low, given the Turnpike's mileposts are in the 300's adjacent to the Coatesville Bypass.

Raises the question . . . what is Pennsylvania's standard for mileposting and milepost numbers on non-Interstate roadways?  Just freeways?  I should note that the U.S. 1 and U.S. 13 freeways in Bucks County are not mileposted . . .

PA generally doesn't milepost surface roads. Also mileage for non-Interstates resets at the county line.

...but the freeway mileposts in PA on non-interstates do not reset at the county lines.

If I had to guess:  the York-Lancaster freeway includes mileage for the portion multiplexed with US 22 and I-376 near Pittsburgh, where the Coatesville/Downingtown/Exton Bypass does not? 
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: tckma on August 27, 2018, 05:17:40 PM
Quote from: ekt8750 on August 27, 2018, 02:20:08 PM
Quote from: akotchi on August 27, 2018, 01:45:29 PM
I don't have pictures to post, but I noticed something interesting two weekends ago.

On U.S. 30, there are two freeway sections between York and Exton -- the York/Lancaster bypass and the Coatesville Bypass.  Both are mileposted every 10th mile, but the arterial section between is not.

The interesting part is this:  The east end of the York/Lancaster bypass has a final eastbound milepost of 270.7, while the first eastbound milepost on the Coatesville Bypass is 267.4.  More interesting is that there is about 19 miles in between these points!  Mileposts also seem low, given the Turnpike's mileposts are in the 300's adjacent to the Coatesville Bypass.

Raises the question . . . what is Pennsylvania's standard for mileposting and milepost numbers on non-Interstate roadways?  Just freeways?  I should note that the U.S. 1 and U.S. 13 freeways in Bucks County are not mileposted . . .

PA generally doesn't milepost surface roads. Also mileage for non-Interstates resets at the county line.

So, wouldn't that then cause it to reset to 0.0, rather than 267.4 ?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ipeters61 on August 27, 2018, 06:32:59 PM
Quote from: akotchi on August 27, 2018, 01:45:29 PM
The interesting part is this:  The east end of the York/Lancaster bypass has a final eastbound milepost of 270.7, while the first eastbound milepost on the Coatesville Bypass is 267.4.  More interesting is that there is about 19 miles in between these points!  Mileposts also seem low, given the Turnpike's mileposts are in the 300's adjacent to the Coatesville Bypass.
Can't speak to the mileposts on the York-Lancaster Bypass and Coatesville-Downingtown Bypass, but I should mention that US-30 has less mileage in PA than the PA Turnpike (for argument's sake, I-76 and I-276).  Wikipedia puts US-30 as being 30 miles shorter than the Turnpike.  It most likely has to do with that southeasterly dip the Turnpike takes a few miles into the state.

US-30: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._Route_30_in_Pennsylvania
PA Turnpike: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pennsylvania_Turnpike
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jemacedo9 on August 27, 2018, 06:54:40 PM
Quote from: ipeters61 on August 27, 2018, 06:32:59 PM
Quote from: akotchi on August 27, 2018, 01:45:29 PM
The interesting part is this:  The east end of the York/Lancaster bypass has a final eastbound milepost of 270.7, while the first eastbound milepost on the Coatesville Bypass is 267.4.  More interesting is that there is about 19 miles in between these points!  Mileposts also seem low, given the Turnpike's mileposts are in the 300's adjacent to the Coatesville Bypass.
Can't speak to the mileposts on the York-Lancaster Bypass and Coatesville-Downingtown Bypass, but I should mention that US-30 has less mileage in PA than the PA Turnpike (for argument's sake, I-76 and I-276).  Wikipedia puts US-30 as being 30 miles shorter than the Turnpike.  It most likely has to do with that southeasterly dip the Turnpike takes a few miles into the state.

US-30: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._Route_30_in_Pennsylvania
PA Turnpike: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pennsylvania_Turnpike

That would explain the MP difference then - if the beginning of the Coatesville section is at MP267, that is roughly even with the Morgantown PA 10 exit of the Turnpike, Exit 298, so that's the ~30 mile difference.

My guess is still that York/Lancaster section includes the multiplexed mileage in Pgh, but the Coatesville one doesn't.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ipeters61 on August 27, 2018, 09:20:45 PM
Quote from: jemacedo9 on August 27, 2018, 06:54:40 PM
My guess is still that York/Lancaster section includes the multiplexed mileage in Pgh, but the Coatesville one doesn't.
I was thinking that, too, but it just didn't seem right to me...it's way too far past the split between 22 and 30.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Alps on August 27, 2018, 11:38:48 PM
Quote from: akotchi on August 27, 2018, 01:45:29 PM
I don't have pictures to post, but I noticed something interesting two weekends ago.

On U.S. 30, there are two freeway sections between York and Exton -- the York/Lancaster bypass and the Coatesville Bypass.  Both are mileposted every 10th mile, but the arterial section between is not.

The interesting part is this:  The east end of the York/Lancaster bypass has a final eastbound milepost of 270.7, while the first eastbound milepost on the Coatesville Bypass is 267.4.  More interesting is that there is about 19 miles in between these points!  Mileposts also seem low, given the Turnpike's mileposts are in the 300's adjacent to the Coatesville Bypass.

Raises the question . . . what is Pennsylvania's standard for mileposting and milepost numbers on non-Interstate roadways?  Just freeways?  I should note that the U.S. 1 and U.S. 13 freeways in Bucks County are not mileposted . . .
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._Route_30_in_Pennsylvania (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._Route_30_in_Pennsylvania)
270 matches up with Lancaster. Coatesville should begin at 287.6. So they're 20.2 miles off. What's 20.2 miles long?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ARMOURERERIC on August 28, 2018, 12:57:44 AM
Maybe US 30's original alignment of way back in the early days of Motoring when the Lincoln Highway took what is now Ohio River Blvd
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jemacedo9 on August 28, 2018, 07:45:18 AM
Quote from: Alps on August 27, 2018, 11:38:48 PM
Quote from: akotchi on August 27, 2018, 01:45:29 PM
I don't have pictures to post, but I noticed something interesting two weekends ago.

On U.S. 30, there are two freeway sections between York and Exton -- the York/Lancaster bypass and the Coatesville Bypass.  Both are mileposted every 10th mile, but the arterial section between is not.

The interesting part is this:  The east end of the York/Lancaster bypass has a final eastbound milepost of 270.7, while the first eastbound milepost on the Coatesville Bypass is 267.4.  More interesting is that there is about 19 miles in between these points!  Mileposts also seem low, given the Turnpike's mileposts are in the 300's adjacent to the Coatesville Bypass.

Raises the question . . . what is Pennsylvania's standard for mileposting and milepost numbers on non-Interstate roadways?  Just freeways?  I should note that the U.S. 1 and U.S. 13 freeways in Bucks County are not mileposted . . .
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._Route_30_in_Pennsylvania (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._Route_30_in_Pennsylvania)
270 matches up with Lancaster. Coatesville should begin at 287.6. So they're 20.2 miles off. What's 20.2 miles long?

According to Wikipedia
US 30 joins US 22 at 21.0 (rounded up from 20.98)
US 30 leaves I-376/US 22 at 42.9 (rounded up from 42.88)
That's 21.9...is that close enough to account for the difference?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on August 30, 2018, 12:53:26 AM
Speaking of US 30, the other day I was in the vicinity of the end of the US 30 expressway east of Lancaster, where they repaved the surface road and replaced most of the signage, changing the lane configuration as well. Most notably the westbound fork at the beginning of the expressway now has the right two lanes feed only onto the expressway, with the single left lane being the only one to PA 462. It doesn't widen back to two lanes again until it passes under US 30 EB. For the left turn from PA 462 EB to US 30 WB, they replaced the doghouse with an FYA, and somewhat eliminated the need for EB through traffic to shift left one lane to go to US 30. I notice they made a point to change all of the indications of "To West PA 283" to simply "To PA 283".

(https://i.imgur.com/Ixl6aM7.jpg)
These new signs replaced these (https://goo.gl/maps/rfLDKJoFmzp), now unambiguously indicating the left lane as left-turn-only, previously indicated only by striping without signage.

(https://i.imgur.com/nP2LJkn.jpg)
Another shot of the more clear left turn lane, showing the FYA as well. They're popping up more and more around Pennsylvania.

(https://i.imgur.com/SK8ZT8t.jpg)
EB through traffic still has to shift over a lane, but the setup is simpler now. In the distance you can see they also replaced the overhead signs approaching Oakview Road.

(https://i.imgur.com/4boT0Ma.jpg)
Both examples from this interchange area of the rare NJ-style BGS shields were replaced, this (https://goo.gl/maps/Ksq9sg2eKWG2) being the predecessor to the pictured one. The new sign is mostly identical except for the removal of "West" from the "To PA 283" indication. At least it's not Clearview. :spin:

(https://i.imgur.com/ZEPPzwa.jpg)
These gore signs are all new. The original destination sign was Clearview but otherwise identical. There were originally more shields (https://goo.gl/maps/PVWu7vxrWF32), but for some reason the new larger 462 shield uses Clearview digits.

(https://i.imgur.com/zqPNsel.jpg)
These signs were replaced for some reason. They're nearly indistinguishable from the old ones except for the aforementioned removal of all the "West" from 283. The arrows are now accurate with the removal of the option lane. An APL would've been good here before the change.

(https://i.imgur.com/oA4Dapq.jpg)
They even added pavement shields to clearly indicate the new configuration. I'd imagine many people would otherwise assume they could just stay in the middle lane onto 462 as before.

(https://i.imgur.com/7H53hyk.jpg)
This I noticed last. These abutments weren't replaced with the reconstruction years ago, only the bridge itself was. It seems the abutments were designed to allow for a four-lane bridge for the eventual (much needed) eastward extension of the expressway. It certainly could fit the narrow, substandard four-lane bridge that they would have had in mind when the road was built.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ixnay on August 30, 2018, 06:12:04 AM
Re the PA 462 Clearview megashields... I've always found those megasize Clearview characters hard on the eyes, MUTCD in that size, not so much.

ixnay
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Beltway on August 30, 2018, 06:19:42 AM
Quote from: Roadsguy on August 30, 2018, 12:53:26 AM
This I noticed last. These abutments weren't replaced with the reconstruction years ago, only the bridge itself was. It seems the abutments were designed to allow for a four-lane bridge for the eventual (much needed) eastward extension of the expressway. It certainly could fit the narrow, substandard four-lane bridge that they would have had in mind when the road was built.

Abutments are massive reinforced concrete structures often with steel piles underneath.  They could last 100+ years and if their design is compatible with the bridge upgrade project then there is no reason to replace the abutment, perhaps rehab the surface as what this one appears to have had.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: PHLBOS on August 30, 2018, 08:39:55 AM
Quote from: Roadsguy on August 30, 2018, 12:53:26 AM
(https://i.imgur.com/Ixl6aM7.jpg)
These new signs replaced these (https://goo.gl/maps/rfLDKJoFmzp), now unambiguously indicating the left lane as left-turn-only, previously indicated only by striping without signage.
IMHO, the old BGS for US 30 eastbound could've remained and the previous BGS for could've just had its lower NEXT LEFT message replaced with a yellow EXIT ONLY banner (with downward arrow).  Either that or the new signs could've been made larger.  The new signs alongside the empty posts makes such look like a temporary measure/condition.  Is that true?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: MASTERNC on August 30, 2018, 09:29:34 AM
Quote from: Roadsguy on August 30, 2018, 12:53:26 AM

Another shot of the more clear left turn lane, showing the FYA as well. They're popping up more and more around Pennsylvania.


Seems to be district by district.  I have not heard of any popping up in the Pittsburgh area, nor have I seen any with new signals or upgrades around Philly (other than the one installed with a new signal in Chester County related to a bridge detour).
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jemacedo9 on August 30, 2018, 02:32:34 PM
I-83 widening east (North) of Harrisburg (I-81 southward to existing 6-lane section north of I-283) has begun...

https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=808 (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=808)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on August 30, 2018, 07:11:28 PM
Quote from: MASTERNC on August 30, 2018, 09:29:34 AM
Quote from: Roadsguy on August 30, 2018, 12:53:26 AM

Another shot of the more clear left turn lane, showing the FYA as well. They're popping up more and more around Pennsylvania.


Seems to be district by district.  I have not heard of any popping up in the Pittsburgh area, nor have I seen any with new signals or upgrades around Philly (other than the one installed with a new signal in Chester County related to a bridge detour).

Makes sense; this is the fourth one I know of in District 8.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: empirestate on August 30, 2018, 07:38:00 PM
Quote from: Hoar_Frost on August 27, 2018, 11:30:01 AM
Hey!  I just joined this forum.  I lived in Pennsylvania (in State College) from 2012 to 2016 but now live in Florida.  When I lived there, I noticed that signs marking township/borough/city/county boundaries, rivers, and lakes are white with blue lettering instead of the green with white lettering like are seen in every other state.  Does anybody know the reason for or history behind that?   

Don't know if there's a reason, other than they had to pick out some color scheme or other, so they chose blue on white.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Flyer78 on August 30, 2018, 11:10:39 PM
Quote from: MASTERNC on August 30, 2018, 09:29:34 AM
Quote from: Roadsguy on August 30, 2018, 12:53:26 AM

Another shot of the more clear left turn lane, showing the FYA as well. They're popping up more and more around Pennsylvania.


Seems to be district by district.  I have not heard of any popping up in the Pittsburgh area, nor have I seen any with new signals or upgrades around Philly (other than the one installed with a new signal in Chester County related to a bridge detour).

Delco got one recently,  PA352/New Middletown Rd at Knowlton Rd... have heard some may make appearances soon on US1 at various locations,  but not yet final. 
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: MASTERNC on August 31, 2018, 12:50:51 PM
Quote from: Flyer78 on August 30, 2018, 11:10:39 PM
Quote from: MASTERNC on August 30, 2018, 09:29:34 AM
Quote from: Roadsguy on August 30, 2018, 12:53:26 AM

Another shot of the more clear left turn lane, showing the FYA as well. They're popping up more and more around Pennsylvania.


Seems to be district by district.  I have not heard of any popping up in the Pittsburgh area, nor have I seen any with new signals or upgrades around Philly (other than the one installed with a new signal in Chester County related to a bridge detour).

Delco got one recently,  PA352/New Middletown Rd at Knowlton Rd... have heard some may make appearances soon on US1 at various locations,  but not yet final. 

Interesting.  There have been a few new light installations with dedicated turn lanes in Montgomery & Delaware counties I've seen - all use the doghouse where an FYA would have worked.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: rickmastfan67 on September 01, 2018, 06:10:12 AM
Quote from: MASTERNC on August 31, 2018, 12:50:51 PM
Quote from: Flyer78 on August 30, 2018, 11:10:39 PM
Quote from: MASTERNC on August 30, 2018, 09:29:34 AM
Quote from: Roadsguy on August 30, 2018, 12:53:26 AM

Another shot of the more clear left turn lane, showing the FYA as well. They're popping up more and more around Pennsylvania.


Seems to be district by district.  I have not heard of any popping up in the Pittsburgh area, nor have I seen any with new signals or upgrades around Philly (other than the one installed with a new signal in Chester County related to a bridge detour).

Delco got one recently,  PA352/New Middletown Rd at Knowlton Rd... have heard some may make appearances soon on US1 at various locations,  but not yet final. 

Interesting.  There have been a few new light installations with dedicated turn lanes in Montgomery & Delaware counties I've seen - all use the doghouse where an FYA would have worked.

And they just removed a Doghouse over here along McKnight Road where it should've stayed and replaced it with a dedicated turn lane signal where the delays now are super annoying due to a super short turn lane bay.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ARMOURERERIC on September 01, 2018, 10:03:09 AM
Which intersection on McKnight
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: rickmastfan67 on September 01, 2018, 11:41:16 AM
Quote from: ARMOURERERIC on September 01, 2018, 10:03:09 AM
Which intersection on McKnight

Pine Creek (https://goo.gl/maps/uqLrznQmVLR2).  It's the last one before McKnight merges into US-19 (Perry Highway).  It was the only doghouse on McKnight (not counting the sometime straight/left lane one @ Ross Park Mall going SB).  It was also the only movement along McKnight that allowed a turn whenever it was clear due to large gaps sometimes of no traffic coming off of Perry Highway SB.  If anywhere on McKnight a FYA would have worked, it would have been here & at Arcadia Drive to the south.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Beltway on September 03, 2018, 02:32:41 PM
The intersection of US-6 and US-219 at Lantz Corners.

Why are there 4-way stop signs there?

That seems to be a "poor man's traffic signal", and all it does is cause driver delay and frustration.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: PAHighways on September 03, 2018, 08:47:12 PM
Quote from: MASTERNC on August 30, 2018, 09:29:34 AMSeems to be district by district.  I have not heard of any popping up in the Pittsburgh area, nor have I seen any with new signals or upgrades around Philly (other than the one installed with a new signal in Chester County related to a bridge detour).

The closest one to Pittsburgh that I have found, so far, is on PA 286 at the US 422 interchange outside Indiana.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadgeek Adam on September 04, 2018, 08:12:27 PM
Quote from: Beltway on September 03, 2018, 02:32:41 PM
The intersection of US-6 and US-219 at Lantz Corners.

Why are there 4-way stop signs there?

That seems to be a "poor man's traffic signal", and all it does is cause driver delay and frustration.

Expect a lot of changes probably. Traffic in that area gets higher and higher thanks to the Kinzua Viaduct. They are opening a Sheetz at the intersection, among other things
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on September 10, 2018, 11:44:45 AM
I still haven't seen any diagrams of the plan for the I-283/PA 283 interchange near Harrisburg, but it seems they're smoothing out the WB-NB ramp and widening it to two lanes. So far this seems to be the only new permanent sign installed:

(https://i.imgur.com/d7FLsWC.jpg)

They did a good job with it. PennDOT's newer signs look a whole lot better when they're not Clearview. :P
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: PHLBOS on September 10, 2018, 11:50:23 AM
Quote from: Roadsguy on September 10, 2018, 11:44:45 AM
I still haven't seen any diagrams of the plan for the I-283/PA 283 interchange near Harrisburg, but it seems they're smoothing out the WB-NB ramp and widening it to two lanes. So far this seems to be the only new permanent sign installed:

(https://i.imgur.com/d7FLsWC.jpg)

They did a good job with it. PennDOT's newer signs look a whole lot better when they're not Clearview. :P
Amen to that. :thumbsup:  Looks like there will eventually be a pair of yellow flashing signals (note the square cut-outs) for that PA 283 BGS.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ipeters61 on September 10, 2018, 11:51:16 AM
Quote from: Roadsguy on September 10, 2018, 11:44:45 AM
I still haven't seen any diagrams of the plan for the I-283/PA 283 interchange near Harrisburg, but it seems they're smoothing out the WB-NB ramp and widening it to two lanes. So far this seems to be the only new permanent sign installed:

(https://i.imgur.com/d7FLsWC.jpg)

They did a good job with it. PennDOT's newer signs look a whole lot better when they're not Clearview. :P
Holy crap, why did I feel sudden satisfaction when seeing this sign?  What is wrong with me?  :-D
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: briantroutman on September 10, 2018, 12:06:33 PM
I should probably take more photos when I'm out and about... I have been through this interchange numerous times in the past few months (including yesterday afternoon), and this assembly has been in place since around the beginning of the summer, if I recall correctly.

Yes, the sign looks good...my only gripe is the undersized arrow on the exit panel. But otherwise, it's nearly textbook-perfect.

I've not seen any diagrams of the interchange re-configuration either, but I'm a bit disappointed that they seem to be minimal improvements to ease flow slightly rather than a complete rebuild to make 283-283 a through movement. I do realize, though, that the Commonwealth has far greater transportation priorities and limited funds, so this scaled down project is certainly better than nothing. I seem to recall reading something on a press release or elsewhere about "eliminating the weave" , so perhaps they're removing the PA 283 WB to PA Turnpike loop and adding a signalized left turn for Turnpike-bound traffic.

Update: Yes, that's precisely what's happening. Here's an excerpt from a PennDOT press release (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-8/Pages/details.aspx?newsid=382):
QuoteA new traffic signal will be installed at the west end of the bridge that carries Route 283 over the I-283 connection with the Pennsylvania Turnpike and a new ramp will be built from the location of the traffic signal to the entrance of the Pennsylvania Turnpike. After the new traffic signal and new ramp are completed, the existing loop ramp in the interchange from westbound Route 283 to southbound I-283 will be removed.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on September 10, 2018, 01:22:31 PM
Quote from: briantroutman on September 10, 2018, 12:06:33 PM
I should probably take more photos when I'm out and about... I have been through this interchange numerous times in the past few months (including yesterday afternoon), and this assembly has been in place since around the beginning of the summer, if I recall correctly.

Yes, the sign looks good...my only gripe is the undersized arrow on the exit panel. But otherwise, it's nearly textbook-perfect.

I've not seen any diagrams of the interchange re-configuration either, but I'm a bit disappointed that they seem to be minimal improvements to ease flow slightly rather than a complete rebuild to make 283-283 a through movement. I do realize, though, that the Commonwealth has far greater transportation priorities and limited funds, so this scaled down project is certainly better than nothing. I seem to recall reading something on a press release or elsewhere about "eliminating the weave" , so perhaps they're removing the PA 283 WB to PA Turnpike loop and adding a signalized left turn for Turnpike-bound traffic.

Update: Yes, that's precisely what's happening. Here's an excerpt from a PennDOT press release (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-8/Pages/details.aspx?newsid=382):
QuoteA new traffic signal will be installed at the west end of the bridge that carries Route 283 over the I-283 connection with the Pennsylvania Turnpike and a new ramp will be built from the location of the traffic signal to the entrance of the Pennsylvania Turnpike. After the new traffic signal and new ramp are completed, the existing loop ramp in the interchange from westbound Route 283 to southbound I-283 will be removed.

I hope it'll be a double left turn. They should've learned their lesson from the northbound backups in the left lane on US 15 approaching PA 581.

At least with minimal improvements, it's less of a waste when they eventually come back and fully redo it like I believe they still want to do at the York Split. This doesn't fall under the I-83 Master Plan, though, so I doubt it...
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Gnutella on September 18, 2018, 10:41:30 AM
I think PennDOT and the Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission should start using purple more often. On the two brand-new signs above, I'd like to see a purple field across the top of the entire left sign with the word 'TOLL' in it, and the 'LAST EXIT BEFORE TOLL' field across the top of the right sign changed from yellow to purple.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: PHLBOS on September 18, 2018, 11:14:58 AM
Quote from: Gnutella on September 18, 2018, 10:41:30 AM
I think PennDOT and the Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission should start using purple more often. On the two brand-new signs above, I'd like to see a purple field across the top of the entire left sign with the word 'TOLL' in it, and the 'LAST EXIT BEFORE TOLL' field across the top of the right sign changed from yellow to purple.
IIRC, purple signs (or portions thereof) are only used for either E-ZPass (or equivalent) lanes and/or an E-ZPass Only/AET scenario/set-up.  Most of the PA Turnpike still has cash lanes & booths.

That said, the above-BGS with just the yellow TOLL banner is 100% appropriate for that location & application.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jeffandnicole on September 18, 2018, 11:18:13 AM
Quote from: Gnutella on September 18, 2018, 10:41:30 AM
I think PennDOT and the Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission should start using purple more often. On the two brand-new signs above, I'd like to see a purple field across the top of the entire left sign with the word 'TOLL' in it, and the 'LAST EXIT BEFORE TOLL' field across the top of the right sign changed from yellow to purple.

That's an absolutely incorrect use of the color purple.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: tckma on September 18, 2018, 04:13:09 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on September 18, 2018, 11:14:58 AM
Quote from: Gnutella on September 18, 2018, 10:41:30 AM
I think PennDOT and the Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission should start using purple more often. On the two brand-new signs above, I'd like to see a purple field across the top of the entire left sign with the word 'TOLL' in it, and the 'LAST EXIT BEFORE TOLL' field across the top of the right sign changed from yellow to purple.
IIRC, purple signs (or portions thereof) are only used for either E-ZPass (or equivalent) lanes and/or an E-ZPass Only/AET scenario/set-up.  Most of the PA Turnpike still has cash lanes & booths.

That said, the above-BGS with just the yellow TOLL banner is 100% appropriate for that location & application.

But is "A TOLL ROAD (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.1687807,-71.533777,3a,51y,70.01h,93.28t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sA9cgYYhGkF3Hpl97aAoY5g!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)" MUTCD-compliant phraseology?  (I love love LOVE New Hampshire; their DOT's usage of "A TOLL ROAD" instead of just "TOLL ROAD" is a personal pet peeve.)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: PHLBOS on September 18, 2018, 05:17:35 PM
Quote from: tckma on September 18, 2018, 04:13:09 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on September 18, 2018, 11:14:58 AM
Quote from: Gnutella on September 18, 2018, 10:41:30 AM
I think PennDOT and the Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission should start using purple more often. On the two brand-new signs above, I'd like to see a purple field across the top of the entire left sign with the word 'TOLL' in it, and the 'LAST EXIT BEFORE TOLL' field across the top of the right sign changed from yellow to purple.
IIRC, purple signs (or portions thereof) are only used for either E-ZPass (or equivalent) lanes and/or an E-ZPass Only/AET scenario/set-up.  Most of the PA Turnpike still has cash lanes & booths.

That said, the above-BGS with just the yellow TOLL banner is 100% appropriate for that location & application.

But is "A TOLL ROAD (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.1687807,-71.533777,3a,51y,70.01h,93.28t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sA9cgYYhGkF3Hpl97aAoY5g!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)" MUTCD-compliant phraseology?  (I love love LOVE New Hampshire; their DOT's usage of "A TOLL ROAD" instead of just "TOLL ROAD" is a personal pet peeve.)
I couldn't find anything in the latest (2009) MUTCD (https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/pdfs/2009r1r2/part2f.pdf) regarding the use of yellow TOLL ROAD or A TOLL ROAD banners; just simply yellow TOLL banners and that's about it.  So, the inclusion of A and ROAD in the TOLL isn't necessarily prohibited by MUTCD per say.

That said, let's try to keep this thread PA-focused.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ixnay on September 18, 2018, 05:20:00 PM
One more thing before we get back to this thread's intended focus...

Quote from: tckma on September 18, 2018, 04:13:09 PMBut is "url=https://www.google.com/maps/@43.1687807,-71.533777,3a,51y,70.01h,93.28t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sA9cgYYhGkF3Hpl97aAoY5g!2e0!7i13312!8i6656]A TOLL ROAD[/url]" MUTCD-compliant phraseology?  (I love love LOVE New Hampshire; their DOT's usage of "A TOLL ROAD" instead of just "TOLL ROAD" is a personal pet peeve.)

"A TOLL ROAD"?  I don't find it a peeve (or a mortal sin), just cute signage (and worth a chuckle).  That said, even I don't find the "A" necessary to get the message across.

OK, back to PA road projects other than the I-95-ization of the Turnpike.  How's the dualization of U.S. 322 (the Conchester) in Delco coming along?  When will the first segment be completed?
ixnay
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Alps on September 18, 2018, 11:39:05 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on September 18, 2018, 05:17:35 PMper say.

per se

my own personal pet peeve :)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Hot Rod Hootenanny on September 18, 2018, 11:48:44 PM
Quote from: ixnay on September 18, 2018, 05:20:00 PM

OK, back to PA road projects other than the I-95-ization of the Turnpike.  How's the dualization of U.S. 322 (the Conchester) in Delco coming along?  When will the first segment be completed?
ixnay

Since you asked, I happened to drive down US 322, between US 1 and Chester, and work on the dualization is going on from US 1 to Clayton Park Golf Course and the approach to PA 261.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ixnay on September 19, 2018, 06:08:44 AM
Quote from: Hot Rod Hootenanny on September 18, 2018, 11:48:44 PMSince you asked, I happened to drive down US 322, between US 1 and Chester, and work on the dualization is going on from US 1 to Clayton Park Golf Course and the approach to PA 261.

How far along does the construction look?  Did you notice?

Yes, I do remember reading that stretch was going to get dualized first, then they'll extend it down to the point between Cherry Tree Rd. and PA 452 where it's already dualized.

ixnay
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Hot Rod Hootenanny on September 19, 2018, 09:28:10 PM
Quote from: ixnay on September 19, 2018, 06:08:44 AM
Quote from: Hot Rod Hootenanny on September 18, 2018, 11:48:44 PMSince you asked, I happened to drive down US 322, between US 1 and Chester, and work on the dualization is going on from US 1 to Clayton Park Golf Course and the approach to PA 261.

How far along does the construction look?  Did you notice?

Yes, I do remember reading that stretch was going to get dualized first, then they'll extend it down to the point between Cherry Tree Rd. and PA 452 where it's already dualized.

ixnay

The closer to US 1 you are, the further ahead they are. They have blacktop down past Station Rd, and some bridge work (more like culverts) been completed. Get south of Smithbridge Rd, and it's just cleared and graded dirt.
Figure its another year or two (2020?) till its completed.
Noticed that the new road is 5-10 ft higher than current US 322 in a handful of locations. Don't know if PennDot will go back and tear up the "old road" to level the two out.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: qguy on September 20, 2018, 09:01:45 AM
Quote from: Hot Rod Hootenanny on September 19, 2018, 09:28:10 PM
Quote from: ixnay on September 19, 2018, 06:08:44 AM
Quote from: Hot Rod Hootenanny on September 18, 2018, 11:48:44 PMSince you asked, I happened to drive down US 322, between US 1 and Chester, and work on the dualization is going on from US 1 to Clayton Park Golf Course and the approach to PA 261.

How far along does the construction look?  Did you notice?

Yes, I do remember reading that stretch was going to get dualized first, then they'll extend it down to the point between Cherry Tree Rd. and PA 452 where it's already dualized.

ixnay
The closer to US 1 you are, the further ahead they are. They have blacktop down past Station Rd, and some bridge work (more like culverts) been completed. Get south of Smithbridge Rd, and it's just cleared and graded dirt.
Figure its another year or two (2020?) till its completed.
Noticed that the new road is 5-10 ft higher than current US 322 in a handful of locations. Don't know if PennDot will go back and tear up the "old road" to level the two out.

It will.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: LeftyJR on September 21, 2018, 06:56:14 PM
Quote from: tckma on September 18, 2018, 04:13:09 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on September 18, 2018, 11:14:58 AM
Quote from: Gnutella on September 18, 2018, 10:41:30 AM
I think PennDOT and the Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission should start using purple more often. On the two brand-new signs above, I'd like to see a purple field across the top of the entire left sign with the word 'TOLL' in it, and the 'LAST EXIT BEFORE TOLL' field across the top of the right sign changed from yellow to purple.
IIRC, purple signs (or portions thereof) are only used for either E-ZPass (or equivalent) lanes and/or an E-ZPass Only/AET scenario/set-up.  Most of the PA Turnpike still has cash lanes & booths.

That said, the above-BGS with just the yellow TOLL banner is 100% appropriate for that location & application.

But is "A TOLL ROAD (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.1687807,-71.533777,3a,51y,70.01h,93.28t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sA9cgYYhGkF3Hpl97aAoY5g!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)" MUTCD-compliant phraseology?  (I love love LOVE New Hampshire; their DOT's usage of "A TOLL ROAD" instead of just "TOLL ROAD" is a personal pet peeve.)
Or the infamous "All Maine Points"  sign on 95.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: CentralPAGal on September 25, 2018, 06:36:20 PM
According to the I-83 beltway website, PennDOT will be revealing the preliminary designs for east shore sections 2 and 3 during a public meeting at the Harrisburg East Mall on October 18.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: TheOneKEA on September 29, 2018, 10:20:08 PM
Does anyone know how the US 11/15 CSVT project near Shamokin Dam is progressing? The website is rarely updated and I haven't been to that part of PA in a while.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Beltway on September 29, 2018, 11:32:43 PM
Quote from: TheOneKEA on September 29, 2018, 10:20:08 PM
Does anyone know how the US 11/15 CSVT project near Shamokin Dam is progressing? The website is rarely updated and I haven't been to that part of PA in a while.

I drove thru there a week ago.  The river bridge has 14 piers and two abutments per the project site plan sheet, and 8 piers and both abutments have been built.  The steel girders have been placed across those spans where piers have been built.

Looks like most of the heavy excavation has been completed on the land portions of Section I.  Section II is not under construction.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: cpzilliacus on October 01, 2018, 08:18:27 PM
After the meet in Mentor, Ohio, over the weekend, we were on the (short) section of I-90 across Erie County, Pennsylvania (between Ashtabula County, Ohio and Chautauqua County, New York), and there were several bridges crossing the freeway that were missing (the bridge abutments remain, blocked-off).

I obviously did not witness the demise of these bridges, but it is my strong suspicion is that the missing bridges were probably lower than current Interstate standard height (rather common on Interstates in Pennsylvania (I have seen as low as 13'6", there were once several low bridges on I-83 between the Maryland border and Harrisburg that have been replaced), but unfortunately low bridges are not so common (on signed Interstates) in neighboring Ohio and New York State).

So it appears that bridge strikes by overheight vehicles severe enough to damage bridges beyond repair are slowly bringing I-90 across Erie County into compliance by knocking-down the superstructures of bridges that are too low.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ARMOURERERIC on October 01, 2018, 10:00:45 PM
Quote from: cpzilliacus on October 01, 2018, 08:18:27 PM
After the meet in Mentor, Ohio, over the weekend, we were on the (short) section of I-90 across Erie County, Pennsylvania (between Ashtabula County, Ohio and Chautauqua County, New York), and there were several bridges crossing the freeway that were missing (the bridge abutments remain, blocked-off).

I obviously did not witness the demise of these bridges, but it is my strong suspicion is that the missing bridges were probably lower than current Interstate standard height (rather common on Interstates in Pennsylvania (I have seen as low as 13'6", there were once several low bridges on I-83 between the Maryland border and Harrisburg that have been replaced), but unfortunately low bridges are not so common (on signed Interstates) in neighboring Ohio and New York State).

So it appears that bridge strikes by overheight vehicles severe enough to damage bridges beyond repair are slowly bringing I-90 across Erie County into compliance by knocking-down the superstructures of bridges that are too low.

IIRC, that section was started slightly pre-interstate as a Turnpike project and hence had originally been designed to kid 1950's PTC standards
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: seicer on October 01, 2018, 10:04:31 PM
I had no idea it was begun as that. But yeah, those bridges were pretty low and while I don't recall any major strikes that caused the bridges to be removed, the girders had some dents to them.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: BrianP on October 02, 2018, 10:49:39 AM
There's also one on I-78.  And that section I believe predates interstate design as well since I think that was originally just a US 22 freeway. 

https://www.google.com/maps/@40.4811611,-76.2670314,3a,75y,73.81h,80.61t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1snPWhBlhoQR3uVzJS95tfiQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

And conveniently there's a tractor trailer in view which helps show how low the bridge was.

Aerial photography shows that new bridge has been built there. 

Old streetview does not show any height signs for this bridge.  But it sure seems from the looks of it that it was struck westbound:
https://www.google.com/maps/@40.4812811,-76.266342,3a,75y,263.75h,83.15t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sBAq9soBFT4bWMsp3eDUYKg!2e0!7i3328!8i1664

This one is pretty low at 13'11" as well.
https://www.google.com/maps/@40.5117976,-76.1285065,3a,75y,58.1h,82.66t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sV0as16QPNi2Z7MSnuuOl-Q!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
It looks like there's less than a foot of clearance for the tractor trailer.

And again here:
https://www.google.com/maps/@40.5156016,-76.111159,3a,75y,38.83h,92.8t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sdNcW10oWirC4J50K8BMIcQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

Usually in cases like this don't they not overlay the concrete under the bridge to retain as much clearance as possible?  I'm surprised they didn't do that here.

At least the bridges along this stretch are being replaced. 
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: qguy on October 02, 2018, 06:46:39 PM
Quote from: BrianP on October 02, 2018, 10:49:39 AM
There's also one on I-78.  And that section I believe predates interstate design as well since I think that was originally just a US 22 freeway. 

https://www.google.com/maps/@40.4811611,-76.2670314,3a,75y,73.81h,80.61t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1snPWhBlhoQR3uVzJS95tfiQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

And conveniently there's a tractor trailer in view which helps show how low the bridge was.

Aerial photography shows that new bridge has been built there. 

Old streetview does not show any height signs for this bridge.  But it sure seems from the looks of it that it was struck westbound:
https://www.google.com/maps/@40.4812811,-76.266342,3a,75y,263.75h,83.15t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sBAq9soBFT4bWMsp3eDUYKg!2e0!7i3328!8i1664

That's Airport Road, in the Bethel area. I briefly (for six months–don't ask) lived in Rehrersburg seven years ago. That bridge was indeed struck by a truck, a long time ago. Not sure when, though. PennDOT removed the damaged concrete girders and left half the span open. At some point a few years ago PennDOT removed all of the center span.

The reason it sat for so long unrepaired was that PennDOT and the local municipality were at odds about who owned it. PennDOT claimed it was the responsibility of the local municipality; the municipality claimed it was PennDOT's.

As is often the case in fights like this in Pennsylvania, eventually PennDOT agreed to replace the bridge if the municipality would take possession of it and assume future responsibility for it.

There are bridges all over Pennsylvania for which ownership is unclear.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ixnay on October 02, 2018, 06:57:58 PM
Quote from: qguy on October 02, 2018, 06:46:39 PM
Quote from: BrianP on October 02, 2018, 10:49:39 AM
There's also one on I-78.  And that section I believe predates interstate design as well since I think that was originally just a US 22 freeway. 

https://www.google.com/maps/@40.4811611,-76.2670314,3a,75y,73.81h,80.61t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1snPWhBlhoQR3uVzJS95tfiQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

And conveniently there's a tractor trailer in view which helps show how low the bridge was.

Aerial photography shows that new bridge has been built there. 

Old streetview does not show any height signs for this bridge.  But it sure seems from the looks of it that it was struck westbound:
https://www.google.com/maps/@40.4812811,-76.266342,3a,75y,263.75h,83.15t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sBAq9soBFT4bWMsp3eDUYKg!2e0!7i3328!8i1664

That's Airport Road, in the Bethel area. ...

The reason it sat for so long unrepaired was that PennDOT and the local municipality were at odds about who owned it. PennDOT claimed it was the responsibility of the local municipality; the municipality claimed it was PennDOT's.

As is often the case in fights like this in Pennsylvania, eventually PennDOT agreed to replace the bridge if the municipality would take possession of it and assume future responsibility for it.

Has that bridge been fully replaced by now?

ixnay
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: qguy on October 02, 2018, 09:12:26 PM
Quote from: ixnay on October 02, 2018, 06:57:58 PM
Quote from: qguy on October 02, 2018, 06:46:39 PM
Quote from: BrianP on October 02, 2018, 10:49:39 AM
There's also one on I-78.  And that section I believe predates interstate design as well since I think that was originally just a US 22 freeway. 

https://www.google.com/maps/@40.4811611,-76.2670314,3a,75y,73.81h,80.61t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1snPWhBlhoQR3uVzJS95tfiQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

And conveniently there's a tractor trailer in view which helps show how low the bridge was.

Aerial photography shows that new bridge has been built there. 

Old streetview does not show any height signs for this bridge.  But it sure seems from the looks of it that it was struck westbound:
https://www.google.com/maps/@40.4812811,-76.266342,3a,75y,263.75h,83.15t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sBAq9soBFT4bWMsp3eDUYKg!2e0!7i3328!8i1664

That's Airport Road, in the Bethel area. ...

The reason it sat for so long unrepaired was that PennDOT and the local municipality were at odds about who owned it. PennDOT claimed it was the responsibility of the local municipality; the municipality claimed it was PennDOT's.

As is often the case in fights like this in Pennsylvania, eventually PennDOT agreed to replace the bridge if the municipality would take possession of it and assume future responsibility for it.
Has that bridge been fully replaced by now?

Yes, fully open. It was finished, I believe, a few months ago.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: cpzilliacus on October 15, 2018, 03:31:36 PM
Visited the PennDOT sign garden located near Meadville, Crawford County, Pennsylvania (located east a short distance east of I-79 Exit 147A on U.S. 6/U.S. 19/U.S. 322) a few weeks ago, and some members might be interested in what it looks like. 

Images are on Facebook here (https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.10214702434826639&type=1&l=977968d86b).

Location is here (https://www.google.com/maps/place/41%C2%B037'14.8%22N+80%C2%B010'05.4%22W/@41.620776,-80.1703611,17z/data=!3m1!4b1!4m14!1m7!3m6!1s0x0:0x0!2zNDHCsDM5JzAwLjAiTiA4MMKwMDknMDAuMCJX!3b1!8m2!3d41.65!4d-80.15!3m5!1s0x0:0x0!7e2!8m2!3d41.6207765!4d-80.1681673?hl=en) on Google Maps (this is the PennDOT Crawford County maintenance facility and office complex).
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: qguy on October 16, 2018, 06:32:26 AM
Quote from: cpzilliacus on October 15, 2018, 03:31:36 PM
Visited the PennDOT sign garden...

That really is a sign garden. When you said "garden," I thought it would be more like what might be called a sign "farm," a place where signs were temporarily stored outdoors, but no, that's a garden alright. What a hoot. Thanks for sharing.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: CentralPAGal on October 18, 2018, 05:47:39 PM
I-83 East Shore Section 2:
(https://i.imgur.com/Dwq5w8W.jpg)
Ramp alignments:
(https://i.imgur.com/orU13Yl.jpg)

Sorry for crappy quality phone pics.

The mainline of the section 2 proposal seems to be approximately inline with that of the 2003 concept. It is shifted to the west of the current alignment. Many of the ramps have been rearranged compared to the previous concept though, and the interchange with Derry St. is a SPUI now. Also, old Paxton St. to the east has been extended across the railroad to Derry St.

I-83 East Shore Section 3:
(https://i.imgur.com/vFVTe4O.jpg)

Section 3 does not include a reconstruction of the John Harris bridge, I was told due to cost, and that it might be in a future west shore project. Additionally, the 2nd St. ramp alignments are the same as current, aside from slight adjustments for added lanes to the east. the previous concept had this redone as a trumpet. Paxton St. is realigned at 13th street. Otherwise, it is similar to the 2003 concept, including the replacement of the 13th St. interchange with one connecting directly to Cameron St. Also, it appears as had previously been done with the northbound side during the west shore early action project in 2015, the southbound shoulder of the Harris bridge will be used as a traffic lane, therefore allowing eight lanes on the bridge.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on October 18, 2018, 10:25:55 PM
Beat me to it. I was there too toward the end, though I didn't get any pictures since all those diagrams will be posted on the website. Big improvements they have planned. Hopefully not much gets cut by the time they actually start construction.

Meanwhile, the 283-283 cloverleaf is further along, though the rest of the PA 283 reconstruction isn't that far advanced. The WB-NB ramp at the cloverleaf is now shifted onto the new smoother alignment, though the new signalized left turn isn't open yet.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: seicer on October 18, 2018, 10:42:06 PM
Has this deviated from what they posted on the website long ago? I didn't think anything would be renovated on the Harris Bridge, which received major updates in 2015.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: CentralPAGal on October 18, 2018, 11:35:45 PM
Quote from: seicer on October 18, 2018, 10:42:06 PM
Has this deviated from what they posted on the website long ago? I didn't think anything would be renovated on the Harris Bridge, which received major updates in 2015.
Section 2 is quite different. The ramps are more complex. Section 3 is pretty similar to the 2003 concept, some details aside.

There were no major updates to that bridge in 2015. The only thing that changed is that the northbound shoulder was remarked as a traffic lane. It currently carries 7 lanes: 4 northbound and 3 southbound.

Quote from: Roadsguy on October 18, 2018, 10:25:55 PM
Meanwhile, the 283-283 cloverleaf is further along, though the rest of the PA 283 reconstruction isn't that far advanced. The WB-NB ramp at the cloverleaf is now shifted onto the new smoother alignment, though the new signalized left turn isn't open yet.

I noticed that as well. Having previously gone through there before traffic shifted, I wasn't sure if the ramp was going to be 1 or 2 lanes, but it appears that its just going to be the one lane. I'm kind of curious if the southbound-to-eastbound loop is going to get signaled too, like the west-to-south loop in the 581/US 15 interchange.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on October 18, 2018, 11:56:26 PM
Quote from: CentralPAguy on October 18, 2018, 11:35:45 PM
Quote from: Roadsguy on October 18, 2018, 10:25:55 PM
Meanwhile, the 283-283 cloverleaf is further along, though the rest of the PA 283 reconstruction isn't that far advanced. The WB-NB ramp at the cloverleaf is now shifted onto the new smoother alignment, though the new signalized left turn isn't open yet.

I noticed that as well. Having previously gone through there before traffic shifted, I wasn't sure if the ramp was going to be 1 or 2 lanes, but it appears that its just going to be the one lane. I'm kind of curious if the southbound-to-eastbound loop is going to get signaled too, like the west-to-south loop in the 581/US 15 interchange.

If I remember correctly, that will not be the case.  I will say that I believe briantroutman will be wondering when the realigned I-83 concept at the Eisenhower Interchange is may be applied to the I-283 to PA 283 movement.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: briantroutman on October 19, 2018, 12:08:28 AM
Quote from: CentralPAguy on October 18, 2018, 11:35:45 PM
Quote from: seicer on October 18, 2018, 10:42:06 PM
Has this deviated from what they posted on the website long ago? I didn't think anything would be renovated on the Harris Bridge, which received major updates in 2015.
Section 2 is quite different. The ramps are more complex.

Sure, there are differences, but I'm surprised (happily) that it is fairly faithful to the arguably ambitious master plan of 15 years ago. The biggest deviation I see is that the 2003 plan kept the old ground-level Bypass 230 route as a sort of C-D for the Derry Street Interchange (similar to the way it is today) whereas the new plan has this odd SPUI at Derry Street which is rather complexly integrated into the overall interchange design. Here are images from the 2003 master plan:

(https://c2.staticflickr.com/2/1965/44696157304_76a9fdecd4_o.png)(https://c2.staticflickr.com/2/1922/30480151647_dffa4c0689_o.png)(https://c2.staticflickr.com/2/1903/30480151607_be202e4cb3_o.png)

But as CentralPAguy mentioned, the I-83 mainline is on basically the same new alignment that was proposed in the 2003 plan–and further, the overall concept of the new Eisenhower Interchange is fairly similar–just a little more complex. The new interchange at Paxton Street with its large loop looks to be nearly the same as in the 2003 plan.

Honestly, after seeing how the 2003 plan's completely redesigned York Split was shelved (at least for now) in favor of some very underwhelming improvements of the existing inadequate interchange, I'm shocked that PennDOT's new plan for Eisenhower is as comprehensive as it is.

Also of note: The 2003's plan to replace the 2nd Street Interchange with a trumpet appears to have been scuttled–I assume because the interchange's integration with the Harris Bridge.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on October 19, 2018, 01:07:55 AM
Quote from: briantroutman on October 19, 2018, 12:08:28 AM
Honestly, after seeing how the 2003 plan's completely redesigned York Split was shelved (at least for now) in favor of some very underwhelming improvements of the existing inadequate interchange, I'm shocked that PennDOT's new plan for Eisenhower is as comprehensive as it is.

Shelved for now indeed. The minor York Split improvements weren't intended to be permanent. It just needed improvement now but would've been the last part of the Master Plan completed. They do intend to revisit the original plans (confirmed in the video shown at the open house and recently posted on the website), though we'll see if that actually happens in our lifetimes...
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: qguy on October 19, 2018, 06:41:35 AM
The reason the Derry Street interchange is more complex is that the current plan provides access to it from every direction from I-83, I-283, and US 322.

If PennDOT can pull this entire thing off, it will be a game-changer for the area. One of the features is the stitching together of some of the local street connections which were severed fifty years ago and have been negatively affecting the area ever since.

I'm told the local EMT stakeholders, for example, are enthusiastic about it. And at the open house last night I heard many positive comments about the proposed plan from people who live in residences visible on the plans (IOW, in the immediate vicinity, who would be affected by the changes on multiple levels).
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: seicer on October 19, 2018, 07:36:09 AM
Thanks for the clarification on the Harris Bridge. It was listed as a major update. When was it substantially rebuilt? The superstructure seems to be in quite a good shape.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on October 19, 2018, 09:18:09 AM
Quote from: seicer on October 19, 2018, 07:36:09 AM
Thanks for the clarification on the Harris Bridge. It was listed as a major update. When was it substantially rebuilt? The superstructure seems to be in quite a good shape.

I don't know if it was totally rebuilt or simply widened, but the section from the York Split to 19th Street was reconstructed in the 1980s and widened to six lanes. The design seemed to indicate intent to extend the widening east, but obviously that never happened and now that whole section will eventually be totally rebuilt.

The bridge will be widened, though, when/if they get around to revisiting the long-term West Shore section improvements. I believe the intent is to widen it to 10 lanes, either carrying that all the way to 581 or having it drop to eight before 581.

EDIT: The overview video and plans from the open house have been posted on the project website: http://www.i-83beltway.com/public-meeting.php
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: CentralPAGal on October 19, 2018, 07:02:47 PM
Quote from: Roadsguy on October 19, 2018, 09:18:09 AM
The bridge will be widened, though, when/if they get around to revisiting the long-term West Shore section improvements. I believe the intent is to widen it to 10 lanes, either carrying that all the way to 581 or having it drop to eight before 581.

I believe the concept calls for 10 lanes all the way to 581, with 6 mainline lanes through the interchange.

With things moving forward with the east shore stuff and plans for north York, I wonder if they're gonna start a study on reconstructing and/or widening the highway between the west shore section and York. At least fix some of the ramps, clustered interchanges near the turnpike and the narrow median...
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on October 19, 2018, 08:40:02 PM
Quote from: CentralPAguy on October 19, 2018, 07:02:47 PM
Quote from: Roadsguy on October 19, 2018, 09:18:09 AM
The bridge will be widened, though, when/if they get around to revisiting the long-term West Shore section improvements. I believe the intent is to widen it to 10 lanes, either carrying that all the way to 581 or having it drop to eight before 581.

I believe the concept calls for 10 lanes all the way to 581, with 6 mainline lanes through the interchange.

With things moving forward with the east shore stuff and plans for north York, I wonder if they're gonna start a study on reconstructing and/or widening the highway between the west shore section and York. At least fix some of the ramps, clustered interchanges near the turnpike and the narrow median...

Maybe my grandkids will be able to drive fully-six-lane I-83 to York at the rate they're going, and considering how long it took them to get from the Master Plan study to this preliminary design.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: CentralPAGal on October 22, 2018, 07:35:46 PM
Not quite new news, but I don't believe I've seen it posted. The preferred alternative for the southern section of the CSVT is on the project's website. Looks like its been there for a bit, but I haven't checked in a while.
http://www.csvt.com/maps/pdfs/58758_Board13-EastAlt-04_May2018.pdf
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Beltway on October 22, 2018, 08:46:49 PM
Quote from: CentralPAguy on October 22, 2018, 07:35:46 PM
Not quite new news, but I don't believe I've seen it posted. The preferred alternative for the southern section of the CSVT is on the project's website. Looks like its been there for a bit, but I haven't checked in a while.
http://www.csvt.com/maps/pdfs/58758_Board13-EastAlt-04_May2018.pdf

Alignment revised to avoid the ash basins.  While there was the advantage of using space not utilized by people, it was deemed too difficult to build a highway thru there, needing to either remove/relocate the material or somehow bridge over it.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: qguy on October 23, 2018, 06:31:12 AM
Quote from: Beltway on October 22, 2018, 08:46:49 PM
Quote from: CentralPAguy on October 22, 2018, 07:35:46 PM
Not quite new news, but I don't believe I've seen it posted. The preferred alternative for the southern section of the CSVT is on the project's website. Looks like its been there for a bit, but I haven't checked in a while.
http://www.csvt.com/maps/pdfs/58758_Board13-EastAlt-04_May2018.pdf
Alignment revised to avoid the ash basins.  While there was the advantage of using space not utilized by people, it was deemed too difficult to build a highway thru there, needing to either remove/relocate the material or somehow bridge over it.

Upon further examination, the fly ash basins turned out to be far more unstable than they appeared from the initial geotechnical surveys. The design team thought the roadway could be built upon fill atop the basins, but the material in some of them is still slurry-like after all these years and will never be a stable base. Bridging over them is simply a nonstarter because of cost, so the only recourse is to avoid them.

Good call. Get the pain of redesign and delay over with now instead of dealing with an expressway that's continuously falling apart for generations.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Beltway on October 23, 2018, 08:47:07 AM
Quote from: qguy on October 23, 2018, 06:31:12 AM
Quote from: Beltway on October 22, 2018, 08:46:49 PM
Alignment revised to avoid the ash basins.  While there was the advantage of using space not utilized by people, it was deemed too difficult to build a highway thru there, needing to either remove/relocate the material or somehow bridge over it.
Upon further examination, the fly ash basins turned out to be far more unstable than they appeared from the initial geotechnical surveys. The design team thought the roadway could be built upon fill atop the basins, but the material in some of them is still slurry-like after all these years and will never be a stable base. Bridging over them is simply a nonstarter because of cost, so the only recourse is to avoid them.
Good call. Get the pain of redesign and delay over with now instead of dealing with an expressway that's continuously falling apart for generations.

At least 3 million cubic yards of material, so relocating it would be very expensive and there would be the problem of finding a disposal area that could receive it.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: noelbotevera on October 23, 2018, 10:09:59 PM
In other news, they're finally getting somewhere with filling in the Potters Mills gap in US 322. For those unfamiliar with the area, US 322 abruptly stops being a freeway and turns into a 2 lane road about 15 miles outside of State College, and traffic can be hell during football games. The only other alternate route in the area is PA 45, which is also a 2 lane road. So this is a welcome improvement.

Project link (https://www.crcog.net/index.asp?Type=B_PR&SEC=%7B53C65FB6-E30F-4276-B2C8-779C8170396D%7D&DE=%7B51DB1826-0F45-43EA-AD89-6EC736CD0744%7D) (I'm aware it's not PennDOT's website, but it's the most up to date info I can find)

Now I have no idea why they don't completely fill the gap (the project ends west of the US 322/PA 144 intersection) all the way to State College, but honestly, any freeway there is a huge improvement over the two lane road.

Also, I don't know why it took 3 years to build an overpass and an interchange (at Sand Mountain Road). I guess it's just how PennDOT works.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ixnay on October 24, 2018, 06:10:45 AM
Quote from: noelbotevera on October 23, 2018, 10:09:59 PM
In other news, they're finally getting somewhere with filling in the Potters Mills gap in US 322.
...

Project link (https://www.crcog.net/index.asp?Type=B_PR&SEC=%7B53C65FB6-E30F-4276-B2C8-779C8170396D%7D&DE=%7B51DB1826-0F45-43EA-AD89-6EC736CD0744%7D) (I'm aware it's not PennDOT's website, but it's the most up to date info I can find.

And within that link is this link...

https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-2/ConstructionsProjectsAndRoadwork/Pages/Potters_Mills_Gap_Transportation_Project.aspx

ixnay
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: MASTERNC on November 12, 2018, 11:06:02 AM
Looks like PennDOT is starting the speed camera process with an advertisement for consulting services.  No solicitation for a contractor yet.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: qguy on November 17, 2018, 03:54:16 PM
Quote from: qguy on July 11, 2018, 12:42:02 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/NmvHDDL.jpg)

Took this picture about a week ago, facing westbound on Tunnel Hill Road just beyond the northwest corner of Lebanon, Pennsylvania. The cut in the bottom half of the picture is an abandoned railroad ROW that is being converted into a trail (an extension of the Lebanon Valley Rail Trail).

The rail line was abandoned sometime after it suffered severe damage from Hurricane Agnes in 1972. (Many rail lines in the region suffered the same fate.) Sometime in the late 1980s PennDOT removed the bridge over the railroad ROW and replaced it with fill. (One less bridge on which to spend money inspecting and maintaining.) PennDOT is now excavating the fill and installing a large concrete box culvert (composed of precast segments, I believe) to allow for an extension of the trail along the old rail line north from its current terminus and trailhead in town.

What's interesting about all of this is that the excavation has revealed that when PennDOT converted the bridge to fill, it did not remove the bridge abutments but merely buried them. They've now been exposed by the excavation. You can see the western abutment in the middle of the image.

The project calls for fill over the box culvert. I don't know whether the old abutments will be removed or reburied. I'll observe and re-post later.

In July 2018 I posted the above and wondered if PennDOT would remove the old bridge abutments or simply rebury them. Well, the project was completed a few weeks ago and the abutments were reburied in place. Here's a pic from 3 Nov from a similar vantage point as the first pic above.

(https://i.imgur.com/JZu0KcU.jpg)

The view is facing west on Tunnel Hill Road. At bottom left can be seen the south portal of the precast concrete tunnel and part of the future Lebanon Valley Rail Trail. I used the panorama function on my phone camera, so the view angle is much wider than the previous image.

Here's a repost of the background information:

Quote from: qguy on July 11, 2018, 12:42:02 PM
Tunnel Hill Road is called that because the Union Canal Tunnel passes beneath it (a few hundred yards to the east of the above pic). Constructed from 1825—1827, it was part of a system of canals and a portage railroad that connected Philadelphia with Pittsburgh over the Allegheny Mountains. It's listed National Historic Landmark and National Historic Civil Engineering Landmark. It's now part of a park which includes a section of the canal. On Sundays during the summer one can take boat tours through it. Here's a pic:

(https://i.imgur.com/TUuHAMA.jpg)

Tunnel Hill Road is just over the crest of the hill atop the canal tunnel.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Bitmapped on November 20, 2018, 09:36:12 PM
The new US 219 freeway between Somerset and Meyersdale opens tomorrow, November 21, 2018. WJAC-TV has a segment with some drone footage and a ride-along with the PennDOT district executive: https://wjactv.com/news/local/drone-video-of-us-219-before-it-opens-to-traffic-wednesday-afternoon
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ipeters61 on November 28, 2018, 10:38:29 PM
Something I noticed when looking at US-220 in the Bedford area on Street View is that it appears to be graded (or at least cleared) for a dual highway.  Is there something I'm missing here? https://www.google.com/maps/@40.0076347,-78.5266674,3a,75y,186.74h,77.71t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s4bQSiYD0bLSUXuT9KiOyVQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

(https://cdn.pbrd.co/images/HPlQPw6.png)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on November 28, 2018, 11:03:59 PM
Quote from: ipeters61 on November 28, 2018, 10:38:29 PM
Something I noticed when looking at US-220 in the Bedford area on Street View is that it appears to be graded (or at least cleared) for a dual highway.  Is there something I'm missing here? https://www.google.com/maps/@40.0076347,-78.5266674,3a,75y,186.74h,77.71t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s4bQSiYD0bLSUXuT9KiOyVQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

(https://cdn.pbrd.co/images/HPlQPw6.png)

That's just one of the few remaining short sections of super-2 left in Pennsylvania. I don't know how far down they wanted to take the full freeway when it was first being built, but it was once anticipated as a southern extension of I-99 to I-68, though I don't think they're still planning that.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Beltway on November 28, 2018, 11:30:04 PM
Quote from: Roadsguy on November 28, 2018, 11:03:59 PM
That's just one of the few remaining short sections of super-2 left in Pennsylvania. I don't know how far down they wanted to take the full freeway when it was first being built, but it was once anticipated as a southern extension of I-99 to I-68, though I don't think they're still planning that.

Yes, that is the US-220 bypass of Bedford that was built around 1970, that section with 2 lanes on a 4-lane limited access right-of-way.

That is on Appalachian Development Highway System Corridor "O" and the corridor still exists but no further construction is planned at this time on the segment between that bypass and the Maryland border.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ipeters61 on November 29, 2018, 01:06:52 PM
Quote from: Beltway on November 28, 2018, 11:30:04 PM
Quote from: Roadsguy on November 28, 2018, 11:03:59 PM
That's just one of the few remaining short sections of super-2 left in Pennsylvania. I don't know how far down they wanted to take the full freeway when it was first being built, but it was once anticipated as a southern extension of I-99 to I-68, though I don't think they're still planning that.

Yes, that is the US-220 bypass of Bedford that was built around 1970, that section with 2 lanes on a 4-lane limited access right-of-way.

That is on Appalachian Development Highway System Corridor "O" and the corridor still exists but no further construction is planned at this time on the segment between that bypass and the Maryland border.
Makes sense.  Thanks for the info!
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Bitmapped on November 29, 2018, 09:52:25 PM
Quote from: Beltway on November 28, 2018, 11:30:04 PM
Quote from: Roadsguy on November 28, 2018, 11:03:59 PM
That's just one of the few remaining short sections of super-2 left in Pennsylvania. I don't know how far down they wanted to take the full freeway when it was first being built, but it was once anticipated as a southern extension of I-99 to I-68, though I don't think they're still planning that.

Yes, that is the US-220 bypass of Bedford that was built around 1970, that section with 2 lanes on a 4-lane limited access right-of-way.

That is on Appalachian Development Highway System Corridor "O" and the corridor still exists but no further construction is planned at this time on the segment between that bypass and the Maryland border.

The wide ROW and rough grading for a second set of lanes extends to Cumberland Road, just north of US 220's intersection with Business 220, the original route. There is also a 1960s-vintage 2-lane bypass of Centerville further south, but it only has a 2-lane ROW.

Traffic flows pretty well on the existing US 220, so there's no need for a major upgrade with Corridor O. I would suggest adding some strategic passing lanes along the route for when traffic backs up behind a slowpoke, but that's really all it needs.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Beltway on November 30, 2018, 01:11:28 AM
Quote from: Bitmapped on November 29, 2018, 09:52:25 PM
Quote from: Beltway on November 28, 2018, 11:30:04 PM
Yes, that is the US-220 bypass of Bedford that was built around 1970, that section with 2 lanes on a 4-lane limited access right-of-way.
That is on Appalachian Development Highway System Corridor "O" and the corridor still exists but no further construction is planned at this time on the segment between that bypass and the Maryland border.
The wide ROW and rough grading for a second set of lanes extends to Cumberland Road, just north of US 220's intersection with Business 220, the original route. There is also a 1960s-vintage 2-lane bypass of Centerville further south, but it only has a 2-lane ROW.

Maryland built a US-220 relocation about 20 years ago, between I-68 and the PA border.  It is mostly 2 lanes and is built on a 4-lane right-of-way.  This project was built as part of ADHS Corridor "O".

Quote from: Bitmapped on November 29, 2018, 09:52:25 PM
Traffic flows pretty well on the existing US 220, so there's no need for a major upgrade with Corridor O. I would suggest adding some strategic passing lanes along the route for when traffic backs up behind a slowpoke, but that's really all it needs.

We could say the same thing about US-219.  The new 4-lane freeway section that just opened in Somerset County PA bypasses the original US-219 where part only carried about 5,000 AADT. 

I agree that there is not a compelling reason currently to build that segment of Corridor "O" as a new 4-lane freeway, but that option could be pursued in the future if the two states saw a need and decided to.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: qguy on November 30, 2018, 06:36:13 AM
Quote from: Beltway on November 30, 2018, 01:11:28 AM
I agree that there is not a compelling reason currently to build that segment of Corridor "O" as a new 4-lane freeway, but that option could be pursued in the future if the two states saw a need and decided to.

Plus, such an option would have the added attraction of inducing all of us on this forum to argue and complain about I-99 all over again!  :-D
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ipeters61 on November 30, 2018, 09:21:05 AM
Quote from: qguy on November 30, 2018, 06:36:13 AM
Quote from: Beltway on November 30, 2018, 01:11:28 AM
I agree that there is not a compelling reason currently to build that segment of Corridor "O" as a new 4-lane freeway, but that option could be pursued in the future if the two states saw a need and decided to.

Plus, such an option would have the added attraction of inducing all of us on this forum to argue and complain about I-99 all over again!  :-D
But it's so catchy (https://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/28/us/28highway.html)! /s
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: briantroutman on November 30, 2018, 01:23:45 PM
Gov. Wolf was on a KDKA call-in program (https://kdkaradio.radio.com/media/audio-channel/pennsylvania-governor-tom-wolf-wants-lower-turnpike-prices) Tuesday, and his brief conversation with the host touched on the issue of transportation funding (at about 2:25 in the recording).

He acknowledges that Acts 44 and 89 (passed during the Rendell and Corbett administrations, incidentally) have put the PTC in an unsustainable cycle of mounting debt and rising toll rates, and he says that there is bipartisan support in Harrisburg for a modification or elimination of the payments from PTC to PennDOT. But unfortunately, this casual conversation doesn't get into the much more complicated topic of how PennDOT–specifically, mass transit subsidies provided under Act 89–would cope with the loss of nearly half a billion dollars per year in funding.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jemacedo9 on November 30, 2018, 03:20:16 PM
PA 295 being renumbered to PA 297...

https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=868 (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=868)

QuoteUpon the completion of a recent construction project on Interstate 95 in Bucks County, a portion of the existing limited access roadway was renamed Interstate 295. Due to the potential conflict involved in having two major Pennsylvania traffic routes designated as 295, it was decided that State Route 295 in York County would be renumbered State Route 297.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on November 30, 2018, 04:09:41 PM
Quote from: jemacedo9 on November 30, 2018, 03:20:16 PM
PA 295 being renumbered to PA 297...

https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=868 (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=868)

QuoteUpon the completion of a recent construction project on Interstate 95 in Bucks County, a portion of the existing limited access roadway was renamed Interstate 295. Due to the potential conflict involved in having two major Pennsylvania traffic routes designated as 295, it was decided that State Route 295 in York County would be renumbered State Route 297.

Good. Usually PennDOT will just change the internal designation and forget about it, even if the new internal designation makes more sense as a number (PA 99 is SR 0699, northern PA 97 is SR 0197, etc.)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Alps on November 30, 2018, 08:54:48 PM
Quote from: qguy on November 30, 2018, 06:36:13 AM
Quote from: Beltway on November 30, 2018, 01:11:28 AM
I agree that there is not a compelling reason currently to build that segment of Corridor "O" as a new 4-lane freeway, but that option could be pursued in the future if the two states saw a need and decided to.

Plus, such an option would have the added attraction of inducing all of us on this forum to argue and complain about I-99 all over again!  :-D
US 219 is I-67.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Bitmapped on November 30, 2018, 10:06:15 PM
Quote from: Beltway on November 30, 2018, 01:11:28 AM
Quote from: Bitmapped on November 29, 2018, 09:52:25 PM
Traffic flows pretty well on the existing US 220, so there's no need for a major upgrade with Corridor O. I would suggest adding some strategic passing lanes along the route for when traffic backs up behind a slowpoke, but that's really all it needs.

We could say the same thing about US-219.  The new 4-lane freeway section that just opened in Somerset County PA bypasses the original US-219 where part only carried about 5,000 AADT. 

US 220 and old US 219 are hardly equivalent. Old US 219 has a number of low speed curves and steeper grades, plus a 25mph speed limit through Berlin. US 220, on the other hand, runs down a wide rural valley. Other than right at the state line, I believe there's one curve signed for reduced speed (45mph). The route has a consistent 55 speed limit and traffic generally flows above that.

Is the new US 219 freeway overkill? Yes. Was the old route adequate? No.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Beltway on November 30, 2018, 11:24:16 PM
Quote from: Bitmapped on November 30, 2018, 10:06:15 PM
Quote from: Beltway on November 30, 2018, 01:11:28 AM
Quote from: Bitmapped on November 29, 2018, 09:52:25 PM
Traffic flows pretty well on the existing US 220, so there's no need for a major upgrade with Corridor O. I would suggest adding some strategic passing lanes along the route for when traffic backs up behind a slowpoke, but that's really all it needs.
We could say the same thing about US-219.  The new 4-lane freeway section that just opened in Somerset County PA bypasses the original US-219 where part only carried about 5,000 AADT. 
US 220 and old US 219 are hardly equivalent. Old US 219 has a number of low speed curves and steeper grades, plus a 25mph speed limit through Berlin. US 220, on the other hand, runs down a wide rural valley. Other than right at the state line, I believe there's one curve signed for reduced speed (45mph). The route has a consistent 55 speed limit and traffic generally flows above that.
Is the new US 219 freeway overkill? Yes. Was the old route adequate? No.

PennDOT dropped $300 million there.  Lot of money for such low AADTs.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadgeek Adam on December 01, 2018, 12:23:45 AM
The problem is that the part of 219 that could absolutely use an upgrade is the stretch from DuBois to Salamanca, the problem is that there's a lot of Section 4F problems and numerous upon numerous fights that would occur of building any type of freeway in that stretch.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Beltway on December 01, 2018, 12:30:13 AM
Quote from: Roadgeek Adam on December 01, 2018, 12:23:45 AM
The problem is that the part of 219 that could absolutely use an upgrade is the stretch from DuBois to Salamanca, the problem is that there's a lot of Section 4F problems and numerous upon numerous fights that would occur of building any type of freeway in that stretch.

When is the NY US-219 section south of I-86 going to be rehabbed?  The old concrete pavement has been bump-de-bump going at least back to 2008 when I started using that section.

PennDOT did a great job rehabbing the pavement and bridges on the US-219 Bradford Expressway back around 2010-12.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadgeek Adam on December 01, 2018, 12:48:14 AM
They did, but that section continues to fall apart north of the border. Not to mention the speed limits are stupid through Limestone.

That said, with Lantz Corners, DuBois and Mt. Jewett growing as a corridor of business and tourism, 219 through the Ridgeway/Johnsonburg/Brockwayville area down to DuBois is horribly inadequate. The problem is that there's no way you can build a freeway through much of that area.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Beltway on December 01, 2018, 12:54:35 AM
Quote from: Roadgeek Adam on December 01, 2018, 12:48:14 AM
They did, but that section continues to fall apart north of the border. Not to mention the speed limits are stupid through Limestone.

When was that?  It looks like the old jointed reinforced concrete pavement (JRCP) from the 1960s.

Quote from: Roadgeek Adam on December 01, 2018, 12:48:14 AM
That said, with Lantz Corners, DuBois and Mt. Jewett growing as a corridor of business and tourism, 219 through the Ridgeway/Johnsonburg/Brockwayville area down to DuBois is horribly inadequate. The problem is that there's no way you can build a freeway through much of that area.

They could, but it would be very expensive.  I would like to see them explore bypasses of the towns and dualization of rural sections.  Much less expensive than a freeway, and a 4-lane rural highway (on the likes of US-22 west of Ebensburg) should be more than adequate for the traffic volumes well into the future.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadgeek Adam on December 01, 2018, 12:56:45 AM
I am talking about the PA section they redid, but the section north of the border is even shabbier now.

Regardless, I don't think there are areas you could even bypass some of these. (Johnsonburg already is bypassed.) It would cost tons in homes and property alone.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: seicer on December 01, 2018, 11:20:24 AM
Quote from: Beltway on December 01, 2018, 12:54:35 AM
Quote from: Roadgeek Adam on December 01, 2018, 12:48:14 AM
They did, but that section continues to fall apart north of the border. Not to mention the speed limits are stupid through Limestone.

When was that?  It looks like the old jointed reinforced concrete pavement (JRCP) from the 1960s.

1962/1984. It was a two-lane on a four-lane ROW until it was widened in 1984 in conjunction with NY 17 being completed through the area. The concrete suffers the same problem as NY 17 did until it was rehabilitated just a few years ago with JRCP with spacing that's too far apart, so each slab cracked mid-slab.

More annoying is the 40 MPH SL through a "town."
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Beltway on December 01, 2018, 12:51:21 PM
Quote from: seicer on December 01, 2018, 11:20:24 AM
Quote from: Beltway on December 01, 2018, 12:54:35 AM
Quote from: Roadgeek Adam on December 01, 2018, 12:48:14 AM
They did, but that section continues to fall apart north of the border. Not to mention the speed limits are stupid through Limestone.
When was that?  It looks like the old jointed reinforced concrete pavement (JRCP) from the 1960s.
1962/1984. It was a two-lane on a four-lane ROW until it was widened in 1984 in conjunction with NY 17 being completed through the area. The concrete suffers the same problem as NY 17 did until it was rehabilitated just a few years ago with JRCP with spacing that's too far apart, so each slab cracked mid-slab.
More annoying is the 40 MPH SL through a "town."

Interesting.  It all looked like 1960s vintage pavement to me.  Nevertheless 1984 is 34 years ago, definitely long in the tooth for any concrete pavement.

I agree about the 40 mph speed limit.  About 2 miles on an at-grade expressway, just because it is near a village.  But that is a whole different issue from the pavement issue.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Alps on December 02, 2018, 01:53:35 AM
Quote from: Beltway on December 01, 2018, 12:51:21 PM
Quote from: seicer on December 01, 2018, 11:20:24 AM
Quote from: Beltway on December 01, 2018, 12:54:35 AM
Quote from: Roadgeek Adam on December 01, 2018, 12:48:14 AM
They did, but that section continues to fall apart north of the border. Not to mention the speed limits are stupid through Limestone.
When was that?  It looks like the old jointed reinforced concrete pavement (JRCP) from the 1960s.
1962/1984. It was a two-lane on a four-lane ROW until it was widened in 1984 in conjunction with NY 17 being completed through the area. The concrete suffers the same problem as NY 17 did until it was rehabilitated just a few years ago with JRCP with spacing that's too far apart, so each slab cracked mid-slab.
More annoying is the 40 MPH SL through a "town."

Interesting.  It all looked like 1960s vintage pavement to me.  Nevertheless 1984 is 34 years ago, definitely long in the tooth for any concrete pavement.

I agree about the 40 mph speed limit.  About 2 miles on an at-grade expressway, just because it is near a village.  But that is a whole different issue from the pavement issue.
Depends on the concrete. US 1 and 13 in PA had original 1930s concrete for 75-80 years. Many highways in the metro NY area still have original concrete in spots (US 46 under bridges in Fairfield for example). If done well, 34 years isn't long. I would reasonably expect 50 in most cases.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Beltway on December 02, 2018, 08:32:36 AM
Quote from: Alps on December 02, 2018, 01:53:35 AM
Quote from: Beltway on December 01, 2018, 12:51:21 PM
It all looked like 1960s vintage pavement to me.  Nevertheless 1984 is 34 years ago, definitely long in the tooth for any concrete pavement.
I agree about the 40 mph speed limit.  About 2 miles on an at-grade expressway, just because it is near a village.  But that is a whole different issue from the pavement issue.
Depends on the concrete. US 1 and 13 in PA had original 1930s concrete for 75-80 years. Many highways in the metro NY area still have original concrete in spots (US 46 under bridges in Fairfield for example). If done well, 34 years isn't long. I would reasonably expect 50 in most cases.

The VA I-85 concrete pavement between MP 40 and 67 performed very well and lasted about 40 years before being rehabbed and resurfaced with asphalt.  Better than average performance.  Most don't make it that long without getting the bump-de-bumps and it is especially bad in certain vehicles like dump trucks.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jeffandnicole on December 02, 2018, 09:21:28 AM
Quote from: Beltway on December 02, 2018, 08:32:36 AM
Quote from: Alps on December 02, 2018, 01:53:35 AM
Quote from: Beltway on December 01, 2018, 12:51:21 PM
It all looked like 1960s vintage pavement to me.  Nevertheless 1984 is 34 years ago, definitely long in the tooth for any concrete pavement.
I agree about the 40 mph speed limit.  About 2 miles on an at-grade expressway, just because it is near a village.  But that is a whole different issue from the pavement issue.
Depends on the concrete. US 1 and 13 in PA had original 1930s concrete for 75-80 years. Many highways in the metro NY area still have original concrete in spots (US 46 under bridges in Fairfield for example). If done well, 34 years isn't long. I would reasonably expect 50 in most cases.

The VA I-85 concrete pavement between MP 40 and 67 performed very well and lasted about 40 years before being rehabbed and resurfaced with asphalt.  Better than average performance.  Most don't make it that long without getting the bump-de-bumps and it is especially bad in certain vehicles like dump trucks.

The concrete isn't bad. It's the joints that have gone bad, which is a relatively easy process to fix - meaning, a total road replacement isn't necessary.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Beltway on December 02, 2018, 03:56:54 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 02, 2018, 09:21:28 AM
[NY US-219 between PA and I-86]

The concrete isn't bad. It's the joints that have gone bad, which is a relatively easy process to fix - meaning, a total road replacement isn't necessary.

I didn't suggest that a total road replacement was necessary.  The damaged/deteriorated pavement sites comprises perhaps 15% of the total square yardage, and that does need to be demolished and replaced.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Alps on December 02, 2018, 04:33:59 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 02, 2018, 09:21:28 AM
Quote from: Beltway on December 02, 2018, 08:32:36 AM
Quote from: Alps on December 02, 2018, 01:53:35 AM
Quote from: Beltway on December 01, 2018, 12:51:21 PM
It all looked like 1960s vintage pavement to me.  Nevertheless 1984 is 34 years ago, definitely long in the tooth for any concrete pavement.
I agree about the 40 mph speed limit.  About 2 miles on an at-grade expressway, just because it is near a village.  But that is a whole different issue from the pavement issue.
Depends on the concrete. US 1 and 13 in PA had original 1930s concrete for 75-80 years. Many highways in the metro NY area still have original concrete in spots (US 46 under bridges in Fairfield for example). If done well, 34 years isn't long. I would reasonably expect 50 in most cases.

The VA I-85 concrete pavement between MP 40 and 67 performed very well and lasted about 40 years before being rehabbed and resurfaced with asphalt.  Better than average performance.  Most don't make it that long without getting the bump-de-bumps and it is especially bad in certain vehicles like dump trucks.

The concrete isn't bad. It's the joints that have gone bad, which is a relatively easy process to fix - meaning, a total road replacement isn't necessary.
Yup, the key to concrete lasting 75+ years is to work those joints over partway through. PA is aggressive with this and frequently closes long stretches of a single lane of freeway to repair all of the concrete joints.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: seicer on December 02, 2018, 09:37:19 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 02, 2018, 09:21:28 AM
Quote from: Beltway on December 02, 2018, 08:32:36 AM
Quote from: Alps on December 02, 2018, 01:53:35 AM
Quote from: Beltway on December 01, 2018, 12:51:21 PM
It all looked like 1960s vintage pavement to me.  Nevertheless 1984 is 34 years ago, definitely long in the tooth for any concrete pavement.
I agree about the 40 mph speed limit.  About 2 miles on an at-grade expressway, just because it is near a village.  But that is a whole different issue from the pavement issue.
Depends on the concrete. US 1 and 13 in PA had original 1930s concrete for 75-80 years. Many highways in the metro NY area still have original concrete in spots (US 46 under bridges in Fairfield for example). If done well, 34 years isn't long. I would reasonably expect 50 in most cases.

The VA I-85 concrete pavement between MP 40 and 67 performed very well and lasted about 40 years before being rehabbed and resurfaced with asphalt.  Better than average performance.  Most don't make it that long without getting the bump-de-bumps and it is especially bad in certain vehicles like dump trucks.

The concrete isn't bad. It's the joints that have gone bad, which is a relatively easy process to fix - meaning, a total road replacement isn't necessary.

With US 219 and I-86/NY 17, it was the mid-span cracks that were the issue, not the joints. It had something like 30' spacings on joints rather than 15' spacings that are more typical for today, but both roads don't have heavy truck traffic. (And other roads with far spacings, like I-64 in eastern West Virginia, are in great shape after 30 years.) I guess you could go through and diamond grind it to be smooth again, but it doesn't solve the underlying issue. I'm not an engineer so I will defer on solutions to someone like Steve.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Beltway on December 02, 2018, 09:52:08 PM
Quote from: seicer on December 02, 2018, 09:37:19 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 02, 2018, 09:21:28 AM
The concrete isn't bad. It's the joints that have gone bad, which is a relatively easy process to fix - meaning, a total road replacement isn't necessary.
With US 219 and I-86/NY 17, it was the mid-span cracks that were the issue, not the joints. It had something like 30' spacings on joints rather than 15' spacings that are more typical for today, but both roads don't have heavy truck traffic. (And other roads with far spacings, like I-64 in eastern West Virginia, are in great shape after 30 years.) I guess you could go through and diamond grind it to be smooth again, but it doesn't solve the underlying issue. I'm not an engineer so I will defer on solutions to someone like Steve.

Agreed, pavement engineers can determine what needs to be done.  It does need serious rehabbing to replace the damaged slabs.  Whether it needs overlay with asphalt is something that the engineers can determine.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jeffandnicole on December 02, 2018, 11:56:22 PM
Quote from: Beltway on December 02, 2018, 09:52:08 PM
Quote from: seicer on December 02, 2018, 09:37:19 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 02, 2018, 09:21:28 AM
The concrete isn't bad. It's the joints that have gone bad, which is a relatively easy process to fix - meaning, a total road replacement isn't necessary.
With US 219 and I-86/NY 17, it was the mid-span cracks that were the issue, not the joints. It had something like 30' spacings on joints rather than 15' spacings that are more typical for today, but both roads don't have heavy truck traffic. (And other roads with far spacings, like I-64 in eastern West Virginia, are in great shape after 30 years.) I guess you could go through and diamond grind it to be smooth again, but it doesn't solve the underlying issue. I'm not an engineer so I will defer on solutions to someone like Steve.

Agreed, pavement engineers can determine what needs to be done.  It does need serious rehabbing to replace the damaged slabs.  Whether it needs overlay with asphalt is something that the engineers can determine.

An asphalt overlay without fixing the underlying problem is a disaster. The asphalt will be cracked and heaved along with the concrete in short order.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Beltway on December 03, 2018, 12:28:10 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 02, 2018, 11:56:22 PM
Quote from: Beltway on December 02, 2018, 09:52:08 PM
Agreed, pavement engineers can determine what needs to be done.  It does need serious rehabbing to replace the damaged slabs.  Whether it needs overlay with asphalt is something that the engineers can determine.
An asphalt overlay without fixing the underlying problem is a disaster. The asphalt will be cracked and heaved along with the concrete in short order.

I have -never- suggested doing that.  Look at my sequence above -- first fully rehab the concrete, then overlay with asphalt if needed.  The need for an asphalt overlay would be predicated on whether the rehabbed concrete has issues with roughness and/or troughing.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jeffandnicole on December 03, 2018, 06:00:08 AM
Quote from: Beltway on December 03, 2018, 12:28:10 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 02, 2018, 11:56:22 PM
Quote from: Beltway on December 02, 2018, 09:52:08 PM
Agreed, pavement engineers can determine what needs to be done.  It does need serious rehabbing to replace the damaged slabs.  Whether it needs overlay with asphalt is something that the engineers can determine.
An asphalt overlay without fixing the underlying problem is a disaster. The asphalt will be cracked and heaved along with the concrete in short order.

I have -never- suggested doing that.  Look at my sequence above -- first fully rehab the concrete, then overlay with asphalt if needed.  The need for an asphalt overlay would be predicated on whether the rehabbed concrete has issues with roughness and/or troughing.

Another reason why I've seen asphalt overlays - change in lane configuration.  Since shoulders generally have a steeper slope, if they need to squeeze in another lane without regrading the entire original base, they can do an asphalt overlay which will allow them to achieve a slightly less slope on the outer lanes.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: CentralPAGal on December 07, 2018, 07:32:23 PM
Penndot is looking to upgrade part of I-83 between Exit 24/PA 295 (soon to be PA 297) and Exit 28/PA 392. They want to add an Exit 26 at PA 921, and make the roadway six lanes (not sure if the added lanes would be exit-to-exit or mainline.)

https://www.wgal.com/article/new-interchange-more-lanes-recommended-for-stretch-of-i-83/25441915 (https://www.wgal.com/article/new-interchange-more-lanes-recommended-for-stretch-of-i-83/25441915)

I wonder if the overall idea is to tie this into the North York Widening that's coming up in a few years...

Edit: dumbass me had a brainfart and mixed up exits 24 and 28
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on December 07, 2018, 10:11:05 PM
Quote from: CentralPAguy on December 07, 2018, 07:32:23 PM
North York Widening

Wait what? How'd I miss that?

The concepts show the six lanes continuing a bit north of PA 181, so it seems it will make it almost to Exit 24 (though the southern end doesn't have an end transition either...). It would be extremely stupid not to widen it through Exit 24.

The article said six lanes from 24 to 28, so it will at least be mainline through the new Exit 26.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on December 07, 2018, 10:56:53 PM
Quote from: CentralPAguy on December 07, 2018, 07:32:23 PM
Penndot is looking to upgrade part of I-83 between Exit 24/PA 238 and Exit 28/PA 295 (soon to be PA 297). They want to add an Exit 26 at PA 921, and make the roadway six lanes (not sure if the added lanes would be exit-to-exit or mainline.)

https://www.wgal.com/article/new-interchange-more-lanes-recommended-for-stretch-of-i-83/25441915 (https://www.wgal.com/article/new-interchange-more-lanes-recommended-for-stretch-of-i-83/25441915)

I wonder if the overall idea is to tie this into the North York Widening that's coming up in a few years...

FTFY.  At least you got the location of PA 921 right. 
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: CentralPAGal on December 08, 2018, 05:37:24 AM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on December 07, 2018, 10:56:53 PM
Quote from: CentralPAguy on December 07, 2018, 07:32:23 PM
Penndot is looking to upgrade part of I-83 between Exit 24/PA 238 and Exit 28/PA 295 (soon to be PA 297). They want to add an Exit 26 at PA 921, and make the roadway six lanes (not sure if the added lanes would be exit-to-exit or mainline.)

https://www.wgal.com/article/new-interchange-more-lanes-recommended-for-stretch-of-i-83/25441915 (https://www.wgal.com/article/new-interchange-more-lanes-recommended-for-stretch-of-i-83/25441915)

I wonder if the overall idea is to tie this into the North York Widening that's coming up in a few years...

FTFY.  At least you got the location of PA 921 right.

Yeah, my bad. I know those exits well, having driven that stretch of 83 enough. Just has a brainfart.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: sbeaver44 on December 08, 2018, 11:52:04 AM
Re:PA 295 -> PA 297

It's already signed, I drove it this morning.  The BGS from 83 still says 295, but PennDOT needs to issue a separate contract for that.(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20181208/6dd6739ca10c1f1abe31c0eb1ad0555f.jpg)(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20181208/176c52d7d4632f268fa8852cfded83ef.jpg)(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20181208/ef56ed6ee04b434564867f878d4d8b8d.jpg)(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20181208/88c982e6672aa3b1870b7d17241a7c13.jpg)(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20181208/8442554b3ef71c29b368af2fb183241e.jpg)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on December 08, 2018, 01:00:16 PM
Quote from: sbeaver44 on December 08, 2018, 11:52:04 AM
Re:PA 295 -> PA 297

It's already signed, I drove it this morning.  The BGS from 83 still says 295, but PennDOT needs to issue a separate contract for that.

Thanks, I had already made the change in Travel Mapping after the news release came out as it implied that this would be done quickly.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on December 08, 2018, 01:00:48 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on December 08, 2018, 01:00:16 PM
Quote from: sbeaver44 on December 08, 2018, 11:52:04 AM
Re:PA 295 -> PA 297

It's already signed, I drove it this morning.  The BGS from 83 still says 295, but PennDOT needs to issue a separate contract for that.

Thanks, I had already made the change in Travel Mapping after the news release came out as it implied that this would be done quickly.

Wikipedia and OSM are now updated as well.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ipeters61 on December 16, 2018, 04:42:36 PM
Does anybody know what these folded signs are for in the Bloomsburg/Central PA area? 

(https://cdn.pbrd.co/images/HS3gS07.png)

I saw them all the time as a kid, when visiting my grandparents in Bloomsburg, but never saw them open.

I found another folded sign on I-80 near Lock Haven, not sure if it's for the same purpose: https://www.google.com/maps/@41.0464587,-77.451338,3a,75y,97.71h,68.63t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s-Bat0GD0at4XivX8VhuQqg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: PAHighways on December 16, 2018, 04:58:21 PM
They are detour routes.  I-70 has the same assemblies around Belle Vernon.

SM-G965U

Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on December 16, 2018, 06:01:18 PM
Quote from: PAHighways on December 16, 2018, 04:58:21 PM
They are detour routes.  I-70 has the same assemblies around Belle Vernon.

Are there any pictures of the unfolded signs? I'm curious what they actually look like if they're that big and have a separate directional trailblazer. Unless they're just those same colored detour beginning signs that they decided to fold up there.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: briantroutman on December 16, 2018, 06:14:44 PM
^ Are they not the same as these? Note the hinge in the center of the sign.

Of course if the legend inside lpeters61's folded sign was similar, that wouldn't explain the separate WEST plate mounted above. Perhaps the legend is equivalent but either with no cardinal direction posted next to the route designation. Maybe I'm imagining it, but I thought I recall seeing one of these colored arrow detour signs unfolded revealing an Interstate shield rather than the all-text approach used here for US 30.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.thorndalefirecompany.com%2Ffiles%2Fnews%2F459%2Flarge%2520detour.JPG&hash=9ade8924e996852cf66906f10eb4e115ab6779cd)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on December 16, 2018, 06:19:37 PM
Quote from: briantroutman on December 16, 2018, 06:14:44 PM
^ Are they not the same as these? Note the hinge in the center of the sign.

Of course if the legend inside lpeters61's folded sign was similar, that wouldn't explain the separate WEST plate mounted above. Perhaps the legend is equivalent but either with no cardinal direction posted next to the route designation. Maybe I'm imagining it, but I thought I recall seeing one of these colored arrow detour signs unfolded revealing an Interstate shield rather than the all-text approach used here for US 30.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.thorndalefirecompany.com%2Ffiles%2Fnews%2F459%2Flarge%2520detour.JPG&hash=9ade8924e996852cf66906f10eb4e115ab6779cd)

This is what I meant by the colored detour beginning signs. There are numerous examples around me (like these (https://goo.gl/maps/PgSSjwcqyc32)). I've never seen one foldable, though I wouldn't exactly know if I did...

All the non-foldable examples that I've seen are text-only, though they don't always include the direction.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: thenetwork on December 16, 2018, 10:03:10 PM
Quote from: Roadsguy on December 16, 2018, 06:19:37 PM
Quote from: briantroutman on December 16, 2018, 06:14:44 PM
^ Are they not the same as these? Note the hinge in the center of the sign.

Of course if the legend inside lpeters61's folded sign was similar, that wouldn't explain the separate WEST plate mounted above. Perhaps the legend is equivalent but either with no cardinal direction posted next to the route designation. Maybe I'm imagining it, but I thought I recall seeing one of these colored arrow detour signs unfolded revealing an Interstate shield rather than the all-text approach used here for US 30.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.thorndalefirecompany.com%2Ffiles%2Fnews%2F459%2Flarge%2520detour.JPG&hash=9ade8924e996852cf66906f10eb4e115ab6779cd)

This is what I meant by the colored detour beginning signs. There are numerous examples around me (like these (https://goo.gl/maps/PgSSjwcqyc32)). I've never seen one foldable, though I wouldn't exactly know if I did...

All the non-foldable examples that I've seen are text-only, though they don't always include the direction.

Must be a variant between PennDOT districts.  Up along I-90 in Erie, and I-80 around I-79 all the colored detour signs are on smaller un-foldable signs.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Bitmapped on December 16, 2018, 10:18:37 PM
Quote from: thenetwork on December 16, 2018, 10:03:10 PM
Quote from: Roadsguy on December 16, 2018, 06:19:37 PM
Quote from: briantroutman on December 16, 2018, 06:14:44 PM
^ Are they not the same as these? Note the hinge in the center of the sign.

Of course if the legend inside lpeters61's folded sign was similar, that wouldn't explain the separate WEST plate mounted above. Perhaps the legend is equivalent but either with no cardinal direction posted next to the route designation. Maybe I'm imagining it, but I thought I recall seeing one of these colored arrow detour signs unfolded revealing an Interstate shield rather than the all-text approach used here for US 30.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.thorndalefirecompany.com%2Ffiles%2Fnews%2F459%2Flarge%2520detour.JPG&hash=9ade8924e996852cf66906f10eb4e115ab6779cd)

This is what I meant by the colored detour beginning signs. There are numerous examples around me (like these (https://goo.gl/maps/PgSSjwcqyc32)). I've never seen one foldable, though I wouldn't exactly know if I did...

All the non-foldable examples that I've seen are text-only, though they don't always include the direction.

Must be a variant between PennDOT districts.  Up along I-90 in Erie, and I-80 around I-79 all the colored detour signs are on smaller un-foldable signs.

The picture is of the initial sign for the detour route. The rest of the ones to follow the route are like 12"x24" with just color, detour, and arrow.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: briantroutman on December 16, 2018, 10:40:11 PM
Quote from: Bitmapped on December 16, 2018, 10:18:37 PM
Quote from: thenetwork on December 16, 2018, 10:03:10 PM
Must be a variant between PennDOT districts.  Up along I-90 in Erie, and I-80 around I-79 all the colored detour signs are on smaller un-foldable signs.

The picture is of the initial sign for the detour route. The rest of the ones to follow the route are like 12"x24" with just color, detour, and arrow.

Just to make sure there's not a misunderstanding: In addition to the folding kind of "begin detour"  sign I showed in the photo, there's also a non-folding variant of the same sign that Roadsguy showed in this example from Google Street View: https://goo.gl/maps/PgSSjwcqyc32

And then there's the small in-detour sign that's used along the route. Bitmapped, I assume you're talking about these signs (https://bloximages.chicago2.vip.townnews.com/southernchestercountyweeklies.com/content/tncms/assets/v3/editorial/4/8a/48ab0dce-2446-5ac7-a79a-490703793be3/5b730963d3829.image.jpg?resize=624%2C790), right?

thenetwork, is that small in-detour sign what you were referring to? Or were you referring to the non-folding type Roadsguy showed...or something else entirely?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on December 19, 2018, 11:33:42 AM
I see in Allentown (or Whitehall) the US 22 & PA 145 colverleaf was turned into a parclo making one ramp for PA 145 in both directions controlled by a signal on both sides. 

Before that I remember the sign for SB PA 145 (used an add on shield on top to save money) read both 7th Street and MacArthur Road together.  Does not MacArthur begin at US 22 and go only north?  Is not the arterial (PA 145 was extended into Allentown in 1988) south of US 22 7th Street?  So why was MacArthur signed on both ramps before the modification?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: briantroutman on December 19, 2018, 02:26:34 PM
I used to live just off MacArthur Road in Whitehall and have vivid memories of driving the now-removed EB-to-NB hairpin loop ramp on my way home. Those interchange modifications were done several years ago...a quick search suggests they were made in 2012.

Yes, the MacArthur Road designation does extend slightly south of the interchange. I believe the dividing line is the Allentown city line/Sumner Avenue–which is about half a mile south of the interchange.

So the previous signage was more technically accurate, but that accuracy was at the expense of some arguably unnecessary confusion. The name MacArthur Road is closely associated with the expanse of suburban commercial development along that road, the vast majority of which is north of the interchange. Likewise, the 7th Street name is closely associated with that street's urban commercial district as well as its role as the primary gateway into Allentown from the north.

By simplifying the signage to list solely MacArthur Road northbound and 7th Street southbound, the motorist's decision is made simpler and clearer: city-bound vs. suburb-bound.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on December 25, 2018, 10:29:58 PM
At some point recently, PennDOT released the 2017 traffic counts. They seem a bit... iffy in some places. For example, this seems a bit impossible:

(https://i.imgur.com/UiJaxjI.png)

They seem to be based on what's currently in the system, including the new distinct SR 0095 segments for the I-95/Turnpike flyovers. The traffic data on them is just a copy of the traffic on I-95 south of the interchange, and nothing on the Turnpike east of the interchange has been updated yet (traffic counts, SR 7276 designation, or traffic route 276), so it's still labeled I-276.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ixnay on December 26, 2018, 06:18:38 AM
Quote from: Roadsguy on December 25, 2018, 10:29:58 PM
At some point recently, PennDOT released the 2017 traffic counts. They seem a bit... iffy in some places. For example, this seems a bit impossible:

(https://i.imgur.com/UiJaxjI.png)

They seem to be based on what's currently in the system, including the new distinct SR 0095 segments for the I-95/Turnpike flyovers. The traffic data on them is just a copy of the traffic on I-95 south of the interchange, and nothing on the Turnpike east of the interchange has been updated yet (traffic counts, SR 7276 designation, or traffic route 276), so it's still labeled I-276.

You have a link?

ixnay
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: briantroutman on December 26, 2018, 07:18:26 AM
^ PennDOT's traffic volume maps are posted on this page: https://www.penndot.gov/ProjectAndPrograms/Planning/Maps/Pages/Traffic-Volume.aspx

New maps simply supersede the old ones as they're released.

As to the I-95/PA Turnpike interchange, I think we're just seeing old data auto populated onto a newer map. This is supposed to be 2017 data, and obviously the flyovers weren't open to traffic in any part of that year.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jeffandnicole on December 26, 2018, 08:16:20 AM
Quote from: ixnay on December 26, 2018, 06:18:38 AM
Quote from: Roadsguy on December 25, 2018, 10:29:58 PM
At some point recently, PennDOT released the 2017 traffic counts. They seem a bit... iffy in some places. For example, this seems a bit impossible:

(https://i.imgur.com/UiJaxjI.png)

They seem to be based on what's currently in the system, including the new distinct SR 0095 segments for the I-95/Turnpike flyovers. The traffic data on them is just a copy of the traffic on I-95 south of the interchange, and nothing on the Turnpike east of the interchange has been updated yet (traffic counts, SR 7276 designation, or traffic route 276), so it's still labeled I-276.

You have a link?

ixnay

Quote from: briantroutman on December 26, 2018, 07:18:26 AM
^ PennDOT’s traffic volume maps are posted on this page: https://www.penndot.gov/ProjectAndPrograms/Planning/Maps/Pages/Traffic-Volume.aspx

New maps simply supersede the old ones as they’re released.

As to the I-95/PA Turnpike interchange, I think we’re just seeing old data auto populated onto a newer map. This is supposed to be 2017 data, and obviously the flyovers weren’t open to traffic in any part of that year.

If I get what Roadsguy is referring to: PA 309 has a traffic count of 47,000 vehicles south of PA 2017.  Just north of that is a partial interchange from and to the south.  North of that, traffic counts jump to 71,000 vehicles, which is an impossible feat because it's impossible for traffic to get on or exit from that point before reaching the point south of the interchange.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on December 26, 2018, 09:58:36 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 26, 2018, 08:16:20 AM
Quote from: briantroutman on December 26, 2018, 07:18:26 AM
^ PennDOT's traffic volume maps are posted on this page: https://www.penndot.gov/ProjectAndPrograms/Planning/Maps/Pages/Traffic-Volume.aspx

New maps simply supersede the old ones as they're released.

As to the I-95/PA Turnpike interchange, I think we're just seeing old data auto populated onto a newer map. This is supposed to be 2017 data, and obviously the flyovers weren't open to traffic in any part of that year.

If I get what Roadsguy is referring to: PA 309 has a traffic count of 47,000 vehicles south of PA 2017.  Just north of that is a partial interchange from and to the south.  North of that, traffic counts jump to 71,000 vehicles, which is an impossible feat because it's impossible for traffic to get on or exit from that point before reaching the point south of the interchange.

Yup, that's what I meant about it being a bit iffy. I know the actual data predates the I-95/Turnpike connection, so obviously none of that is updated. I wonder if they'll sort out the segments of the Turnpike so they can measure that accurately between the new interchange and US 13 next year. (Does PennDOT measure traffic on the Turnpike or do they get that data from the PTC for their system?)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: CentralPAGal on December 27, 2018, 07:27:12 PM
Quote from: Roadsguy on December 07, 2018, 10:11:05 PM
Quote from: CentralPAguy on December 07, 2018, 07:32:23 PM
North York Widening

Wait what? How'd I miss that?

The concepts show the six lanes continuing a bit north of PA 181, so it seems it will make it almost to Exit 24 (though the southern end doesn't have an end transition either...). It would be extremely stupid not to widen it through Exit 24.

The article said six lanes from 24 to 28, so it will at least be mainline through the new Exit 26.

Just found this (http://www.ycpc.org/images/pdfs/tranportation/I-83%20Master%20Plan.pdf (http://www.ycpc.org/images/pdfs/tranportation/I-83%20Master%20Plan.pdf)) today. The Master Plan (not to be confused with the Harrisburg area Master Plan) for I-83 north of York. It appears that it will tie directly into the North York project, and that by 2047, in theory, there should be six lanes along I-83 from north of PA 297/exit 28 all the way down to Mt Rose/exit 18. It includes complete reconstruction of present interchanges at PA 238 and PA 297. Hope it happens.

Maybe then they can address exits 8 (PA 216) and 16 (PA 74), and from north of exit 32 (PA 382) up to exit 36 (PA 262).
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on December 28, 2018, 04:23:39 PM
The intersection of I-83 BL (George St) at Rathton Rd and Country Club Dr will be under construction starting January 14th. (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=884)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ixnay on January 11, 2019, 07:50:51 AM
How problematic are volumes on I-81 north of, say, the junction with I-78, especially on weekends?  Not just in PA but all the way up to at least Syracuse?

The thread about the tolling of 81 in VA mentioned high weekend volumes on that road from TN on up to Harrisburg.

ixnay
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ipeters61 on January 11, 2019, 09:20:07 AM
Quote from: ixnay on January 11, 2019, 07:50:51 AM
How problematic are volumes on I-81 north of, say, the junction with I-78, especially on weekends?  Not just in PA but all the way up to at least Syracuse?

The thread about the tolling of 81 in VA mentioned high weekend volumes on that road from TN on up to Harrisburg.

ixnay
I've heard that in the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre area it can get pretty clogged.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ARMOURERERIC on January 11, 2019, 09:47:18 AM
There was supposedly a study to build high speed interchanges at both 81/476 junctions to encourage more through traffic off of 81 north of Moosic.  I never heard of any results.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: PAHighways on January 11, 2019, 10:00:24 AM
Quote from: ARMOURERERIC on January 11, 2019, 09:47:18 AM
There was supposedly a study to build high speed interchanges at both 81/476 junctions to encourage more through traffic off of 81 north of Moosic.  I never heard of any results.
It is still in the works:  https://www.patpconstruction.com/scrantonbeltway/

SM-G965U

Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: seicer on January 11, 2019, 10:18:24 AM
How would the Clarks Summit interchange have been configured if the PA Turnpike Extension followed I-81 as originally intended? There are remnants of the mainline that's visible but nothing for the ramps.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on January 11, 2019, 10:56:45 AM
Quote from: ixnay on January 11, 2019, 07:50:51 AM
How problematic are volumes on I-81 north of, say, the junction with I-78, especially on weekends?  Not just in PA but all the way up to at least Syracuse?

The thread about the tolling of 81 in VA mentioned high weekend volumes on that road from TN on up to Harrisburg.

ixnay

I don't think there are any issues between I-78 and at least I-80. I'm not sure whether any Scranton—Wilkes-Barre area widening should go as far down as I-80 or just to PA 29 or 309.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Alps on January 11, 2019, 11:44:32 AM
Quote from: seicer on January 11, 2019, 10:18:24 AM
How would the Clarks Summit interchange have been configured if the PA Turnpike Extension followed I-81 as originally intended? There are remnants of the mainline that's visible but nothing for the ramps.
Regular trumpet.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on January 11, 2019, 01:44:38 PM
Quote from: Alps on January 11, 2019, 11:44:32 AM
Quote from: seicer on January 11, 2019, 10:18:24 AM
How would the Clarks Summit interchange have been configured if the PA Turnpike Extension followed I-81 as originally intended? There are remnants of the mainline that's visible but nothing for the ramps.
Regular trumpet.

IIRC it would have been along the lines of this:

(https://i.imgur.com/GVxI4ZT.png)

Note that the existing sharp curve and its southwest approach would have been the northbound off-ramp. The stub visible today would have been the northbound carriageway. There's a southbound concrete stub too, but it's been mostly paved over as presumably an emergency pull-off. The trumpet loop and northbound on-ramp I'm just guessing on.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on January 11, 2019, 05:04:02 PM
 PennDOT Announces Plans for Route 414 Landslide Repair in Leroy Township, Bradford County (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2175)

PA 414 has been closed due to a landslide since early December.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Gnutella on January 11, 2019, 07:27:24 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on January 11, 2019, 05:04:02 PM
PennDOT Announces Plans for Route 414 Landslide Repair in Leroy Township, Bradford County (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2175)

PA 414 has been closed due to a landslide since early December.

On a related note, PA 120 between Emporium and Renovo was down to one lane when I was there in July, due to subsidence under the road.

If you've never been there, that part of the Commonwealth has severe terrain, and PA 120 is the only viable east/west route between I-80 and U.S. 6.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on January 12, 2019, 05:29:23 AM
New Exclusive Left-Turn Lane Now Open for Motorists on Chester Road at Oregon Pike (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=888)

The left-turn lane is for PA 272.  I'll have to check this out when I go to Shady Maple on my birthday.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ixnay on January 12, 2019, 08:43:52 AM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on January 12, 2019, 05:29:23 AM
New Exclusive Left-Turn Lane Now Open for Motorists on Chester Road at Oregon Pike (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=888)

The left-turn lane is for PA 272.  I'll have to check this out when I go to Shady Maple on my birthday.

That stretch of 272 was U.S. 222 waaaaaay back in the day (and still is 222 south of the 30 bypass [until the junction with PA 501, which is Lititz Pike, which goes up to Lititz, whose pronunciation reminds me of Lits, as in dearly departed Lit Brothers department stores in Philadelphia]).

ixnay
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on January 12, 2019, 11:26:10 AM
Quote from: ixnay on January 12, 2019, 08:43:52 AM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on January 12, 2019, 05:29:23 AM
New Exclusive Left-Turn Lane Now Open for Motorists on Chester Road at Oregon Pike (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=888)

The left-turn lane is for PA 272.  I'll have to check this out when I go to Shady Maple on my birthday.

That stretch of 272 was U.S. 222 waaaaaay back in the day (and still is 222 south of the 30 bypass [until the junction with PA 501, which is Lititz Pike, which goes up to Lititz, whose pronunciation reminds me of Lits, as in dearly departed Lit Brothers department stores in Philadelphia]).

ixnay

Oregon Pike is the "official" US 222, but functionally only carries northbound. Southbound 222 uses PA 501 because you can't exit westbound 30 and turn left onto southbound Oregon Pike. The signage is a bit inconsistent, though. That movement was missing even before the big reconstruction in the late '90s, though I don't know how well it was signed then.

About time they opened that turning lane. It's been sitting striped for weeks.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: briantroutman on January 14, 2019, 02:27:31 PM
Quote from: seicer on January 11, 2019, 10:18:24 AM
How would the Clarks Summit interchange have been configured if the PA Turnpike Extension followed I-81 as originally intended? There are remnants of the mainline that's visible but nothing for the ramps.

I think Roadsguy is essentially correct: If the Northeast Extension had been built as originally planned (prior to the 1956 Act), it would have continued northward to Binghamton along what later became the I-81 alignment, and the Clarks Summit Interchange would have been a trumpet just like countless other interchanges throughout the PTC's system.

The one adjustment I'd make to Roadsguy's sketch is that I'd expect a PTC trumpet from that era to be more geometrically perfect–i.e. with the underpass crossing the mainline at a 90° angle.

The 1960 aerial photo on PennPilot (http://data.cei.psu.edu/pennpilot/era1960/lackawanna_1960/lackawanna_1960_photos_jpg_800/lackawanna_060660_aqz_8w_18.zip) shows an interesting snapshot of the Clarks Summit Interchange area in the brief period when the Northeast Extension was complete up to Clarks Summit and I-81 construction was well underway from that point northward. This photo makes it even easier to connect the dots and see how the I-81 alignment fit into the PTC's original plan. On the graded stub of the Turnpike mainline, you can also see where fill was being piled up on both sides of what would have been the interchange's underpass.

Continuing down the "what if"  path a little further, I wonder what Clarks Summit would have looked like had the PTC completed the Northeast Extension before the 90/10 funding scheme had been passed. Assuming that I-81 had still been built on its current alignment through the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre area and southward, I think it's reasonable to expect that another Breezewood-type situation would have been created in Clarks Summit, with the Pennsylvania Department of Highways using 90% federal funds to build I-81 up to a terminus of sorts at US 6-11, where traffic would be forced to make a turn onto the surface road, then take the Turnpike ramp and get a ticket to follow the Northeast Extension northward from there–which would have carried the I-81 designation from Clarks Summit to the NY state line.

But I've always been a bit perplexed as to the PTC's thinking when aligning the Northeast Extension through the W-B/S area. Considering how the PTC and PDH seemed to work somewhat cooperatively to provide direct access from the Turnpike to the central freeway arteries serving the other metro areas adjacent to the Turnpike (Schuylkill Expressway, Penn-Lincoln Parkway, Lehigh Valley Thruway, Baltimore-Harrisburg Expressway), I'm somewhat surprised the two agencies apparently didn't plan better access for the Wyoming Valley.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on January 14, 2019, 03:18:16 PM
Quote from: briantroutman on January 14, 2019, 02:27:31 PM
The one adjustment I'd make to Roadsguy's sketch is that I'd expect a PTC trumpet from that era to be more geometrically perfect–i.e. with the underpass crossing the mainline at a 90° angle.

The 1960 aerial photo on PennPilot (http://data.cei.psu.edu/pennpilot/era1960/lackawanna_1960/lackawanna_1960_photos_jpg_800/lackawanna_060660_aqz_8w_18.zip) shows an interesting snapshot of the Clarks Summit Interchange area in the brief period when the Northeast Extension was complete up to Clarks Summit and I-81 construction was well underway from that point northward. This photo makes it even easier to connect the dots and see how the I-81 alignment fit into the PTC's original plan. On the graded stub of the Turnpike mainline, you can also see where fill was being piled up on both sides of what would have been the interchange's underpass.

I think I had it in my head for some reason that terrain would be too restrictive for that, but looking now, a 90° trumpet would definitely fit there.

I had no idea there were ever stubs for the other ramps at the sharp curve. That makes it even more obvious that a normal 90° trumpet would have been built and very clearly shows how the southwest approach is just the would-be NB on-ramp widened to the left. There doesn't seem to be any trace of the stubs. According to Historic Aerials, they were still visible in 1969, but seem to have been removed or buried by 1992.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: SGwithADD on January 14, 2019, 07:42:48 PM
Quote from: briantroutman on January 14, 2019, 02:27:31 PM
Quote from: seicer on January 11, 2019, 10:18:24 AM
How would the Clarks Summit interchange have been configured if the PA Turnpike Extension followed I-81 as originally intended? There are remnants of the mainline that's visible but nothing for the ramps.

I think Roadsguy is essentially correct: If the Northeast Extension had been built as originally planned (prior to the 1956 Act), it would have continued northward to Binghamton along what later became the I-81 alignment, and the Clarks Summit Interchange would have been a trumpet just like countless other interchanges throughout the PTC's system.

The one adjustment I'd make to Roadsguy's sketch is that I'd expect a PTC trumpet from that era to be more geometrically perfect–i.e. with the underpass crossing the mainline at a 90° angle.

The 1960 aerial photo on PennPilot (http://data.cei.psu.edu/pennpilot/era1960/lackawanna_1960/lackawanna_1960_photos_jpg_800/lackawanna_060660_aqz_8w_18.zip) shows an interesting snapshot of the Clarks Summit Interchange area in the brief period when the Northeast Extension was complete up to Clarks Summit and I-81 construction was well underway from that point northward. This photo makes it even easier to connect the dots and see how the I-81 alignment fit into the PTC's original plan. On the graded stub of the Turnpike mainline, you can also see where fill was being piled up on both sides of what would have been the interchange's underpass.

Continuing down the "what if"  path a little further, I wonder what Clarks Summit would have looked like had the PTC completed the Northeast Extension before the 90/10 funding scheme had been passed. Assuming that I-81 had still been built on its current alignment through the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre area and southward, I think it's reasonable to expect that another Breezewood-type situation would have been created in Clarks Summit, with the Pennsylvania Department of Highways using 90% federal funds to build I-81 up to a terminus of sorts at US 6-11, where traffic would be forced to make a turn onto the surface road, then take the Turnpike ramp and get a ticket to follow the Northeast Extension northward from there–which would have carried the I-81 designation from Clarks Summit to the NY state line.

But I've always been a bit perplexed as to the PTC's thinking when aligning the Northeast Extension through the W-B/S area. Considering how the PTC and PDH seemed to work somewhat cooperatively to provide direct access from the Turnpike to the central freeway arteries serving the other metro areas adjacent to the Turnpike (Schuylkill Expressway, Penn-Lincoln Parkway, Lehigh Valley Thruway, Baltimore-Harrisburg Expressway), I'm somewhat surprised the two agencies apparently didn't plan better access for the Wyoming Valley.

Wow.  That picture is an amazing find.  I've always thought about what if the PTC had built the extension up to Binghamton.  Never seen the stub ramps before.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: RevZimmerman on January 15, 2019, 10:20:07 AM
Some discussion about potentially widening I-81 from the PA/MD state line to the I-81/I-78 split is included in the linked article: https://www.pennlive.com/news/2019/01/more-warehouses-traffic-prompt-plan-to-widen-i-81-to-6-lanes.html (https://www.pennlive.com/news/2019/01/more-warehouses-traffic-prompt-plan-to-widen-i-81-to-6-lanes.html)

Details about costs are included in the article. Reference is made to a study completed by PennDOT, but I haven't seenlinks to the study itself at this point.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on January 19, 2019, 12:08:29 AM
PennDOT has banned trucks on almost all Interstates and some other freeways in preparation for the upcoming winter storm:

https://www.penndot.gov/Pages/AlertDetails.aspx (https://www.penndot.gov/Pages/AlertDetails.aspx)

The affected non-Interstates on the map are US 22 from I-78 to the NJ state line and the entire length of PA 33. Notably, I-95 and I-295 seem to be excluded.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: goobnav on January 25, 2019, 09:14:39 AM
Is I-81 still a rutted mess from north of Lebanon to Hazelton?  Will be traveling that stretch later this year and haven't been on it in over 10 years.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on January 25, 2019, 10:26:06 AM
Quote from: goobnav on January 25, 2019, 09:14:39 AM
Is I-81 still a rutted mess from north of Lebanon to Hazelton?  Will be traveling that stretch later this year and haven't been on it in over 10 years.

They recently wrapped up a full-depth reconstruction between the Lebanon/Schuylkill county line and the PA 125/Ravine interchange. That was the worst stretch.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: goobnav on January 25, 2019, 11:02:29 AM
Quote from: Roadsguy on January 25, 2019, 10:26:06 AM
Quote from: goobnav on January 25, 2019, 09:14:39 AM
Is I-81 still a rutted mess from north of Lebanon to Hazelton?  Will be traveling that stretch later this year and haven't been on it in over 10 years.

They recently wrapped up a full-depth reconstruction between the Lebanon/Schuylkill county line and the PA 125/Ravine interchange. That was the worst stretch.

Thank you for the update.  The last time it was so bad, could not believe it was still open to traffic.  Who my kidding, there could be a 50 ft crater and they'd have it open.  At least that was how it was in the Wyoming Valley. :)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ipeters61 on January 25, 2019, 11:29:35 AM
Quote from: goobnav on January 25, 2019, 11:02:29 AM
Quote from: Roadsguy on January 25, 2019, 10:26:06 AM
Quote from: goobnav on January 25, 2019, 09:14:39 AM
Is I-81 still a rutted mess from north of Lebanon to Hazelton?  Will be traveling that stretch later this year and haven't been on it in over 10 years.

They recently wrapped up a full-depth reconstruction between the Lebanon/Schuylkill county line and the PA 125/Ravine interchange. That was the worst stretch.

Thank you for the update.  The last time it was so bad, could not believe it was still open to traffic.  Who my kidding, there could be a 50 ft crater and they'd have it open.  At least that was how it was in the Wyoming Valley. :)
Whenever I visit my grandparents in the Wyoming Valley, I'm always baffled by how bad the roads are up there.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: goobnav on January 25, 2019, 11:34:27 AM
Quote from: ipeters61 on January 25, 2019, 11:29:35 AM
Quote from: goobnav on January 25, 2019, 11:02:29 AM
Quote from: Roadsguy on January 25, 2019, 10:26:06 AM
Quote from: goobnav on January 25, 2019, 09:14:39 AM
Is I-81 still a rutted mess from north of Lebanon to Hazelton?  Will be traveling that stretch later this year and haven't been on it in over 10 years.

They recently wrapped up a full-depth reconstruction between the Lebanon/Schuylkill county line and the PA 125/Ravine interchange. That was the worst stretch.

Thank you for the update.  The last time it was so bad, could not believe it was still open to traffic.  Who my kidding, there could be a 50 ft crater and they'd have it open.  At least that was how it was in the Wyoming Valley. :)
Whenever I visit my grandparents in the Wyoming Valley, I'm always baffled by how bad the roads are up there.

I'm not, bad contracts with pavers, no real oversight for how much they put down or how well the road is built due to kickbacks.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ipeters61 on January 25, 2019, 01:05:52 PM
Quote from: goobnav on January 25, 2019, 11:34:27 AM
Quote from: ipeters61 on January 25, 2019, 11:29:35 AM
Quote from: goobnav on January 25, 2019, 11:02:29 AM
Thank you for the update.  The last time it was so bad, could not believe it was still open to traffic.  Who my kidding, there could be a 50 ft crater and they'd have it open.  At least that was how it was in the Wyoming Valley. :)
Whenever I visit my grandparents in the Wyoming Valley, I'm always baffled by how bad the roads are up there.

I'm not, bad contracts with pavers, no real oversight for how much they put down or how well the road is built due to kickbacks.
Yeah.  I guess I meant that the difference in pavement quality is striking.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Gnutella on January 28, 2019, 11:17:50 PM
Quote from: ipeters61 on January 25, 2019, 01:05:52 PM
Quote from: goobnav on January 25, 2019, 11:34:27 AM
Quote from: ipeters61 on January 25, 2019, 11:29:35 AM
Quote from: goobnav on January 25, 2019, 11:02:29 AM
Thank you for the update.  The last time it was so bad, could not believe it was still open to traffic.  Who my kidding, there could be a 50 ft crater and they'd have it open.  At least that was how it was in the Wyoming Valley. :)
Whenever I visit my grandparents in the Wyoming Valley, I'm always baffled by how bad the roads are up there.

I'm not, bad contracts with pavers, no real oversight for how much they put down or how well the road is built due to kickbacks.
Yeah.  I guess I meant that the difference in pavement quality is striking.

I think some PennDOT districts are just better than others. I've commented on the pattern accuracy of signs by district, but maybe the same can be said for construction quality? Districts 1, 4, 5 and 9 seem to be the worst for sign pattern accuracy, and Districts 2, 6, 8 and 11 seem to be the best. If Districts 4 and 5 have poor construction quality too, then those districts are just jokes all around. Construction quality seems to be good in Districts 2 and 11, at least in the last 30 years.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: goobnav on January 29, 2019, 07:50:13 AM
Quote from: Gnutella on January 28, 2019, 11:17:50 PM
Quote from: ipeters61 on January 25, 2019, 01:05:52 PM
Quote from: goobnav on January 25, 2019, 11:34:27 AM
Quote from: ipeters61 on January 25, 2019, 11:29:35 AM
Quote from: goobnav on January 25, 2019, 11:02:29 AM
Thank you for the update.  The last time it was so bad, could not believe it was still open to traffic.  Who my kidding, there could be a 50 ft crater and they'd have it open.  At least that was how it was in the Wyoming Valley. :)
Whenever I visit my grandparents in the Wyoming Valley, I'm always baffled by how bad the roads are up there.

I'm not, bad contracts with pavers, no real oversight for how much they put down or how well the road is built due to kickbacks.
Yeah.  I guess I meant that the difference in pavement quality is striking.

I think some PennDOT districts are just better than others. I've commented on the pattern accuracy of signs by district, but maybe the same can be said for construction quality? Districts 1, 4, 5 and 9 seem to be the worst for sign pattern accuracy, and Districts 2, 6, 8 and 11 seem to be the best. If Districts 4 and 5 have poor construction quality too, then those districts are just jokes all around. Construction quality seems to be good in Districts 2 and 11, at least in the last 30 years.

Grew up in districts 4 & 5 in NE PA, the contractors their were shall we say "in the know" with the local politicians and there was never a fair bidding process period.  After moving to NC, the difference is night and day!!!
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: MASTERNC on February 05, 2019, 10:36:59 AM
Work zone speed camera RFP is up, if anyone is interested

http://www.emarketplace.state.pa.us/Solicitations.aspx?SID=19-10480-8400
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: billpa on February 09, 2019, 05:38:05 PM
Noticed today penndot changed control cities on Interstate 83 at the 283 split east of Harrisburg. Hazelton and Lancaster remain on their respective signs but State College has replaced Lewistown and Airport has been replaced by Harrisburg Intl Airport. Both new control cities are in Clearview.

Pixel 2

Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: qguy on February 09, 2019, 09:45:24 PM
Quote from: billpa on February 09, 2019, 05:38:05 PM
Noticed today penndot changed control cities on Interstate 83 at the 283 split east of Harrisburg. Hazelton and Lancaster remain on their respective signs but State College has replaced Lewistown and Airport has been replaced by Harrisburg Intl Airport. Both new control cities are in Clearview.
Pixel 2

I just saw that today as I was driving through the interchange for the first time in a few months. Those Clearview patches on the Highway Gothic signs are revolting.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on February 09, 2019, 10:29:11 PM
The question is are the signs on I-81 changed to reflect this particularly at the systems interchange where US 322 and I-81 part at US 22?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on February 11, 2019, 06:12:44 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on February 09, 2019, 10:29:11 PM
The question is are the signs on I-81 changed to reflect this particularly at the systems interchange where US 322 and I-81 part at US 22?


https://www.google.com/maps/@40.3015545,-76.8719938,3a,75y,299.53h,85.41t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sEcpFwdKr0bbKUSKg1t9uSg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656


Note that the Harrisburg Int'l Airport has never been referenced here on the signs.  State College and Lewistown are both referenced in the above GSV link.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on February 11, 2019, 10:28:38 AM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on February 11, 2019, 06:12:44 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on February 09, 2019, 10:29:11 PM
The question is are the signs on I-81 changed to reflect this particularly at the systems interchange where US 322 and I-81 part at US 22?


https://www.google.com/maps/@40.3015545,-76.8719938,3a,75y,299.53h,85.41t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sEcpFwdKr0bbKUSKg1t9uSg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656


Note that the Harrisburg Int'l Airport has never been referenced here on the signs.  State College and Lewistown are both referenced in the above GSV link.

Though earlier signs for the 22/322 interchange only include Lewistown, as does I-83 NB approaching I-81.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: billpa on February 11, 2019, 12:42:44 PM
Quote from: Roadsguy on February 11, 2019, 10:28:38 AM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on February 11, 2019, 06:12:44 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on February 09, 2019, 10:29:11 PM
The question is are the signs on I-81 changed to reflect this particularly at the systems interchange where US 322 and I-81 part at US 22?


https://www.google.com/maps/@40.3015545,-76.8719938,3a,75y,299.53h,85.41t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sEcpFwdKr0bbKUSKg1t9uSg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656


Note that the Harrisburg Int'l Airport has never been referenced here on the signs.  State College and Lewistown are both referenced in the above GSV link.

Though earlier signs for the 22/322 interchange only include Lewistown, as does I-83 NB approaching I-81.
There are pieces of what will be a new large over-the-road sign structure, on 83 northbound just before the Elmerton Street bridge, currently on the side of the highway... Who knows what those signs will say.

Pixel 2

Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Gnutella on February 11, 2019, 03:45:03 PM
Quote from: billpa on February 09, 2019, 05:38:05 PM
Noticed today penndot changed control cities on Interstate 83 at the 283 split east of Harrisburg. Hazelton and Lancaster remain on their respective signs but State College has replaced Lewistown and Airport has been replaced by Harrisburg Intl Airport. Both new control cities are in Clearview.

Pixel 2



I hate when major airports are just called "Airport" on highway signs. That's how it is in Pittsburgh, though there is a "Pgh Int'l Airport" on I-80 at the I-376 interchange. Unfortunately, there's also a "Pgh Intrnt'l Airport" on I-79, which is ridiculous. Use "Pittsburgh Int'l Airport," please!
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on February 11, 2019, 04:15:18 PM
At least if the new signs that have gone up in the PA 283 reconstruction near Highspire and Middletown are any indication, PennDOT is beginning to use the MUTCD airport symbol in signs as if it were a route shield:

(https://i.imgur.com/d7FLsWC.jpg)

Hopefully including more than just "Airport" becomes more normal as well.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: briantroutman on February 11, 2019, 06:14:24 PM
Quote from: Gnutella on February 11, 2019, 03:45:03 PM
I hate when major airports are just called "Airport" on highway signs.

Why do you hate it so much? I don't necessarily have a strong opinion either way, but this topic has come up before, and other posters have been quick to point out that very few cities have more than one major commercial airport, and usually they're far enough apart that "which airport?"  confusion is unlikely.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Ben114 on February 11, 2019, 06:45:34 PM
Quote from: Roadsguy on February 11, 2019, 04:15:18 PM
At least if the new signs that have gone up in the PA 283 reconstruction near Highspire and Middletown are any indication, PennDOT is beginning to use the MUTCD airport symbol in signs as if it were a route shield:

(https://i.imgur.com/d7FLsWC.jpg)

Hopefully including more than just "Airport" becomes more normal as well.
Is it just me or are there two holes at the bottom corners of that right sign?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ipeters61 on February 11, 2019, 07:03:40 PM
Quote from: Ben114 on February 11, 2019, 06:45:34 PM
Quote from: Roadsguy on February 11, 2019, 04:15:18 PM
At least if the new signs that have gone up in the PA 283 reconstruction near Highspire and Middletown are any indication, PennDOT is beginning to use the MUTCD airport symbol in signs as if it were a route shield:

(https://i.imgur.com/d7FLsWC.jpg)

Hopefully including more than just "Airport" becomes more normal as well.
Is it just me or are there two holes at the bottom corners of that right sign?
I think I saw another photo of that sign with the holes filled with lights.

Quote from: briantroutman on February 11, 2019, 06:14:24 PM
Quote from: Gnutella on February 11, 2019, 03:45:03 PM
I hate when major airports are just called "Airport" on highway signs.

Why do you hate it so much? I don't necessarily have a strong opinion either way, but this topic has come up before, and other posters have been quick to point out that very few cities have more than one major commercial airport, and usually they're far enough apart that "which airport?"  confusion is unlikely.
I think Philadelphia compromised with "Intl Airport" on I-95 signage.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on February 11, 2019, 07:07:00 PM
Quote from: ipeters61 on February 11, 2019, 07:03:40 PM
Quote from: Ben114 on February 11, 2019, 06:45:34 PM
Quote from: Roadsguy on February 11, 2019, 04:15:18 PM
At least if the new signs that have gone up in the PA 283 reconstruction near Highspire and Middletown are any indication, PennDOT is beginning to use the MUTCD airport symbol in signs as if it were a route shield:

(https://i.imgur.com/d7FLsWC.jpg)

Hopefully including more than just "Airport" becomes more normal as well.
Is it just me or are there two holes at the bottom corners of that right sign?
I think I saw another photo of that sign with the holes filled with lights.

I haven't seen recent photos, but it still looked like that the last time I was through there. Clearly it's designed for flashing lights like those at the York Split (https://goo.gl/maps/r2wZXghZ9N92).
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: MNHighwayMan on February 11, 2019, 08:01:08 PM
Quote from: briantroutman on February 11, 2019, 06:14:24 PM
Quote from: Gnutella on February 11, 2019, 03:45:03 PM
I hate when major airports are just called "Airport" on highway signs.
Why do you hate it so much? I don't necessarily have a strong opinion either way, but this topic has come up before, and other posters have been quick to point out that very few cities have more than one major commercial airport, and usually they're far enough apart that "which airport?"  confusion is unlikely.

Ehh. I'm of the opinion that anything that reduces ambiguity is a positive, even if the possibility of confusion is minimal.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ipeters61 on February 12, 2019, 10:13:56 AM
Does anybody know why this intersection (PA-309/US-202 Business/PA-463 in Montgomeryville) has stoplight assemblies like this?  I was just thinking about it now: https://www.google.com/maps/@40.2471773,-75.2438027,3a,75y,350.11h,75.03t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1syH8_8YZ9mRi7hU9BkmWR1g!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Beltway on February 12, 2019, 10:31:35 AM
Quote from: ipeters61 on February 12, 2019, 10:13:56 AM
Does anybody know why this intersection (PA-309/US-202 Business/PA-463 in Montgomeryville) has stoplight assemblies like this?  I was just thinking about it now: https://www.google.com/maps/@40.2471773,-75.2438027,3a,75y,350.11h,75.03t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1syH8_8YZ9mRi7hU9BkmWR1g!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

One way to address very long span length, probably about 100 feet.

Long mast arms become massive --
https://www.google.com/maps/@37.5008935,-77.5291524,3a,30y,255.35h,92.28t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sMX-Dgt-raf_GlU7Sm9WicA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656



Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Rothman on February 12, 2019, 10:57:17 AM
Still doesn't look stable enough to me.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: PHLBOS on February 12, 2019, 11:16:33 AM
Quote from: Beltway on February 12, 2019, 10:31:35 AM
Quote from: ipeters61 on February 12, 2019, 10:13:56 AM
Does anybody know why this intersection (PA-309/US-202 Business/PA-463 in Montgomeryville) has stoplight assemblies like this?  I was just thinking about it now: https://www.google.com/maps/@40.2471773,-75.2438027,3a,75y,350.11h,75.03t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1syH8_8YZ9mRi7hU9BkmWR1g!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

One way to address very long span length, probably about 100 feet.

Long mast arms become massive --
https://www.google.com/maps/@37.5008935,-77.5291524,3a,30y,255.35h,92.28t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sMX-Dgt-raf_GlU7Sm9WicA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
Not to mention the fact that signal truss gantry looks to be from the 1980s and likely predated long mast-arm designs.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jeffandnicole on February 12, 2019, 11:43:13 AM
Quote from: Rothman on February 12, 2019, 10:57:17 AM
Still doesn't look stable enough to me.

I'm sure an engineer just didn't guess at it.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Chris19001 on February 12, 2019, 12:26:46 PM
I grew up about 2 miles from 5 points intersection.  That intersection had those masts put up in the mid to late 80's when 202 and 463 had their approaches widened. They replaced simple stringed lights from what I remember.  DVRPC has a project on the books to revamp the intersection including replacing the gantry, but that can has been kicked for 20 years now..  I guess the advantage to building them the way they did is that they last for quite a while?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Rothman on February 12, 2019, 12:31:12 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on February 12, 2019, 11:43:13 AM
Quote from: Rothman on February 12, 2019, 10:57:17 AM
Still doesn't look stable enough to me.

I'm sure an engineer just didn't guess at it.
You'd be surprised. :D
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: billpa on February 12, 2019, 12:47:13 PM
They sure didn't cover themselves in glory with the street name signs. Both the size and the placement leaves a bit to be desired.

Pixel 2

Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ipeters61 on February 12, 2019, 01:52:26 PM
Quote from: billpa on February 12, 2019, 12:47:13 PM
They sure didn't cover themselves in glory with the street name signs. Both the size and the placement leaves a bit to be desired.
You see, I thought there would be something like BGSes planned for the intersection with that stoplight assembly.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Alps on February 12, 2019, 03:31:34 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on February 12, 2019, 11:43:13 AM
Quote from: Rothman on February 12, 2019, 10:57:17 AM
Still doesn't look stable enough to me.

I'm sure an engineer just didn't guess at it.
You see what the older 60+ footers are doing around NJ? They weren't guessing then either, but it wasn't enough for long-term horizontality. I don't trust a 90' mast arm no matter how designed it is.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: J N Winkler on February 12, 2019, 06:07:06 PM
What looks like engineers "guessing" is often a result of applying design criteria that later research suggests are insufficiently conservative.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jemacedo9 on February 13, 2019, 11:55:47 AM
Closing the gap east of State College PA is inching just a little closer...

https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1225 (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1225)

QuoteStakeholders and community members in south-central Centre County have long desired a four-lane connection that would increase safety and mobility in the often-congested area.

QuoteGovernor Wolf announced that PennDOT is committing $5 million to begin preliminary engineering this year on this complex, significant project, and emphasized that community involvement will be a critical component of the project-development process. Given the extensive collaboration with local communities, businesses, and others through the design, utilities, and right-of-way phases, the department is also taking steps to align resources for a targeted 2027 construction start.

QuoteThe commitment follows action from the administration in 2017 when the department started a refresh of environmental, traffic, and safety data regarding commercial development and community needs for a corridor involving Route 322, Route 45, and Route 144 in south central Centre County.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Gnutella on February 13, 2019, 02:56:09 PM
Quote from: jemacedo9 on February 13, 2019, 11:55:47 AM
Closing the gap east of State College PA is inching just a little closer...

https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1225 (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1225)

QuoteStakeholders and community members in south-central Centre County have long desired a four-lane connection that would increase safety and mobility in the often-congested area.

QuoteGovernor Wolf announced that PennDOT is committing $5 million to begin preliminary engineering this year on this complex, significant project, and emphasized that community involvement will be a critical component of the project-development process. Given the extensive collaboration with local communities, businesses, and others through the design, utilities, and right-of-way phases, the department is also taking steps to align resources for a targeted 2027 construction start.

QuoteThe commitment follows action from the administration in 2017 when the department started a refresh of environmental, traffic, and safety data regarding commercial development and community needs for a corridor involving Route 322, Route 45, and Route 144 in south central Centre County.

Fill in the gap at Duncannon and maybe I-78 could be extended westward to State College?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: briantroutman on February 13, 2019, 03:11:56 PM
Quote from: Gnutella on February 13, 2019, 02:56:09 PM
Fill in the gap at Duncannon and maybe I-78 could be extended westward to State College?

I believe such an idea has been bandied about in roadgeek pipe dream circles for as long as I can remember. Further, if the deferred ADHS Corridor O-1 connection (Port Matilda to Clearfield) were to be built, an extended I-78 could run all the way to I-80. And the reconfiguration/bypass of the growing commercial strip near Duncannon would also be necessary for a theoretical I-83 northward extension to Williamsport and beyond (another perennial roadgeek fantasy idea).

But we're really into fictional territory with all of the above.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Bitmapped on February 13, 2019, 09:20:46 PM
Quote from: Gnutella on February 13, 2019, 02:56:09 PM
Quote from: jemacedo9 on February 13, 2019, 11:55:47 AM
Closing the gap east of State College PA is inching just a little closer...

https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1225 (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1225)

QuoteStakeholders and community members in south-central Centre County have long desired a four-lane connection that would increase safety and mobility in the often-congested area.

QuoteGovernor Wolf announced that PennDOT is committing $5 million to begin preliminary engineering this year on this complex, significant project, and emphasized that community involvement will be a critical component of the project-development process. Given the extensive collaboration with local communities, businesses, and others through the design, utilities, and right-of-way phases, the department is also taking steps to align resources for a targeted 2027 construction start.

QuoteThe commitment follows action from the administration in 2017 when the department started a refresh of environmental, traffic, and safety data regarding commercial development and community needs for a corridor involving Route 322, Route 45, and Route 144 in south central Centre County.

Fill in the gap at Duncannon and maybe I-78 could be extended westward to State College?

You still have an at-grade railroad crossing in Lewistown. Also, is the rest of the corridor up to Interstate standards? Parts east of Seven Mountains and around Harrisburg seem like they might not be.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on February 13, 2019, 10:00:58 PM
Honestly, I'd rather take 78 out to Pittsburgh from Lewistown, though that would require finishing Corridor M and upgrading US 22 all the way from Monroeville to Ebensburg, which would certainly require new alignment at least around Murrysville.

There are definitely more substandard freeway sections of 322 left. The segment around Laurel Creek Reservoir near Potters Mills is very narrow, tight, and steep, with a few of what appear to be service driveways and one proper T intersection with a public road. PennDOT doesn't indicate it as a freeway at all west of the newer section of freeway around Milroy. The entire section through Lewistown is also substandard, as is the railroad underpass just east of Dauphin.

Most of the freeway sections are at least mostly Interstate-standard, requiring minor improvements at best. Probably the worst thing on these sections is the rare "LILO" at Huggins Road north (i.e. west) of 11/15.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Alps on February 14, 2019, 12:35:58 AM
Quote from: Roadsguy on February 13, 2019, 10:00:58 PM
Honestly, I'd rather take 78 out to Pittsburgh from Lewistown, though that would require finishing Corridor M and upgrading US 22 all the way from Monroeville to Ebensburg, which would certainly require new alignment at least around Murrysville.

There are definitely more substandard freeway sections of 322 left. The segment around Laurel Creek Reservoir near Potters Mills is very narrow, tight, and steep, with a few of what appear to be service driveways and one proper T intersection with a public road. PennDOT doesn't indicate it as a freeway at all west of the newer section of freeway around Milroy. The entire section through Lewistown is also substandard, as is the railroad underpass just east of Dauphin.

Most of the freeway sections are at least mostly Interstate-standard, requiring minor improvements at best. Probably the worst thing on these sections is the rare "LILO" at Huggins Road north (i.e. west) of 11/15.
There's no reason to finish US 22 as a corridor. 322 to 99 works just fine.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: billpa on February 14, 2019, 11:29:41 AM
Here are the "new control city" signs on 83 northbound outside Harrisburg...(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20190214/8468d92a597dc58d2d939f224185aa50.jpg)(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20190214/20af25ce3d9ee895167402604dee829f.jpg)

Pixel 2

Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Rothman on February 14, 2019, 12:09:08 PM
Humbug Int'l Airport
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Hot Rod Hootenanny on February 14, 2019, 12:10:34 PM
Quote from: billpa on February 14, 2019, 11:29:41 AM
Here are the "new control city" signs on 83 northbound outside Harrisburg...
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20190214/20af25ce3d9ee895167402604dee829f.jpg)

Whole new signs, or ODOT style tape job for the new control cities?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: billpa on February 14, 2019, 12:12:52 PM
Old signs with patches.

Pixel 2

Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on February 14, 2019, 01:40:55 PM
Browsing ECMS, those overlays are part of the East Shore Section 1 contract, which does not bode well for the rest of the new signage...
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Ben114 on February 14, 2019, 03:41:53 PM
Quote from: billpa on February 14, 2019, 11:29:41 AM
Here are the "new control city" signs on 83 northbound outside Harrisburg...(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20190214/8468d92a597dc58d2d939f224185aa50.jpg)(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20190214/20af25ce3d9ee895167402604dee829f.jpg)

Pixel 2
That Clearview-FHWA mix is disgusting.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: PHLBOS on February 14, 2019, 03:54:12 PM
Quote from: Ben114 on February 14, 2019, 03:41:53 PM
Quote from: billpa on February 14, 2019, 11:29:41 AM
Here are the "new control city" signs on 83 northbound outside Harrisburg...
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20190214/8468d92a597dc58d2d939f224185aa50.jpg)(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20190214/20af25ce3d9ee895167402604dee829f.jpg)
That Clearview-FHWA mix is disgusting.
Especially since PennDOT supposedly phased-out Clearview from their newer installs/modifications.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: briantroutman on February 14, 2019, 04:16:56 PM
Not that this excuses the use of Clearview, but I assume one reason the reason for the somewhat slapdash patch is that this entire assembly will be replaced when the Eisenhower Interchange is reconstructed which theoretically could begin in 2022.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on February 14, 2019, 04:27:49 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on February 14, 2019, 03:54:12 PM
Quote from: Ben114 on February 14, 2019, 03:41:53 PM
Quote from: billpa on February 14, 2019, 11:29:41 AM
Here are the "new control city" signs on 83 northbound outside Harrisburg...
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20190214/8468d92a597dc58d2d939f224185aa50.jpg)(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20190214/20af25ce3d9ee895167402604dee829f.jpg)
That Clearview-FHWA mix is disgusting.
Especially since PennDOT supposedly phased-out Clearview from their newer installs/modifications.

Have we actually confirmed that they actively no longer use Clearview and haven't gone back to it? They used it all the way up to the initial yanking of interim approval and I'm not sure that any new Highway Gothic signage isn't just what was still in the pipeline.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: PHLBOS on February 14, 2019, 04:38:09 PM
Quote from: Roadsguy on February 14, 2019, 04:27:49 PMHave we actually confirmed that they actively no longer use Clearview and haven't gone back to it? They used it all the way up to the initial yanking of interim approval and I'm not sure that any new Highway Gothic signage isn't just what was still in the pipeline.
When the IA was initially yanked; many newer PennDOT installs indeed switched back to Highway Gothic.  Whether PennDOT has since switched back officially; nobody knows...  maybe not all districts are on the same page as of yet.  OTOH, I don't believe the PTC has switched back to Clearview.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on February 16, 2019, 04:08:09 PM
I originally posted this in the Clearview thread, but it applies here as well:

Bad news (for most of us at least): I just spoke with the PennDOT District 8 senior project manager about signage on the I-83 East Shore Section 1 project and he confirmed that PennDOT has returned to Clearview, this project included. I have no idea about the Turnpike Commission.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ixnay on February 16, 2019, 04:48:22 PM
Well, the Clearview/MUTCD/other sign fonts "controversy" makes it fun to "collect" signs with the various fonts, you gotta admit!

ixnay
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: billpa on February 19, 2019, 12:43:25 PM
A couple more updated signs. These are along I-81 in Susquehanna Township, near the northern end of I-83...(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20190219/3aa79873f00a908301dfaf7d433816b2.jpg)(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20190219/059bbda9df6fd8d58911cdfee64a2555.jpg)(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20190219/35334b8e8d22186fde24a62683fd325b.jpg)

Pixel 2

Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: PHLBOS on February 19, 2019, 01:11:31 PM
Quote from: billpa on February 19, 2019, 12:43:25 PM
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20190219/059bbda9df6fd8d58911cdfee64a2555.jpg)
Couldn't they at least center-justified that State College mask (over Lewistown)?
Interesting-looking EXIT 67A-B tab as well; yeah, I know, such has been there for a while.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ipeters61 on February 19, 2019, 01:38:33 PM
Quote from: ixnay on February 16, 2019, 04:48:22 PM
Well, the Clearview/MUTCD/other sign fonts "controversy" makes it fun to "collect" signs with the various fonts, you gotta admit!

ixnay
What about this mess? https://www.google.com/maps/@40.4192077,-80.0901792,3a,18.8y,118.1h,99.99t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sISPdxeanRqbJzzDFFkC2Mw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on March 11, 2019, 05:05:13 PM
Recently, PennDOT built a new left turn lane here (https://goo.gl/maps/3GaUaojgm8U2) on the eastbound US 30 frontage road (Chester Road) approaching PA 272/Oregon Pike. For the signage, though, all they initially did was take the existing signs (https://goo.gl/maps/rCw7MGa6FF12) and cover up the left and middle signs' arrows and put two arrows in the corners of the middle sign, not even shifting the signs' positions. Since then, though, they've replaced all three of the signs here, and they look quite good. They even replaced the one on the right for some reason, judging by the minor differences you can spot between this photo and the Street View.

(https://i.imgur.com/0sGkkpv.jpg)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jeffandnicole on March 12, 2019, 07:54:59 AM
Quote from: Roadsguy on March 11, 2019, 05:05:13 PM
Recently, PennDOT built a new left turn lane here (https://goo.gl/maps/3GaUaojgm8U2) on the eastbound US 30 frontage road (Chester Road) approaching PA 272/Oregon Pike. For the signage, though, all they initially did was take the existing signs (https://goo.gl/maps/rCw7MGa6FF12) and cover up the left and middle signs' arrows and put two arrows in the corners of the middle sign, not even shifting the signs' positions. Since then, though, they've replaced all three of the signs here, and they look quite good. They even replaced the one on the right for some reason, judging by the minor differences you can spot between this photo and the Street View.

(https://i.imgur.com/0sGkkpv.jpg)

I want to hear the planner for the left-most sign:

"While I hear you in a left arrow will be fine, I'm just afraid someone will turn left immediately, drive up the embankment and crash into the guardrail.  I think we need to be specific where they should turn left".
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: PHLBOS on March 12, 2019, 08:58:51 AM
Quote from: Roadsguy on March 11, 2019, 05:05:13 PM
Recently, PennDOT built a new left turn lane here (https://goo.gl/maps/3GaUaojgm8U2) on the eastbound US 30 frontage road (Chester Road) approaching PA 272/Oregon Pike. For the signage, though, all they initially did was take the existing signs (https://goo.gl/maps/rCw7MGa6FF12) and cover up the left and middle signs' arrows and put two arrows in the corners of the middle sign, not even shifting the signs' positions. Since then, though, they've replaced all three of the signs here, and they look quite good. They even replaced the one on the right for some reason, judging by the minor differences you can spot between this photo and the Street View.

(https://i.imgur.com/0sGkkpv.jpg)
Is it me or does the mixed-case lettering on the new signs appear thicker-stroked than those on the old signs?  I thought the mixed-case lettering on the old BGS' were Series E(M).  Was such actually an experimental case of Enhanced E(M) (Series E w/E(M) spacing).

Either way, the text on the older BGS' were actually more readable from a distance than those on the newer BGS' IMHO.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ipeters61 on March 12, 2019, 10:07:39 AM
Quote from: PHLBOS on March 12, 2019, 08:58:51 AM
Quote from: Roadsguy on March 11, 2019, 05:05:13 PM
Recently, PennDOT built a new left turn lane here (https://goo.gl/maps/3GaUaojgm8U2) on the eastbound US 30 frontage road (Chester Road) approaching PA 272/Oregon Pike. For the signage, though, all they initially did was take the existing signs (https://goo.gl/maps/rCw7MGa6FF12) and cover up the left and middle signs' arrows and put two arrows in the corners of the middle sign, not even shifting the signs' positions. Since then, though, they've replaced all three of the signs here, and they look quite good. They even replaced the one on the right for some reason, judging by the minor differences you can spot between this photo and the Street View.

(https://i.imgur.com/0sGkkpv.jpg)
Is it me or does the mixed-case lettering on the new signs appear thicker-stroked than those on the old signs?  I thought the mixed-case lettering on the old BGS' were Series E(M).  Was such actually an experimental case of Enhanced E(M) (Series E w/E(M) spacing).

Either way, the text on the older BGS' were actually more readable from a distance than those on the newer BGS' IMHO.
Is it just me or do those shields look slightly too big?  Or is the text slightly too small?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: billpa on March 12, 2019, 10:41:24 AM
Quote from: ipeters61 on March 12, 2019, 10:07:39 AM
Quote from: PHLBOS on March 12, 2019, 08:58:51 AM
Quote from: Roadsguy on March 11, 2019, 05:05:13 PM
Recently, PennDOT built a new left turn lane here (https://goo.gl/maps/3GaUaojgm8U2) on the eastbound US 30 frontage road (Chester Road) approaching PA 272/Oregon Pike. For the signage, though, all they initially did was take the existing signs (https://goo.gl/maps/rCw7MGa6FF12) and cover up the left and middle signs' arrows and put two arrows in the corners of the middle sign, not even shifting the signs' positions. Since then, though, they've replaced all three of the signs here, and they look quite good. They even replaced the one on the right for some reason, judging by the minor differences you can spot between this photo and the Street View.

(https://i.imgur.com/0sGkkpv.jpg)
Is it me or does the mixed-case lettering on the new signs appear thicker-stroked than those on the old signs?  I thought the mixed-case lettering on the old BGS' were Series E(M).  Was such actually an experimental case of Enhanced E(M) (Series E w/E(M) spacing).

Either way, the text on the older BGS' were actually more readable from a distance than those on the newer BGS' IMHO.
Is it just me or do those shields look slightly too big?  Or is the text slightly too small?
On gsv the two '2s' in 272 - on the right sign - come right up against the edge of the keystone. On the new sign there's a lot more white space.

Pixel 2

Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: billpa on March 12, 2019, 10:48:13 AM
I also just noticed on the left side of the road they failed to use updated arrow lane assignment signs and instead used a 'Left Lane MUST Turn Left' sign, which I find annoying.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: PHLBOS on March 12, 2019, 10:48:30 AM
Quote from: ipeters61 on March 12, 2019, 10:07:39 AMIs it just me or do those shields look slightly too big?  Or is the text slightly too small?
No, the shields are the same size as the old ones and are properly sized IMHO.  See examples in the MUTCD for confirmation.

Oversized control city text and/or undersized route shields has been one of the unintended consequences of many state agencies (including DelDOT, since you're from that state) adopting the Clearview font.  The intended use of that font was to be done instead of using larger text not in addition to such.

Although DelDOT has since switched back to FHWA; many of their newer installs still feature unnecessarily large sign panels (see I-95 just south of I-495 for examples) due to the use of larger text for the control cities.

That said & again, the heights of the shields & text in the above US 30/222/PA 272 examples in Lancaster are indeed correct.

Quote from: billpa on March 12, 2019, 10:41:24 AMOn gsv the two '2s' in 272 come right up against the edge of the keystone. On these new signs there's a lot more white space.
Actually, the numerals on the 272 Keystone shield on the new BGS' as well as the old northbound 272 BGS are Series C.  The numerals (all of them not just the 2s) on the old 272 southbound are the wider Series D. 

Since both shields & numerals are of the same size/height; the result of using the Series D numerals meant that such numerals were scrunched in and why, IMHO, such should only be used on 3-digit route signs where the route number has at least a 1 in it.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: akotchi on March 12, 2019, 11:30:13 AM
It is possible that the text size was reduced on the panels, from 16" upper case to 13.3" upper case.  That may be why the shields look larger, because actually the text may be smaller.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Alps on March 15, 2019, 07:41:54 AM
Guess what I found? State named I-78 shields! They're on overhead guide signs on US 22 west at PA 33.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: PHLBOS on March 15, 2019, 09:03:46 AM
Quote from: Alps on March 15, 2019, 07:41:54 AMGuess what I found? State named I-78 shields! They're on overhead guide signs on US 22 west at PA 33.
FYI, such was mentioned about two-and-a-half years ago in Reply #327 of the State-named interstate shields thread (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=12304.325).  Every BGS that has an I-78 shield on it for that cloverleaf is a state-named I-shield.  I believe those BGS' date back to when I-78 and the PA 33 extension to such was built.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on March 15, 2019, 11:06:04 AM
Quote from: PHLBOS on March 15, 2019, 09:03:46 AM
Quote from: Alps on March 15, 2019, 07:41:54 AMGuess what I found? State named I-78 shields! They're on overhead guide signs on US 22 west at PA 33.
FYI, such was mentioned about two-and-a-half years ago in Reply #327 of the State-named interstate shields thread (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=12304.325).  Every BGS that has an I-78 shield on it for that cloverleaf is a state-named I-shield.  I believe those BGS' date back to when I-78 and the PA 33 extension to such was built.

The PA 33 extension was built in the early 2000s (opening 2002), just over a decade later than the southerly I-78 bypass. You can tell because the original signage on I-78 was button copy (I think there are some surviving examples, but they're disappearing), but the PA 33 signage is modern retroreflective signage. Presumably all the signage at the US 22/PA 33 cloverleaf was replaced when the PA 33 extension was built, so these state-name shields are relatively new.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Alps on March 15, 2019, 03:28:09 PM
So you're saying I just never noticed them... or more likely am getting senile.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: PHLBOS on March 18, 2019, 09:14:14 AM
Quote from: Alps on March 15, 2019, 03:28:09 PMor more likely am getting senile.
Welcome to the... club.  :sombrero:
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on March 18, 2019, 09:27:21 AM
Quote from: Roadsguy on March 15, 2019, 11:06:04 AM
Quote from: PHLBOS on March 15, 2019, 09:03:46 AM
Quote from: Alps on March 15, 2019, 07:41:54 AMGuess what I found? State named I-78 shields! They're on overhead guide signs on US 22 west at PA 33.
FYI, such was mentioned about two-and-a-half years ago in Reply #327 of the State-named interstate shields thread (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=12304.325).  Every BGS that has an I-78 shield on it for that cloverleaf is a state-named I-shield.  I believe those BGS' date back to when I-78 and the PA 33 extension to such was built.

The PA 33 extension was built in the early 2000s (opening 2002), just over a decade later than the southerly I-78 bypass. You can tell because the original signage on I-78 was button copy (I think there are some surviving examples, but they're disappearing), but the PA 33 signage is modern retroreflective signage. Presumably all the signage at the US 22/PA 33 cloverleaf was replaced when the PA 33 extension was built, so these state-name shields are relatively new.
The original signs on the Lehigh Valley Thruway were ground mount using 2 x6 wooden posts.  Only the PA 309 and Airport Road interchanges had modern freeway signs there only because both clover leafs were redone in the late 70's.  However, the signs that were there in 1990 were carbon copies as originally the signs used texts for the PA routes and in the 80's were made to typical shields.  Although, when PennDOT did truncate both PA 191 and PA 512, they did so before the later signs and again carbon copies showing no direction of north for either two even with the later shield signs.

Even the clover leaf at MacArthur in Fullerton was ground mounted and further west at Hamburg PA 61 had no overheads there and used substandard signs on the ground.  So yeah for sure those at PA 33 if they are modern for all ramps they had to be contracted into the PA 33 extension construction my best guess is.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: PHLBOS on March 18, 2019, 10:01:52 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on March 18, 2019, 09:27:21 AMThe original signs on the Lehigh Valley Thruway were ground mount using 2 x6 wooden posts.  Only the PA 309 and Airport Road interchanges had modern freeway signs there only because both clover leafs were redone in the late 70's.  However, the signs that were there in 1990 were carbon copies as originally the signs used texts for the PA routes and in the 80's were made to typical shields.
Are you telling me that these BGS' (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.6000114,-75.5593643,3a,75y,57.4h,68.73t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sLypTZp4hUv5aYetOVwEikA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) are 1990s vintage? I don't think so.  IIRC, PennDOT stopped using green-porcelain sign boards after the late 70s (maybe very early 80s). 
This GSV is from July 2015 and the signs were replaced with the current ones roughly a year later.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jpi on March 28, 2019, 01:55:34 PM
From Pennlive.com, some recent pics of the US 322 construction near State Collage

https://www.pennlive.com/news/2019/03/watch-work-accelerates-on-final-phase-of-route-322-potters-mills-gap-project.html?fbclid=IwAR05W2s31qA6Kq1o0pQcrFWg98eIlCpG4v2QgUltqt-_HrP1AoUdB_pSojo
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on March 28, 2019, 02:05:35 PM
Quote from: jpi on March 28, 2019, 01:55:34 PM
From Pennlive.com, some recent pics of the US 322 construction near State Collage

https://www.pennlive.com/news/2019/03/watch-work-accelerates-on-final-phase-of-route-322-potters-mills-gap-project.html?fbclid=IwAR05W2s31qA6Kq1o0pQcrFWg98eIlCpG4v2QgUltqt-_HrP1AoUdB_pSojo

I looked at the sign plans and apparently PA 144 will be left with a dangling end at soon-to-be-old US 322. It won't be routed over to the new diamond; instead, signs will just say "To PA 144" and "To US 322." Of course, the entire design isn't exactly friendly to PA 144 access anyway.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on April 02, 2019, 04:06:35 PM
There will be an open house on Thursday for improvements to the US 322 intersection with Chambers Hill Rd and Grayson Rd (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=945).  The recommended alternative sadly does not include an interchange.

Also the speed limit on I-99 has increased from 55 to 65 from Gray's Wood (Exit 68-while on the US 322 concurrency) to the end of the freeway just south of I-80 (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1263).

Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: CentralPAGal on April 05, 2019, 08:00:13 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on April 02, 2019, 04:06:35 PM
There will be an open house on Thursday for improvements to the US 322 intersection with Chambers Hill Rd and Grayson Rd (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=945).  The recommended alternative sadly does not include an interchange.

And it's a pretty horrible plan, too, IMO. They are putting in six lanes for approximately a half mile or whatever, just to squeeze it back to four on either side again. Guessing maybe to help with cueing at the light? Still seems counterproductive though. Also, they could have closed off 82nd St at the intersection, and ED'd a few properties around the intersection as well (a few houses on 322 just east, and a business just west of the intersection on the eastbound side). /end rant
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on April 24, 2019, 03:29:38 PM
Got a shot of the new traffic signal going in at the intersection of Cornwall Road and Isabel Drive south of Lebanon:

(https://i.imgur.com/IDWUama.jpg)

Looks like an FYA left turn signal for both directions of Cornwall Road. Isabel Drive is getting no turning lanes, so just normal signals.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: webny99 on May 14, 2019, 12:55:34 PM
In other news, PennDOT has now added mile markers and exit numbers to US 15 between Williamsport and the NY state line! MM 136 is near the I-180/US-220 junction and MM 197 (?) is at the state line. It has been a long time coming, but I guess with this there is hope for I-99 to actually be complete someday!  :)

Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jp the roadgeek on May 14, 2019, 01:02:29 PM
From what I figure, those mileposts are based on I-99 mileage if you followed I-80 and US-220 to fill the gap, so it makes one wonder if the I-99 designation from I-180 to the NY border will happen soon. The US 15 mileposts are 4 miles lower than the I-99 ones.  From the signs I made, only a couple of exits were off by 1 (I had 152 as 153 and 165 as 164).
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: MASTERNC on May 14, 2019, 08:06:25 PM
Quote from: webny99 on May 14, 2019, 12:55:34 PM
In other news, PennDOT has now added mile markers and exit numbers to US 15 between Williamsport and the NY state line! MM 136 is near the I-180/US-220 junction and MM 197 (?) is at the state line. It has been a long time coming, but I guess with this there is hope for I-99 to actually be complete someday!  :)



Think those were there last July when I drove through, but still good to see progress towards (hopeful) designation.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: vdeane on May 14, 2019, 09:08:18 PM
Yeah, not quite brand new at this point.  And the corresponding segment of US 220 has had numbers far longer... I wonder if they were waiting for all the signs to naturally be replaced with ones that could accommodate a number so it would be as simple as patching them in, with no tabs added or gores replaced.  Some of the signs have been waiting for numbers for a decade.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: tylert120 on May 15, 2019, 03:48:11 PM
Question regarding directional signage, pictured here. Why not out all the destinations on one sign instead of 3 on the top sign and 2 on the bottom? Here you could make the argument that the arrows all face the same way on the respective signs, but that's not the case everywhere. I've noticed PennDot does this frequently, and I've always wondered why they don't just fit everything on one sign?

This is Freeport Rd at PA 910/PA 28 in Harmar Twp, Allegheny County. This sign was just installed, and replaced a fairly old sign. Interestingly enough, the old sign was one unit versus two, and had all the same destinations on it. This is the first Clearview sign I've seen installed since they switched back.

(https://i.imgur.com/2hgG7An.jpg)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: PAHighways on May 16, 2019, 11:33:54 PM
Quote from: tylert120 on May 15, 2019, 03:48:11 PM
Question regarding directional signage, pictured here. Why not out all the destinations on one sign instead of 3 on the top sign and 2 on the bottom? Here you could make the argument that the arrows all face the same way on the respective signs, but that's not the case everywhere. I've noticed PennDot does this frequently, and I've always wondered why they don't just fit everything on one sign?

They must be following the Handbook of Approved Signs to the "T," as 3 are the most lines on destination and distance signs (http://www.pahighways.com/mutcd/destination.html).

Quote from: tylert120 on May 15, 2019, 03:48:11 PMThis is the first Clearview sign I've seen installed since they switched back.

The destination and distance signs were always to be manufactured with Clearview font, even when it faded from use on guide signage.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on May 16, 2019, 11:36:09 PM
Quote from: PAHighways on May 16, 2019, 11:33:54 PM
Quote from: tylert120 on May 15, 2019, 03:48:11 PM
Question regarding directional signage, pictured here. Why not out all the destinations on one sign instead of 3 on the top sign and 2 on the bottom? Here you could make the argument that the arrows all face the same way on the respective signs, but that's not the case everywhere. I've noticed PennDot does this frequently, and I've always wondered why they don't just fit everything on one sign?

They must be following the Handbook of Approved Signs to the "T," as 3 are the most lines on destination and distance signs (http://www.pahighways.com/mutcd/destination.html).

Quote from: tylert120 on May 15, 2019, 03:48:11 PMThis is the first Clearview sign I've seen installed since they switched back.

The destination and distance signs were always to be manufactured with Clearview font, even when it faded from use on guide signage.

There are a few mixed-case Highway Gothic destination/distance signs around at least Lebanon and Lancaster counties that were put up during the time PennDOT used Highway Gothic again, though some of the earlier ones had Clearview numbers... :ded:
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: LeftyJR on May 17, 2019, 11:35:42 PM
Quote from: tylert120 on May 15, 2019, 03:48:11 PM
Question regarding directional signage, pictured here. Why not out all the destinations on one sign instead of 3 on the top sign and 2 on the bottom? Here you could make the argument that the arrows all face the same way on the respective signs, but that's not the case everywhere. I've noticed PennDot does this frequently, and I've always wondered why they don't just fit everything on one sign?

This is Freeport Rd at PA 910/PA 28 in Harmar Twp, Allegheny County. This sign was just installed, and replaced a fairly old sign. Interestingly enough, the old sign was one unit versus two, and had all the same destinations on it. This is the first Clearview sign I've seen installed since they switched back.

(https://i.imgur.com/2hgG7An.jpg)

This was an old button copy sign.  I used to live about 5 miles from this spot.  Too bad its been replaced.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ixnay on May 18, 2019, 07:47:22 AM
Here's how that sign looked to GSV in Aug. 2007...

https://www.google.com/maps/@40.5365635,-79.8402674,3a,15y,92.17h,86.8t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s_DW3tmNyp10PHPF8konbDA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

ixnay
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: tylert120 on May 18, 2019, 12:50:07 PM
Quote from: PAHighways on May 16, 2019, 11:33:54 PM

Quote from: tylert120 on May 15, 2019, 03:48:11 PMThis is the first Clearview sign I've seen installed since they switched back.

The destination and distance signs were always to be manufactured with Clearview font, even when it faded from use on guide signage.

Interesting. When PennDot ditched Clearview, all signage around here began using Highway Gotic again, including guide signage.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ixnay on May 18, 2019, 09:18:02 PM
Quote from: Roadsguy on May 16, 2019, 11:36:09 PM
There are a few mixed-case Highway Gothic destination/distance signs around at least Lebanon and Lancaster counties that were put up during the time PennDOT used Highway Gothic again, though some of the earlier ones had Clearview numbers... :ded:

Wonder what the font situation is in the rest of District 8 (Dauphin, York, Cumberland, Perry, Adams, and Franklin counties)?

ixnay
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on May 18, 2019, 10:33:41 PM
Quote from: ixnay on May 18, 2019, 09:18:02 PM
Quote from: Roadsguy on May 16, 2019, 11:36:09 PM
There are a few mixed-case Highway Gothic destination/distance signs around at least Lebanon and Lancaster counties that were put up during the time PennDOT used Highway Gothic again, though some of the earlier ones had Clearview numbers... :ded:

Wonder what the font situation is in the rest of District 8 (Dauphin, York, Cumberland, Perry, Adams, and Franklin counties)?

ixnay

Probably the same. I was just going off what I've seen just from everyday travels. I don't often go to the other counties in the district. I think the status of Clearview usage is a statewide thing.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ixnay on June 13, 2019, 06:10:30 PM
Chicagolanders call their Eisenhower Expressway "the Ike".  Does anybody around Harrisburg apply the same to the 83/283/322 mixing bowl?

ixnay
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: briantroutman on June 13, 2019, 06:22:21 PM
Quote from: ixnay on June 13, 2019, 06:10:30 PM
Chicagolanders call their Eisenhower Expressway "the Ike".  Does anybody around Harrisburg apply the same to the 83/283/322 mixing bowl?

ixnay

I lived in Harrisburg for a few years and never heard anyone refer to that interchange as "the Ike" . Very rarely, I'd hear people mention "the Eisenhower Interchange" . But much more frequently, people would just reference the route numbers–such as "I was at the exit for 283 when I saw..."
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Beltway on June 13, 2019, 09:36:48 PM
Quote from: briantroutman on June 13, 2019, 06:22:21 PM
Quote from: ixnay on June 13, 2019, 06:10:30 PM
Chicagolanders call their Eisenhower Expressway "the Ike".  Does anybody around Harrisburg apply the same to the 83/283/322 mixing bowl?
I lived in Harrisburg for a few years and never heard anyone refer to that interchange as "the Ike" . Very rarely, I'd hear people mention "the Eisenhower Interchange" . But much more frequently, people would just reference the route numbers–such as "I was at the exit for 283 when I saw..."

PennDOT literature in the 1970s commonly referred to it as the Eisenhower Interchange, and one of the annual state highway maps had a low altitude oblique aerial photo of it.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Alps on June 13, 2019, 10:06:16 PM
Quote from: Beltway on June 13, 2019, 09:36:48 PM
Quote from: briantroutman on June 13, 2019, 06:22:21 PM
Quote from: ixnay on June 13, 2019, 06:10:30 PM
Chicagolanders call their Eisenhower Expressway "the Ike".  Does anybody around Harrisburg apply the same to the 83/283/322 mixing bowl?
I lived in Harrisburg for a few years and never heard anyone refer to that interchange as "the Ike" . Very rarely, I'd hear people mention "the Eisenhower Interchange" . But much more frequently, people would just reference the route numbers–such as "I was at the exit for 283 when I saw..."

PennDOT literature in the 1970s commonly referred to it as the Eisenhower Interchange, and one of the annual state highway maps had a low altitude oblique aerial photo of it.
I think they still refer to it that way when discussing the upcoming rebuild, but concur that it's not used in common parlance.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: CentralPAGal on June 15, 2019, 08:51:47 PM
Quote from: briantroutman on June 13, 2019, 06:22:21 PM
Quote from: ixnay on June 13, 2019, 06:10:30 PM
Chicagolanders call their Eisenhower Expressway "the Ike".  Does anybody around Harrisburg apply the same to the 83/283/322 mixing bowl?

ixnay

I lived in Harrisburg for a few years and never heard anyone refer to that interchange as "the Ike" . Very rarely, I'd hear people mention "the Eisenhower Interchange" .
I hear the traffic people on the radio refer to it as "The Ike" sometimes. However, more often I just hear "the Eisenhower Interchange."
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: briantroutman on July 11, 2019, 11:26:01 AM
This isn't news, certainly, but I thought this thread would be the most logical place to post. I found this 1956 article about the Keystone Shortway (I-80) in the East Stroudsburg Daily Record, and while I realize that the hand drawn map isn't supposed to be taken literally, per se, I found the absolutely arrow-straight line to be a bit comical.

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/48257904972_3e9dd9c947_o.png)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: mrsman on July 12, 2019, 09:56:01 AM
You never know, it may have influenced votes, as people know that a straght route is much faster and more direct.

I recall seeing some documentary that a Russian czar had ordered that the Moscow-St.Petersburg railway be built as straight as possible, even if the need to destroy town and farms along the way.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Bitmapped on July 12, 2019, 10:16:18 PM
Quote from: mrsman on July 12, 2019, 09:56:01 AM
You never know, it may have influenced votes, as people know that a straght route is much faster and more direct.

I recall seeing some documentary that a Russian czar had ordered that the Moscow-St.Petersburg railway be built as straight as possible, even if the need to destroy town and farms along the way.


Trains don't tolerate curves nearly as well as cars do. Curves can result in significant speed reductions and extra wear on the cars and the rail. You want railroads to be as straight as possible.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on July 17, 2019, 12:16:51 AM
Is PA 611 on I-80 at Ninth Street purposely omitted to avoid confusion with those who wish to go from I-80 E Bound to PA 611 S Bound toward Easton prematurely?  Or is it because the I-80 freeway from that ramp eastward was once US 611, the predecessor to PA 611?  I ask that cause at one time the Park Avenue exit was not even signed for PA 611, but only PA 191.  Also old maps have the freeway when I-80 was US 611 ending at the point where the EB Ninth Street ramp is currently.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on July 23, 2019, 09:49:40 PM
Also what is with the END TRUCK US 209 here in Marshall's Creek?

https://goo.gl/maps/H39evUQRSoWBgTNT6
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on July 24, 2019, 07:13:33 AM
For your PA 611 question, I would recomment contacting PennDOT District 5 (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-5/Pages/default.aspx).

Quote from: roadman65 on July 23, 2019, 09:49:40 PM
Also what is with the END TRUCK US 209 here in Marshall's Creek?

https://goo.gl/maps/H39evUQRSoWBgTNT6

It is for a truck route due to a weight-restricted bridge (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.0153929,-75.1300449,3a,75y,39.76h,84.5t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sLDOvvR7Z7lrUKWOuTAoo-A!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) on US 209 in the area.  It is in Travel Mapping (http://travelmapping.net/hb/index.php?units=miles&u=markkos1992&r=pa.us209trkmar).
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ixnay on July 24, 2019, 08:53:53 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on July 17, 2019, 12:16:51 AM
Is PA 611 on I-80 at Ninth Street purposely omitted to avoid confusion with those who wish to go from I-80 E Bound to PA 611 S Bound toward Easton prematurely? 

Ninth St. in Stroudsburg?  You sure you don't mean 7th St.?  Ninth St. doesn't connect with I-80.  Seventh St. does.

ixnay
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on July 24, 2019, 11:10:52 AM
Quote from: ixnay on July 24, 2019, 08:53:53 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on July 17, 2019, 12:16:51 AM
Is PA 611 on I-80 at Ninth Street purposely omitted to avoid confusion with those who wish to go from I-80 E Bound to PA 611 S Bound toward Easton prematurely? 

Ninth St. in Stroudsburg?  You sure you don't mean 7th St.?  Ninth St. doesn't connect with I-80.  Seventh St. does.

ixnay
Both do. Going EN the first and third exits are for PA 611 and yes it does connect to Ninth by slip ramp.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ixnay on July 24, 2019, 08:47:38 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on July 24, 2019, 11:10:52 AM
Quote from: ixnay on July 24, 2019, 08:53:53 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on July 17, 2019, 12:16:51 AM
Is PA 611 on I-80 at Ninth Street purposely omitted to avoid confusion with those who wish to go from I-80 E Bound to PA 611 S Bound toward Easton prematurely? 

Ninth St. in Stroudsburg?  You sure you don't mean 7th St.?  Ninth St. doesn't connect with I-80.  Seventh St. does.

ixnay
Both do. Going EN the first and third exits are for PA 611 and yes it does connect to Ninth by slip ramp.

Do you mean exit 303 which dumps you into that commercial strip dominated by the Stroud Mall?  Having very rarely gone through the Stroudsburgs except via I-80 as opposed to 611 or Business 209, I only know 9th St. as 611 (thanks to maps).  You folks had me looking at 9th St. where it terminates at Ann St., 2 blocks (if you count Mill Alley as a block) south of where 611 abandons 9th St. at Main St. closer to downtown Stroudsburg.

ixnay
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on July 30, 2019, 06:23:32 PM
What is up now on the NE Extension with the redundant ramps to PA 31 at Kulpsville?  I know Exit 31A is for EZPass while Exit 31B is for Cash Tolls, however, the layout of the Exit 31 toll plaza is three EZPass Lanes on the right side (where NB traffic merges into the Exit 31 road) so really there is no weaving to get to the EZPass lanes and because the Cash Lanes are in the center, NB traffic paying cash has to weave against SB traffic looking to use the right side EZPass lanes.
https://goo.gl/maps/tXdxVNeps7jJFmVg7
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on July 30, 2019, 06:38:16 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on July 30, 2019, 06:23:32 PM
What is up now on the NE Extension with the redundant ramps to PA 63 at Kulpsville?  I know Exit 31A is for EZPass while Exit 31B is for Cash Tolls, however, the layout of the Exit 31 toll plaza is three EZPass Lanes on the right side (where NB traffic merges into the Exit 31 road) so really there is no weaving to get to the EZPass lanes and because the Cash Lanes are in the center, NB traffic paying cash has to weave against SB traffic looking to use the right side EZPass lanes.
https://goo.gl/maps/tXdxVNeps7jJFmVg7

FTFY.   I guess that EZPASS gets priority from what you are saying.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on July 30, 2019, 06:48:14 PM
The cash lanes should be on the right and all EZPass on the left so the NB traffic don't have to weave.  Simple fix.  The SB are only using those EZPass lanes and should be in perfect reach of them.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: SteveG1988 on August 27, 2019, 12:09:45 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on July 30, 2019, 06:23:32 PM
What is up now on the NE Extension with the redundant ramps to PA 31 at Kulpsville?  I know Exit 31A is for EZPass while Exit 31B is for Cash Tolls, however, the layout of the Exit 31 toll plaza is three EZPass Lanes on the right side (where NB traffic merges into the Exit 31 road) so really there is no weaving to get to the EZPass lanes and because the Cash Lanes are in the center, NB traffic paying cash has to weave against SB traffic looking to use the right side EZPass lanes.
https://goo.gl/maps/tXdxVNeps7jJFmVg7

I've picked up freight from that area, that exit is designed for truck traffic, hence the redundant ramps. The southbound ezpass only ramp cannot be used by a truck turning right into it. too sharp of a turn. And the lane layout...probably due to some rule.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: noelbotevera on September 01, 2019, 03:38:58 PM
Went up to Harrisburg yesterday, so I'll take the opportunity to list more gripes than observations (I know the area fairly well).

-Really wish the York Split was redesigned. It shouldn't be a trumpet interchange, and I-83 NB could move better through the interchange. While there has been some attempts at reconstruction and smoothing out I-83 NB on the West Shore (like removing exit 42), I think the Lemoyne exits should go. People who want to access the West Shore could use either PA 581 exit 5 or I-83 exit 40B, and convert exit 40B into a full interchange w/C-D lanes (to prevent conflict with PA 581). People who want to access the south end of Harrisburg (i.e. Market Street Bridge folks) could use I-83 exits 43-44.

-Also wish PA 581/US 15 was redesigned. I think US 15 NB -> PA 581 WB needs 2 lanes and no traffic light; perhaps a flyover (expensive, I know) could work better.

-I-81 should have 6 lanes between Carlisle and Harrisburg. Up to I-78 would be nice, but that section would be a great start.

-I think PA 581 should be signed as TO US 15 South and I-81 signed as TO US 15 North for through traffic purposes. Alternatively, US 22/322 could be signed as TO US 15 North, as 22/322 is a freeway compared to 11/15's 2 lanes.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: billpa on September 01, 2019, 05:01:32 PM
If you get to 83 in Lower Paxton Township, above the Union Deposit Road exit, you'll see the supports for the new lanes being built in the ongoing widening project on both sides of the highway. Also take note of the digital speed limit signs in the construction zone.

SM-T230NU

Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: CentralPAGal on September 01, 2019, 05:06:24 PM
Quote from: noelbotevera on September 01, 2019, 03:38:58 PM
-Really wish the York Split was redesigned. It shouldn't be a trumpet interchange, and I-83 NB could move better through the interchange. While there has been some attempts at reconstruction and smoothing out I-83 NB on the West Shore (like removing exit 42), I think the Lemoyne exits should go. People who want to access the West Shore could use either PA 581 exit 5 or I-83 exit 40B, and convert exit 40B into a full interchange w/C-D lanes (to prevent conflict with PA 581). People who want to access the south end of Harrisburg (i.e. Market Street Bridge folks) could use I-83 exits 43-44.
The modifications that PennDot did a few years ago were just a stop-gap, although I think they could have done a little better, even for what it is. I believe the intention is to revisit this area after East Shore Section 3 is completed. Here is an outline of PennDot's Harrisburg area I-83 strategy:http://www.i-83beltway.com/ (http://www.i-83beltway.com/)

Quote from: noelbotevera on September 01, 2019, 03:38:58 PM
-Also wish PA 581/US 15 was redesigned. I think US 15 NB -> PA 581 WB needs 2 lanes and no traffic light; perhaps a flyover (expensive, I know) could work better.
Yeah, I don't know what the engineers were smoking when they designed that, but they're repeating the mistake at the I-283/PA 283 interchange. I agree on a flyover being ideal, but I could see space constraints being an issue. I could even deal with the 581w to 15s loop, if there was a way to get rid of the red-light and cross-traffic. Someone on here posted an interesting concept in the redesigned interchanges thread in the fictional forum, some years ago. Anyway, I don't think PennDot has plans to revisit this, unfortunately (that left turn really backs up the left lane on 15n

Quote from: noelbotevera on September 01, 2019, 03:38:58 PM
-I-81 should have 6 lanes between Carlisle and Harrisburg. Up to I-78 would be nice, but that section would be a great start.
preaching to the choir. Penndot is supposed to do a new widening study as an update to the 2003 study.



Quote from: billpa on September 01, 2019, 05:01:32 PM
If you get to 83 in Lower Paxton Township, above the Union Deposit Road exit, you'll see the supports for the new lanes being built in the ongoing widening project on both sides of the highway. Also take note of the digital speed limit signs in the construction zone.
Saw that yesterday coming back from the east mall. Really looking forward to seeing some tangible results from this project. While I don't get through there often, I'm looking forward to seeing the bridges completed and some more grading done. particularly under the new overpasses, and the small bit south of the Union Deposit interchange that is supposed to be widened with this project.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: VTGoose on September 05, 2019, 04:49:31 PM
"...a bunch of orange shirts standing around.

Cleveland Browns are the Penn-DOT of the NFL."

Pittsburgh Dad https://youtu.be/LuePmqOIA2I
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: goobnav on September 06, 2019, 08:57:05 AM
Quote from: VTGoose on September 05, 2019, 04:49:31 PM
"...a bunch of orange shirts standing around.

Cleveland Browns are the Penn-DOT of the NFL."

Pittsburgh Dad https://youtu.be/LuePmqOIA2I


There's an understatement, :)!!
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on September 06, 2019, 09:45:30 AM
I noticed that the district that handles Monroe County does not sign I-80 like other interstates when it comes to mileage signs.  I see east of PA 115 both Stroudsburg at 24 miles out and the Delaware Water Gap is 5 miles further.  Even west of I-380 the mileage sign has always said mileages for Hazleton and Bloomsburg.

I-78 since the section from NJ to Kuhnsville opened in 1990, has used the next exit/ control city format which FDOT uses in Florida for freeways.

Now in my own opinion with exits spaced out along I-80 the format used on I-78 would work better or even mix the two.  Like the EB Stroudsburg 24/ Del Water Gap 29 should still be but add I-380 to it over the top of the two.  Ditto for Hazleton/ Bloomsburg with PA 115 as well.

It is so interesting, though, to find inconsistencies in state DOT districts, like even for years PennDOT had it's district in charge of the Philly area insist that metal pole traffic lights be used as the rest of the state did not care whether span wire or mast arms could be used.  Now of course I think PA has phased out most mast arms as I have been seeing them more and more statewide and less span wire installations.  FDOT would have D-4 be different from the rest in mileage signs as well doing the NY and SC thing of posting numbers on the at intersection guides rather than post intersection mileage signs leading away on the highway.

Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: PAHighways on September 06, 2019, 12:37:42 PM
Quote from: VTGoose on September 05, 2019, 04:49:31 PM
"...a bunch of orange shirts standing around.

Cleveland Browns are the Penn-DOT of the NFL."

Pittsburgh Dad https://youtu.be/LuePmqOIA2I
A few other "Pittsburgh Dad" episodes involving roads:

https://youtu.be/_LySIihUT34
https://youtu.be/0Zh-cjOMv2w
https://youtu.be/mYVCp2aBPFI

SM-G965U

Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Alex on September 09, 2019, 09:27:30 AM
I separated the bulk of Philadelphia area posts (17 pages worth) into a separate thread (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=25649.0).
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ixnay on September 09, 2019, 07:42:52 PM
Quote from: Alex on September 09, 2019, 09:27:30 AM
I separated the bulk of Philadelphia area posts (17 pages worth) into a separate thread (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=25649.0).

:thumbsup:

ixnay
[born and raised in Delaware County]
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: RevZimmerman on September 12, 2019, 06:13:18 PM
Not the most-detailed local TV news story, but there are some data points about the I-83 construction project around Harrisburg.

2022 start date is mentioned, as well as an anticipated end of project in 10 years. Environmental clearances are expected in Spring 2020.

https://www.abc27.com/news/traffic/penndot-i-83-construction-in-dauphin-county-may-take-10-years (https://www.abc27.com/news/traffic/penndot-i-83-construction-in-dauphin-county-may-take-10-years)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: CentralPAGal on September 15, 2019, 05:25:57 PM
Quote from: RevZimmerman on September 12, 2019, 06:13:18 PM
Not the most-detailed local TV news story, but there are some data points about the I-83 construction project around Harrisburg.

2022 start date is mentioned, as well as an anticipated end of project in 10 years. Environmental clearances are expected in Spring 2020.

https://www.abc27.com/news/traffic/penndot-i-83-construction-in-dauphin-county-may-take-10-years (https://www.abc27.com/news/traffic/penndot-i-83-construction-in-dauphin-county-may-take-10-years)

And looks like they're starting planning for York Split (re-)reconstruction!
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: epzik8 on September 15, 2019, 05:46:24 PM
Quote from: RevZimmerman on September 12, 2019, 06:13:18 PM
Not the most-detailed local TV news story, but there are some data points about the I-83 construction project around Harrisburg.

2022 start date is mentioned, as well as an anticipated end of project in 10 years. Environmental clearances are expected in Spring 2020.

https://www.abc27.com/news/traffic/penndot-i-83-construction-in-dauphin-county-may-take-10-years (https://www.abc27.com/news/traffic/penndot-i-83-construction-in-dauphin-county-may-take-10-years)
Harrisburg traffic is a mess sometimes, and I-83 construction in the area always exacerbates that.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: route17fan on October 01, 2019, 10:46:42 PM
I-84 eastbound at exit 17. Button copy and still standing as of this past weekend.

GSV: https://www.google.com/maps/@41.3540654,-75.4114859,3a,15y,148.08h,91.95t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sGNPLjqCIGwpKZWo6GuOO9Q!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Crown Victoria on October 12, 2019, 04:59:22 AM
More information about the upcoming I-83 widening in Harrisburg...10 lanes instead of 12, which I believe would still make it one of the widest segments of interstate in PA.

https://www.pennlive.com/news/2019/10/i-83-expansion-plan-in-harrisburg-could-be-reduced-from-12-to-10-lanes-engineers.html
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: noelbotevera on October 12, 2019, 04:55:13 PM
Trip up to Knoebels and Centralia yesterday, some observations:

-US 22/322 -> PA 225 -> PA 325 -> US 209 is a nice alternative to I-81 between exits 67 and 107, especially when it's fall. Lots of trees.
-Centralia is a lot more disappointing than how most websites portray it. You can't even see the smoke unless it's winter, and abandoned PA 61 is really the highlight of the place.
-Knoebels is definitely worth the drive. The Phoenix is probably one of the most intense coasters I've ever ridden.
-Ate at Coney Island Lunch in Shamokin; seems like a place stuck in the 1920s, but the food (and even the soda) is local and delicious. Also worth it.
-Still awaiting a 6 lane upgrade to I-81 between Carlisle and Harrisburg.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jeffandnicole on October 12, 2019, 06:24:04 PM
Quote from: noelbotevera on October 12, 2019, 04:55:13 PM
Trip up to Knoebels and Centralia yesterday, some observations:
...
-Centralia is a lot more disappointing than how most websites portray it. You can't even see the smoke unless it's winter, and abandoned PA 61 is really the highlight of the place.


Centralia...

So, what's happened there is the fires have moved on in the tunnels. We were there 10 or so years ago and the sulfur smell was toxic! Today, it's basically an urban forest with a grid street pattern. I don't think you would even see the smoke in the wintertime!

The websites that refer to Centralia are many years old, and any website that talks about the area currently is probably referencing web sites and stories that are over a decade old.

That's also a problem with many travel sites.  The authors often have no experience of what they're talking about.  They're just basing their story on what was previously written. Anytime you see a story that says the best time to buy airline tickets is 3pm on a Tuesday is a writer that should never be allowed to write again. That was true 25 years ago due to Southwest's "Ding" alert. Hasn't existed since the 90's. Yet people still believe it.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: PAHighways on October 12, 2019, 07:42:47 PM
Quote from: noelbotevera on October 12, 2019, 04:55:13 PM
-Centralia is a lot more disappointing than how most websites portray it. You can't even see the smoke unless it's winter, and abandoned PA 61 is really the highlight of the place.

When I visited Centralia (http://www.pahighways.com/features/centralia.html) in the early 2000s, there was no smoke wafting through the area.  An area was smoldering near the cemetary, but that was about the extent.  In fact, I could not find any of the vent pipes that I always saw in news footage spewing smoke and steam when I was growing up.  Most of the buidlings that comparised the town were gone, and the fire had begun to move towards Ashland which was the cause of the closure and subsequent detour of PA 61.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Rothman on October 12, 2019, 11:14:55 PM
Makes me wonder how the Coney Island Lunch in Shamokin compares to the one in Scranton.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: noelbotevera on October 13, 2019, 04:00:55 AM
Quote from: PAHighways on October 12, 2019, 07:42:47 PM
Quote from: noelbotevera on October 12, 2019, 04:55:13 PM
-Centralia is a lot more disappointing than how most websites portray it. You can't even see the smoke unless it's winter, and abandoned PA 61 is really the highlight of the place.

When I visited Centralia (http://www.pahighways.com/features/centralia.html) in the early 2000s, there was no smoke wafting through the area.  An area was smoldering near the cemetary, but that was about the extent.  In fact, I could not find any of the vent pipes that I always saw in news footage spewing smoke and steam when I was growing up.  Most of the buidlings that comparised the town were gone, and the fire had begun to move towards Ashland which was the cause of the closure and subsequent detour of PA 61.
I visited the Odd Fellows Cemetery, which is supposed to be near where the fire started. There seems to be several rusted structures near there that might be the vent pipes, but they're completely cold.

For abandoned PA 61, it's absolutely covered in graffiti. That's a recent thing; websites like Alps Roads and PA Highways show nothing. I guess since the state won't bother to fix or do anything with it, may as well turn it into an art piece. The cracks in the road were at best warm, but I couldn't tell if it was just the sun or if it's actually the fire. (Also, the pavement is turning red on the open road itself. Not sure if it's accurate to say that the road is literally rusting.)

As for the town itself, I count 4 houses: 2 on PA 61, one on Big Mine Run Road, and one on a random street. There's not many remains of civilization otherwise; the best you can make out are sidewalk remnants, wood planks that might have been fences, some fire hydrants, the streets, and empty grass lots. Everything else is left to nature and whatever junk people throw on the ground. The only sign of a town is a municipal building and a stop sign; you'd have no clue you were in a town if you passed by at night!

At this point, since there's no danger of the fire ever returning to the town, why has nobody bothered to move back?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: PAHighways on October 13, 2019, 07:30:53 AM
Quote from: noelbotevera on October 13, 2019, 04:00:55 AM
For abandoned PA 61, it's absolutely covered in graffiti. That's a recent thing; websites like Alps Roads and PA Highways show nothing.

When I visited, there was some graffiti here and there on old 61 but the coverage has increased in those ensuing 15 years.  I would like to go back and take more recent pictures, but I don't have the time as I did back then.

Quote from: noelbotevera on October 13, 2019, 04:00:55 AMAt this point, since there's no danger of the fire ever returning to the town, why has nobody bothered to move back?

There is nothing to move back to since the town, as it once was, is gone.  Most of the houses no longer stand, and the people who left started new lives wherever they ended up.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Mr. Matté on October 13, 2019, 08:55:12 AM
I got some shots of the road from September here (https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:ListFiles/Mr._Matt%C3%A9&ilshowall=1) (just skip past all the Abandoned Turnpike pix). The "red" road might just be PennDOT's asphalt mix, as seen in one of my photos PA 61 south of the closure is red all the way down and I think I've seen in the past other random roads with that tint.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: goobnav on October 13, 2019, 09:29:30 AM
Quote from: noelbotevera on October 13, 2019, 04:00:55 AM
Quote from: PAHighways on October 12, 2019, 07:42:47 PM
Quote from: noelbotevera on October 12, 2019, 04:55:13 PM
-Centralia is a lot more disappointing than how most websites portray it. You can't even see the smoke unless it's winter, and abandoned PA 61 is really the highlight of the place.

When I visited Centralia (http://www.pahighways.com/features/centralia.html) in the early 2000s, there was no smoke wafting through the area.  An area was smoldering near the cemetary, but that was about the extent.  In fact, I could not find any of the vent pipes that I always saw in news footage spewing smoke and steam when I was growing up.  Most of the buidlings that comparised the town were gone, and the fire had begun to move towards Ashland which was the cause of the closure and subsequent detour of PA 61.
I visited the Odd Fellows Cemetery, which is supposed to be near where the fire started. There seems to be several rusted structures near there that might be the vent pipes, but they're completely cold.

For abandoned PA 61, it's absolutely covered in graffiti. That's a recent thing; websites like Alps Roads and PA Highways show nothing. I guess since the state won't bother to fix or do anything with it, may as well turn it into an art piece. The cracks in the road were at best warm, but I couldn't tell if it was just the sun or if it's actually the fire. (Also, the pavement is turning red on the open road itself. Not sure if it's accurate to say that the road is literally rusting.)

As for the town itself, I count 4 houses: 2 on PA 61, one on Big Mine Run Road, and one on a random street. There's not many remains of civilization otherwise; the best you can make out are sidewalk remnants, wood planks that might have been fences, some fire hydrants, the streets, and empty grass lots. Everything else is left to nature and whatever junk people throw on the ground. The only sign of a town is a municipal building and a stop sign; you'd have no clue you were in a town if you passed by at night!

At this point, since there's no danger of the fire ever returning to the town, why has nobody bothered to move back?

WHAT!!!!!  The fire is still burning!!  The last residents, 10 per Wikipedia, at the most, once gone will permanently close that area to any building whatsoever.  Nobody in their right mind would move back there and even visiting that area is at your own risk.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Alps on October 13, 2019, 10:26:04 AM
The fire is not, and was never, directly underneath the settled part of the town. It's in the hills south of the town and spreading east and west from there. The issue was that toxic gases from the fire are seeping through the rock and coming out all over, including in the town. The fear was that this would include people's basements (like radon does now) and people would die of CO or CO2 poisoning.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jeffandnicole on October 13, 2019, 11:17:26 AM
Quote from: noelbotevera on October 13, 2019, 04:00:55 AM
Quote from: PAHighways on October 12, 2019, 07:42:47 PM
Quote from: noelbotevera on October 12, 2019, 04:55:13 PM
-Centralia is a lot more disappointing than how most websites portray it. You can't even see the smoke unless it's winter, and abandoned PA 61 is really the highlight of the place.

When I visited Centralia (http://www.pahighways.com/features/centralia.html) in the early 2000s, there was no smoke wafting through the area.  An area was smoldering near the cemetary, but that was about the extent.  In fact, I could not find any of the vent pipes that I always saw in news footage spewing smoke and steam when I was growing up.  Most of the buidlings that comparised the town were gone, and the fire had begun to move towards Ashland which was the cause of the closure and subsequent detour of PA 61.
I visited the Odd Fellows Cemetery, which is supposed to be near where the fire started. There seems to be several rusted structures near there that might be the vent pipes, but they're completely cold.

For abandoned PA 61, it's absolutely covered in graffiti. That's a recent thing; websites like Alps Roads and PA Highways show nothing. I guess since the state won't bother to fix or do anything with it, may as well turn it into an art piece. The cracks in the road were at best warm, but I couldn't tell if it was just the sun or if it's actually the fire. (Also, the pavement is turning red on the open road itself. Not sure if it's accurate to say that the road is literally rusting.)

As for the town itself, I count 4 houses: 2 on PA 61, one on Big Mine Run Road, and one on a random street. There's not many remains of civilization otherwise; the best you can make out are sidewalk remnants, wood planks that might have been fences, some fire hydrants, the streets, and empty grass lots. Everything else is left to nature and whatever junk people throw on the ground. The only sign of a town is a municipal building and a stop sign; you'd have no clue you were in a town if you passed by at night!

At this point, since there's no danger of the fire ever returning to the town, why has nobody bothered to move back?

Why do you think the fires will never return? The fires are burning in open underground mines, so the fires can easily flow through the tunnels back under Centralia if fuel becomes available to allow them to burn, which in their weakened state could easily happen.

Besides...and the more important reason: the feds bought out the homeowners properties.  They're not going to put those properties back on the market. Even the people living there are doing so based on an agreement with the feds. They don't really even own their homes.

As for Graffiti Highway...that's been a thing for about 15 years. The area gained its fame due to the World Wide Web and websites devoted to weird stuff. The police hate that stuff, as it mostly causes people to trespass on private, closed and dangerous properties.  Due to that, there's been increased enforcement and arrests of people trespassing on Graffiti Highway.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: noelbotevera on October 13, 2019, 11:46:02 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on October 13, 2019, 11:17:26 AM
Quote from: noelbotevera on October 13, 2019, 04:00:55 AM
I visited the Odd Fellows Cemetery, which is supposed to be near where the fire started. There seems to be several rusted structures near there that might be the vent pipes, but they're completely cold.

For abandoned PA 61, it's absolutely covered in graffiti. That's a recent thing; websites like Alps Roads and PA Highways show nothing. I guess since the state won't bother to fix or do anything with it, may as well turn it into an art piece. The cracks in the road were at best warm, but I couldn't tell if it was just the sun or if it's actually the fire. (Also, the pavement is turning red on the open road itself. Not sure if it's accurate to say that the road is literally rusting.)

As for the town itself, I count 4 houses: 2 on PA 61, one on Big Mine Run Road, and one on a random street. There's not many remains of civilization otherwise; the best you can make out are sidewalk remnants, wood planks that might have been fences, some fire hydrants, the streets, and empty grass lots. Everything else is left to nature and whatever junk people throw on the ground. The only sign of a town is a municipal building and a stop sign; you'd have no clue you were in a town if you passed by at night!

At this point, since there's no danger of the fire ever returning to the town, why has nobody bothered to move back?

Why do you think the fires will never return? The fires are burning in open underground mines, so the fires can easily flow through the tunnels back under Centralia if fuel becomes available to allow them to burn, which in their weakened state could easily happen.

Besides...and the more important reason: the feds bought out the homeowners properties.  They're not going to put those properties back on the market. Even the people living there are doing so based on an agreement with the feds. They don't really even own their homes.

As for Graffiti Highway...that's been a thing for about 15 years. The area gained its fame due to the World Wide Web and websites devoted to weird stuff. The police hate that stuff, as it mostly causes people to trespass on private, closed and dangerous properties.  Due to that, there's been increased enforcement and arrests of people trespassing on Graffiti Highway.
From what I can gather, the deadly thing here isn't the actual fire, but the smoke from the fire. Considering the fact that the fire has moved on past abandoned PA 61, and have mostly stayed contained in the hills spreading in an east-west direction, then it's not hard to conclude that northward is an unlikely direction for the fire. Until something supernatural happens, it's probably going to stay that way.

But, since Centrailia is practically federal land now, I guess I was being a bit too idealistic.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Beltway on October 13, 2019, 02:31:17 PM
Quote from: Alps on October 13, 2019, 10:26:04 AM
The fire is not, and was never, directly underneath the settled part of the town. It's in the hills south of the town and spreading east and west from there. The issue was that toxic gases from the fire are seeping through the rock and coming out all over, including in the town. The fear was that this would include people's basements (like radon does now) and people would die of CO or CO2 poisoning.
CO2 is non-poisonous, but in enough quantity it can displace oxygen in the immediate area and people can smother to death.  Hydrogen sulfide is another poisonous gas that comes from coal fires.

Coal fires also cause toxic pollutants in the local ground and groundwater --

Coal fires also release more noxious pollutants.  When coal is burned in a power plant, operators supply oxygen so that the coal burns hot enough to burn less by-products.  Coal burning in an abandoned mine, however, typically gets far less oxygen.  As a result, the coal smolders and releases a wide range of partially oxidized compounds.  Testing at Centralia has revealed 45 organic and inorganic chemicals, including toxins like benzene, toluene, and xylene.  Fifty-six compounds have been identified in the gases from one of China's coal fires.

https://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Coal_fires
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: empirestate on October 14, 2019, 10:37:29 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on October 12, 2019, 06:24:04 PM
The websites that refer to Centralia are many years old, and any website that talks about the area currently is probably referencing web sites and stories that are over a decade old.

That's also a problem with many travel sites.  The authors often have no experience of what they're talking about.  They're just basing their story on what was previously written.

Quote from: PAHighways on October 13, 2019, 07:30:53 AM
When I visited, there was some graffiti here and there on old 61 but the coverage has increased in those ensuing 15 years.  I would like to go back and take more recent pictures, but I don't have the time as I did back then.

That kind of sums up the state of much of the information out there, particularly with niche hobbies like ours. There was decidedly a "golden age" of websites in the mid-to-late 90s, and into the early aughts, where people meticulously researched and wrote about all kinds of arcane and fascinating things, simply because they could, and because such information had never really been compiled for public consumption before. But since then, not only the Internet itself, but also the interests and priorities of its users, have changed markedly.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: billpa on October 26, 2019, 07:30:50 PM
Here's new signage at the northern terminus of I-83 as it splits onto I-81 near Harrisburg.(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20191026/65ee1e77dfb861eee23f77e65dda13ad.jpg)

Pixel 2

Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Gnutella on October 28, 2019, 03:06:37 PM
Quote from: billpa on October 26, 2019, 07:30:50 PM
Here's new signage at the northern terminus of I-83 as it splits onto I-81 near Harrisburg.(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20191026/65ee1e77dfb861eee23f77e65dda13ad.jpg)

Pixel 2



Whoever fabricated those signs should do them statewide. Pennsylvania is the rare state whose extruded-panel signs are more attractive than their increment-panel signs.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on October 28, 2019, 03:08:26 PM
Quote from: Gnutella on October 28, 2019, 03:06:37 PM
Quote from: billpa on October 26, 2019, 07:30:50 PM
Here's new signage at the northern terminus of I-83 as it splits onto I-81 near Harrisburg.(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20191026/65ee1e77dfb861eee23f77e65dda13ad.jpg)

Pixel 2



Whoever fabricated those signs should do them statewide. Pennsylvania is the rare state whose extruded-panel signs are more attractive than their increment-panel signs.

District 8 in particular has been great with actual information layout, too, even with the return to Clearview as seen in this last picture.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: tylert120 on October 28, 2019, 10:16:21 PM
PennDOT recently replaced signage on the Fort Duquesne bridge in Pittsburgh (279). It requires a full overnight closure of the upper deck. Replaced were three individual signs with a new, large single sign. Oddly, highway gothic was used instead of Clearview. PennDOT says future overnight closures will occur to replace other signage on the bridge. Below is a picture of the new signage, and here is a link to the old signage: https://www.google.com/maps/@40.4452657,-80.0095095,3a,75.000000y,342.993530h,78.895760t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1satcO9-JQSHQFjXIAthpZyg!2e0

(https://i.imgur.com/wwppAgJ_d.jpg?maxwidth=640&shape=thumb&fidelity=medium)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on October 28, 2019, 11:23:37 PM
Quote from: tylert120 on October 28, 2019, 10:16:21 PM
PennDOT recently replaced signage on the Fort Duquesne bridge in Pittsburgh (279). It requires a full overnight closure of the upper deck. Replaced were three individual signs with a new, large single sign. Oddly, highway gothic was used instead of Clearview. PennDOT says future overnight closures will occur to replace other signage on the bridge. Below is a picture of the new signage, and here is a link to the old signage: https://www.google.com/maps/@40.4452657,-80.0095095,3a,75.000000y,342.993530h,78.895760t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1satcO9-JQSHQFjXIAthpZyg!2e0

(https://i.imgur.com/wwppAgJ_d.jpg?maxwidth=640&shape=thumb&fidelity=medium)

A surprise, to be sure, but a welcome one. Could just be an old contract finally getting done. Weird that the APL is missing an exit tab on the left, though, since the gore still has its exit sign.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: rickmastfan67 on October 29, 2019, 12:48:33 AM
Also odd to see the "TO PA-28" go first instead of the I-279 shield.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: KEVIN_224 on October 29, 2019, 02:05:50 PM
I'm guessing the project is in progress, hence no Exit number panels?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: The Ghostbuster on October 29, 2019, 04:21:06 PM
Speaking of PA-28, are they ever going to renumber the exits to mileage-based? I know the existing freeway wasn't 100% complete when the mileage-based conversion occurred statewide in 2001, but I think it is high time PA-28 underwent a similar exit renumbering.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: PAHighways on October 29, 2019, 04:31:48 PM
There were no plans to renumber any of PennDOT's US or PA designated expressways that have exit numbers.  The 2001 conversion was just for roadways that are limited-access in their entirety (except I-579 and I-676).

SM-G965U

Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on October 29, 2019, 07:20:22 PM
PennDOT should honestly just start generally numbering exits on all expressways.

I wonder why PA 28 was given exit numbers at all, when other similar suburban and rural non-Interstate expressways like US 219 never got any. From a quick check of historic GSV, the PA 60 expressway had sequential exit numbers as well until it was made I-376.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: PAHighways on October 29, 2019, 07:27:24 PM
It appears to be a district-by-district basis as only Districts 4, 5, 8, and 11 have non-Interstate expressways with exit numbers, and only one or two at most in each.

SM-G965U

Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ipeters61 on October 29, 2019, 10:50:00 PM
Quote from: Roadsguy on October 29, 2019, 07:20:22 PM
PennDOT should honestly just start generally numbering exits on all expressways.

I wonder why PA 28 was given exit numbers at all, when other similar suburban and rural non-Interstate expressways like US 219 never got any. From a quick check of historic GSV, the PA 60 expressway had sequential exit numbers as well until it was made I-376.
PA-309 North Cross Valley Expressway and PA-29 South Cross Valley Expressway in the Wilkes-Barre area both have exit numbers, but PA-283 between Harrisburg and Lancaster, US-30 between Coatesville and Exton, and US-202 between West Chester and King of Prussia don't have exit numbers.  Is it a district thing, I wonder?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ixnay on October 30, 2019, 07:06:13 AM
Quote from: ipeters61 on October 29, 2019, 10:50:00 PM
PA-309 North Cross Valley Expressway and PA-29 South Cross Valley Expressway in the Wilkes-Barre area both have exit numbers, but PA-283 between Harrisburg and Lancaster, US-30 between Coatesville and Exton, and US-202 between West Chester and King of Prussia don't have exit numbers.  Is it a district thing, I wonder?

And if so, why is PennDOT allowing it to be so?

ixnay
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ekt8750 on October 30, 2019, 10:52:04 AM
Hell while we're at it, I wish PennDOT would post mileage on their surface traffic routes. An enhanced mile marker at every half mile (ala what NJ has done) would make the system easier to traverse especially in locations where routes are hard to follow (looking right at you Philly).
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: storm2k on October 30, 2019, 11:46:06 AM
Quote from: ekt8750 on October 30, 2019, 10:52:04 AM
Hell while we're at it, I wish PennDOT would post mileage on their surface traffic routes. An enhanced mile marker at every half mile (ala what NJ has done) would make the system easier to traverse especially in locations where routes are hard to follow (looking right at you Philly).

Agree that the EMM's on surface roads would be a nice improvement, but don't think it would necessarily help in cities, since the cities themselves usually maintain the roads even if they're considered state highways. NJ-28 thru Plainfield is the first thing that pops to mind for me, as what signs there are are old and decayed, and not usually replaced if they fall off or get vandalized. Plus, no EMM's through there. I would like Philly to do more of this (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.0306381,-75.0549198,3a,15y,104.4h,95t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sjXAMfzGpFjvM-lseUMgrhg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192), which is a smart way to keep routes signed throughout the city. It's nice where it exists, but it's very inconsistent.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on October 30, 2019, 02:03:55 PM
Quote from: ekt8750 on October 30, 2019, 10:52:04 AM
Hell while we're at it, I wish PennDOT would post mileage on their surface traffic routes. An enhanced mile marker at every half mile (ala what NJ has done) would make the system easier to traverse especially in locations where routes are hard to follow (looking right at you Philly).

PennDOT doesn't even post their little white LRS markers on surface streets in Philadelphia. They definitely won't install mile markers on streets in the city.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ekt8750 on October 30, 2019, 03:10:30 PM
Quote from: storm2k on October 30, 2019, 11:46:06 AM
I would like Philly to do more of this (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.0306381,-75.0549198,3a,15y,104.4h,95t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sjXAMfzGpFjvM-lseUMgrhg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192), which is a smart way to keep routes signed throughout the city. It's nice where it exists, but it's very inconsistent.

Agreed but since they only seem to replace their sign blades on what they consider an "as needed" basis, it'll be a long time before those shielded blades become the rule more than the exception.

Quote from: Roadsguy on October 30, 2019, 02:03:55 PM
PennDOT doesn't even post their little white LRS markers on surface streets in Philadelphia. They definitely won't install mile markers on streets in the city.

You're right about that and it's an annoyance. I have a buddy who works in Philly's Streets Dept and he has a ton of stories about residents finding out they live on state roads within the city (usually when it comes to snow removal).
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on October 30, 2019, 03:58:42 PM
Quote from: ekt8750 on October 30, 2019, 03:10:30 PM
Quote from: storm2k on October 30, 2019, 11:46:06 AM
I would like Philly to do more of this (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.0306381,-75.0549198,3a,15y,104.4h,95t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sjXAMfzGpFjvM-lseUMgrhg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192), which is a smart way to keep routes signed throughout the city. It's nice where it exists, but it's very inconsistent.

Agreed but since they only seem to replace their sign blades on what they consider an "as needed" basis, it'll be a long time before those shielded blades become the rule more than the exception.

Quote from: Roadsguy on October 30, 2019, 02:03:55 PM
PennDOT doesn't even post their little white LRS markers on surface streets in Philadelphia. They definitely won't install mile markers on streets in the city.

You're right about that and it's an annoyance. I have a buddy who works in Philly's Streets Dept and he has a ton of stories about residents finding out they live on state roads within the city (usually when it comes to snow removal).

The state routes are shown on the PennDOT VideoLog (https://gis.penndot.gov/Videolog/) (which just changed its address for the record).
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Crown Victoria on November 19, 2019, 03:32:01 PM
An interesting article about the planning for I-78 through the Lehigh Valley:

https://www.mcall.com/business/transportation/road-warrior/mc-biz-road-warrior-interstate-78-corridor-debate-20191119-ncjzr63strg57bft37v5avr56y-story.html
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: seicer on December 01, 2019, 06:20:01 PM
Regarding the future US 322/I-95 interchange reconstruction project, what will that entail? Reading over the slides for Section CSX (http://us322conchester.com/news/section-csx-open-house-slideshow/), provisions are being made for a future I-95 NB to US Route 322 WB ramp. Have plans been released as to what this interchange will look like?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: MASTERNC on December 01, 2019, 09:54:46 PM
I never thought I would see this but I found a 60 MPH zone in PA - it was a work zone speed limit on I-79 southbound just north of Cranberry.  Traffic is routed onto a temporary bridge in the median.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: SteveG1988 on December 01, 2019, 10:23:14 PM
Quote from: Crown Victoria on November 19, 2019, 03:32:01 PM
An interesting article about the planning for I-78 through the Lehigh Valley:

https://www.mcall.com/business/transportation/road-warrior/mc-biz-road-warrior-interstate-78-corridor-debate-20191119-ncjzr63strg57bft37v5avr56y-story.html

Interesting read. I do think they took a good option on how to route I78 around Easton. It would have been very dumb to take it through town and over the older bridge there. Having a Southern bypass of the city was a better idea. Not making 22 a 3di as well was a missed oppertunity to tie in easton to the interstate grid.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Beltway on December 01, 2019, 11:47:09 PM
Quote from: Crown Victoria on November 19, 2019, 03:32:01 PM
An interesting article about the planning for I-78 through the Lehigh Valley:
https://www.mcall.com/business/transportation/road-warrior/mc-biz-road-warrior-interstate-78-corridor-debate-20191119-ncjzr63strg57bft37v5avr56y-story.html
The southern line adds about 4 more miles to the PA-309 line that was chosen.

The thing I liked about the southern line back when the bypass was being proposed, was the connection with the Turnpike at a location where it could effectively serve I-78 to the east of there.

According to the article, at least by omission, the list of interchanges would not include a Turnpike interchange.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ixnay on December 02, 2019, 08:30:52 AM
I attended what is now Kutztown Univ. in the early '80s when the I-78 debate was going on.  Where the southern I-78 route would have branched off current 78/22 near Adams Road, I recall seeing a sign saying (approximate quote) /"[I-78 shield] ENDS HERE/FOLLOW US 22".  (don't recall if "US 22" was text or a 22 shield).

About the only landmark in that area that I recall was the Schaefer (now Samuel Adams) brewery on PA 100 just south of current 78/22.  Now that proposed I-78 corridor is built up at the west end with an Ocean Spray plant, Home Depot and Nestle' water distribution centers, and lodgings and industrial parks.  How much of that was there in the early '80s idk.  I-78 couldn't run through there now if it wanted to.

ixnay
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Crown Victoria on December 02, 2019, 08:59:24 PM
Quote from: Beltway on December 01, 2019, 11:47:09 PM
Quote from: Crown Victoria on November 19, 2019, 03:32:01 PM
An interesting article about the planning for I-78 through the Lehigh Valley:
https://www.mcall.com/business/transportation/road-warrior/mc-biz-road-warrior-interstate-78-corridor-debate-20191119-ncjzr63strg57bft37v5avr56y-story.html
The southern line adds about 4 more miles to the PA-309 line that was chosen.

The thing I liked about the southern line back when the bypass was being proposed, was the connection with the Turnpike at a location where it could effectively serve I-78 to the east of there.

According to the article, at least by omission, the list of interchanges would not include a Turnpike interchange.

I thought it was a bit strange that there was no Turnpike interchange with the proposed southern route shown...but then again, this is PA we're talking about.  I wouldn't have put it past them to not plan that interchange!

Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Beltway on December 02, 2019, 09:07:14 PM
Quote from: Crown Victoria on December 02, 2019, 08:59:24 PM
Quote from: Beltway on December 01, 2019, 11:47:09 PM
The southern line adds about 4 more miles to the PA-309 line that was chosen.
The thing I liked about the southern line back when the bypass was being proposed, was the connection with the Turnpike at a location where it could effectively serve I-78 to the east of there.
According to the article, at least by omission, the list of interchanges would not include a Turnpike interchange.
I thought it was a bit strange that there was no Turnpike interchange with the proposed southern route shown...but then again, this is PA we're talking about.  I wouldn't have put it past them to not plan that interchange!
They typically didn't, or relegated the Turnpike interchange to sometime in the future after the PennDOT freeway was built.

That was the case with the I-476/I-276 interchange, PennDOT had a scheme worked out to connect it to the Plymouth Meeting local interchange with the Turnpike, until some day when the direct connection could be built.  Fortunately the PTC and PennDOT worked out a funding arrangement to build the direct interchange connection at the same time.

Nice that the newspaper showed the southern line.  I looked around for about 10 minutes and I found no such map posted on the Internet.  PennDOT has historical maps for every tenth year, but the 1980 and 1970 maps did not show the proposed I-78 Bypass route.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Crown Victoria on December 04, 2019, 07:26:41 PM
Back to the present on I-78...looks like reconstruction from the Berks line to PA 100 is finally on the table:

https://www.mcall.com/business/transportation/mc-biz-lehigh-valley-interstate-78-update-20191204-lifyztkuejadxgiovamwvfnt7q-story.html


Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Alps on December 04, 2019, 11:01:58 PM
Quote from: Crown Victoria on December 04, 2019, 07:26:41 PM
Back to the present on I-78...looks like reconstruction from the Berks line to PA 100 is finally on the table:

https://www.mcall.com/business/transportation/mc-biz-lehigh-valley-interstate-78-update-20191204-lifyztkuejadxgiovamwvfnt7q-story.html



Forget that, there's finally a climbing lane heading east toward PA 33! Praise the Lord.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on December 05, 2019, 06:46:16 AM
Quote from: Alps on December 04, 2019, 11:01:58 PM
Quote from: Crown Victoria on December 04, 2019, 07:26:41 PM
Back to the present on I-78...looks like reconstruction from the Berks line to PA 100 is finally on the table:

https://www.mcall.com/business/transportation/mc-biz-lehigh-valley-interstate-78-update-20191204-lifyztkuejadxgiovamwvfnt7q-story.html



Forget that, there's finally a climbing lane heading east toward PA 33! Praise the Lord.

I completely agree with you on that.  That may be the most significant improvement needed to I-78 minus a widening to 6 lanes that may not happen for a few decades.

In other PA news, a proposed P3 project that will widen I-81 to 6 lanes between Exits 164 (PA 29) and 168 (Highland Park Blvd) (https://www.penndot.gov/pages/all-news-details.aspx?newsid=690) in the Wilkes-Barre area was approved yesterday by the P3 Board.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: seicer on December 05, 2019, 07:29:16 AM
"The project includes widening the Interstate to three lanes in both directions between Exit 164 to Exit 168, realigning 2.5 miles of I-81 southbound and replacing 8 bridges, as well as other related improvements. Safety and mobility improvements include eliminating a left-hand exit on I-81 northbound (Route 309) and addressing a substandard weave distance between SR 0029 and SR 0309 on I-81 northbound."

I'm trying to determine what will be realigned along I-81 SB.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on December 05, 2019, 09:35:14 AM
Quote from: seicer on December 05, 2019, 07:29:16 AM
"The project includes widening the Interstate to three lanes in both directions between Exit 164 to Exit 168, realigning 2.5 miles of I-81 southbound and replacing 8 bridges, as well as other related improvements. Safety and mobility improvements include eliminating a left-hand exit on I-81 northbound (Route 309) and addressing a substandard weave distance between SR 0029 and SR 0309 on I-81 northbound."

I'm trying to determine what will be realigned along I-81 SB.

My first guess would be realigning the southbound lanes through the southern PA 309/Business 309 interchange to stay parallel to the northbound lanes and moving the ramps accordingly, though that only measures about 1.5 miles according to Google Maps. Not sure what else would be realigned since the lanes stick together throughout the rest of the stretch, except for a slight median widening at the Highland Park Blvd interchange that I really hope isn't what they mean.

Hopefully it's eventually six-laned up into Scranton without leaving a gap between Highland Park Blvd and the PA 309 expressway. They haven't had funding in the past, but they've been gradually replacing all the bridges between 309 and the Central Scranton Expressway with room for a third lane included. Arguably, it should be eight lanes between the Central Scranton and I-84/380/US 6, but I doubt they're in a hurry to widen the big bridge over Roaring Brook and Mill Street.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: seicer on December 05, 2019, 11:06:55 AM
There won't be a need for eight lanes when the I-476 is used as a de-facto bypass of Scranton. It looks like that project is moving ahead.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: vdeane on December 05, 2019, 01:42:55 PM
I remain skeptical that they'll get significant traffic relief - at least not if they de-toll that part of I-476, which as far as I'm aware, is not part of the plan.  PA Turnpike tolls are obscene and I'm sure there will be many shunpikers.  Plus traffic going to/from I-84 or Scranton will still need to go that way.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on December 05, 2019, 05:24:51 PM
The conversion from a regular diamond to a DDI at the US 222/US 322 interchange near Ephrata has begun. (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1081)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Crown Victoria on December 05, 2019, 07:03:50 PM
PennDOT wants to know what the public thinks about I-81 in south central PA:

https://www.pennlive.com/news/2019/12/public-input-wanted-to-help-guide-i-81-improvements-website-launched.html

Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: DJStephens on December 06, 2019, 11:21:30 PM
Quote from: SteveG1988 on December 01, 2019, 10:23:14 PM
Quote from: Crown Victoria on November 19, 2019, 03:32:01 PM
An interesting article about the planning for I-78 through the Lehigh Valley:

https://www.mcall.com/business/transportation/road-warrior/mc-biz-road-warrior-interstate-78-corridor-debate-20191119-ncjzr63strg57bft37v5avr56y-story.html

Interesting read. I do think they took a good option on how to route I78 around Easton. It would have been very dumb to take it through town and over the older bridge there. Having a Southern bypass of the city was a better idea. Not making 22 a 3di as well was a missed oppertunity to tie in easton to the interstate grid.

Disagree.  78 should have been kept on the Lehigh Valley Expressway.  Had an aunt/uncle who lived in the area for many years.  Uncle was head of engineering at former Mack Truck facility.   Remember the plans and debates about routing - first way south of the Allentown/Bethlehem metro area and then what was ultimately chosen - the overlay and upgrade of state route 309.   Personally it could have preserved more of the semi-rural character of that area had the Lehigh Valley Expressway (US 22) been properly upgraded through both Easton and Phillipsburg.   Direct and logical.   Political factions in Easton were able to blunt US 22 upgrading to true Interstate standards.   
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Beltway on December 06, 2019, 11:28:32 PM
Quote from: DJStephens on December 06, 2019, 11:21:30 PM
Disagree.  78 should have been kept on the Lehigh Valley Expressway.   
[......]
Political factions in Easton were able to blunt US 22 upgrading to true Interstate standards.   
Problem is, how to engineer it thru Easton, deal with Cemetery Curve, and then how to engineer it thru Phillipsburg where there was no freeway for US-22.

https://www.google.com/maps/place/Phillipsburg,+NJ+08865/@40.6985537,-75.223117,2739m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m5!3m4!1s0x89c46da371024c57:0xee9545623288de2!8m2!3d40.6937099!4d-75.1901761
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: DJStephens on December 06, 2019, 11:33:48 PM
Yes am aware of the sinuous alignment there.   Not saying it would have been easy, just preferable.  Acquiring a block wide corridor was possible in the early to mid sixties.   
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Beltway on December 07, 2019, 12:48:47 AM
Quote from: DJStephens on December 06, 2019, 11:33:48 PM
Yes am aware of the sinuous alignment there.   Not saying it would have been easy, just preferable.  Acquiring a block wide corridor was possible in the early to mid sixties.   
Rather hilly terrain, major grade changes, a couple viaducts.  They would have had to cut thru the a hill and take out a wide swath in that neighborhood.

It was built in the late 1950s and they would have gone thru the neighborhood had it been feasible.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ixnay on December 07, 2019, 08:28:52 AM
Quote from: Beltway on December 07, 2019, 12:48:47 AM
Quote from: DJStephens on December 06, 2019, 11:33:48 PM
Yes am aware of the sinuous alignment there.   Not saying it would have been easy, just preferable.  Acquiring a block wide corridor was possible in the early to mid sixties.   
Rather hilly terrain, major grade changes, a couple viaducts.  They would have had to cut thru the a hill and take out a wide swath in that neighborhood.

It was built in the late 1950s and they would have gone thru the neighborhood had it been feasible.

How would have 78 been routed through Phillipsburg*?  Would it have joined the current alignment at exit 3?

*Do locals still call Phillipsburg "P'burg"?  The student in charge of my dormitory wing at Kutztown U when I was a freshman did so.  His girlfriend was from P'burg.  He himself was from Easton.

ixnay
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Beltway on December 07, 2019, 09:19:02 AM
Quote from: ixnay on December 07, 2019, 08:28:52 AM
How would have 78 been routed through Phillipsburg*?  Would it have joined the current alignment at exit 3?
Good question.  I wonder if an alternative was preliminarily designed for such a route.

The big advantage to the new location I-78 south of the A-B-E-P area is that there are now two major east-west highways thru the region, actually skirting the edges of the built-up area.  Provides service both north and south of the cities.

With the volume of traffic today, an upgraded US-22/I-78 would need at least 8 lanes and there is the aforementioned issue where to route it thru Phillipsburg, or perhaps follow US-22 but use the PA-33 route to connect US-22 to where today's southern bypass of Phillipsburg runs to the east of there into N.J.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Alps on December 09, 2019, 11:09:33 PM
Quote from: Beltway on December 06, 2019, 11:28:32 PM
Quote from: DJStephens on December 06, 2019, 11:21:30 PM
Disagree.  78 should have been kept on the Lehigh Valley Expressway.   
[......]
Political factions in Easton were able to blunt US 22 upgrading to true Interstate standards.   
Problem is, how to engineer it thru Easton, deal with Cemetery Curve, and then how to engineer it thru Phillipsburg where there was no freeway for US-22.

https://www.google.com/maps/place/Phillipsburg,+NJ+08865/@40.6985537,-75.223117,2739m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m5!3m4!1s0x89c46da371024c57:0xee9545623288de2!8m2!3d40.6937099!4d-75.1901761
Through Easton, elevate it over the cemetery so that you only have to move a few people under each pier. Through Pburg, I think you need a new Delaware River bridge, bypass the heart of town to the north, then swing down into the 24-28 Connector stretch of US 22 and upgrade on the spot from there. Can't do it now, maybe could do it then, but still a lot of takings.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Beltway on December 09, 2019, 11:23:31 PM
Quote from: Alps on December 09, 2019, 11:09:33 PM
Quote from: Beltway on December 06, 2019, 11:28:32 PM
Problem is, how to engineer it thru Easton, deal with Cemetery Curve, and then how to engineer it thru Phillipsburg where there was no freeway for US-22.
Through Easton, elevate it over the cemetery so that you only have to move a few people under each pier. Through Pburg, I think you need a new Delaware River bridge, bypass the heart of town to the north, then swing down into the 24-28 Connector stretch of US 22 and upgrade on the spot from there. Can't do it now, maybe could do it then, but still a lot of takings.
The straightest route to eliminate the cemetery curve would pass thru the neighborhood just south of the cemetery.

The issue is that there is enough of a hill there that there would be a large cut needed, bridging over would entail steep grades.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: qguy on December 10, 2019, 06:36:59 AM
Quote from: Beltway on December 09, 2019, 11:23:31 PM
Quote from: Alps on December 09, 2019, 11:09:33 PM
Quote from: Beltway on December 06, 2019, 11:28:32 PM
Problem is, how to engineer it thru Easton, deal with Cemetery Curve, and then how to engineer it thru Phillipsburg where there was no freeway for US-22.
Through Easton, elevate it over the cemetery so that you only have to move a few people under each pier. Through Pburg, I think you need a new Delaware River bridge, bypass the heart of town to the north, then swing down into the 24-28 Connector stretch of US 22 and upgrade on the spot from there. Can't do it now, maybe could do it then, but still a lot of takings.
The straightest route to eliminate the cemetery curve would pass thru the neighborhood just south of the cemetery.

The issue is that there is enough of a hill there that there would be a large cut needed, bridging over would entail steep grades.

Sometime around 2000 PennDOT District 5-0 studied boring a tunnel under the hill to straighten the alignment as a safety improvement. I saw a plan of one of the alignments considered when I worked at District 6-0. In the end they abandoned the idea.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Beltway on December 10, 2019, 06:43:09 AM
Quote from: qguy on December 10, 2019, 06:36:59 AM
Quote from: Beltway on December 09, 2019, 11:23:31 PM
The straightest route to eliminate the cemetery curve would pass thru the neighborhood just south of the cemetery.   The issue is that there is enough of a hill there that there would be a large cut needed, bridging over would entail steep grades.
Sometime around 2000 PennDOT District 5-0 studied boring a tunnel under the hill to straighten the alignment as a safety improvement. I saw a plan of one of the alignments considered when I worked at District 6-0. In the end they abandoned the idea.
Looks like it would be about 4,500 feet long.

That would likely be in the $500 million to $1 billion range, to construct.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: TheGrassGuy on December 10, 2019, 02:44:26 PM
I was looking on Google Maps and saw that an EB ramp had been built between Aramingo and PA 90 in Philly. A much needed connection, even if it destroyed a stub. Anyone know more about that?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ekt8750 on December 10, 2019, 03:29:04 PM
Quote from: TheGrassGuy on December 10, 2019, 02:44:26 PM
I was looking on Google Maps and saw that an EB ramp had been built between Aramingo and PA 90 in Philly. A much needed connection, even if it destroyed a stub. Anyone know more about that?

That's part of a larger project to connect Torresdale Av with the Betsy Ross via the alignment of Adams Av. The interchange improvements with I-95 and Aramingo Av (and the elimination of the infamous stub ramps) was the first stage. It's a far cry from the original intent to have a freeway that was to connect the Blvd to the bridge.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: odditude on December 10, 2019, 05:07:08 PM
Quote from: TheGrassGuy on December 10, 2019, 02:44:26 PM
Anyone know more about that?

The project site (http://www.95revive.com/) has all the details, and the interchange in question is part of section BRI (http://www.95revive.com/i95/project-areas/bridge-street-interchange-to-betsy-ross-bridge-interchange-(bri)/bri-home).
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on December 10, 2019, 05:22:11 PM
The opening of the new ramp (and the activation of the new signal) for PA 283 WB traffic accessing I-76/PA Turnpike will be activated Thursday. (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1082)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on December 12, 2019, 11:23:58 AM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on December 05, 2019, 06:46:16 AM
Quote from: Alps on December 04, 2019, 11:01:58 PM
Quote from: Crown Victoria on December 04, 2019, 07:26:41 PM
Back to the present on I-78...looks like reconstruction from the Berks line to PA 100 is finally on the table:

https://www.mcall.com/business/transportation/mc-biz-lehigh-valley-interstate-78-update-20191204-lifyztkuejadxgiovamwvfnt7q-story.html



Forget that, there's finally a climbing lane heading east toward PA 33! Praise the Lord.

I completely agree with you on that.  That may be the most significant improvement needed to I-78 minus a widening to 6 lanes that may not happen for a few decades.


In response to this, the Road Warrior column in the Morning Call responds to a question about potentially making US 22 and PA 33 interstates (http://www.mcall.com/business/transportation/road-warrior/mc-biz-road-warrior-reader-response-route-22-interstate-20191211-zpadel6vnbapvkuwawl2dby4qu-story.html).

With funding being taken away from US 22 to improve I-78, yeah about that...

Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: CentralPAGal on December 15, 2019, 03:26:56 PM
The I-83/Mt. Rose interchange saga continues:

https://www.abc27.com/news/local/york/mt-rose-contractor-seeks-more-time-money/ (https://www.abc27.com/news/local/york/mt-rose-contractor-seeks-more-time-money/)

Personally, I am hoping that this contractor gets blacklisted from PennDot contracts in the future.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Crown Victoria on December 15, 2019, 04:13:30 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on December 12, 2019, 11:23:58 AM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on December 05, 2019, 06:46:16 AM
Quote from: Alps on December 04, 2019, 11:01:58 PM
Quote from: Crown Victoria on December 04, 2019, 07:26:41 PM
Back to the present on I-78...looks like reconstruction from the Berks line to PA 100 is finally on the table:

https://www.mcall.com/business/transportation/mc-biz-lehigh-valley-interstate-78-update-20191204-lifyztkuejadxgiovamwvfnt7q-story.html



Forget that, there's finally a climbing lane heading east toward PA 33! Praise the Lord.

I completely agree with you on that.  That may be the most significant improvement needed to I-78 minus a widening to 6 lanes that may not happen for a few decades.


In response to this, the Road Warrior column in the Morning Call responds to a question about potentially making US 22 and PA 33 interstates (http://www.mcall.com/business/transportation/road-warrior/mc-biz-road-warrior-reader-response-route-22-interstate-20191211-zpadel6vnbapvkuwawl2dby4qu-story.html).

With funding being taken away from US 22 to improve I-78, yeah about that...

Ironic considering US 22 was I-78 at one time.  The reality is, both roads need upgrades yesterday.   But with so much of our gas tax going to the State Police, and uncertainty at the federal level, decisions needed to be made...
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: MASTERNC on December 21, 2019, 02:51:46 PM
Seeing a few more four head FYAs in PA but very scattered. Philadelphia has one at 15th & Arch for SB right turns and then for WB left turns onto 15th.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: PAHighways on December 21, 2019, 03:00:56 PM
Quote from: MASTERNC on December 21, 2019, 02:51:46 PM
Seeing a few more four head FYAs in PA but very scattered. Philadelphia has one at 15th & Arch for SB right turns and then for WB left turns onto 15th.
I know of at least two FYAs in Allegheny County:  Oakland neighborhood of Pittsburgh near the Carnegie-Mellon University campus and PA 48/PA 148 intersection in McKeesport.  So far none in my home county.

Interesting there is a FYA for a right turn considering PennDOT does not recommend them for those turns.  Then again, Philadelphia had red arrows long before the rest of the state.

SM-G965U

Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: MASTERNC on December 21, 2019, 10:41:21 PM
Quote from: PAHighways on December 21, 2019, 03:00:56 PM
Quote from: MASTERNC on December 21, 2019, 02:51:46 PM
Seeing a few more four head FYAs in PA but very scattered. Philadelphia has one at 15th & Arch for SB right turns and then for WB left turns onto 15th.
I know of at least two FYAs in Allegheny County:  Oakland neighborhood of Pittsburgh near the Carnegie-Mellon University campus and PA 48/PA 148 intersection in McKeesport.  So far none in my home county.

Interesting there is a FYA for a right turn considering PennDOT does not recommend them for those turns.  Then again, Philadelphia had red arrows long before the rest of the state.

SM-G965U



They also don't seem to be using the green arrow in either case at that intersection despite having it in the signal. Even the left turn, which used to be a regular left turn signal now shows a FYA when there used to be a green arrow.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: tylert120 on December 22, 2019, 07:09:56 PM
Quote from: PAHighways on December 21, 2019, 03:00:56 PM
Quote from: MASTERNC on December 21, 2019, 02:51:46 PM
Seeing a few more four head FYAs in PA but very scattered. Philadelphia has one at 15th & Arch for SB right turns and then for WB left turns onto 15th.
I know of at least two FYAs in Allegheny County:  Oakland neighborhood of Pittsburgh near the Carnegie-Mellon University campus and PA 48/PA 148 intersection in McKeesport.  So far none in my home county.

Interesting there is a FYA for a right turn considering PennDOT does not recommend them for those turns.  Then again, Philadelphia had red arrows long before the rest of the state.

SM-G965U

I know of one in Greentree at SR 121 & Potomac Ave.

Also, the city of Pittsburgh is in the process of installing several as they upgrade signals around town.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Mr_Northside on December 23, 2019, 03:31:43 PM
I can vouch for one being somewhere on PA-65 between Freedom & Sewickley somewhere.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: sbeaver44 on December 26, 2019, 08:56:09 PM
I know of 3 FYAs around Harrisburg, 2 of which were installed in the last 6 months:
-Yorktown Rd (I-83 SB frontage road at Exit 35) at PA 177
-Hunter Ln at Erford Rd near Wormleysburg for Rite Aid Corporate HQ
-Wesley Dr at US 15 near Mechanicsburg
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: SGwithADD on January 04, 2020, 09:48:19 PM
Quote from: tylert120 on December 22, 2019, 07:09:56 PM
Quote from: PAHighways on December 21, 2019, 03:00:56 PM
Quote from: MASTERNC on December 21, 2019, 02:51:46 PM
Seeing a few more four head FYAs in PA but very scattered. Philadelphia has one at 15th & Arch for SB right turns and then for WB left turns onto 15th.
I know of at least two FYAs in Allegheny County:  Oakland neighborhood of Pittsburgh near the Carnegie-Mellon University campus and PA 48/PA 148 intersection in McKeesport.  So far none in my home county.

Interesting there is a FYA for a right turn considering PennDOT does not recommend them for those turns.  Then again, Philadelphia had red arrows long before the rest of the state.

SM-G965U

I know of one in Greentree at SR 121 & Potomac Ave.

Also, the city of Pittsburgh is in the process of installing several as they upgrade signals around town.

The city just installed a 4-head FYA at the intersection of Fifth Ave. and Negley Ave., replacing a signal that did not previously provide protected turns for traffic on Negley.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ixnay on January 05, 2020, 08:24:38 AM
Quote from: SGwithADD on January 04, 2020, 09:48:19 PM
Quote from: tylert120 on December 22, 2019, 07:09:56 PM
Quote from: PAHighways on December 21, 2019, 03:00:56 PM
Quote from: MASTERNC on December 21, 2019, 02:51:46 PM
Seeing a few more four head FYAs in PA but very scattered. Philadelphia has one at 15th & Arch for SB right turns and then for WB left turns onto 15th.
I know of at least two FYAs in Allegheny County:  Oakland neighborhood of Pittsburgh near the Carnegie-Mellon University campus and PA 48/PA 148 intersection in McKeesport.  So far none in my home county.

Interesting there is a FYA for a right turn considering PennDOT does not recommend them for those turns.  Then again, Philadelphia had red arrows long before the rest of the state.

SM-G965U

I know of one in Greentree at SR 121 & Potomac Ave.

Also, the city of Pittsburgh is in the process of installing several as they upgrade signals around town.

The city just installed a 4-head FYA at the intersection of Fifth Ave. and Negley Ave., replacing a signal that did not previously provide protected turns for traffic on Negley.

FYA?  :confused:

ixnay
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Alps on January 05, 2020, 10:19:24 AM
Quote from: ixnay on January 05, 2020, 08:24:38 AM
Quote from: SGwithADD on January 04, 2020, 09:48:19 PM
Quote from: tylert120 on December 22, 2019, 07:09:56 PM
Quote from: PAHighways on December 21, 2019, 03:00:56 PM
Quote from: MASTERNC on December 21, 2019, 02:51:46 PM
Seeing a few more four head FYAs in PA but very scattered. Philadelphia has one at 15th & Arch for SB right turns and then for WB left turns onto 15th.
I know of at least two FYAs in Allegheny County:  Oakland neighborhood of Pittsburgh near the Carnegie-Mellon University campus and PA 48/PA 148 intersection in McKeesport.  So far none in my home county.

Interesting there is a FYA for a right turn considering PennDOT does not recommend them for those turns.  Then again, Philadelphia had red arrows long before the rest of the state.

SM-G965U

I know of one in Greentree at SR 121 & Potomac Ave.

Also, the city of Pittsburgh is in the process of installing several as they upgrade signals around town.

The city just installed a 4-head FYA at the intersection of Fifth Ave. and Negley Ave., replacing a signal that did not previously provide protected turns for traffic on Negley.

FYA?  :confused:

ixnay
Flashing Yellow Arrow :alarmed:
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on January 08, 2020, 04:14:52 PM
Markley St (US 202 SB) will be closed to northbound traffic for 2.5 years starting January 27th (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=5418).

There is no surprise that Dekalb St (US 202 NB) is the detour.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Alps on January 08, 2020, 05:47:56 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on January 08, 2020, 04:14:52 PM
Markley St (US 202 SB) will be closed to northbound traffic for 2.5 years starting January 27th (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=5418).

There is no surprise that Dekalb St (US 202 NB) is the detour.
Why does 202 split through Norristown? It would seem to me that the NB road should be the business route.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on January 08, 2020, 07:51:59 PM
Quote from: Alps on January 08, 2020, 05:47:56 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on January 08, 2020, 04:14:52 PM
Markley St (US 202 SB) will be closed to northbound traffic for 2.5 years starting January 27th (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=5418).

There is no surprise that Dekalb St (US 202 NB) is the detour.
Why does 202 split through Norristown? It would seem to me that the NB road should be the business route.

Why it doesn't just follow Markley Street/Swede Road all the way is a very good question, but making Dekalb Street a business route wouldn't really work since it's one-way through downtown Norristown.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ixnay on January 08, 2020, 07:59:43 PM
Quote from: Alps on January 05, 2020, 10:19:24 AM
Quote from: ixnay on January 05, 2020, 08:24:38 AM
Quote from: SGwithADD on January 04, 2020, 09:48:19 PM
Quote from: tylert120 on December 22, 2019, 07:09:56 PM
Quote from: PAHighways on December 21, 2019, 03:00:56 PM
Quote from: MASTERNC on December 21, 2019, 02:51:46 PM
Seeing a few more four head FYAs in PA but very scattered. Philadelphia has one at 15th & Arch for SB right turns and then for WB left turns onto 15th.
I know of at least two FYAs in Allegheny County:  Oakland neighborhood of Pittsburgh near the Carnegie-Mellon University campus and PA 48/PA 148 intersection in McKeesport.  So far none in my home county.

Interesting there is a FYA for a right turn considering PennDOT does not recommend them for those turns.  Then again, Philadelphia had red arrows long before the rest of the state.

SM-G965U

I know of one in Greentree at SR 121 & Potomac Ave.

Also, the city of Pittsburgh is in the process of installing several as they upgrade signals around town.

The city just installed a 4-head FYA at the intersection of Fifth Ave. and Negley Ave., replacing a signal that did not previously provide protected turns for traffic on Negley.

FYA?  :confused:

ixnay
Flashing Yellow Arrow :alarmed:

D'oh!

ixnay
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on January 08, 2020, 08:38:03 PM
Quote from: Roadsguy on January 08, 2020, 07:51:59 PM
Quote from: Alps on January 08, 2020, 05:47:56 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on January 08, 2020, 04:14:52 PM
Markley St (US 202 SB) will be closed to northbound traffic for 2.5 years starting January 27th (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=5418).

There is no surprise that Dekalb St (US 202 NB) is the detour.
Why does 202 split through Norristown? It would seem to me that the NB road should be the business route.

Why it doesn't just follow Markley Street/Swede Road all the way is a very good question, but making Dekalb Street a business route wouldn't really work since it's one-way through downtown Norristown.

Markley St will still only be one lane NB after the project is complete so leaving the split at least keeps two lanes per direction in the area. (as confusing as that sounds)

Having said that, I agree that US 202 SB should be on Swede Rd instead of cutting over at Johnson Hwy.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on January 08, 2020, 09:10:49 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on January 08, 2020, 08:38:03 PM
Quote from: Roadsguy on January 08, 2020, 07:51:59 PM
Quote from: Alps on January 08, 2020, 05:47:56 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on January 08, 2020, 04:14:52 PM
Markley St (US 202 SB) will be closed to northbound traffic for 2.5 years starting January 27th (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=5418).

There is no surprise that Dekalb St (US 202 NB) is the detour.
Why does 202 split through Norristown? It would seem to me that the NB road should be the business route.

Why it doesn't just follow Markley Street/Swede Road all the way is a very good question, but making Dekalb Street a business route wouldn't really work since it's one-way through downtown Norristown.

Markley St will still only be one lane NB after the project is complete so leaving the split at least keeps two lanes per direction in the area. (as confusing as that sounds)

Having said that, I agree that US 202 SB should be on Swede Rd instead of cutting over at Johnson Hwy.

I suppose if they really wanted to, they could make the pair of road three lanes, with two one way and one the other, so that US 202 can be four lanes. If necessary, Markley Street could be made one-way through at least part of downtown. This would work better after Lafayette Street is completed to the weird half-diamond thing at the Dannehower Bridge, to allow for more east-west connectivity between the two directions of 202.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: sbeaver44 on January 11, 2020, 05:20:03 PM
Probably a pedantic question, but is the northern end of I-476 the trumpet with I-81, or the trumpet with US 11?  If it's US 11, then there is a very short unsigned I-476/US 6 concurrency.  I consider the two trumpets to be separate interchanges.

Wiki says I-81/US 6/US 11 so it's treating it all as one interchange.  But it also says 476 "ends at an interchange with connections to I-81, US 6 and US 11. US 6 joins the turnpike for less than 1⁄4 mile (0.40 km) to connect between I-81 and US 11. "

If I read this correctly, I-476 ends at the trumpet with I-81, and only US 6 exists between the trumpets without I-476, but that US 6 is sort of part of the (non-tolled) PA Turnpike for a hot second.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on January 11, 2020, 05:37:39 PM
We discussed this on TM (http://forum.travelmapping.net/index.php?topic=2939.0) last year and agreed to extend I-476 to US 11.  You can see the green extend to there on the PennDOT Traffic Volume Map for Lackawanna County (http://www.dot7.state.pa.us/BPR_pdf_files/MAPS/Traffic/Traffic_Volume/County_Maps/Lackawanna_TV.pdf).

Having said that, we will see if the Scranton Beltway in the future could require another change here.

Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Alps on January 11, 2020, 07:12:03 PM
Quote from: sbeaver44 on January 11, 2020, 05:20:03 PM
Probably a pedantic question, but is the northern end of I-476 the trumpet with I-81, or the trumpet with US 11?  If it's US 11, then there is a very short unsigned I-476/US 6 concurrency.  I consider the two trumpets to be separate interchanges.

Wiki says I-81/US 6/US 11 so it's treating it all as one interchange.  But it also says 476 "ends at an interchange with connections to I-81, US 6 and US 11. US 6 joins the turnpike for less than 1⁄4 mile (0.40 km) to connect between I-81 and US 11. "

If I read this correctly, I-476 ends at the trumpet with I-81, and only US 6 exists between the trumpets without I-476, but that US 6 is sort of part of the (non-tolled) PA Turnpike for a hot second.
Now see, I'd end it at I-81, meaning on that other trumpet ramp, and also concurrent with 6.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on January 11, 2020, 08:01:38 PM
PennDOT defines SR 7476 (and presumably thus I-476) to end at US 11, with the I-81 double-trumpet being SR 8015. The FHWA's National Highway System map (https://hepgis.fhwa.dot.gov/fhwagis/#), however, shows the Interstate corridor turning to end at I-81 itself. I don't know where to find out official records of route termini from the FHWA.

Further ambiguity is added by the PTC's signage of the Clarks Summit exit being designed as if the Northeast Extension continued north as it was originally intended to. Exit 131 is only seen in reference to the entire interchange complex on signs located before the hairpin curve, and all signs after the toll plaza have no exit tabs.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: akotchi on January 11, 2020, 09:41:14 PM
A quick look at StreetView shows I-476 milemarkers extending past the ramps to I-81 and just short of the ramp split to U.S. 11.  I guess it shows how PTC views the northern limit.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Crown Victoria on January 19, 2020, 01:46:55 PM
I've noticed this pair of stub ramps on I-78 westbound between Shartlesville and Strausstown over the years but I've never figured out what they're for.  Any ideas? 

https://www.google.com/maps/@40.5093465,-76.1445529,1165m/data=!3m1!1e3?hl=en
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on January 19, 2020, 01:53:32 PM
Quote from: Crown Victoria on January 19, 2020, 01:46:55 PM
I've noticed this pair of stub ramps on I-78 westbound between Shartlesville and Strausstown over the years but I've never figured out what they're for.  Any ideas? 

https://www.google.com/maps/@40.5093465,-76.1445529,1165m/data=!3m1!1e3?hl=en

A once-proposed rest that was never built and probably never will be. You can see the outline of the ROW for it. I think there might be another set of stubs and ROW for an eastbound rest area somewhere else, but I don't remember for sure or where.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Crown Victoria on January 19, 2020, 02:05:16 PM
Quote from: Roadsguy on January 19, 2020, 01:53:32 PM
Quote from: Crown Victoria on January 19, 2020, 01:46:55 PM
I've noticed this pair of stub ramps on I-78 westbound between Shartlesville and Strausstown over the years but I've never figured out what they're for.  Any ideas? 

https://www.google.com/maps/@40.5093465,-76.1445529,1165m/data=!3m1!1e3?hl=en

A once-proposed rest that was never built and probably never will be. You can see the outline of the ROW for it. I think there might be another set of stubs and ROW for an eastbound rest area somewhere else, but I don't remember for sure or where.

That's what I figured, considering there's nothing matching on the eastbound side immediately across.  And I agree, such a rest area won't be built now.

My other guess was a proposed freeway interchange, possibly something running up from Reading along PA 183.  I recall reading somewhere about the idea being floated decades ago but not sure exactly where I saw that. 
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Alps on January 19, 2020, 03:04:29 PM
Quote from: Crown Victoria on January 19, 2020, 02:05:16 PM
Quote from: Roadsguy on January 19, 2020, 01:53:32 PM
Quote from: Crown Victoria on January 19, 2020, 01:46:55 PM
I've noticed this pair of stub ramps on I-78 westbound between Shartlesville and Strausstown over the years but I've never figured out what they're for.  Any ideas? 

https://www.google.com/maps/@40.5093465,-76.1445529,1165m/data=!3m1!1e3?hl=en

A once-proposed rest that was never built and probably never will be. You can see the outline of the ROW for it. I think there might be another set of stubs and ROW for an eastbound rest area somewhere else, but I don't remember for sure or where.

That's what I figured, considering there's nothing matching on the eastbound side immediately across.  And I agree, such a rest area won't be built now.

My other guess was a proposed freeway interchange, possibly something running up from Reading along PA 183.  I recall reading somewhere about the idea being floated decades ago but not sure exactly where I saw that. 
Whenever you see ROW in that shape, it's a rest area. Check out the NJ Turnpike.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: briantroutman on January 19, 2020, 05:16:10 PM
Quote from: Roadsguy on January 19, 2020, 01:53:32 PM
A once-proposed rest that was never built and probably never will be. You can see the outline of the ROW for it. I think there might be another set of stubs and ROW for an eastbound rest area somewhere else, but I don't remember for sure or where.

The eastbound rest area would have been here, approximately one mile west of the PA 183 interchange and three miles west of the westbound rest area: https://goo.gl/maps/1Hjx8ixyWn5dj5Ds8

Though the eastbound site doesn't have visible, paved ramp stubs, as the westbound rest area does, the locations where the on and off ramps would have been located is posted with no parking signs: https://goo.gl/maps/yNiLcrnjZKjfAGHG8
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Crown Victoria on January 19, 2020, 05:29:04 PM
Quote from: Alps on January 19, 2020, 03:04:29 PM
Quote from: Crown Victoria on January 19, 2020, 02:05:16 PM
Quote from: Roadsguy on January 19, 2020, 01:53:32 PM
Quote from: Crown Victoria on January 19, 2020, 01:46:55 PM
I've noticed this pair of stub ramps on I-78 westbound between Shartlesville and Strausstown over the years but I've never figured out what they're for.  Any ideas? 

https://www.google.com/maps/@40.5093465,-76.1445529,1165m/data=!3m1!1e3?hl=en

A once-proposed rest that was never built and probably never will be. You can see the outline of the ROW for it. I think there might be another set of stubs and ROW for an eastbound rest area somewhere else, but I don't remember for sure or where.

That's what I figured, considering there's nothing matching on the eastbound side immediately across.  And I agree, such a rest area won't be built now.

My other guess was a proposed freeway interchange, possibly something running up from Reading along PA 183.  I recall reading somewhere about the idea being floated decades ago but not sure exactly where I saw that. 
Whenever you see ROW in that shape, it's a rest area. Check out the NJ Turnpike.
Quote from: briantroutman on January 19, 2020, 05:16:10 PM

The eastbound rest area would have been here, approximately one mile west of the PA 183 interchange and three miles west of the westbound rest area: https://goo.gl/maps/1Hjx8ixyWn5dj5Ds8

Though the eastbound site doesn't have visible, paved ramp stubs, as the westbound rest area does, the locations where the on and off ramps would have been located is posted with no parking signs: https://goo.gl/maps/yNiLcrnjZKjfAGHG8

Thanks to all.  Too bad PennDOT never developed them; there would be more truck parking areas available if those rest areas had been built.  Of course the lack of rest areas nowadays is better for the commercial truck stops that have sprung up.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: seicer on January 19, 2020, 06:06:37 PM
And here is the never-completed eastbound rest area, complete with popo: https://goo.gl/maps/ifQmN8EsPG88m5Uj7
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: sbeaver44 on January 20, 2020, 06:34:01 AM
Two more FYAs to report:
US 422 @ PA 645, Myerstown
US 422 @ Ramona Rd, W of Myerstown
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Crown Victoria on January 20, 2020, 03:09:35 PM
Quote from: sbeaver44 on January 20, 2020, 06:34:01 AM
Two more FYAs to report:
US 422 @ PA 645, Myerstown
US 422 @ Ramona Rd, W of Myerstown

I'll add one at the PA 581/Creekview Road interchange near Mechanicsburg, if no one else has mentioned it yet.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on January 20, 2020, 03:40:18 PM
Quote from: sbeaver44 on January 20, 2020, 06:34:01 AM
Two more FYAs to report:
US 422 @ PA 645, Myerstown
US 422 @ Ramona Rd, W of Myerstown

Also a pair of FYAs at the PA 501 intersection for PA 501 itself, added with the left turn lanes in the same project that added the FYAs at PA 645. (422 at 501 still has protected-only left turn phases as it did before the project.)

What's special about the westbound FYA at PA 645 is the lack of a green arrow. The only reason it's there is to allow for Dallas phasing so that you can have a permissive left turn while westbound traffic is stopped and eastbound traffic has a protected left. I thought this was unique until I stumbled on another signal like it by accident on Street View (I think somewhere in NC, but I don't remember where). Has this configuration been used anywhere else in Pennsylvania yet?




In other FYA-related news, two more intersections just got FYAs in Lebanon County: the intersection of Cornwall Road and Isabel Drive, and the intersection of PA 72 and Rocherty Road. The former was activated about a month or two ago, and the latter just within the past two weeks. The one on 72 also has FYAs on three of the four approaches, with only the planned double left turn from Rocherty onto PA 72 southbound having a protected-only turn phase.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: MASTERNC on January 20, 2020, 04:00:09 PM
There was supposed to be a permanent FYA installed at PA 926 and Pocopson Road in Chester County as part of the PA 52 bridge reconstruction but it has never been done.  Guess it wasn't part of the detour preparation work.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on January 20, 2020, 07:18:24 PM
You can add US 30 at PA 94 (both directions) north of Hanover as well. (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.8708315,-77.0274789,3a,75y,39.27h,85.76t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sYVKm1USKKIMFhB-kYAzcxQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)


In other news, the speed limit on the US 222 Trexlertown Bypass has been raised from 45 to 55.  It reduces back to 45 NB right at the Brookside Rd overpass.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on January 20, 2020, 07:54:40 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on January 20, 2020, 07:18:24 PM
You can add US 30 at PA 94 (both directions) north of Hanover as well. (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.8708315,-77.0274789,3a,75y,39.27h,85.76t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sYVKm1USKKIMFhB-kYAzcxQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)

Huh, there's only one standard through signal for PA 94 in each direction. Northbound 94 has the right-turn doghouse, which is functionally a second through signal, but PennDOT typically adds right-turn doghouses in addition to the two through signals, not replacing one. Southbound 94 straight-up has just one standard signal.

Looking at the old Street View, this seems to have been due to blindly replacing the old doghouses with FYA signals, even though the left-turn doghouses on 94 were in place of one of the through signals as is standard in PA for having only one through lane.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Crown Victoria on January 20, 2020, 07:55:04 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on January 20, 2020, 07:18:24 PM
In other news, the speed limit on the US 222 Trexlertown Bypass has been raised from 45 to 55.  It reduces back to 45 NB right at the Brookside Rd overpass.

That's a little closer to how fast everyone's actually driving on that road... :-D
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Alps on January 20, 2020, 08:10:58 PM
Quote from: Crown Victoria on January 20, 2020, 07:55:04 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on January 20, 2020, 07:18:24 PM
In other news, the speed limit on the US 222 Trexlertown Bypass has been raised from 45 to 55.  It reduces back to 45 NB right at the Brookside Rd overpass.

That's a little closer to how fast everyone's actually driving on that road... :-D
I'd rather have it unenforced at 45 than enforced at 55.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on January 21, 2020, 07:20:24 AM
Was the two-lane PA 100 portion of the bypass left at 45 or was it also raised to 55? Also, does southbound 222 increase to 55 right after the Kressler Road light or only after the Brookside Road bridge?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on January 21, 2020, 04:15:07 PM
Quote from: Roadsguy on January 21, 2020, 07:20:24 AM
Was the two-lane PA 100 portion of the bypass left at 45 or was it also raised to 55? Also, does southbound 222 increase to 55 right after the Kressler Road light or only after the Brookside Road bridge?

The PA 100 portion was 45 south of Weilers Rd/Schaefer Run Rd, but the part from there to US 222 (basically the ramps) were 55.

I am pretty sure the US 222 SB speed limit increased to 55 at the Brookside Rd bridge as well.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Hwy 61 Revisited on January 22, 2020, 12:59:10 PM
I honestly wonder why 222 isn't just a full freeway between Lancaster and Allentown. It's a pretty high-priority corridor if I'm not mistaken. Maybe 176 could be extended along the 222 freeway if upgrades are ever done.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: PHLBOS on January 22, 2020, 02:59:44 PM
Quote from: Hwy 61 Revisited on January 22, 2020, 12:59:10 PMI honestly wonder why 222 isn't just a full freeway between Lancaster and Allentown. It's a pretty high-priority corridor if I'm not mistaken.
As with one old-plan of the entire PA portion of US 202 being an expressway; similar may have been true for US 222 between Lancaster & Allentown was probably planned & proposed but didn't get off the ground due to either lack of funding and/or NIMBY opposition.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Hwy 61 Revisited on January 22, 2020, 03:07:18 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on January 22, 2020, 02:59:44 PM
Quote from: Hwy 61 Revisited on January 22, 2020, 12:59:10 PMI honestly wonder why 222 isn't just a full freeway between Lancaster and Allentown. It's a pretty high-priority corridor if I'm not mistaken.
As with one old-plan of the entire PA portion of US 202 being an expressway; similar may have been true for US 222 between Lancaster & Allentown was probably planned & proposed but didn't get off the ground due to either lack of funding and/or NIMBY opposition.
It simply brings me shame that the 3rd and 5th-largest cities in Pennsylvania do not have an expressway connecting them. Someone else said on a thread about non-Interstates carrying Interstate-level traffic that 222 was a major choke-point. Why is a connection between Reading and the Turnpike necessary, but not the Turnpike and the Lehigh Valley?

I'm not that familiar with the Reading area, but Kutztown had enough traffic to warrant a freeway bypass. Why not upgrade it in Blandon or Breinigsville? Or plain old Allentown?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on January 22, 2020, 03:18:01 PM
Quote from: Hwy 61 Revisited on January 22, 2020, 03:07:18 PM
Why is a connection between Reading and the Turnpike necessary, but not the Turnpike and the Lehigh Valley?

Because no one on the Turnpike would use 222 to get to Allentown even if it were all freeway. From Harrisburg and west, you'd use I-81 and I-78, and from the Philadelphia area, you'd use the Northeast Extension. Completing the 222 expressway is needed, but only because of its high traffic volumes as the only link to get from Lancaster and Reading to Allentown. Completing it would even be a shortcut for traffic from Baltimore to avoid Philadelphia or Harrisburg.

I don't know if there was any significant NIMBY opposition to completing 222, but it's definitely a funding issue, which was explicitly stated as the reason for why the most recent studies were dropped in favor or just widening the existing road (which is still going to take forever).
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Crown Victoria on January 22, 2020, 07:35:27 PM
Quote from: Roadsguy on January 22, 2020, 03:18:01 PM
Quote from: Hwy 61 Revisited on January 22, 2020, 03:07:18 PM
Why is a connection between Reading and the Turnpike necessary, but not the Turnpike and the Lehigh Valley?

Because no one on the Turnpike would use 222 to get to Allentown even if it were all freeway. From Harrisburg and west, you'd use I-81 and I-78, and from the Philadelphia area, you'd use the Northeast Extension. Completing the 222 expressway is needed, but only because of its high traffic volumes as the only link to get from Lancaster and Reading to Allentown. Completing it would even be a shortcut for traffic from Baltimore to avoid Philadelphia or Harrisburg.

I don't know if there was any significant NIMBY opposition to completing 222, but it's definitely a funding issue, which was explicitly stated as the reason for why the most recent studies were dropped in favor or just widening the existing road (which is still going to take forever).
Quote from: Hwy 61 Revisited on January 22, 2020, 03:07:18 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on January 22, 2020, 02:59:44 PM
Quote from: Hwy 61 Revisited on January 22, 2020, 12:59:10 PMI honestly wonder why 222 isn't just a full freeway between Lancaster and Allentown. It's a pretty high-priority corridor if I'm not mistaken.
As with one old-plan of the entire PA portion of US 202 being an expressway; similar may have been true for US 222 between Lancaster & Allentown was probably planned & proposed but didn't get off the ground due to either lack of funding and/or NIMBY opposition.
It simply brings me shame that the 3rd and 5th-largest cities in Pennsylvania do not have an expressway connecting them. Someone else said on a thread about non-Interstates carrying Interstate-level traffic that 222 was a major choke-point. Why is a connection between Reading and the Turnpike necessary, but not the Turnpike and the Lehigh Valley?

I'm not that familiar with the Reading area, but Kutztown had enough traffic to warrant a freeway bypass. Why not upgrade it in Blandon or Breinigsville? Or plain old Allentown?

Believe me, a lot of us in Berks County and the Lehigh Valley would like no less than a 222 freeway. There's plenty of traffic to support that.  However, that's not happening anytime soon, and neither is the widening that was planned.  PennDOT is shifting funding from non-Interstate projects to the Interstates. The only improvements that will still happen are roundabouts at the major intersections (except at Route 73 which keeps traffic lights).  I can say that the roundabout at PA 662 has helped, but the entire road needs widening ASAP.

Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jemacedo9 on January 23, 2020, 08:37:34 AM
Quote from: Crown Victoria on January 22, 2020, 07:35:27 PM
Quote from: Roadsguy on January 22, 2020, 03:18:01 PM
Quote from: Hwy 61 Revisited on January 22, 2020, 03:07:18 PM
Why is a connection between Reading and the Turnpike necessary, but not the Turnpike and the Lehigh Valley?

Because no one on the Turnpike would use 222 to get to Allentown even if it were all freeway. From Harrisburg and west, you'd use I-81 and I-78, and from the Philadelphia area, you'd use the Northeast Extension. Completing the 222 expressway is needed, but only because of its high traffic volumes as the only link to get from Lancaster and Reading to Allentown. Completing it would even be a shortcut for traffic from Baltimore to avoid Philadelphia or Harrisburg.

I don't know if there was any significant NIMBY opposition to completing 222, but it's definitely a funding issue, which was explicitly stated as the reason for why the most recent studies were dropped in favor or just widening the existing road (which is still going to take forever).
Quote from: Hwy 61 Revisited on January 22, 2020, 03:07:18 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on January 22, 2020, 02:59:44 PM
Quote from: Hwy 61 Revisited on January 22, 2020, 12:59:10 PMI honestly wonder why 222 isn't just a full freeway between Lancaster and Allentown. It's a pretty high-priority corridor if I'm not mistaken.
As with one old-plan of the entire PA portion of US 202 being an expressway; similar may have been true for US 222 between Lancaster & Allentown was probably planned & proposed but didn't get off the ground due to either lack of funding and/or NIMBY opposition.
It simply brings me shame that the 3rd and 5th-largest cities in Pennsylvania do not have an expressway connecting them. Someone else said on a thread about non-Interstates carrying Interstate-level traffic that 222 was a major choke-point. Why is a connection between Reading and the Turnpike necessary, but not the Turnpike and the Lehigh Valley?

I'm not that familiar with the Reading area, but Kutztown had enough traffic to warrant a freeway bypass. Why not upgrade it in Blandon or Breinigsville? Or plain old Allentown?

Believe me, a lot of us in Berks County and the Lehigh Valley would like no less than a 222 freeway. There's plenty of traffic to support that.  However, that's not happening anytime soon, and neither is the widening that was planned.  PennDOT is shifting funding from non-Interstate projects to the Interstates. The only improvements that will still happen are roundabouts at the major intersections (except at Route 73 which keeps traffic lights).  I can say that the roundabout at PA 662 has helped, but the entire road needs widening ASAP.



If I remember correctly, US 222 in that section (PA 73 to PA 100) has the highest AADT of any 2-lane road in the state, peaking at 27K.  There are a lot of commuters in that section of Berks County who work in the Lehigh Valley. Something needs to be done for sure.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Beltway on January 23, 2020, 04:41:59 PM
Quote from: jemacedo9 on January 23, 2020, 08:37:34 AM
If I remember correctly, US 222 in that section (PA 73 to PA 100) has the highest AADT of any 2-lane road in the state, peaking at 27K.  There are a lot of commuters in that section of Berks County who work in the Lehigh Valley. Something needs to be done for sure.
The 2-lane parts should at least be a 4-lane arterial highway.

A freeway bypass would be a lot more expensive to build.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on January 23, 2020, 11:19:08 PM
Quote from: Beltway on January 23, 2020, 04:41:59 PM
Quote from: jemacedo9 on January 23, 2020, 08:37:34 AM
If I remember correctly, US 222 in that section (PA 73 to PA 100) has the highest AADT of any 2-lane road in the state, peaking at 27K.  There are a lot of commuters in that section of Berks County who work in the Lehigh Valley. Something needs to be done for sure.
The 2-lane parts should at least be a 4-lane arterial highway.
A freeway bypass would be a lot more expensive to build.

Back in 1980 I remember a house with a clipped corner along the route.  Rather than tear the house down when a part of it was widened they just tore a piece of it off instead.  It looked weird.  Is that house still there 40 years later?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Hwy 61 Revisited on February 02, 2020, 02:01:31 PM
Does it bug anyone that I-376 isn't signed N-S, despite that being its general direction? The opposite goes for PA 60, which I-376 supplanted.

In addition, the continuation of 376 north of I-80 should be PA 376, not PA 760.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: sbeaver44 on February 02, 2020, 03:13:28 PM
Quote from: Hwy 61 Revisited on February 02, 2020, 02:01:31 PM
Does it bug anyone that I-376 isn't signed N-S, despite that being its general direction? The opposite goes for PA 60, which I-376 supplanted.
yes, actually.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Alps on February 02, 2020, 04:23:31 PM
Quote from: Hwy 61 Revisited on February 02, 2020, 02:01:31 PM
Does it bug anyone that I-376 isn't signed N-S, despite that being its general direction? The opposite goes for PA 60, which I-376 supplanted.

In addition, the continuation of 376 north of I-80 should be PA 376, not PA 760.
In addition, since I-376 is now a loop from I-80 to I-76, it should be renumbered I-876, 280, or 880.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Beltway on February 02, 2020, 04:41:46 PM
Quote from: Alps on February 02, 2020, 04:23:31 PM
Quote from: Hwy 61 Revisited on February 02, 2020, 02:01:31 PM
Does it bug anyone that I-376 isn't signed N-S, despite that being its general direction? The opposite goes for PA 60, which I-376 supplanted.
In addition, the continuation of 376 north of I-80 should be PA 376, not PA 760.
In addition, since I-376 is now a loop from I-80 to I-76, it should be renumbered I-876, 280, or 880.
It ends at I-80 at the northern end, crosses I-76 south of there, and ends at I-76 at the southern/eastern end.

I have suggested utilizing I-480 for the whole route.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ixnay on February 02, 2020, 04:46:40 PM
Quote from: Beltway on February 02, 2020, 04:41:46 PM
Quote from: Alps on February 02, 2020, 04:23:31 PM
Quote from: Hwy 61 Revisited on February 02, 2020, 02:01:31 PM
Does it bug anyone that I-376 isn't signed N-S, despite that being its general direction? The opposite goes for PA 60, which I-376 supplanted.
In addition, the continuation of 376 north of I-80 should be PA 376, not PA 760.
In addition, since I-376 is now a loop from I-80 to I-76, it should be renumbered I-876, 280, or 880.
It ends at I-80 at the northern end, crosses I-76 south of there, and ends at I-76 at the southern/eastern end.

I have suggested utilizing I-480 for the whole route.

And confuse Allegheny Countians even more?   :rolleyes: :-|  :) East of (current) I-79 that part alone has been I-70, 76, 79, 279, as well as 376 at various times.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstate_376

ixnay
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Hwy 61 Revisited on February 02, 2020, 04:54:55 PM
Quote from: ixnay on February 02, 2020, 04:46:40 PM
Quote from: Beltway on February 02, 2020, 04:41:46 PM
Quote from: Alps on February 02, 2020, 04:23:31 PM
Quote from: Hwy 61 Revisited on February 02, 2020, 02:01:31 PM
Does it bug anyone that I-376 isn't signed N-S, despite that being its general direction? The opposite goes for PA 60, which I-376 supplanted.
In addition, the continuation of 376 north of I-80 should be PA 376, not PA 760.
In addition, since I-376 is now a loop from I-80 to I-76, it should be renumbered I-876, 280, or 880.
It ends at I-80 at the northern end, crosses I-76 south of there, and ends at I-76 at the southern/eastern end.

I have suggested utilizing I-480 for the whole route.

And confuse Allegheny Countians even more?   :rolleyes: :-|  :) East of (current) I-79 that part alone has been I-70, 76, 79, 279, as well as 376 at various times.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstate_376

ixnay
So yeah, 376 should be 376. No doubt. Just flip the direction of signage and you'll be fine.
Also, for some reason I think that 576 should be N-S upon completion too, although it does travel more NW-SE. What would 43 be as an Interstate designation? 776? 168?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: PAHighways on February 02, 2020, 05:50:17 PM
Quote from: ixnay on February 02, 2020, 04:46:40 PMAnd confuse Allegheny Countians even more?   :rolleyes: :-|  :) East of (current) I-79 that part alone has been I-70, 76, 79, 279, as well as 376 at various times.

Pittsburghers just call it "the Parkway" no matter its route designations.

Quote from: ixnay on February 02, 2020, 04:46:40 PMhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstate_376

I'm partial to this page (http://www.pahighways.com/interstates/I376.html).
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: PHLBOS on February 03, 2020, 08:54:37 AM
Quote from: Alps on February 02, 2020, 04:23:31 PM
Quote from: Hwy 61 Revisited on February 02, 2020, 02:01:31 PM
Does it bug anyone that I-376 isn't signed N-S, despite that being its general direction? The opposite goes for PA 60, which I-376 supplanted.

In addition, the continuation of 376 north of I-80 should be PA 376, not PA 760.
In addition, since I-376 is now a loop from I-80 to I-76, it should be renumbered I-876, 280, or 880.
As most of us here know, one reason why I-376 is signed E-W was because such was how the original 1972-segment of I-376 from I-279 and eastward was signed.  I-376 taking over the southern leg of I-279 and most of PA 60 has only been a thing of the past decade(?).  Another reason was probably due to the mile markers/interchange numbers along I-376 starting at the northern end and increasing in the southeasterly direction.

That said, PennDOT/PTC could've either made the entire I-376 N-S with those additional miles or simply sign the added stretch N-S and keep the eastern portion E-W.  3-digit interstates changing direction cardinals within a state are indeed allowed in certain instances. 

As far as using a different, even 3-di number for I-376; I agree.  Although I would either choose I-280 or reassign I-276 to that stretch and redesignate the current I-276 as I-876.  Heck, had all the movements of the I-95/276/295 interchange been fully built; I-276 could've become an western extension of I-295 and such would indirectly resolve the awkward E-W signing of I-295 in PA.

I know, the above is fictional territory; so I'll stop here.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Hwy 61 Revisited on February 03, 2020, 01:39:23 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on February 03, 2020, 08:54:37 AM
Quote from: Alps on February 02, 2020, 04:23:31 PM
Quote from: Hwy 61 Revisited on February 02, 2020, 02:01:31 PM
Does it bug anyone that I-376 isn't signed N-S, despite that being its general direction? The opposite goes for PA 60, which I-376 supplanted.

In addition, the continuation of 376 north of I-80 should be PA 376, not PA 760.
In addition, since I-376 is now a loop from I-80 to I-76, it should be renumbered I-876, 280, or 880.
As most of us here know, one reason why I-376 is signed E-W was because such was how the original 1972-segment of I-376 from I-279 and eastward was signed.  I-376 taking over the southern leg of I-279 and most of PA 60 has only been a thing of the past decade(?).  Another reason was probably due to the mile markers/interchange numbers along I-376 starting at the northern end and increasing in the southeasterly direction.

That said, PennDOT/PTC could've either made the entire I-376 N-S with those additional miles or simply sign the added stretch N-S and keep the eastern portion E-W.  3-digit interstates changing direction cardinals within a state are indeed allowed in certain instances. 

As far as using a different, even 3-di number for I-376; I agree.  Although I would either choose I-280 or reassign I-276 to that stretch and redesignate the current I-276 as I-876.  Heck, had all the movements of the I-95/276/295 interchange been fully built; I-276 could've become an western extension of I-295 and such would indirectly resolved the awkward E-W signing of I-295 in PA.

I know, the above is fictional territory; so I'll stop here.

I'd say I-79 should be the dividing line since EB 376 from there to 279 was former NB 279.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Alps on February 03, 2020, 09:07:28 PM
Quote from: Hwy 61 Revisited on February 03, 2020, 01:39:23 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on February 03, 2020, 08:54:37 AM
Quote from: Alps on February 02, 2020, 04:23:31 PM
Quote from: Hwy 61 Revisited on February 02, 2020, 02:01:31 PM
Does it bug anyone that I-376 isn't signed N-S, despite that being its general direction? The opposite goes for PA 60, which I-376 supplanted.

In addition, the continuation of 376 north of I-80 should be PA 376, not PA 760.
In addition, since I-376 is now a loop from I-80 to I-76, it should be renumbered I-876, 280, or 880.
As most of us here know, one reason why I-376 is signed E-W was because such was how the original 1972-segment of I-376 from I-279 and eastward was signed.  I-376 taking over the southern leg of I-279 and most of PA 60 has only been a thing of the past decade(?).  Another reason was probably due to the mile markers/interchange numbers along I-376 starting at the northern end and increasing in the southeasterly direction.

That said, PennDOT/PTC could've either made the entire I-376 N-S with those additional miles or simply sign the added stretch N-S and keep the eastern portion E-W.  3-digit interstates changing direction cardinals within a state are indeed allowed in certain instances. 

As far as using a different, even 3-di number for I-376; I agree.  Although I would either choose I-280 or reassign I-276 to that stretch and redesignate the current I-276 as I-876.  Heck, had all the movements of the I-95/276/295 interchange been fully built; I-276 could've become an western extension of I-295 and such would indirectly resolved the awkward E-W signing of I-295 in PA.

I know, the above is fictional territory; so I'll stop here.

I'd say I-79 should be the dividing line since EB 376 from there to 279 was former NB 279.
I doubt you're going to see this happen because W-E and S-N are both the "zero" direction, so it would be violating exit number convention one way or the other.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Hwy 61 Revisited on February 03, 2020, 09:09:42 PM
Quote from: Alps on February 03, 2020, 09:07:28 PM
Quote from: Hwy 61 Revisited on February 03, 2020, 01:39:23 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on February 03, 2020, 08:54:37 AM
Quote from: Alps on February 02, 2020, 04:23:31 PM
Quote from: Hwy 61 Revisited on February 02, 2020, 02:01:31 PM
Does it bug anyone that I-376 isn't signed N-S, despite that being its general direction? The opposite goes for PA 60, which I-376 supplanted.

In addition, the continuation of 376 north of I-80 should be PA 376, not PA 760.
In addition, since I-376 is now a loop from I-80 to I-76, it should be renumbered I-876, 280, or 880.
As most of us here know, one reason why I-376 is signed E-W was because such was how the original 1972-segment of I-376 from I-279 and eastward was signed.  I-376 taking over the southern leg of I-279 and most of PA 60 has only been a thing of the past decade(?).  Another reason was probably due to the mile markers/interchange numbers along I-376 starting at the northern end and increasing in the southeasterly direction.

That said, PennDOT/PTC could've either made the entire I-376 N-S with those additional miles or simply sign the added stretch N-S and keep the eastern portion E-W.  3-digit interstates changing direction cardinals within a state are indeed allowed in certain instances. 

As far as using a different, even 3-di number for I-376; I agree.  Although I would either choose I-280 or reassign I-276 to that stretch and redesignate the current I-276 as I-876.  Heck, had all the movements of the I-95/276/295 interchange been fully built; I-276 could've become an western extension of I-295 and such would indirectly resolved the awkward E-W signing of I-295 in PA.

I know, the above is fictional territory; so I'll stop here.

I'd say I-79 should be the dividing line since EB 376 from there to 279 was former NB 279.
I doubt you're going to see this happen because W-E and S-N are both the "zero" direction, so it would be violating exit number convention one way or the other.

Then let's make it completely S-N. That way, its exit numbers can increase from its parent instead of decreasing to it.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Alps on February 04, 2020, 04:51:19 PM
Quote from: Hwy 61 Revisited on February 03, 2020, 09:09:42 PM
Quote from: Alps on February 03, 2020, 09:07:28 PM
Quote from: Hwy 61 Revisited on February 03, 2020, 01:39:23 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on February 03, 2020, 08:54:37 AM
Quote from: Alps on February 02, 2020, 04:23:31 PM
Quote from: Hwy 61 Revisited on February 02, 2020, 02:01:31 PM
Does it bug anyone that I-376 isn't signed N-S, despite that being its general direction? The opposite goes for PA 60, which I-376 supplanted.

In addition, the continuation of 376 north of I-80 should be PA 376, not PA 760.
In addition, since I-376 is now a loop from I-80 to I-76, it should be renumbered I-876, 280, or 880.
As most of us here know, one reason why I-376 is signed E-W was because such was how the original 1972-segment of I-376 from I-279 and eastward was signed.  I-376 taking over the southern leg of I-279 and most of PA 60 has only been a thing of the past decade(?).  Another reason was probably due to the mile markers/interchange numbers along I-376 starting at the northern end and increasing in the southeasterly direction.

That said, PennDOT/PTC could've either made the entire I-376 N-S with those additional miles or simply sign the added stretch N-S and keep the eastern portion E-W.  3-digit interstates changing direction cardinals within a state are indeed allowed in certain instances. 

As far as using a different, even 3-di number for I-376; I agree.  Although I would either choose I-280 or reassign I-276 to that stretch and redesignate the current I-276 as I-876.  Heck, had all the movements of the I-95/276/295 interchange been fully built; I-276 could've become an western extension of I-295 and such would indirectly resolved the awkward E-W signing of I-295 in PA.

I know, the above is fictional territory; so I'll stop here.

I'd say I-79 should be the dividing line since EB 376 from there to 279 was former NB 279.
I doubt you're going to see this happen because W-E and S-N are both the "zero" direction, so it would be violating exit number convention one way or the other.

Then let's make it completely S-N. That way, its exit numbers can increase from its parent instead of decreasing to it.
I'm gonna say no because that highway already just had its numbers changed and still runs west to east. We can discuss a 3xx not being appropriate but there is no reason now to change anything. What-if scenarios go to Fictional Highways.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Bitmapped on February 04, 2020, 06:11:32 PM
Quote from: Hwy 61 Revisited on February 03, 2020, 09:09:42 PM
Quote from: Alps on February 03, 2020, 09:07:28 PM
Quote from: Hwy 61 Revisited on February 03, 2020, 01:39:23 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on February 03, 2020, 08:54:37 AM
Quote from: Alps on February 02, 2020, 04:23:31 PM
Quote from: Hwy 61 Revisited on February 02, 2020, 02:01:31 PM
Does it bug anyone that I-376 isn't signed N-S, despite that being its general direction? The opposite goes for PA 60, which I-376 supplanted.

In addition, the continuation of 376 north of I-80 should be PA 376, not PA 760.
In addition, since I-376 is now a loop from I-80 to I-76, it should be renumbered I-876, 280, or 880.
As most of us here know, one reason why I-376 is signed E-W was because such was how the original 1972-segment of I-376 from I-279 and eastward was signed.  I-376 taking over the southern leg of I-279 and most of PA 60 has only been a thing of the past decade(?).  Another reason was probably due to the mile markers/interchange numbers along I-376 starting at the northern end and increasing in the southeasterly direction.

That said, PennDOT/PTC could've either made the entire I-376 N-S with those additional miles or simply sign the added stretch N-S and keep the eastern portion E-W.  3-digit interstates changing direction cardinals within a state are indeed allowed in certain instances. 

As far as using a different, even 3-di number for I-376; I agree.  Although I would either choose I-280 or reassign I-276 to that stretch and redesignate the current I-276 as I-876.  Heck, had all the movements of the I-95/276/295 interchange been fully built; I-276 could've become an western extension of I-295 and such would indirectly resolved the awkward E-W signing of I-295 in PA.

I know, the above is fictional territory; so I'll stop here.

I'd say I-79 should be the dividing line since EB 376 from there to 279 was former NB 279.
I doubt you're going to see this happen because W-E and S-N are both the "zero" direction, so it would be violating exit number convention one way or the other.

Then let's make it completely S-N. That way, its exit numbers can increase from its parent instead of decreasing to it.

I-376 is east-west on what is, by far, its most heavily traveled segment between the Pittsburgh airport, downtown Pittsburgh, and Monroeville. North/south through here would be confusing and make no sense.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Beltway on February 04, 2020, 08:55:50 PM
Quote from: Bitmapped on February 04, 2020, 06:11:32 PM
I-376 is east-west on what is, by far, its most heavily traveled segment between the Pittsburgh airport, downtown Pittsburgh, and Monroeville. North/south through here would be confusing and make no sense.
Gripes nothwithstanding ...

The way that they used I-376 had the benefits of the least amount of Interstate renumbering needed (just I-279 between I-79 and the downtown) and the use of one number for the whole corridor.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Alps on February 04, 2020, 09:04:58 PM
Quote from: Beltway on February 04, 2020, 08:55:50 PM
Quote from: Bitmapped on February 04, 2020, 06:11:32 PM
I-376 is east-west on what is, by far, its most heavily traveled segment between the Pittsburgh airport, downtown Pittsburgh, and Monroeville. North/south through here would be confusing and make no sense.
Gripes nothwithstanding ...

The way that they used I-376 had the benefits of the least amount of Interstate renumbering needed (just I-279 between I-79 and the downtown) and the use of one number for the whole corridor.
False. Keeping 279 and 376, and using a new even-numbered Interstate for PA 60, would have been the minimum. This required renumbering a whole host of exits. There is also not one corridor here - the former PA 60 is a separate utility from Parkway West.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Beltway on February 04, 2020, 09:40:10 PM
Quote from: Alps on February 04, 2020, 09:04:58 PM
Quote from: Beltway on February 04, 2020, 08:55:50 PM
The way that they used I-376 had the benefits of the least amount of Interstate renumbering needed (just I-279 between I-79 and the downtown) and the use of one number for the whole corridor.
False. Keeping 279 and 376, and using a new even-numbered Interstate for PA 60, would have been the minimum. This required renumbering a whole host of exits. There is also not one corridor here - the former PA 60 is a separate utility from Parkway West.
I'm just citing what was probably PennDOT's rationale for the route.

So the east-west highway between the airport and Monroeville would have 3 separate Interstate numbers.

What do you think was PennDOT's rationale here?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Alps on February 04, 2020, 10:17:04 PM
Quote from: Beltway on February 04, 2020, 09:40:10 PM
Quote from: Alps on February 04, 2020, 09:04:58 PM
Quote from: Beltway on February 04, 2020, 08:55:50 PM
The way that they used I-376 had the benefits of the least amount of Interstate renumbering needed (just I-279 between I-79 and the downtown) and the use of one number for the whole corridor.
False. Keeping 279 and 376, and using a new even-numbered Interstate for PA 60, would have been the minimum. This required renumbering a whole host of exits. There is also not one corridor here - the former PA 60 is a separate utility from Parkway West.
I'm just citing what was probably PennDOT's rationale for the route.

So the east-west highway between the airport and Monroeville would have 3 separate Interstate numbers.

What do you think was PennDOT's rationale here?
I really don't know why this needed to be an Interstate at all.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Beltway on February 04, 2020, 10:33:25 PM
Quote from: Alps on February 04, 2020, 10:17:04 PM
Quote from: Beltway on February 04, 2020, 09:40:10 PM
Quote from: Alps on February 04, 2020, 09:04:58 PM
Quote from: Beltway on February 04, 2020, 08:55:50 PM
The way that they used I-376 had the benefits of the least amount of Interstate renumbering needed (just I-279 between I-79 and the downtown) and the use of one number for the whole corridor.
False. Keeping 279 and 376, and using a new even-numbered Interstate for PA 60, would have been the minimum. This required renumbering a whole host of exits. There is also not one corridor here - the former PA 60 is a separate utility from Parkway West.
I'm just citing what was probably PennDOT's rationale for the route.
So the east-west highway between the airport and Monroeville would have 3 separate Interstate numbers.
What do you think was PennDOT's rationale here?
I really don't know why this needed to be an Interstate at all.
True ... it did well enough as PA-60.

I-279 was an urban access loop, or partial loop providing southerly/westerly and northerly access to the downtown of Pittsburgh, from/to I-79.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Hwy 61 Revisited on February 05, 2020, 08:49:38 AM
Quote from: Beltway on February 04, 2020, 10:33:25 PM
Quote from: Alps on February 04, 2020, 10:17:04 PM
Quote from: Beltway on February 04, 2020, 09:40:10 PM
Quote from: Alps on February 04, 2020, 09:04:58 PM
Quote from: Beltway on February 04, 2020, 08:55:50 PM
The way that they used I-376 had the benefits of the least amount of Interstate renumbering needed (just I-279 between I-79 and the downtown) and the use of one number for the whole corridor.
False. Keeping 279 and 376, and using a new even-numbered Interstate for PA 60, would have been the minimum. This required renumbering a whole host of exits. There is also not one corridor here - the former PA 60 is a separate utility from Parkway West.
I'm just citing what was probably PennDOT's rationale for the route.
So the east-west highway between the airport and Monroeville would have 3 separate Interstate numbers.
What do you think was PennDOT's rationale here?
I really don't know why this needed to be an Interstate at all.
True ... it did well enough as PA-60.

I-279 was an urban access loop, or partial loop providing southerly/westerly and northerly access to the downtown of Pittsburgh, from/to I-79.

The switch was made because Pittsburgh International Airport was one of the few that didn't have any Interstate access. So why not just extend 376? Extending 279 would have been nonsense, and it might be odd to have 2 N-S Interstates start at the same place.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Beltway on February 05, 2020, 01:20:03 PM
Quote from: Hwy 61 Revisited on February 05, 2020, 08:49:38 AM
Quote from: Beltway on February 04, 2020, 10:33:25 PM
True ... it did well enough as PA-60.
I-279 was an urban access loop, or partial loop providing southerly/westerly and northerly access to the downtown of Pittsburgh, from/to I-79.
The switch was made because Pittsburgh International Airport was one of the few that didn't have any Interstate access. So why not just extend 376? Extending 279 would have been nonsense, and it might be odd to have 2 N-S Interstates start at the same place.
There are a whole group of Beaver Valley boros and cities that probably wanted an Interstate highway as well.

Has there been a thread of international airports without Interstate access?

I can think of a number in my region of the country, 2 of the 3 NYC airports and 2 of the 3 Washington area airports.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Alps on February 05, 2020, 03:04:05 PM
Quote from: Beltway on February 05, 2020, 01:20:03 PM
Quote from: Hwy 61 Revisited on February 05, 2020, 08:49:38 AM
Quote from: Beltway on February 04, 2020, 10:33:25 PM
True ... it did well enough as PA-60.
I-279 was an urban access loop, or partial loop providing southerly/westerly and northerly access to the downtown of Pittsburgh, from/to I-79.
The switch was made because Pittsburgh International Airport was one of the few that didn't have any Interstate access. So why not just extend 376? Extending 279 would have been nonsense, and it might be odd to have 2 N-S Interstates start at the same place.
There are a whole group of Beaver Valley boros and cities that probably wanted an Interstate highway as well.

Has there been a thread of international airports without Interstate access?

I can think of a number in my region of the country, 2 of the 3 NYC airports and 2 of the 3 Washington area airports.

JFK->678, EWR->78...
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Gnutella on February 06, 2020, 02:04:55 AM
If you're going to screw around with the cardinal directions on I-376, then do it at the PA 576/Pittsburgh International Airport interchange. West of the interchange, have a BGS that says I-376 West BECOMES I-376 North. East of the interchange, have a BGS that says I-376 South BECOMES I-376 East.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: seicer on February 06, 2020, 07:38:36 AM
You don't really need a sign to indicate that. Plenty of cardinal directions change without any indication.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: VTGoose on February 06, 2020, 09:16:00 AM
Quote from: Gnutella on February 06, 2020, 02:04:55 AM
If you're going to screw around with the cardinal directions on I-376, then do it at the PA 576/Pittsburgh International Airport interchange. West of the interchange, have a BGS that says I-376 West BECOMES I-376 North. East of the interchange, have a BGS that says I-376 South BECOMES I-376 East.

Is the average driver that concerned about which direction a highway goes? With GPS instructions giving guidance, how difficult is it for someone to get from Carnegie to the airport and on to Erie? This just seems to be a road geek's wet dream and not a problem for everyone else.

Bruce in Blacksburg (but a native of the 'Burgh)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: PHLBOS on February 06, 2020, 09:50:32 AM
Quote from: seicer on February 06, 2020, 07:38:36 AMYou don't really need a sign to indicate that. Plenty of cardinal directions change without any indication.
True, but such didn't stop NJDOT from recently erecting advance, state-line cardinal direction change for I-295 approaching the replacement Scudder Falls Bridge.  Such is the only location I'm aware of where such signage is present.  If other locations exist; I'd be curious to know.

I stated such on the Scudder Falls Bridge Replacement thread and I'll restate here; while such signage may be technically correct, it's not really necessary IMHO... especially if such a change occurs at a state-line.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Beltway on February 06, 2020, 02:29:55 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on February 06, 2020, 09:50:32 AM
I stated such on the Scudder Falls Bridge Replacement thread and I'll restate here; while such signage may be technically correct, it's not really necessary IMHO... especially if such a change occurs at a state-line.
I see that the project is moving along --

Replace the current congestion-prone, functionally obsolete Scudder Falls Bridge with a dual-span structure carrying six thru-traffic lanes (three in each direction) and three auxiliary lanes (two Pennsylvania to New Jersey bound, one New Jersey to Pennsylvania bound) for traffic merging onto and off the bridge and shoulders for breakdown/emergency access.

Widen the bridge's Pennsylvania I-295 approach, increasing the roadway to three lanes in each direction. Improve drainage and approach-roadway exit/entry transitions in New Jersey; both project components to be completed in 2021.
http://www.scudderfallsbridge.com/construction/

Project Construction Start  Spring 2017
First span of new bridge open to traffic -- Opened overnight July 9, 2019
Start All-Electronic Tolling (PA-bound only)  -- July 14, 2019
Second span of new bridge open to traffic -- Late 2021
Estimated Project Completion -- Early 2022
http://www.scudderfallsbridge.com/construction/update/
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: noelbotevera on February 06, 2020, 05:49:53 PM
Visited Philadelphia a month ago...and only now I'm posting this. Cause why not?

This was on Saturday, January 4th; everyone in my family was present and we hadn't been to Philly in a while.

-Left at roughly 11 AM; got on the Turnpike at I-83, exited at Valley Forge.
-Traffic was bad on the Schuylkill because it always is (except when it isn't, and that's whenever it feels like it); deflected onto I-476 and I-95 and entered Philly on Broad Street. Found parking fairly easily, despite being a weekend.
-Ate at South Philly Barbacoa (really good tacos! Highly recommend if you want Mexican food, though it was crowded because it was the lunch rush (2 PM)). Wasn't satisfied, so we ate at Pat's for the Philly cheesesteak (I liked the ones with sharp provolone) and cannolis.
-Made our way to Eastern State Penitentiary, more or less when the sun was setting. Actually a spooky place when it gets dark (and also chilly inside the walls), but would make for a killer paintball arena - though the current Halloween attraction sounds like a fair compromise. Also laugh at their idea of prison reform in the 1820s (covering their faces with burlap bags? Practically the same as being executed).
-Also checked out Elfreth's Alley in the dark, because why not - we weren't hungry. Turns out finding parking in Philly is a nightmare on weekends.
-Decided to go to Villa di Roma, since that's where major scenes in The Irishmen were filmed - I think it's where Frank Sheeran meets Russell Bufalino. Turns out we'd already been there, so oh well. Burnt $10 on parking. We decided to check out an interesting sandwich shop (Paesano's) instead, and then learned they moved recently (from Girard Avenue to a couple blocks up Frankford Avenue, on Marlborough Street - why?). Oh well, bad luck; ate dinner at a nearby pho place - I got some bahn mi and a mango smoothie, so I wasn't entirely unhappy.
-Left at around 9 PM, back in Chambersburg by 11 or so. By some miracle, the Schuylkill was clear as well.

Turns out the Italian Market isn't very Italian these days. Also, Northeast Philly (particularly north of Spring Garden Street) is home to a lot of rather...modern...places. Take a walk down Frankford Avenue near Girard and you see what I mean.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Hwy 61 Revisited on February 10, 2020, 05:23:50 PM
Quote from: noelbotevera on February 06, 2020, 05:49:53 PM
Visited Philadelphia a month ago...and only now I'm posting this. Cause why not?

This was on Saturday, January 4th; everyone in my family was present and we hadn't been to Philly in a while.

-Left at roughly 11 AM; got on the Turnpike at I-83, exited at Valley Forge.
-Traffic was bad on the Schuylkill because it always is (except when it isn't, and that's whenever it feels like it); deflected onto I-476 and I-95 and entered Philly on Broad Street. Found parking fairly easily, despite being a weekend.
-Ate at South Philly Barbacoa (really good tacos! Highly recommend if you want Mexican food, though it was crowded because it was the lunch rush (2 PM)). Wasn't satisfied, so we ate at Pat's for the Philly cheesesteak (I liked the ones with sharp provolone) and cannolis.
-Made our way to Eastern State Penitentiary, more or less when the sun was setting. Actually a spooky place when it gets dark (and also chilly inside the walls), but would make for a killer paintball arena - though the current Halloween attraction sounds like a fair compromise. Also laugh at their idea of prison reform in the 1820s (covering their faces with burlap bags? Practically the same as being executed).
-Also checked out Elfreth's Alley in the dark, because why not - we weren't hungry. Turns out finding parking in Philly is a nightmare on weekends.
-Decided to go to Villa di Roma, since that's where major scenes in The Irishmen were filmed - I think it's where Frank Sheeran meets Russell Bufalino. Turns out we'd already been there, so oh well. Burnt $10 on parking. We decided to check out an interesting sandwich shop (Paesano's) instead, and then learned they moved recently (from Girard Avenue to a couple blocks up Frankford Avenue, on Marlborough Street - why?). Oh well, bad luck; ate dinner at a nearby pho place - I got some bahn mi and a mango smoothie, so I wasn't entirely unhappy.
-Left at around 9 PM, back in Chambersburg by 11 or so. By some miracle, the Schuylkill was clear as well.

Turns out the Italian Market isn't very Italian these days. Also, Northeast Philly (particularly north of Spring Garden Street) is home to a lot of rather...modern...places. Take a walk down Frankford Avenue near Girard and you see what I mean.

Oh dear, the Schuylkill is a nightmare! Why don't they make it a stacked highway or something throughout?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: tckma on February 11, 2020, 12:15:45 PM
Quote from: Hwy 61 Revisited on February 10, 2020, 05:23:50 PM
Oh dear, the Schuylkill is a nightmare! Why don't they make it a stacked highway or something throughout?

I don't think the ground can support a double-decker highway.  Given that some superior intellect decided to build the darn thing between a river and a mountain, I don't think there are any expansion options.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Hwy 61 Revisited on February 12, 2020, 04:10:47 PM
Quote from: Beltway on February 05, 2020, 01:20:03 PM
Has there been a thread of international airports without Interstate access?

Now there is!  :sombrero: https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=26408.0
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ixnay on February 12, 2020, 05:04:03 PM
Quote from: PAHighways on February 02, 2020, 05:50:17 PM
Quote from: ixnay on February 02, 2020, 04:46:40 PMAnd confuse Allegheny Countians even more?   :rolleyes: :-|  :) East of (current) I-79 that part alone has been I-70, 76, 79, 279, as well as 376 at various times.

Pittsburghers just call it "the Parkway" no matter its route designations.

Quote from: ixnay on February 02, 2020, 04:46:40 PMhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstate_376

I'm partial to this page (http://www.pahighways.com/interstates/I376.html).

I tried it, but looking for the Parkway's signing history on that page was like looking for a needle in a haystack.  Sorry, pal.

ixnay
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: briantroutman on February 12, 2020, 06:19:41 PM
Took me all of five seconds–neatly summarized at the bottom of the page.

QuoteFormer Designations:   
PA 28 (1951 - 1961):  Exit 65 to Exit 69C
PA 80 (1951 - 1961):  Exit 78B to Exit 80
Alternate US 19 (1960 - 1961):  Exit 69C to Exit 70C
I-70 (1960 - 1964):  Exit 64A to I-76/PA Turnpike
PA 60 (1962 - 2009):  Exit 57 to Exit 60
I-79 (1964 - 1972):  Exit 64A to Exit 70C
I-76 (1964 - 1973):  Exit 70C to I-76/PA Turnpike
PA 18 (1968 - 1978):  Exit 1C to Exit 2
I-76 (1972 - 1973):  Exit 64A to Exit 70C
I-279 (1973 - 2009):  Exit 64A to Exit 70C
PA Toll 60 (1991 - 2008):  Exit 15 to Exit 17
PA 60 (1992 - 2009):  Exit 50 to Exit 57
PA Toll 60 (1992 - 2008):  Exit 17 to Exit 31
PA Turnpike 60 (2008 - 2009):  Exit 15 to Exit 31
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ixnay on February 12, 2020, 06:54:43 PM
Quote from: briantroutman on February 12, 2020, 06:19:41 PM
Took me all of five seconds–neatly summarized at the bottom of the page.

QuoteFormer Designations:   
PA 28 (1951 - 1961):  Exit 65 to Exit 69C
PA 80 (1951 - 1961):  Exit 78B to Exit 80
Alternate US 19 (1960 - 1961):  Exit 69C to Exit 70C
I-70 (1960 - 1964):  Exit 64A to I-76/PA Turnpike
PA 60 (1962 - 2009):  Exit 57 to Exit 60
I-79 (1964 - 1972):  Exit 64A to Exit 70C
I-76 (1964 - 1973):  Exit 70C to I-76/PA Turnpike
PA 18 (1968 - 1978):  Exit 1C to Exit 2
I-76 (1972 - 1973):  Exit 64A to Exit 70C
I-279 (1973 - 2009):  Exit 64A to Exit 70C
PA Toll 60 (1991 - 2008):  Exit 15 to Exit 17
PA 60 (1992 - 2009):  Exit 50 to Exit 57
PA Toll 60 (1992 - 2008):  Exit 17 to Exit 31
PA Turnpike 60 (2008 - 2009):  Exit 15 to Exit 31

I rarely scroll down that far on those pages, thus those parts are not on my radar.

ixnay
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Alps on February 12, 2020, 08:20:36 PM
Quote from: ixnay on February 12, 2020, 06:54:43 PM
Quote from: briantroutman on February 12, 2020, 06:19:41 PM
Took me all of five seconds–neatly summarized at the bottom of the page.

QuoteFormer Designations:   
PA 28 (1951 - 1961):  Exit 65 to Exit 69C
PA 80 (1951 - 1961):  Exit 78B to Exit 80
Alternate US 19 (1960 - 1961):  Exit 69C to Exit 70C
I-70 (1960 - 1964):  Exit 64A to I-76/PA Turnpike
PA 60 (1962 - 2009):  Exit 57 to Exit 60
I-79 (1964 - 1972):  Exit 64A to Exit 70C
I-76 (1964 - 1973):  Exit 70C to I-76/PA Turnpike
PA 18 (1968 - 1978):  Exit 1C to Exit 2
I-76 (1972 - 1973):  Exit 64A to Exit 70C
I-279 (1973 - 2009):  Exit 64A to Exit 70C
PA Toll 60 (1991 - 2008):  Exit 15 to Exit 17
PA 60 (1992 - 2009):  Exit 50 to Exit 57
PA Toll 60 (1992 - 2008):  Exit 17 to Exit 31
PA Turnpike 60 (2008 - 2009):  Exit 15 to Exit 31

I rarely scroll down that far on those pages, thus those parts are not on my radar.

ixnay
Today we learned that  needles fall to the bottom of haystacks.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Crown Victoria on February 13, 2020, 03:25:38 PM
More I-78 upgrades set to begin this spring:


https://www.readingeagle.com/news/local/penndot-s-million-upgrades-on-i--and-route-starting/article_71252042-4db4-11ea-866c-9bd7894c47f2.html
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ixnay on February 14, 2020, 08:29:53 AM
Quote from: Crown Victoria on February 13, 2020, 03:25:38 PM
More I-78 upgrades set to begin this spring:


https://www.readingeagle.com/news/local/penndot-s-million-upgrades-on-i--and-route-starting/article_71252042-4db4-11ea-866c-9bd7894c47f2.html

https://outline.com/LVUfk4

ixnay
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ixnay on February 14, 2020, 08:33:42 AM
Quote from: Alps on February 12, 2020, 08:20:36 PM
Quote from: ixnay on February 12, 2020, 06:54:43 PM
Quote from: briantroutman on February 12, 2020, 06:19:41 PM
Took me all of five seconds–neatly summarized at the bottom of the page.

QuoteFormer Designations:   
PA 28 (1951 - 1961):  Exit 65 to Exit 69C
PA 80 (1951 - 1961):  Exit 78B to Exit 80
Alternate US 19 (1960 - 1961):  Exit 69C to Exit 70C
I-70 (1960 - 1964):  Exit 64A to I-76/PA Turnpike
PA 60 (1962 - 2009):  Exit 57 to Exit 60
I-79 (1964 - 1972):  Exit 64A to Exit 70C
I-76 (1964 - 1973):  Exit 70C to I-76/PA Turnpike
PA 18 (1968 - 1978):  Exit 1C to Exit 2
I-76 (1972 - 1973):  Exit 64A to Exit 70C
I-279 (1973 - 2009):  Exit 64A to Exit 70C
PA Toll 60 (1991 - 2008):  Exit 15 to Exit 17
PA 60 (1992 - 2009):  Exit 50 to Exit 57
PA Toll 60 (1992 - 2008):  Exit 17 to Exit 31
PA Turnpike 60 (2008 - 2009):  Exit 15 to Exit 31

I rarely scroll down that far on those pages, thus those parts are not on my radar.

ixnay
Today we learned that  needles fall to the bottom of haystacks.

:rolleyes:

ixnay
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: VTGoose on February 14, 2020, 09:01:46 AM
Quote from: Alps on February 12, 2020, 08:20:36 PM
Quote from: ixnay on February 12, 2020, 06:54:43 PM
Quote from: briantroutman on February 12, 2020, 06:19:41 PM
Took me all of five seconds–neatly summarized at the bottom of the page.

QuoteFormer Designations:   
PA 28 (1951 - 1961):  Exit 65 to Exit 69C
PA 80 (1951 - 1961):  Exit 78B to Exit 80
Alternate US 19 (1960 - 1961):  Exit 69C to Exit 70C
I-70 (1960 - 1964):  Exit 64A to I-76/PA Turnpike
PA 60 (1962 - 2009):  Exit 57 to Exit 60
I-79 (1964 - 1972):  Exit 64A to Exit 70C
I-76 (1964 - 1973):  Exit 70C to I-76/PA Turnpike
PA 18 (1968 - 1978):  Exit 1C to Exit 2
I-76 (1972 - 1973):  Exit 64A to Exit 70C
I-279 (1973 - 2009):  Exit 64A to Exit 70C
PA Toll 60 (1991 - 2008):  Exit 15 to Exit 17
PA 60 (1992 - 2009):  Exit 50 to Exit 57
PA Toll 60 (1992 - 2008):  Exit 17 to Exit 31
PA Turnpike 60 (2008 - 2009):  Exit 15 to Exit 31

I rarely scroll down that far on those pages, thus those parts are not on my radar.

ixnay
Today we learned that  needles fall to the bottom of haystacks.

Today I learned I had a mis-spent youth -- all those names for highways that we just called the "Parkway East", "Parkway West" (or just "the Parkway" in Moon Township), and the "Beaver Valley Expressway" (when it only went as far as bustling Vanport). Those of us who grew up in Moon still mourn the loss of White Swan Park to the new road.

Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: PAHighways on February 15, 2020, 09:42:24 AM
Quote from: ixnay on February 12, 2020, 05:04:03 PM
Quote from: PAHighways on February 02, 2020, 05:50:17 PM
Quote from: ixnay on February 02, 2020, 04:46:40 PMAnd confuse Allegheny Countians even more?   :rolleyes: :-|  :) East of (current) I-79 that part alone has been I-70, 76, 79, 279, as well as 376 at various times.

Pittsburghers just call it "the Parkway" no matter its route designations.

Quote from: ixnay on February 02, 2020, 04:46:40 PMhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstate_376

I'm partial to this page (http://www.pahighways.com/interstates/I376.html).

I tried it, but looking for the Parkway's signing history on that page was like looking for a needle in a haystack.  Sorry, pal.

ixnay

:rolleyes:
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Hot Rod Hootenanny on February 15, 2020, 09:49:15 PM
Quote from: PAHighways on February 15, 2020, 09:45:10 AM
Quote from: briantroutman on February 12, 2020, 06:19:41 PM
Took me all of five seconds–neatly summarized at the bottom of the page.

QuoteFormer Designations:   
PA 28 (1951 - 1961):  Exit 65 to Exit 69C
PA 80 (1951 - 1961):  Exit 78B to Exit 80
Alternate US 19 (1960 - 1961):  Exit 69C to Exit 70C
I-70 (1960 - 1964):  Exit 64A to I-76/PA Turnpike
PA 60 (1962 - 2009):  Exit 57 to Exit 60
I-79 (1964 - 1972):  Exit 64A to Exit 70C
I-76 (1964 - 1973):  Exit 70C to I-76/PA Turnpike
PA 18 (1968 - 1978):  Exit 1C to Exit 2
I-76 (1972 - 1973):  Exit 64A to Exit 70C
I-279 (1973 - 2009):  Exit 64A to Exit 70C
PA Toll 60 (1991 - 2008):  Exit 15 to Exit 17
PA 60 (1992 - 2009):  Exit 50 to Exit 57
PA Toll 60 (1992 - 2008):  Exit 17 to Exit 31
PA Turnpike 60 (2008 - 2009):  Exit 15 to Exit 31

Thank you, Brian.

I didn't think it was hard to find in that highlighted section of quick facts all these years.

Kids today.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Hwy 61 Revisited on February 16, 2020, 12:14:54 PM
I-80 Project: Yea or Nay? https://www.poconorecord.com/news/20200216/proposed-i-80-expansion-nears-final-design
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: DJStephens on February 16, 2020, 03:08:09 PM
Remember 80 in the Stroudsburg area as being already antiquated in the early / mid eighties.  Forty years later, can only guess how bad it's become.   
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: interstate73 on February 16, 2020, 03:37:01 PM
Drive through that stretch all the time between home and school and its always the crappiest, most unreliable stretch. Woefully undercapacity, jams at all times of the day, frequent crashes due to the poor design and constant traffic that jam things up even worse, and no useful alternatives that wouldn't also be jammed if there's a problem on 80... really there needs to be 3 lanes (or a freeway-standard bypass) from Exit 4 in NJ to the 380 split, but I understand the topography and development would make that difficult-to-impossible, so anything else that could be done at all would be a vast improvement.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: cpzilliacus on February 16, 2020, 03:45:58 PM
Quote from: Crown Victoria on February 13, 2020, 03:25:38 PM
More I-78 upgrades set to begin this spring:


https://www.readingeagle.com/news/local/penndot-s-million-upgrades-on-i--and-route-starting/article_71252042-4db4-11ea-866c-9bd7894c47f2.html

The images here neatly sum up so much of what is wrong with older freeway corridors in Pennsylvania (examples include much of the "free" parts of I-70 and I-83 between the Maryland border and PA-581.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: DJStephens on February 16, 2020, 10:16:42 PM
Quote from: cpzilliacus on February 16, 2020, 03:45:58 PM
Quote from: Crown Victoria on February 13, 2020, 03:25:38 PM
More I-78 upgrades set to begin this spring:


https://www.readingeagle.com/news/local/penndot-s-million-upgrades-on-i--and-route-starting/article_71252042-4db4-11ea-866c-9bd7894c47f2.html

The images here neatly sum up so much of what is wrong with older freeway corridors in Pennsylvania (examples include much of the "free" parts of I-70 and I-83 between the Maryland border and PA-581.

Article definitely written by an author without a construction/engineering background.  Appears simply an additional lane will be added to the crossing, from the description.   What about an inner shoulder?  Isn't that required, when a cross-section goes to three or more lanes??  Maybe the best solution would have been to construct a new span, on each side of the existing one - with "retro" design on the substructures to match the old one.   Then demolish the original 1955 bridge.  Would give a decent median.   A lot of the older Interstates in Penn seem to have been modeled after the 1940 Penn Turnpike.  Very little in terms of median separation.  70 and 78 mainly come to mind.  And 80 in Stroudsburg.  And 276 and 476 Northeast Extension come to think of it.   Have to wonder, a lot could have been reconstructed by building all new mainlines to the outside of the original narrow alignments in many places.   Not all, of course, due to topography or dense adjoining development.   
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Beltway on February 16, 2020, 10:33:25 PM
So are there plans to widen I-80 thru the Delaware Water Gap area, to 6 lanes between I-380 and where 6 lanes starts in New Jersey?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Hwy 61 Revisited on February 16, 2020, 10:54:31 PM
Quote from: Beltway on February 16, 2020, 10:33:25 PM
So are there plans to widen I-80 thru the Delaware Water Gap area, to 6 lanes between I-380 and where 6 lanes starts in New Jersey?

It was said that after the Stroudsburg section gets finished, they will start on the Scotrun area, which is currently in design. I, for one, would like to see Exit 302 rehabilitated, as there is SO MUCH WEAVING coming between 33 NB and 80 WB to 611.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on February 17, 2020, 12:13:26 AM
Quote from: Beltway on February 16, 2020, 10:33:25 PM
So are there plans to widen I-80 thru the Delaware Water Gap area, to 6 lanes between I-380 and where 6 lanes starts in New Jersey?

I remember seeing a project website a long time ago for widening through the Delaware Water Gap and over the river for six continuous lanes from Stroudsburg into New Jersey, but I can't find any current official mention of it. It's essentially disappeared.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Alps on February 17, 2020, 12:51:19 AM
Quote from: Roadsguy on February 17, 2020, 12:13:26 AM
Quote from: Beltway on February 16, 2020, 10:33:25 PM
So are there plans to widen I-80 thru the Delaware Water Gap area, to 6 lanes between I-380 and where 6 lanes starts in New Jersey?

I remember seeing a project website a long time ago for widening through the Delaware Water Gap and over the river for six continuous lanes from Stroudsburg into New Jersey, but I can't find any current official mention of it. It's essentially disappeared.
It will never be widened in the DWG. That's a protected area.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: J N Winkler on February 17, 2020, 01:10:53 AM
Quote from: DJStephens on February 16, 2020, 10:16:42 PMArticle definitely written by an author without a construction/engineering background.  Appears simply an additional lane will be added to the crossing, from the description.   What about an inner shoulder?  Isn't that required, when a cross-section goes to three or more lanes??

The article definitely shows no sign of having been written by someone with an awareness of the technical aspects of the project, but fortunately the plans are available through ECMS (project number is 93494).  The upgraded bridge will have 12 ft right shoulders and a median of 11 ft 5 1/2 in, the latter being wide enough to accommodate shoulders of about 4 1/2 ft, assuming Jersey barrier base width of 2 ft.

For Interstate shoulders, the base standard is 4 ft left/10 ft right.  I don't know if this part of I-78 has enough truck traffic to attract 12 ft shoulders both sides.

Quote from: DJStephens on February 16, 2020, 10:16:42 PMMaybe the best solution would have been to construct a new span, on each side of the existing one - with "retro" design on the substructures to match the old one.   Then demolish the original 1955 bridge.  Would give a decent median.   A lot of the older Interstates in Penn seem to have been modeled after the 1940 Penn Turnpike.  Very little in terms of median separation.  70 and 78 mainly come to mind.  And 80 in Stroudsburg.  And 276 and 476 Northeast Extension come to think of it.   Have to wonder, a lot could have been reconstructed by building all new mainlines to the outside of the original narrow alignments in many places.   Not all, of course, due to topography or dense adjoining development.

I wouldn't want to be the ROW agent dealing with the people living on the hill just to the north of I-78 on the east bank of the Schuylkill River--those are $250,000 houses.  I can certainly see the case for a wide median, but I don't see PennDOT going for it at the bridge absent a decision to rebuild all free Interstates in Pennsylvania with wide medians except at locations of special difficulty.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Beltway on February 17, 2020, 01:11:07 AM
Quote from: Alps on February 17, 2020, 12:51:19 AM
Quote from: Roadsguy on February 17, 2020, 12:13:26 AM
Quote from: Beltway on February 16, 2020, 10:33:25 PM
So are there plans to widen I-80 thru the Delaware Water Gap area, to 6 lanes between I-380 and where 6 lanes starts in New Jersey?
I remember seeing a project website a long time ago for widening through the Delaware Water Gap and over the river for six continuous lanes from Stroudsburg into New Jersey, but I can't find any current official mention of it. It's essentially disappeared.
It will never be widened in the DWG. That's a protected area.
Then that would mean a relocation.  Someone mapped this out I think back on m.t.r.

About 10 miles of relocated highway to the south.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Beltway on February 17, 2020, 01:14:28 AM
Quote from: J N Winkler on February 17, 2020, 01:10:53 AM
I wouldn't want to be the ROW agent dealing with the people living on the hill just to the north of I-78 on the east bank of the Schuylkill River--those are $250,000 houses.  I can certainly see the case for a wide median, but I don't see PennDOT going for it at the bridge absent a decision to rebuild all free Interstates in Pennsylvania with wide medians except at locations of special difficulty.
Depends on the definition of "wide median."

The 26 feet used on the Turnpike 6-lane reconstruction projects is a fully modern design.  In a rural area I would prefer at least 60 feet of graded median, but with 26 feet you get two 12-foot left shoulders and 2 feet for a concrete median barrier.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Rothman on February 17, 2020, 08:17:51 AM
Quote from: Beltway on February 17, 2020, 01:11:07 AM
Quote from: Alps on February 17, 2020, 12:51:19 AM
Quote from: Roadsguy on February 17, 2020, 12:13:26 AM
Quote from: Beltway on February 16, 2020, 10:33:25 PM
So are there plans to widen I-80 thru the Delaware Water Gap area, to 6 lanes between I-380 and where 6 lanes starts in New Jersey?
I remember seeing a project website a long time ago for widening through the Delaware Water Gap and over the river for six continuous lanes from Stroudsburg into New Jersey, but I can't find any current official mention of it. It's essentially disappeared.
It will never be widened in the DWG. That's a protected area.
Then that would mean a relocation.  Someone mapped this out I think back on m.t.r.

About 10 miles of relocated highway to the south.
I don't know if widening is out of the question, especially with safety concerns.  Road projects in NPS sites are common.

Moving it south would not be possible, since the NRA and protected river extends a long way down.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: J N Winkler on February 17, 2020, 02:54:24 PM
Quote from: Beltway on February 17, 2020, 01:14:28 AMDepends on the definition of "wide median."

The 26 feet used on the Turnpike 6-lane reconstruction projects is a fully modern design.  In a rural area I would prefer at least 60 feet of graded median, but with 26 feet you get two 12-foot left shoulders and 2 feet for a concrete median barrier.

DJStephens (if I understand correctly) is based in the Las Cruces area, so I was thinking in terms of median width of at least 60 ft, which is pretty much the norm in the intermountain West.  I think that is a nonstarter in Pennsylvania, though MoDOT's preferred alternative for the widening of rural I-70 in Missouri (unfunded for over two decades and possibly permanently unfundable) involves a radical expansion of median width in rolling terrain.

What PennDOT is actually building does expand the available shoulder width as well as the traffic capacity.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Alps on February 17, 2020, 11:41:18 PM
Quote from: J N Winkler on February 17, 2020, 01:10:53 AM
Quote from: DJStephens on February 16, 2020, 10:16:42 PMArticle definitely written by an author without a construction/engineering background.  Appears simply an additional lane will be added to the crossing, from the description.   What about an inner shoulder?  Isn't that required, when a cross-section goes to three or more lanes??

The article definitely shows no sign of having been written by someone with an awareness of the technical aspects of the project, but fortunately the plans are available through ECMS (project number is 93494).  The upgraded bridge will have 12 ft right shoulders and a median of 11 ft 5 1/2 in, the latter being wide enough to accommodate shoulders of about 4 1/2 ft, assuming Jersey barrier base width of 2 ft.

For Interstate shoulders, the base standard is 4 ft left/10 ft right.  I don't know if this part of I-78 has enough truck traffic to attract 12 ft shoulders both sides.

Quote from: DJStephens on February 16, 2020, 10:16:42 PMMaybe the best solution would have been to construct a new span, on each side of the existing one - with "retro" design on the substructures to match the old one.   Then demolish the original 1955 bridge.  Would give a decent median.   A lot of the older Interstates in Penn seem to have been modeled after the 1940 Penn Turnpike.  Very little in terms of median separation.  70 and 78 mainly come to mind.  And 80 in Stroudsburg.  And 276 and 476 Northeast Extension come to think of it.   Have to wonder, a lot could have been reconstructed by building all new mainlines to the outside of the original narrow alignments in many places.   Not all, of course, due to topography or dense adjoining development.

I wouldn't want to be the ROW agent dealing with the people living on the hill just to the north of I-78 on the east bank of the Schuylkill River--those are $250,000 houses.  I can certainly see the case for a wide median, but I don't see PennDOT going for it at the bridge absent a decision to rebuild all free Interstates in Pennsylvania with wide medians except at locations of special difficulty.
I would think I-78 warrants 12' shoulders based on the truck traffic I always see there. Also, in this area, $250,000 is nothing.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Gnutella on February 18, 2020, 07:56:09 AM
Quote from: cpzilliacus on February 16, 2020, 03:45:58 PM
Quote from: Crown Victoria on February 13, 2020, 03:25:38 PM
More I-78 upgrades set to begin this spring:


https://www.readingeagle.com/news/local/penndot-s-million-upgrades-on-i--and-route-starting/article_71252042-4db4-11ea-866c-9bd7894c47f2.html

The images here neatly sum up so much of what is wrong with older freeway corridors in Pennsylvania (examples include much of the "free" parts of I-70 and I-83 between the Maryland border and PA-581.

Speaking of upgrading substandard Interstate segments, Google Maps shows a lot of the work being done on I-70 south of Pittsburgh:


1. Here's (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.18674,-80.2360754,295m/data=!3m1!1e3) the upgraded segment of the I-70/I-79 concurrency between the I-70/I-79 west/north junction (Exit 18) and the Murtland Avenue interchange (Exit 19).

2. Here's (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.1746179,-80.2158127,417m/data=!3m1!1e3) the reconstruction and six-lane expansion of the I-70/I-79 concurrency in Washington, between the Murtland Avenue interchange (Exit 19) and the I-70/I-79 east/south junction (Exit 21).

3. Here's (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.1591419,-80.1560057,287m/data=!3m1!1e3) the reconstruction between the I-70/I-79 east/south junction and the Eighty Four interchange (Exit 25), including improvements in curve geometry.

4. Here's (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.1557786,-80.1314107,294m/data=!3m1!1e3) the upgraded PA 519/Eighty Four/Glyde interchange (Exit 25).

5. Here's (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.1667064,-80.0842516,305m/data=!3m1!1e3) the upgraded underpass at the Dunningsville interchange (Exit 27).

6. Here's (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.1502898,-80.0315016,291m/data=!3m1!1e3) the upgraded overpass at the Kammerer interchange (Exit 31).

7. Here's (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.1333237,-79.995771,321m/data=!3m1!1e3) the upgraded Bentleyville interchange (Exits 32A-B).

8. Here's (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.1251838,-79.9581838,295m/data=!3m1!1e3) the upgraded PA 481/Monongahela/Centerville interchange (Exit 35).

9. Here's (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.1691284,-79.7331351,310m/data=!3m1!1e3) the upgraded Smithton interchange (Exit 49), which, aside from the I-70/I-79 east/south junction flyover ramp (Exit 21), was the first improvement on this segment of I-70.

10. Here's (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.188686,-79.7009801,328m/data=!3m1!1e3) the PA 31/West Newton/Mt. Pleasant interchange (Exit 51) upgrade in progress, with improvements in curve geometry to the east and west of the interchange.

11. Here's (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.2163885,-79.6143004,307m/data=!3m1!1e3) the upgraded and combined New Stanton/Hunker interchange (Exit 57).

12. Here's (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.2179094,-79.6075769,310m/data=!3m1!1e3) the upgraded segment between the New Stanton/Hunker interchange (Exit 57) and the Pennsylvania Turnpike interchange (Exit 58).


One thing you might notice is that the earliest interchange upgrades used asphalt, but recent projects have used concrete.

On deck are the following improvements:


1. The Speers interchange (http://www.i-70projects.com/SR2027overI-70.html) (Exit 39) overpass replacement (currently in final design; construction expected to begin in 2022).

2. The North Belle Vernon interchange (http://www.i-70projects.com/3007Bridge.html) (Exit 42) overpass replacement (project timeline TBD)

2. The Arnold City interchange (http://i-70projects.com/arnold.html) (Exit 44) and adjacent segments of the highway (currently in final design; construction expected to begin in 2021).

3. The PA 51/Pittsburgh/Uniontown interchange (http://www.i-70projects.com/I-70andSR51.html) (Exit 46) and adjacent segments of the highway (currently in environmental clearance; construction expected to begin in 2022).

4. The Yukon and Madison interchanges (http://www.i-70projects.com/Yukon.html) (Exits 53-54), and the segment of the highway east of the Madison interchange (Exit 54) all the way to the recently upgraded New Stanton/Hunker interchange (Exit 57) (construction imminent).


In just a few more years, I-70 will have been reconstructed to modern Interstate standards from the I-79 north junction (Exit 18) to the PA 519/Eighty Four/Glyde interchange (Exit 25), and from the Smithton Hi-Level Bridge (MM 48) to the Pennsylvania Turnpike (Exit 58), for a total of 17 miles. It appears that the focus of the construction will gradually move its way from east to west, with the segment between the PA 519/Eighty Four/Glyde interchange (Exit 25) and the Speers-Belle Vernon Bridge (MM 40) being the last to be reconstructed.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: DJStephens on February 18, 2020, 10:37:09 AM
Quote from: J N Winkler on February 17, 2020, 02:54:24 PM
Quote from: Beltway on February 17, 2020, 01:14:28 AMDepends on the definition of "wide median."

The 26 feet used on the Turnpike 6-lane reconstruction projects is a fully modern design.  In a rural area I would prefer at least 60 feet of graded median, but with 26 feet you get two 12-foot left shoulders and 2 feet for a concrete median barrier.

DJStephens (if I understand correctly) is based in the Las Cruces area, so I was thinking in terms of median width of at least 60 ft, which is pretty much the norm in the intermountain West.  I think that is a nonstarter in Pennsylvania, though MoDOT's preferred alternative for the widening of rural I-70 in Missouri (unfunded for over two decades and possibly permanently unfundable) involves a radical expansion of median width in rolling terrain.

What PennDOT is actually building does expand the available shoulder width as well as the traffic capacity.

Was under the impression FHWA requires a full left shoulder on cross sections of three or more lanes in one direction.  Not that it is dependent on the amount of truck traffic.   Have viewed exceptions of course - the "widening" of Interstate 10 in East El Paso, they seem to have gotten around that requirement somehow. Guessing there is a 3-4 foot distance to the left (the CBR/Jersey Barrier), and the mainlines appear to be 10 or 11 feet wide (McRae to Zaragosa).   The tex-dot in El Paso certainly seems to have struggled with the growth in the area, despite having plenty of funding in the last decade or so.   
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jeffandnicole on February 18, 2020, 12:03:34 PM
Quote from: DJStephens on February 18, 2020, 10:37:09 AM
Quote from: J N Winkler on February 17, 2020, 02:54:24 PM
Quote from: Beltway on February 17, 2020, 01:14:28 AMDepends on the definition of "wide median."

The 26 feet used on the Turnpike 6-lane reconstruction projects is a fully modern design.  In a rural area I would prefer at least 60 feet of graded median, but with 26 feet you get two 12-foot left shoulders and 2 feet for a concrete median barrier.

DJStephens (if I understand correctly) is based in the Las Cruces area, so I was thinking in terms of median width of at least 60 ft, which is pretty much the norm in the intermountain West.  I think that is a nonstarter in Pennsylvania, though MoDOT's preferred alternative for the widening of rural I-70 in Missouri (unfunded for over two decades and possibly permanently unfundable) involves a radical expansion of median width in rolling terrain.

What PennDOT is actually building does expand the available shoulder width as well as the traffic capacity.

Was under the impression FHWA requires a full left shoulder on cross sections of three or more lanes in one direction.  Not that it is dependent on the amount of truck traffic.   Have viewed exceptions of course - the "widening" of Interstate 10 in East El Paso, they seem to have gotten around that requirement somehow. Guessing there is a 3-4 foot distance to the left (the CBR/Jersey Barrier), and the mainlines appear to be 10 or 11 feet wide (McRae to Zaragosa).   The tex-dot in El Paso certainly seems to have struggled with the growth in the area, despite having plenty of funding in the last decade or so.   

Exceptions exist for various reasons, probably mostly due to space issues. 

When NJDOT worked on I-295, they widened the left shoulder to a full left shoulder in some areas, but not others, probably based on traffic volumes.  Of course, it's all relative: The 3 lane portion of 295 where a full paved left shoulder wasn't provided is lower in volume to other areas of I-295 where one was added, but traffic volumes would probably still dictate a 4 or 5 lane wide section in other areas of the country!

I-76 WB in NJ is 6 lanes wide, with only a full right shoulder and no left shoulder whatsoever. https://goo.gl/maps/ULWvKcVkVvWnkd2L7

So as long as the states can justify why a full shoulder isn't necessary, space-prohibitive or is cost-prohibitive, the feds are willing to allow exceptions.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Bitmapped on February 25, 2020, 11:00:25 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on February 18, 2020, 12:03:34 PM
Quote from: DJStephens on February 18, 2020, 10:37:09 AM
Quote from: J N Winkler on February 17, 2020, 02:54:24 PM
Quote from: Beltway on February 17, 2020, 01:14:28 AMDepends on the definition of "wide median."

The 26 feet used on the Turnpike 6-lane reconstruction projects is a fully modern design.  In a rural area I would prefer at least 60 feet of graded median, but with 26 feet you get two 12-foot left shoulders and 2 feet for a concrete median barrier.

DJStephens (if I understand correctly) is based in the Las Cruces area, so I was thinking in terms of median width of at least 60 ft, which is pretty much the norm in the intermountain West.  I think that is a nonstarter in Pennsylvania, though MoDOT's preferred alternative for the widening of rural I-70 in Missouri (unfunded for over two decades and possibly permanently unfundable) involves a radical expansion of median width in rolling terrain.

What PennDOT is actually building does expand the available shoulder width as well as the traffic capacity.

Was under the impression FHWA requires a full left shoulder on cross sections of three or more lanes in one direction.  Not that it is dependent on the amount of truck traffic.   Have viewed exceptions of course - the "widening" of Interstate 10 in East El Paso, they seem to have gotten around that requirement somehow. Guessing there is a 3-4 foot distance to the left (the CBR/Jersey Barrier), and the mainlines appear to be 10 or 11 feet wide (McRae to Zaragosa).   The tex-dot in El Paso certainly seems to have struggled with the growth in the area, despite having plenty of funding in the last decade or so.   

Exceptions exist for various reasons, probably mostly due to space issues. 

When NJDOT worked on I-295, they widened the left shoulder to a full left shoulder in some areas, but not others, probably based on traffic volumes.  Of course, it's all relative: The 3 lane portion of 295 where a full paved left shoulder wasn't provided is lower in volume to other areas of I-295 where one was added, but traffic volumes would probably still dictate a 4 or 5 lane wide section in other areas of the country!

I-76 WB in NJ is 6 lanes wide, with only a full right shoulder and no left shoulder whatsoever. https://goo.gl/maps/ULWvKcVkVvWnkd2L7

So as long as the states can justify why a full shoulder isn't necessary, space-prohibitive or is cost-prohibitive, the feds are willing to allow exceptions.

WVDOH regularly omits a full-width inner shoulder on its 6-lane widening projects where there is a Jersey barrier. The only place I can think in WV that has a full-width inner shoulder is I-79 north of Clarksburg, where the road was originally built with an exceptionally wide median.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: D-Dey65 on February 27, 2020, 11:54:29 PM
Hey, I just found the archive for Doug Kerr's old Breezewood webpage:
https://web.archive.org/web/20080104102250/http://www.gribblenation.net/penna/breezewood/

Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Crown Victoria on March 03, 2020, 03:53:49 PM
PA's work zone cameras are going live next week...

https://www.readingeagle.com/news/transportation/interstate-drivers-beware-automated-ticketing-for-speeding-in-work-zones/article_f7ff170e-5d76-11ea-8f79-136c599f86d0.html
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: briantroutman on March 03, 2020, 05:44:18 PM
Quote from: Crown Victoria on March 03, 2020, 03:53:49 PM
PA's work zone cameras are going live next week...

https://www.readingeagle.com/news/transportation/interstate-drivers-beware-automated-ticketing-for-speeding-in-work-zones/article_f7ff170e-5d76-11ea-8f79-136c599f86d0.html

QuoteA 60-day pilot project to monitor speeding in work zones without issuing tickets on some federal highways in Pennsylvania...

What...did a viatologist write this article?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on March 08, 2020, 11:13:30 AM
How long will it take for PennDOT to upgrade their signs?
https://goo.gl/maps/2M5g31HAMNn33dPD6
PA 115 has not been commissioned in Easton and northward to Wind Gap in almost five decades, yet they keep Wind Gap (and Stroudsburg) on this guide along PA 248 in Easton.  Considering PennDOT used black on white guides when PA 115 got truncated back in the early 70's it had to be redone on typical green first before going mixed case. So in essence this sign is been copied at least three times.

One could argue that even though PA 115 is not a designation here anymore, the pavement it ran on still is there and goes to Wind Gap, but with PA 33 nearby as a freeway (the reason why PA 115 got cut in the first place) getting there faster, the signs would point toward US 22 west to get there.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Hwy 61 Revisited on March 08, 2020, 11:18:07 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on March 08, 2020, 11:13:30 AM
How long will it take for PennDOT to upgrade their signs?
https://goo.gl/maps/2M5g31HAMNn33dPD6
PA 115 has not been commissioned in Easton and northward to Wind Gap in almost five decades, yet they keep Wind Gap (and Stroudsburg) on this guide along PA 248 in Easton.  Considering PennDOT used black on white guides when PA 115 got truncated back in the early 70's it had to be redone on typical green first before going mixed case. So in essence this sign is been copied at least three times.

One could argue that even though PA 115 is not a designation here anymore, the pavement it ran on still is there and goes to Wind Gap, but with PA 33 nearby as a freeway (the reason why PA 115 got cut in the first place) getting there faster, the signs would point toward US 22 west to get there.

I still think PA 115 should exist in Easton, at least as the main N-S throughfare down to 78. It's a shame to see it gone.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on March 08, 2020, 11:32:35 AM
I agree PA 115 should still be the highway for locals, but PennDOT does not like to have redundant state routes next to freeway bypasses.  US 30 around Bedford for one, and then US 422 east of Pottstown got the Ridge and Germantown Pikes to be number less when the freeway got extended to Valley Forge.   PA 309 when the Sellersville Bypass got built and US 1 in Chester County when the Oxford- Kennet Square Bypass was built are among many that took away state routes from the system.  However, in PA 115's case its far enough away from PA 33 to be its own corridor, but we can only imagine.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on March 08, 2020, 01:23:51 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on March 08, 2020, 11:32:35 AM
I agree PA 115 should still be the highway for locals, but PennDOT does not like to have redundant state routes next to freeway bypasses.  US 30 around Bedford for one, and then US 422 east of Pottstown got the Ridge and Germantown Pikes to be number less when the freeway got extended to Valley Forge.   PA 309 when the Sellersville Bypass got built and US 1 in Chester County when the Oxford- Kennet Square Bypass was built are among many that took away state routes from the system.  However, in PA 115's case its far enough away from PA 33 to be its own corridor, but we can only imagine.


US 30 actually (minus Greensburg even though 4 routes still go through downtown) tends to have numbered routes along its freeway portions (US 30 BUS in Bedford, Everett, Coatesville-Downingtown, and PA 462 for York and Lancaster).  I do agree that the old routes of PA 115 and US 422 should still be traffic routes.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Hwy 61 Revisited on March 08, 2020, 06:00:31 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on March 08, 2020, 01:23:51 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on March 08, 2020, 11:32:35 AM
I agree PA 115 should still be the highway for locals, but PennDOT does not like to have redundant state routes next to freeway bypasses.  US 30 around Bedford for one, and then US 422 east of Pottstown got the Ridge and Germantown Pikes to be number less when the freeway got extended to Valley Forge.   PA 309 when the Sellersville Bypass got built and US 1 in Chester County when the Oxford- Kennet Square Bypass was built are among many that took away state routes from the system.  However, in PA 115's case its far enough away from PA 33 to be its own corridor, but we can only imagine.


US 30 actually (minus Greensburg even though 4 routes still go through downtown) tends to have numbered routes along its freeway portions (US 30 BUS in Bedford, Everett, Coatesville-Downingtown, and PA 462 for York and Lancaster).  I do agree that the old routes of PA 115 and US 422 should still be traffic routes.

Old 309 in Sellersville should become 309 Bus. and Old 611 in Doylestown 611 Bus. It just makes sense.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on March 09, 2020, 11:55:24 PM
Was the Easton Phillipsburg Toll Bridge built before the Lehigh Valley Thruway?  The reason why I ask is that jog on the PA side of the bridge that US 22 makes, and the fact Bushkill Street is in direct line with the bridge instead of the freeway.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Hot Rod Hootenanny on March 10, 2020, 12:15:30 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on March 09, 2020, 11:55:24 PM
Was the Easton Phillipsburg Toll Bridge built before the Lehigh Valley Thruway?  The reason why I ask is that jog on the PA side of the bridge that US 22 makes, and the fact Bushkill Street is in direct line with the bridge instead of the freeway.

1937 for when the bridge was constructed.
http://bridgehunter.com/pa/northampton/487302999200100/
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadgeek Adam on March 10, 2020, 01:22:32 AM
Built during 1937, opened to public on January 14, 1938.

Note it is commonly referred to as the Bushkill Street Bridge, so yes, Bushkill Street was the original intent.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadgeek Adam on March 10, 2020, 01:44:07 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on March 08, 2020, 11:13:30 AM
How long will it take for PennDOT to upgrade their signs?
https://goo.gl/maps/2M5g31HAMNn33dPD6
PA 115 has not been commissioned in Easton and northward to Wind Gap in almost five decades, yet they keep Wind Gap (and Stroudsburg) on this guide along PA 248 in Easton.  Considering PennDOT used black on white guides when PA 115 got truncated back in the early 70's it had to be redone on typical green first before going mixed case. So in essence this sign is been copied at least three times.


It's mostly the same argument as the Singac discussion. Signs commonly are replaced in kind. There's no rhyme or reason. People aren't going to fix what isn't broken obviously. If it still said ROUTE 115 I'd understand. It'll still say it for a long time to come.

The basic driver doesn't understand that these destinations were relevant to SR 0115. To us it looks normal. The contractors don't know either. These signs just get replaced in kind.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Hwy 61 Revisited on March 10, 2020, 09:37:50 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on March 09, 2020, 11:55:24 PM
Was the Easton Phillipsburg Toll Bridge built before the Lehigh Valley Thruway?  The reason why I ask is that jog on the PA side of the bridge that US 22 makes, and the fact Bushkill Street is in direct line with the bridge instead of the freeway.

I was planning on removing the freeway, so that connection could possibly be reinvigorated if it happens.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Alps on March 10, 2020, 04:31:50 PM
Quote from: Hwy 61 Revisited on March 10, 2020, 09:37:50 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on March 09, 2020, 11:55:24 PM
Was the Easton Phillipsburg Toll Bridge built before the Lehigh Valley Thruway?  The reason why I ask is that jog on the PA side of the bridge that US 22 makes, and the fact Bushkill Street is in direct line with the bridge instead of the freeway.

I was planning on removing the freeway, so that connection could possibly be reinvigorated if it happens.
Keep it in fictional.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on March 11, 2020, 12:10:13 AM
Quote from: Hot Rod Hootenanny on March 10, 2020, 12:15:30 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on March 09, 2020, 11:55:24 PM
Was the Easton Phillipsburg Toll Bridge built before the Lehigh Valley Thruway?  The reason why I ask is that jog on the PA side of the bridge that US 22 makes, and the fact Bushkill Street is in direct line with the bridge instead of the freeway.



1937 for when the bridge was constructed.
http://bridgehunter.com/pa/northampton/487302999200100/



I would think that it was built for the Lehigh Valley Thruway as the bridge and Thruway both replaces US 22 on the streets of both Phillipsburg and Easton.  The Thruway replaced the William Penn Highway but considering US 22 was upgraded from Paxtionia to Easton years before the interstate system was considered it could be that both were made at the same time.  However, that jog at the west end and the fact that the bridge was not built 200 feet to the north as on the NJ side it comes in from the NE (as after you pay the toll the bridge proper is at 2 o clock.  It would have been more feasible to cut the angle between the two points.

However considering Memorial Parkway on the NJ side is an arterial (probably a simple street originally) the concept of the bridge being built could have been for two streets to connect rather than an arterial to a freeway.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on March 11, 2020, 12:30:37 AM
Per PA Highways (http://www.pahighways.com/us/US22.html), the Lehigh Valley Thruway wasn't built to the bridge until 1955, 17 years after the bridge opened in 1938. (Wikipedia cites a news article from that year for the bridge opening.) Early planning for the Thruway may have been underway at the time, but it would have had to have fed into Bushkill Street. Unfortunately Historic Aerials has no imagery from this time period, going straight from no bridge in 1931 to bridge and Thruway in 1955, though some of the topographic maps show the bridge feeding into Bushkill Street with no Thruway.

Memorial Parkway seems to have been upgraded from the preexisting streets when the bridge was built, or at least soon after. It was already built in the 1955 imagery. (The short freeway connector that dumps into Memorial Parkway further east was built sometime between 1956 and 1962, presumably planned for I-78, though there were never any stubs.)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadgeek Adam on March 11, 2020, 10:28:47 PM
Quote from: Roadsguy on March 11, 2020, 12:30:37 AM
Per PA Highways (http://www.pahighways.com/us/US22.html), the Lehigh Valley Thruway wasn't built to the bridge until 1955, 17 years after the bridge opened in 1938. (Wikipedia cites a news article from that year for the bridge opening.) Early planning for the Thruway may have been underway at the time, but it would have had to have fed into Bushkill Street. Unfortunately Historic Aerials has no imagery from this time period, going straight from no bridge in 1931 to bridge and Thruway in 1955, though some of the topographic maps show the bridge feeding into Bushkill Street with no Thruway.

For one thing, cause I added the source news article after I clipped the article.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Crown Victoria on March 16, 2020, 08:08:01 PM
PennDOT is temporarily shutting down construction, rest areas, and offices, and also extending expiration dates for licenses, registrations, and inspections:


https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-11/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4210&fbclid=IwAR0h3WTs2SiJhbPyRj2RsGOx-su0qF5TsuabcXJ9sogLyTM1pxGH6k-F4Gw
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Bitmapped on March 21, 2020, 05:53:59 PM
Quote from: tylert120 on March 21, 2020, 10:00:54 AM
Question regarding signage, specifically the white/blue signage that PennDOT uses at municipal and county borders, as well as stream and river crossings. Why hasn't PennDOT gone back to using Clearview and mixed case lettering for the names? Doesn't the MUTCD say that signage should be mixed case instead of all caps?

Here is a version that uses mixed case and Clearview: https://goo.gl/maps/RJye2RQptqXBrFgs9
And a newer sign (since PennDOT has returned to Clearview) that still uses Hwy Gothic and all caps: https://goo.gl/maps/qPxRSzBRMPnNUgE9A

Just curious about the discrepancies since PennDOT makes all these signs in one central sign shop...thanks for the info.

I don't think PennDOT ever changed the signs on surface routes to mixed-case Clearview.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on March 30, 2020, 11:47:34 AM
PennDOT finally updated PA 295 to PA 297 on the BGSes on I-83, but rather than a shield overlay, they sloppily overlaid just the last digit, creating this unholy abomination (https://goo.gl/maps/QgxXYk7jnkCvuZur6) on each of the signs. Almost looks like some kind of hybrid between the PA and Wisconsin route shields.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: odditude on March 30, 2020, 02:16:11 PM
Quote from: Roadsguy on March 30, 2020, 11:47:34 AM
PennDOT finally updated PA 295 to PA 297 on the BGSes on I-83, but rather than a shield overlay, they sloppily overlaid just the last digit, creating this unholy abomination (https://goo.gl/maps/QgxXYk7jnkCvuZur6) on each of the signs. Almost looks like some kind of hybrid between the PA and Wisconsin route shields.
i think that's worthy of the "good/bad/ugly" thread.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: cpzilliacus on March 30, 2020, 02:59:44 PM
Quote from: Roadsguy on March 30, 2020, 11:47:34 AM
PennDOT finally updated PA 295 to PA 297 on the BGSes on I-83, but rather than a shield overlay, they sloppily overlaid just the last digit, creating this unholy abomination (https://goo.gl/maps/QgxXYk7jnkCvuZur6) on each of the signs. Almost looks like some kind of hybrid between the PA and Wisconsin route shields.

Because PennDOT! 

Or to be fair, because the Pennsylvania legislature, and its years and years of keeping fuel taxes as low as possible.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ekt8750 on March 30, 2020, 05:18:02 PM
Quote from: Roadsguy on March 30, 2020, 11:47:34 AM
PennDOT finally updated PA 295 to PA 297 on the BGSes on I-83, but rather than a shield overlay, they sloppily overlaid just the last digit, creating this unholy abomination (https://goo.gl/maps/QgxXYk7jnkCvuZur6) on each of the signs. Almost looks like some kind of hybrid between the PA and Wisconsin route shields.

Damn. A good exacto knife could fix that in 5 mins lol
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: odditude on March 30, 2020, 07:05:08 PM
Quote from: ekt8750 on March 30, 2020, 05:18:02 PM
Quote from: Roadsguy on March 30, 2020, 11:47:34 AM
PennDOT finally updated PA 295 to PA 297 on the BGSes on I-83, but rather than a shield overlay, they sloppily overlaid just the last digit, creating this unholy abomination (https://goo.gl/maps/QgxXYk7jnkCvuZur6) on each of the signs. Almost looks like some kind of hybrid between the PA and Wisconsin route shields.

Damn. A good exacto knife could fix that in 5 mins lol

nope - that 7 is in D, the other digits are in C.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jeffandnicole on March 30, 2020, 10:16:33 PM
Doesn't matter what agency in PA it is, they are all horrible with sign mods.

See also, the 276 shield over the NJ Tpk Shield (or vice versa) on the PA Tpk near Valley Forge.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Hwy 61 Revisited on March 30, 2020, 10:50:50 PM
Would it be safe to say that PennDOT and the Turnpike Commission are fronts for... The Mob?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Alps on March 30, 2020, 11:58:34 PM
Quote from: Hwy 61 Revisited on March 30, 2020, 10:50:50 PM
Would it be safe to say that PennDOT and the Turnpike Commission are fronts for... The Mob?

:confused: :confused:
I don't get the joke, but it's never safe to talk about the mob. Which doesn't exist.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jemacedo9 on March 31, 2020, 08:21:56 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on March 30, 2020, 10:16:33 PM
Doesn't matter what agency in PA it is, they are all horrible with sign mods.

See also, the 276 shield over the NJ Tpk Shield (or vice versa) on the PA Tpk near Valley Forge.

That one has since been replaced...but it was brutal.  Further west at the Downingtown interchange, for years you could see the corners of an old PA 9 shield sticking out from under an I-476 shield.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on March 31, 2020, 08:35:39 AM
Quote from: jemacedo9 on March 31, 2020, 08:21:56 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on March 30, 2020, 10:16:33 PM
Doesn't matter what agency in PA it is, they are all horrible with sign mods.

See also, the 276 shield over the NJ Tpk Shield (or vice versa) on the PA Tpk near Valley Forge.

That one has since been replaced...but it was brutal.  Further west at the Downingtown interchange, for years you could see the corners of an old PA 9 shield sticking out from under an I-476 shield.

There were still quite a few assorted signs with PA 9 still peeking from under I-476, mostly signs at the gores of toll plazas. I do remember the overhead sign at Downingtown before that was replaced. I think they're all replaced now; the last one I knew of was at Willow Grove.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jeffandnicole on March 31, 2020, 09:11:38 AM
Quote from: Roadsguy on March 31, 2020, 08:35:39 AM
Quote from: jemacedo9 on March 31, 2020, 08:21:56 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on March 30, 2020, 10:16:33 PM
Doesn't matter what agency in PA it is, they are all horrible with sign mods.

See also, the 276 shield over the NJ Tpk Shield (or vice versa) on the PA Tpk near Valley Forge.

That one has since been replaced...but it was brutal.  Further west at the Downingtown interchange, for years you could see the corners of an old PA 9 shield sticking out from under an I-476 shield.

There were still quite a few assorted signs with PA 9 still peeking from under I-476, mostly signs at the gores of toll plazas. I do remember the overhead sign at Downingtown before that was replaced. I think they're all replaced now; the last one I knew of was at Willow Grove.

Yep, all replaced. But they lasted a few decades. And when signage has a life expectancy of a few decades, that shows how old that signage was!

I've commented before about the "Old Exit" signage that is never removed, to the point where new "Old Exit" signage finally replaced 15 year-old Old Exit signage on I-95, now I-295.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jemacedo9 on March 31, 2020, 09:39:42 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on March 31, 2020, 09:11:38 AM
Quote from: Roadsguy on March 31, 2020, 08:35:39 AM
Quote from: jemacedo9 on March 31, 2020, 08:21:56 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on March 30, 2020, 10:16:33 PM
Doesn't matter what agency in PA it is, they are all horrible with sign mods.

See also, the 276 shield over the NJ Tpk Shield (or vice versa) on the PA Tpk near Valley Forge.

That one has since been replaced...but it was brutal.  Further west at the Downingtown interchange, for years you could see the corners of an old PA 9 shield sticking out from under an I-476 shield.

There were still quite a few assorted signs with PA 9 still peeking from under I-476, mostly signs at the gores of toll plazas. I do remember the overhead sign at Downingtown before that was replaced. I think they're all replaced now; the last one I knew of was at Willow Grove.

Yep, all replaced. But they lasted a few decades. And when signage has a life expectancy of a few decades, that shows how old that signage was!

I've commented before about the "Old Exit" signage that is never removed, to the point where new "Old Exit" signage finally replaced 15 year-old Old Exit signage on I-95, now I-295.

Agreed (that PA 9 one was overlaid ~1996 and replaced ~2016),  and agreed...
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: seicer on April 06, 2020, 10:53:12 AM
https://www.facebook.com/ZiggysPowersport/posts/1160394334308330

RIP Old PA Route 61 in Centralia AKA Graffiti Highway
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: briantroutman on April 06, 2020, 12:21:45 PM
Good riddance.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Alps on April 06, 2020, 12:29:37 PM
Quote from: briantroutman on April 06, 2020, 12:21:45 PM
Good riddance.
Unfortunately. 15 years ago it was a great place to explore for the roads community. By even 10 years ago it became overrun with the worst elements of teenage society.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ozarkman417 on April 06, 2020, 02:47:00 PM
We live in a society.....It's a shame I never got to see it in person.

For the sake of history I like the idea of PennDOT buying as little as a couple hundred feet of the highway near the southern end of the abandoned stretch to preserve it (whats the worst that could happen, its already been graffiti-ed to death). I see that it was only recently that PennDOT sold the stretch but keeping a fraction of it would have been a good idea.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on April 06, 2020, 02:51:06 PM
Quote from: ozarkman417 on April 06, 2020, 02:47:00 PM
We live in a society.....It's a shame I never got to see it in person.

For the sake of history I like the idea of PennDOT buying as little as a couple hundred feet of the highway near the southern end of the abandoned stretch to preserve it (whats the worst that could happen, its already been graffiti-ed to death). I see that it was only recently that PennDOT sold the stretch but keeping a fraction of it would have been a good idea.

I feel like there were probably a higher amount of visitors there the last few weeks.  As a result, I am pretty sure that the timeline to do this was moved up to keep people away.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: noelbotevera on April 06, 2020, 03:07:19 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on April 06, 2020, 02:51:06 PM
Quote from: ozarkman417 on April 06, 2020, 02:47:00 PM
We live in a society.....It's a shame I never got to see it in person.

For the sake of history I like the idea of PennDOT buying as little as a couple hundred feet of the highway near the southern end of the abandoned stretch to preserve it (whats the worst that could happen, its already been graffiti-ed to death). I see that it was only recently that PennDOT sold the stretch but keeping a fraction of it would have been a good idea.

I feel like there were probably a higher amount of visitors there the last few weeks.  As a result, I am pretty sure that the timeline to do this was moved up to keep people away.
Back when I visited last fall, I actually had no clue that abandoned PA 61 was still state property. Sure, there were obligatory "No Trespassing" signs, but there was nobody stopping me (except for two piles of gravel with clear paths through them). There were also other cars parked there, so I just assumed that it was A-OK to enter. It wasn't until I posted about the trip here that somebody told me that the state still owned PA 61.

Now as to why the state still owns the road, I have no clue, because there's no point in maintaining 4 lanes on PA 61 (it goes down to 2 at the north end near PA 42, even before the fire closed the road). IMO they should've given it up and let it rot to nature or turn it into a bike trail.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ozarkman417 on April 06, 2020, 03:23:31 PM
Quote from: noelbotevera on April 06, 2020, 03:07:19 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on April 06, 2020, 02:51:06 PM
Quote from: ozarkman417 on April 06, 2020, 02:47:00 PM
We live in a society.....It's a shame I never got to see it in person.

For the sake of history I like the idea of PennDOT buying as little as a couple hundred feet of the highway near the southern end of the abandoned stretch to preserve it (whats the worst that could happen, its already been graffiti-ed to death). I see that it was only recently that PennDOT sold the stretch but keeping a fraction of it would have been a good idea.

I feel like there were probably a higher amount of visitors there the last few weeks.  As a result, I am pretty sure that the timeline to do this was moved up to keep people away.
Back when I visited last fall, I actually had no clue that abandoned PA 61 was still state property. Sure, there were obligatory "No Trespassing" signs, but there was nobody stopping me (except for two piles of gravel with clear paths through them). There were also other cars parked there, so I just assumed that it was A-OK to enter. It wasn't until I posted about the trip here that somebody told me that the state still owned PA 61.

Now as to why the state still owns the road, I have no clue, because there's no point in maintaining 4 lanes on PA 61 (it goes down to 2 at the north end near PA 42, even before the fire closed the road). IMO they should've given it up and let it rot to nature or turn it into a bike trail.
Last fall? This article (https://www.centraliapa.org/penndot-returns-graffiti-highway-centralia-pa/) says the highway has been owned by a private company since at least early to mid 2018. That article also says PennDOT was trying to keep people off the old highway, though at the same time I wouldn't trust a private company to preserve the highway.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: simon on April 12, 2020, 02:25:47 PM
Anyone remember when PA-33 (then the PA-115 freeway) had a temporary southern terminus onto Sullivan Trail?

(https://i.imgur.com/A83NUmh.png)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Hwy 61 Revisited on April 12, 2020, 03:59:16 PM
Quote from: simon on April 12, 2020, 02:25:47 PM
Anyone remember when PA-33 (then the PA-115 freeway) had a temporary southern terminus onto Sullivan Trail?

(https://i.imgur.com/A83NUmh.png)

Pepperidge Farm remembers...
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ipeters61 on April 18, 2020, 06:51:24 PM
Quote from: Alps on April 06, 2020, 12:29:37 PM
Quote from: briantroutman on April 06, 2020, 12:21:45 PM
Good riddance.
Unfortunately. 15 years ago it was a great place to explore for the roads community. By even 10 years ago it became overrun with the worst elements of teenage society.
I agree.  My grandparents lived about 30 minutes from Centralia so we went a few times for my grandfather to tell people the story.  When I started hearing "Graffiti Highway" I just was cringing.  The way it's been treated is incredibly disrespectful to the people who have actual ties to Centralia.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: DJStephens on April 19, 2020, 11:28:37 AM
[quote Anyone remember when PA-33 (then the PA-115 freeway) had a temporary southern terminus onto Sullivan Trail?
[/quote]

   Neat road.  Remember it in the early eighties - while traveling to aunt/uncles place in Allentown area for thanksgiving dinner.   Was part of a long detour around the NYC area.   Interstate 84 to port jervis, route 209 south, then 33 to A/B/E area.  Was still largely concrete then, probably all covered by now.   Joint repairs on 84 had already begun, even though that road was barely a decade old in the early eighties. 
   One would need to crank up the really way back machine to find that early construction.  On 33.
There must have been ultimate plans for that road then, such as extending N of I-80 and S of the A/B/E metropolitan area.   
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jemacedo9 on April 19, 2020, 12:42:07 PM
Just driving 33 today, you can see the large difference in engineering standards in the section north of 512 (paved/concrete medians, older bridge structures/designs) vs the section south of 512 to US 220 (wide grass median, newer structures) vs the final extension south of US 22.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Crown Victoria on May 12, 2020, 08:09:56 PM
Update regarding PennDOT's (and the PTC's) current financial difficulties due to the pandemic:

https://www.post-gazette.com/news/transportation/2020/05/12/PennDOT-Pennsylvania-Turnpike-COVID-19-push-bacck-projects-roads-bridges/stories/202005120111

(Also posted on the PA Turnpike thread)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: PHLBOS on May 14, 2020, 04:26:41 PM
Quote from: tylert120 on March 21, 2020, 10:00:54 AM
Question regarding signage, specifically the white/blue signage that PennDOT uses at municipal and county borders, as well as stream and river crossings. Why hasn't PennDOT gone back to using Clearview and mixed case lettering for the names? Doesn't the MUTCD say that signage should be mixed case instead of all caps?

Here is a version that uses mixed case and Clearview: https://goo.gl/maps/RJye2RQptqXBrFgs9
And a newer sign (since PennDOT has returned to Clearview) that still uses Hwy Gothic and all caps: https://goo.gl/maps/qPxRSzBRMPnNUgE9A

Just curious about the discrepancies since PennDOT makes all these signs in one central sign shop...thanks for the info.
It's worth noting that the usage of Clearview for negative contrast signs (dark letters on light background) was never intended to be applied per the Interim Approval (IA).  Those installations with Clearview, be it all-caps or mixed-case, likely date back when PennDOT wasn't quite getting the hang of how to properly (per the IA) use the font.

That said, the newer signs should still use mixed-case in Highway Gothic for the municipality names per MUTCD.  My guess is that PennDOT may have still had a surplus of blue capital letters in their sign shop that were quicker to fabricate.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: SteveG1988 on May 18, 2020, 02:57:56 AM
They've started the clearing of trees for the 78 bridge widening at Hamburg.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: sprjus4 on May 25, 2020, 08:11:15 AM
Lancaster Watchdog: Closed ramp on Route 283; determining speed limits on highways (https://lancasteronline.com/news/local/lancaster-watchdog-closed-ramp-on-route-283-determining-speed-limits-on-highways/article_eee46eb0-9c5c-11ea-af37-b32779a20349.html)
QuoteWhat makes a speed limit?
The same reader wondered what causes speed limits to be different on busy highways.

"If the speed limit on (Interstate) 83 between York and Harrisburg is 65MPH, why cannot Route 30 between York and Lancaster be posted at 65 MPH?"

Both highways, while similarly busy at times, are simply running on different standards.

Speed limit determinations are based on a process rooted in "Regulatory speed limits are determined based on a standardized process that is rooted in the National Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices,"  a PennDOT representative said in a statement to Watchdog.

A PennDOT representative told Watchdog that speed limits are determined based on a standardized process rooted in the National Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices from the Federal Highway Administration. "Generally speaking, as proven by countless local, state and federal studies, drivers travel at speeds commensurate with their comfort level, regardless of the regulatory speed limit, and the road is safest when the speed limit is near the normal running speeds."

Driver comfort, according to PennDOT, is mostly affected by physical conditions such as lane width, shoulder width, horizontal/vertical curvature and type of roadside hazards.

On the Route 30 highway connecting York and Lancaster, PennDOT states the road simply "doesn't meet the criteria...Raising the speed limit may have undesirable effects and is not being considered at this time."
Am I missing something here?

I-83 (65 mph) - Jersey barrier median, no left shoulder, narrow footprint, narrow interchanges - https://www.google.com/maps/@40.1618893,-76.8261501,3a,43y,339.23h,85.01t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sdykplNzzseE3yzL4FmoG1w!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e1
US-30 - (55 mph) Paved left shoulder, wide median, wide footprint, wide interchanges - https://www.google.com/maps/@40.0245667,-76.5651133,3a,40.3y,252.44h,86.85t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s9O3djB26mnCGsUaArBgqRw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e1

US-30 is built to much higher design quality and standards than I-83 is, and they claim 65 mph is okay on I-83, yet it will have "undesirable effects" and "is not being considered" for US-30?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Crown Victoria on May 25, 2020, 08:49:36 AM
Quote from: sprjus4 on May 25, 2020, 08:11:15 AM
Lancaster Watchdog: Closed ramp on Route 283; determining speed limits on highways (https://lancasteronline.com/news/local/lancaster-watchdog-closed-ramp-on-route-283-determining-speed-limits-on-highways/article_eee46eb0-9c5c-11ea-af37-b32779a20349.html)
QuoteWhat makes a speed limit?
The same reader wondered what causes speed limits to be different on busy highways.

"If the speed limit on (Interstate) 83 between York and Harrisburg is 65MPH, why cannot Route 30 between York and Lancaster be posted at 65 MPH?"

Both highways, while similarly busy at times, are simply running on different standards.

Speed limit determinations are based on a process rooted in "Regulatory speed limits are determined based on a standardized process that is rooted in the National Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices,"  a PennDOT representative said in a statement to Watchdog.

A PennDOT representative told Watchdog that speed limits are determined based on a standardized process rooted in the National Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices from the Federal Highway Administration. "Generally speaking, as proven by countless local, state and federal studies, drivers travel at speeds commensurate with their comfort level, regardless of the regulatory speed limit, and the road is safest when the speed limit is near the normal running speeds."

Driver comfort, according to PennDOT, is mostly affected by physical conditions such as lane width, shoulder width, horizontal/vertical curvature and type of roadside hazards.

On the Route 30 highway connecting York and Lancaster, PennDOT states the road simply "doesn't meet the criteria...Raising the speed limit may have undesirable effects and is not being considered at this time."
Am I missing something here?

I-83 (65 mph) - Jersey barrier median, no left shoulder, narrow footprint, narrow interchanges - https://www.google.com/maps/@40.1618893,-76.8261501,3a,43y,339.23h,85.01t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sdykplNzzseE3yzL4FmoG1w!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e1
US-30 - (55 mph) Paved left shoulder, wide median, wide footprint, wide interchanges - https://www.google.com/maps/@40.0245667,-76.5651133,3a,40.3y,252.44h,86.85t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s9O3djB26mnCGsUaArBgqRw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e1

US-30 is built to much higher design quality and standards than I-83 is, and they claim 65 mph is okay on I-83, yet it will have "undesirable effects" and "is not being considered" for US-30?

If I had to guess, it's because of the older, lower-standard sections of US 30 west of PA 24 in York County and east of Prospect Road in Lancaster County.  Those stretches have narrower shoulders and a guardrail for a median barrier.  The better-designed part of US 30 between those two could still be signed for 65 mph though.  And based on experience, actual speeds are closer to 70-75 mph the whole way anyway.  Still does not explain I-83 being 65 mph (or the NE Extension being 70 mph at similar standards).

For comparison, PA 283 is posted at 65 mph even where it has a narrower footprint until it gets close to Lancaster.  US 222 further east is Interstate standard with a wide median and is posted at 65 mph (although actual speeds are often a bit higher).
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on May 25, 2020, 09:28:53 AM
And Texas would post all of these at 75 mph as their state does not discriminate, except in Greater Houston area where most freeways are 60 if you are lucky to have an open road considering that metro area growing and needs.

Heck US 59, is at 75 mph on arterial sections.

Back to PA, yes they make no sense in application of the 70 mph as I pointed out before I-80 (from GSV) still has I-80 at 65 mph between PA 115 and I-380 which is 10 miles of exit less freeway and designed for higher speed limits than most roads are.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: sprjus4 on May 25, 2020, 10:11:10 AM
Quote from: Crown Victoria on May 25, 2020, 08:49:36 AM
If I had to guess, it's because of the older, lower-standard sections of US 30 west of PA 24 in York County and east of Prospect Road in Lancaster County.  Those stretches have narrower shoulders and a guardrail for a median barrier.  The better-designed part of US 30 between those two could still be signed for 65 mph though.  And based on experience, actual speeds are closer to 70-75 mph the whole way anyway.  Still does not explain I-83 being 65 mph (or the NE Extension being 70 mph at similar standards).
Between PA-24 and some exit in Lancaster, 65 mph could reasonably be posted, especially comparing to narrow segments of I-83, PA-283, I-476, and many other highways in Pennsylvania that hold 65 mph or even 70 mph limits.

Quote from: Crown Victoria on May 25, 2020, 08:49:36 AM
For comparison, PA 283 is posted at 65 mph even where it has a narrower footprint until it gets close to Lancaster.  US 222 further east is Interstate standard with a wide median and is posted at 65 mph (although actual speeds are often a bit higher).
Correct about PA-283, this (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.0925346,-76.38829,3a,51.1y,302.24h,83.89t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s3XdFb6J-wPdq4yce4Pe98Q!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e1) narrow segment holds 65 mph just north of Lancaster. There has to be some reason that they've not increased US-30, perhaps regarding the localities it passes through.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: sprjus4 on May 25, 2020, 10:16:27 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on May 25, 2020, 09:28:53 AM
And Texas would post all of these at 75 mph as their state does not discriminate, except in Greater Houston area where most freeways are 60 if you are lucky to have an open road considering that metro area growing and needs.
Houston is interesting because the "green" zone that limits speed limits to 65 mph. I believe segments of I-69, I-10, and I-45 inside Loop 8 are 60 mph though. I've easily cruised down at 70 - 75 mph through there, and still was not the fastest car. In Dallas, San Antonio, Austin, or any other metro in Texas for example, the speed limit would likely be 65 or 70 mph there. In Corpus Christi, I-37 jumps to 75 mph past SH-358, only 4 miles from Downtown. I believe the remainder inside is 65 mph until the end.

Quote from: roadman65 on May 25, 2020, 09:28:53 AM
Heck US 59, is at 75 mph on arterial sections.
US-59 is 75 mph on two and four lane stretches for the most part. The entire highway (US-59 and US-77) between Corpus Christi and Houston (except Refugio and Odem) is 75 mph divided non-limited-access highway with town bypasses. This applies to most two (70 or 75 mph) and four lane highways in Texas.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Alps on May 25, 2020, 12:53:28 PM
Quote from: sprjus4 on May 25, 2020, 08:11:15 AM
Lancaster Watchdog: Closed ramp on Route 283; determining speed limits on highways (https://lancasteronline.com/news/local/lancaster-watchdog-closed-ramp-on-route-283-determining-speed-limits-on-highways/article_eee46eb0-9c5c-11ea-af37-b32779a20349.html)
QuoteWhat makes a speed limit?
The same reader wondered what causes speed limits to be different on busy highways.

"If the speed limit on (Interstate) 83 between York and Harrisburg is 65MPH, why cannot Route 30 between York and Lancaster be posted at 65 MPH?"

Both highways, while similarly busy at times, are simply running on different standards.

Speed limit determinations are based on a process rooted in "Regulatory speed limits are determined based on a standardized process that is rooted in the National Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices,"  a PennDOT representative said in a statement to Watchdog.

A PennDOT representative told Watchdog that speed limits are determined based on a standardized process rooted in the National Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices from the Federal Highway Administration. "Generally speaking, as proven by countless local, state and federal studies, drivers travel at speeds commensurate with their comfort level, regardless of the regulatory speed limit, and the road is safest when the speed limit is near the normal running speeds."

Driver comfort, according to PennDOT, is mostly affected by physical conditions such as lane width, shoulder width, horizontal/vertical curvature and type of roadside hazards.

On the Route 30 highway connecting York and Lancaster, PennDOT states the road simply "doesn't meet the criteria...Raising the speed limit may have undesirable effects and is not being considered at this time."
Am I missing something here?

I-83 (65 mph) - Jersey barrier median, no left shoulder, narrow footprint, narrow interchanges - https://www.google.com/maps/@40.1618893,-76.8261501,3a,43y,339.23h,85.01t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sdykplNzzseE3yzL4FmoG1w!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e1
US-30 - (55 mph) Paved left shoulder, wide median, wide footprint, wide interchanges - https://www.google.com/maps/@40.0245667,-76.5651133,3a,40.3y,252.44h,86.85t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s9O3djB26mnCGsUaArBgqRw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e1

US-30 is built to much higher design quality and standards than I-83 is, and they claim 65 mph is okay on I-83, yet it will have "undesirable effects" and "is not being considered" for US-30?
You're missing that US 30 is a shunpike for I-76.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: sbeaver44 on May 25, 2020, 07:34:24 PM
Quote from: Alps on May 25, 2020, 12:53:28 PM
Quote from: sprjus4 on May 25, 2020, 08:11:15 AM
Lancaster Watchdog: Closed ramp on Route 283; determining speed limits on highways (https://lancasteronline.com/news/local/lancaster-watchdog-closed-ramp-on-route-283-determining-speed-limits-on-highways/article_eee46eb0-9c5c-11ea-af37-b32779a20349.html)
QuoteWhat makes a speed limit?
The same reader wondered what causes speed limits to be different on busy highways.

"If the speed limit on (Interstate) 83 between York and Harrisburg is 65MPH, why cannot Route 30 between York and Lancaster be posted at 65 MPH?"

Both highways, while similarly busy at times, are simply running on different standards.

Speed limit determinations are based on a process rooted in "Regulatory speed limits are determined based on a standardized process that is rooted in the National Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices,"  a PennDOT representative said in a statement to Watchdog.

A PennDOT representative told Watchdog that speed limits are determined based on a standardized process rooted in the National Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices from the Federal Highway Administration. "Generally speaking, as proven by countless local, state and federal studies, drivers travel at speeds commensurate with their comfort level, regardless of the regulatory speed limit, and the road is safest when the speed limit is near the normal running speeds."

Driver comfort, according to PennDOT, is mostly affected by physical conditions such as lane width, shoulder width, horizontal/vertical curvature and type of roadside hazards.

On the Route 30 highway connecting York and Lancaster, PennDOT states the road simply "doesn't meet the criteria...Raising the speed limit may have undesirable effects and is not being considered at this time."
Am I missing something here?

I-83 (65 mph) - Jersey barrier median, no left shoulder, narrow footprint, narrow interchanges - https://www.google.com/maps/@40.1618893,-76.8261501,3a,43y,339.23h,85.01t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sdykplNzzseE3yzL4FmoG1w!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e1
US-30 - (55 mph) Paved left shoulder, wide median, wide footprint, wide interchanges - https://www.google.com/maps/@40.0245667,-76.5651133,3a,40.3y,252.44h,86.85t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s9O3djB26mnCGsUaArBgqRw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e1

US-30 is built to much higher design quality and standards than I-83 is, and they claim 65 mph is okay on I-83, yet it will have "undesirable effects" and "is not being considered" for US-30?
You're missing that US 30 is a shunpike for I-76.
I agree with you, but I've absolutely used PA 283 to US 30 to US 202 to shunpike, and PA 283 is mainly 65

I don't have an issue with US 30's Coatesville-Downingtown freeway being 55.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on May 26, 2020, 01:00:41 PM
QuoteI agree with you, but I've absolutely used PA 283 to US 30 to US 202 to shunpike, and PA 283 is mainly 65

I don't have an issue with US 30's Coatesville-Downingtown freeway being 55.

I would not mind if US 30 between PA 24 and PA 741 and on the entire Coatesville-Downingtown Bypass was raised from 55 to 60.  I still am unsure why PA does not allow for 60 mph speed limits.

Anyway, in case no one posted this a few months ago somewhere else, the preferred alternatives for the PA 10/US 30 BUS intersections and the Airport Rd interchange (http://www.us30-chesco.com/) have been selected for the future reconstruction project for the Coatesville-Downingtown Bypass. 
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ARMOURERERIC on May 26, 2020, 06:43:29 PM
Near the Us30, Pa10 intersection, I see reference to a 4 lane connector road to be built by others.  If that road is ever built, why not grade separate 30 and 10 and use that new road to provide to connection movements?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Hwy 61 Revisited on May 26, 2020, 06:48:35 PM
Quote from: ARMOURERERIC on May 26, 2020, 06:43:29 PM
Near the Us30, Pa10 intersection, I see reference to a 4 lane connector road to be built by others.  If that road is ever built, why not grade separate 30 and 10 and use that new road to provide to connection movements?


Grade separation would be best if the US 30 freeway were truly build between there and Lancaster.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on May 26, 2020, 06:53:14 PM
Quote from: Hwy 61 Revisited on May 26, 2020, 06:48:35 PM
Quote from: ARMOURERERIC on May 26, 2020, 06:43:29 PM
Near the Us30, Pa10 intersection, I see reference to a 4 lane connector road to be built by others.  If that road is ever built, why not grade separate 30 and 10 and use that new road to provide to connection movements?


Grade separation would be best if the US 30 freeway were truly build between there and Lancaster.

I heard on here its virtually impossible due to local opposition preventing it.  The same who probably prevented the Goat Path from opening to traffic. 
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: MASTERNC on May 26, 2020, 07:48:11 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on May 26, 2020, 01:00:41 PM
QuoteI agree with you, but I've absolutely used PA 283 to US 30 to US 202 to shunpike, and PA 283 is mainly 65

I don't have an issue with US 30's Coatesville-Downingtown freeway being 55.

I would not mind if US 30 between PA 24 and PA 741 and on the entire Coatesville-Downingtown Bypass was raised from 55 to 60.  I still am unsure why PA does not allow for 60 mph speed limits.


I've seen a 60 MPH construction zone speed limit in western PA
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadrunner75 on May 26, 2020, 07:55:00 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on May 26, 2020, 06:53:14 PM
Quote from: Hwy 61 Revisited on May 26, 2020, 06:48:35 PM
Quote from: ARMOURERERIC on May 26, 2020, 06:43:29 PM
Near the Us30, Pa10 intersection, I see reference to a 4 lane connector road to be built by others.  If that road is ever built, why not grade separate 30 and 10 and use that new road to provide to connection movements?


Grade separation would be best if the US 30 freeway were truly build between there and Lancaster.

I heard on here its virtually impossible due to local opposition preventing it.  The same who probably prevented the Goat Path from opening to traffic.
I would say the local opposition would be Wawa, Sunoco, CVS, etc.  I hope I live to see the day that the Lancaster Bypass and the Coatesville Bypass are connected.  That stretch sorely needs it.  And while we're at it, complete a bypass to the bypass around York.

I'm pleasantly surprised that they are going with 3 lanes each direction on the eastern end of the Coatesville Bypass section.  If only they had the foresight (and money) to have built the newer Exton bypass to 6 lanes when they had the chance, we would get 6 lanes clear (mostly) to King of Prussia with the improvements to 202.

Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jeffandnicole on May 26, 2020, 11:41:52 PM
Quote from: Roadrunner75 on May 26, 2020, 07:55:00 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on May 26, 2020, 06:53:14 PM
Quote from: Hwy 61 Revisited on May 26, 2020, 06:48:35 PM
Quote from: ARMOURERERIC on May 26, 2020, 06:43:29 PM
Near the Us30, Pa10 intersection, I see reference to a 4 lane connector road to be built by others.  If that road is ever built, why not grade separate 30 and 10 and use that new road to provide to connection movements?


Grade separation would be best if the US 30 freeway were truly build between there and Lancaster.

I heard on here its virtually impossible due to local opposition preventing it.  The same who probably prevented the Goat Path from opening to traffic.
I would say the local opposition would be Wawa, Sunoco, CVS, etc.  I hope I live to see the day that the Lancaster Bypass and the Coatesville Bypass are connected.  That stretch sorely needs it.  And while we're at it, complete a bypass to the bypass around York.

I'm pleasantly surprised that they are going with 3 lanes each direction on the eastern end of the Coatesville Bypass section.  If only they had the foresight (and money) to have built the newer Exton bypass to 6 lanes when they had the chance, we would get 6 lanes clear (mostly) to King of Prussia with the improvements to 202.



Rarely are large businesses opposed to projects like this, because the store is just one of hundreds or thousands. Corporations aren't really bothered by this stuff.  It would be the individuals owner of a business, so maybe the Sunoco owner would be opposed. But normally it's the residents of the area that are opposed to projects.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadrunner75 on May 27, 2020, 12:05:34 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on May 26, 2020, 11:41:52 PM
Quote from: Roadrunner75 on May 26, 2020, 07:55:00 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on May 26, 2020, 06:53:14 PM
Quote from: Hwy 61 Revisited on May 26, 2020, 06:48:35 PM
Quote from: ARMOURERERIC on May 26, 2020, 06:43:29 PM
Near the Us30, Pa10 intersection, I see reference to a 4 lane connector road to be built by others.  If that road is ever built, why not grade separate 30 and 10 and use that new road to provide to connection movements?


Grade separation would be best if the US 30 freeway were truly build between there and Lancaster.

I heard on here its virtually impossible due to local opposition preventing it.  The same who probably prevented the Goat Path from opening to traffic.
I would say the local opposition would be Wawa, Sunoco, CVS, etc.  I hope I live to see the day that the Lancaster Bypass and the Coatesville Bypass are connected.  That stretch sorely needs it.  And while we're at it, complete a bypass to the bypass around York.

I'm pleasantly surprised that they are going with 3 lanes each direction on the eastern end of the Coatesville Bypass section.  If only they had the foresight (and money) to have built the newer Exton bypass to 6 lanes when they had the chance, we would get 6 lanes clear (mostly) to King of Prussia with the improvements to 202.



Rarely are large businesses opposed to projects like this, because the store is just one of hundreds or thousands. Corporations aren't really bothered by this stuff.  It would be the individuals owner of a business, so maybe the Sunoco owner would be opposed. But normally it's the residents of the area that are opposed to projects.
Grade separation of this particular intersection would create a big headache at least for these businesses for access and require some takings.  It's otherwise pretty rural except for this business strip centered around the intersection, but I have no doubt residential objectors will come out of the woodwork. 

The reconfiguration and new westbound lanes down at the 41 intersection in Gap is bit goofy but it seems to work.   I'll just take 4 lanes between the bypasses if I can't get full freeway.   I don't ask for much.  30 is the "retain my sanity" option when visiting the in-laws out near Gettysburg, as opposed to the mind numbingly boring / high speed deathtrap a few miles to the north.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: sprjus4 on May 27, 2020, 12:15:57 AM
Quote from: Alps on May 25, 2020, 12:53:28 PM
You're missing that US 30 is a shunpike for I-76.
So that's a reason to post an artificial speed limit? It also serves regional traffic between York and Lancaster, along with York traffic bound to I-76. Should I-295 in New Jersey be 55 mph?

PA-283 and US-222 can both also be used as a shunpike of I-76, yet they're 65 mph, built to same design standards as US-30 is, even lower in some areas closer to Lancaster.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jemacedo9 on May 27, 2020, 08:14:46 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on May 26, 2020, 11:41:52 PM
Quote from: Roadrunner75 on May 26, 2020, 07:55:00 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on May 26, 2020, 06:53:14 PM
Quote from: Hwy 61 Revisited on May 26, 2020, 06:48:35 PM
Quote from: ARMOURERERIC on May 26, 2020, 06:43:29 PM
Near the Us30, Pa10 intersection, I see reference to a 4 lane connector road to be built by others.  If that road is ever built, why not grade separate 30 and 10 and use that new road to provide to connection movements?


Grade separation would be best if the US 30 freeway were truly build between there and Lancaster.

I heard on here its virtually impossible due to local opposition preventing it.  The same who probably prevented the Goat Path from opening to traffic.
I would say the local opposition would be Wawa, Sunoco, CVS, etc.  I hope I live to see the day that the Lancaster Bypass and the Coatesville Bypass are connected.  That stretch sorely needs it.  And while we're at it, complete a bypass to the bypass around York.

I'm pleasantly surprised that they are going with 3 lanes each direction on the eastern end of the Coatesville Bypass section.  If only they had the foresight (and money) to have built the newer Exton bypass to 6 lanes when they had the chance, we would get 6 lanes clear (mostly) to King of Prussia with the improvements to 202.



Rarely are large businesses opposed to projects like this, because the store is just one of hundreds or thousands. Corporations aren't really bothered by this stuff.  It would be the individuals owner of a business, so maybe the Sunoco owner would be opposed. But normally it's the residents of the area that are opposed to projects.

The land in the path of any proposed freeway is in the heart of the Amish and Mennonite farming and tourist communities - those are the largest NIMBYs involved here.  Someone upthread mentioned the Goat Path...same general area and same issues.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Alps on May 27, 2020, 10:42:26 AM
Quote from: sprjus4 on May 27, 2020, 12:15:57 AM
Quote from: Alps on May 25, 2020, 12:53:28 PM
You're missing that US 30 is a shunpike for I-76.
So that's a reason to post an artificial speed limit? It also serves regional traffic between York and Lancaster, along with York traffic bound to I-76. Should I-295 in New Jersey be 55 mph?

PA-283 and US-222 can both also be used as a shunpike of I-76, yet they're 65 mph, built to same design standards as US-30 is, even lower in some areas closer to Lancaster.
I still get the nagging feeling that 30 is 55 MPH (and patrolled) specifically so that people will stay on the Turnpike longer.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jemacedo9 on May 27, 2020, 11:05:16 AM
Quote from: Alps on May 27, 2020, 10:42:26 AM
Quote from: sprjus4 on May 27, 2020, 12:15:57 AM
Quote from: Alps on May 25, 2020, 12:53:28 PM
You're missing that US 30 is a shunpike for I-76.
So that's a reason to post an artificial speed limit? It also serves regional traffic between York and Lancaster, along with York traffic bound to I-76. Should I-295 in New Jersey be 55 mph?

PA-283 and US-222 can both also be used as a shunpike of I-76, yet they're 65 mph, built to same design standards as US-30 is, even lower in some areas closer to Lancaster.
I still get the nagging feeling that 30 is 55 MPH (and patrolled) specifically so that people will stay on the Turnpike longer.
The only thing I can think of (and I don't buy it personally) is that the distance of the areas outside of the greater York and Lancaster areas (18 miles) is too short for PennDOT to want to raise to 65 MPH. 

I don't know what the shortest 65 MPH zone is in PA but probably not that short.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Ketchup99 on May 27, 2020, 01:19:09 PM
US-22's freeway from 99 to Ebensburg is 14 miles and 65mph.

And I've never understood "this is too short to be X mph." 15 or so miles is ample time and space to accelerate and then decelerate. What's the concern even?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: vdeane on May 27, 2020, 01:37:23 PM
Yeah, 18 miles is hardly "short" to be porking along at only 55.  Even a mile of underposted limits can feel painful to drive.  I've never understood the "it's too short" mentality.  If it's long enough to feel uncomfortably slow, it's long enough to have a higher limit.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jeffandnicole on May 27, 2020, 01:54:18 PM
Quote from: Ketchup99 on May 27, 2020, 01:19:09 PM
US-22's freeway from 99 to Ebensburg is 14 miles and 65mph.

And I've never understood "this is too short to be X mph." 15 or so miles is ample time and space to accelerate and then decelerate. What's the concern even?

Yep.  I've seen 55 mph zones of around a mile or so in length (and probably less), so not sure why 65 mph needs so much more distance.

NJ originally said they didn't want a 65 mph zone less than 10 miles in length, although they must've relaxed that as the NJ 18 limit of 65 mph is about 7 miles in length.  It would be painful if that was only 55 mph.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadrunner75 on May 27, 2020, 02:30:59 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on May 27, 2020, 01:54:18 PM
Quote from: Ketchup99 on May 27, 2020, 01:19:09 PM
US-22's freeway from 99 to Ebensburg is 14 miles and 65mph.

And I've never understood "this is too short to be X mph." 15 or so miles is ample time and space to accelerate and then decelerate. What's the concern even?

Yep.  I've seen 55 mph zones of around a mile or so in length (and probably less), so not sure why 65 mph needs so much more distance.

NJ originally said they didn't want a 65 mph zone less than 10 miles in length, although they must've relaxed that as the NJ 18 limit of 65 mph is about 7 miles in length.  It would be painful if that was only 55 mph.
Kutztown Bypass on 222 is less than 5 miles and posted at 65 and similar in cross-section design to 30 on the west side of the Susquehanna.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on May 27, 2020, 02:34:09 PM
Quote from: Roadrunner75 on May 27, 2020, 02:30:59 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on May 27, 2020, 01:54:18 PM
Quote from: Ketchup99 on May 27, 2020, 01:19:09 PM
US-22's freeway from 99 to Ebensburg is 14 miles and 65mph.

And I've never understood "this is too short to be X mph." 15 or so miles is ample time and space to accelerate and then decelerate. What's the concern even?

Yep.  I've seen 55 mph zones of around a mile or so in length (and probably less), so not sure why 65 mph needs so much more distance.

NJ originally said they didn't want a 65 mph zone less than 10 miles in length, although they must've relaxed that as the NJ 18 limit of 65 mph is about 7 miles in length.  It would be painful if that was only 55 mph.
Kutztown Bypass on 222 is less than 5 miles and posted at 65 and similar in cross-section design to 30 on the west side of the Susquehanna.

The US 460 Appomattox Bypass in Virginia is 65 mph and is less than three miles.  It seems like it almost ends before it begins westbound.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Ketchup99 on May 27, 2020, 02:55:45 PM
There are plenty of short freeways that should have limits >55, especially when they connect to another freeway. Case in point: The expressway section of US-322 in State College (Mount Nittany Expressway) is only abut five miles long, but it connects to I-99 on the western end and most traffic using it also utilizes I-99. However, I-99 is 65mph, while US-322 is 55mph. Same exact type of highway. Relatively good compliance on the 65, almost no compliance on the 55. Similarly: The short bit of US-322 freeway west of I-99. 55. Prevailing speed is probably around 70 if I had to guess. The US-220 freeway stub after the southern terminus of I-99? 55, for no good reason. US-15 around Duncannon? You guessed it. The insistence of PennDOT on signing rural, short freeways connecting to another freeway at 55 makes no sense whatsoever.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on May 27, 2020, 05:56:09 PM
Quote from: Ketchup99 on May 27, 2020, 02:55:45 PM
There are plenty of short freeways that should have limits >55, especially when they connect to another freeway. Case in point: The expressway section of US-322 in State College (Mount Nittany Expressway) is only abut five miles long, but it connects to I-99 on the western end and most traffic using it also utilizes I-99. However, I-99 is 65mph, while US-322 is 55mph. Same exact type of highway. Relatively good compliance on the 65, almost no compliance on the 55. Similarly: The short bit of US-322 freeway west of I-99. 55. Prevailing speed is probably around 70 if I had to guess. The US-220 freeway stub after the southern terminus of I-99? 55, for no good reason. US-15 around Duncannon? You guessed it. The insistence of PennDOT on signing rural, short freeways connecting to another freeway at 55 makes no sense whatsoever.

Even weirder is that they have posted short, rural freeways at 65 mph, including the US 6 freeway between Scranton and Carbondale, and most notably the short PA 8 freeway north of I-80, which doesn't connect to another freeway at all.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Ketchup99 on May 27, 2020, 07:02:21 PM
PennDOT doesn't seem to post speed limits with much rhyme or reason. I cannot think of a rural freeway that should be posted <65 - in PA at least - but PA thinks otherwise
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: webny99 on May 27, 2020, 08:09:11 PM
Quote from: jemacedo9 on April 19, 2020, 12:42:07 PM
Just driving 33 today, you can see the large difference in engineering standards in the section north of 512 (paved/concrete medians, older bridge structures/designs) vs the section south of 512 to US 220 (wide grass median, newer structures) vs the final extension south of US 22.

Yes, I would say PA 33 is one of the more varying state route freeways I've been on, going from extremely wide and spacious at the southern end to narrow and winding as you get closer to Stroudsburg.

It's a fun drive, done it several times and personally prefer the northern section: it has more character, and is more fun to drive at high speeds (apparently I'm not the only that thinks so; traffic seems to usually move at around 75 despite the 55 mph limit).
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on June 05, 2020, 05:21:08 PM
From PennDOT's Website: Lighting and Mayfly Study Underway on Route 462 Veterans Memorial (Columbia-Wrightsville) Bridge in Lancaster and York Counties (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1154)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadrunner75 on June 05, 2020, 07:21:34 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on June 05, 2020, 05:21:08 PM
From PennDOT's Website: Lighting and Mayfly Study Underway on Route 462 Veterans Memorial (Columbia-Wrightsville) Bridge in Lancaster and York Counties (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1154)
I've always liked this view of the bridge although GSV doesn't do it justice:
https://www.google.com/maps/@40.0255918,-76.5307651,3a,15y,76.42h,89.99t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s2K2o3eYHQsaz5mqbNa9gXA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192 (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.0255918,-76.5307651,3a,15y,76.42h,89.99t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s2K2o3eYHQsaz5mqbNa9gXA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)
Somewhere I have some photos I took from roughly this spot that are much better.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: sbeaver44 on June 05, 2020, 09:00:17 PM
Just drove over it Sat night around sunset.  I really like the PA 462 bridge.

Also a fan of the PA 441 Columbia realignment/"bypass" they did a decade or so ago.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Hwy 61 Revisited on June 05, 2020, 09:32:07 PM
Quote from: sbeaver44 on June 05, 2020, 09:00:17 PM
Just drove over it Sat night around sunset.  I really like the PA 462 bridge.

Also a fan of the PA 441 Columbia realignment/"bypass" they did a decade or so ago.


Why isn't old 441 called 441 Bus.? It just makes sense!
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on June 05, 2020, 09:43:22 PM
Quote from: Hwy 61 Revisited on June 05, 2020, 09:32:07 PM
Quote from: sbeaver44 on June 05, 2020, 09:00:17 PM
Just drove over it Sat night around sunset.  I really like the PA 462 bridge.

Also a fan of the PA 441 Columbia realignment/"bypass" they did a decade or so ago.


Why isn't old 441 called 441 Bus.? It just makes sense!

The intent of the bypass (opened in 2015) (https://www.wgal.com/article/route-441-columbia-bypass-to-open-today/5959821) was to keep trucks out of Downtown Columbia.  A business route would not have done a good job of that. Besides PennDOT seems to prefer not to use them unless a municipality wants it.



Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Alps on June 06, 2020, 01:06:47 AM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on June 05, 2020, 09:43:22 PM
Quote from: Hwy 61 Revisited on June 05, 2020, 09:32:07 PM
Quote from: sbeaver44 on June 05, 2020, 09:00:17 PM
Just drove over it Sat night around sunset.  I really like the PA 462 bridge.

Also a fan of the PA 441 Columbia realignment/"bypass" they did a decade or so ago.


Why isn't old 441 called 441 Bus.? It just makes sense!

The intent of the bypass (opened in 2015) (https://www.wgal.com/article/route-441-columbia-bypass-to-open-today/5959821) was to keep trucks out of Downtown Columbia.  A business route would not have done a good job of that. Besides PennDOT seems to prefer not to use them unless a municipality wants it.
I feel like Bypass is a misnomer. It's a reroute around downtown, similar to PA 611 in Easton.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jmacswimmer on June 09, 2020, 02:35:32 PM
Doing some GSV-exploring around Wilkes-Barre and came across what appears to be a closed left-turn from the ending PA 115 North to the I-81 South onramp (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.2507981,-75.822221,217m/data=!3m1!1e3?hl=en).  Does anyone know when/why this was closed?  I imagine it was safety related?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Hwy 61 Revisited on June 09, 2020, 02:53:11 PM
Quote from: jmacswimmer on June 09, 2020, 02:35:32 PM
Doing some GSV-exploring around Wilkes-Barre and came across what appears to be a closed left-turn from the ending PA 115 North to the I-81 South onramp (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.2507981,-75.822221,217m/data=!3m1!1e3?hl=en).  Does anyone know when/why this was closed?  I imagine it was safety related?


I think it was due to a car crash, but also to make the whole NCVE an expressway throughout.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: briantroutman on June 09, 2020, 05:36:18 PM
According to various historic aerial photos I could find, the left-turn access from PA 115 North to the I-81 South on-ramp was closed at some point in the '90s. It was still intact in 1992 but blocked by 1999. I couldn't find a contemporary accounting of when it was closed (or precisely why), but as Hwy 61 suggested, it was apparently following a significant collision. Here's an excerpt from a 2012 Citizens' Voice article (https://www.citizensvoice.com/opinion/road-to-nowhere-1.1357176) on various Wyoming Valley highway topics that mentioned the ramp:

QuoteAt one time, a left turn was allowed off Route 115, but that required crossing two lanes of the highway. A tragic fatal accident there led to closing the left-turn ramp. The key question is: why didn't the original I-81 interchange include a cloverleaf flyover or underpass to ease this access?

The answer to the article's "key question"  is, I believe, obvious. When this interchange was originally constructed in the 1960s (and provided access to arterial PA 115 rather than the PA 309 freeway that exists there today), there was virtually zero development on PA 115 immediately south (east) of I-81. This ramp provided I-81 SB access for the relatively few homes in the Bear Creek area, but otherwise, it was virtually superfluous. And assumably, the PDH decided that traffic volumes would be low enough so that the left turn would not cause considerable congestion or an unreasonable safety hazard.

But decades later, after the construction (and expansion) of the sprawling Geisinger campus, a Social Security Administration building, other office buildings, an apartment complex, a Holiday Inn, and other businesses, that's certainly not the case. I suppose motorists need to backtrack to Juniper Road, turn south on PA 315, then get onto PA 309 South in order to get to I-81 SB.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on June 09, 2020, 05:46:48 PM
QuoteBut decades later, after the construction (and expansion) of the sprawling Geisinger campus, a Social Security Administration building, other office buildings, an apartment complex, a Holiday Inn, and other businesses, that's certainly not the case. I suppose motorists need to backtrack to Juniper Road, turn south on PA 315, then get onto PA 309 South in order to get to I-81 SB.

FTFY.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: briantroutman on June 09, 2020, 05:47:44 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on June 09, 2020, 05:46:48 PM
QuoteBut decades later, after the construction (and expansion) of the sprawling Geisinger campus, a Social Security Administration building, other office buildings, an apartment complex, a Holiday Inn, and other businesses, that's certainly not the case. I suppose motorists need to backtrack to Juniper Road, turn south on PA 315, then get onto PA 309 South in order to get to I-81 SB.

FTFY.

A typo.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Hwy 61 Revisited on June 09, 2020, 06:13:18 PM
When I-81 inevitably gets reconstructed, I hope Exit 190 is turned into a turbine interchange or something to that effect, as right now Route 309 exits via a loop rather than a flyover.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: storm2k on June 10, 2020, 08:43:29 AM
Would I be correct in assuming that this signage (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.6938652,-75.2047877,3a,75y,200.41h,92.53t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1siXWqYSfm7PQnWcHiTM9vGA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en) was erected and is maintained by the DRJTBC and not PennDOT? It doesn't look like any sort of PennDOT spec. In fact, it looks more like an approximation of NJDOT's spec for destination signage than anything else. I assume that whole underpass is DRJTBC as the pavement is different from the surrounding street grid?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Flyer78 on June 10, 2020, 11:57:41 AM
Quote from: briantroutman on June 09, 2020, 05:36:18 PM

The answer to the article's "key question"  is, I believe, obvious. When this interchange was originally constructed in the 1960s (and provided access to arterial PA 115 rather than the PA 309 freeway that exists there today), there was virtually zero development on PA 115 immediately south (east) of I-81. This ramp provided I-81 SB access for the relatively few homes in the Bear Creek area, but otherwise, it was virtually superfluous. And assumably, the PDH decided that traffic volumes would be low enough so that the left turn would not cause considerable congestion or an unreasonable safety hazard.

I think it is the last line of the snippet above; that is key (assumed traffic values would be acceptable).   In addition to the other growth you mentioned, the areas around the mall expanded (eventually led to the construction of Exit 46/168) to serve the (then new and now named) Mohegan Sun Arena and new retail complexes. If my memory is right, this completed around 2000 or so (I remember it had opened just before the roll-out of mileage based numbering)  The aerials from 1999 show it still under construction.

I remember the Red Roof Inn had its access (and likely address) moved to 315, which explains its access (and orientation towards the expressway) today. Valley Crest Nursing Home also had access to/from what is now the NCVE. The new expressway was lowered considerably to allow for the 315 overpass over 309/NCVE.

Traffic from Geisinger is routed a different path to get to 81S via East Mountain Rd, Jumper Road, 315S. (saves the loop now required via Exit 1). A further annoyance is that interchange does not allow right on red from either lane of the exit. (https://goo.gl/maps/Wzm1GHPEBiK1NCTr6)

PennDOT just swapped the overhead signs on 115S, (https://goo.gl/maps/gDjQ96zTWdbk6r4N7) and applied a green-out over what I believe was an Exit Only panel (or, being PA, perhaps THIS LANE) to the left turn lane.

One complication is access from the Turnpike, which is a few miles up the hill on 115S, now requires either going via the above mentioned East Mountain Rd to Jumper Rd, or through Exit 1, to access 81S (for AHL/Arena events, shopping, etc.) Many national retailers are located along the hub as the only location in the Wyoming Valley... Of course, this may all change again as online retail replaces in-person pickup.





Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: storm2k on June 30, 2020, 01:58:33 PM
Something I've always been curious about. Who's responsible for the street name blades you see attached to traffic signals in PA? (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.862813,-75.6797833,3a,75y,63.8h,94.45t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s-RinkeJEdAZaoCneBa8XCw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) They always seem to use weirdly spaced or proportioned fonts, and not always FHWA Gothic or Clearview. I would have thought if it was PennDOT, they'd use standard fonts for it.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: MASTERNC on June 30, 2020, 03:37:01 PM
Quote from: storm2k on June 30, 2020, 01:58:33 PM
Something I've always been curious about. Who's responsible for the street name blades you see attached to traffic signals in PA? (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.862813,-75.6797833,3a,75y,63.8h,94.45t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s-RinkeJEdAZaoCneBa8XCw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) They always seem to use weirdly spaced or proportioned fonts, and not always FHWA Gothic or Clearview. I would have thought if it was PennDOT, they'd use standard fonts for it.

Think it's the townships, as they don't even all use the same background color (normally green or blue).
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Crown Victoria on June 30, 2020, 08:46:59 PM
Quote from: MASTERNC on June 30, 2020, 03:37:01 PM
Quote from: storm2k on June 30, 2020, 01:58:33 PM
Something I've always been curious about. Who's responsible for the street name blades you see attached to traffic signals in PA? (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.862813,-75.6797833,3a,75y,63.8h,94.45t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s-RinkeJEdAZaoCneBa8XCw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) They always seem to use weirdly spaced or proportioned fonts, and not always FHWA Gothic or Clearview. I would have thought if it was PennDOT, they'd use standard fonts for it.

Think it's the townships, as they don't even all use the same background color (normally green or blue).

The recent rehabilitation of PA 61 in Ontelaunee Twp. and Perry Twp. in Berks County included upgraded signals with signs in the standard FHWA font.
https://www.google.com/maps/@40.5024169,-75.9636539,3a,75y,22.2h,95.74t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sTNdQcp4Pcqzg4K60pVC6yw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en

Whether the choice of font is PennDOT's or a local municipality's, I don't know. From my personal observation a lot of recent installations are either in Highway Gothic or Clearview.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Flyer78 on July 01, 2020, 06:29:41 PM
Another item I noticed is that single line signs have borders, two line signs, do not.

Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: tylert120 on July 02, 2020, 07:58:49 PM
Those signs are the responsibility of the municipality. But if PennDot is replacing the signs as part of a signal upgrade then they will typically be clearview.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: webny99 on July 07, 2020, 01:36:10 PM
Does anyone have any insight as to what is going on at the northern end of I-476, near the final toll barrier where it meets US 11 and I-81?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on July 07, 2020, 07:33:10 PM
Quote from: webny99 on July 07, 2020, 01:36:10 PM
Does anyone have any insight as to what is going on at the northern end of I-476, near the final toll barrier where it meets US 11 and I-81?

The PA Turnpike Northeast Extension was originally intended to extend further north. Before the Interstate system, the Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission planned a number of Turnpike extensions much like the Northeast Extension connecting to various areas of the state. When the Interstate system was first proposed, these were scrapped and incorporated into planned Interstate corridors (more info on the PA Highways page (https://www.pahighways.com/toll/PATurnpike.html)). One of these proposals was extending the Northeast Extension further from its then-temporary end at US 11 along what's now the I-81 corridor to the NY state line. (I don't know what it would have connected to on the other side; perhaps a Thruway extension down from Syracuse?) Obviously this never happened and I-81 was built instead, but all that was ever changed of the "temporary" terminus was squeezing in a double-trumpet with I-81 just past the toll plaza.

You can even still see the stubs (https://goo.gl/maps/3SAUDXbNFFwSYWnf8) for the northbound (very visible) and southbound (mostly buried under gravel now) carriageways that would have diverged from the present alignment, which was meant to only be the northbound exit ramp. There were even once stubs at the sharp curve for the trumpet loop and northbound on-ramp, but these were removed at some point.

It would have looked something like this:
(https://i.imgur.com/bAJELWT.png)

There is a project in the works to redesign this interchange and provide direct, high-speed ramps to and from I-81 to the north (and to do similar where the two routes meet again south of Scranton). The PTC has a project website (https://www.patpconstruction.com/scrantonbeltway/) for it.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Flyer78 on July 07, 2020, 07:34:59 PM
They appear to be replacing the bridge over Edella Rd.(https://goo.gl/maps/7pP9e9wGGWEW48Xe8)

Per the Turnpike's construction site it is not a part of the proposed Scranton Beltway.

Quote from: https://www.patpconstruction.com/scrantonbeltway/FAQ.aspx
...a totally independent project to address the Edella Road bridge. Being in poor condition, this bridge is to be replaced starting spring 2019. This bridge replacement project is not part of the Scranton Beltway project, but is part of the Commission's statewide program to address structurally deficient bridges.

Spring 2019, right on (Turnpike) Time...
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: vdeane on July 07, 2020, 09:35:46 PM
Quote from: Roadsguy on July 07, 2020, 07:33:10 PM
There is a project in the works to redesign this interchange and provide direct, high-speed ramps to and from I-81 to the north (and to do similar where the two routes meet again south of Scranton). The PTC has a project website (https://www.patpconstruction.com/scrantonbeltway/) for it.
I found some interchange diagrams in the study document.  It's a bit more low-key than I would have expected from a project calling itself the "Scranton Beltway".
https://www.patpconstruction.com/scrantonbeltway/library/2015_12-Feasibility-Study-II.pdf
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: SGwithADD on July 08, 2020, 07:13:06 AM
Quote from: vdeane on July 07, 2020, 09:35:46 PM
I found some interchange diagrams in the study document.  It's a bit more low-key than I would have expected from a project calling itself the "Scranton Beltway".
https://www.patpconstruction.com/scrantonbeltway/library/2015_12-Feasibility-Study-II.pdf

You're right. Huh.

I'm also surprised by the fact that they're building this despite such low traffic estimates (< 5000 vehicles shifted to the beltway).  I think the project is long overdue (especially given the PTC's hatred/cheapness with regards to direct connections), but I would've expected a bit larger number.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Hwy 61 Revisited on July 08, 2020, 12:30:30 PM
Quote from: SGwithADD on July 08, 2020, 07:13:06 AM
Quote from: vdeane on July 07, 2020, 09:35:46 PM
I found some interchange diagrams in the study document.  It's a bit more low-key than I would have expected from a project calling itself the "Scranton Beltway".
https://www.patpconstruction.com/scrantonbeltway/library/2015_12-Feasibility-Study-II.pdf (https://www.patpconstruction.com/scrantonbeltway/library/2015_12-Feasibility-Study-II.pdf)

You're right. Huh.

I'm also surprised by the fact that they're building this despite such low traffic estimates (< 5000 vehicles shifted to the beltway).  I think the project is long overdue (especially given the PTC's hatred/cheapness with regards to direct connections), but I would've expected a bit larger number.


There would be a bigger number if they built more interchanges and waived tolls.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: DrSmith on July 08, 2020, 07:44:38 PM
Based on a quick look at street view (and admittedly not reading the report), 3 additional potential benefits I can see are:
1. Removing sharp loops, particularly as you come to the end of the NE Ext prior to the toll plaza. Is there a problem with accidents here?
2. Trying to go south from 81 onto the PATP NE Ext, the ramp has a stop sign and a short weave before the toll plaza. This issue would be removed.
3. Entering onto 81 North it appears to be climbing, so you would remove the issue of dumping low speed trucks coming off yet another loop and then working to pick up speed going uphill.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jeffandnicole on July 08, 2020, 07:55:52 PM
Quote from: Hwy 61 Revisited on July 08, 2020, 12:30:30 PM
Quote from: SGwithADD on July 08, 2020, 07:13:06 AM
Quote from: vdeane on July 07, 2020, 09:35:46 PM
I found some interchange diagrams in the study document.  It's a bit more low-key than I would have expected from a project calling itself the "Scranton Beltway".
https://www.patpconstruction.com/scrantonbeltway/library/2015_12-Feasibility-Study-II.pdf (https://www.patpconstruction.com/scrantonbeltway/library/2015_12-Feasibility-Study-II.pdf)

You're right. Huh.

I'm also surprised by the fact that they're building this despite such low traffic estimates (< 5000 vehicles shifted to the beltway).  I think the project is long overdue (especially given the PTC's hatred/cheapness with regards to direct connections), but I would've expected a bit larger number.


There would be a bigger number if they built more interchanges and waived tolls.

And then they wouldn't have the money to make the improvements.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadrunner75 on July 08, 2020, 08:06:13 PM
From just looking at the project design alternative exhibits it doesn't look like they are helping it be much of a "beltway" in terms of easier movements to circulate around Scranton.  It looks more like it just helps 476 become a more direct bypass for 81 - picking up some tolls in the process - and sending through traffic on 81 in both directions west of the city instead.  Otherwise you're still stuck with the existing ramp system.  Of course the report narrative probably says as such, but I got things to do and I go right for the pretty pictures.  Better than nothing though.

Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Hwy 61 Revisited on July 08, 2020, 08:21:11 PM
If it were a true beltway, there would be access ramps to both directions of I-476.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: webny99 on July 08, 2020, 11:20:10 PM
Quote from: Hwy 61 Revisited on July 08, 2020, 08:21:11 PM
If it were a true beltway, there would be access ramps to both directions of I-476.

Bypass seems like the more appropriate term. The new ramps connecting to I-81 to/from the north will be a bypass within a bypass if they ever come fruition.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: sbeaver44 on July 18, 2020, 09:16:29 PM
Drove through Reading today, checked out River Rd.  It has Jersey barriers at the intersection with Buttonwood St.  What's the story here?(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20200719/d8bb868eb51c7b4542b1450a535fb2fd.jpg)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Alps on July 18, 2020, 10:26:24 PM
Quote from: sbeaver44 on July 18, 2020, 09:16:29 PM
Drove through Reading today, checked out River Rd.  It has Jersey barriers at the intersection with Buttonwood St.  What's the story here?(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20200719/d8bb868eb51c7b4542b1450a535fb2fd.jpg)
It doesn't continue... they never built the connecting stretch north.
Title: Pennsylvania
Post by: Tonytone on July 18, 2020, 10:28:37 PM
Quote from: Alps on July 18, 2020, 10:26:24 PM
Quote from: sbeaver44 on July 18, 2020, 09:16:29 PM
Drove through Reading today, checked out River Rd.  It has Jersey barriers at the intersection with Buttonwood St.  What's the story here?(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20200719/d8bb868eb51c7b4542b1450a535fb2fd.jpg)
It doesn't continue... they never built the connecting stretch north.
Ahh the good old highway that was supposed to go to KOP or somewhere else.

I asked about that as well & someone posted the wiki page about it.

Basically its the good old fashion PA system.

Create plans.

Actually start plans.

Plans run out of money.

Plans never happen.

Edit: Added link

https://www.alpsroads.net/roads/pa/pa_23/p.html (https://www.alpsroads.net/roads/pa/pa_23/p.html)

iPhone
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Crown Victoria on July 19, 2020, 08:48:34 AM
Quote from: Alps on July 18, 2020, 10:26:24 PM
Quote from: sbeaver44 on July 18, 2020, 09:16:29 PM
Drove through Reading today, checked out River Rd.  It has Jersey barriers at the intersection with Buttonwood St.  What's the story here?(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20200719/d8bb868eb51c7b4542b1450a535fb2fd.jpg)
It doesn't continue... they never built the connecting stretch north.

There's been a project in the works for years to connect this part of River Road to the section further north, however progress has moved at a glacial pace (we're in PA, surprise!). According to the draft TIP for 2021-2024 for the Reading area, some work should begin soon, possibly this year or next.
https://www.co.berks.pa.us/Dept/Planning/Documents/Transportation/FFY2021-2024_TIP/03Section2.pdf
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on July 19, 2020, 09:24:09 AM
Quote from: Tonytone on July 18, 2020, 10:28:37 PM
Quote from: Alps on July 18, 2020, 10:26:24 PM
Quote from: sbeaver44 on July 18, 2020, 09:16:29 PM
Drove through Reading today, checked out River Rd.  It has Jersey barriers at the intersection with Buttonwood St.  What's the story here?(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20200719/d8bb868eb51c7b4542b1450a535fb2fd.jpg)
It doesn't continue... they never built the connecting stretch north.
Ahh the good old highway that was supposed to go to KOP or somewhere else.

I asked about that as well & someone posted the wiki page about it.

Basically its the good old fashion PA system.

Create plans.

Actually start plans.

Plans run out of money.

Plans never happen.

Edit: Added link

https://www.alpsroads.net/roads/pa/pa_23/p.html (https://www.alpsroads.net/roads/pa/pa_23/p.html)

iPhone

I think we are starting to get confused over PA stubs and missing freeways.  The Reading one in the photo and the PA 23 ones (Schuylkill Parkway and the Goat Path) are unrelated.  Though you are right that many of these projects stopped during construction as a result of running out of funding.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Tonytone on July 19, 2020, 09:30:20 AM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on July 19, 2020, 09:24:09 AM
Quote from: Tonytone on July 18, 2020, 10:28:37 PM
Quote from: Alps on July 18, 2020, 10:26:24 PM
Quote from: sbeaver44 on July 18, 2020, 09:16:29 PM
Drove through Reading today, checked out River Rd.  It has Jersey barriers at the intersection with Buttonwood St.  What's the story here?(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20200719/d8bb868eb51c7b4542b1450a535fb2fd.jpg)
It doesn't continue... they never built the connecting stretch north.
Ahh the good old highway that was supposed to go to KOP or somewhere else.

I asked about that as well & someone posted the wiki page about it.

Basically its the good old fashion PA system.

Create plans.

Actually start plans.

Plans run out of money.

Plans never happen.

Edit: Added link

https://www.alpsroads.net/roads/pa/pa_23/p.html (https://www.alpsroads.net/roads/pa/pa_23/p.html)

iPhone

I think we are starting to get confused over PA stubs and missing freeways.  The Reading one in the photo and the PA 23 ones (Schuylkill Parkway and the Goat Path) are unrelated.  Though you are right that many of these projects stopped during construction as a result of running out of funding.
Even though they are all 3 different projects. If it was built it was all on the same route.


iPhone
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Alex4897 on July 19, 2020, 12:37:56 PM
Quote from: Tonytone on July 19, 2020, 09:30:20 AM
Even though they are all 3 different projects. If it was built it was all on the same route.
That's not even remotely true, the PA 23 stubs were part of the Lancaster - Norristown Expressway, part of a relief route along PA 23 itself between Lancaster and Norristown, the link you posted said as much already. PA 23 doesn't go anywhere near Reading, and Reading is nowhere near the straight line drawn between Lancaster and Norristown. Not to mention those inter-city connections are already satisfied by the US 222 freeway and the partial US 422 freeway.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Tonytone on July 19, 2020, 12:46:48 PM
Quote from: Alex4897 on July 19, 2020, 12:37:56 PM
Quote from: Tonytone on July 19, 2020, 09:30:20 AM
Even though they are all 3 different projects. If it was built it was all on the same route.
That's not even remotely true, the PA 23 stubs were part of the Lancaster - Norristown Expressway, part of a relief route along PA 23 itself between Lancaster and Norristown, the link you posted said as much already. PA 23 doesn't go anywhere near Reading, and Reading is nowhere near the straight line drawn between Lancaster and Norristown. Not to mention those inter-city connections are already satisfied by the US 222 freeway and the partial US 422 freeway.
You're right. I just found out about the Reading highway. I thought it was the Bridgeport stub.

However the Goat Path & Parkway were gonna connect if completed. If I looked at the two plans correctly.


iPhone
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on July 19, 2020, 02:15:31 PM
Does anyone know if actually extending the four lane section of River Road from the stub at Buttonwood Street to connect to PA 183 is still being planned? The project called the River Road Extension doesn't do this, but simply connects the northernmost end of River Road (where it becomes Spring Street) to Windsor Street to allow better access to PA 183.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Crown Victoria on July 20, 2020, 05:05:44 AM
Quote from: Roadsguy on July 19, 2020, 02:15:31 PM
Does anyone know if actually extending the four lane section of River Road from the stub at Buttonwood Street to connect to PA 183 is still being planned? The project called the River Road Extension doesn't do this, but simply connects the northernmost end of River Road (where it becomes Spring Street) to Windsor Street to allow better access to PA 183.

As far as I know it still is planned, but who knows when it will actually happen. I've been trying to find some information but no luck so far. Having a fully complete River Road would be beneficial for opening up the old industrial area along the proposed route, as well as providing a connection if North Wyomissing Blvd. is ever extended across the Schuylkill River (waxing Fictional here...).
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on July 20, 2020, 12:15:34 PM
The FONSI and EA are up for I-83 East Shore Section 2 as of the July 2020 Update (https://www.i-83beltway.com/projects/east-shore-section-2.php).
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Ketchup99 on July 21, 2020, 10:48:09 PM
Question about PA speed limits. As we all know, rural freeways are 65 or 70, with a couple stubs at 55. Seems to me like many limits could be raised, and new 75 or 80 zones implemented. What does everyone think? Potential 75-80 zones include I-80 (everything west of 380), I-81 (I-78 to I-80), I-99 (south of State College, except Altoona), Turnpike (tons), I-79 (north of Turnpike), I-90 ("BuT iTs An UrBaN aReA!"), and I-84 (east of Scranton there's nothing and you can slow down for yourself on curves), US-322 (Lewistown-Harrisburg), US-15 (south of the Dillsburg quagmire and the future I-99 part), and the large parts of the NE Extension. Are there any I missed?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadrunner75 on July 21, 2020, 10:57:09 PM
Quote from: Ketchup99 on July 21, 2020, 10:48:09 PM
....US-15 (south of the Dillsburg quagmire.....)
You can say that again.  I hate that stretch when going to my in-laws.  Anyone know of plans in the works to bypass Dillsburg on 15 or otherwise eliminate the signalized intersections?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: seicer on July 21, 2020, 11:17:04 PM
At least I-99 north of State College is now 65 MPH, up from 55 MPH! I think I said it here before, but there is no uniform rationale for speed limits in the state.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Bitmapped on July 21, 2020, 11:32:06 PM
Quote from: Ketchup99 on July 21, 2020, 10:48:09 PM
Question about PA speed limits. As we all know, rural freeways are 65 or 70, with a couple stubs at 55. Seems to me like many limits could be raised, and new 75 or 80 zones implemented. What does everyone think? Potential 75-80 zones include I-80 (everything west of 380), I-81 (I-78 to I-80), I-99 (south of State College, except Altoona), Turnpike (tons), I-79 (north of Turnpike), I-90 ("BuT iTs An UrBaN aReA!"), and I-84 (east of Scranton there's nothing and you can slow down for yourself on curves), US-322 (Lewistown-Harrisburg), US-15 (south of the Dillsburg quagmire and the future I-99 part), and the large parts of the NE Extension. Are there any I missed?

You're not going to see 75mph or 80mph zones. The design speeds of the roads don't support it.

It would be better to focus on eliminating the arbitrary speed zones, like the 55mph "urban area" zones on I-79 near Pittsburgh and I-99 near Altoona, and the 45mph traffic signal zones on US 22 between Monroeville and Ebensburg. Stuff like this is probably more supported from an engineering perspective. It's also going to give the most "bang for the buck" in terms of aligning speed limits with driver expectations.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Hwy 61 Revisited on July 22, 2020, 12:12:33 AM

Quote from: Bitmapped on July 21, 2020, 11:32:06 PM
Quote from: Ketchup99 on July 21, 2020, 10:48:09 PM
Question about PA speed limits. As we all know, rural freeways are 65 or 70, with a couple stubs at 55. Seems to me like many limits could be raised, and new 75 or 80 zones implemented. What does everyone think? Potential 75-80 zones include I-80 (everything west of 380), I-81 (I-78 to I-80), I-99 (south of State College, except Altoona), Turnpike (tons), I-79 (north of Turnpike), I-90 ("BuT iTs An UrBaN aReA!"), and I-84 (east of Scranton there's nothing and you can slow down for yourself on curves), US-322 (Lewistown-Harrisburg), US-15 (south of the Dillsburg quagmire and the future I-99 part), and the large parts of the NE Extension. Are there any I missed?

You're not going to see 75mph or 80mph zones. The design speeds of the roads don't support it.

It would be better to focus on eliminating the arbitrary speed zones, like the 55mph "urban area" zones on I-79 near Pittsburgh and I-99 near Altoona, and the 45mph traffic signal zones on US 22 between Monroeville and Ebensburg. Stuff like this is probably more supported from an engineering perspective. It's also going to give the most "bang for the buck" in terms of aligning speed limits with driver expectations.

What about the 219 freeway?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Ketchup99 on July 22, 2020, 09:36:32 AM
Quote from: Roadrunner75 on July 21, 2020, 10:57:09 PM
Quote from: Ketchup99 on July 21, 2020, 10:48:09 PM
....US-15 (south of the Dillsburg quagmire.....)
You can say that again.  I hate that stretch when going to my in-laws.  Anyone know of plans in the works to bypass Dillsburg on 15 or otherwise eliminate the signalized intersections?
God, that would be nice. As a part of the I-83 project, I'd like to see Rochester-Harrisburg be I-83 and then Harrisburg-DC (via 15 and I-270) as 83W and Harrisburg-Baltimore-Annapolis as 83E. I have a diagram of what the full freeway conversion in and around Dillsburg might look like:
https://www.google.com/maps/d/edit?mid=1h01yUIPZu3unhxPD2BXuBZEIZi8aOuAq&usp=sharing
This also deals with the mess of the 581/15 interchange. Sadly I don't think either part of my plan has a chance.
75 would be permitted south of the point called "75mph speed limit line" and potentially 55 would remain north of it, maybe 65. Traffic flows around the latter.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Ketchup99 on July 22, 2020, 09:42:52 AM
Quote from: Bitmapped on July 21, 2020, 11:32:06 PM
Quote from: Ketchup99 on July 21, 2020, 10:48:09 PM
Question about PA speed limits. As we all know, rural freeways are 65 or 70, with a couple stubs at 55. Seems to me like many limits could be raised, and new 75 or 80 zones implemented. What does everyone think? Potential 75-80 zones include I-80 (everything west of 380), I-81 (I-78 to I-80), I-99 (south of State College, except Altoona), Turnpike (tons), I-79 (north of Turnpike), I-90 ("BuT iTs An UrBaN aReA!"), and I-84 (east of Scranton there's nothing and you can slow down for yourself on curves), US-322 (Lewistown-Harrisburg), US-15 (south of the Dillsburg quagmire and the future I-99 part), and the large parts of the NE Extension. Are there any I missed?

You're not going to see 75mph or 80mph zones. The design speeds of the roads don't support it.
I don't know what the actual design speeds of these roadways are, but I've driven all of the roadways in question (except I-90 and US-322 - 75mph) comfortably at 80mph or better. Many have very little traffic - I-99 south of Altoona probably has the least.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Hwy 61 Revisited on July 22, 2020, 12:46:37 PM
Traffic counts if you want them: https://www.penndot.gov/ProjectAndPrograms/Planning/Maps/Pages/Traffic-Volume.aspx (https://www.penndot.gov/ProjectAndPrograms/Planning/Maps/Pages/Traffic-Volume.aspx)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jeffandnicole on July 22, 2020, 12:52:56 PM
Quote from: Ketchup99 on July 22, 2020, 09:42:52 AM
Quote from: Bitmapped on July 21, 2020, 11:32:06 PM
Quote from: Ketchup99 on July 21, 2020, 10:48:09 PM
Question about PA speed limits. As we all know, rural freeways are 65 or 70, with a couple stubs at 55. Seems to me like many limits could be raised, and new 75 or 80 zones implemented. What does everyone think? Potential 75-80 zones include I-80 (everything west of 380), I-81 (I-78 to I-80), I-99 (south of State College, except Altoona), Turnpike (tons), I-79 (north of Turnpike), I-90 ("BuT iTs An UrBaN aReA!"), and I-84 (east of Scranton there's nothing and you can slow down for yourself on curves), US-322 (Lewistown-Harrisburg), US-15 (south of the Dillsburg quagmire and the future I-99 part), and the large parts of the NE Extension. Are there any I missed?

You're not going to see 75mph or 80mph zones. The design speeds of the roads don't support it.
I don't know what the actual design speeds of these roadways are, but I've driven all of the roadways in question (except I-90 and US-322 - 75mph) comfortably at 80mph or better. Many have very little traffic - I-99 south of Altoona probably has the least.

Did you drive them in a fully loaded, 80,000 pound 18 wheeler?

Design speeds take into account all traffic.  Not just your comfort level.  If the design speed was 70 mph, it doesn't mean you'll crash at 72 mph.  Likewise, if the design speed was 70 mph, it doesn't mean you'll survive a crash going 68 mph.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Ketchup99 on July 22, 2020, 06:22:45 PM
A speed limit doesn't require traveling at it. If your truck is governed to 65, then you can keep going 65. A truck/car differential of 10-15mph is by no means unheard of. If we want to avoid trucks going 75-80, we can hold the truck limit at 70. And many states have limits above 70 with trucks governed to 65 and it's fine.

61, thanks for the traffic counts. They seem to (at first glance) confirm what I was saying about I-99.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: MASTERNC on July 22, 2020, 08:35:15 PM
I do wish they'd post more highways at 70 MPH.  An example would be US 222 north of Lancaster.  Traffic already goes over 70 MPH anyway, and the road is rather wide (i.e. no major geometric deficiencies)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Hwy 61 Revisited on July 22, 2020, 11:10:34 PM
No problem 99!
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Rothman on July 23, 2020, 12:46:32 AM
What is this, Get Smart?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Ketchup99 on July 23, 2020, 10:16:13 AM
Quote from: Rothman on July 23, 2020, 12:46:32 AM
What is this, Get Smart?
When you're forty years older than me references are gonna fly over my head. :D

I agree PA should have more 70 zones - Route 222 would be a good candidate, as would I-90 in Erie County if they don't make that 75. But honestly, there's no reason at all that loads of freeways here can't be given higher speed limits.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ARMOURERERIC on July 23, 2020, 11:39:20 AM
Quote from: Rothman on July 23, 2020, 12:46:32 AM
What is this, Get Smart?

I've been on this site so long that I once posted that they get Don Addams and Barbara Feldon to cut the ribbon when the 86/99 interchange was completed.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: SGwithADD on July 23, 2020, 03:26:40 PM
Quote from: ARMOURERERIC on July 23, 2020, 11:39:20 AM
Quote from: Rothman on July 23, 2020, 12:46:32 AM
What is this, Get Smart?

I've been on this site so long that I once posted that they get Don Addams and Barbara Feldon to cut the ribbon when the 86/99 interchange was completed.

Talk about a missed opportunity
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: VTGoose on July 24, 2020, 01:49:12 PM
Quote from: SGwithADD on July 23, 2020, 03:26:40 PM
Quote from: ARMOURERERIC on July 23, 2020, 11:39:20 AM
Quote from: Rothman on July 23, 2020, 12:46:32 AM
What is this, Get Smart?

I've been on this site so long that I once posted that they get Don Addams and Barbara Feldon to cut the ribbon when the 86/99 interchange was completed.

Talk about a missed opportunity

Missed it by that much . . .
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ARMOURERERIC on July 24, 2020, 03:48:48 PM
Sorry about that Chief
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Interstatefan78 on August 07, 2020, 04:33:50 PM
Quote from: MASTERNC on July 22, 2020, 08:35:15 PM
I do wish they'd post more highways at 70 MPH.  An example would be US 222 north of Lancaster.  Traffic already goes over 70 MPH anyway, and the road is rather wide (i.e. no major geometric deficiencies)
Correct and also I-81 American Legion Hwy Exit 70 I-83 to Wilkes Barre exit 165 via Exit 89 I-78 78th Division Hwy Allentown Clinton, NJ and Exit 151 I-80 ZH Confair Hwy Bloomsburg San Francisco, CA Stroudsburg Patterson, NJ. I-78 only exits 1-35 PA-143 but not exit 60 to mp 77.3 Delaware River due to the climb after exit 60 towards Exit 67.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Ketchup99 on August 09, 2020, 12:02:41 AM
Quote from: Interstatefan78 on August 07, 2020, 04:33:50 PM
Quote from: MASTERNC on July 22, 2020, 08:35:15 PM
I do wish they'd post more highways at 70 MPH.  An example would be US 222 north of Lancaster.  Traffic already goes over 70 MPH anyway, and the road is rather wide (i.e. no major geometric deficiencies)
Correct and also I-81 American Legion Hwy Exit 70 I-83 to Wilkes Barre exit 165 via Exit 89 I-78 78th Division Hwy Allentown Clinton, NJ and Exit 151 I-80 ZH Confair Hwy Bloomsburg San Francisco, CA Stroudsburg Patterson, NJ. I-78 only exits 1-35 PA-143 but not exit 60 to mp 77.3 Delaware River due to the climb after exit 60 towards Exit 67.
Can someone translate this... I-83 doesn't go to Wilkes Barre, San Francisco has nothing to do with this...
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on August 09, 2020, 07:29:27 AM
Quote from: Ketchup99 on August 09, 2020, 12:02:41 AM
Quote from: Interstatefan78 on August 07, 2020, 04:33:50 PM
Quote from: MASTERNC on July 22, 2020, 08:35:15 PM
I do wish they'd post more highways at 70 MPH.  An example would be US 222 north of Lancaster.  Traffic already goes over 70 MPH anyway, and the road is rather wide (i.e. no major geometric deficiencies)
Correct and also I-81 American Legion Hwy Exit 70 I-83 to Wilkes Barre exit 165 via Exit 89 I-78 78th Division Hwy Allentown Clinton, NJ and Exit 151 I-80 ZH Confair Hwy Bloomsburg San Francisco, CA Stroudsburg Patterson, NJ. I-78 only exits 1-35 PA-143 but not exit 60 to mp 77.3 Delaware River due to the climb after exit 60 towards Exit 67.
Can someone translate this... I-83 doesn't go to Wilkes Barre, San Francisco has nothing to do with this...

I-81 (I-83 (Exit 70) to PA 309 (Exit 165))
I-78 (I-81 (Exit 1) to PA 143 (Exit 35)) (though not PA 309 SB/PA 145 (Exit 60) to the NJ Line due to the climb EB between PA 412 (Exit 67) and PA 33 (Exit 71))

I think that it is what Interstatefan78 meant to type.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Interstatefan78 on August 11, 2020, 09:10:57 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on August 09, 2020, 07:29:27 AM
Quote from: Ketchup99 on August 09, 2020, 12:02:41 AM
Quote from: Interstatefan78 on August 07, 2020, 04:33:50 PM
Quote from: MASTERNC on July 22, 2020, 08:35:15 PM
I do wish they'd post more highways at 70 MPH.  An example would be US 222 north of Lancaster.  Traffic already goes over 70 MPH anyway, and the road is rather wide (i.e. no major geometric deficiencies)
Correct and also I-81 American Legion Hwy Exit 70 I-83 to Wilkes Barre exit 165 via Exit 89 I-78 78th Division Hwy Allentown Clinton, NJ and Exit 151 I-80 ZH Confair Hwy Bloomsburg San Francisco, CA Stroudsburg Patterson, NJ. I-78 only exits 1-35 PA-143 but not exit 60 to mp 77.3 Delaware River due to the climb after exit 60 towards Exit 67.
Can someone translate this... I-83 doesn't go to Wilkes Barre, San Francisco has nothing to do with this...

I-81 (I-83 (Exit 70) to PA 309 (Exit 165))
I-78 (I-81 (Exit 1) to PA 143 (Exit 35)) (though not PA 309 SB/PA 145 (Exit 60) to the NJ Line due to the climb EB between PA 412 (Exit 67) and PA 33 (Exit 71))

I think that it is what Interstatefan78 meant to type.
you got that correct. Speaking of I-81 & I-80 interchange it's Exit 151.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: seicer on August 14, 2020, 07:15:25 PM
It looks like more band-aids are in the works right now along US 220 between PA 287 at Jersey Shore and PA 2014/West 4th at Linden. I can't exactly tell what all is occurring other than jughandles are being built, median opening are being closed and shoulders are either being strengthened or widened. It also appears that the Quenshuckery Road intersection is being realigned.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: seicer on August 14, 2020, 07:16:04 PM
Just found the project page: https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-3/ConstructionsProjectsAndRoadwork/Pages/220-122.aspx

Judging from the construction plans posted, this does set up US 220 for easier conversion into I-99 as roads are being built in areas to take local traffic off of US 220.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Ketchup99 on August 14, 2020, 11:48:56 PM
Does anyone know if there are plans in the works to bypass that entire mess, or as it's upgraded to I-99 are they somehow going to limit access completely?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Hwy 61 Revisited on August 15, 2020, 12:42:36 AM
Quote from: Ketchup99 on August 14, 2020, 11:48:56 PM
Does anyone know if there are plans in the works to bypass that entire mess, or as it's upgraded to I-99 are they somehow going to limit access completely?


This is PennDOT. They're gonna lay people off when shovels stand up by themselves.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Ketchup99 on August 15, 2020, 09:45:37 AM
Quote from: Hwy 61 Revisited on August 15, 2020, 12:42:36 AM
Quote from: Ketchup99 on August 14, 2020, 11:48:56 PM
Does anyone know if there are plans in the works to bypass that entire mess, or as it's upgraded to I-99 are they somehow going to limit access completely?


This is PennDOT. They're gonna lay people off when shovels stand up by themselves.
Uhhhhh... my question wasn't about layoffs :P
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: qguy on August 20, 2020, 07:35:54 PM
PennDOT District 6-0 broke ground on a new Regional Traffic Management Center (RTMC). It will be in a separate building being built on the district office property, where a small parking garage is/was.

The district's TMC already looked like NASA's mission control. The expanded version should be quite impressive.

PennDOT's press release:
https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=5998
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: qguy on August 22, 2020, 11:04:43 AM
The US 422 Schuylkill River Complex in the Valley Forge area is nearing wrap-up. Eastbound traffic has been shifted onto the eastbound bridge. (Both directions had been on the completed westbound bridge while the eastbound structure was under construction.) The project is on schedule to be completed in late October or early November.

Adjacent to the PA 23 interchange (the one at the left in the below graphic), the relocation of PA 23 within the Valley Forge National Historic Park is projected to move to construction late next year. All of the other work delineated by dotted lines (Schuylkill River Trail/pedestrian/bike bridge over the Schuylkill River, missing moves at the Trooper interchange) were completed earlier.

Project graphic:
(https://i.imgur.com/cDoshCC.jpg)

PennDOT's press release:
https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=6019

Project website:
https://www.422improvements.com/us-422-in-valley-forge
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: storm2k on August 24, 2020, 03:02:23 PM
Is this NRBC gem still standing? (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.3611136,-74.970955,3a,46.8y,308.58h,93.76t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sqf-gHLrAeMx4dDTKa1sung!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) Surprising that it's lasted that long (GSV is from 2018), given that roads around here have been reconstructed several times over the years.

Also, I find it interesting that they still sign this as the "Toll Bridge" to NJ, given that the bridge, like all DRJTBC bridges, only charges a toll coming into PA and has for many years (granted, this is an old sign, but even newer signs (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.3686511,-74.964761,3a,41.5y,71.83h,98.59t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s506InI5RGSo3QvHul9rvAA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) showcase it, even though I'm sure most were replace in kind with no updates to their legends.)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Chris19001 on August 24, 2020, 03:08:44 PM
So I stumbled across this beauty in Langhorne within the past month.  It may have been there for a while, but it only caught my eye recently.
https://www.google.com/maps/@40.1695685,-74.9179315,3a,75y,233.7h,100.85t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1suNXSERH_xUSgCBcvXPcumw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Is there actually a PA Route 1 somewhere out in another part of the state?  I get a chuckle out of thinking how it came about each time I see it.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: storm2k on August 24, 2020, 03:11:05 PM
Quote from: Chris19001 on August 24, 2020, 03:08:44 PM
So I stumbled across this beauty in Langhorne within the past month.  It may have been there for a while, but it only caught my eye recently.
https://www.google.com/maps/@40.1695685,-74.9179315,3a,75y,233.7h,100.85t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1suNXSERH_xUSgCBcvXPcumw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Is there actually a PA Route 1 somewhere out in another part of the state?  I get a chuckle out of thinking how it came about each time I see it.

PA 1 does not exist. PA at least tries by and large to avoid State Route duplication with US Routes and Interstates.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: briantroutman on August 24, 2020, 05:50:35 PM
Quote from: Chris19001 on August 24, 2020, 03:08:44 PM
Is there actually a PA Route 1 somewhere out in another part of the state?  I get a chuckle out of thinking how it came about each time I see it.

Prior to the numbering of the US Numbered Highways network, Pennsylvania did have a PA 1 (https://www.pahighways.com/state/PA1-50.html#PA1) that was roughly equivalent to the routing of the Lincoln Highway (which is mostly US 30 today). The section of PA 1 between Philadelphia and Trenton followed what today is the US 1 corridor, so that sign in Bucks County is almost accurate–95 years after the fact.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Hwy 61 Revisited on August 24, 2020, 06:35:07 PM
Quote from: briantroutman on August 24, 2020, 05:50:35 PM
Quote from: Chris19001 on August 24, 2020, 03:08:44 PM
Is there actually a PA Route 1 somewhere out in another part of the state?  I get a chuckle out of thinking how it came about each time I see it.

Prior to the numbering of the US Numbered Highways network, Pennsylvania did have a PA 1 (https://www.pahighways.com/state/PA1-50.html#PA1) that was roughly equivalent to the routing of the Lincoln Highway (which is mostly US 30 today). The section of PA 1 between Philadelphia and Trenton followed what today is the US 1 corridor, so that sign in Bucks County is almost accurate–95 years after the fact.


Then why isn't there a modern PA 2?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: briantroutman on August 24, 2020, 07:53:00 PM
Quote from: Hwy 61 Revisited on August 24, 2020, 06:35:07 PM
Then why isn't there a modern PA 2?

The original PA 2 was redesignated as parts of US 11 and US 611.

Pennsylvania's 1925 state route numbering scheme started with #1 and designated a number of significant cross-state traffic movements in roughly descending order:

PA 1 - Philadelphia to Pittsburgh (NJ to WV)
PA 2 - Philadelphia to Allentown to Scranton (to NY State)
PA 3 - Pittsburgh to Harrisburg to Allentown (WV to NJ)
PA 4 - York to Harrisburg to Williamsport (MD to NY)
PA 5 - Erie to Harrisburg (via PA 3)

...and so on up through the low 20s, I believe.

When the US Numbered Highway network was designated shortly thereafter, many of the PA numbering system's low-digit numbers were soon claimed by US routes passing through Pennsylvania (such as 1, 6, 11, 13, 15, 19, 22). Additionally, since they were generally routes of regional and national importance, significant sections of the original PA state network were repurposed as parts of US routes (as was the case with PA 2 becoming US 611 and US 11). To my knowledge, the only of the 1925 PA routes to retain any part of their original corridors are PA 5 and PA 8.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.mapsofpa.com%2Fart9pics%2F1925-452-2.jpg&hash=45183e8f72315a1c5404745d007b05d5ed556d0d)

Now, as to why the number 2 wasn't reused later for an unrelated route (since it wasn't duplicated by a US route or Interstate), I'm not sure. For what it's worth, some other disused low-number PA route designations were not reused either (PA 4, 7).
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jemacedo9 on August 25, 2020, 09:58:34 AM
What's interesting is that there are child routes that will relate to the original numbering:

1:  PA 401, PA 501, PA 601
2:  PA 402, PA 502
3:  PA 103, PA 403
4:  PA 104, PA 204, PA 304
5:  PA 305, PA 505
7:  PA 107, PA 307, PA 407, PA 507, PA 607
8:  PA 108, PA 208, PA 308, PA 408
13: PA 113
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on August 27, 2020, 02:06:52 PM
From PennDOT District 8: Traffic to be Switched to New Ramp from Mount Rose Avenue to I-83 NB in Springettsbury Township, York County (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1209)

Well the I-83/PA 124 interchange should be completed eventually.

Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: noelbotevera on September 15, 2020, 06:51:28 PM
Okay, what is up with PA's numbering system? I swear it was anarchy in the office that day.

So it looks like PA groups routes in similar areas; PA 72 is near its "child" routes PA 272, PA 372, and PA 772...then PA 472 is completely detached from PA 72.

Or even better: PA 14 is in the northern part of the state (Bradford and Tioga counties). PA 114? Oh, just down in the Harrisburg area. PA 214? Near York. PA 914? Why, south of Chambersburg; where else would we put it? PA 414 and PA 514 is the only child to meet or even be near its parent.

Some numbers that look like they're from thin air makes sense (PA 130 is near US 30, PA 819 near US 119) but most are nonsensical (PA 380 in Pittsburgh even though I-80 is nowhere near it).
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Alps on September 15, 2020, 07:19:29 PM
Quote from: noelbotevera on September 15, 2020, 06:51:28 PM
Okay, what is up with PA's numbering system? I swear it was anarchy in the office that day.

So it looks like PA groups routes in similar areas; PA 72 is near its "child" routes PA 272, PA 372, and PA 772...then PA 472 is completely detached from PA 72.

Or even better: PA 14 is in the northern part of the state (Bradford and Tioga counties). PA 114? Oh, just down in the Harrisburg area. PA 214? Near York. PA 914? Why, south of Chambersburg; where else would we put it? PA 414 and PA 514 is the only child to meet or even be near its parent.

Some numbers that look like they're from thin air makes sense (PA 130 is near US 30, PA 819 near US 119) but most are nonsensical (PA 380 in Pittsburgh even though I-80 is nowhere near it).
Some of these, like the 14s I believe, are based on old numbers that were overlaid by US routes and reassigned.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jemacedo9 on September 15, 2020, 08:15:14 PM
That's because there used to be some sense to all of it. 

1 and 2 digit even numbers were N-S routes, x2s in the east to x8s in the west.
1 and 2 digit odd numbers were E-W routes, x1s in the south to x9s in the north.
All were assigned before the US route numbers were assigned.

3 digit numbers 101-799 were child routes off their parent 1/2 digit numbers
3 digit numbers 801-999 were additional routes off of their parent 1/2 digit numbers in reverse order.  (for example, PA 1 was the Lincoln Highway...and you can see PA 999, PA 997, PA 995, PA 993 still connect.)

Jeff Kitsko's pahighways.com (http://pahighways.com) site has a great listing of all the current and former designations.
If you go to penndot.gov (http://penndot.gov) and download some of the older maps you can see many of the old alignments as well.

Another example:  PA 72 followed US 222 south of Lancaster city...and there was a PA 172 down in Little Britain.
PA 380 was around before I-380.
PA 286 used to be PA 80 so PA 380 was a child off of it)...but who knows why PA 80 was renumbered but PA 380 was not.  I-380 wasn't that initially, though, it was I-81E. 




Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: rickmastfan67 on September 16, 2020, 01:02:48 AM
Quote from: jemacedo9 on September 15, 2020, 08:15:14 PM
PA 380 was around before I-380.
PA 286 used to be PA 80 so PA 380 was a child off of it)...but who knows why PA 80 was renumbered but PA 380 was not.  I-380 wasn't that initially, though, it was I-81E.

PA-380 did get renumbered, but just not resigned.  It's officially PA-400.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Bitmapped on September 16, 2020, 10:39:14 AM
Quote from: rickmastfan67 on September 16, 2020, 01:02:48 AM
Quote from: jemacedo9 on September 15, 2020, 08:15:14 PM
PA 380 was around before I-380.
PA 286 used to be PA 80 so PA 380 was a child off of it)...but who knows why PA 80 was renumbered but PA 380 was not.  I-380 wasn't that initially, though, it was I-81E.

PA-380 did get renumbered, but just not resigned.  It's officially PA-400.

I think that should read that it's still PA 380, but now designated as SR 400 instead of SR 380. PennDOT did similar SR redesignations for PA 86 (to SR 886) and the northwestern PA 97 (to SR 197), but frankly, just re-sign the traffic routes so everything matches.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jemacedo9 on September 16, 2020, 11:14:29 AM
Quote from: Bitmapped on September 16, 2020, 10:39:14 AM
Quote from: rickmastfan67 on September 16, 2020, 01:02:48 AM
Quote from: jemacedo9 on September 15, 2020, 08:15:14 PM
PA 380 was around before I-380.
PA 286 used to be PA 80 so PA 380 was a child off of it)...but who knows why PA 80 was renumbered but PA 380 was not.  I-380 wasn't that initially, though, it was I-81E.

PA-380 did get renumbered, but just not resigned.  It's officially PA-400.

I think that should read that it's still PA 380, but now designated as SR 400 instead of SR 380. PennDOT did similar SR redesignations for PA 86 (to SR 886) and the northwestern PA 97 (to SR 197), but frankly, just re-sign the traffic routes so everything matches.

Technically, it is PA Traffic Route 380, designated State Route (SR) 0400.

PA 283 = SR0300 (avoid duplicate with SR0283 which is I-283).
PA 380 = SR0400 (avoid duplicate with SR0380 which is I-380).
PA 86 = SR0886 (avoid duplicate with SR0086 which is I-86).
PA 99 = SR0699 (avoid duplicate with SR0099 which is I-99).
PA 97 = SR0197 (avoid duplicate with SR0097 which is a separate PA 97 in Adams County).

But the two separate PA 29s both are SR0029.

SR 0886 is to avoid duplication with I-86 (SR 0086).

SR 0197 is

In addition to the ones you mentioned, PA 283 is SR 0300, and PA 99 is SR 0699.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on September 16, 2020, 11:24:52 AM
Quote from: jemacedo9 on September 16, 2020, 11:14:29 AM
Quote from: Bitmapped on September 16, 2020, 10:39:14 AM
Quote from: rickmastfan67 on September 16, 2020, 01:02:48 AM
Quote from: jemacedo9 on September 15, 2020, 08:15:14 PM
PA 380 was around before I-380.
PA 286 used to be PA 80 so PA 380 was a child off of it)...but who knows why PA 80 was renumbered but PA 380 was not.  I-380 wasn't that initially, though, it was I-81E.

PA-380 did get renumbered, but just not resigned.  It's officially PA-400.

I think that should read that it's still PA 380, but now designated as SR 400 instead of SR 380. PennDOT did similar SR redesignations for PA 86 (to SR 886) and the northwestern PA 97 (to SR 197), but frankly, just re-sign the traffic routes so everything matches.

Technically, it is PA Traffic Route 380, designated State Route (SR) 0400.

PA 283 = SR0300 (avoid duplicate with SR0283 which is I-283).
PA 380 = SR0400 (avoid duplicate with SR0380 which is I-380).
PA 86 = SR0886 (avoid duplicate with SR0086 which is I-86).
PA 99 = SR0699 (avoid duplicate with SR0099 which is I-99).
PA 97 = SR0197 (avoid duplicate with SR0097 which is a separate PA 97 in Adams County).

But the two separate PA 29s both are SR0029.

SR 0886 is to avoid duplication with I-86 (SR 0086).

SR 0197 is

In addition to the ones you mentioned, PA 283 is SR 0300, and PA 99 is SR 0699.

Additionally, the former PA 295 in York County was briefly designated SR 0297, which everyone assumed would be all they'd do, but then they went ahead and renumbered the whole route to PA 297 (including some hideous BGS overlays (https://goo.gl/maps/3aFwuhJMFoSsBE296) on I-83). I'm surprised that along these lines, they never bothered to renumber PA 86 and 99 to PA 886 and PA 699, respectively.

SR 0197 is probably the exception, not the rule, since both PA 29s are SR 0029 (as you mentioned), and both US 422s are SR 0422.

Technically PA 222 is a duplicate number of US 222, but because it serves as an extension continuing straight from the end of US 222 (unlike I-283/PA 283, which cross each other near their ends), both routes are part of one continuous internal SR 0222 designation. This also makes sense considering that the only reason PA 222 exists is because AASHTO rejected PennDOT's proposal to reextend US 222 into Allentown in the 1980s.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on September 16, 2020, 11:42:10 AM
I think the northern segment of PA 29 should be renumbered to PA 7 (there is none) to match NY 7, but that is heading into fictional territory.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on September 16, 2020, 02:21:49 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on September 16, 2020, 11:42:10 AM
I think the northern segment of PA 29 should be renumbered to PA 7 (there is none) to match NY 7, but that is heading into fictional territory.

I've always thought PA 7 should be used for the short piece of road connecting PA 41 to DE 7, but PA 29 definitely deserves the number more. It would require a lot more sign changes and effort to publicize the change, though.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Alps on September 16, 2020, 03:15:22 PM
Quote from: jemacedo9 on September 16, 2020, 11:14:29 AM
Quote from: Bitmapped on September 16, 2020, 10:39:14 AM
Quote from: rickmastfan67 on September 16, 2020, 01:02:48 AM
Quote from: jemacedo9 on September 15, 2020, 08:15:14 PM
PA 380 was around before I-380.
PA 286 used to be PA 80 so PA 380 was a child off of it)...but who knows why PA 80 was renumbered but PA 380 was not.  I-380 wasn't that initially, though, it was I-81E.

PA-380 did get renumbered, but just not resigned.  It's officially PA-400.

I think that should read that it's still PA 380, but now designated as SR 400 instead of SR 380. PennDOT did similar SR redesignations for PA 86 (to SR 886) and the northwestern PA 97 (to SR 197), but frankly, just re-sign the traffic routes so everything matches.

Technically, it is PA Traffic Route 380, designated State Route (SR) 0400.

PA 283 = SR0300 (avoid duplicate with SR0283 which is I-283).
PA 380 = SR0400 (avoid duplicate with SR0380 which is I-380).
PA 86 = SR0886 (avoid duplicate with SR0086 which is I-86).
PA 99 = SR0699 (avoid duplicate with SR0099 which is I-99).
PA 97 = SR0197 (avoid duplicate with SR0097 which is a separate PA 97 in Adams County).

But the two separate PA 29s both are SR0029.
That's because it's really one route that got cleaved, unlike the other cases. I agree with the other poster, I would re-sign all of these to the new numbers. Why not?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: sbeaver44 on September 24, 2020, 05:09:55 PM
I'd tend to agree.  Especially the two unrelated PA 97s really bother me.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: sbeaver44 on September 24, 2020, 05:15:10 PM
I saw on the local news recently there is apparently talk of building a new interchange on I-83 for PA 921, which is between current exits 24 and 28.  It makes sense because getting to Manchester or Dover from 83 is not exactly direct.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on September 25, 2020, 09:25:47 AM
Well US 322 EB traffic was supposed to start using one lane of the new alignment as of yesterday afternoon at the Potters Mill Gap Project. (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1799)  It looks like the project will still be completed next month.

PennDOT News Release From This Afternoon: https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1803
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: briantroutman on September 30, 2020, 02:32:53 AM
I was debating posting here vs. the now-pinned thread (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=27710.0) linking to a database of AASHTO numbering applications and correspondence.

Looking through a 1958 PDH application regarding three-digit Interstates across Pennsylvania, one notable item I found concerned the proposed alignment of Allentown's I-178–which, as shown in the application, departed from what I had previously seen described.

The Yellow Book's depiction (http://www.ajfroggie.com/roads/yellowbook/allentown.jpg) of I-178's path is vague to the point of being virtually meaningless. (Compare the Yellow Book's 378 with that route's actual alignment.)

Jeff Kitsko's mention (https://www.pahighways.com/interstates/pdi.html#I178) of I-178 indicates that the proposed route would have intersected the Lehigh Valley Thruway between the 15th Street and MacArthur Road interchanges, displacing 7th and 8th Streets as well as the Liberty Bell Shrine near Hamilton Street. He also links a 1963 Rand McNally inset map (https://www.pahighways.com/graphics/maps/I178map.jpg) that basically goes along with that description.

Steve Anderson's page on I-178 (http://www.phillyroads.com/roads/I-178_PA/) says that the plan for an Allentown spur from the Lehigh Valley Thruway predates the Interstate System and was first announced in 1954. He pins the route down more specifically, saying that it would have intersected its parent at a point east of the Lehigh River and west of the current Airport Road interchange. The spur was to follow the river's east bank, then turn westward and cross the river somewhere between Tilghman and Hamilton Streets, and finally terminate near Hamilton and Third.

But the route indicated on the 1958 application shows I-178 intersecting its parent virtually at the 15th Street interchange–might this have been intended as a reconfiguration, with the interchange becoming a full eight-ramp cloverleaf and I-178's northbound through movement continuing onto Mauch Chunk Road? The map suggests that I-178 would have curved around to the east side of Highland Park Cemetery, roughly following 14th Street before terminating at Tilghman Street–barely more than a mile in total length. The map was initialed and marked "OK"  by the AASHO representative.

The routing shown on this map seems rather specific to be a completely unrealistic placeholder–but it's nowhere near the routing that Steve Anderson describes, assuming that east bank alignment was already the preferred option in 1958. Yet, if this isn't merely an arbitrary line on a map, this proposed mile-long spur arguably would have provided less useful access to Center City Allentown than the arterial connection already provided via the MacArthur Road/7th Street interchange.

For what it's worth, that same 1958 application packet included a more or less geographically accurate depiction of I-378's proposed alignment.

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/50400251442_ea6a609aee_o.png)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on October 09, 2020, 02:47:21 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on September 25, 2020, 09:25:47 AM
Well US 322 EB traffic was supposed to start using one lane of the new alignment as of yesterday afternoon at the Potters Mill Gap Project. (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1799)  It looks like the project will still be completed next month.

PennDOT News Release From This Afternoon: https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1803

Now both directions of US 322 are using the new alignment as of today.  (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1822)

Update on the new US 62/US 62 BUS Roundabout in Hermitage: https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1299

EDIT (10-11-2020): PA 441 has been recently realigned in Middletown onto the old PA 441 Truck Route.  I clarified this by driving there in the morning yesterday.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on October 11, 2020, 01:27:57 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on October 09, 2020, 02:47:21 PM
EDIT (10-11-2020): PA 441 has been recently realigned in Middletown onto the old PA 441 Truck Route.  I clarified this by driving there in the morning yesterday.

Huh. Has PennDOT announced anything about this? I see it in the signage plans for the Ann Street bridge replacement over the Amtrak line, but none of the news articles about the project mention it.

Considering Ann Street was always borough-maintained and thus had no SR designation, I wonder if SR 0441 will remain on its current alignment, or if PennDOT will take over Ann Street and 441's original alignment will become a new quadrant route.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on October 11, 2020, 01:51:57 PM
Quote from: Roadsguy on October 11, 2020, 01:27:57 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on October 09, 2020, 02:47:21 PM
EDIT (10-11-2020): PA 441 has been recently realigned in Middletown onto the old PA 441 Truck Route.  I clarified this by driving there in the morning yesterday.

Huh. Has PennDOT announced anything about this? I see it in the signage plans for the Ann Street bridge replacement over the Amtrak line, but none of the news articles about the project mention it.

Considering Ann Street was always borough-maintained and thus had no SR designation, I wonder if SR 0441 will remain on its current alignment, or if PennDOT will take over Ann Street and 441's original alignment will become a new quadrant route.

I checked the CE Expert System (http://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain.nsf) (using "441" as a search) and clarified the following:

QuoteAnn Street, between S.R. 0230 and S.R. 0441, is currently owned by Middletown Borough, but ownership will be transferred to PennDOT and Ann Street will be signed as SR 441.

I did not realize that the public could even access this until just now.  I thought it was only accessible when logged in as a commonwealth employee on my work laptop.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on October 11, 2020, 02:54:35 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on October 11, 2020, 01:51:57 PM
Quote from: Roadsguy on October 11, 2020, 01:27:57 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on October 09, 2020, 02:47:21 PM
EDIT (10-11-2020): PA 441 has been recently realigned in Middletown onto the old PA 441 Truck Route.  I clarified this by driving there in the morning yesterday.

Huh. Has PennDOT announced anything about this? I see it in the signage plans for the Ann Street bridge replacement over the Amtrak line, but none of the news articles about the project mention it.

Considering Ann Street was always borough-maintained and thus had no SR designation, I wonder if SR 0441 will remain on its current alignment, or if PennDOT will take over Ann Street and 441's original alignment will become a new quadrant route.

I checked the CE Expert System (http://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain.nsf) (using "441" as a search) and clarified the following:

QuoteAnn Street, between S.R. 0230 and S.R. 0441, is currently owned by Middletown Borough, but ownership will be transferred to PennDOT and Ann Street will be signed as SR 441.

I did not realize that the public could even access this until just now.  I thought it was only accessible when logged in as a commonwealth employee on my work laptop.

TIL that exists. Did it say anything about a new quadrant route designation for the old 441 on Union Street?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jmacswimmer on October 11, 2020, 03:48:59 PM
Didn't get any pictures, but I was on I-83 yesterday and it appears the exit 28 signs have now been completely replaced with proper PA 297 shields!  The 7 in the shield still looked a little funky when whizzing by, but it's much much better than the patch job discussed previously in this thread :banghead:
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on October 11, 2020, 04:14:16 PM
QuoteTIL that exists. Did it say anything about a new quadrant route designation for the old 441 on Union Street?

I will have to recheck.  I thought that Union St was going to the borough.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on October 19, 2020, 11:28:46 AM
PennDOT Website on PA 228:Lanes to Shift on Route 228 for MSA Thruway Work (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=887) 
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: sbeaver44 on October 19, 2020, 09:21:22 PM
What was the reasoning that I-81 and US 11 run so far apart between Harrisburg and Wilkes Barre?  It just seems so odd that virtually everywhere else 81 is within 5 miles of 11.

I looked at the PAHighways site which always has a great depth of info.  I see there was a plan pre 81 to take a Turnpike extension Harrisburg to Scranton.  But I suppose that could have theoretically also followed US 11.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: rickmastfan67 on October 19, 2020, 10:05:36 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on October 19, 2020, 11:28:46 AM
PennDOT Website on PA 228:Lanes to Shift on Route 228 for MSA Thruway Work (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=887)

Corrected the URL for ya since they changed the newsid. ;)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: dkblake on October 19, 2020, 10:43:57 PM
Quote from: sbeaver44 on October 19, 2020, 09:21:22 PM
What was the reasoning that I-81 and US 11 run so far apart between Harrisburg and Wilkes Barre?  It just seems so odd that virtually everywhere else 81 is within 5 miles of 11.

I looked at the PAHighways site which always has a great depth of info.  I see there was a plan pre 81 to take a Turnpike extension Harrisburg to Scranton.  But I suppose that could have theoretically also followed US 11.

I've only driven that stretch once, but I remember much of that stretch south of 80 runs across the top of a ridge. Probably easier to acquire land/thread the highway up there.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Bitmapped on October 20, 2020, 09:15:40 AM
Quote from: sbeaver44 on October 19, 2020, 09:21:22 PM
What was the reasoning that I-81 and US 11 run so far apart between Harrisburg and Wilkes Barre?  It just seems so odd that virtually everywhere else 81 is within 5 miles of 11.

I looked at the PAHighways site which always has a great depth of info.  I see there was a plan pre 81 to take a Turnpike extension Harrisburg to Scranton.  But I suppose that could have theoretically also followed US 11.

US 11 follows the Susquehanna River. Much of the valley is already developed, with a number of towns and built-up areas. It would have been expensive to shoehorn a freeway in there - PennDOT still hasn't managed to do it along much of the distance.

I-81, on the other hand, largely follows a new terrain alignment so it had less development to accommodate. I-81 also shares almost 20 miles heading northeast out of Harrisburg with a freeway that would have needed built anyway for I-78, and the overall route is shorter than US 11.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Crown Victoria on October 20, 2020, 09:39:26 AM
Quote from: Bitmapped on October 20, 2020, 09:15:40 AM
Quote from: sbeaver44 on October 19, 2020, 09:21:22 PM
What was the reasoning that I-81 and US 11 run so far apart between Harrisburg and Wilkes Barre?  It just seems so odd that virtually everywhere else 81 is within 5 miles of 11.

I looked at the PAHighways site which always has a great depth of info.  I see there was a plan pre 81 to take a Turnpike extension Harrisburg to Scranton.  But I suppose that could have theoretically also followed US 11.

US 11 follows the Susquehanna River. Much of the valley is already developed, with a number of towns and built-up areas. It would have been expensive to shoehorn a freeway in there - PennDOT still hasn't managed to do it along much of the distance.

I-81, on the other hand, largely follows a new terrain alignment so it had less development to accommodate. I-81 also shares almost 20 miles heading northeast out of Harrisburg with a freeway that would have needed built anyway for I-78, and the overall route is shorter than US 11.

It's also worth noting that I-81 passes directly through a much larger stretch of the anthracite coal region of PA than US 11. It's certainly possible that this route was seen as a benefit to coal mining interests (even though the coal industry was well in decline in the area by the 1960s) and the regional economy in general (more recently realized with the warehouses popping up), aside from being an overall shorter route and having much more favorable geography than US 11's route.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on October 20, 2020, 10:29:39 AM
Quote from: rickmastfan67 on October 19, 2020, 10:05:36 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on October 19, 2020, 11:28:46 AM
PennDOT Website on PA 228:Lanes to Shift on Route 228 for MSA Thruway Work (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=887)

Corrected the URL for ya since they changed the newsid. ;)

Oddly enough I got two emails on this news release. 

PA 228 is probably going to end up in the center of a roadmeet within the next few years.  Eventually, it is supposed to be widened to at least four lanes and realigned at points all the way east to PA 8.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jmacswimmer on October 20, 2020, 10:49:45 AM
Quote from: jmacswimmer on October 11, 2020, 03:48:59 PM
Didn't get any pictures, but I was on I-83 yesterday and it appears the exit 28 signs have now been completely replaced with proper PA 297 shields!  The 7 in the shield still looked a little funky when whizzing by, but it's much much better than the patch job discussed previously in this thread :banghead:

Update: Got a picture of one of the new signs.
(https://i.ibb.co/DgntRMr/83.jpg)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Mr_Northside on October 20, 2020, 04:15:18 PM
Quote from: rickmastfan67 on October 19, 2020, 10:05:36 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on October 19, 2020, 11:28:46 AM
PennDOT Website on PA 228:Lanes to Shift on Route 228 for MSA Thruway Work (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=887)

Corrected the URL for ya since they changed the newsid. ;)

Another reason to be glad to be working from home (even if it is due to a friggin' pandemic) - Hopefully then can get all that done before (if???) we have to start going back to the office (I think they started the traffic restrictions not long after my team started working from home)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: sbeaver44 on October 20, 2020, 07:25:23 PM
Quote from: Crown Victoria on October 20, 2020, 09:39:26 AM
Quote from: Bitmapped on October 20, 2020, 09:15:40 AM
Quote from: sbeaver44 on October 19, 2020, 09:21:22 PM
What was the reasoning that I-81 and US 11 run so far apart between Harrisburg and Wilkes Barre?  It just seems so odd that virtually everywhere else 81 is within 5 miles of 11.

I looked at the PAHighways site which always has a great depth of info.  I see there was a plan pre 81 to take a Turnpike extension Harrisburg to Scranton.  But I suppose that could have theoretically also followed US 11.

US 11 follows the Susquehanna River. Much of the valley is already developed, with a number of towns and built-up areas. It would have been expensive to shoehorn a freeway in there - PennDOT still hasn't managed to do it along much of the distance.

I-81, on the other hand, largely follows a new terrain alignment so it had less development to accommodate. I-81 also shares almost 20 miles heading northeast out of Harrisburg with a freeway that would have needed built anyway for I-78, and the overall route is shorter than US 11.

It's also worth noting that I-81 passes directly through a much larger stretch of the anthracite coal region of PA than US 11. It's certainly possible that this route was seen as a benefit to coal mining interests (even though the coal industry was well in decline in the area by the 1960s) and the regional economy in general (more recently realized with the warehouses popping up), aside from being an overall shorter route and having much more favorable geography than US 11's route.
Well that does all make sense.  Funny how it never seemed to happen anywhere else along 81.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Alps on October 20, 2020, 09:47:38 PM
Quote from: jmacswimmer on October 20, 2020, 10:49:45 AM
Quote from: jmacswimmer on October 11, 2020, 03:48:59 PM
Didn't get any pictures, but I was on I-83 yesterday and it appears the exit 28 signs have now been completely replaced with proper PA 297 shields!  The 7 in the shield still looked a little funky when whizzing by, but it's much much better than the patch job discussed previously in this thread :banghead:

Update: Got a picture of one of the new signs.

No you didn't.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: rickmastfan67 on October 21, 2020, 02:12:09 AM
Quote from: Mr_Northside on October 20, 2020, 04:15:18 PM
Quote from: rickmastfan67 on October 19, 2020, 10:05:36 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on October 19, 2020, 11:28:46 AM
PennDOT Website on PA 228:Lanes to Shift on Route 228 for MSA Thruway Work (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=887)

Corrected the URL for ya since they changed the newsid. ;)

Another reason to be glad to be working from home (even if it is due to a friggin' pandemic) - Hopefully then can get all that done before (if???) we have to start going back to the office (I think they started the traffic restrictions not long after my team started working from home)

Here's a story and video from KDKA about this:
https://pittsburgh.cbslocal.com/2020/10/20/cranberry-township-tunnel-msa-thruway/

I've only been up to Cranberry once since this entire C19 thing, so I had 0 idea that this was even happening since I used US-19 only!
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: briantroutman on October 21, 2020, 01:39:47 PM
Quote from: sbeaver44 on October 19, 2020, 09:21:22 PM
What was the reasoning that I-81 and US 11 run so far apart between Harrisburg and Wilkes Barre?  It just seems so odd that virtually everywhere else 81 is within 5 miles of 11.

I looked at the PAHighways site which always has a great depth of info.  I see there was a plan pre 81 to take a Turnpike extension Harrisburg to Scranton.  But I suppose that could have theoretically also followed US 11.

This is a question that has occurred to me in the past, and while I don't have any definite answers, I have a few thoughts.

Let's say that the prevailing intent was for I-81 to follow US 11 more closely through the Central Susquehanna Valley: Perhaps the challenges that dissuaded engineers from taking that path are the same reasons why, after the CSVT is completed, there will remain a roughly 30-mile gap in an otherwise an all-freeway route from Rochester to Baltimore.

Then also, as you mentioned, I-81's routing perhaps owes something to prior planning by the PTC for a diagonal Harrisburg/Scranton connection. And, as was the case with both the mainline east-west Turnpike as well as the Northeast Extension, the PTC seemed to plan alignments without much regard for existing corridors or intermediate destinations between major control points. So it's logical that a PTC-planned alignment between Harrisburg and Scranton would follow the shortest practical routing between those two points without regard for the preceding route (US 11) or small towns along the way (Selinsgrove, Bloomsburg, Berwick, etc.). Furthering that line of thinking: Note that the greatest divergence between US 11 and I-81 is the section between the two ostensible endpoints of a PTC-planned Harrisburg-Scranton extension.

On the other hand, despite the references to "planned extensions"  I've seen on PAHighways.com, in Dan Cupper's PTC history book, and elsewhere, I wonder how far any of these proposed extensions got beyond vague pie-in-the-sky ideas and lines casually drawn on a map. I've seen a couple of mid '50s maps depicting future toll roads, and they don't show a straight Harrisburg-Scranton route that's truly equivalent to today's I-81. Rather, they show a somewhat diagonal east-west road that would have been north of today's I-78 corridor and would have required travelers to switch to the Northeast Extension to continue to Scranton. One map (below) even shows the route being roughly along the US 209 corridor and inexplicably dead ending somewhere north of Harrisburg, perhaps at Millersburg–an odd detail also mentioned on PAHighways.


(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/50513744321_b15e033d40_w.jpg)
(https://live.staticflickr.com/457/19962890721_4eec84849e_w.jpg)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ARMOURERERIC on October 21, 2020, 02:52:59 PM
You asked if any of the proposals got beyond the wish level:. What is I-90 in Erie County actually broke ground as a Turnpike project.  What is I-79 in Franklin Park And Ohio To in Pittsburgh has some ROW aquisition under the PTC.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: briantroutman on October 21, 2020, 05:53:36 PM
Quote from: ARMOURERERIC on October 21, 2020, 02:52:59 PM
What is I-90 in Erie County actually broke ground as a Turnpike project.

I've long wondered about that, too.

Jeff Kitsko's article on I-90  (https://www.pahighways.com/interstates/I90.html)mentions that the road had at least gotten to the final design phase under the auspices of the PTC by the time that the Federal Aid Highway Act of 1956 was passed–and that the 1956 PTC system map showed the Northwestern Extension as "under construction" . But the article also says that the "plans"  were shipped from the PTC to the PDH in 1956 and that construction began in 1958.

Assuming that the PTC had finalized designs (or even began construction) on what's today I-90, then simply handed over the plans to the PDH, I have to wonder why I-90 was so unlike anything in the Pennsylvania Turnpike system at the time. I-90 has a roughly 50-foot grass median. Exits are closely spaced, with minor interchanges generally being diamonds and some larger ones adding one or more loop ramps. Perhaps that's explains by the PTC planning to use barrier tolls instead of a closed ticket system (which I would find surprising since the entire system was closed-ticket at the time), but even so, why would the Northwestern Extensions design standards be so different from the Northeastern Extension, which was still under construction in 1956 and wouldn't be completed until the end of 1957.

Actually, I-90's design standards put me in mind of some other late '50s PDH "clean sheet"  designs of free Interstates such as I-80 near Corsicana (1958) and I-81 south of Greencastle (1959). (By "clean sheet" , I mean not an upgrade of an existing highway that was planned or begun prior to the 1956 Act–such as I-70 near New Stanton (PA 71), I-83 near York (US 111), and I-78 in Berks County (US 22).)

If you know of any resources that have more detailed information on the PTC's progress in planning/designing roads that were later built as free Interstates, I'd be very interested in looking at them.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ARMOURERERIC on October 21, 2020, 10:19:37 PM
One reason I claim it was started as a PTC project is that the mainline lanes were built to PTC specs and with weather up there, they were already doing a full rebuild in 1977
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: sbeaver44 on October 22, 2020, 12:19:44 AM
Fantastic discussion!

Not that 81 always directly follows these routes but I feel like it loosely corresponds to US 22/PA 72/PA 443/PA 125/US 209/US-PA 309 so the US 209 thing is really interesting to me.

I'm definitely glad 81 got built where it did (3rd lane between 83 and 78 please) as 11 is still a high quality corridor between 22/322 and Selinsgrove.  Schuylkill County having a good connection to other places is great for them. 
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: rickmastfan67 on October 22, 2020, 08:40:00 AM
So, going thru some of my dad's old stuff the other day, I came across two pretty interesting items going back to the beginning days of the Interstate system here in PA.

One was a progress report for I-79, dated 07/01/68 showing the current progress on the Interstate at that time.  The map is similar to the one shown on the PA Highways history page for I-79 (https://www.pahighways.com/interstates/I79.html) from 1970. However, this 1968 map mentions PA-358, while doesn't have a single mention of US-19, US-62, PA-50, or PA-198.  Also has a few less cities mentioned in comparison with it's 1970 counterpart.

The second was a layout of I-81 Exit 66, with the mention of being constructed in "Late 1968".  The most interesting thing about it, is cities they used to show which direction I-81 was going towards.  For NB I-81, they listed the control cities of "Ottawa - Canada; Indiantown Gap".  For SB I-81, they had "Carlisle; New Orleans - Louisiana".  Pretty interesting choices by PADOH back then.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jemacedo9 on October 22, 2020, 02:19:03 PM
Per PennDOT, all lanes of the new US 322 through Potters Gap will be open by the end of tomorrow.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: noelbotevera on October 22, 2020, 02:42:10 PM
Quote from: jemacedo9 on October 22, 2020, 02:19:03 PM
Per PennDOT, all lanes of the new US 322 through Potters Gap will be open by the end of tomorrow.
One step closer to closing that gap. Only a mere, oh, 9 miles to build through open land. Probably opening by 2040 at the rate we're going.

In all honesty the PA 144 intersection was a problem especially if you wanted to turn left onto US 322 - then it became a deathtrap. I never understood why PennDOT didn't finish the freeway to State College when they initially built it.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on October 22, 2020, 03:13:37 PM
Quote from: noelbotevera on October 22, 2020, 02:42:10 PM
Quote from: jemacedo9 on October 22, 2020, 02:19:03 PM
Per PennDOT, all lanes of the new US 322 through Potters Gap will be open by the end of tomorrow.
One step closer to closing that gap. Only a mere, oh, 9 miles to build through open land. Probably opening by 2040 at the rate we're going.

In all honesty the PA 144 intersection was a problem especially if you wanted to turn left onto US 322 - then it became a deathtrap. I never understood why PennDOT didn't finish the freeway to State College when they initially built it.


The news release is linked here. (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-2/Pages/default.aspx)

Well the Lewistown Narrows was not completely freeway until 2008 (https://www.pahighways.com/us/US322.html) so funding has been a problem for a long while.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on October 29, 2020, 07:20:42 PM
The US 62/US 62 BUS Roundabout in Hermitage is expected to be fully to southbound traffic tomorrow. (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1311)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: noelbotevera on November 05, 2020, 08:11:21 PM
I'm heading to NYC rather soon, but I'm not looking for the fast way. Would I-81 ->  US 209 -> I-80 be a good scenic route, or is there anything better? I'd prefer not to go north of I-80 and meander too much, nor trying to reach the beginning of US 209 (I swear I'll clinch it - one of these days).
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on November 05, 2020, 08:25:07 PM
Quote from: noelbotevera on November 05, 2020, 08:11:21 PM
I'm heading to NYC rather soon, but I'm not looking for the fast way. Would I-81 ->  US 209 -> I-80 be a good scenic route, or is there anything better? I'd prefer not to go north of I-80 and meander too much, nor trying to reach the beginning of US 209 (I swear I'll clinch it - one of these days).

I cannot remember off the top of my head on how scenic US 209 is, but your route is fine if you want to get to NYC relatively quickly.  It can be pretty slow going through Pottsville, Tamaqua, Jim Thorpe, and Lehighton, but it gets much faster east of I-476.

Obviously, the real scenic portion of US 209 is north of I-80 through the Delaware Water Gap.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: noelbotevera on November 05, 2020, 10:02:11 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on November 05, 2020, 08:25:07 PM
Quote from: noelbotevera on November 05, 2020, 08:11:21 PM
I'm heading to NYC rather soon, but I'm not looking for the fast way. Would I-81 ->  US 209 -> I-80 be a good scenic route, or is there anything better? I'd prefer not to go north of I-80 and meander too much, nor trying to reach the beginning of US 209 (I swear I'll clinch it - one of these days).

I cannot remember off the top of my head on how scenic US 209 is, but your route is fine if you want to get to NYC relatively quickly.  It can be pretty slow going through Pottsville, Tamaqua, Jim Thorpe, and Lehighton, but it gets much faster east of I-476.

Obviously, the real scenic portion of US 209 is north of I-80 through the Delaware Water Gap.
Rather out of the way and I've already traveled through the gap (IMO, too many trees and not enough river views; lots of the good stuff is off US 209). I could try PA 443, potentially less traffic and I still reach US 209.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Alps on November 05, 2020, 10:11:35 PM
Quote from: noelbotevera on November 05, 2020, 08:11:21 PM
I'm heading to NYC rather soon, but I'm not looking for the fast way. Would I-81 ->  US 209 -> I-80 be a good scenic route, or is there anything better? I'd prefer not to go north of I-80 and meander too much, nor trying to reach the beginning of US 209 (I swear I'll clinch it - one of these days).
I might suggest 895 instead of the first half of 209.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Rothman on November 06, 2020, 07:32:20 AM
Does this road trip advice need to be split into another thread?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on November 06, 2020, 02:17:54 PM
Quote from: Alps on November 05, 2020, 10:11:35 PM
Quote from: noelbotevera on November 05, 2020, 08:11:21 PM
I'm heading to NYC rather soon, but I'm not looking for the fast way. Would I-81 ->  US 209 -> I-80 be a good scenic route, or is there anything better? I'd prefer not to go north of I-80 and meander too much, nor trying to reach the beginning of US 209 (I swear I'll clinch it - one of these days).
I might suggest 895 instead of the first half of 209.

If I remember correctly, the only traffic signals on PA 895 from its western end at PA 443 in Pine Grove and its eastern end at PA 248 in Bowmanstown are at the intersections with PA 61 (jughandles at both ends of the PA 61/PA 895 concurrency).
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on November 06, 2020, 02:20:00 PM
Latest update on the Potters Mills Gap project:  https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1838
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Hwy 61 Revisited on November 06, 2020, 05:46:11 PM
When do you think the Stroudsburg stretch of the I-80 project will be done? And what would the parts past that look like?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on November 06, 2020, 06:43:01 PM
Quote from: Hwy 61 Revisited on November 06, 2020, 05:46:11 PM
When do you think the Stroudsburg stretch of the I-80 project will be done? And what would the parts past that look like?

The Project Report (https://gis.penndot.gov/paprojects/Reports/ProjectReport.aspx?ProjectID=76357&ReportType=Project) accessed from the TIP Map (https://gis.penndot.gov/paprojects/TipVisMap.aspx) says 2027.  Considering funding, we will see.

I think that the goal is for I-80 to eventually be six lanes from I-380 (Exit 293) to the east end of the US 209 concurrency (Exit 308).  However, anything widening west of PA 33 (Exit 302) is probably at least 15-20 years away.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on November 09, 2020, 02:07:40 PM
PennDOT Website:  PennDOT Celebrates Near-Completion of Route 322/Potters Mills Gap Project (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1840)

Also an update on US 219:  Wolf Administration Announces Federal Funding to Resume Environmental Studies for Expansion of U.S. 219 in Somerset County, $6 Million Has Been Secured for U.S. 219 Expansion (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-9/pages/details.aspx?newsid=865)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Bitmapped on November 12, 2020, 09:25:11 PM
PennDOT is launching a PPP program that will toll bridges to pay for repairs. https://www.post-gazette.com/news/transportation/2020/11/12/PennDOT-bridge-tolls-road-repairs-public-private-partnership-E-ZPASS/stories/202011120180
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Crown Victoria on November 13, 2020, 12:02:38 AM
Quote from: Bitmapped on November 12, 2020, 09:25:11 PM
PennDOT is launching a PPP program that will toll bridges to pay for repairs. https://www.post-gazette.com/news/transportation/2020/11/12/PennDOT-bridge-tolls-road-repairs-public-private-partnership-E-ZPASS/stories/202011120180

Can't imagine this will go over very well, with our high fuel taxes (currently 2nd highest). However, repairs have to be paid for somehow...

A few bridges that may be suitable for this: I-81 George Wade Bridge, I-83 John Harris Bridge (especially if both are eventually tolled; this would make the PA Turnpike happy as well), I-70 Belle Vernon Bridge and Smithton High Level Bridge, I-80 Emlenton Bridge and both Susquehanna River bridges
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jemacedo9 on November 13, 2020, 10:52:30 AM
Quote from: Crown Victoria on November 13, 2020, 12:02:38 AM
Quote from: Bitmapped on November 12, 2020, 09:25:11 PM
PennDOT is launching a PPP program that will toll bridges to pay for repairs. https://www.post-gazette.com/news/transportation/2020/11/12/PennDOT-bridge-tolls-road-repairs-public-private-partnership-E-ZPASS/stories/202011120180

Can't imagine this will go over very well, with our high fuel taxes (currently 2nd highest). However, repairs have to be paid for somehow...

A few bridges that may be suitable for this: I-81 George Wade Bridge, I-83 John Harris Bridge (especially if both are eventually tolled; this would make the PA Turnpike happy as well), I-70 Belle Vernon Bridge and Smithton High Level Bridge, I-80 Emlenton Bridge and both Susquehanna River bridges


This is going to be interesting to see how this works.

The I-80 Susquehanna River bridges were rehabbed within the last 10 years...the west crossing was widened with a CD lane maybe 10-15 years ago, and the east crossing was within the last 5. 

I think the two Harrisburg bridges and the I-70 bridges are prime candidates.  The I-80 Emlenton bridge also.  Maybe the I-79 and I-376 bridges over the Ohio River?  I wonder if any non-interstate bridges would be covered?  The US 22/322 Clarks Ferry Bridge?   
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Crown Victoria on November 13, 2020, 12:03:59 PM
Quote from: jemacedo9 on November 13, 2020, 10:52:30 AM
Quote from: Crown Victoria on November 13, 2020, 12:02:38 AM
Quote from: Bitmapped on November 12, 2020, 09:25:11 PM
PennDOT is launching a PPP program that will toll bridges to pay for repairs. https://www.post-gazette.com/news/transportation/2020/11/12/PennDOT-bridge-tolls-road-repairs-public-private-partnership-E-ZPASS/stories/202011120180

Can't imagine this will go over very well, with our high fuel taxes (currently 2nd highest). However, repairs have to be paid for somehow...

A few bridges that may be suitable for this: I-81 George Wade Bridge, I-83 John Harris Bridge (especially if both are eventually tolled; this would make the PA Turnpike happy as well), I-70 Belle Vernon Bridge and Smithton High Level Bridge, I-80 Emlenton Bridge and both Susquehanna River bridges


This is going to be interesting to see how this works.

The I-80 Susquehanna River bridges were rehabbed within the last 10 years...the west crossing was widened with a CD lane maybe 10-15 years ago, and the east crossing was within the last 5. 

I think the two Harrisburg bridges and the I-70 bridges are prime candidates.  The I-80 Emlenton bridge also.  Maybe the I-79 and I-376 bridges over the Ohio River?  I wonder if any non-interstate bridges would be covered?  The US 22/322 Clarks Ferry Bridge?   

With the I-376 bridge, it's a possibility, but could be a bit tricky considering Shell just built that big plant nearby. As for the I-79 bridge, it would work so long as the toll wouldn't impact Neville Island residents going to/from home.

As far as non-Interstate bridges, I agree with the Clarks Ferry Bridge, especially if tied in with an upgrade to the short surface section of US 22/322 immediately adjacent. I also thought about the US 30 Wright's Ferry Bridge, but that is easily shunpiked on the PA 462 Columbia-Wrightsville Bridge.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 02 Park Ave on November 13, 2020, 02:04:03 PM
Quote from: Bitmapped on November 12, 2020, 09:25:11 PM
PennDOT is launching a PPP program that will toll bridges to pay for repairs. https://www.post-gazette.com/news/transportation/2020/11/12/PennDOT-bridge-tolls-road-repairs-public-private-partnership-E-ZPASS/stories/202011120180

I can easily see the Girard Point Bridge on I-95 in Philadelphia being tolled.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Alps on November 13, 2020, 06:15:09 PM
Quote from: Bitmapped on November 12, 2020, 09:25:11 PM
PennDOT is launching a PPP program that will toll bridges to pay for repairs. https://www.post-gazette.com/news/transportation/2020/11/12/PennDOT-bridge-tolls-road-repairs-public-private-partnership-E-ZPASS/stories/202011120180
Not surprised due to Act 44. They have no money to pay for repairs, so they will rely on the private sector to pay for them and then collect tolls. In other words, travelers now pay directly for repairs instead of through user fees/taxes. Sad reality of PennDOT's funding situation, but I'm not looking forward to the ramifications.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: vdeane on November 13, 2020, 09:08:14 PM
Worse, this will set a precedent that will make similar schemes more likely to occur elsewhere.  I do wonder, though, what, if anything, FHWA will say about the provision allowing tolls to be diverted elsewhere.  That's what sunk the original proposal to toll I-80 in the first place.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: empirestate on November 14, 2020, 01:53:41 AM
Not roads-related, but Pennsylvania related, so please forgive the brief off-topic aside...

I've noticed during the season of election coverage that news reporters and other observers have made a continual habit of pointing out that Pennsylvania is a "commonwealth" rather than* a "state"–they seem, lately, to take every opportunity to self-correct on this point. I don't remember this being a thing until just recently, and I'm wondering what precipitated it? Was there a memo or something?

*To be quite clear, I'm not asking what actually is the difference between the two terms–I already have a clear understanding of that, and it's certainly been discussed here before. I'm just wondering why the sudden attention to the nomenclature. I've only noticed it with respect to Pennsylvania, not to the other three "commonwealth" states.

(I would point out, however, that whenever people do note the distinction, it never has any actual bearing on the point they may be making. The distinction is merely one of style, as there is no legal or political difference between the terms as far as the 50 states are concerned. So this makes the phenomenon all the more curious!)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: dkblake on November 16, 2020, 08:34:08 AM
Quote from: empirestate on November 14, 2020, 01:53:41 AM
Not roads-related, but Pennsylvania related, so please forgive the brief off-topic aside...

I've noticed during the season of election coverage that news reporters and other observers have made a continual habit of pointing out that Pennsylvania is a "commonwealth" rather than* a "state"–they seem, lately, to take every opportunity to self-correct on this point. I don't remember this being a thing until just recently, and I'm wondering what precipitated it? Was there a memo or something?

*To be quite clear, I'm not asking what actually is the difference between the two terms–I already have a clear understanding of that, and it's certainly been discussed here before. I'm just wondering why the sudden attention to the nomenclature. I've only noticed it with respect to Pennsylvania, not to the other three "commonwealth" states.

(I would point out, however, that whenever people do note the distinction, it never has any actual bearing on the point they may be making. The distinction is merely one of style, as there is no legal or political difference between the terms as far as the 50 states are concerned. So this makes the phenomenon all the more curious!)

As someone who grew up in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, I know the feeling! I think it's simply using more official language for the election and possibly preempting pedantic commentators, and it sticks out because the other three commonwealths (MA, VA, KY) aren't swing states.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: VTGoose on November 16, 2020, 09:31:08 AM
Quote from: dkblake on November 16, 2020, 08:34:08 AM

As someone who grew up in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, I know the feeling! I think it's simply using more official language for the election and possibly preempting pedantic commentators, and it sticks out because the other three commonwealths (MA, VA, KY) aren't swing states.

As someone who grew up in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and now lives in the Commonwealth of Virginia, it seems to be a point of pride about being a bit "uncommon" when it comes to "state" status.

Bruce in Blacksburg
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: VTGoose on November 16, 2020, 09:35:16 AM
Quote from: Crown Victoria on November 13, 2020, 12:03:59 PM

As for the I-79 bridge, it would work so long as the toll wouldn't impact Neville Island residents going to/from home.

Actually, it would have to consider the impact on the whole local area. The I-79 bridge is the main backup for local travel when the Sewickley Bridge is out of service and somewhat a backup when the McKees Rocks Bridge is blocked or out of service.

Bruce in Blacksburg (but a native of the 'burgh)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: MASTERNC on November 16, 2020, 10:47:04 AM
I think repairs to the bridges themselves have to be the central aspect of any tolling project.  Maybe they could do a minor bridge rehabilitation project and erect tolls there to pay for other transportation projects, but I imagine the most logical projects involve major replacements or widening projects that include bridges (say I-70 or I-81).
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on November 16, 2020, 12:13:22 PM
Recent updates from PennDOT over the last few days:

PA 29 Realignment in Collegeville for new Royal Farms location:  https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=6258
US 11 Closure due to rockslide in Northumberland County: https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=3243
I-70 Update:  PennDOT launches the I-70 Belle Vernon Bridge to Bentleyville Reconstruction Project (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-12/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1545)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: empirestate on November 16, 2020, 05:30:02 PM
Quote from: VTGoose on November 16, 2020, 09:31:08 AM
Quote from: dkblake on November 16, 2020, 08:34:08 AM

As someone who grew up in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, I know the feeling! I think it's simply using more official language for the election and possibly preempting pedantic commentators, and it sticks out because the other three commonwealths (MA, VA, KY) aren't swing states.

As someone who grew up in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and now lives in the Commonwealth of Virginia, it seems to be a point of pride about being a bit "uncommon" when it comes to "state" status.

Nothing more specific, though? It seems to be all of a sudden, and relatively widespread (I've seen it across news networks, on Twitter, etc.), almost as if there had been a meme going around that everyone's reacting to.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: odditude on November 18, 2020, 01:48:45 PM
Quote from: empirestate on November 16, 2020, 05:30:02 PM
Quote from: VTGoose on November 16, 2020, 09:31:08 AM
Quote from: dkblake on November 16, 2020, 08:34:08 AM

As someone who grew up in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, I know the feeling! I think it's simply using more official language for the election and possibly preempting pedantic commentators, and it sticks out because the other three commonwealths (MA, VA, KY) aren't swing states.

As someone who grew up in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and now lives in the Commonwealth of Virginia, it seems to be a point of pride about being a bit "uncommon" when it comes to "state" status.

Nothing more specific, though? It seems to be all of a sudden, and relatively widespread (I've seen it across news networks, on Twitter, etc.), almost as if there had been a meme going around that everyone's reacting to.

it's been commonplace in Philadelphia-area news for as long as I can remember.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: empirestate on November 18, 2020, 11:39:27 PM
Quote from: odditude on November 18, 2020, 01:48:45 PM
it's been commonplace in Philadelphia-area news for as long as I can remember.

Well, they're probably not getting it wrong in the first place. ;-)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on November 19, 2020, 05:18:13 PM
US 11 Rockslide Closure Update: https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=3249
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Crown Victoria on November 22, 2020, 10:34:27 AM
A Berks County landmark along I-78 closes forever...

https://www.wfmz.com/news/area/berks/roadside-america-closes-after-85-years-in-business/article_d4df6b22-2cc2-11eb-a453-5748f3fac08c.html?fbclid=IwAR1uXwOHX-dBzVzMxjfZviGVEmvZ3PoVxbs6DBjrlOtL9vizyGygs09XbUs
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: sbeaver44 on November 22, 2020, 03:52:04 PM
Quote from: Crown Victoria on November 22, 2020, 10:34:27 AM
A Berks County landmark along I-78 closes forever...

https://www.wfmz.com/news/area/berks/roadside-america-closes-after-85-years-in-business/article_d4df6b22-2cc2-11eb-a453-5748f3fac08c.html?fbclid=IwAR1uXwOHX-dBzVzMxjfZviGVEmvZ3PoVxbs6DBjrlOtL9vizyGygs09XbUs
Dangit my toddler is just about old enough we were gonna take him soon-ish
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: briantroutman on November 22, 2020, 10:21:06 PM
I immediately knew the subject of the article just from "I-78"  and "landmark" –then "Berks County"  clinched it. (I assumed the article wasn't about the Pat Garret Amphitheater or the Assemblies of Yahweh transmitter.)  Roadside America will join the list of places that I meant to visit and then later learned had closed. And in this case, I used to drive the Lebanon/Berks stretch of I-78 as often as weekly during part of my college years, so I saw the building countless times over the years.

To anyone who had visited Roadside America: Did the diorama feature anything from a roadgeek perspective? Any freeway-like setups or interesting signage?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Crown Victoria on November 23, 2020, 11:45:58 AM
PennDOT will halt some projects next week without more funding:

https://www.mcall.com/news/pennsylvania/capitol-ideas/mc-nws-pa-road-projects-funding-20201123-q257mzrqjbguhkbl5nn5lx42nu-story.html


Quote from: briantroutman on November 22, 2020, 10:21:06 PM
I immediately knew the subject of the article just from "I-78"  and "landmark" –then "Berks County"  clinched it. (I assumed the article wasn't about the Pat Garret Amphitheater or the Assemblies of Yahweh transmitter.)  Roadside America will join the list of places that I meant to visit and then later learned had closed. And in this case, I used to drive the Lebanon/Berks stretch of I-78 as often as weekly during part of my college years, so I saw the building countless times over the years.

To anyone who had visited Roadside America: Did the diorama feature anything from a roadgeek perspective? Any freeway-like setups or interesting signage?

It's been quite some time since I was there myself but I'm sure there was something for the roadgeeks somewhere. Definitely good stuff for the railfans!
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on November 23, 2020, 04:49:54 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on November 19, 2020, 05:18:13 PM
US 11 Rockslide Closure Update: https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=3249

US 11 has reopened. (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=3253)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: noelbotevera on November 24, 2020, 08:11:05 PM
Quote from: Crown Victoria on November 22, 2020, 10:34:27 AM
A Berks County landmark along I-78 closes forever...

https://www.wfmz.com/news/area/berks/roadside-america-closes-after-85-years-in-business/article_d4df6b22-2cc2-11eb-a453-5748f3fac08c.html?fbclid=IwAR1uXwOHX-dBzVzMxjfZviGVEmvZ3PoVxbs6DBjrlOtL9vizyGygs09XbUs
I'll be honest, I thought this place was a tourist trap; something like South of the Border and Wall Drug. Never stopped by - didn't look interesting and I was always on trips to better places.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: qguy on November 24, 2020, 09:35:45 PM
Quote from: noelbotevera on November 24, 2020, 08:11:05 PM
Quote from: Crown Victoria on November 22, 2020, 10:34:27 AM
A Berks County landmark along I-78 closes forever...

https://www.wfmz.com/news/area/berks/roadside-america-closes-after-85-years-in-business/article_d4df6b22-2cc2-11eb-a453-5748f3fac08c.html?fbclid=IwAR1uXwOHX-dBzVzMxjfZviGVEmvZ3PoVxbs6DBjrlOtL9vizyGygs09XbUs
I'll be honest, I thought this place was a tourist trap; something like South of the Border and Wall Drug. Never stopped by - didn't look interesting and I was always on trips to better places.

No, the place was amazing. Trains and buildings everywhere. Many buttons to push to activate various features. All very three-dimensional. Once an hour, it would run through a night cycle as well. The house lights would go dark, all the little street lights and buildings' inner lights would sequence on, the moon and stars would shine, a flag would fly, and a recording of Kate Smith singing God Bless America would play. Very patriotic.

It was one of my favorite places. I visited with my family a few times as a boy and took my own kids there a few times. Glad I did. So sad to see it go.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ixnay on November 26, 2020, 12:12:18 PM
Quote from: qguy on November 24, 2020, 09:35:45 PM
Quote from: noelbotevera on November 24, 2020, 08:11:05 PM
Quote from: Crown Victoria on November 22, 2020, 10:34:27 AM
A Berks County landmark along I-78 closes forever...

https://www.wfmz.com/news/area/berks/roadside-america-closes-after-85-years-in-business/article_d4df6b22-2cc2-11eb-a453-5748f3fac08c.html?fbclid=IwAR1uXwOHX-dBzVzMxjfZviGVEmvZ3PoVxbs6DBjrlOtL9vizyGygs09XbUs
I'll be honest, I thought this place was a tourist trap; something like South of the Border and Wall Drug. Never stopped by - didn't look interesting and I was always on trips to better places.

No, the place was amazing. Trains and buildings everywhere. Many buttons to push to activate various features. All very three-dimensional. Once an hour, it would run through a night cycle as well. The house lights would go dark, all the little street lights and buildings' inner lights would sequence on, the moon and stars would shine, a flag would fly, and a recording of Kate Smith singing God Bless America would play. Very patriotic.

It was one of my favorite places. I visited with my family a few times as a boy and took my own kids there a few times. Glad I did. So sad to see it go.

Even as a little lad, for some reason I was always less of a fan of toy trains than the 12-inch-to-the-foot scale variety (although I did have a basic Lionel set back then), but I was at Roadside America twice (a quarter century apart) and enjoyed it, especially the interactive elements.

Now Shartlesville's only active landmark is across I-78 from RA:  the antenna farm for Reading's 830 am. :)

I'll withhold judgment on South of the Border as I have never stopped there (although my mother and stepfather [RIP to the latter] did and were unimpressed).  As for Wall Drug, I have been no closer to the Dakotas than Cincinnati or the DFW metroplex (specifcally their main airports).

ixnay

Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: dkblake on November 27, 2020, 08:16:17 PM
Quote from: ixnay on November 26, 2020, 12:12:18 PM

I'll withhold judgment on South of the Border as I have never stopped there (although my mother and stepfather [RIP to the latter] did and were unimpressed).  As for Wall Drug, I have been no closer to the Dakotas than Cincinnati or the DFW metroplexm (specifcally their main airports).

ixnay


I was at Wall Drug maybe 7 or 8 years ago and it was honestly totally unmemorable? Far more memorable were the alien vistas of the Badlands and sunset over the absolute nothingness of I-90 through central South Dakota.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: tylert120 on November 30, 2020, 02:31:41 PM
Funding crisis update: https://www.mcall.com/news/pennsylvania/capitol-ideas/mc-nws-pa-wolf-penndot-funding-20201130-v7vos5lb4zgzdbgnpp4b64lwm4-story.html (https://www.mcall.com/news/pennsylvania/capitol-ideas/mc-nws-pa-wolf-penndot-funding-20201130-v7vos5lb4zgzdbgnpp4b64lwm4-story.html)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on December 11, 2020, 06:52:03 PM
The US 422 Schuylkill River Bridges project should be completed next week. (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=6323)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: MASTERNC on December 13, 2020, 07:40:23 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on December 11, 2020, 06:52:03 PM
The US 422 Schuylkill River Bridges project should be completed next week. (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=6323)

The roadway has been fully open for a few weeks now and the speed limit is up to 55 MPH (higher than pre-construction).
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on December 15, 2020, 05:09:05 PM
An update on US 322: PennDOT Completes First Phase of U.S. 322 (Conchester Highway) Widening, Improvements in Concord Township, Delaware County (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=6324)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on December 17, 2020, 09:17:02 AM
QuotePA 29 Realignment in Collegeville for new Royal Farms location:  https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=6258

The Collegeville Borough News Facebook page (https://www.facebook.com/cvilleboroughnews/?hc_ref=ARSJjRv-tfVsscVvplCK-96OCmaqXeet05t0VLm2zi76QlrqNFLW-3yeujLg059cJ5A&fref=nf&__tn__=kC-R) stated that the realignment opened on November 18th.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: rickmastfan67 on December 17, 2020, 02:39:17 PM
I-80 Westbound Still Closed After Clinton County Crash Involving 66 Vehicles (https://pittsburgh.cbslocal.com/2020/12/17/i-80-clinton-county-crash/)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on December 17, 2020, 07:47:05 PM
Quote from: rickmastfan67 on December 17, 2020, 02:39:17 PM
I-80 Westbound Still Closed After Clinton County Crash Involving 66 Vehicles (https://pittsburgh.cbslocal.com/2020/12/17/i-80-clinton-county-crash/)

One westbound lane is open on I-80 now. (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1864)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jemacedo9 on December 17, 2020, 08:02:00 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on December 17, 2020, 07:47:05 PM
Quote from: rickmastfan67 on December 17, 2020, 02:39:17 PM
I-80 Westbound Still Closed After Clinton County Crash Involving 66 Vehicles (https://pittsburgh.cbslocal.com/2020/12/17/i-80-clinton-county-crash/)

One westbound lane is open on I-80 now. (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1864)

Every winter there seems to be one of these multi-vehicle crashes on I-80...the photos looked crazy,
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Tonytone on December 17, 2020, 08:05:44 PM
Quote from: jemacedo9 on December 17, 2020, 08:02:00 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on December 17, 2020, 07:47:05 PM
Quote from: rickmastfan67 on December 17, 2020, 02:39:17 PM
I-80 Westbound Still Closed After Clinton County Crash Involving 66 Vehicles (https://pittsburgh.cbslocal.com/2020/12/17/i-80-clinton-county-crash/)

One westbound lane is open on I-80 now. (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1864)

Every winter there seems to be one of these multi-vehicle crashes on I-80...the photos looked crazy,
What im confused about is why do people really speed in the snow especially with PA's Hilly, curvy & potholed roads it just doesn't make sense.

The suvs & the trucks are the main culprits zooming by because they have 4WD only to see them in a ditch or crushed up against the median wall down the road.

Slow down in inclement weather folks!!


iPhone
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on December 17, 2020, 08:12:46 PM
Quote from: jemacedo9 on December 17, 2020, 08:02:00 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on December 17, 2020, 07:47:05 PM
Quote from: rickmastfan67 on December 17, 2020, 02:39:17 PM
I-80 Westbound Still Closed After Clinton County Crash Involving 66 Vehicles (https://pittsburgh.cbslocal.com/2020/12/17/i-80-clinton-county-crash/)

One westbound lane is open on I-80 now. (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1864)

Every winter there seems to be one of these multi-vehicle crashes on I-80...the photos looked crazy,

There are enough days of snow squalls coming from Lake Erie in the winter to make me cautious driving northwest of Harrisburg this time of year. (though they reach here some days)

Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: seicer on December 17, 2020, 08:50:14 PM
I haven't been in any snow-related accidents, but I can attest to being stuck in several major traffic jams because of snow.

I remember being on Interstate 80 several years ago in clear weather and running into an intense snow squall that led to white-out conditions within seconds. I slowed down from 80 MPH to around 45 MPH and put on my hazards and most other vehicles were doing the same. It didn't matter as a tractor-trailer had jackknifed up ahead. I was able to stop in time but others were not at lucky.

About 10 years ago, I was running fairly fast on a relatively clear Interstate 75 near Findlay, Ohio and hit a snow squall. I slowed to about 55 MPH and went into the right lane to let a tractor-trailer pass who then proceeded to jacknife in front of me. I started to slow down (but not slam on the brakes), watching the truck swerve off the left shoulder, cross in front of me and then veer down into the berm on the right.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Gnutella on December 18, 2020, 03:18:49 AM
Quote from: Tonytone on December 17, 2020, 08:05:44 PM
What im confused about is why do people really speed in the snow especially with PA's Hilly, curvy & potholed roads it just doesn't make sense.

Because I-80 is not potholed and has plenty of straight segments. Add in some dumb drivers, and you get pile-ups in the snow.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jeffandnicole on December 18, 2020, 08:38:25 AM
Quote from: Gnutella on December 18, 2020, 03:18:49 AM
Quote from: Tonytone on December 17, 2020, 08:05:44 PM
What im confused about is why do people really speed in the snow especially with PA's Hilly, curvy & potholed roads it just doesn't make sense.

Because I-80 is not potholed and has plenty of straight segments. Add in some dumb drivers, and you get pile-ups in the snow.

Yep.  There's nothing really unique about PA that you don't find in other states.  And this seemingly yearly issue of accidents on their roads isn't in one spot or on one highway, but has occurred all over the state.  Just drivers who absolutely refuse to slow down properly, and think they can speed their way thru a snowstorm.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Tonytone on December 18, 2020, 01:11:00 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 18, 2020, 08:38:25 AM
Quote from: Gnutella on December 18, 2020, 03:18:49 AM
Quote from: Tonytone on December 17, 2020, 08:05:44 PM
What im confused about is why do people really speed in the snow especially with PA's Hilly, curvy & potholed roads it just doesn't make sense.

Because I-80 is not potholed and has plenty of straight segments. Add in some dumb drivers, and you get pile-ups in the snow.

Yep.  There's nothing really unique about PA that you don't find in other states.  And this seemingly yearly issue of accidents on their roads isn't in one spot or on one highway, but has occurred all over the state.  Just drivers who absolutely refuse to slow down properly, and think they can speed their way thru a snowstorm.
You both are correct & in my statement it was more general to the state of PA. I understand I-80 can be hit with squalls suddenly so that you cant really plan.

However alot of PA the area I can think about most I/95 & Philly has a lot of hills in the city & 95 also has alot of curves & dips. People should exercise a little more caution. But this isnt just a PA problem as Jeff has pointed out this is just regular human behavior. Happens everywhere


iPhone
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on December 18, 2020, 07:33:19 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on December 17, 2020, 07:47:05 PM
Quote from: rickmastfan67 on December 17, 2020, 02:39:17 PM
I-80 Westbound Still Closed After Clinton County Crash Involving 66 Vehicles (https://pittsburgh.cbslocal.com/2020/12/17/i-80-clinton-county-crash/)

One westbound lane is open on I-80 now. (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1864)

Both lanes of I-80 WB are open now. (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1865)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on December 20, 2020, 09:30:10 AM
I-80 Westbound Closed Between Penfield and DuBois]I-80 Westbound is currently closed between Penfield and DuBois. (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1866)

EDIT: It reopened before I posted the first link. (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1867)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on December 24, 2020, 10:59:03 AM
Traffic was shifted on I-83 on the east side of Harrisburg this week. (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1276)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: TheGrassGuy on January 04, 2021, 01:35:59 PM
Where can I find a list of every quadrant route in PA? The lists on Wikipedia are incomplete (e.g. Bucks County only lists two 3000's routes and zero 4000's routes), and they only exist for about a third of the counties.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on January 04, 2021, 01:42:14 PM
Quote from: TheGrassGuy on January 04, 2021, 01:35:59 PM
Where can I find a list of every quadrant route in PA? The lists on Wikipedia are incomplete (e.g. Bucks County only lists two 3000's routes and zero 4000's routes), and they only exist for about a third of the counties.

The best that I know of would be the SLDs (https://www.penndot.gov/ProjectAndPrograms/ResearchandTesting/RoadwayManagementandTesting/Pages/RMS-Annual-SLDs-By-County.aspx). 
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: TheGrassGuy on January 04, 2021, 02:08:38 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on January 04, 2021, 01:42:14 PM
Quote from: TheGrassGuy on January 04, 2021, 01:35:59 PM
Where can I find a list of every quadrant route in PA? The lists on Wikipedia are incomplete (e.g. Bucks County only lists two 3000's routes and zero 4000's routes), and they only exist for about a third of the counties.

The best that I know of would be the SLDs (https://www.penndot.gov/ProjectAndPrograms/ResearchandTesting/RoadwayManagementandTesting/Pages/RMS-Annual-SLDs-By-County.aspx).
Wow. That's a loooong list. :wow:
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: TheGrassGuy on January 05, 2021, 05:36:59 PM
Any Wikipedia editors in here, willing to decipher the SLDs and make easily readable lists?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Hwy 61 Revisited on January 19, 2021, 02:15:28 AM
Went for a ride today with my parents on the newly-expanded Route 115 segment. It was somewhat trippy seeing the old PA 903 Y-intersection revised into a traffic light, but I agree that it's mostly better-designed.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on January 19, 2021, 02:05:59 PM
PennDOT is now in the process of realigning PA 320 at Hanging Rock. (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=6354)

And an I-95 Update: PennDOT Completes Major Construction on I-95 Ramp, Surface Street Improvement Project at Betsy Ross Bridge in Philadelphia (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=6384)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Hot Rod Hootenanny on January 20, 2021, 02:22:11 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on January 19, 2021, 02:05:59 PM
PennDOT is now in the process of realigning PA 320 at Hanging Rock. (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=6354)

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!  :bigass:
Paging Brian Troutman. We need a Main Line/West Philly suburbs roadmeet this fall.  :wave:
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: briantroutman on January 20, 2021, 05:25:22 PM
If there's enough interest, I'd consider doing it.

Within Pennsylvania–but outside of the Philadelphia area–one potentially meet-worthy item is the CSVT, since the Susquehanna River crossing is now complete (to the best my knowledge).
Title: Pennsylvania
Post by: sbeaver44 on January 23, 2021, 06:28:17 PM
Passed through Bedford today, using I-99 exit 1 over to the Turnpike.  At the light with Business 220, the shield assembly has EAST Business 220 left, SOUTH Business 220 right.  Hmmmmm
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: briantroutman on January 23, 2021, 07:14:54 PM
Quote from: sbeaver44 on January 23, 2021, 06:28:17 PM
Passed through Bedford today, using I-99 exit 1 over to the Turnpike.  At the light with Business 220, the shield assembly has EAST Business 220 left, SOUTH Business 220 right.  Hmmmmm

You're referring to this (https://goo.gl/maps/Ux4CLPekNUEroX8j7). I've been through that interchange at least a few times and never noticed it. The erroneous "EAST"  was apparently posted around 2017. This GSV image from 2016 (https://goo.gl/maps/aULNbN9capgKZcSj8) still has the correct "NORTH", but a subsequent GSV from 2018 (https://goo.gl/maps/Rr2u89oRZAfJ36fKA) shows the error.

A subsequent reassurance marker (https://goo.gl/maps/EywdPERCyhdHX1zK6) after the intersection has the correct direction.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: sbeaver44 on January 23, 2021, 10:32:57 PM
Quote from: briantroutman on January 23, 2021, 07:14:54 PM
Quote from: sbeaver44 on January 23, 2021, 06:28:17 PM
Passed through Bedford today, using I-99 exit 1 over to the Turnpike.  At the light with Business 220, the shield assembly has EAST Business 220 left, SOUTH Business 220 right.  Hmmmmm

You're referring to this (https://goo.gl/maps/Ux4CLPekNUEroX8j7). I've been through that interchange at least a few times and never noticed it. The erroneous "EAST"  was apparently posted around 2017. This GSV image from 2016 (https://goo.gl/maps/aULNbN9capgKZcSj8) still has the correct "NORTH", but a subsequent GSV from 2018 (https://goo.gl/maps/Rr2u89oRZAfJ36fKA) shows the error.

A subsequent reassurance marker (https://goo.gl/maps/EywdPERCyhdHX1zK6) after the intersection has the correct direction.
Yes that's the one.  I stopped at Taco Bell and circled around so I saw a North Business 220 sign at the same intersection from a different angle.

I know there's roads that switch directions midway but that's not one of them.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Crown Victoria on January 27, 2021, 11:06:33 AM
Some truckers are not too happy about PennDOT's Bridge Tolling plan...

https://www.ttnews.com/articles/pennsylvania-truckers-object-bridge-tolling-plan

According to the article, the list of bridges targeted for tolls will be released next month, and will all be on Interstate highways.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: sbeaver44 on February 09, 2021, 07:16:30 PM
Quote from: Crown Victoria on January 27, 2021, 11:06:33 AM
Some truckers are not too happy about PennDOT's Bridge Tolling plan...

https://www.ttnews.com/articles/pennsylvania-truckers-object-bridge-tolling-plan

According to the article, the list of bridges targeted for tolls will be released next month, and will all be on Interstate highways.
10 bridges

I have to imagine the John Harris/I-83 bridge is likely to be one of them as it is over 60 years old.  I can also imagine how awful this will be for Harrisburg if so.

I'd guess more trucks use the George Wade/81 bridge but that bridge is at least a decade newer and has a significantly lower AADT.  I'm certainly terrified to imagine a situation where 81 is tolled and 83 is not, pushing more traffic onto 581 and 83...
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Crown Victoria on February 10, 2021, 11:30:03 AM
Quote from: sbeaver44 on February 09, 2021, 07:16:30 PM
Quote from: Crown Victoria on January 27, 2021, 11:06:33 AM
Some truckers are not too happy about PennDOT's Bridge Tolling plan...

https://www.ttnews.com/articles/pennsylvania-truckers-object-bridge-tolling-plan

According to the article, the list of bridges targeted for tolls will be released next month, and will all be on Interstate highways.
10 bridges

I have to imagine the John Harris/I-83 bridge is likely to be one of them as it is over 60 years old.  I can also imagine how awful this will be for Harrisburg if so.

I'd guess more trucks use the George Wade/81 bridge but that bridge is at least a decade newer and has a significantly lower AADT.  I'm certainly terrified to imagine a situation where 81 is tolled and 83 is not, pushing more traffic onto 581 and 83...

I would imagine that both or neither of those bridges will be tolled...too much shunpiking potential if one is tolled and the other not.


I wonder if any bridges currently under construction are being considered. If so, then we can include I-78 over the Schuylkill River in Hamburg as a candidate, which is in the process of being widened as part of the I-78/PA 61 project, although it would be fairly easy to shunpike a toll here.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: TheGrassGuy on February 10, 2021, 04:16:14 PM
What's the extra rail for? (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.5397943,-75.4847711,3a,89.4y,346.21h,74.88t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sGyGEZJevUYkyEORnZSVx4w!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: briantroutman on February 10, 2021, 04:43:56 PM
Quote from: TheGrassGuy on February 10, 2021, 04:16:14 PM
What's the extra rail for? (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.5397943,-75.4847711,3a,89.4y,346.21h,74.88t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sGyGEZJevUYkyEORnZSVx4w!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)

Interesting and perplexing. What's particularly odd is that the third rail was apparently added between 2016 and 2019. And at the same time, the rail does not continue through Klines Lane; it looks like the rail had been cut through the surface of Klines Lane and then asphalted over afterward. As of when this GSV image (https://goo.gl/maps/FxYuBWQvy9YkuUQU6) was taken in July 2019, the additional rail went as far south as the crossing with 2nd Street. To the north, there's no sign of the third rail by the time the railroad ROW approaches Harrison Street (https://goo.gl/maps/ZWCrzXW54wkJZXWLA). The railroad's crossing with Main Street is grade separated, so unfortunately we can't see whether the third rail reached that far north.

My guess would be that the third rail was added to allow for the temporary movement of a non-standard gauge vehicle–or perhaps more likely, a large piece of otherwise stationary machinery being rolled along the rails. But whatever that would have been, where it would have come from and where it would have gone to–no more than 3/4 mile away–is a mystery to me. Maybe some piece of railroad maintenance equipment? Perhaps the third rail would have covered a longer distance but the project was shelved for some reason?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: noelbotevera on February 10, 2021, 10:01:54 PM
Speaking of extra rails, any reason why the Kinzua Viaduct has two inner, redundant rails? (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.7606256,-78.5884442,3a,75.1y,171.03h,65.43t/data=!3m8!1e1!3m6!1sAF1QipPYohjzIK1vgRvPb9uCJ9YMKn4GMzY45g2SzCSm!2e10!3e11!6shttps:%2F%2Flh5.googleusercontent.com%2Fp%2FAF1QipPYohjzIK1vgRvPb9uCJ9YMKn4GMzY45g2SzCSm%3Dw203-h100-k-no-pi0-ya224.96843-ro-0-fo100!7i5376!8i2688)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: MASTERNC on February 10, 2021, 10:11:50 PM
Quote from: Crown Victoria on January 27, 2021, 11:06:33 AM
Some truckers are not too happy about PennDOT's Bridge Tolling plan...

https://www.ttnews.com/articles/pennsylvania-truckers-object-bridge-tolling-plan

According to the article, the list of bridges targeted for tolls will be released next month, and will all be on Interstate highways.

Thinking the Ohio River bridge on I-79 or (crazier) the Fort Pitt Bridge in Pittsburgh.  The latter could pay to reconfigure the Banksville/51 weave.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Dirt Roads on February 10, 2021, 10:26:27 PM
Quote from: noelbotevera on February 10, 2021, 10:01:54 PM
Speaking of extra rails, any reason why the Kinzua Viaduct has two inner, redundant rails? (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.7606256,-78.5884442,3a,75.1y,171.03h,65.43t/data=!3m8!1e1!3m6!1sAF1QipPYohjzIK1vgRvPb9uCJ9YMKn4GMzY45g2SzCSm!2e10!3e11!6shttps:%2F%2Flh5.googleusercontent.com%2Fp%2FAF1QipPYohjzIK1vgRvPb9uCJ9YMKn4GMzY45g2SzCSm%3Dw203-h100-k-no-pi0-ya224.96843-ro-0-fo100!7i5376!8i2688)

They are actually called "bridge rails" and they are used as a derailment protection system.  The derailed axle will stay between the primary rail and the bridge rail.  Sometimes we get lucky and the axle will actually catch a crosstie (called a sleeper in Europe) and hop back on the tracks.  Off of the bridge, railroads do the same thing in tight curves but they generally only put one curve rail on the inside of the "high rail" (at the top of the superelevation).  In olden days, I saw a few locations that had a second curve rail down below the "low rail", but those should have a longer crosstie (which fits outside of the normal ballast profile (rockbed) and really messes up the automated roadbed maintenance process.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Mr. Matté on February 11, 2021, 08:14:36 AM
Quote from: noelbotevera on February 10, 2021, 10:01:54 PM
Speaking of extra rails, any reason why the Kinzua Viaduct has two inner, redundant rails? (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.7606256,-78.5884442,3a,75.1y,171.03h,65.43t/data=!3m8!1e1!3m6!1sAF1QipPYohjzIK1vgRvPb9uCJ9YMKn4GMzY45g2SzCSm!2e10!3e11!6shttps:%2F%2Flh5.googleusercontent.com%2Fp%2FAF1QipPYohjzIK1vgRvPb9uCJ9YMKn4GMzY45g2SzCSm%3Dw203-h100-k-no-pi0-ya224.96843-ro-0-fo100!7i5376!8i2688)

Technically all four rails are redundant now.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: VTGoose on February 11, 2021, 09:49:11 AM
Quote from: TheGrassGuy on February 10, 2021, 04:16:14 PM
What's the extra rail for? (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.5397943,-75.4847711,3a,89.4y,346.21h,74.88t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sGyGEZJevUYkyEORnZSVx4w!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)

There's actually two rails there in the middle. It is new ribbon rail that will replace the existing rail on one of the tracks. Before the project begins, a train loaded with quarter-mile lengths of continuous welded rail (CWR) unloaded the new rail on the right of way. In this case, a trench was cut into the grade crossing, the new rail laid in it, then it was covered over. When work starts, a long string of track machines will move along as a group to pull up the old rails and hardware and put the new rails in place. When complete, another rail train will come along to load the old rail.

Bruce in Blacksburg
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on February 12, 2021, 04:34:47 PM
PennDOT Announces Work to Begin on Project to Improve PA 443 in Carbon County. (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-5/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2646)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: noelbotevera on February 12, 2021, 05:57:26 PM
Quote from: Dirt Roads on February 10, 2021, 10:26:27 PM
Quote from: noelbotevera on February 10, 2021, 10:01:54 PM
Speaking of extra rails, any reason why the Kinzua Viaduct has two inner, redundant rails? (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.7606256,-78.5884442,3a,75.1y,171.03h,65.43t/data=!3m8!1e1!3m6!1sAF1QipPYohjzIK1vgRvPb9uCJ9YMKn4GMzY45g2SzCSm!2e10!3e11!6shttps:%2F%2Flh5.googleusercontent.com%2Fp%2FAF1QipPYohjzIK1vgRvPb9uCJ9YMKn4GMzY45g2SzCSm%3Dw203-h100-k-no-pi0-ya224.96843-ro-0-fo100!7i5376!8i2688)
(Some of the quote has been trimmed for brevity.)
The derailed axle will stay between the primary rail and the bridge rail.  Sometimes we get lucky and the axle will actually catch a crosstie (called a sleeper in Europe) and hop back on the tracks.  Off of the bridge, railroads do the same thing in tight curves but they generally only put one curve rail on the inside of the "high rail" (at the top of the superelevation).
Will fully admit I'm not an expert in rails, but this sounds like it's a crapshoot to get the train back on the tracks. While a stuck train is better than a derailed train, isn't there a better way to prevent the train axle from derailing in the first place?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: tylert120 on February 12, 2021, 07:42:51 PM
Quote from: MASTERNC on February 10, 2021, 10:11:50 PM
Quote from: Crown Victoria on January 27, 2021, 11:06:33 AM
Some truckers are not too happy about PennDOT's Bridge Tolling plan...

https://www.ttnews.com/articles/pennsylvania-truckers-object-bridge-tolling-plan

According to the article, the list of bridges targeted for tolls will be released next month, and will all be on Interstate highways.

Thinking the Ohio River bridge on I-79 or (crazier) the Fort Pitt Bridge in Pittsburgh.  The latter could pay to reconfigure the Banksville/51 weave.

I can't foresee  them choosing to toll any bridge inside city limits.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: sbeaver44 on February 13, 2021, 09:42:42 AM
Quote from: tylert120 on February 12, 2021, 07:42:51 PM
I can't foresee  them choosing to toll any bridge inside city limits.

I wonder if any I-80 bridges will get tolled.  Since they couldn't toll I-80 as a whole.  The one over the Susquehanna main branch between Exits 241-242 is a fairly long way around, for instance.  Or the Allegheny bridge near Emlenton.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: VTGoose on February 15, 2021, 09:35:19 AM
Quote from: noelbotevera on February 12, 2021, 05:57:26 PM
Will fully admit I'm not an expert in rails, but this sounds like it's a crapshoot to get the train back on the tracks. While a stuck train is better than a derailed train, isn't there a better way to prevent the train axle from derailing in the first place?

This is straying a bit from roads, but I'll bring it back . . .

A derailment can happen for a variety of reasons, such as a wheel or bearing that fails, or a section of rail fails due to a fracture in the steel -- accidents happen, but technology is being adopted by the railroads to provide better monitoring of things like bearings, the state of wheels, and rail.

The same question could be asked about highways and if might be better to prevent trucks from jackknifing or running into the guard rail or prevent cars from running into other cars. Drivers fall asleep, black ice suddenly appears, tires fail -- things happen. Technology is helping, with adaptive cruise control, lane-keep assist, and collision avoidance warning and braking systems, but accidents are still going to happen. The railroads learned long ago that guard rails on bridges may not prevent a derailment but they might prevent the wreck from happening on the bridge, where cleanup would be a problem.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on February 16, 2021, 10:58:29 AM
From PennDOT on weekday upcoming closures along PA 23: 
PECO to Restrict Route 23 (Valley Forge Road) for Utility Improvement in Schuylkill Township, Chester County (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=6430)

I had an issue like this affect me last year when I was attempting to clinch PA 372 on MLK Day (they still worked even on a holiday).  I took care of this though on my NJ/PA 73 Trip that was one year ago yesterday.

EDIT (2-16-2021):  Note that the news release was edited as stated in the below posts.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ixnay on February 16, 2021, 07:12:28 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on February 16, 2021, 10:58:29 AM
From PennDOT on weekday upcoming closures along PA 23:  PECO to Close Route 23 (Valley Forge Road) Through November for Utility Improvement in Chester County (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=6430)

I had an issue like this affect me last year when I was attempting to clinch PA 372 on MLK Day (they still worked even on a holiday).  I took care of this though on my NJ/PA 73 Trip that was one year ago yesterday.

Where did you get the headline?  The article (dated 2/16/21) you linked says it won't be a full closure but an alternating traffic situation during gas main installation along that 1.1 mile stretch.  And I found no mention of anything November in the article.

QuotePECO to Restrict Route 23 (Valley Forge Road) for Utility Improvement in Schuylkill Township, Chester County
02/16/2021

King of Prussia, PA — PECO Energy is planning a single lane closure with flagging on Route 23 (Valley Forge Road) between Moorehall Drive and Country Club Road in Schuylkill Township, Chester County, beginning Wednesday, February 17, for gas main installation, the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation (PennDOT) announced today. The lane closure will be in place weekdays from 9:00 AM to 3:00 PM through late-March.

ixnay
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: MASTERNC on February 16, 2021, 07:40:43 PM
Quote from: ixnay on February 16, 2021, 07:12:28 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on February 16, 2021, 10:58:29 AM
From PennDOT on weekday upcoming closures along PA 23:  PECO to Close Route 23 (Valley Forge Road) Through November for Utility Improvement in Chester County (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=6430)

I had an issue like this affect me last year when I was attempting to clinch PA 372 on MLK Day (they still worked even on a holiday).  I took care of this though on my NJ/PA 73 Trip that was one year ago yesterday.

Where did you get the headline?  The article (dated 2/16/21) you linked says it won't be a full closure but an alternating traffic situation during gas main installation along that 1.1 mile stretch.  And I found no mention of anything November in the article.

QuotePECO to Restrict Route 23 (Valley Forge Road) for Utility Improvement in Schuylkill Township, Chester County
02/16/2021

King of Prussia, PA — PECO Energy is planning a single lane closure with flagging on Route 23 (Valley Forge Road) between Moorehall Drive and Country Club Road in Schuylkill Township, Chester County, beginning Wednesday, February 17, for gas main installation, the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation (PennDOT) announced today. The lane closure will be in place weekdays from 9:00 AM to 3:00 PM through late-March.

ixnay

It did say earlier today the road would be closed weekdays for several months after these initial lane restrictions - seems the release has been edited
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on February 16, 2021, 07:41:50 PM
^The original release that came to my email stated the following:

QuoteThe work schedule and location is: 

Wednesday, February 17, through Friday, February 26, from 9:00 AM to 3:30 PM, a weekday lane closure with flagging is scheduled on Route 23 (Valley Forge Road) between Moorehall Drive and Country Club Road; and 
Monday, March 1, through late November, from 9:00 AM to 3:30 PM, Route 23 (Valley Forge Road) is scheduled to close weekdays between Moorehall Drive and Country Club Road. During the closure, motorists will be detoured over Whitehorse Road and Valley Park Road.

It must have been actually been March, and the original release must have been in error.  I did not get notified of a correction until your posts.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jemacedo9 on February 16, 2021, 07:44:30 PM
Quote from: ixnay on February 16, 2021, 07:12:28 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on February 16, 2021, 10:58:29 AM
From PennDOT on weekday upcoming closures along PA 23:  PECO to Close Route 23 (Valley Forge Road) Through November for Utility Improvement in Chester County (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=6430)

I had an issue like this affect me last year when I was attempting to clinch PA 372 on MLK Day (they still worked even on a holiday).  I took care of this though on my NJ/PA 73 Trip that was one year ago yesterday.

Where did you get the headline?  The article (dated 2/16/21) you linked says it won't be a full closure but an alternating traffic situation during gas main installation along that 1.1 mile stretch.  And I found no mention of anything November in the article.

QuotePECO to Restrict Route 23 (Valley Forge Road) for Utility Improvement in Schuylkill Township, Chester County
02/16/2021

King of Prussia, PA — PECO Energy is planning a single lane closure with flagging on Route 23 (Valley Forge Road) between Moorehall Drive and Country Club Road in Schuylkill Township, Chester County, beginning Wednesday, February 17, for gas main installation, the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation (PennDOT) announced today. The lane closure will be in place weekdays from 9:00 AM to 3:00 PM through late-March.

ixnay

INTERESTING...I read this earlier today directly on the PennDOT site, and the work was starting with lane closures but then would be full weekday closures. through November.  The local township police department posted that version to their FB page.  What the release says now has changed to just state the single-lane through mid-March.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: TheGrassGuy on February 17, 2021, 08:09:03 AM
Another railroad with an extra line: https://www.google.com/maps/@40.3760955,-77.8715013,3a,75y,337.22h,83.98t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s-C9V3X2jqzAvulnsHacgyA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: VTGoose on February 17, 2021, 09:35:41 AM
Quote from: TheGrassGuy on February 17, 2021, 08:09:03 AM
Another railroad with an extra line: https://www.google.com/maps/@40.3760955,-77.8715013,3a,75y,337.22h,83.98t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s-C9V3X2jqzAvulnsHacgyA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

Those are tracks of the East Broad Top Railroad (https://eastbroadtop.com), which ran from the connection with the Pennsylvania Railroad to Rockhill and beyond. It was a narrow gauge line that hauled coal, but at the connection there were dual gauge tracks, such as seen in this road crossing, to allow interchange of traffic. The line is now being restored to operate as a tourist line and to preserve the shop complex, which the previous owner did little to change from when the line was abandoned.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: TheGrassGuy on February 18, 2021, 12:11:35 PM
Which sections of PA-32 were one-lane, as shown here (https://www.alpsroads.net/roads/pa/pa_32/)?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: sbeaver44 on February 18, 2021, 05:11:49 PM
PennDot has released the 9 "Candidate"  bridges for tolling

As I expected, 83 over the Susquehanna is one of them.  4 of the 9 are on I-80.  I wonder if this will go to court again over the I-80 issue.

The list per  https://www.penndot.gov/about-us/funding/Pages/Solutions.aspx (https://www.penndot.gov/about-us/funding/Pages/Solutions.aspx) includes

I-78: Lenhartsville
I-79: Bridgeville
I-80: Canoe Creek, North Fork, Nescopeck Creek, Lehigh River
I-81: Susquehanna River (at Great Bend near NY State Line)
I-83: Susquehanna River
I-95: Girard Point
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Great Lakes Roads on February 18, 2021, 05:55:44 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SkRdqRv_WE

Here's a video on the introduction of the I-83 South Bridge Project in Harrisburg.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: sbeaver44 on February 18, 2021, 06:20:13 PM
Alright so what happens first:
1) Replacement 83 John Harris bridge begins construction
2) Mt Rose Ave (I-83 Exit 18) interchange construction project completed
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: MASTERNC on February 18, 2021, 06:49:50 PM
Quote from: sbeaver44 on February 18, 2021, 05:11:49 PM
PennDot has released the 9 "Candidate"  bridges for tolling

As I expected, 83 over the Susquehanna is one of them.  4 of the 9 are on I-80.  I wonder if this will go to court again over the I-80 issue.

The list per  https://www.penndot.gov/about-us/funding/Pages/Solutions.aspx (https://www.penndot.gov/about-us/funding/Pages/Solutions.aspx) includes

I-78: Lenhartsville
I-79: Bridgeville
I-80: Canoe Creek, North Fork, Nescopeck Creek, Lehigh River
I-81: Susquehanna River (at Great Bend near NY State Line)
I-83: Susquehanna River
I-95: Girard Point

The Bridgeville proposal is peculiar and is probably designed to catch all the commuter traffic.

I'm surprised the Mon River bridge on I-70 wasn't on the list.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: odditude on February 18, 2021, 06:55:17 PM
Quote from: sbeaver44 on February 18, 2021, 05:11:49 PM
PennDot has released the 9 "Candidate"  bridges for tolling

(snip)
I-95: Girard Point

something tells me there would be a significant increase in traffic on the Platt Bridge from commuters heading to Center City from the south (and vice versa).
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jemacedo9 on February 18, 2021, 06:57:51 PM
Quote from: TheGrassGuy on February 18, 2021, 12:11:35 PM
Which sections of PA-32 were one-lane, as shown here (https://www.alpsroads.net/roads/pa/pa_32/)?
Just south of PA 611...by the Narrowsville Cliffs...that was damage due to flooding next to the canal.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: MASTERNC on February 18, 2021, 07:03:01 PM
Quote from: odditude on February 18, 2021, 06:55:17 PM
Quote from: sbeaver44 on February 18, 2021, 05:11:49 PM
PennDot has released the 9 "Candidate"  bridges for tolling

(snip)
I-95: Girard Point

something tells me there would be a significant increase in traffic on the Platt Bridge from commuters heading to Center City from the south (and vice versa).

Yep, but I'm sure the city will love all the red light camera tickets from the left turn onto 26th Street
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ARMOURERERIC on February 18, 2021, 07:12:05 PM
Quote from: MASTERNC on February 18, 2021, 06:49:50 PM
Quote from: sbeaver44 on February 18, 2021, 05:11:49 PM
PennDot has released the 9 "Candidate"  bridges for tolling

As I expected, 83 over the Susquehanna is one of them.  4 of the 9 are on I-80.  I wonder if this will go to court again over the I-80 issue.

The list per  https://www.penndot.gov/about-us/funding/Pages/Solutions.aspx (https://www.penndot.gov/about-us/funding/Pages/Solutions.aspx) includes

I-78: Lenhartsville
I-79: Bridgeville
I-80: Canoe Creek, North Fork, Nescopeck Creek, Lehigh River
I-81: Susquehanna River (at Great Bend near NY State Line)
I-83: Susquehanna River
I-95: Girard Point

The Bridgeville proposal is peculiar and is probably designed to catch all the commuter traffic.

I'm surprised the Mon River bridge on I-70 wasn't on the list.

If the Bridgeville toll was to fund an 8 laning of 79 from 70 to 376, it would be worth considering.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: MASTERNC on February 18, 2021, 07:42:41 PM
Quote from: ARMOURERERIC on February 18, 2021, 07:12:05 PM
Quote from: MASTERNC on February 18, 2021, 06:49:50 PM
Quote from: sbeaver44 on February 18, 2021, 05:11:49 PM
PennDot has released the 9 "Candidate"  bridges for tolling

As I expected, 83 over the Susquehanna is one of them.  4 of the 9 are on I-80.  I wonder if this will go to court again over the I-80 issue.

The list per  https://www.penndot.gov/about-us/funding/Pages/Solutions.aspx (https://www.penndot.gov/about-us/funding/Pages/Solutions.aspx) includes

I-78: Lenhartsville
I-79: Bridgeville
I-80: Canoe Creek, North Fork, Nescopeck Creek, Lehigh River
I-81: Susquehanna River (at Great Bend near NY State Line)
I-83: Susquehanna River
I-95: Girard Point

The Bridgeville proposal is peculiar and is probably designed to catch all the commuter traffic.

I'm surprised the Mon River bridge on I-70 wasn't on the list.

If the Bridgeville toll was to fund an 8 laning of 79 from 70 to 376, it would be worth considering.

Or at least six lanes for that entire stretch
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Alps on February 18, 2021, 11:34:05 PM
Quote from: sbeaver44 on February 18, 2021, 05:11:49 PM
PennDot has released the 9 "Candidate"  bridges for tolling

As I expected, 83 over the Susquehanna is one of them.  4 of the 9 are on I-80.  I wonder if this will go to court again over the I-80 issue.

The list per  https://www.penndot.gov/about-us/funding/Pages/Solutions.aspx (https://www.penndot.gov/about-us/funding/Pages/Solutions.aspx) includes

I-78: Lenhartsville
I-79: Bridgeville
I-80: Canoe Creek, North Fork, Nescopeck Creek, Lehigh River
I-81: Susquehanna River (at Great Bend near NY State Line)
I-83: Susquehanna River
I-95: Girard Point
At least 3 of those bridges are not major bridges and I don't think this is gonna fly.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: rickmastfan67 on February 19, 2021, 12:00:32 AM
Quote from: sbeaver44 on February 18, 2021, 05:11:49 PM
I-79: Bridgeville

Yeah, that one might not fly at all.

People will use PA-50 to bypass it for sure.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Crown Victoria on February 19, 2021, 08:08:42 AM
Quote from: sbeaver44 on February 18, 2021, 05:11:49 PM
PennDot has released the 9 "Candidate"  bridges for tolling

As I expected, 83 over the Susquehanna is one of them.  4 of the 9 are on I-80.  I wonder if this will go to court again over the I-80 issue.

The list per  https://www.penndot.gov/about-us/funding/Pages/Solutions.aspx (https://www.penndot.gov/about-us/funding/Pages/Solutions.aspx) includes

I-78: Lenhartsville
I-79: Bridgeville
I-80: Canoe Creek, North Fork, Nescopeck Creek, Lehigh River
I-81: Susquehanna River (at Great Bend near NY State Line)
I-83: Susquehanna River
I-95: Girard Point

The I-78 Lenhartsville Bridge seems a bit curious to me. That bridge isn't really a big deal (although the project is needed as currently one is required to stop on the onramp from PA 143 before entering I-78 eastbound), and the estimated project cost is only $50 million or so. I suspect the actual purpose here is to raise revenue for other I-78 projects, as is permitted once the actual bridge project the tolls are set up for is paid off.

That being said, I'm not opposed to bridge tolls where used appropriately. These tolls will capture revenue from out-of-state and electric vehicles that present funding (the gas tax) misses.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: PHLBOS on February 19, 2021, 09:12:59 AM
Quote from: Alps on February 18, 2021, 11:34:05 PM
Quote from: sbeaver44 on February 18, 2021, 05:11:49 PM
PennDot has released the 9 "Candidate"  bridges for tolling

As I expected, 83 over the Susquehanna is one of them.  4 of the 9 are on I-80.  I wonder if this will go to court again over the I-80 issue.

The list per  https://www.penndot.gov/about-us/funding/Pages/Solutions.aspx (https://www.penndot.gov/about-us/funding/Pages/Solutions.aspx) includes

I-78: Lenhartsville
I-79: Bridgeville
I-80: Canoe Creek, North Fork, Nescopeck Creek, Lehigh River
I-81: Susquehanna River (at Great Bend near NY State Line)
I-83: Susquehanna River
I-95: Girard Point
At least 3 of those bridges are not major bridges and I don't think this is gonna fly.
Given that all of the above are Interstates; I believe such toll implementation is still subject to federal approval.   Have the feds actually signed off on this?  And before somebody mentions Rhode Island; those tolls are only charged for commercial trucks.

Additionally, let's not forget that Gov. Lamont in CT seemed all confident that tolls would get (re)established & the feds would approve such only to have Westchester County, NY shoot things down because the plan included I-684 in the mix.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jeffandnicole on February 19, 2021, 09:35:44 AM
I'm curious about the legality of these Interstate tolls as well.  Most of them are for projects ready to go to construction shortly, which means federal funding has already (or should have) been requested and programmed for each project.  If that's the case, then why are tolls needed?

Even the I-95 Girard Point Bridge is questionable. The planned construction includes this line item: "bridge superstructure painting".  The bridge was painted in a fairly comprehensive construction $76 million project just 10 years ago (http://www.pspe-philly.org/oea/2012%20OEA/GIRARD%20POINT%20BRIDGE.pdf).
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jemacedo9 on February 19, 2021, 10:40:42 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on February 19, 2021, 09:35:44 AM
I'm curious about the legality of these Interstate tolls as well.  Most of them are for projects ready to go to construction shortly, which means federal funding has already (or should have) been requested and programmed for each project.  If that's the case, then why are tolls needed?

Even the I-95 Girard Point Bridge is questionable. The planned construction includes this line item: "bridge superstructure painting".  The bridge was painted in a fairly comprehensive construction $76 million project just 10 years ago (http://www.pspe-philly.org/oea/2012%20OEA/GIRARD%20POINT%20BRIDGE.pdf).


Some of these I get (notwithstanding the funding question...which is a big question).  Others not so much.
The I-80 Canoe Creek, North Fork, and Lehigh River bridges I get...pretty large bridges that are going to be fully replaced.
Same with the I-83 and I-81 Susquehanna Bridges.

The other I-80 bridge (Nescopeck Creek - the deck on that one is a quilt of patches) and the I-78 bridge both need to be replaced also...but...not major bridges?

The I-79 bridge is really a short widening project disguised as a bridge toll?

I-95...I had the same thought.  The approach spans were not repainted...but I'd think that's pretty minor?  I wonder if they are going to include the viaducts north and south of there (though I thought the viaduct by the Sports Complex is already under rehab)?

Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on February 19, 2021, 03:24:13 PM
Specific I-83 South Bridge Update: PennDOT Hosting On-Demand Virtual Public Meeting for I-83 South Bridge Project (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1312)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ARMOURERERIC on February 19, 2021, 04:18:45 PM
The I-79 project sees to be a move to capitalize on Southern Beltway future shunpikers.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: CentralPAGal on February 19, 2021, 05:01:09 PM
I wonder why they didn't include the I-81 George Wade bridge? Wouldn't the north section of the capital beltway seem like an obvious shunpike, even if it is longer?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: TheGrassGuy on February 19, 2021, 06:26:47 PM
Philadelphia Zoo in GSV is labeled as "Cattail Slough Public Use Area", and the rest of Fairmount Park is labeled as "Philadelphia Zoo" :-D :-D :-D
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: vdeane on February 19, 2021, 10:12:03 PM
My understanding is that tolling of major bridges on existing free interstates is legal as long as the money isn't diverted away from the road.  As such, unless PennDOT is planning to do something like they were with the prior I-80 tolling initiative, I would expect at least some of these to easily get approved.  The more minor bridges might be an issue.  As there is no equivalent of I-684 (which is basically an intra-NY route that happens to pass through a piece of CT), I don't see out of state interests having as much leverage to kill the plan.

Basically: this has a better chance of actually happening than the other recent initiatives in PA and CT.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: PHLBOS on February 19, 2021, 10:56:04 PM
Quote from: vdeane on February 19, 2021, 10:12:03 PM
My understanding is that tolling of major bridges on existing free interstates is legal as long as the money isn't diverted away from the road.  As such, unless PennDOT is planning to do something like they were with the prior I-80 tolling initiative, I would expect at least some of these to easily get approved.  The more minor bridges might be an issue.
The issue w/PA's past Act 44 & 89 initiatives is the lack of genuine transparency with regards to where the toll revenue is actually going when such are being proposed/marketed to the taxpaying public.

In the case of Act 44; while it was mentioned that a percentage of the toll revenue would go to transit agencies; most thought that such would completely go towards actual projects as opposed to allegedly subsidizing union pensions.

Act 89 was advertised & marketed completely for roadway & transit projects as a means of getting taxpayer support for such.  However, it was later discovered that revenue was also going to State Police funding; something that was never mentioned at all when marketed/advertised.  While I personally have nothing against funding the State Police; sneaking such into gas tax increases is deceptive to say the least, flat out wrong to say the most.

Given the above & PA's past flat-out reluctance to abide by federal rules for allocating revenue via tolling the fore-mentioned I-80 more than once under 2 different administrations & parties; I wouldn't trust them doing the right thing with this current plan.

For the record, the only federal approval for such has been in Rhode Island; but tolls on those highways are only charged for large commercial trucks.  The PA plan will be to charge tolls for all vehicles.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Mr_Northside on February 20, 2021, 04:48:36 PM
Quote from: MASTERNC on February 18, 2021, 06:49:50 PM
The Bridgeville proposal is peculiar and is probably designed to catch all the commuter traffic.

I'm surprised the Mon River bridge on I-70 wasn't on the list.

I believe they just finished a big rehab of the I-70 ("Speers Bridge") about 3 or so years ago, so it should hopefully not need the toll treatment (assuming this actually goes thru) for another 15-20 years.

The toll plan aside, the one article I read mentioned that they don't just want to widen I-79 in the Bridgeville area, but also want to re-design & re-construct the interchange.   I am now curious as to what a re-design will look like.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jmd41280 on February 20, 2021, 07:59:42 PM
Quote from: MASTERNC on February 18, 2021, 06:49:50 PMI'm surprised the Mon River bridge on I-70 wasn't on the list.

I'm very thankful for that, for several reasons. For one, I cross this bridge twice daily due to my commute. Also, the resultant shunpikers would create massive traffic problems on PA 906, the 2-lane Charleroi Monessen Bridge, and PA 88 through downtown Charleroi.

https://www.google.com/maps/dir/40.1313465,-79.8726375/40.1510735,-79.9074562/40.1229187,-79.8819233/@40.1251069,-79.9094968,13.39z/data=!4m10!4m9!1m0!1m5!3m4!1m2!1d-79.8874591!2d40.1287404!3s0x88351c92f38df6f1:0x6a753318fbc31bfb!1m0!3e0 (https://www.google.com/maps/dir/40.1313465,-79.8726375/40.1510735,-79.9074562/40.1229187,-79.8819233/@40.1251069,-79.9094968,13.39z/data=!4m10!4m9!1m0!1m5!3m4!1m2!1d-79.8874591!2d40.1287404!3s0x88351c92f38df6f1:0x6a753318fbc31bfb!1m0!3e0)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: vdeane on February 20, 2021, 10:58:21 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on February 19, 2021, 10:56:04 PM
Quote from: vdeane on February 19, 2021, 10:12:03 PM
My understanding is that tolling of major bridges on existing free interstates is legal as long as the money isn't diverted away from the road.  As such, unless PennDOT is planning to do something like they were with the prior I-80 tolling initiative, I would expect at least some of these to easily get approved.  The more minor bridges might be an issue.
The issue w/PA's past Act 44 & 89 initiatives is the lack of genuine transparency with regards to where the toll revenue is actually going when such are being proposed/marketed to the taxpaying public.

In the case of Act 44; while it was mentioned that a percentage of the toll revenue would go to transit agencies; most thought that such would completely go towards actual projects as opposed to allegedly subsidizing union pensions.

Act 89 was advertised & marketed completely for roadway & transit projects as a means of getting taxpayer support for such.  However, it was later discovered that revenue was also going to State Police funding; something that was never mentioned at all when marketed/advertised.  While I personally have nothing against funding the State Police; sneaking such into gas tax increases is deceptive to say the least, flat out wrong to say the most.

Given the above & PA's past flat-out reluctance to abide by federal rules for allocating revenue via tolling the fore-mentioned I-80 more than once under 2 different administrations & parties; I wouldn't trust them doing the right thing with this current plan.

For the record, the only federal approval for such has been in Rhode Island; but tolls on those highways are only charged for large commercial trucks.  The PA plan will be to charge tolls for all vehicles.
My understanding is that the plan is to do these projects as P3s, with the private company collecting the toll revenue.  Unless you're insinuating that PennDOT is lying?

While the RI truck tolls are the only time I know of this tolling authority going through, it's not the only attempt.  Also see CT's tolling plan and the I-10 bridges around Mobile, AL - both of these plans would have tolled all vehicles, and it was politics that shot them down, not the feds.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: famartin on February 20, 2021, 11:11:46 PM
I'm guessing PennDOT got the memo about not using VMS's for non-road messages (drove I-95 in Philly on Tuesday, still had the COVID quarantine messages, today they are gone).
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on February 21, 2021, 10:29:42 AM
Quote from: famartin on February 20, 2021, 11:11:46 PM
I'm guessing PennDOT got the memo about not using VMS's for non-road messages (drove I-95 in Philly on Tuesday, still had the COVID quarantine messages, today they are gone).

Yeah I did not see any COVID quarantine messages on I-99, I-80, I-180, etc. yesterday either.

When they closed the I-83 South Bridge NB one weekend last month, all the COVID quarantine messages in Harrisburg and York were replaced with messages related to the I-83 closure.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: MASTERNC on February 21, 2021, 08:11:12 PM
Quote from: Mr_Northside on February 20, 2021, 04:48:36 PM
Quote from: MASTERNC on February 18, 2021, 06:49:50 PM
The Bridgeville proposal is peculiar and is probably designed to catch all the commuter traffic.

I'm surprised the Mon River bridge on I-70 wasn't on the list.

I believe they just finished a big rehab of the I-70 ("Speers Bridge") about 3 or so years ago, so it should hopefully not need the toll treatment (assuming this actually goes thru) for another 15-20 years.

The toll plan aside, the one article I read mentioned that they don't just want to widen I-79 in the Bridgeville area, but also want to re-design & re-construct the interchange.   I am now curious as to what a re-design will look like.




That whole area is substandard (45 MPH, no acceleration lanes) and will need to be replaced in order to remedy those issues, especially if they are modernizing the rest of I-70
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on February 22, 2021, 12:04:07 PM
PennDOT: Work to Realign Routes 160/756 (Elton Intersection) to Begin (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-9/pages/details.aspx?newsid=888)

In reality, this is a realignment of PA 756 just west of the PA 160 intersection.

Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: PHLBOS on February 22, 2021, 04:23:38 PM
Quote from: vdeane on February 20, 2021, 10:58:21 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on February 19, 2021, 10:56:04 PM
Quote from: vdeane on February 19, 2021, 10:12:03 PM
My understanding is that tolling of major bridges on existing free interstates is legal as long as the money isn't diverted away from the road.  As such, unless PennDOT is planning to do something like they were with the prior I-80 tolling initiative, I would expect at least some of these to easily get approved.  The more minor bridges might be an issue.
The issue w/PA's past Act 44 & 89 initiatives is the lack of genuine transparency with regards to where the toll revenue is actually going when such are being proposed/marketed to the taxpaying public.

In the case of Act 44; while it was mentioned that a percentage of the toll revenue would go to transit agencies; most thought that such would completely go towards actual projects as opposed to allegedly subsidizing union pensions.

Act 89 was advertised & marketed completely for roadway & transit projects as a means of getting taxpayer support for such.  However, it was later discovered that revenue was also going to State Police funding; something that was never mentioned at all when marketed/advertised.  While I personally have nothing against funding the State Police; sneaking such into gas tax increases is deceptive to say the least, flat out wrong to say the most.

Given the above & PA's past flat-out reluctance to abide by federal rules for allocating revenue via tolling the fore-mentioned I-80 more than once under 2 different administrations & parties; I wouldn't trust them doing the right thing with this current plan.

For the record, the only federal approval for such has been in Rhode Island; but tolls on those highways are only charged for large commercial trucks.  The PA plan will be to charge tolls for all vehicles.
My understanding is that the plan is to do these projects as P3s, with the private company collecting the toll revenue.  Unless you're insinuating that PennDOT is lying?
Given the past lack of transparency; I wouldn't be surprised and that isn't exclusively directed towards PennDOT.

Quote from: vdeane on February 20, 2021, 10:58:21 PM
While the RI truck tolls are the only time I know of this tolling authority going through, it's not the only attempt.  Also see CT's tolling plan and the I-10 bridges around Mobile, AL - both of these plans would have tolled all vehicles, and it was politics that shot them down, not the feds.
While I can't answer for the I-10 bridges in Mobile, AL (such example reads to be only for one of road as opposed to several Interstates in AL); we will likely never know whether the feds would've approved the CT tolls had Gov. Lamont not jumped the shark by including I-684 in his tolling plan as well as Westchester County, NY objecting to what was basically a blindside.

In short, attempting to implement tolls vs. actually doing such are two very different things.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Ketchup99 on February 22, 2021, 06:15:40 PM
For what it's worth, I saw quarantine signs on US-322 between State College and Lewistown on Friday.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on February 22, 2021, 09:14:27 PM
Quote from: Ketchup99 on February 22, 2021, 06:15:40 PM
For what it's worth, I saw quarantine signs on US-322 between State College and Lewistown on Friday.

I probably should have mentioned that the VMS's I saw on Saturday all were referring to potential changing winter conditions along I-99 due to flurries that resulted from the lake effect snow coming from Lake Erie.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: famartin on February 23, 2021, 12:19:29 AM
Quote from: Ketchup99 on February 22, 2021, 06:15:40 PM
For what it's worth, I saw quarantine signs on US-322 between State College and Lewistown on Friday.
Maybe they came down Friday night or some districts  following through when others aren't. Was on 95 in Philly again tonight and all the covid signs are still gone. I think all are now time to locations.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: rickmastfan67 on February 23, 2021, 11:16:34 PM
Quote from: ARMOURERERIC on February 19, 2021, 04:18:45 PM
The I-79 project sees to be a move to capitalize on Southern Beltway future shunpikers.

Just heard on the news is that it's suppose to help fund 3-laning I-79 there.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: MASTERNC on February 24, 2021, 08:39:31 PM
Quote from: rickmastfan67 on February 23, 2021, 11:16:34 PM
Quote from: ARMOURERERIC on February 19, 2021, 04:18:45 PM
The I-79 project sees to be a move to capitalize on Southern Beltway future shunpikers.

Just heard on the news is that it's suppose to help fund 3-laning I-79 there.

I just don't see the need right now - there is no congestion on 79 in that area.  The congestion is on the intersecting roadway because of all the exiting traffic and a T intersection just beyond the interchange that leads to two-lane roads.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on February 25, 2021, 10:04:08 AM
PennDOT: Potters Mills Work to Resume March 1 (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1912)

This work is specifically for the old US 322 alignment (SR 2015).

And for more US 322 construction:

PennDOT:  Work to Start Wednesday on Route 322 Near Philipsburg (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1913)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Bitmapped on February 25, 2021, 04:38:50 PM
Quote from: MASTERNC on February 24, 2021, 08:39:31 PM
Quote from: rickmastfan67 on February 23, 2021, 11:16:34 PM
Quote from: ARMOURERERIC on February 19, 2021, 04:18:45 PM
The I-79 project sees to be a move to capitalize on Southern Beltway future shunpikers.

Just heard on the news is that it's suppose to help fund 3-laning I-79 there.

I just don't see the need right now - there is no congestion on 79 in that area.  The congestion is on the intersecting roadway because of all the exiting traffic and a T intersection just beyond the interchange that leads to two-lane roads.

I-79 is relatively busy in general, often with restricted passing opportunities in the 2-lane part south of Bridgeville. It is congested at rush hour.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on March 01, 2021, 02:26:31 PM
PennDOT Announces Virtual Plans Display for Interstate 80 - North Fork Bridges Project, Jefferson County (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=931)

Comments will be accepted until March 22, 2021.  The big note here is that I-80 EB will be realigned to parallel the new I-80 WB bridge.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jemacedo9 on March 01, 2021, 04:20:57 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on March 01, 2021, 02:26:31 PM
PennDOT Announces Virtual Plans Display for Interstate 80 - North Fork Bridges Project, Jefferson County (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=931)

Comments will be accepted until March 22, 2021.  The big note here is that I-80 EB will be realigned to parallel the new I-80 WB bridge.
...which solves the construction staging problem...the same thing was done on the Susquehanna River East Branch crossing...build the EB structure on a new alignment, switch WB to to the new structure and rebuild the WB structure, then place both directions on the new structures and then demolish the old EB structure.  (I think the Susq crossing was the switched opposite of this.)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Alps on March 01, 2021, 06:30:21 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on March 01, 2021, 02:26:31 PM
PennDOT Announces Virtual Plans Display for Interstate 80 - North Fork Bridges Project, Jefferson County (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=931)

Comments will be accepted until March 22, 2021.  The big note here is that I-80 EB will be realigned to parallel the new I-80 WB bridge.
But the big question: will it be tolled.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on March 01, 2021, 10:05:34 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on March 01, 2021, 02:26:31 PM
PennDOT Announces Virtual Plans Display for Interstate 80 - North Fork Bridges Project, Jefferson County (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=931)

Comments will be accepted until March 22, 2021.  The big note here is that I-80 EB will be realigned to parallel the new I-80 WB bridge.

The bridges look to be wide enough for three lanes each way!
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on March 02, 2021, 12:27:58 PM
Update from PennDOT on I-83 at PA 851 (Exit 4): Beam Setting Planned on I-83 Bridge Over Route 851 at Exit 4 in Southern York County (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1321)

And a US 22 bridge replacement near Fredericksburg: Bridge Replacement Project Scheduled on Route 22 (William Penn Highway) Over Beach Run in Bethel Township, Lebanon County (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1322)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Bitmapped on March 02, 2021, 08:00:34 PM
Quote from: Roadsguy on March 01, 2021, 10:05:34 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on March 01, 2021, 02:26:31 PM
PennDOT Announces Virtual Plans Display for Interstate 80 - North Fork Bridges Project, Jefferson County (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=931)

Comments will be accepted until March 22, 2021.  The big note here is that I-80 EB will be realigned to parallel the new I-80 WB bridge.

The bridges look to be wide enough for three lanes each way!

The proposed bridges do have a 27-foot inside shoulder, but I suspect this is more with the idea of supporting future climbing lanes here than with the thought that I-80 is going to be 6-laned across Pennsylvania.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on March 05, 2021, 03:04:19 PM
PennDOT Update on US 15 south of Dillsburg: Project on Route 15 in Adams and York Counties to Begin Sunday Night (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1326)

Of note here is a new jughandle on US 15 at County Line Road.  I am unsure if this is the project where a bunch of crossovers were planned to be closed. 
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on March 06, 2021, 11:40:36 AM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on March 05, 2021, 03:04:19 PM
PennDOT Update on US 15 south of Dillsburg: Project on Route 15 in Adams and York Counties to Begin Sunday Night (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1326)

Of note here is a new jughandle on US 15 at County Line Road.  I am unsure if this is the project where a bunch of crossovers were planned to be closed.

This is that project; I just checked the plans on ECMS. All intersections on the at-grade expressway section between York Springs and Dillsburg will be converted to superstreet intersections or just plain RIROs, and the accel/decel lanes at the PA 94 interchange will be lengthened on the north side (not the south side, though, because they won't be widening the bridge over PA 94).
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: sbeaver44 on March 07, 2021, 01:08:56 PM
Quote from: Roadsguy on March 06, 2021, 11:40:36 AM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on March 05, 2021, 03:04:19 PM
PennDOT Update on US 15 south of Dillsburg: Project on Route 15 in Adams and York Counties to Begin Sunday Night (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1326)

Of note here is a new jughandle on US 15 at County Line Road.  I am unsure if this is the project where a bunch of crossovers were planned to be closed.

This is that project; I just checked the plans on ECMS. All intersections on the at-grade expressway section between York Springs and Dillsburg will be converted to superstreet intersections or just plain RIROs, and the accel/decel lanes at the PA 94 interchange will be lengthened on the north side (not the south side, though, because they won't be widening the bridge over PA 94).
And still I'm sure PennDOT wouldn't up the speed limit from 55.  I still think these are good safety improvements.  Maybe this is a time to test a 60 zone.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Ketchup99 on March 07, 2021, 05:41:46 PM
The Legislature would have to approve it if the limit were to exceed 55.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: NE2 on March 09, 2021, 12:24:43 PM
Does anyone know anything about potential traffic route numbers in the 1930s for every legislative route added during the Depression? They show up on most of the 1940 census maps, for example http://catalog.archives.gov/id/5838518 ; this one is special because somehow PA 438 west of Ligonier found its way onto the 1941 county map (and so did PA 173 to the east):
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FVIPGIrV.png&hash=ae03a1b9ceaaedb904ffd1fa5e1eb7ce05a7b7ec)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on March 09, 2021, 10:45:40 PM
What is up with US 222 in Lancaster? Why does it not continue along Queen Street in Downtown? I noticed it turns NE on Church Street and then north four blocks east. Thus along PA 462 you have quite a distance between the two alignments of US 222.

It must be the widest one way couplets in the nation's road system.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jemacedo9 on March 10, 2021, 11:38:52 AM
PennDOT posted to their Facebook feed that the Variable Speed Limit signs will be turned on "in the next few weeks" with a PSA from the State Police stating the signs will be enforceable.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on March 10, 2021, 01:00:18 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on March 09, 2021, 10:45:40 PM
What is up with US 222 in Lancaster? Why does it not continue along Queen Street in Downtown? I noticed it turns NE on Church Street and then north four blocks east. Thus along PA 462 you have quite a distance between the two alignments of US 222.

It must be the widest one way couplets in the nation's road system.

It's just a consequence of the way the street grid connects. 222 from the south logically feeds into Prince and Queen Streets, and from the north it feeds into Duke and Lime Streets. The northbound routing makes sense; it's southbound jogging all the way over to Prince Street that's weird, especially since it cuts off southbound PA 72 to end on the north side of town, while northbound 72 begins on the south side. This means PA 72 exists only in the northbound direction on Queen Street in downtown Lancaster.

This can't easily be avoided, though, because Duke Street doesn't have a good connection over to Prince Street. Northbound 222 uses the diagonal Church Street, which is plenty wide enough to sacrifice a parking lane to allow for two through lanes in each direction. If the diagonal section of the street grid extended just one block further to Prince Street, that would be the best routing of southbound 222.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on March 10, 2021, 01:22:29 PM
Quote from: jemacedo9 on March 10, 2021, 11:38:52 AM
PennDOT posted to their Facebook feed that the Variable Speed Limit signs will be turned on "in the next few weeks" with a PSA from the State Police stating the signs will be enforceable.

I just looked on it, and I did not see anything.  I guess you are referring to I-76 on the Schuylkill Expressway.

Anyway, an update on PA 283 at PA 722 (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1329).
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jemacedo9 on March 10, 2021, 02:53:32 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on March 10, 2021, 01:22:29 PM
Quote from: jemacedo9 on March 10, 2021, 11:38:52 AM
PennDOT posted to their Facebook feed that the Variable Speed Limit signs will be turned on "in the next few weeks" with a PSA from the State Police stating the signs will be enforceable.

I just looked on it, and I did not see anything.  I guess you are referring to I-76 on the Schuylkill Expressway.

I meant to add that, yes...I-76 Schuylkill Expressway (US 202 to City Ave US 1).

My FB notification came from Greater Philly Area PennDOT...but the post appears to have come from the PennDOT page directly.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jeffandnicole on March 10, 2021, 03:11:38 PM
Quote from: jemacedo9 on March 10, 2021, 11:38:52 AM
PennDOT posted to their Facebook feed that the Variable Speed Limit signs will be turned on "in the next few weeks" with a PSA from the State Police stating the signs will be enforceable.

Was the person in charge of writing that PSA laughing at the time?

The shoulders along much of the Schuylkill Expressway are substandard.  It makes it incredibly tough for any actual enforcement to take place when a traffic stop involves the cop car encroaching on a travel lane and the suspect car encroaching on a travel lane.  And it will almost guarantee that it will further increase the traffic jam back, when the reduced limit would've been the reason the cop is pulling over the person in the first place.

It's possible to do 80 on the Schuylkill...on a Sunday morning at 6am.  Outside of that, it's tough to really do too much speed to begin with; especially anything significant enough to warrant being pulled over.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: famartin on March 10, 2021, 05:30:51 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on March 10, 2021, 03:11:38 PM
Quote from: jemacedo9 on March 10, 2021, 11:38:52 AM
PennDOT posted to their Facebook feed that the Variable Speed Limit signs will be turned on "in the next few weeks" with a PSA from the State Police stating the signs will be enforceable.

Was the person in charge of writing that PSA laughing at the time?

The shoulders along much of the Schuylkill Expressway are substandard.  It makes it incredibly tough for any actual enforcement to take place when a traffic stop involves the cop car encroaching on a travel lane and the suspect car encroaching on a travel lane.  And it will almost guarantee that it will further increase the traffic jam back, when the reduced limit would've been the reason the cop is pulling over the person in the first place.

It's possible to do 80 on the Schuylkill...on a Sunday morning at 6am.  Outside of that, it's tough to really do too much speed to begin with; especially anything significant enough to warrant being pulled over.

Gotta admit, based on what I routinely see on I-95 thru Philly, the idea of any serious limit enforcement seems like a fantasy or a joke.  People scream past me routinely even when I'm 10 over the limit.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jeffandnicole on March 10, 2021, 06:36:46 PM
Quote from: famartin on March 10, 2021, 05:30:51 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on March 10, 2021, 03:11:38 PM
Quote from: jemacedo9 on March 10, 2021, 11:38:52 AM
PennDOT posted to their Facebook feed that the Variable Speed Limit signs will be turned on "in the next few weeks" with a PSA from the State Police stating the signs will be enforceable.

Was the person in charge of writing that PSA laughing at the time?

The shoulders along much of the Schuylkill Expressway are substandard.  It makes it incredibly tough for any actual enforcement to take place when a traffic stop involves the cop car encroaching on a travel lane and the suspect car encroaching on a travel lane.  And it will almost guarantee that it will further increase the traffic jam back, when the reduced limit would've been the reason the cop is pulling over the person in the first place.

It's possible to do 80 on the Schuylkill...on a Sunday morning at 6am.  Outside of that, it's tough to really do too much speed to begin with; especially anything significant enough to warrant being pulled over.

Gotta admit, based on what I routinely see on I-95 thru Philly, the idea of any serious limit enforcement seems like a fantasy or a joke.  People scream past me routinely even when I'm 10 over the limit.

Yeah...at 65 mph, that's slow on 95.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on March 10, 2021, 06:50:40 PM
Update on US 202 in Norristown: Markley Street Traffic Shift Thursday Marks Completion of New Northbound Bridge Over Stony Creek in Norristown (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=6489)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on March 11, 2021, 12:35:12 AM
Quote from: Roadsguy on March 10, 2021, 01:00:18 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on March 09, 2021, 10:45:40 PM
What is up with US 222 in Lancaster? Why does it not continue along Queen Street in Downtown? I noticed it turns NE on Church Street and then north four blocks east. Thus along PA 462 you have quite a distance between the two alignments of US 222.

It must be the widest one way couplets in the nation's road system.

It's just a consequence of the way the street grid connects. 222 from the south logically feeds into Prince and Queen Streets, and from the north it feeds into Duke and Lime Streets. The northbound routing makes sense; it's southbound jogging all the way over to Prince Street that's weird, especially since it cuts off southbound PA 72 to end on the north side of town, while northbound 72 begins on the south side. This means PA 72 exists only in the northbound direction on Queen Street in downtown Lancaster.

This can't easily be avoided, though, because Duke Street doesn't have a good connection over to Prince Street. Northbound 222 uses the diagonal Church Street, which is plenty wide enough to sacrifice a parking lane to allow for two through lanes in each direction. If the diagonal section of the street grid extended just one block further to Prince Street, that would be the best routing of southbound 222.


Another weird one is EB PA 462 and EB PA 23 being on separate alignments while Westbound they both share a concurrency.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on March 11, 2021, 10:58:58 AM
PennDOT announces update on PA 228:  Prep Work to begin on State Route 228 from Route 8 to Officer Edward Brooks Drive, Middlesex Township, Butler County (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=935)

Also PennDOT Announces New Scenic Byway Designation for the Brandywine Valley Scenic Byway (https://www.penndot.gov/pages/all-news-details.aspx?newsid=825)

Third on US 220 Safety Improvements between PA 287 and Williamsport (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=3408).

Fourth: PennDOT Announces Virtual Plans Display for State Route 3020 Powell to Haine School Improvement project in Cranberry Township, Butler County (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=936)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on March 11, 2021, 07:59:06 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on March 11, 2021, 12:35:12 AM
Quote from: Roadsguy on March 10, 2021, 01:00:18 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on March 09, 2021, 10:45:40 PM
What is up with US 222 in Lancaster? Why does it not continue along Queen Street in Downtown? I noticed it turns NE on Church Street and then north four blocks east. Thus along PA 462 you have quite a distance between the two alignments of US 222.

It must be the widest one way couplets in the nation's road system.

It's just a consequence of the way the street grid connects. 222 from the south logically feeds into Prince and Queen Streets, and from the north it feeds into Duke and Lime Streets. The northbound routing makes sense; it's southbound jogging all the way over to Prince Street that's weird, especially since it cuts off southbound PA 72 to end on the north side of town, while northbound 72 begins on the south side. This means PA 72 exists only in the northbound direction on Queen Street in downtown Lancaster.

This can't easily be avoided, though, because Duke Street doesn't have a good connection over to Prince Street. Northbound 222 uses the diagonal Church Street, which is plenty wide enough to sacrifice a parking lane to allow for two through lanes in each direction. If the diagonal section of the street grid extended just one block further to Prince Street, that would be the best routing of southbound 222.


Another weird one is EB PA 462 and EB PA 23 being on separate alignments while Westbound they both share a concurrency.

Yeah, that one I have no idea why they did. It seems like a completely arbitrary decision since Orange Street would provide a continuous route for westbound 462, compared to the actual routing following Walnut Street all the way to Race Avenue, which isn't signed very well because Walnut and Chestnut Streets are maintained by the city of Lancaster, not by PennDOT like King, Orange, and all four major north-south streets are.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jemacedo9 on March 12, 2021, 08:26:23 AM
Quote from: NE2 on March 09, 2021, 12:24:43 PM
Does anyone know anything about potential traffic route numbers in the 1930s for every legislative route added during the Depression? They show up on most of the 1940 census maps, for example http://catalog.archives.gov/id/5838518 ; this one is special because somehow PA 438 west of Ligonier found its way onto the 1941 county map (and so did PA 173 to the east):
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FVIPGIrV.png&hash=ae03a1b9ceaaedb904ffd1fa5e1eb7ce05a7b7ec)

I've always wondered that.  PA had a pretty good numbering parent-child-spur numbering system, but it seemed like somewhere along the way a bunch of new routes were added with numbers that seemed arbitrary.  Some examples off the top of my head that maybe fit this or maybe not:
Chester County - PA 345
Berks County - PA 419, PA 568, PA 737, PA 645
York County - PA 382, PA 392, PA 177, PA 262, PA 425
Erie County - PA 531
Indiana County - PA 259
Lackawanna County - PA 632, PA 438, PA 524, PA 348


Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on March 12, 2021, 12:02:54 PM
From District 6: PennDOT to Begin Project to Widen and Improve 1.5 Miles of U.S. 1 in Bensalem, Middletown Townships, Bucks County (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=6497)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Crown Victoria on March 12, 2021, 11:09:35 PM
A commission has been organized to study the future of PA's transportation funding, including eliminating the gas tax (yes you read that correctly):

https://www.pennlive.com/news/2021/03/gov-tom-wolf-proposes-phasing-out-pennsylvanias-gasoline-tax.html
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: vdeane on March 12, 2021, 11:23:49 PM
Yeesh.  I hate user fees.  The great thing about the gas tax is that it's (mostly) invisible.

This is why it should be illegal for states to divert gas tax revenue for other purposes.  Of the listed diversions, the only one that could possibly be legitimate is the one to local governments - and even then, only if it's in a fund specifically for road/bridge projects, similar to NY's CHIPS program.  The toll roads around Pittsburgh are part of the Turnpike and should be funded as such, and the other diversions aren't even related to the gas tax's purpose of building/maintaining the highway system.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Crown Victoria on March 15, 2021, 10:13:04 AM
Quote from: vdeane on March 12, 2021, 11:23:49 PM
Yeesh.  I hate user fees.  The great thing about the gas tax is that it's (mostly) invisible.

This is why it should be illegal for states to divert gas tax revenue for other purposes.  Of the listed diversions, the only one that could possibly be legitimate is the one to local governments - and even then, only if it's in a fund specifically for road/bridge projects, similar to NY's CHIPS program.  The toll roads around Pittsburgh are part of the Turnpike and should be funded as such, and the other diversions aren't even related to the gas tax's purpose of building/maintaining the highway system.

The diversion of fuel tax revenue to the state police is probably the most controversial of those items listed. Annual amounts have been in excess of $800 million in the past (and currently in the upper $600 millions I believe), but are now (slowly) being reduced to $500 million/yr. While not nearly enough to address PennDOT's funding issues, that's still a lot of money, probably enough to, say, begin widening I-81, for instance.

The problem here is that, in order to fully restore all fuel tax revenues to PennDOT, other sources of funding would need to be found. When you combine this with Act 44's diversions from the Turnpike that are set to be reduced by $400 million next year, that leaves a hole in the budget of over $1 billion that would be tough to fill, considering that the Legislature would have to either raise taxes or reduce/divert other spending.

And, of course, restoring fuel tax revenue to PennDOT is only a temporary fix, as that money itself is slowly declining...

I should also note that fuel tax revenue in PA is constitutionally protected...but, as "safety" is included in the allowable uses for said revenue, this ostensibly allows the diversion of funds to the State Police.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Ketchup99 on March 15, 2021, 11:48:19 AM
One thing that occurred to me driving back from New York on Saturday morning is that the 70 zones on I-80 seem to be kind of arbitrary.

Between I-380 and the Luzerne-Columbia line, why can't it be 70 and not 65? It seems like an identical roadway in every respect, including traffic volume, interchange spacing, the whole nine yards.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on March 17, 2021, 03:02:14 PM
The I-80/PA 26 Interchange work resumes next week. (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1920)  (I quoted the article from the email I received because the PennDOT website is currently down.) EDIT: Link was added at 3:18 PM.

QuotePennDOT - District 2 News
Local Interchange Project Work Resumes Next Week

The Pennsylvania Department of Transportation (PennDOT) is alerting area motorists that work will resume next week on its Local Interchange/Route 26 project in Centre County. The work zone is located along I-80 near the Bellefonte/161 interchange and work to build the local interchange can affect traffic flow on Interstate 80.

This year, motorists will use a crossover taking one lane of traffic from I-80 westbound to I-80 eastbound. The lane configuration through the work zone will be three lanes on eastbound and one remaining on westbound. To prepare for opening of the crossovers there will be some preliminary work taking place.

During the week of March 22, lane closures will be used to complete cross-pipe work on I-80 westbound. The right lane will be closed for a period of 2-3 days followed by the left lane for a period of 2-3 days. Additionally, there will be a right lane closure on I-80 eastbound for 2-3 days to complete shoulder repair.

Work on this project is in accordance with Centers for Disease Control and state Department of Health guidance as well as a project-specific COVID-19 safety plan. The plan includes protocols for social distancing, use of face coverings, personal and job site cleaning protocols, management of entries to the job site and relevant training.

Work this season will include completion of basin construction in the median, completion of norther ramps, full depth reconstruction of I-80 westbound bridge piers and northern abutment, and construction of the connector road between I-80 and Route 26.

The I-80/Route 26 local interchange project is east of Bellefonte and is part of a long-awaited safety-improvement in Centre County. HRI, Inc. of State College is the contractor on this $52 million project. Up-to-date information can be found on the project page at www.penndot.gov/SR26Localinterchange
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jemacedo9 on March 17, 2021, 05:04:36 PM
Quote from: Ketchup99 on March 15, 2021, 11:48:19 AM
One thing that occurred to me driving back from New York on Saturday morning is that the 70 zones on I-80 seem to be kind of arbitrary.

Between I-380 and the Luzerne-Columbia line, why can't it be 70 and not 65? It seems like an identical roadway in every respect, including traffic volume, interchange spacing, the whole nine yards.

My guess has been that there are a couple of sharp downhill curves with 45MPH advisory speeds and truck rollover warning signs...one between the PA 940/I-476 Exit and the PA 534 exit, and another west of the PA 93 exits. So instead of raising and lowering between 65 and 70, PennDOT kept it at 65 until you clear the westernmost curve. 

That bridge just after the curve west of PA 93 is one of the proposed bridge tolls.  The bridge deck is a quilted mess...and the shunpike route is very inconvenient.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: rickmastfan67 on March 17, 2021, 07:49:25 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on March 17, 2021, 03:02:14 PM
The lane configuration through the work zone will be three lanes on eastbound and one remaining on westbound.

This can't be right, can it?  3 lanes EB???
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Alps on March 17, 2021, 08:00:00 PM
Quote from: rickmastfan67 on March 17, 2021, 07:49:25 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on March 17, 2021, 03:02:14 PM
The lane configuration through the work zone will be three lanes on eastbound and one remaining on westbound.

This can't be right, can it?  3 lanes EB???
I think that means 2 EB and 1 WB on the eastbound roadway.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: rickmastfan67 on March 17, 2021, 08:56:12 PM
Quote from: Alps on March 17, 2021, 08:00:00 PM
Quote from: rickmastfan67 on March 17, 2021, 07:49:25 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on March 17, 2021, 03:02:14 PM
The lane configuration through the work zone will be three lanes on eastbound and one remaining on westbound.

This can't be right, can it?  3 lanes EB???
I think that means 2 EB and 1 WB on the eastbound roadway.

Now that I've reread it again, yeah, that must be it.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: MASTERNC on March 18, 2021, 07:44:09 PM
Quote from: Alps on March 17, 2021, 08:00:00 PM
Quote from: rickmastfan67 on March 17, 2021, 07:49:25 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on March 17, 2021, 03:02:14 PM
The lane configuration through the work zone will be three lanes on eastbound and one remaining on westbound.

This can't be right, can it?  3 lanes EB???
I think that means 2 EB and 1 WB on the eastbound roadway.
Quote from: rickmastfan67 on March 17, 2021, 08:56:12 PM
Quote from: Alps on March 17, 2021, 08:00:00 PM
Quote from: rickmastfan67 on March 17, 2021, 07:49:25 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on March 17, 2021, 03:02:14 PM
The lane configuration through the work zone will be three lanes on eastbound and one remaining on westbound.

This can't be right, can it?  3 lanes EB???
I think that means 2 EB and 1 WB on the eastbound roadway.

Now that I've reread it again, yeah, that must be it.

They should have called it the Express Lane setup or a split traffic pattern.  The wording was definitely confusing at first read.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on March 19, 2021, 10:35:32 AM
PennDOT: Wolf Administration Announces Project to Reconstruct Seven Miles of Interstate 90, Replace Four Bridges in Erie County (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1422)

Note that a hit from an oversized load made an early removal of the PA 215 bridge necessary.

Also for US 20:  PennDOT Announces Virtual Plans Display for Route 20 Project in City of Erie and Millcreek Township, Erie County (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1423)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: NE2 on March 22, 2021, 01:09:46 PM
Quote from: NE2 on March 09, 2021, 12:24:43 PM
Does anyone know anything about potential traffic route numbers in the 1930s for every legislative route added during the Depression?
They also turn up occasionally in state laws:
http://books.google.com/books?id=AaxKAQAAMAAJ&focus=searchwithinvolume&q=%22traffic+route+275%22 http://catalog.archives.gov/id/5838089
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on March 23, 2021, 10:58:16 AM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on February 19, 2021, 03:24:13 PM
Specific I-83 South Bridge Update: PennDOT Hosting On-Demand Virtual Public Meeting for I-83 South Bridge Project (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1312)

I-83 South Bridge Update: Reminder: I-83 South Bridge Virtual Public Meeting/Comment Period Ends March 29 (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1337)

Upcoming closure on PA 352:  (Route 352) Edgmont Avenue over I-95 to Close for Several Months for Bridge Rehabilitation in the City of Chester (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=6531)

I guess the detour for PA 352 proves that the signage for the US 13 changes approved by AASHTO recently have not been done yet.

Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ekt8750 on March 23, 2021, 11:06:13 AM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on March 23, 2021, 10:58:16 AM
guess the detour for PA 352 proves that the signage for the US 13 changes approved by AASHTO recently have not been done yet.

I must have missed something. How is 13 getting realigned?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on March 23, 2021, 11:19:14 AM
Quote from: ekt8750 on March 23, 2021, 11:06:13 AM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on March 23, 2021, 10:58:16 AM
guess the detour for PA 352 proves that the signage for the US 13 changes approved by AASHTO recently have not been done yet.

I must have missed something. How is 13 getting realigned?

See here:  https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=27090.msg2562670#msg2562670

Basically, US 13 is being realigned onto PA 291 and Morton Ave.  The current US 13 alignment will become US 13 Business.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ekt8750 on March 23, 2021, 11:42:22 AM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on March 23, 2021, 11:19:14 AM
Quote from: ekt8750 on March 23, 2021, 11:06:13 AM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on March 23, 2021, 10:58:16 AM
guess the detour for PA 352 proves that the signage for the US 13 changes approved by AASHTO recently have not been done yet.

I must have missed something. How is 13 getting realigned?

See here:  https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=27090.msg2562670#msg2562670

Basically, US 13 is being realigned onto PA 291 and Morton Ave.  The current US 13 alignment will become US 13 Business.

Makes perfect sense. That's usually the route I take through Chester to begin with. Also 13 is poorly signed in the city to begin with so that will be an added benefit.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jemacedo9 on March 23, 2021, 01:01:34 PM
Quote from: ekt8750 on March 23, 2021, 11:42:22 AM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on March 23, 2021, 11:19:14 AM
Quote from: ekt8750 on March 23, 2021, 11:06:13 AM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on March 23, 2021, 10:58:16 AM
guess the detour for PA 352 proves that the signage for the US 13 changes approved by AASHTO recently have not been done yet.


I must have missed something. How is 13 getting realigned?


See here:  https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=27090.msg2562670#msg2562670

Basically, US 13 is being realigned onto PA 291 and Morton Ave.  The current US 13 alignment will become US 13 Business.

Makes perfect sense. That's usually the route I take through Chester to begin with. Also 13 is poorly signed in the city to begin with so that will be an added benefit.
Wasn't Morton Ave lowered under the underpass there to remove the low clearance?  I think that opened the door for the re-route.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on March 23, 2021, 01:24:06 PM
Clarifying jemacedo9's post was "Wasn't Morton Ave lowered under the underpass there to remove the low clearance?  I think that opened the door for the re-route."

It sounds like you are referring to this project (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1501).

QuoteCrews are reconstructing curbs and sidewalks; milling and resurfacing the streets; installing new traffic signals; and reconstructing Morton Avenue from 7th Street to 4th Street to lower the road under the Amtrak overpass to increase vertical clearance from 12 feet 9 inches to 13 feet 9 inches.   
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jemacedo9 on March 23, 2021, 03:38:46 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on March 23, 2021, 01:24:06 PM
Clarifying jemacedo9's post was "Wasn't Morton Ave lowered under the underpass there to remove the low clearance?  I think that opened the door for the re-route."

It sounds like you are referring to this project (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1501).

QuoteCrews are reconstructing curbs and sidewalks; milling and resurfacing the streets; installing new traffic signals; and reconstructing Morton Avenue from 7th Street to 4th Street to lower the road under the Amtrak overpass to increase vertical clearance from 12 feet 9 inches to 13 feet 9 inches.   

Yes (and I fixed the quote tags above).
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on March 23, 2021, 05:01:12 PM
PennDOT District 2 is reporting a crash closing all lanes of US 322 on the east end of the State College Bypass (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1923).
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: sbeaver44 on March 23, 2021, 07:30:03 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on March 23, 2021, 11:19:14 AM
Quote from: ekt8750 on March 23, 2021, 11:06:13 AM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on March 23, 2021, 10:58:16 AM
guess the detour for PA 352 proves that the signage for the US 13 changes approved by AASHTO recently have not been done yet.

I must have missed something. How is 13 getting realigned?

See here:  https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=27090.msg2562670#msg2562670

Basically, US 13 is being realigned onto PA 291 and Morton Ave.  The current US 13 alignment will become US 13 Business.
Ahhh man I gotta go back and re-clinch US 13 in PA again
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on March 24, 2021, 06:58:17 AM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on March 23, 2021, 05:01:12 PM
PennDOT District 2 is reporting a crash closing all lanes of US 322 on the east end of the State College Bypass (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1923).

US 322 has reopened. (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1924)

Also in relation to I-90 at PA 215: Interstate 90 Ramps for Route 215 in Erie County to be Closed (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1426)

Update on PA 8 north of I-80: Work to Start Soon on the Second Year of the Route 8 Reconstruction Project in Venango County (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1427)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: MASTERNC on March 25, 2021, 02:01:51 PM
Nice of PennDOT to permit closure of a detour route around the SR 320 Hanging Rock project.

https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=6535 (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=6535)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on March 26, 2021, 10:53:54 AM
Quote from: MASTERNC on March 18, 2021, 07:44:09 PM
Quote from: Alps on March 17, 2021, 08:00:00 PM
Quote from: rickmastfan67 on March 17, 2021, 07:49:25 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on March 17, 2021, 03:02:14 PM
The lane configuration through the work zone will be three lanes on eastbound and one remaining on westbound.

This can't be right, can it?  3 lanes EB???
I think that means 2 EB and 1 WB on the eastbound roadway.
Quote from: rickmastfan67 on March 17, 2021, 08:56:12 PM
Quote from: Alps on March 17, 2021, 08:00:00 PM
Quote from: rickmastfan67 on March 17, 2021, 07:49:25 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on March 17, 2021, 03:02:14 PM
The lane configuration through the work zone will be three lanes on eastbound and one remaining on westbound.

This can't be right, can it?  3 lanes EB???
I think that means 2 EB and 1 WB on the eastbound roadway.

Now that I've reread it again, yeah, that must be it.

They should have called it the Express Lane setup or a split traffic pattern.  The wording was definitely confusing at first read.

Hopefully this link makes it clearer.  (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1927)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Crown Victoria on March 26, 2021, 11:28:20 AM
The PA Transportation Revenue Options Commission (T-ROC) met for the first time yesterday. A final report is due August 1 of this year.

Potential revenue options discussed initially include doubling registration fees, a vehicle sales tax (presumably in addition to the sales tax already collected), electric car fees, mileage taxes, statewide tolling of Interstates, and congestion pricing.

https://www.pennlive.com/news/2021/03/panel-begins-work-on-finding-new-ways-to-pay-for-pas-transportation-needs.html
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on March 26, 2021, 02:07:15 PM
PennDOT District 1:  Route 6 Closed in Crawford County (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1429) 

And here is the wind damage.

Also from District 6 on US 202: Morris Road to Close Beginning April 12 for Construction in Whitpain Township (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=6545)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on March 31, 2021, 12:47:38 AM
https://goo.gl/maps/V1Z9vrhdCzYF4K8u9
Love here how both freeways are I-70 above and below, but to get from one to the other is over a mile of driving between the two.

PS Love I am sarcastic.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on March 31, 2021, 02:03:46 PM
Upcoming closure on PA 320:  PECO to Close Route 320 (Sproul Road) Beginning April 14 for Utility Improvement in Marple Township (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=6556)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: MASTERNC on March 31, 2021, 02:49:16 PM
Sounds like PennDOT is redoing bridge decks on I-79 north of the Ohio River in Pittsburgh.  Thought that stretch was done (bridges included) not that long ago.  Understand repaving but the bridges are a surprise.

https://www.post-gazette.com/news/transportation/2021/03/31/Pennsylvania-Department-of-Transportation-Allegheny-County-Beaver-County-Lawrence-County-road-projects-summer-schedule/stories/202103310075 (https://www.post-gazette.com/news/transportation/2021/03/31/Pennsylvania-Department-of-Transportation-Allegheny-County-Beaver-County-Lawrence-County-road-projects-summer-schedule/stories/202103310075)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jemacedo9 on March 31, 2021, 02:59:44 PM
https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-9/pages/details.aspx?newsid=904 (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-9/pages/details.aspx?newsid=904)

QuoteWork to Begin on the Route 219 Meyersdale Bypass to Berlin Preservation Project

QuoteOverall work will consist of 4.4 miles of pavement preservation, bridge preservation, and safety enhancements to the existing four-lane facility. Concrete patching and overlay will take place on the four-lane roadways, a small portion of two-lane roadway will also be milled and overlayed.

Is this referring to the old US 219 routing between Berlin and Meyesrdale...of which I don't think there is a 4-lane section?
Or is this referring to the new US 219 freeway that shouldn't need any preservation as it is less than 5 years old?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Mr_Northside on March 31, 2021, 04:18:48 PM
Quote from: jemacedo9 on March 31, 2021, 02:59:44 PM
https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-9/pages/details.aspx?newsid=904 (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-9/pages/details.aspx?newsid=904)

Is this referring to the old US 219 routing between Berlin and Meyesrdale...of which I don't think there is a 4-lane section?
Or is this referring to the new US 219 freeway that shouldn't need any preservation as it is less than 5 years old?

I suspect that this project must include at least part of the Meyersdale bypass, given I don't know that the 2-lane old route has any concrete, and the article also mentions putting cable barrier in the median.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on March 31, 2021, 04:30:00 PM
Quote from: Mr_Northside on March 31, 2021, 04:18:48 PM
Quote from: jemacedo9 on March 31, 2021, 02:59:44 PM
https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-9/pages/details.aspx?newsid=904 (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-9/pages/details.aspx?newsid=904)

Is this referring to the old US 219 routing between Berlin and Meyesrdale...of which I don't think there is a 4-lane section?
Or is this referring to the new US 219 freeway that shouldn't need any preservation as it is less than 5 years old?

I suspect that this project must include at least part of the Meyersdale bypass, given I don't know that the 2-lane old route has any concrete, and the article also mentions putting cable barrier in the median.

It comes off as referring to the new four-lane portion...
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: BrianP on March 31, 2021, 06:45:27 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on March 31, 2021, 04:30:00 PM
Quote from: Mr_Northside on March 31, 2021, 04:18:48 PM
Quote from: jemacedo9 on March 31, 2021, 02:59:44 PM
https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-9/pages/details.aspx?newsid=904 (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-9/pages/details.aspx?newsid=904)

Is this referring to the old US 219 routing between Berlin and Meyesrdale...of which I don't think there is a 4-lane section?
Or is this referring to the new US 219 freeway that shouldn't need any preservation as it is less than 5 years old?

I suspect that this project must include at least part of the Meyersdale bypass, given I don't know that the 2-lane old route has any concrete, and the article also mentions putting cable barrier in the median.

It comes off as referring to the new four-lane portion...
It is odd that they mention Berlin.  But the 4.4 miles they refer to seems to match up with the old Meyersdale bypass if you include the two lane part down to here  (https://goo.gl/maps/WWFuPbFe5Fj78As5A)where the full shoulders end.  And it's about there where the bypass would meet the old road.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on April 01, 2021, 04:25:56 PM
Well in regard to Old US 219 (SR 2047):  Work to Continue on Route 2047 (Berlin Plank Road) and 3021 (Plank Road), Brotherton Road Berlin/Somerset Interchange Project (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-9/pages/details.aspx?newsid=910)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jemacedo9 on April 01, 2021, 04:59:49 PM
Quote from: BrianP on March 31, 2021, 06:45:27 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on March 31, 2021, 04:30:00 PM
Quote from: Mr_Northside on March 31, 2021, 04:18:48 PM
Quote from: jemacedo9 on March 31, 2021, 02:59:44 PM
https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-9/pages/details.aspx?newsid=904 (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-9/pages/details.aspx?newsid=904)

Is this referring to the old US 219 routing between Berlin and Meyesrdale...of which I don't think there is a 4-lane section?
Or is this referring to the new US 219 freeway that shouldn't need any preservation as it is less than 5 years old?

I suspect that this project must include at least part of the Meyersdale bypass, given I don't know that the 2-lane old route has any concrete, and the article also mentions putting cable barrier in the median.

It comes off as referring to the new four-lane portion...
It is odd that they mention Berlin.  But the 4.4 miles they refer to seems to match up with the old Meyersdale bypass if you include the two lane part down to here  (https://goo.gl/maps/WWFuPbFe5Fj78As5A)where the full shoulders end.  And it's about there where the bypass would meet the old road.

That makes more sense...but agreed that mentioning Berlin is odd. 

But even there...is it already time for pavement rehab?  The Meyersdale Bypass is what...15 years old?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: sbeaver44 on April 01, 2021, 10:35:27 PM
Last night I drove all of PA 867, 868, and the section of PA 869 east of I-99 to clinch.   Going NB on 867, it takes a very odd route through Roaring Spring proper.  The turn from Sprang onto Main I missed partly because the 867 shield was missing for the left turn.  It is also a weird intersection and I couldn't tell which way the "left"  meant...and guessed wrong.   According to wiki, that is maintained by Roaring Spring Borough, not PennDOT.  And they could definitely have done a much better job with signage through the Borough.  I had to park and pull up Wiki + a map to figure out how it traversed the Borough.

Additionally, I feel like 868 would have been fine as a quadrant route. 

It's been a few years since I was on 869 west of I-99.  But I like the entire route.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Mr_Northside on April 02, 2021, 04:14:30 PM
Quote from: jemacedo9 on April 01, 2021, 04:59:49 PM
But even there...is it already time for pavement rehab?  The Meyersdale Bypass is what...15 years old?

I'm pretty sure it opened in 1998..... so I think it's going on 23 years now.

Fuck, I feel old as dirt.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on April 03, 2021, 05:14:43 PM
Quote from: sbeaver44 on April 01, 2021, 10:35:27 PM
Last night I drove all of PA 867, 868, and the section of PA 869 east of I-99 to clinch.   Going NB on 867, it takes a very odd route through Roaring Spring proper.  The turn from Sprang onto Main I missed partly because the 867 shield was missing for the left turn.  It is also a weird intersection and I couldn't tell which way the "left"  meant...and guessed wrong.   According to wiki, that is maintained by Roaring Spring Borough, not PennDOT.  And they could definitely have done a much better job with signage through the Borough.  I had to park and pull up Wiki + a map to figure out how it traversed the Borough.

Additionally, I feel like 868 would have been fine as a quadrant route. 

It's been a few years since I was on 869 west of I-99.  But I like the entire route.

I agree with you on PA 869.  It definitely has scenic value, and I think is one of the better mountain routes to drive in that area.  You even get practically an aerial view of I-99/US 220.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: noelbotevera on April 05, 2021, 04:17:30 PM
While fooling around Google Maps, I found this curiosity (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.1161542,-74.9848824,127m/data=!3m1!1e3). It is located on US 1 at the bleeding edge of the Philly city limits, near where US 1 turns into a freeway into New Jersey. The overpass is old - maybe 1960s or 1970s - and is located in the middle of a field. There does seem to be remnants of roads and parking lots to the north (towards the top) but any sort of access from this side is gated (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.1155716,-74.9895602,3a,75y,27.78h,81.74t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s0UzNTiwGzJuFibo-Z1qxmQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192).

Any story behind this?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Mr. Matté on April 05, 2021, 05:12:16 PM
Probably connected campuses of the former Philadelphia State Hospital at Byberry (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philadelphia_State_Hospital_at_Byberry) closed between 1987-1990
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: qguy on April 06, 2021, 06:32:25 AM
Quote from: Mr. Matté on April 05, 2021, 05:12:16 PM
Probably connected campuses of the former Philadelphia State Hospital at Byberry (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philadelphia_State_Hospital_at_Byberry) closed between 1987-1990

No probably's about it. That's exactly what that is. Three reasons for it's survival. It has remained in relatively good shape, it would be somewhat expensive to demolish, and the City of Philadelphia has toyed with the idea of using it as a pedestrian connection from the west side of US 1 to the east side where Benjamin Rush State Park is located.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on April 06, 2021, 01:24:27 PM
Update on PA 286 Widening in Indiana: Route 286 Oakland Avenue Traffic Pattern Changes Next Week in Indiana (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=947)

EDIT (4-7-2021):Update on I-70 at PA 51:  PennDOT Announces Virtual Plans Display for the Interstate 70 at SR 51 Interchange Improvement Project (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-12/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1573)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: noelbotevera on April 07, 2021, 02:58:14 PM
Quote from: qguy on April 06, 2021, 06:32:25 AM
Quote from: Mr. Matté on April 05, 2021, 05:12:16 PM
Probably connected campuses of the former Philadelphia State Hospital at Byberry (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philadelphia_State_Hospital_at_Byberry) closed between 1987-1990

No probably's about it. That's exactly what that is. Three reasons for it's survival. It has remained in relatively good shape, it would be somewhat expensive to demolish, and the City of Philadelphia has toyed with the idea of using it as a pedestrian connection from the west side of US 1 to the east side where Benjamin Rush State Park is located.
From what I can tell on the aerial view, it looks like there's plenty of room to build more parking for the state park. Unless there's utility tunnels from the Byberry era, I don't see much digging needed (or even if they have to dig that deep).

Also, that bridge looks mighty rusty.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on April 07, 2021, 03:03:38 PM
Update on PA 28 at the Highland Park Interchange: Route 28 Phase Change Begins this Week in Allegheny County (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-11/pages/details.aspx?newsid=5043)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jemacedo9 on April 08, 2021, 02:10:04 PM
I-76/Schuylkill Expwy Variable Speed Limit signs are now active.

Speeds will stay at 55MPH until 5/10 as part of a testing period.

https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=6578 (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=6578)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: snowc on April 08, 2021, 02:28:34 PM
Quote from: sbeaver44 on April 01, 2021, 10:35:27 PM
Last night I drove all of PA 867, 868, and the section of PA 869 east of I-99 to clinch.   Going NB on 867, it takes a very odd route through Roaring Spring proper.  The turn from Sprang onto Main I missed partly because the 867 shield was missing for the left turn.  It is also a weird intersection and I couldn't tell which way the "left"  meant...and guessed wrong.   According to wiki, that is maintained by Roaring Spring Borough, not PennDOT.  And they could definitely have done a much better job with signage through the Borough.  I had to park and pull up Wiki + a map to figure out how it traversed the Borough.

Additionally, I feel like 868 would have been fine as a quadrant route. 

It's been a few years since I was on 869 west of I-99.  But I like the entire route.
I just clinched I-99 when traveling back home.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on April 09, 2021, 10:52:11 AM
US 220 Update: Route 220 Safety Improvement Project Updates (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=3448)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: snowc on April 09, 2021, 11:43:32 AM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on April 09, 2021, 10:52:11 AM
US 220 Update: Route 220 Safety Improvement Project Updates (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=3448)
great, just as we left NY. 🙄🙄
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on April 12, 2021, 12:38:49 PM
This news release is very confusing. (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-4/pages/details.aspx?newsid=791)  I am not even sure what bridge is being referred to.  Beyond that, why recommend traffic go all the way down to Providence Rd on the North Scranton Expressway (US 11/PA 307) before turning around?

EDIT:  According to one of my coworkers, this is for one of the ramps in the US 11/US 6 BUS interchange.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on April 13, 2021, 02:06:45 PM
On US 62/PA 8 in Franklin: PennDOT Announces Second Virtual Public Meeting for Study of the Route 62, Route 8 Intersection and 15th Street Hill in Venango County (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1442)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on April 14, 2021, 09:29:35 PM
Was I-76 at one time to anyone's knowledge to only be in PA and NJ? As a child I remember one of my dads old PA maps showed I-76 exiting the Turnpike in Monroeville where I-376 ends and follow it to end at Downtown Pittsburgh where I-79 was proposed to be I-279 then with I-79 being I-279.

In addition the rest of I-76 in PA and OH was I-80S.   Did I remember a brief moment of I-76 in Pittsburgh?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Alps on April 14, 2021, 09:47:59 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on April 14, 2021, 09:29:35 PM
Was I-76 at one time to anyone's knowledge to only be in PA and NJ? As a child I remember one of my dads old PA maps showed I-76 exiting the Turnpike in Monroeville where I-376 ends and follow it to end at Downtown Pittsburgh where I-79 was proposed to be I-279 then with I-79 being I-279.

In addition the rest of I-76 in PA and OH was I-80S.   Did I remember a brief moment of I-76 in Pittsburgh?
you are correct
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: PHLBOS on April 15, 2021, 06:40:18 PM
Quote from: Alps on April 14, 2021, 09:47:59 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on April 14, 2021, 09:29:35 PM
Was I-76 at one time to anyone's knowledge to only be in PA and NJ? As a child I remember one of my dads old PA maps showed I-76 exiting the Turnpike in Monroeville where I-376 ends and follow it to end at Downtown Pittsburgh where I-79 was proposed to be I-279 then with I-79 being I-279.

In addition the rest of I-76 in PA and OH was I-80S.   Did I remember a brief moment of I-76 in Pittsburgh?
you are correct
To add: such was true until 1972.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on April 15, 2021, 06:57:14 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on April 06, 2021, 01:24:27 PM
EDIT (4-7-2021):Update on I-70 at PA 51:  PennDOT Announces Virtual Plans Display for the Interstate 70 at SR 51 Interchange Improvement Project (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-12/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1573)

Looking at the Public Meeting (https://www.i-70projects.com/70-51-interchange-public-meeting.php), the new I-70/PA 51 interchange will be a DDI. Also Finley Rd will be relocated to a redone signalized intersection at PA 51 and PA 981.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jmd41280 on April 17, 2021, 05:49:33 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on April 15, 2021, 06:57:14 PMLooking at the Public Meeting (https://www.i-70projects.com/70-51-interchange-public-meeting.php), the new I-70/PA 51 interchange will be a DDI. Also Finley Rd will be relocated to a redone signalized intersection at PA 51 and PA 981.

This cannot come soon enough. Right now, both onramps from PA 51 to I-70 end at a stop sign (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.1558136,-79.7732042,3a,75y,48.7h,88.54t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sxfmsQV2JWOPKVYnrB7J7hQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) with absolutely no acceleration lane. You have to wait for a large enough opening (which can take awhile on this stretch of I-70) and then gun it as quickly as your vehicle will allow.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on April 17, 2021, 06:05:50 PM
Quote from: jmd41280 on April 17, 2021, 05:49:33 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on April 15, 2021, 06:57:14 PMLooking at the Public Meeting (https://www.i-70projects.com/70-51-interchange-public-meeting.php), the new I-70/PA 51 interchange will be a DDI. Also Finley Rd will be relocated to a redone signalized intersection at PA 51 and PA 981.

This cannot come soon enough. Right now, both onramps from PA 51 to I-70 end at a stop sign (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.1558136,-79.7732042,3a,75y,48.7h,88.54t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sxfmsQV2JWOPKVYnrB7J7hQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) with absolutely no acceleration lane. You have to wait for a large enough opening (which can take awhile on this stretch of I-70) and then gun it as quickly as your vehicle will allow.

I have to do that right now getting onto I-83 from Union Deposit Rd due to the widening project. Yes, it is very much annoying. 
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on April 19, 2021, 11:17:10 AM
On PA 366:  Route 366 Tarentum Bridge Traffic Stoppages Wednesday in Tarentum (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-11/pages/details.aspx?newsid=5068)

There will be bridge stoppages once a week through mid-May.

On US 15: County Line Road to be Closed at Route 15 for Resurfacing and Safety Improvement Project in Adams and York Counties (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1364)

There are being jughandles built here.

On Bloomsburg: Bloomsburg Reconstruction Project Continues in Columbia County (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=3472)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Crown Victoria on April 21, 2021, 09:35:02 AM
PA is the only state that does not allow local police to use radar. There's another effort underway to allow its use:

https://wjactv.com/news/local/proposed-bill-allows-for-local-police-to-run-radar
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: MASTERNC on April 21, 2021, 08:03:22 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on April 17, 2021, 06:05:50 PM
Quote from: jmd41280 on April 17, 2021, 05:49:33 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on April 15, 2021, 06:57:14 PMLooking at the Public Meeting (https://www.i-70projects.com/70-51-interchange-public-meeting.php), the new I-70/PA 51 interchange will be a DDI. Also Finley Rd will be relocated to a redone signalized intersection at PA 51 and PA 981.

This cannot come soon enough. Right now, both onramps from PA 51 to I-70 end at a stop sign (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.1558136,-79.7732042,3a,75y,48.7h,88.54t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sxfmsQV2JWOPKVYnrB7J7hQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) with absolutely no acceleration lane. You have to wait for a large enough opening (which can take awhile on this stretch of I-70) and then gun it as quickly as your vehicle will allow.

I have to do that right now getting onto I-83 from Union Deposit Rd due to the widening project. Yes, it is very much annoying. 

For some reason, PennDOT and the Turnpike have a love for stop signs on entrance ramps during construction projects, whereas other states almost always have enough room to permit a yield condition.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Ketchup99 on April 21, 2021, 09:50:37 PM
Quote from: Crown Victoria on April 21, 2021, 09:35:02 AM
PA is the only state that does not allow local police to use radar. There's another effort underway to allow its use:

https://wjactv.com/news/local/proposed-bill-allows-for-local-police-to-run-radar

There's always an effort underway to change this.  :biggrin:
Frankly, it's stupid that local cops can't use radar to clock speed, but as long as they're trying to write me a ticket for going 35mph on a four lane road which the old people on the Council don't like to drive over 25 on so they decided everyone else should too, I have no qualms with making their job harder in this particular instance. Hope it fails.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on April 21, 2021, 10:01:09 PM
What is up with the traffic pattern inside the Wabash Tunnel in Pittsburgh? Why is it only open at certain times to only one direction only?

Just discovered it's existence including the busway tunnel just east of it and was curious about it. It links no freeways and is between local streets. It's striped for two lanes so it seems odd it's not open 24/7.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ixnay on April 22, 2021, 06:31:24 AM
Quote from: qguy on April 06, 2021, 06:32:25 AM
Quote from: Mr. Matté on April 05, 2021, 05:12:16 PM
Probably connected campuses of the former Philadelphia State Hospital at Byberry (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philadelphia_State_Hospital_at_Byberry) closed between 1987-1990

No probably's about it. That's exactly what that is.

PA closed another facility for the mentally ill around the same time, in the shadow of the Limerick cooling towers.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pennhurst_State_School_and_Hospital

ixnay
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ixnay on April 22, 2021, 06:37:07 AM
Quote from: PHLBOS on April 15, 2021, 06:40:18 PM
Quote from: Alps on April 14, 2021, 09:47:59 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on April 14, 2021, 09:29:35 PM
Was I-76 at one time to anyone's knowledge to only be in PA and NJ? As a child I remember one of my dads old PA maps showed I-76 exiting the Turnpike in Monroeville where I-376 ends and follow it to end at Downtown Pittsburgh where I-79 was proposed to be I-279 then with I-79 being I-279.

In addition the rest of I-76 in PA and OH was I-80S.   Did I remember a brief moment of I-76 in Pittsburgh?
you are correct
To add: such was true until 1972.

Meaning I-76 once ran through the Parkway East and West tubes and crossed the Fort Pitt Bridge, it seems like.

ixnay
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: rickmastfan67 on April 22, 2021, 11:21:45 AM
Quote from: ixnay on April 22, 2021, 06:37:07 AM
Quote from: PHLBOS on April 15, 2021, 06:40:18 PM
Quote from: Alps on April 14, 2021, 09:47:59 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on April 14, 2021, 09:29:35 PM
Was I-76 at one time to anyone's knowledge to only be in PA and NJ? As a child I remember one of my dads old PA maps showed I-76 exiting the Turnpike in Monroeville where I-376 ends and follow it to end at Downtown Pittsburgh where I-79 was proposed to be I-279 then with I-79 being I-279.

In addition the rest of I-76 in PA and OH was I-80S.   Did I remember a brief moment of I-76 in Pittsburgh?
you are correct
To add: such was true until 1972.

Meaning I-76 once ran through the Parkway East and West tubes and crossed the Fort Pitt Bridge, it seems like.

ixnay

Only for 1 year did it cross the Fort Pitt Bridge.

QuoteI-70 (1960 - 1964):  Exit 64A to I-76/PA Turnpike
I-79 (1964 - 1972):  Exit 64A to Exit 70C
I-76 (1964 - 1973):  Exit 70C to I-76/PA Turnpike
I-76 (1972 - 1973):  Exit 64A to Exit 70C
I-279 (1973 - 2009):  Exit 64A to Exit 70C
https://www.pahighways.com/interstates/I376.html
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Mr_Northside on April 22, 2021, 03:39:17 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on April 21, 2021, 10:01:09 PM
What is up with the traffic pattern inside the Wabash Tunnel in Pittsburgh? Why is it only open at certain times to only one direction only?

When the Port Authority rehabbed it for automobile use, they decided it was just a little bit to narrow for 2-way traffic.  In that regard it's usually open in the direction that favors whichever rush hour is applicable.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: noelbotevera on April 22, 2021, 10:11:13 PM
What was the original plans for the PA 147 freeway (south of Lewisburg)? It looks like there's a stub (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.9534932,-76.8497032,1224m/data=!3m1!1e3?hl=en) but there's no clear ROW to the south. Was this a bypass for Chillisquaque or would it have tied into US 15?

My hypothesis: Maybe this had to do with a Lewisburg bypass for US 15?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on April 23, 2021, 09:45:49 AM
Quote from: noelbotevera on April 22, 2021, 10:11:13 PM
What was the original plans for the PA 147 freeway (south of Lewisburg)? It looks like there's a stub (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.9534932,-76.8497032,1224m/data=!3m1!1e3?hl=en) but there's no clear ROW to the south. Was this a bypass for Chillisquaque or would it have tied into US 15?

My hypothesis: Maybe this had to do with a Lewisburg bypass for US 15?

I thought it always had to do with the CSVT.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jemacedo9 on April 23, 2021, 11:13:07 AM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on April 23, 2021, 09:45:49 AM
Quote from: noelbotevera on April 22, 2021, 10:11:13 PM
What was the original plans for the PA 147 freeway (south of Lewisburg)? It looks like there's a stub (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.9534932,-76.8497032,1224m/data=!3m1!1e3?hl=en) but there's no clear ROW to the south. Was this a bypass for Chillisquaque or would it have tied into US 15?

My hypothesis: Maybe this had to do with a Lewisburg bypass for US 15?

I thought it always had to do with the CSVT.

I wondered this also.  Is the currently-in-progress CSVT following the path of the very original proposal?  Or was the proposal different.
And how did the US 15 freeway that runs north and south from I-80 on the west side of the river tie into all of this?  Or was it completely separate and stand-alone (since there aren't any obvious stubs)?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on April 23, 2021, 11:15:52 AM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on April 23, 2021, 09:45:49 AM
Quote from: noelbotevera on April 22, 2021, 10:11:13 PM
What was the original plans for the PA 147 freeway (south of Lewisburg)? It looks like there's a stub (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.9534932,-76.8497032,1224m/data=!3m1!1e3?hl=en) but there's no clear ROW to the south. Was this a bypass for Chillisquaque or would it have tied into US 15?

My hypothesis: Maybe this had to do with a Lewisburg bypass for US 15?

I thought it always had to do with the CSVT.

I imagine the current stub was built with the intention of connecting to the CSVT, but the original PA 147 super-2 is much older. How long had the CSVT been planned rather than just extending the current 11/15 freeway up to I-80?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on April 23, 2021, 02:25:47 PM
PennDOT: Lane Restrictions, Traffic Shift Scheduled at I-83 Exit 4 Project in Southern York County (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1367)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: CentralPAGal on April 23, 2021, 03:00:22 PM
Quote from: noelbotevera on April 22, 2021, 10:11:13 PM
What was the original plans for the PA 147 freeway (south of Lewisburg)? It looks like there's a stub (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.9534932,-76.8497032,1224m/data=!3m1!1e3?hl=en) but there's no clear ROW to the south. Was this a bypass for Chillisquaque or would it have tied into US 15?

My hypothesis: Maybe this had to do with a Lewisburg bypass for US 15?

Presently under construction as part of the larger CSVT/Shamokin Dam bypass project. I believe that portion is supposed to open to traffic next year, actually.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Alps on April 23, 2021, 03:20:49 PM
Quote from: jemacedo9 on April 23, 2021, 11:13:07 AM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on April 23, 2021, 09:45:49 AM
Quote from: noelbotevera on April 22, 2021, 10:11:13 PM
What was the original plans for the PA 147 freeway (south of Lewisburg)? It looks like there's a stub (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.9534932,-76.8497032,1224m/data=!3m1!1e3?hl=en) but there's no clear ROW to the south. Was this a bypass for Chillisquaque or would it have tied into US 15?

My hypothesis: Maybe this had to do with a Lewisburg bypass for US 15?

I thought it always had to do with the CSVT.

I wondered this also.  Is the currently-in-progress CSVT following the path of the very original proposal?  Or was the proposal different.
And how did the US 15 freeway that runs north and south from I-80 on the west side of the river tie into all of this?  Or was it completely separate and stand-alone (since there aren't any obvious stubs)?
If you go back a few years to the project beginning there was a thread on this topic. Can't search right now from my phone.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on April 23, 2021, 06:48:24 PM
PennDOT:  Chemical Road, I-476 North Ramp to Chemical Road Remain Closed Due to Underground Sinkholes in Plymouth Township (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=6637)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: MASTERNC on April 26, 2021, 07:32:04 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on April 23, 2021, 06:48:24 PM
PennDOT:  Chemical Road, I-476 North Ramp to Chemical Road Remain Closed Due to Underground Sinkholes in Plymouth Township (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=6637)

There was a sinkhole that developed on I-76 in King of Prussia (on the westbound collector-distributor roadway) that created a suspension-crunching dip a few weeks ago.  The lane closure caused a traffic nightmare but they fortunately only needed 10 days to repair.  Definitely a recurring issue in this area.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on April 26, 2021, 11:28:09 PM
Quote from: MASTERNC on April 26, 2021, 07:32:04 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on April 23, 2021, 06:48:24 PM
PennDOT:  Chemical Road, I-476 North Ramp to Chemical Road Remain Closed Due to Underground Sinkholes in Plymouth Township (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=6637)

There was a sinkhole that developed on I-76 in King of Prussia (on the westbound collector-distributor roadway) that created a suspension-crunching dip a few weeks ago.  The lane closure caused a traffic nightmare but they fortunately only needed 10 days to repair.  Definitely a recurring issue in this area.

Weren't there also recurring sinkholes during either or both of the reconstruction of the King of Prussia interchange complex in the early 2000s and the construction of the Mid-County interchange in the 1990s? I remember reading about that.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: qguy on April 27, 2021, 06:31:45 AM
Quote from: Roadsguy on April 26, 2021, 11:28:09 PM
Quote from: MASTERNC on April 26, 2021, 07:32:04 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on April 23, 2021, 06:48:24 PM
PennDOT:  Chemical Road, I-476 North Ramp to Chemical Road Remain Closed Due to Underground Sinkholes in Plymouth Township (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=6637)
There was a sinkhole that developed on I-76 in King of Prussia (on the westbound collector-distributor roadway) that created a suspension-crunching dip a few weeks ago.  The lane closure caused a traffic nightmare but they fortunately only needed 10 days to repair.  Definitely a recurring issue in this area.
Weren't there also recurring sinkholes during either or both of the reconstruction of the King of Prussia interchange complex in the early 2000s and the construction of the Mid-County interchange in the 1990s? I remember reading about that.

Yes. I worked for PennDOT at the District 6 office nearby during that project. There are bad sinkholes in that area because of the limestone there. I stood next to one of the gaping holes that developed.

Because of the geotechnical investigations, the sinkholes were expected and a temporary grout factory was built on-site to produce the massive quantities of the stuff needed to be injected down into the voids.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on April 27, 2021, 01:37:01 PM
Traffic is being fully shifted to the outside lanes on I-83 NB just weekend north of Union Deposit Rd.

PennDOT: Weekend Lane Restriction Scheduled for NB I-83 Project Near Harrisburg (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1369)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on April 28, 2021, 02:50:23 AM
Why is the Pennsylvania Turnpike now six lanes west of Carlisle?  Is the area around Blue Mountain a new bedroom community for Harrisburg?

The last time I drove on it, it was 25 miles exit less (the second longest gap on the system next to Somerset to Bedford at 36 miles) so I do not see local traffic an issue.  Then it narrows to four lanes east of US 11 closer to the Harrisburg Metro Area.

Is that just to justify keeping tolls or is there really congestion in the rural farmlands?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on April 28, 2021, 07:00:02 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on April 28, 2021, 02:50:23 AM
Why is the Pennsylvania Turnpike now six lanes west of Carlisle?  Is the area around Blue Mountain a new bedroom community for Harrisburg?

The last time I drove on it, it was 25 miles exit less (the second longest gap on the system next to Somerset to Bedford at 36 miles) so I do not see local traffic an issue.  Then it narrows to four lanes east of US 11 closer to the Harrisburg Metro Area.

Is that just to justify keeping tolls or is there really congestion in the rural farmlands?

Because they're widening all the sections they reconstruct to six lanes (at least all the ones not reconstructed before they decided to widen), and for whatever reason decided to reconstruct those sections first over the last decade. I do wish they'd have put that funding toward widening from Valley Forge out to Morgantown, though...
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jemacedo9 on April 28, 2021, 08:17:04 AM
Quote from: Roadsguy on April 28, 2021, 07:00:02 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on April 28, 2021, 02:50:23 AM
Why is the Pennsylvania Turnpike now six lanes west of Carlisle?  Is the area around Blue Mountain a new bedroom community for Harrisburg?

The last time I drove on it, it was 25 miles exit less (the second longest gap on the system next to Somerset to Bedford at 36 miles) so I do not see local traffic an issue.  Then it narrows to four lanes east of US 11 closer to the Harrisburg Metro Area.

Is that just to justify keeping tolls or is there really congestion in the rural farmlands?

Because they're widening all the sections they reconstruct to six lanes (at least all the ones not reconstructed before they decided to widen), and for whatever reason decided to reconstruct those sections first over the last decade. I do wish they'd have put that funding toward widening from Valley Forge out to Morgantown, though...

The original reconstruction was going to be the original Turnpike section (Irwin to Carlisle).  Then they added some of the higher volume sections as well (Pittsburgh, Harrisburg, Philly areas).

Valley Forge to Great Valley was mired in environmental lawsuits for years, which I think have been resolved but caused expensive re-design?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Crown Victoria on April 28, 2021, 08:35:47 AM
Quote from: jemacedo9 on April 28, 2021, 08:17:04 AM
Quote from: Roadsguy on April 28, 2021, 07:00:02 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on April 28, 2021, 02:50:23 AM
Why is the Pennsylvania Turnpike now six lanes west of Carlisle?  Is the area around Blue Mountain a new bedroom community for Harrisburg?

The last time I drove on it, it was 25 miles exit less (the second longest gap on the system next to Somerset to Bedford at 36 miles) so I do not see local traffic an issue.  Then it narrows to four lanes east of US 11 closer to the Harrisburg Metro Area.

Is that just to justify keeping tolls or is there really congestion in the rural farmlands?

Because they're widening all the sections they reconstruct to six lanes (at least all the ones not reconstructed before they decided to widen), and for whatever reason decided to reconstruct those sections first over the last decade. I do wish they'd have put that funding toward widening from Valley Forge out to Morgantown, though...

The original reconstruction was going to be the original Turnpike section (Irwin to Carlisle).  Then they added some of the higher volume sections as well (Pittsburgh, Harrisburg, Philly areas).

Valley Forge to Great Valley was mired in environmental lawsuits for years, which I think have been resolved but caused expensive re-design?

The PA Turnpike has made some interesting decisions as far as where and when it does its reconstruction and widening projects. They need to balance out the needs of the system in the more populated areas with the fact that the original Irwin-Carlisle stretch is now over 80 years old with the remaining unreconstructed segments being somewhat substandard and still having the original pavement underneath (not to mention the fact that just over half of that original stretch carries quite a bit of traffic from I-70). This is why the Blue Mountain-Carlisle segment has been done, and why the stretch just west of Somerset is being done currently, while areas near Philly and Pittsburgh keep waiting.

As far as that Valley Forge segment, the lawsuits have indeed been resolved. The only reason it hasn't gone to construction yet is money...
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on April 28, 2021, 04:09:07 PM
On PA 320: PennDOT to Rehabilitate 232-Year-Old Trinity Lane (Route 320) Bridge over Gulph Mills Creek in Upper Merion Township (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=6644)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on April 28, 2021, 11:33:59 PM
Quote from: Crown Victoria on April 28, 2021, 08:35:47 AM
As far as that Valley Forge segment, the lawsuits have indeed been resolved. The only reason it hasn't gone to construction yet is money...

Apparently half of it (they split it into two phases) has gone to construction, technically, but so far it's just tree clearing.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Mr_Northside on April 29, 2021, 08:32:51 AM
Quote from: jemacedo9 on April 28, 2021, 08:17:04 AM
Quote from: Roadsguy on April 28, 2021, 07:00:02 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on April 28, 2021, 02:50:23 AM
Why is the Pennsylvania Turnpike now six lanes west of Carlisle?  Is the area around Blue Mountain a new bedroom community for Harrisburg?

The last time I drove on it, it was 25 miles exit less (the second longest gap on the system next to Somerset to Bedford at 36 miles) so I do not see local traffic an issue.  Then it narrows to four lanes east of US 11 closer to the Harrisburg Metro Area.

Is that just to justify keeping tolls or is there really congestion in the rural farmlands?

Because they're widening all the sections they reconstruct to six lanes (at least all the ones not reconstructed before they decided to widen), and for whatever reason decided to reconstruct those sections first over the last decade. I do wish they'd have put that funding toward widening from Valley Forge out to Morgantown, though...

The original reconstruction was going to be the original Turnpike section (Irwin to Carlisle).  Then they added some of the higher volume sections as well (Pittsburgh, Harrisburg, Philly areas).

They apparently figured out during the first string of total reconstruction projects (mostly in eastern Westmoreland County, from New Stanton to Somerset County) that it was conducive to the 6-lane widenings (while those first projects didn't always add lanes, it was still widened - mostly the median).  By the time they do all the shifting to maintain 4 lanes during construction, it becomes cost effective (though still more expensive than just a 4-lane reconstruction) to do 6 lanes.  The PTC website had, and may still have, a little video on the reasoning behind the 6-lane template.

They were going at a pretty good pace, until the financial situation has drastically slowed all the sections down.  The PTC press releases at the time (late 90's) mentioned rebuilding the "original" turnpike sections.   Of course, now, a little over 20 years later, the whole thing (and NE Extension) is older than just the original Irwin - Carlisle was back when they started those 70/76 concurrency sections in Westmoreland Co. - and at this rate it seems it will take decades more.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on April 29, 2021, 12:58:11 PM
PennDOT: Wolf Administration Previews 2021 Construction Season for Northwest Region (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1456)

I am mainly posting this to note that traffic signal timings are being adjusted in Erie to account for the upcoming Bayfront Pkwy project.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jemacedo9 on April 29, 2021, 03:08:01 PM
Quote from: Roadsguy on April 28, 2021, 11:33:59 PM
Quote from: Crown Victoria on April 28, 2021, 08:35:47 AM
As far as that Valley Forge segment, the lawsuits have indeed been resolved. The only reason it hasn't gone to construction yet is money...

Apparently half of it (they split it into two phases) has gone to construction, technically, but so far it's just tree clearing.

The Press Release for the tree clearing (1/22/2021) mentions nothing about it being related to the widening project.  And there haven't been any other announcements about that section.  They did announce via a Press Release for the next widening project near Somerset (MP102-109) on 1/8/2021.  So I don't think anything has officially started in VF yet.

There have been several tree clearing projects all along the mainline over the last 3 years or so.

(This whole mini-thread should really be on the PA Turnpike board.)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on April 29, 2021, 04:10:50 PM
PennDOT:  PennDOT Shares Draft Transportation Funding Study for Public Review, Comment (https://www.penndot.gov/pages/all-news-details.aspx?newsid=839)

Comments will be accepted until June 1st.

Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: thenetwork on April 29, 2021, 09:42:08 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on April 29, 2021, 12:58:11 PM
PennDOT: Wolf Administration Previews 2021 Construction Season for Northwest Region (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1456)

I am mainly posting this to note that traffic signal timings are being adjusted in Erie to account for the upcoming Bayfront Pkwy project.

Just out of curiosity -- Are traffic counts along I-90 in PA high enough to begin considering an additional lane (3-lanes) in each direction?  Since this is a total rebuild, this would be the time to consider it, no?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on April 30, 2021, 07:22:06 AM
Quote from: thenetwork on April 29, 2021, 09:42:08 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on April 29, 2021, 12:58:11 PM
PennDOT: Wolf Administration Previews 2021 Construction Season for Northwest Region (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1456)

I am mainly posting this to note that traffic signal timings are being adjusted in Erie to account for the upcoming Bayfront Pkwy project.

Just out of curiosity -- Are traffic counts along I-90 in PA high enough to begin considering an additional lane (3-lanes) in each direction?  Since this is a total rebuild, this would be the time to consider it, no?

Definitely not, looking at the Erie County Traffic Volume Map, I-90 does not even get above 36,000 AADT. (https://gis.penndot.gov/BPR_PDF_FILES/MAPS/Traffic/Traffic_Volume/County_Maps/Erie_tv.pdf)

Other PennDOT News from today:
PennDOT Announces Start of Construction on I-76 East (Schuylkill Expressway) Slope Repair Project in Montgomery County (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=6660)

Lehigh County: West State Street Closure in Coopersburg (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-5/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2750)  (For an indefinite bridge closure)

Sixth Street Closure Begins Monday in Aspinwall Borough (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-11/pages/details.aspx?newsid=5093)  (For Highland Park Bridge Project)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on May 01, 2021, 12:50:55 AM
I was looking at Google Street View and noticed that the old alignment of US 202 wheee the Parkway bypassed it, has not been given over to local control, but still maintained by PennDOT.  I see on PA 309 at the five points intersection in Montgomeryville Business US 202 shields are up for Doylestown Road and also on PA 611 at the State Street exit.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on May 01, 2021, 07:20:13 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on May 01, 2021, 12:50:55 AM
I was looking at Google Street View and noticed that the old alignment of US 202 wheee the Parkway bypassed it, has not been given over to local control, but still maintained by PennDOT.  I see on PA 309 at the five points intersection in Montgomeryville Business US 202 shields are up for Doylestown Road and also on PA 611 at the State Street exit.

Yes, that is correct.  The old alignment of US 202 became a US 202 Business route due to businesses saying that they lost revenue due to the parkway.  It was approved by AASHTO in 2015. (http://sp.route.transportation.org/Documents/05%2014%202015%20Cheyenne,%20WY%20Report/SM%202015%20USRN%20SCOH%20REPORT.pdf)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on May 01, 2021, 11:20:41 AM
I see in addition PennDOT eliminated the half diamond interchange at the north end of the Doylestown Bypass for a T intersection. I am guessing the freeway to New Hope is completely cancelled that they did that.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on May 01, 2021, 12:13:09 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on May 01, 2021, 11:20:41 AM
I see in addition PennDOT eliminated the half diamond interchange at the north end of the Doylestown Bypass for a T intersection. I am guessing the freeway to New Hope is completely cancelled that they did that.

Yes, I believe that was completed in 2018.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on May 01, 2021, 04:28:07 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on April 27, 2021, 01:37:01 PM
Traffic is being fully shifted to the outside lanes on I-83 NB just weekend north of Union Deposit Rd.

PennDOT: Weekend Lane Restriction Scheduled for NB I-83 Project Near Harrisburg (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1369)

This has been done. 

PennDOT: Lanes Restriction Lifted on NB I-83 Near Harrisburg; Traffic switched to the outside portion of highway. Two lanes open. (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1377)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: TheGrassGuy on May 02, 2021, 01:10:35 PM
Go to the Wikipedia article of PA-413 if you want to have a good laugh. :-D
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on May 02, 2021, 01:16:32 PM
Quote from: TheGrassGuy on May 02, 2021, 01:10:35 PM
Go to the Wikipedia article of PA-413 if you want to have a good laugh. :-D

Am I supposed to be laughing at the route not being shown on the map at the upper right?

Or this:

QuotePA 413 begins at the Burlington—Bristol Bridge, a vertical-lift bridge over the Delaware River, in Bristol Township, Bucks County, where the road continues south into the city of Burlington, New Jersey as Route 413.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on May 03, 2021, 05:35:25 PM
Update from PennDOT on US 222 at US 322: Detour Scheduled for Route 322 at Route 222 Interchange in Ephrata and West Earl Townships in Lancaster County (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1378)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: qguy on May 04, 2021, 06:24:51 AM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on May 01, 2021, 12:13:09 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on May 01, 2021, 11:20:41 AM
I see in addition PennDOT eliminated the half diamond interchange at the north end of the Doylestown Bypass for a T intersection. I am guessing the freeway to New Hope is completely cancelled that they did that.
Yes, I believe that was completed in 2018.

The location of that project is called Poole's Corner, BTW.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: MASTERNC on May 04, 2021, 09:01:46 AM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on May 01, 2021, 12:13:09 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on May 01, 2021, 11:20:41 AM
I see in addition PennDOT eliminated the half diamond interchange at the north end of the Doylestown Bypass for a T intersection. I am guessing the freeway to New Hope is completely cancelled that they did that.

Yes, I believe that was completed in 2018.

They still haven't fixed the intersection in Buckingham where traffic on NB 202 has to turn left at a stop-controlled intersection to continue north.  There should be a signal there.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Angelo71 on May 04, 2021, 08:46:44 PM
Will US-30 ever stop being updated? My cousin, Adrianna lives in Pittsburgh and she told me that US-30 is under construction after a pavement and other construction. Why is that?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Mr_Northside on May 05, 2021, 04:07:25 PM
I'm not sure what "updated" really means here.   A lot of time "under construction" is just rehabbing.  Basically what's been there, except in better shape.
As US-30 stretches across the whole state, E-W style, there's probably always going to be some kind of construction on some segment of roadway that US-30 is signed on.

I guess my short answer is:  No.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on May 10, 2021, 06:13:05 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on August 27, 2020, 02:06:52 PM
From PennDOT District 8: Traffic to be Switched to New Ramp from Mount Rose Avenue to I-83 NB in Springettsbury Township, York County (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1209)

Well the I-83/PA 124 interchange should be completed eventually.

Update from District 8 on this project: Traffic Switch, Lane Restrictions Scheduled at I-83/Mount Rose Avenue, in Springettsbury Township, York County (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1385)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on May 11, 2021, 11:06:36 AM
Quote from: jemacedo9 on April 08, 2021, 02:10:04 PM
I-76/Schuylkill Expwy Variable Speed Limit signs are now active.

Speeds will stay at 55MPH until 5/10 as part of a testing period.

https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=6578 (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=6578)

And they are live...  PennDOT Begins Posting Variable Speed Limits on I-76 (Schuylkill Expressway) between King of Prussia and Philadelphia (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=6691)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on May 17, 2021, 02:17:48 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on May 11, 2021, 11:06:36 AM
Quote from: jemacedo9 on April 08, 2021, 02:10:04 PM
I-76/Schuylkill Expwy Variable Speed Limit signs are now active.

Speeds will stay at 55MPH until 5/10 as part of a testing period.

https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=6578 (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=6578)

And they are live...  PennDOT Begins Posting Variable Speed Limits on I-76 (Schuylkill Expressway) between King of Prussia and Philadelphia (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=6691)

Driving through this section on Saturday, they must have been active due to road work on the shoulder because there was no congestion here.  I probably would have been crashed had I actually drove 35 mph.

Anyway from PennDOT District 8 on US 22/US 322: ​Wolf Administration Announces Opening of Diverging Diamond Interchange at Routes 322/222 in Ephrata, Lancaster County (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1393)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jemacedo9 on May 17, 2021, 03:20:01 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on May 17, 2021, 02:17:48 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on May 11, 2021, 11:06:36 AM
Quote from: jemacedo9 on April 08, 2021, 02:10:04 PM
I-76/Schuylkill Expwy Variable Speed Limit signs are now active.

Speeds will stay at 55MPH until 5/10 as part of a testing period.

https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=6578 (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=6578)

And they are live...  PennDOT Begins Posting Variable Speed Limits on I-76 (Schuylkill Expressway) between King of Prussia and Philadelphia (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=6691)

Driving through this section on Saturday, they must have been active due to road work on the shoulder because there was no congestion here.  I probably would have been crashed had I actually drove 35 mph.

Anyway from PennDOT District 8 on US 22/US 322: ​Wolf Administration Announces Opening of Diverging Diamond Interchange at Routes 322/222 in Ephrata, Lancaster County (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1393)

There was a FB post earlier in the week regarding that work zone...there were static signs for a 45MPH limit but the VSLs read 40MPH, and PennDOT replied that it was an error and being looked into.  I saw a separate post also complaining about the 35MPH limit with no congestion noted.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: sprjus4 on May 17, 2021, 05:15:03 PM
And this is why variable speed limits stand the chance to be ineffective... if you post low, unreasonable limits, they won't be followed. Even worse violation than the actual speed limit.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Bitmapped on May 19, 2021, 08:52:25 AM
Quote from: sprjus4 on May 17, 2021, 05:15:03 PM
And this is why variable speed limits stand the chance to be ineffective... if you post low, unreasonable limits, they won't be followed. Even worse violation than the actual speed limit.

Posting low, unreasonable speed limits is PennDOT's raison d'etre. It manifests with the public and police routinely ignoring the posted limits on "urban" freeways and traveling at 10-15 over. Variable speed limits are going to have the same problem unless PennDOT actually uses reasonable speeds relatively to conditions.

PennDOT has long maxed out speed limits at 55 in "urban" areas. If the concern is the potential for congestion and they have variable speed limits, maybe a sign of good faith would be to post speed limits higher than 55 when traffic is light.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Ketchup99 on May 19, 2021, 09:25:28 AM
Perhaps, but remember PA cannot legally post 60, and I can't really see 65 ever being posted on much of the Schuylkill. Not saying it shouldn't be, but that's not even imaginable.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: PHLBOS on May 19, 2021, 11:17:05 AM
Quote from: Ketchup99 on May 19, 2021, 09:25:28 AM
Perhaps, but remember PA cannot legally post 60, and I can't really see 65 ever being posted on much of the Schuylkill. Not saying it shouldn't be, but that's not even imaginable.
Although such was a Work-Zone Speed Limit but I did see some Speed Limit 60 signs along I-99's current work zones.  The regular speed limit there is 70.

The above was the first time I've seen a SPEED LIMIT 60 sign in PA.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: NJRoadfan on May 19, 2021, 11:50:02 AM
Variable speed limits really should only be implemented when there is an active roadway hazard (roadwork, fog, construction, accident, etc.) The entire NJ Turnpike has variable speed limits, but its rare to see them set below the normal 55/65 unless there is some sort of triggering event. Normal traffic congestion isn't one of them!
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Ketchup99 on May 19, 2021, 11:52:26 AM
Quote from: PHLBOS on May 19, 2021, 11:17:05 AM
Quote from: Ketchup99 on May 19, 2021, 09:25:28 AM
Perhaps, but remember PA cannot legally post 60, and I can't really see 65 ever being posted on much of the Schuylkill. Not saying it shouldn't be, but that's not even imaginable.
Although such was a Work-Zone Speed Limit but I did see some Speed Limit 60 signs along I-99's current work zones.  The regular speed limit there is 70.

The above was the first time I've seen a SPEED LIMIT 60 sign in PA.
Recently? Where?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Crown Victoria on May 19, 2021, 12:14:43 PM
Quote from: Ketchup99 on May 19, 2021, 11:52:26 AM
Quote from: PHLBOS on May 19, 2021, 11:17:05 AM
Quote from: Ketchup99 on May 19, 2021, 09:25:28 AM
Perhaps, but remember PA cannot legally post 60, and I can't really see 65 ever being posted on much of the Schuylkill. Not saying it shouldn't be, but that's not even imaginable.
Although such was a Work-Zone Speed Limit but I did see some Speed Limit 60 signs along I-99's current work zones.  The regular speed limit there is 70.

The above was the first time I've seen a SPEED LIMIT 60 sign in PA.
Recently? Where?

I can also attest to seeing a Work Zone Speed Limit 60 sign recently here in PA. I also don't remember exactly where, but I think it was either I-78 or the PA Turnpike out by Somerset.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on May 19, 2021, 03:00:17 PM
PennDOT - District 6 News: Township Line Road to Close at U.S. 202 (Dekalb Pike) for Construction in Whitpain, Lower Gwynedd Townships (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=6719)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: MASTERNC on May 19, 2021, 03:20:24 PM
Quote from: Crown Victoria on May 19, 2021, 12:14:43 PM
Quote from: Ketchup99 on May 19, 2021, 11:52:26 AM
Quote from: PHLBOS on May 19, 2021, 11:17:05 AM
Quote from: Ketchup99 on May 19, 2021, 09:25:28 AM
Perhaps, but remember PA cannot legally post 60, and I can't really see 65 ever being posted on much of the Schuylkill. Not saying it shouldn't be, but that's not even imaginable.
Although such was a Work-Zone Speed Limit but I did see some Speed Limit 60 signs along I-99's current work zones.  The regular speed limit there is 70.

The above was the first time I've seen a SPEED LIMIT 60 sign in PA.
Recently? Where?

I can also attest to seeing a Work Zone Speed Limit 60 sign recently here in PA. I also don't remember exactly where, but I think it was either I-78 or the PA Turnpike out by Somerset.

There was one on I-79 in Cranberry when they were redoing a pair of bridges.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadgeekteen on May 19, 2021, 05:21:00 PM
Quote from: NJRoadfan on May 19, 2021, 11:50:02 AM
Variable speed limits really should only be implemented when there is an active roadway hazard (roadwork, fog, construction, accident, etc.) The entire NJ Turnpike has variable speed limits, but its rare to see them set below the normal 55/65 unless there is some sort of triggering event. Normal traffic congestion isn't one of them!
Traffic congestion? Wouldn't traffic just slow down naturally?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: JREwing78 on May 19, 2021, 11:50:00 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 19, 2021, 05:21:00 PM
Quote from: NJRoadfan on May 19, 2021, 11:50:02 AM
Variable speed limits really should only be implemented when there is an active roadway hazard (roadwork, fog, construction, accident, etc.) The entire NJ Turnpike has variable speed limits, but its rare to see them set below the normal 55/65 unless there is some sort of triggering event. Normal traffic congestion isn't one of them!
Traffic congestion? Wouldn't traffic just slow down naturally?
They want to avoid the really sudden stops, caused by impacting another vehicle, a guardrail, a bridge, etc.

Or, at least have the speeds slow enough that the stops aren't deadly.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: empirestate on May 20, 2021, 12:00:03 AM
Quote from: Ketchup99 on May 19, 2021, 09:25:28 AM
Perhaps, but remember PA cannot legally post 60, and I can't really see 65 ever being posted on much of the Schuylkill. Not saying it shouldn't be, but that's not even imaginable.

Is that kind of like how you can't get an 18-pack of beer?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadgeekteen on May 20, 2021, 12:03:05 AM
Ah, bureaucracy. Because the law said "65" and not "up to 65", they can't post 60. Typical politicians.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: sprjus4 on May 20, 2021, 12:13:12 AM
While perhaps urban speed limits could go above 55 mph, even if they are to be capped at 55 mph, the variable speed limits should be realistic in the fact they don't just drop to 35 mph cause a work truck is parked on the shoulder. At least only lower it from the default (low or not) limit when there's truly congestion.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: empirestate on May 20, 2021, 08:23:50 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 20, 2021, 12:03:05 AM
Ah, bureaucracy. Because the law said "65" and not "up to 65", they can't post 60. Typical politicians.

Mm, I'd say typical lawyers. The exact construction of language is a big part of their course of study.

On the other hand, the typical politician probably is a lawyer, so you've got one there!
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: PHLBOS on May 20, 2021, 10:42:36 AM
Quote from: Ketchup99 on May 19, 2021, 11:52:26 AM
Quote from: PHLBOS on May 19, 2021, 11:17:05 AM
Quote from: Ketchup99 on May 19, 2021, 09:25:28 AM
Perhaps, but remember PA cannot legally post 60, and I can't really see 65 ever being posted on much of the Schuylkill. Not saying it shouldn't be, but that's not even imaginable.
Although such was a Work-Zone Speed Limit but I did see some Speed Limit 60 signs along I-99's current work zones.  The regular speed limit there is 70.

The above was the first time I've seen a SPEED LIMIT 60 sign in PA.
Recently? Where?
As recent as 3 weeks ago.  Along I-99 about 2 miles north of the Turnpike.  The zone is about 10 miles long.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Ketchup99 on May 20, 2021, 04:39:43 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on May 20, 2021, 10:42:36 AM
Quote from: Ketchup99 on May 19, 2021, 11:52:26 AM
Quote from: PHLBOS on May 19, 2021, 11:17:05 AM
Quote from: Ketchup99 on May 19, 2021, 09:25:28 AM
Perhaps, but remember PA cannot legally post 60, and I can't really see 65 ever being posted on much of the Schuylkill. Not saying it shouldn't be, but that's not even imaginable.
Although such was a Work-Zone Speed Limit but I did see some Speed Limit 60 signs along I-99's current work zones.  The regular speed limit there is 70.

The above was the first time I've seen a SPEED LIMIT 60 sign in PA.
Recently? Where?
As recent as 3 weeks ago.  Along I-99 about 2 miles north of the Turnpike.  The zone is about 10 miles long.
Interesting, might go check it out and see if it's still there.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: MASTERNC on May 20, 2021, 05:00:02 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 20, 2021, 12:03:05 AM
Ah, bureaucracy. Because the law said "65" and not "up to 65", they can't post 60. Typical politicians.

If you read Section 3363, it does seem to indicate that on expressways/Interstates, the speed limit can be set at the discretion of PennDOT (after a study) but not higher than 70 MPH.  Seems there is some wiggle room there.  Emphasis is mine.

Quote§ 3363.  Alteration of maximum limits.

On highways under their respective jurisdictions, local authorities subject to section 6109(e) (relating to specific powers of department and local authorities) or the department, upon the basis of an engineering and traffic investigation, may determine that the maximum speed permitted under this subchapter is greater or less than is reasonable and safe under the conditions found to exist upon any such highway or part thereof and establish a reasonable and safe maximum limit. The maximum speed limit may be made effective at all times or at times indicated and may vary for different weather conditions and other factors bearing on safe speeds. No maximum speed greater than 55 miles per hour shall be established under this section except on highways listed in section 3362(a)(1.1) (relating to maximum speed limits), where the maximum speed for all vehicles shall not be greater than 70 miles per hour.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadgeekteen on May 20, 2021, 05:06:09 PM
Quote from: MASTERNC on May 20, 2021, 05:00:02 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 20, 2021, 12:03:05 AM
Ah, bureaucracy. Because the law said "65" and not "up to 65", they can't post 60. Typical politicians.

If you read Section 3363, it does seem to indicate that on expressways/Interstates, the speed limit can be set at the discretion of PennDOT (after a study) but not higher than 70 MPH.  Seems there is some wiggle room there.  Emphasis is mine.

Quote§ 3363.  Alteration of maximum limits.

On highways under their respective jurisdictions, local authorities subject to section 6109(e) (relating to specific powers of department and local authorities) or the department, upon the basis of an engineering and traffic investigation, may determine that the maximum speed permitted under this subchapter is greater or less than is reasonable and safe under the conditions found to exist upon any such highway or part thereof and establish a reasonable and safe maximum limit. The maximum speed limit may be made effective at all times or at times indicated and may vary for different weather conditions and other factors bearing on safe speeds. No maximum speed greater than 55 miles per hour shall be established under this section except on highways listed in section 3362(a)(1.1) (relating to maximum speed limits), where the maximum speed for all vehicles shall not be greater than 70 miles per hour.
Ok, seems like they allowed 60 when they allowed 70.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Ketchup99 on May 20, 2021, 10:59:55 PM
Quote
3362.  Maximum speed limits.

(a)  General rule.--Except when a special hazard exists that requires lower speed for compliance with section 3361 (relating to driving vehicle at safe speed), the limits specified in this section or established under this subchapter shall be maximum lawful speeds and no person shall drive a vehicle at a speed in excess of the following maximum limits:

(1)  35 miles per hour in any urban district.

(1.1)  65 miles per hour or 70 miles per hour for all vehicles on freeways where the department has posted a 65-miles-per-hour or 70-miles-per-hour speed limit.

(1.2)  25 miles per hour in a residence district if the highway:

(i)  is not a numbered traffic route; and

(ii)  is functionally classified by the department as a local highway.

(2)  55 miles per hour in other locations.

(3)  Any other maximum speed limit established under this subchapter.
This makes it seem like 65 and 70 only are allowed, not 60.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadgeekteen on May 21, 2021, 12:16:06 AM
Quote from: Ketchup99 on May 20, 2021, 10:59:55 PM
Quote
3362.  Maximum speed limits.

(a)  General rule.--Except when a special hazard exists that requires lower speed for compliance with section 3361 (relating to driving vehicle at safe speed), the limits specified in this section or established under this subchapter shall be maximum lawful speeds and no person shall drive a vehicle at a speed in excess of the following maximum limits:

(1)  35 miles per hour in any urban district.

(1.1)  65 miles per hour or 70 miles per hour for all vehicles on freeways where the department has posted a 65-miles-per-hour or 70-miles-per-hour speed limit.

(1.2)  25 miles per hour in a residence district if the highway:

(i)  is not a numbered traffic route; and

(ii)  is functionally classified by the department as a local highway.

(2)  55 miles per hour in other locations.

(3)  Any other maximum speed limit established under this subchapter.
This makes it seem like 65 and 70 only are allowed, not 60.
:banghead:
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: sprjus4 on May 21, 2021, 12:34:00 AM
The first statue posted seems to allow PennDOT to increase the speed limit up to a maximum of 70 mph on limited access highways, the second statue posted simply sets statuary limits.

So while the statutory on limited access highways is 65 mph or 70 mph, they are legally allowed to post anything up to 70 mph that's not statutory, which includes 60 mph.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Ketchup99 on May 21, 2021, 01:37:35 AM
Quote from: sprjus4 on May 21, 2021, 12:34:00 AM
The first statue posted seems to allow PennDOT to increase the speed limit up to a maximum of 70 mph on limited access highways, the second statue posted simply sets statuary limits.

So while the statutory on limited access highways is 65 mph or 70 mph, they are legally allowed to post anything up to 70 mph that's not statutory, which includes 60 mph.
Brings up another question: If 60 is legal, does PennDOT know this?  :sombrero:
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jeffandnicole on May 21, 2021, 06:15:52 AM
Quote from: Ketchup99 on May 21, 2021, 01:37:35 AM
Quote from: sprjus4 on May 21, 2021, 12:34:00 AM
The first statue posted seems to allow PennDOT to increase the speed limit up to a maximum of 70 mph on limited access highways, the second statue posted simply sets statuary limits.

So while the statutory on limited access highways is 65 mph or 70 mph, they are legally allowed to post anything up to 70 mph that's not statutory, which includes 60 mph.
Brings up another question: If 60 is legal, does PennDOT know this?  :sombrero:

It would seem so, as it was posted.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadgeekteen on May 21, 2021, 08:29:57 AM
Does PA post 60 in work zones?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on May 21, 2021, 10:48:13 AM
PennDOT - District 6 News: U.S. 1 Periodic Lane Closures at Night Next Week for Construction in Bucks County (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=6728)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: vdeane on May 21, 2021, 01:11:21 PM
Quote from: Ketchup99 on May 20, 2021, 10:59:55 PM
Quote
3362.  Maximum speed limits.

(a)  General rule.--Except when a special hazard exists that requires lower speed for compliance with section 3361 (relating to driving vehicle at safe speed), the limits specified in this section or established under this subchapter shall be maximum lawful speeds and no person shall drive a vehicle at a speed in excess of the following maximum limits:

(1)  35 miles per hour in any urban district.

(1.1)  65 miles per hour or 70 miles per hour for all vehicles on freeways where the department has posted a 65-miles-per-hour or 70-miles-per-hour speed limit.

(1.2)  25 miles per hour in a residence district if the highway:

(i)  is not a numbered traffic route; and

(ii)  is functionally classified by the department as a local highway.

(2)  55 miles per hour in other locations.

(3)  Any other maximum speed limit established under this subchapter.
This makes it seem like 65 and 70 only are allowed, not 60.
Going by that logic, 30, 40, and 45 would appear to not be allowed either.  As such, I'm going to go with the way sprjus4 interpreted it.

Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 21, 2021, 08:29:57 AM
Does PA post 60 in work zones?
There have been multiple examples listed of them doing just that.  Here's another from I-380 (https://nysroads.com/photos.php?route=i380&state=PA&file=101_7902.JPG).
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on May 21, 2021, 01:20:16 PM
PennDOT - District 3 News: McKees Half Falls Rest Area Opens Today in Snyder County (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=3526)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadgeekteen on May 21, 2021, 02:12:01 PM
Quote from: vdeane on May 21, 2021, 01:11:21 PM
Quote from: Ketchup99 on May 20, 2021, 10:59:55 PM
Quote
3362.  Maximum speed limits.

(a)  General rule.--Except when a special hazard exists that requires lower speed for compliance with section 3361 (relating to driving vehicle at safe speed), the limits specified in this section or established under this subchapter shall be maximum lawful speeds and no person shall drive a vehicle at a speed in excess of the following maximum limits:

(1)  35 miles per hour in any urban district.

(1.1)  65 miles per hour or 70 miles per hour for all vehicles on freeways where the department has posted a 65-miles-per-hour or 70-miles-per-hour speed limit.

(1.2)  25 miles per hour in a residence district if the highway:

(i)  is not a numbered traffic route; and

(ii)  is functionally classified by the department as a local highway.

(2)  55 miles per hour in other locations.

(3)  Any other maximum speed limit established under this subchapter.
This makes it seem like 65 and 70 only are allowed, not 60.
Going by that logic, 30, 40, and 45 would appear to not be allowed either.  As such, I'm going to go with the way sprjus4 interpreted it.

Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 21, 2021, 08:29:57 AM
Does PA post 60 in work zones?
There have been multiple examples listed of them doing just that.  Here's another from I-380 (https://nysroads.com/photos.php?route=i380&state=PA&file=101_7902.JPG).
Then they must be allowed to post 60.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jeffandnicole on May 21, 2021, 10:27:33 PM
Quote from: vdeane on May 21, 2021, 01:11:21 PM
Quote from: Ketchup99 on May 20, 2021, 10:59:55 PM
Quote
3362.  Maximum speed limits.

(a)  General rule.--Except when a special hazard exists that requires lower speed for compliance with section 3361 (relating to driving vehicle at safe speed), the limits specified in this section or established under this subchapter shall be maximum lawful speeds and no person shall drive a vehicle at a speed in excess of the following maximum limits:

(1)  35 miles per hour in any urban district.

(1.1)  65 miles per hour or 70 miles per hour for all vehicles on freeways where the department has posted a 65-miles-per-hour or 70-miles-per-hour speed limit.

(1.2)  25 miles per hour in a residence district if the highway:

(i)  is not a numbered traffic route; and

(ii)  is functionally classified by the department as a local highway.

(2)  55 miles per hour in other locations.

(3)  Any other maximum speed limit established under this subchapter.
This makes it seem like 65 and 70 only are allowed, not 60.
Going by that logic, 30, 40, and 45 would appear to not be allowed either.  As such, I'm going to go with the way sprjus4 interpreted it.

Numeeous people need to reread the very first line of the quoted law.

The speeds listed are MAXIMUM speeds, not the only permitted speeds.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on May 25, 2021, 10:12:33 AM
On US 11: PennDOT - District 4 News: PennDOT Initiated a Project to Study SR 11 Bridge Between Pittston and West Pittston, Luzerne County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-4/pages/details.aspx?newsid=799)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on May 27, 2021, 11:08:44 AM
PennDOT - District 9 News: PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING DISTRICT 9 WINS 2020 PERPETUAL PAVEMENT AWARD (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-9/pages/details.aspx?newsid=936)

This is for a section of PA 96.  Yes, I know that most of you will not believe this.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: J N Winkler on May 27, 2021, 12:32:23 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on May 27, 2021, 11:08:44 AMPennDOT - District 9 News: PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING DISTRICT 9 WINS 2020 PERPETUAL PAVEMENT AWARD (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-9/pages/details.aspx?newsid=936)

This is for a section of PA 96.  Yes, I know that most of you will not believe this.

With those AADT numbers on a highway that forms no part of a logical truck route, and the award being given by an asphalt industry group that leaves overlays out of consideration when it claims asphalt pavements can be "perpetual," I absolutely believe it.  Any agency can get lucky with a forgiving subgrade.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on May 27, 2021, 04:04:52 PM
PennDOT - District 6 News: I-76 West Collector/Distributor Ramp to U.S. 202/U.S. 422 to be Reduced to Single Lane for Several Months for Sinkhole Repair in Montgomery County (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=6748)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jemacedo9 on May 27, 2021, 04:25:34 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on May 27, 2021, 04:04:52 PM
PennDOT - District 6 News: I-76 West Collector/Distributor Ramp to U.S. 202/U.S. 422 to be Reduced to Single Lane for Several Months for Sinkhole Repair in Montgomery County (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=6748)
The red line on the map is in the wrong place...the C/D lanes to 202/422 are where the "328B" is noted...gotta love it...
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on May 27, 2021, 04:27:13 PM
PennDOT - District 5 News: Wolf Administration Previews 2021 Construction Season in East Central Region (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-5/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2774)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: MASTERNC on May 30, 2021, 12:18:41 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on May 27, 2021, 04:04:52 PM
PennDOT - District 6 News: I-76 West Collector/Distributor Ramp to U.S. 202/U.S. 422 to be Reduced to Single Lane for Several Months for Sinkhole Repair in Montgomery County (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=6748)

That's going to be a major mess - traffic was backed up at all hours of the day when they did the temporary repairs.  Add to that the Hanging Rock road closure and Matsonford Road, and the back roads are going to be quite busy.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on June 02, 2021, 02:31:53 PM
On PA 366: PennDOT - District 11 News: Route 366 Tarentum Bridge Long-Term Closure Begins Next Week in Tarentum (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-11/pages/details.aspx?newsid=5162)

Update on Potters Mills Gap:  PennDOT - District 2 News: Potters Mills Update as Work Winds Down (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1974)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on June 04, 2021, 10:57:34 AM
PennDOT - District 4 News: Wolf Administration Previews 2021 Northeast Region Construction Season, Highlights Projects (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-4/pages/details.aspx?newsid=803)

PennDOT - District 2 News: PennDOT, Highway Safety Network, Visit Clearfield County Commemorate Opening of Clearfield County Traffic Safety Geotrail (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1976)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: CapeCodder on June 08, 2021, 10:16:22 PM
Has the project on 81 near W-B and Scranton been completed? I seem to remember at one point the individual lanes were divided by Jersey barriers through the work zone.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on June 09, 2021, 07:39:54 AM
Quote from: CapeCodder on June 08, 2021, 10:16:22 PM
Has the project on 81 near W-B and Scranton been completed? I seem to remember at one point the individual lanes were divided by Jersey barriers through the work zone.

If you are referring to this project (https://gis.penndot.gov/paprojects/Reports/ProjectReport.aspx?ProjectID=109304&ReportType=UnderConstruction), it is supposed to be completed this month.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on June 10, 2021, 04:03:15 PM
PennDOT - District 6 News: New Detour Begins Monday for Route 320 (South Gulph Road) Improvement Project at Hanging Rock in Upper Merion Township (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=6779)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on June 11, 2021, 05:31:47 PM
PennDOT - District 6 News: PennDOT to Begin Project to Improve, Widen, Reconstruct 1.8 Miles of U.S. 202 (Dekalb Pike) in Montgomery County (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=6786)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ekt8750 on June 12, 2021, 03:21:34 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on June 11, 2021, 05:31:47 PM
PennDOT - District 6 News: PennDOT to Begin Project to Improve, Widen, Reconstruct 1.8 Miles of U.S. 202 (Dekalb Pike) in Montgomery County (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=6786)

I guess they finished the stretch from Township Line north to Morris Road? I was up that way two months ago and it looked like they still had a ton of work to do.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on June 12, 2021, 04:01:55 PM
Quote from: ekt8750 on June 12, 2021, 03:21:34 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on June 11, 2021, 05:31:47 PM
PennDOT - District 6 News: PennDOT to Begin Project to Improve, Widen, Reconstruct 1.8 Miles of U.S. 202 (Dekalb Pike) in Montgomery County (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=6786)
I guess they finished the stretch from Township Line north to Morris Road? I was up that way two months ago and it looked like they still had a ton of work to do.

The current completion date of that project is not until November 26, 2025 (https://gis.penndot.gov/paprojects/Reports/ProjectReport.aspx?ProjectID=63491&ReportType=UnderConstruction).
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Rothman on June 12, 2021, 04:56:09 PM
*Waits for I-81 to be repaved from NY/PA line to New Milford*
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on June 15, 2021, 04:03:11 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on April 07, 2021, 03:03:38 PM
Update on PA 28 at the Highland Park Interchange: Route 28 Phase Change Begins this Week in Allegheny County (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-11/pages/details.aspx?newsid=5043)

PennDOT - District 11 News: Northbound Route 28 Off-ramp to the Highland Park Bridge Long-term Closure Begins Monday in Sharpsburg (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-11/pages/details.aspx?newsid=5183)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: CapeCodder on June 15, 2021, 08:06:44 PM
Looking at a map of Bucks County, I noticed Exit 39 on 95 looks overbuilt. Was there supposed to be something much larger?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: sprjus4 on June 16, 2021, 12:11:20 AM
Quote from: CapeCodder on June 15, 2021, 08:06:44 PM
Looking at a map of Bucks County, I noticed Exit 39 on 95 looks overbuilt. Was there supposed to be something much larger?
I-95's original proposed alignment, IIRC.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Alps on June 16, 2021, 12:48:23 AM
Quote from: sprjus4 on June 16, 2021, 12:11:20 AM
Quote from: CapeCodder on June 15, 2021, 08:06:44 PM
Looking at a map of Bucks County, I noticed Exit 39 on 95 looks overbuilt. Was there supposed to be something much larger?
I-95's original proposed alignment, IIRC.
That and I-895 connecting into NJ on a new Burlington-Bristol Bridge - 4 leg double trumpet of sorts.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on June 17, 2021, 09:28:43 PM
District 6:
PennDOT - District 6 News: U.S. 1 South (Roosevelt Expressway) Lane Closures at Night Next Week for Traffic Pattern Change in Philadelphia (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=6797)
PennDOT - District 6 News: PennDOT Announces Start of Construction on Barbadoes Street Connector Project in Norristown, Montgomery County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=6789)
PennDOT - District 6 News: U.S. 202 (Dekalb Pike) Daytime Lane Closures Planned Next Week for Construction in Montgomery County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=6793)

District 8:
PennDOT - District 8 News: Detour Scheduled for Route 851 at Interstate 83 (Exit 4) Interchange in Shrewsbury Township, York County (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1413)
PennDOT - District 8 News: Lane Restrictions Begin Next Week for Maintenance Work on the I-83 John Harris Memorial (South) Bridge (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1412)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: sprjus4 on June 17, 2021, 10:51:08 PM
What are with these new variable speed limits on I-76? I get their usage for during heavy traffic, but the whole segment this evening was fluctuating between 35 mph and 50 mph, with actual flows between 60-75 mph. If you did 35 mph, you're almost asking to be ran off the road - you might as well use hazards!

Variable speed limits should not be used in the manner they are applying them here. They're even more of a joke than the actual speed limits, which is 55 mph on the majority of the stretch by default, which is far more reasonable for this highway in particular - sure traffic moved much faster, but I wouldn't recommend any higher limit officially simply due to the geometry of the roadway - maybe 60 mph if those were permitted, but even that's questionable.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on June 18, 2021, 07:17:35 PM
Quote from: sprjus4 on June 17, 2021, 10:51:08 PM
What are with these new variable speed limits on I-76? I get their usage for during heavy traffic, but the whole segment this evening was fluctuating between 35 mph and 50 mph, with actual flows between 60-75 mph. If you did 35 mph, you're almost asking to be ran off the road - you might as well use hazards!

Variable speed limits should not be used in the manner they are applying them here. They're even more of a joke than the actual speed limits, which is 55 mph on the majority of the stretch by default, which is far more reasonable for this highway in particular - sure traffic moved much faster, but I wouldn't recommend any higher limit officially simply due to the geometry of the roadway - maybe 60 mph if those were permitted, but even that's questionable.

It sounds like that PennDOT has not fully addressed this issue.  I cannot remember offhand if I brought it up during a staff meeting or not.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on June 23, 2021, 10:35:06 AM
PennDOT - District 8 News: Bridge Deck Repairs Planned for Saturday on NB I-81 (George N. Wade Memorial) Bridge Between Cumberland and Dauphin Counties (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1416)

EDIT (6-24-2021):  PennDOT - District 10 News: Wolf Administration Highlights 2021 District 10 Region Construction Season
(http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1017)

Of note here are the projects related to SR 3020 and PA 228, the latter of which (or maybe both if PA 228 is eventually extended to PA 65) will eventually affect Travel Mapping.

PennDOT - District 8 News: Barrier Removal Tomorrow on State Road (Route 722) at the Route 283 Landisville Interchange Project in Lancaster County (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1418)

EDIT (6-25-2021):  PennDOT - District 11 News: Route 366 Tarentum Bridge Long-Term Closure Extended in Tarentum (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-11/pages/details.aspx?newsid=5199)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Crown Victoria on June 26, 2021, 09:26:11 AM
The project to reconstruct PA 61 between St. Clair and Frackville has been awarded just over $21 million through an INFRA grant.

This project is much needed as truck traffic is growing in the area due to the large number of warehouses throughout eastern PA and with Route 61 serving as a link between I-78 and I-81. Currently PA 61 is in pretty rough shape here, up to the point where southbound is limited to one lane due to the roadway collapsing.

https://www.skooknews.com/2021/06/penndot-awarded-21012220-million.html

https://www.revitalize61.com/
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on June 26, 2021, 02:17:05 PM
Quote from: Crown Victoria on June 26, 2021, 09:26:11 AM
The project to reconstruct PA 61 between St. Clair and Frackville has been awarded just over $21 million through an INFRA grant.

This project is much needed as truck traffic is growing in the area due to the large number of warehouses throughout eastern PA and with Route 61 serving as a link between I-78 and I-81. Currently PA 61 is in pretty rough shape here, up to the point where southbound is limited to one lane due to the roadway collapsing.

https://www.skooknews.com/2021/06/penndot-awarded-21012220-million.html

https://www.revitalize61.com/

I did not realize that.  Thank you for mentioning it.  I do not think I will need to update PA 61 in Travel Mapping as the centerline does not seem to change very much.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Crown Victoria on June 26, 2021, 06:08:08 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on June 26, 2021, 02:17:05 PM
Quote from: Crown Victoria on June 26, 2021, 09:26:11 AM
The project to reconstruct PA 61 between St. Clair and Frackville has been awarded just over $21 million through an INFRA grant.

This project is much needed as truck traffic is growing in the area due to the large number of warehouses throughout eastern PA and with Route 61 serving as a link between I-78 and I-81. Currently PA 61 is in pretty rough shape here, up to the point where southbound is limited to one lane due to the roadway collapsing.

https://www.skooknews.com/2021/06/penndot-awarded-21012220-million.html

https://www.revitalize61.com/

I did not realize that.  Thank you for mentioning it.  I do not think I will need to update PA 61 in Travel Mapping as the centerline does not seem to change very much.

You're welcome! Thank you for all the project updates that you provide for us.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on June 26, 2021, 06:11:27 PM
Quote from: Crown Victoria on June 26, 2021, 06:08:08 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on June 26, 2021, 02:17:05 PM
Quote from: Crown Victoria on June 26, 2021, 09:26:11 AM
The project to reconstruct PA 61 between St. Clair and Frackville has been awarded just over $21 million through an INFRA grant.

This project is much needed as truck traffic is growing in the area due to the large number of warehouses throughout eastern PA and with Route 61 serving as a link between I-78 and I-81. Currently PA 61 is in pretty rough shape here, up to the point where southbound is limited to one lane due to the roadway collapsing.

https://www.skooknews.com/2021/06/penndot-awarded-21012220-million.html

https://www.revitalize61.com/

I did not realize that.  Thank you for mentioning it.  I do not think I will need to update PA 61 in Travel Mapping as the centerline does not seem to change very much.

You're welcome! Thank you for all the project updates that you provide for us.

For some reason, District 5 is not the best when it comes to news releases.  Outside of maybe District 4 at times, the other districts seem to do a solid job at them.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on June 28, 2021, 03:42:59 PM
PennDOT - District 8 News: Diverging Diamond Interchange Opens at I-83 Exit 4 (Route 851) in Shrewsbury Township, York County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1420)  (I-83 at PA 851)

PennDOT - District 12 News: Emergency Closure Route 40 - Henry Clay Township (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-12/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1605)  (Well no clinching US 40 for the 4th of July)

PennDOT - District 12 News: Wolf Administration Previews 2021 Construction Season for Southwest Region (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-12/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1606)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ixnay on June 28, 2021, 08:51:53 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on June 28, 2021, 03:42:59 PM
PennDOT - District 12 News: Emergency Closure Route 40 - Henry Clay Township (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-12/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1605)  (Well no clinching US 40 for the 4th of July)

Reminds me of the closure of US 30 in the North Versailles(?) area east of Pittsburgh to stabilize that cliffside stretch.

ixnay
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on July 01, 2021, 02:34:24 PM
PennDOT - District 12 News: Ramp Closures Interstate 70 - Exit 54 (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-12/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1608)

PennDOT - District 6 News: U.S. 202 (Dekalb Pike) Long-Term Lane Closures Planned for Construction in Montgomery County (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=6826)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on July 02, 2021, 09:49:58 AM
PennDOT - District 6 News: (Route 352) Edgmont Avenue over I-95 to Reopen Today Following Bridge Rehabilitation in the City of Chester (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=6833)

PennDOT - District 3 News: Route 220 Safety Improvement Project Updates (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=3600)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Flyer78 on July 02, 2021, 11:21:03 AM
PennDOT has created a detailed website for improvements to US 1 in the Middletown (Delco) area at https://pa352us1delco.com/

Some major changes to the very antiquated cloverleaf interchange at PA352. Also a new ramp will be added to allow traffic heading south on Baltimore Pike to access the bypass directly, which I think will actually be useful, even if it is "out of the way" from Media to get on its own bypass.

Improvements also detailed for the US1/PA452 and PA352/PA452 interchanges.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Crown Victoria on July 02, 2021, 11:53:35 AM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on July 01, 2021, 02:34:24 PM
PennDOT - District 12 News: Ramp Closures Interstate 70 - Exit 54 (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-12/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1608)

Having traveled the Washington PA-New Stanton stretch of I-70 recently, it's interesting to see the contrast between the improvements made over the last decade and the unimproved sections. Once all upgrades are completed, that stretch of I-70 will be a much more enjoyable ride.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ekt8750 on July 05, 2021, 11:24:49 AM
Quote from: Flyer78 on July 02, 2021, 11:21:03 AM
PennDOT has created a detailed website for improvements to US 1 in the Middletown (Delco) area at https://pa352us1delco.com/

Some major changes to the very antiquated cloverleaf interchange at PA352. Also a new ramp will be added to allow traffic heading south on Baltimore Pike to access the bypass directly, which I think will actually be useful, even if it is "out of the way" from Media to get on its own bypass.

Improvements also detailed for the US1/PA452 and PA352/PA452 interchanges.

That 1-352 interchange is an absolute nightmare during rush hours. I really like the idea of making it an SPUI and moving the ramps to the Media Bypass to the left lanes.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on July 05, 2021, 02:46:13 PM
PennDOT - District 9 News: Section of Route 2031 (Garrett Shortcut Road) Closed Due to Sinkhole in Somerset County (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-9/pages/details.aspx?newsid=957)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on July 05, 2021, 03:37:32 PM
Quote from: ekt8750 on July 05, 2021, 11:24:49 AM
Quote from: Flyer78 on July 02, 2021, 11:21:03 AM
PennDOT has created a detailed website for improvements to US 1 in the Middletown (Delco) area at https://pa352us1delco.com/

Some major changes to the very antiquated cloverleaf interchange at PA352. Also a new ramp will be added to allow traffic heading south on Baltimore Pike to access the bypass directly, which I think will actually be useful, even if it is "out of the way" from Media to get on its own bypass.

Improvements also detailed for the US1/PA452 and PA352/PA452 interchanges.

That 1-352 interchange is an absolute nightmare during rush hours. I really like the idea of making it an SPUI and moving the ramps to the Media Bypass to the left lanes.

I love how both alternatives involve technically extending the freeway.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ekt8750 on July 05, 2021, 11:09:59 PM
Quote from: Roadsguy on July 05, 2021, 03:37:32 PM
Quote from: ekt8750 on July 05, 2021, 11:24:49 AM
Quote from: Flyer78 on July 02, 2021, 11:21:03 AM
PennDOT has created a detailed website for improvements to US 1 in the Middletown (Delco) area at https://pa352us1delco.com/

Some major changes to the very antiquated cloverleaf interchange at PA352. Also a new ramp will be added to allow traffic heading south on Baltimore Pike to access the bypass directly, which I think will actually be useful, even if it is "out of the way" from Media to get on its own bypass.

Improvements also detailed for the US1/PA452 and PA352/PA452 interchanges.

That 1-352 interchange is an absolute nightmare during rush hours. I really like the idea of making it an SPUI and moving the ramps to the Media Bypass to the left lanes.

I love how both alternatives involve technically extending the freeway.

Just a tad. It also alleviates the bottleneck caused by the lane drop at the end of the freeway. Another choke point at rush hour.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on July 06, 2021, 09:53:20 AM
PennDOT - District 11 News: Northbound I-79 Neville Island Bridge Weekend Closure July 9-12 (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-11/pages/details.aspx?newsid=5212)
PennDOT - District 10 News: Weekend Closure of Freedom Road in Butler County (Cranberry Township) (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1028)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: PHLBOS on July 06, 2021, 07:46:13 PM
Quote from: Flyer78 on July 02, 2021, 11:21:03 AM
PennDOT has created a detailed website for improvements to US 1 in the Middletown (Delco) area at https://pa352us1delco.com/

Some major changes to the very antiquated cloverleaf interchange at PA352. Also a new ramp will be added to allow traffic heading south on Baltimore Pike to access the bypass directly, which I think will actually be useful, even if it is "out of the way" from Media to get on its own bypass.

Improvements also detailed for the US1/PA452 and PA352/PA452 interchanges.
Having viewed the above, my preferences are as follows:

Area 1 (US 1/PA 352 & Baltimore Pike): Alternate B - the SPUI interchange for US 1/PA 352, one less signal along US 1

Area 2 (US 1/PA 452): Alternative A - Loop Road with no left turns, one less signal along US 1

Area 3 (PA 352/452): Alternative A - I'm not completely sold on the roundabout option in Alternate B.

Quote from: ekt8750 on July 05, 2021, 11:24:49 AM
That 1-352 interchange is an absolute nightmare during rush hours. I really like the idea of making it an SPUI and moving the ramps to the Media Bypass to the left lanes.
Having given a friend of mine a ride from his home in the Glenolden area to his job at Fair Acres during the early afternoons multiple times over the past year; that ramp from 352 southbound to US 1 northbound for my return trip at/around 2:30-3 PM can be very congested.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on July 12, 2021, 12:33:15 PM
PennDOT - District 12 News: Road Closure Route 356 - Allegheny Township (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-12/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1610)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on July 13, 2021, 12:00:09 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on July 06, 2021, 09:53:20 AM
PennDOT - District 11 News: Northbound I-79 Neville Island Bridge Weekend Closure July 9-12 (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-11/pages/details.aspx?newsid=5212)
PennDOT - District 10 News: Weekend Closure of Freedom Road in Butler County (Cranberry Township) (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1028)
PennDOT - District 10 News: Change of Date for Weekend Closure of Freedom Road in Butler County (Cranberry Township) (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1034)

EDIT:  PennDOT - District 10 News: Route 286 Oakland Avenue Road Closure Next Week
(http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1035)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Crown Victoria on July 15, 2021, 08:47:26 AM
A draft of the TROC report, due in August, is proposing eliminating the gas tax, while establishing a mileage fee, a package delivery fee, and increases to other fees related to transportation:

https://www.post-gazette.com/news/transportation/2021/07/14/penndot-transportation-funding-mileage-driven-fee-package-delivery-shared-rides-uber-lyft-troc/stories/202107140143
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: MASTERNC on July 15, 2021, 12:05:10 PM
Quote from: Crown Victoria on July 15, 2021, 08:47:26 AM
A draft of the TROC report, due in August, is proposing eliminating the gas tax, while establishing a mileage fee, a package delivery fee, and increases to other fees related to transportation:

https://www.post-gazette.com/news/transportation/2021/07/14/penndot-transportation-funding-mileage-driven-fee-package-delivery-shared-rides-uber-lyft-troc/stories/202107140143

This is going to have a hard time gaining support.  Someone driving 12k miles per year would pay nearly $1,000, on top of a value-based registration fee and an 8-10% sales tax at purchase.  What is paid with the gas tax is multiples less.  There is also a question about out-of-state vehicles (both PA vehicles driving outside PA and non-PA vehicles driving in PA).
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jeffandnicole on July 15, 2021, 01:04:58 PM
Quote from: MASTERNC on July 15, 2021, 12:05:10 PM
Quote from: Crown Victoria on July 15, 2021, 08:47:26 AM
A draft of the TROC report, due in August, is proposing eliminating the gas tax, while establishing a mileage fee, a package delivery fee, and increases to other fees related to transportation:

https://www.post-gazette.com/news/transportation/2021/07/14/penndot-transportation-funding-mileage-driven-fee-package-delivery-shared-rides-uber-lyft-troc/stories/202107140143

This is going to have a hard time gaining support.  Someone driving 12k miles per year would pay nearly $1,000, on top of a value-based registration fee and an 8-10% sales tax at purchase.  What is paid with the gas tax is multiples less.  There is also a question about out-of-state vehicles (both PA vehicles driving outside PA and non-PA vehicles driving in PA).

With a $8 billion deficit, the point is to raise money, and someone paying more than than they do via taxes at the pump is very much the goal. 

Several other issues though is raising the money thru other means that are loosely tied with driving, or creates another "double taxation" scenario.  Any sort of delivery fee or business costs are passed onto the consumer anyway, directly or indirectly.

PA no doubt has a serious funding issue, and they really should be talking to the feds about getting more $$$, rather than constantly looking at the taxpayer to grab more money from them.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: vdeane on July 15, 2021, 01:22:31 PM
Or admit that they can't keep subsidizing transit at the rate they currently do, or do system expansions the way they do.  There's a reason neighboring NY is in preservation mode.  The issue here is that it's not just a little more, it's a LOT more.  I drive around 15k miles/year.  That comes out to $1,215 under the mileage tax.  If we assume my Civic averages around 30 miles/gallon, it comes out to an equivalent gas tax of $2.43/gallon, or more than four times the existing gas tax.  And that's before doubling the registration fee and adding a property tax on the car.  Or the out of state issue.  I can't imagine people will be pleased to get slapped with a big bill every year.  It would have the effect of disincentivizing driving, which to certain advocates would be a feature rather than a flaw.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on July 15, 2021, 07:45:48 PM
PennDOT - District 6 News: U.S. 1 North Ramp to I-295 West to Close for Bridge Rehabilitation Project in Middletown Township - Lane restrictions also planned next week on several ramps at the U.S. 1/I-295 Interchange (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=6873)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Crown Victoria on July 15, 2021, 11:26:34 PM
What we need to remember here is that, whatever the recommendations in the report, the state legislature will alter them substantially. There's no way they're going to approve $8.1 billion in new annual revenue (which is the stated gap in funding), never mind the $11.5 billion that following all the recommendations would generate long term. Act 89 of 2013 only generated about $2.5 billion annually.

One major issue facing this whole thing is the mileage tax. There needs to be a national policy of some kind regarding the collection of the tax, or at least cooperation between the states, before it can be truly viable and acceptable. With the large volume of out-of-state travelers passing through PA, we need a way to pass on the mileage tax to them, and insure that they will pay the tax.

I will add to this discussion one other point...there is a way to charge everyone per-mile being used in PA right now, regardless of where they're from, and it's got an almost 81-year track record. Had Act 44 not soured the public's mood regarding tolls, they might be one solution ready for use right now, at least on freeways.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on July 16, 2021, 10:19:53 PM
PennDOT - District 8 News: Traffic Switch Next Week on State Road at the Landisville Interchange Project in Lancaster County  (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1434) (meant to post this last week)

PennDOT - District 3 News: Route 220 Safety Improvement Project Updates (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=3620)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: MASTERNC on July 19, 2021, 08:34:46 PM
It's interesting that PennDOT was saying that flashing yellow arrows would be used for new and replacement signal installations in lieu of the doghouse signals.  However, it seems, at least in District 6, they are still using doghouse setups for new installations and there are random installations of FYA.  I'm guessing it's because they need to install two new signals (a FYA assembly and a second thru signal), whereas using the doghouse covers both the turning and thru movements.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ekt8750 on July 20, 2021, 09:06:10 AM
Quote from: MASTERNC on July 19, 2021, 08:34:46 PM
It's interesting that PennDOT was saying that flashing yellow arrows would be used for new and replacement signal installations in lieu of the doghouse signals.  However, it seems, at least in District 6, they are still using doghouse setups for new installations and there are random installations of FYA.  I'm guessing it's because they need to install two new signals (a FYA assembly and a second thru signal), whereas using the doghouse covers both the turning and thru movements.

From what I've seen, the FYAs have been going in at newly built and rebuilt intersections and most of those have been in more sparsely populated suburban to rural areas. I haven't seen any say in the city or more densely populated suburbs as of yet. I'm guessing in those areas, they need to be weaned off the doghouse before showing them something they haven't seen before and cause accidents.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on July 20, 2021, 02:24:20 PM
PennDOT - District 8 News: Closures Planned at Interstate 83 (Exit 4/Route 851) Interchange in Shrewsbury Township, York County (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1439)

PennDOT - District 8 News: Detour Planned for Roundabout Project at Route 34, Route 850 and Pisgah St. Road in Carroll Township, Perry County (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1440)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: tylert120 on July 20, 2021, 08:03:12 PM
Quote from: ekt8750 on July 20, 2021, 09:06:10 AM
Quote from: MASTERNC on July 19, 2021, 08:34:46 PM
It's interesting that PennDOT was saying that flashing yellow arrows would be used for new and replacement signal installations in lieu of the doghouse signals.  However, it seems, at least in District 6, they are still using doghouse setups for new installations and there are random installations of FYA.  I'm guessing it's because they need to install two new signals (a FYA assembly and a second thru signal), whereas using the doghouse covers both the turning and thru movements.

From what I've seen, the FYAs have been going in at newly built and rebuilt intersections and most of those have been in more sparsely populated suburban to rural areas. I haven't seen any say in the city or more densely populated suburbs as of yet. I'm guessing in those areas, they need to be weaned off the doghouse before showing them something they haven't seen before and cause accidents.


It is the complete opposite in Pittsburgh. There are more FYAs going up in city limits than you can count.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: MASTERNC on July 20, 2021, 08:27:36 PM
Quote from: ekt8750 on July 20, 2021, 09:06:10 AM
Quote from: MASTERNC on July 19, 2021, 08:34:46 PM
It's interesting that PennDOT was saying that flashing yellow arrows would be used for new and replacement signal installations in lieu of the doghouse signals.  However, it seems, at least in District 6, they are still using doghouse setups for new installations and there are random installations of FYA.  I'm guessing it's because they need to install two new signals (a FYA assembly and a second thru signal), whereas using the doghouse covers both the turning and thru movements.

From what I've seen, the FYAs have been going in at newly built and rebuilt intersections and most of those have been in more sparsely populated suburban to rural areas. I haven't seen any say in the city or more densely populated suburbs as of yet. I'm guessing in those areas, they need to be weaned off the doghouse before showing them something they haven't seen before and cause accidents.

I've actually seen at least one FYA in Philadelphia for right turns (15th & Arch), though they use it completely wrong.  It's a four section signal but the green arrow is never used.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on July 28, 2021, 04:23:25 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on June 28, 2021, 03:42:59 PM
PennDOT - District 12 News: Emergency Closure Route 40 - Henry Clay Township (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-12/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1605)  (Well no clinching US 40 for the 4th of July)

Route 40 to Reopen - Henry Clay Township, Fayette County (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-12/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1620)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Crown Victoria on July 30, 2021, 12:24:47 PM
The TROC report has been released:

https://www.penndot.gov/about-us/funding/Pages/TROC-Report.aspx
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on July 30, 2021, 01:53:53 PM
PennDOT - District 10 News: Weekend Closure of Freedom Road in Butler County (Cranberry Township) (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1057)

PennDOT - District 1 News: Route 215 Bridge to Reopen as Project to Reconstruct Interstate 90 in Erie County Continues (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1524) (For PA 215)

PennDOT - District 10 News: Road Closure on River Road (State Route 56) (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1058) (For PA 56)

PennDOT - District 6 News: PennDOT to Begin Lansdowne Avenue Improvement Project in Delaware County (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=6910)

PennDOT - District 8 News: Lane Restrictions Planned for State Road at the Landisville Interchange Project in Lancaster County (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1454)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: tylert120 on July 30, 2021, 05:26:06 PM
PennDOT unveiled the initial plans to improve the I-376 Banksville interchange just before the western portal of the Fort Pitt Tunnel. The project calls for a new bridge and new slip ramp.

https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-11/pages/details.aspx?newsid=5267 (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-11/pages/details.aspx?newsid=5267)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jemacedo9 on July 30, 2021, 07:40:49 PM
Breezewood improvements...$18.9M...but not what everyone wants...

https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-9/pages/details.aspx?newsid=966 (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-9/pages/details.aspx?newsid=966)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: rickmastfan67 on July 30, 2021, 11:49:37 PM
Quote from: tylert120 on July 30, 2021, 05:26:06 PM
PennDOT unveiled the initial plans to improve the I-376 Banksville interchange just before the western portal of the Fort Pitt Tunnel. The project calls for a new bridge and new slip ramp.

https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-11/pages/details.aspx?newsid=5267 (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-11/pages/details.aspx?newsid=5267)

Interesting that they are going to fix this area up finally.  Say good bye to US-19 Truck multiplexing with itself.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on July 31, 2021, 10:23:52 AM
Quote from: rickmastfan67 on July 30, 2021, 11:49:37 PM
Quote from: tylert120 on July 30, 2021, 05:26:06 PM
PennDOT unveiled the initial plans to improve the I-376 Banksville interchange just before the western portal of the Fort Pitt Tunnel. The project calls for a new bridge and new slip ramp.

https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-11/pages/details.aspx?newsid=5267 (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-11/pages/details.aspx?newsid=5267)

Interesting that they are going to fix this area up finally.  Say good bye to US-19 Truck multiplexing with itself.

US 19 Truck will still have the wrong-way concurrency with itself on the loop ramp at Banksville Road where it does today, but it will be much shorter because the ramp will split before merging with I-376. This will also mean that southbound 19 Truck won't be concurrent with eastbound I-376 anymore.

You can still join the Microsoft Teams meeting from the project page (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-11/PublicMeetings/AlleghenyCounty/Pages/I-376BanksvilleInterchangeProject.aspx), which just lets you play back the recording of the entire meeting, including a 3D rendering of the project. I don't know how long this will stay up, but they said the renderings and other materials will be posted on the page later this next week.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on August 06, 2021, 02:48:43 PM
PennDOT - District 10 News: 24-Hour Flagging to Begin Monday at State Route 28/322 Intersection (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1060)

EDIT (8-9-2021):  PennDOT - District 2 News: Early August Update for Local Interchange Project in Centre County (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2025)

PennDOT - District 10 News: Change of Dates for Weekend Closure of Freedom Road in Butler County (Cranberry Township)
(https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1068)

EDIT (8-10-2021):  PennDOT - District 9 News: Detour to be Placed for Next Phase of Work to Realign Routes 160/756 (Elton Intersection) in Cambria County (Cranberry Township) (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-9/pages/details.aspx?newsid=967)  (For PA 160/PA 756)

PennDOT - District 3 News: Route 901 Closed in Coal Township, Northumberland County (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=3658)  (For PA 901)

EDIT (8-12-2021):  PennDOT - District 3 News: Route 220 Safety Improvement Project Updates (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=3668)  (For US 220)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on August 13, 2021, 01:38:32 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on July 28, 2021, 04:23:25 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on June 28, 2021, 03:42:59 PM
PennDOT - District 12 News: Emergency Closure Route 40 - Henry Clay Township (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-12/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1605)  (Well no clinching US 40 for the 4th of July)

Route 40 to Reopen - Henry Clay Township, Fayette County (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-12/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1620)

PennDOT - District 12 News: Route 40 Open - Henry Clay Township, Fayette County (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-12/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1627)(For US 40)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on August 17, 2021, 09:43:55 AM
PennDOT - District 2 News: PennDOT to Host State College Area Connector (SCAC) Project Booth at Centre Grange Fair (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2033)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on August 17, 2021, 11:40:42 AM
https://goo.gl/maps/rZistybHZ4kyX2HK7
What is the purpose of the white place card on the stoplight pole on the right?  SR 3009 that is with its corespondent numbers?

https://goo.gl/maps/jer5GJqptMsLCHhg9
Another one after turning left from the intersection in the first.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: billpa on August 17, 2021, 12:22:52 PM
It's essentially a minor state route along with the PennDOT location reference number assigned to that small section of the road.

Pixel 2
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Bitmapped on August 17, 2021, 09:59:33 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on August 17, 2021, 11:40:42 AM
https://goo.gl/maps/rZistybHZ4kyX2HK7
What is the purpose of the white place card on the stoplight pole on the right?  SR 3009 that is with its corespondent numbers?

https://goo.gl/maps/jer5GJqptMsLCHhg9
Another one after turning left from the intersection in the first.

These are standard PennDOT Little White Signs. The numbers below the SR number are the inventory section of the route starting at the sign.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: SignBridge on August 21, 2021, 09:53:31 PM
I've just obtained an old copy of the 1958 book How Superhighways Are Made by David C. Cooke. On page 54 there is a photo of a nearly completed interchange between U.S.1 and U.S.13 in Pennsylvania with route markers shown. It is a complex interchange showing a left-hand exit from southbound Route 1 to Route 13 with hills in the background. It appears not to be the interchange outside Morrisville in Bucks County which is a completely different cloverleaf type junction on flat terrain.

I have overflown all of U.S. 1 in Pennsylvania using Google Earth and can't find any interchange that looks like the one in the photo. Does anyone here know where this place is or was, if maybe it was rebuilt at some point and looks different today? Any help will be appreciated.

Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Alps on August 22, 2021, 12:23:02 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on August 21, 2021, 09:53:31 PM
I've just obtained an old copy of the 1958 book How Superhighways Are Made by David C. Cooke. On page 54 there is a photo of a nearly completed interchange between U.S.1 and U.S.13 in Pennsylvania with route markers shown. It is a complex interchange showing a left-hand exit from southbound Route 1 to Route 13 with hills in the background. It appears not to be the interchange outside Morrisville in Bucks County which is a completely different cloverleaf type junction on flat terrain.

I have overflown all of U.S. 1 in Pennsylvania using Google Earth and can't find any interchange that looks like the one in the photo. Does anyone here know where this place is or was, if maybe it was rebuilt at some point and looks different today? Any help will be appreciated.


can we see a scan?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: SignBridge on August 22, 2021, 04:44:13 PM
Guys on the General Highway Talk board tipped me off. It's the interchange of I-76 and U.S. 1/City Ave. in Philadelphia. Area looks a lot different today than in the sixty year old photo.

I'm not the most computer savvy guy. Can anyone tell me how to copy the photo from my docs folder to this forum?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Alps on August 23, 2021, 12:30:25 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on August 22, 2021, 04:44:13 PM
Guys on the General Highway Talk board tipped me off. It's the interchange of I-76 and U.S. 1/City Ave. in Philadelphia. Area looks a lot different today than in the sixty year old photo.

I'm not the most computer savvy guy. Can anyone tell me how to copy the photo from my docs folder to this forum?
You would need to post it somewhere online like Instagram.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on August 23, 2021, 10:36:13 AM
PennDOT - District 1 News: Route 8 Project in Venango County Moves into Phase 4 (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1547)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on August 24, 2021, 03:55:10 PM
I see PennDOT finally saw the light on I-380 at Exit 3 for PA 940!

They finally figured out that "Pocono"  is not a city.  I saw on east coast roads that they placed both "Pocono Pines"  and " Mt. Pocono"  as control cities.  About time!
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: MASTERNC on August 26, 2021, 04:46:14 PM
Quote from: MASTERNC on May 19, 2021, 03:20:24 PM
Quote from: Crown Victoria on May 19, 2021, 12:14:43 PM
Quote from: Ketchup99 on May 19, 2021, 11:52:26 AM
Quote from: PHLBOS on May 19, 2021, 11:17:05 AM
Quote from: Ketchup99 on May 19, 2021, 09:25:28 AM
Perhaps, but remember PA cannot legally post 60, and I can't really see 65 ever being posted on much of the Schuylkill. Not saying it shouldn't be, but that's not even imaginable.
Although such was a Work-Zone Speed Limit but I did see some Speed Limit 60 signs along I-99's current work zones.  The regular speed limit there is 70.

The above was the first time I've seen a SPEED LIMIT 60 sign in PA.
Recently? Where?

I can also attest to seeing a Work Zone Speed Limit 60 sign recently here in PA. I also don't remember exactly where, but I think it was either I-78 or the PA Turnpike out by Somerset.

There was one on I-79 in Cranberry when they were redoing a pair of bridges.

Just happened to find photo proof on PennDOT's homepage.  Yes, 60 MPH in Pennsylvania is possible.

https://www.facebook.com/PennsylvaniaDepartmentofTransportation/photos/g.2469556183367290/4693095004041273
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on August 29, 2021, 03:36:11 PM
PennDOT - District 10 News: Weekend Closure of Freedom Road in Butler County (Cranberry Township) (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1084)

PennDOT - District 10 News: Traffic Restriction on State Route 28 in Jefferson County Begins August 30 (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1087)  (For PA 28)

PennDOT - District 6 News: U.S. 1 South (Baltimore Pike) Long-Term Pattern Begins Saturday for Concrete Patching in Chadds Ford Township (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=6976)

(For US 220)

PennDOT - District 3 News: Road Widening Continues Next Week on Route 220 in Muncy Township, Lycoming County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=3699)

PennDOT - District 3 News: Route 220 Safety Improvement Project Updates (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=3703)

(For US 322)  PennDOT - District 2 News: Detour Coming as Route 322 Work Continues Near Philipsburg (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2045)

(For PA 8)  PennDOT - District 1 News: Detour Timeline Updated for Route 8 Project in Venango County (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1552)

(For PA 18)  PennDOT - District 1 News: Route 18 Bridge in Girard Township, Erie County to be Removed (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1551)

(For PA 356)  PennDOT - District 12 News: Road Closure Route 356 (Leechburg Valley Road) - Allegheny Township, Westmoreland County (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-12/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1631)

EDIT (8-30-2021):

(For PA 5)  PennDOT - District 1 News: Route 5 to be Closed for Demolition Work (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1557)

(For US 322)  PennDOT - District 2 News: Route 322/Decatur Hill Road Detour Near Philipsburg Postponed (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2053)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on August 31, 2021, 09:54:59 AM
PennDOT - District 1 News: PennDOT Announces Public Meetings to Provide Updates on the Bayfront Parkway Central Corridor Improvement Project (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1558)

(For PA 420) PennDOT - District 6 News: Southbound Route 420 (Wanamaker Avenue) Lane Reopened over Darby Creek Following Bridge Repair in Tinicum Township, Delaware County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=6989)

EDIT (9-1-2021):  (For PA 18) PennDOT - District 1 News: Detour Announced for Expediated Route 18 Bridge Removal in Girard Township, Erie County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1559)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on September 02, 2021, 04:31:58 PM
PennDOT - District 2 News: State College Area Connector Website to be Updated in Anticipation of Late September Public Meeting (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2061)

EDIT (9-3-2021):  (For US 220)  PennDOT - District 3 News: Route 220 Safety Improvement Project Updates (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=3732)

(For I-80)  PennDOT - District 2 News: Early September Update for Local Interchange Project in Centre County (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2062)

EDIT (9-7-2021):  (For PA 8) PennDOT - District 1 News: Route 8 in Venango County Closed for Construction (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1562)

PennDOT - District 2 News: PennDOT Provides Roadwork Update for Drivers Bound for Beaver Stadium (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2063)

PennDOT - District 12 News: PennDOT Receives Regional America's Transportation Award for Improving Mobility, Accessibility at Ohiopyle State Park (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-12/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1637)  (For PA 381)

EDIT (9-8-2021):  PennDOT - District 2 News: Route 1005 (North Main Street) Closed Just North of Burnham (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2066)

PennDOT - District 5 News: Monroe County: Sugar Hollow Road Bridge Closed in Chestnuthill Township (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-5/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2891)

(For PA 18) PennDOT - District 1 News: Interstate 90 Ramp Closures Delayed as Route 18 Bridge Removal Continues (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1565)

EDIT (9-9-2021):  (For PA 879) PennDOT - District 2 News: Reminder: Repairs to Karthaus Truss Bridge Will Require Temporary Closure and Detour Starting Monday (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2068)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on September 09, 2021, 05:38:39 PM
PennDOT - District 8 News: Nighttime Lane Restrictions Planned for I-83 Project Near Harrisburg (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1501)

EDIT (9-10-2021):  PennDOT - District 2 News: Route 1005 (North Main Street) Closure Continues Just North of Burnham (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2071)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: famartin on September 10, 2021, 11:29:31 AM
So while I was wondering around northeastern PA yesterday, I noticed an oddity with signage which happened in multiple places.

Typical guidance for reassurance signs on interstates and other freeways is to place one shortly after on-ramps, to "reassure" the traveler as to which way they are going.

However, in several locations (on both I-81 and I-84) in northeast PA, I noticed the reassurance sign was placed shortly beyond the off-ramp, but notably BEFORE the on-ramp (such that there was no way traffic from the on-ramp would see it). It seemed as if they were reminding you "If you intended to exit, you just missed".  :-D
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on September 10, 2021, 02:47:43 PM
(For PA 28) PennDOT - District 11 News: Northbound Route 28 Ramp to the Highland Park Bridge to Reopen Saturday in Sharpsburg (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-11/pages/details.aspx?newsid=5404)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on September 11, 2021, 12:38:30 PM
I just noticed something interesting about Exit 310 on I-80. It's not only a pair of directional interchanges, but also a folded diamond as well on the Delaware Water Gap Village side where the PA 611 connector and the local road intersect as well.

Obviously that was before I-80 got built when former US 611 was aligned from the Delaware Water Gap Bridge into the connector road which then brought 611 back to it's PA two lane alignment. The folded diamond was an interchange of that route after it curved to the left after the plaza.

Also the ramp at the toll plaza that is closed also was used when US 611 was solely on the bridge to NJ then as well. I assumed it got closed post I-80 to avoid weaving at the plaza and redundancy when Exit 310 opened.

Edit: as per 1953 historical aerials shows that as a parclo interchange, so it was not so as I guessed.  When I-80 was built they changed that particular interchange with Broad Street as in 1963, I-80 was opened by then with the current configuration.

So the Wiki article about the I-80 freeway through Stroudsburg can't be right as it stated that originally built to be a bypass for defunct US 611 around Stroudsburg before it became I-80.
Title: Pennsylvania
Post by: sbeaver44 on September 12, 2021, 09:02:33 AM
Wikipedia says that PA 235 has an unsigned concurrency with PA 17 and that they both end at US 11/15 in Liverpool

However when I pull the Perry County SLDs dated 12/31/20

Page 213 has SR 0235 ending at SR 0017.   I'd expect this anyway, since, for example, you'll see SR 0015 not really existing in these diagrams (as US 15 is entirely concurrent with US 11 in Perry County, so it will only be SR 0011).  In both cases, if PA 235 actually ended at PA 17, or if it didn't – the SR 0235 designation would end here, as PA 17 is a lower number of the same class, and so even a signed PA 17/235 concurrency would simply bear SR 0017.

Pages 253-254 have SR 0017 between SR 0235 and SR 0011 (US 11/15) but I can't tell how I would read if PA 235 is also existing (but not signed) along here.

Source:

https://www.dot.state.pa.us/public/Bureaus/BOMO/RM/RITS/Annual%20Electronic%20SLDs%20by%20County/District%208/Perry%20Without%20Pipes.pdf (https://www.dot.state.pa.us/public/Bureaus/BOMO/RM/RITS/Annual%20Electronic%20SLDs%20by%20County/District%208/Perry%20Without%20Pipes.pdf)


On this note, are there any other weird hidden concurrencies in PA like this?   For the record, I am not talking about not-signed-but-obviously-implied ones like US 30/PA 23 along the Lancaster Bypass, but here – why would PA 235 be extended along PA 17 just to end and not continue after?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on September 12, 2021, 07:55:28 PM
^I should consider asking someone in District 8 about this.  Thankfully, PA 235 does not extend along PA 17 to US 11/US 15 in Travel Mapping at the moment anyway.

These odd hidden concurrencies seem to be more of an Ohio issue based on my experience.  OH 43 does not seem to be signed along OH 14 at all, yet it still apparently follows it all the way to the Public Square in Cleveland.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: amroad17 on September 13, 2021, 03:42:59 AM
Quote from: famartin on September 10, 2021, 11:29:31 AM
So while I was wondering around northeastern PA yesterday, I noticed an oddity with signage which happened in multiple places.

Typical guidance for reassurance signs on interstates and other freeways is to place one shortly after on-ramps, to "reassure" the traveler as to which way they are going.

However, in several locations (on both I-81 and I-84) in northeast PA, I noticed the reassurance sign was placed shortly beyond the off-ramp, but notably BEFORE the on-ramp (such that there was no way traffic from the on-ramp would see it). It seemed as if they were reminding you "If you intended to exit, you just missed".  :-D
This was very prevalent in the 1970's--especially on I-81 north of Scranton.  At almost every interchange, there would be a direction-less reassurance sign placed between the off-ramp and the over/underpass about 100-150 feet past the gore.

Here is one at Exit 201 with a NORTH directional banner.
https://goo.gl/maps/XS2HmC2TP2kQjMwh7

In the 1970's there would not be any NORTH banner on the post, just the I-81 sign.  I figured it was "something Pennsylvania did" that was slightly out of the ordinary.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: sbeaver44 on September 13, 2021, 08:08:01 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on September 12, 2021, 07:55:28 PM
^I should consider asking someone in District 8 about this.  Thankfully, PA 235 does not extend along PA 17 to US 11/US 15 in Travel Mapping at the moment anyway.

These odd hidden concurrencies seem to be more of an Ohio issue based on my experience.  OH 43 does not seem to be signed along OH 14 at all, yet it still apparently follows it all the way to the Public Square in Cleveland.
Good idea, I have written District 8 before.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: sbeaver44 on September 13, 2021, 08:16:19 PM
I notice the 511PA Allentown account always Tweets "PA 229"  in reference to Cedar Crest Boulevard but also in places it doesn't make sense

"Roadwork on US 22 eastbound between PA 229/Cedar Crest Blvd and PA 145 South/7th St.  There is a lane restriction."

PA 29 doesn't intersect US 22?  Both the signage and SR 29 designation on SLDs end at I-78.  There is no SR 0229.

https://twitter.com/511paallentown/status/1437547891485286402?s=21 (https://twitter.com/511paallentown/status/1437547891485286402?s=21)

Now according to  https://www.pahighways.com/state/PA201-250.html#PA229 (https://www.pahighways.com/state/PA201-250.html#PA229) PA 229 was signed here...till 1946

I suppose it's probably their database simply not accounting for the decommissioning but...wow
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on September 13, 2021, 09:46:25 PM
Quote from: sbeaver44 on September 13, 2021, 08:08:01 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on September 12, 2021, 07:55:28 PM
^I should consider asking someone in District 8 about this.  Thankfully, PA 235 does not extend along PA 17 to US 11/US 15 in Travel Mapping at the moment anyway.

These odd hidden concurrencies seem to be more of an Ohio issue based on my experience.  OH 43 does not seem to be signed along OH 14 at all, yet it still apparently follows it all the way to the Public Square in Cleveland.
Good idea, I have written District 8 before.

I am currently on a trip to Arizona so I do not have time to do this at the moment.

Quote from: sbeaver44 on September 13, 2021, 08:16:19 PM
I notice the 511PA Allentown account always Tweets "PA 229"  in reference to Cedar Crest Boulevard but also in places it doesn't make sense

"Roadwork on US 22 eastbound between PA 229/Cedar Crest Blvd and PA 145 South/7th St.  There is a lane restriction."

PA 29 doesn't intersect US 22?  Both the signage and SR 29 designation on SLDs end at I-78.  There is no SR 0229.

https://twitter.com/511paallentown/status/1437547891485286402?s=21 (https://twitter.com/511paallentown/status/1437547891485286402?s=21)

Now according to  https://www.pahighways.com/state/PA201-250.html#PA229 (https://www.pahighways.com/state/PA201-250.html#PA229) PA 229 was signed here...till 1946

I suppose it's probably their database simply not accounting for the decommissioning but...wow

Maybe it is time to just consider changing PA 29 to PA 229 and extending it slightly north (fictional territory).   :-D

Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on September 13, 2021, 09:48:45 PM
(For PA 28) PennDOT - District 11 News: Northbound Freeport Road Ramp to the Highland Park Bridge Intermittent Stoppages Today in Sharpsburg (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-11/pages/details.aspx?newsid=5408)

PennDOT - District 2 News: Public Meeting/Open House Set for State College Area Connector Study (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2073)

(For PA 414)  PennDOT - District 3 News: Retaining Wall Project on Route 414 in Morris Township, Tioga County Continues (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=3758) 
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on September 14, 2021, 10:16:31 PM
(For US 422)  PennDOT - District 6 News: U.S. 422 Full Overnight Closure Begins Next Sunday for Bridge Construction in Lower Pottsgrove Township (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7030)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on September 15, 2021, 09:37:46 AM
PennDOT - District 10 News: Upcoming Interstate 80 Weekend Ramp Closure (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1105)

PennDOT - District 11 News: Northbound I-79 Neville Island Bridge Weekend Closure September 17-20 (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-11/pages/details.aspx?newsid=5412)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: thenetwork on September 15, 2021, 11:41:30 AM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on September 12, 2021, 07:55:28 PM
These odd hidden concurrencies seem to be more of an Ohio issue based on my experience.  OH 43 does not seem to be signed along OH 14 at all, yet it still apparently follows it all the way to the Public Square in Cleveland.

When I used to live in Cleveland decades ago, there was END SR-43 signage on WB Miles Avenue at SR-14/Broadway.  In Public Square on SB Ontario Ave, the only routes ever listed were US-422, SR-21 (nee US-21), SR-8 and SR-14.  SR-87 (Woodland Ave) began at East 55th Street while US-422/SR-8 followed Kinsman Ave., although I seem to recall seeing an old photograph at or near Public Square with a SR-87 shield, but no SR-43 shield.  So SR-43 never multiplexed into downtown Cleveland, as far as I know.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ekt8750 on September 15, 2021, 12:29:43 PM
Quote from: thenetwork on September 15, 2021, 11:41:30 AM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on September 12, 2021, 07:55:28 PM
These odd hidden concurrencies seem to be more of an Ohio issue based on my experience.  OH 43 does not seem to be signed along OH 14 at all, yet it still apparently follows it all the way to the Public Square in Cleveland.

When I used to live in Cleveland decades ago, there was END SR-43 signage on WB Miles Avenue at SR-14/Broadway.  In Public Square on SB Ontario Ave, the only routes ever listed were US-422, SR-21 (nee US-21), SR-8 and SR-14.  SR-87 (Woodland Ave) began at East 55th Street while US-422/SR-8 followed Kinsman Ave., although I seem to recall seeing an old photograph at or near Public Square with a SR-87 shield, but no SR-43 shield.  So SR-43 never multiplexed into downtown Cleveland, as far as I know.

Gotta love moderate to major cities and how poorly signed-routes are signed within their limits. Looking right at you Philly.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on September 15, 2021, 02:35:03 PM
Quote from: ekt8750 on September 15, 2021, 12:29:43 PM
Quote from: thenetwork on September 15, 2021, 11:41:30 AM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on September 12, 2021, 07:55:28 PM
These odd hidden concurrencies seem to be more of an Ohio issue based on my experience.  OH 43 does not seem to be signed along OH 14 at all, yet it still apparently follows it all the way to the Public Square in Cleveland.

When I used to live in Cleveland decades ago, there was END SR-43 signage on WB Miles Avenue at SR-14/Broadway.  In Public Square on SB Ontario Ave, the only routes ever listed were US-422, SR-21 (nee US-21), SR-8 and SR-14.  SR-87 (Woodland Ave) began at East 55th Street while US-422/SR-8 followed Kinsman Ave., although I seem to recall seeing an old photograph at or near Public Square with a SR-87 shield, but no SR-43 shield.  So SR-43 never multiplexed into downtown Cleveland, as far as I know.

Gotta love moderate to major cities and how poorly signed-routes are signed within their limits. Looking right at you Philly.

I do have to give Philly credit on one thing.   They do a decent job of posting shields on the street signs, which helped me out a lot when clinching US 13 (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.0158476,-75.1537677,3a,75y,0.42h,83.12t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sOdJmAsj6gQ93WdxHItu0xw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) a few years ago.

Sadly it does not help with PA 3.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ekt8750 on September 16, 2021, 11:32:34 AM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on September 15, 2021, 02:35:03 PM
Quote from: ekt8750 on September 15, 2021, 12:29:43 PM
Quote from: thenetwork on September 15, 2021, 11:41:30 AM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on September 12, 2021, 07:55:28 PM
These odd hidden concurrencies seem to be more of an Ohio issue based on my experience.  OH 43 does not seem to be signed along OH 14 at all, yet it still apparently follows it all the way to the Public Square in Cleveland.

When I used to live in Cleveland decades ago, there was END SR-43 signage on WB Miles Avenue at SR-14/Broadway.  In Public Square on SB Ontario Ave, the only routes ever listed were US-422, SR-21 (nee US-21), SR-8 and SR-14.  SR-87 (Woodland Ave) began at East 55th Street while US-422/SR-8 followed Kinsman Ave., although I seem to recall seeing an old photograph at or near Public Square with a SR-87 shield, but no SR-43 shield.  So SR-43 never multiplexed into downtown Cleveland, as far as I know.

Gotta love moderate to major cities and how poorly signed-routes are signed within their limits. Looking right at you Philly.

I do have to give Philly credit on one thing.   They do a decent job of posting shields on the street signs, which helped me out a lot when clinching US 13 (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.0158476,-75.1537677,3a,75y,0.42h,83.12t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sOdJmAsj6gQ93WdxHItu0xw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) a few years ago.

Sadly it does not help with PA 3.

Yeah they've gotten better with adding those trailblazers to the sign blades but those don't help much at intersections where routes change streets. That's where ground mounted signage matters the most and the city greatly lacks those.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: storm2k on September 16, 2021, 07:37:17 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on September 15, 2021, 02:35:03 PM
Quote from: ekt8750 on September 15, 2021, 12:29:43 PM
Quote from: thenetwork on September 15, 2021, 11:41:30 AM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on September 12, 2021, 07:55:28 PM
These odd hidden concurrencies seem to be more of an Ohio issue based on my experience.  OH 43 does not seem to be signed along OH 14 at all, yet it still apparently follows it all the way to the Public Square in Cleveland.

When I used to live in Cleveland decades ago, there was END SR-43 signage on WB Miles Avenue at SR-14/Broadway.  In Public Square on SB Ontario Ave, the only routes ever listed were US-422, SR-21 (nee US-21), SR-8 and SR-14.  SR-87 (Woodland Ave) began at East 55th Street while US-422/SR-8 followed Kinsman Ave., although I seem to recall seeing an old photograph at or near Public Square with a SR-87 shield, but no SR-43 shield.  So SR-43 never multiplexed into downtown Cleveland, as far as I know.

Gotta love moderate to major cities and how poorly signed-routes are signed within their limits. Looking right at you Philly.

I do have to give Philly credit on one thing.   They do a decent job of posting shields on the street signs, which helped me out a lot when clinching US 13 (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.0158476,-75.1537677,3a,75y,0.42h,83.12t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sOdJmAsj6gQ93WdxHItu0xw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) a few years ago.

Sadly it does not help with PA 3.

They only seem to do that on the occasion of changing blade signs though, and it's wildly uneven. Still, that's a pretty common thing in most cities. Chicago is one of the few that always felt like they did an above average job of actually posting reassurance markers and signs to indicate when routes turn onto other roadways within the city.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on September 18, 2021, 10:19:08 AM
(For PA 34)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Weekend Detour Planned on Route 34 (Keystone Way) in Perry County (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1508)

PennDOT - District 9 News: Weight Posting to be Implemented on Route 4013 (Huntingdon Furnace Road) Bridge in Huntingdon County (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-9/pages/details.aspx?newsid=994)

PennDOT - District 8 News: Final Paving to Begin on I-83 Project Near Harrisburg (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1510)

PennDOT - District 6 News: U.S. 1 Periodic Nighttime Lane Closures, Traffic Stoppages Next Week for Construction in Bucks County (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7042) (For US 1)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: cpzilliacus on September 22, 2021, 08:12:44 PM
Pittsburgh Post Gazette: Taking a toll: PennDOT moves forward with controversial plan to charge for bridges, names potential development teams (https://www.post-gazette.com/news/transportation/2021/09/20/PennDOT-bridge-tolls-replacement-development-teams-I79-Bridgeville-bridge-public-private-partnership-interstate-traffic/stories/202109200116)

QuoteThe Pennsylvania Department of Transportation took the next step toward replacing and charging tolls on as many as nine bridges Monday, but motorists won't pay to use the bridges until 2023 at the earliest.

QuotePennDOT announced it has selected three firms to submit proposals for finishing the design of the nine bridges and propose whether to bundle them together under one contract, replace them individually or a combination of the two. The department's goal is to turn the bridges over to private firms to design and replace them, then maintain them for 30 years with the tolls covering the costs.

QuoteTolls haven't been set but are expected to be $1 or $2.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on September 22, 2021, 09:07:04 PM
PennDOT - District 1 News: Presentation on Bayfront Parkway Improvement Project Available to View through Local Public Access Channel (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1569)  (I apologize for not posting this earlier when it could be viewed on TV.)

(For I-90 and PA 18)  PennDOT - District 1 News: Closures Delayed for I-90 Ramps near Route 18 in Erie County (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1570)

(For PA 756)  PennDOT - District 9 News: Detour To Be Lifted and Third Leg of Roundabout To Open As Work on Geistown Corridor Improvement Project Continues in Cambria County (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-9/pages/details.aspx?newsid=995)

EDIT (9-23-2021):  (For US 322) PennDOT - District 2 News: Potters Mills Update as Project Nears Completion (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2080)

(For PA 324) PennDOT - District 8 News: Long-term Closure Expected on Route 324 (Marticville Road) in Lancaster County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1515)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Mergingtraffic on September 23, 2021, 04:39:55 PM
Anybody travel to Breezewood lately to see if any new signs are up yet? A sign replacement project was supposed to start in July.

I like orange extruded aluminum signs but hate Clearview.  My one and only Clearview pic.
Are they adding capacity on I-95 at all in Philly with all the reconstruction?

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51500710946_4eef0927c1_c.jpg)[/url]
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: famartin on September 23, 2021, 04:42:42 PM
Quote from: Mergingtraffic on September 23, 2021, 04:39:55 PM
Anybody travel to Breezewood lately to see if any new signs are up yet? A sign replacement project was supposed to start in July.

I like orange extruded aluminum signs but hate Clearview.  My one and only Clearview pic.
Are they adding capacity on I-95 at all in Philly with all the reconstruction?

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51500710946_4eef0927c1_c.jpg)[/url]

95revive, PennDOT's official name for their never ending project to make everyone hate 95 in Philly, has some spot safety, operational and capacity improvements, but I don't think any wholesale widening is involved.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: SignBridge on September 23, 2021, 08:58:03 PM
Why is that sign orange? It looks permanent to me........
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: plain on September 23, 2021, 09:58:49 PM
It's temporary. But I feel they could've at least put Wilmington or maybe even Chester :-D under 95.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: SignBridge on September 23, 2021, 10:03:35 PM
They could easily display both.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jeffandnicole on September 23, 2021, 10:09:37 PM
Quote from: plain on September 23, 2021, 09:58:49 PM
It's "temporary".

Fixed for you. 

The sign is over 6 years old now. The orange is fading.   Although the tagging on the back is relatively new, occurring between the August and October 2019 view captures.  https://goo.gl/maps/cRnKM8CtqGCE2oEJA
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: plain on September 23, 2021, 10:24:43 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on September 23, 2021, 10:09:37 PM
Quote from: plain on September 23, 2021, 09:58:49 PM
It's "temporary".

Fixed for you. 

The sign is over 6 years old now. The orange is fading.   Although the tagging on the back is relatively new, occurring between the August and October 2019 view captures.  https://goo.gl/maps/cRnKM8CtqGCE2oEJA

Indeed, but still temporary. That's not going to be there when the project is finished 624 years from now lmao.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on September 23, 2021, 11:27:34 PM
Quote from: famartin on September 23, 2021, 04:42:42 PM
Quote from: Mergingtraffic on September 23, 2021, 04:39:55 PM
Anybody travel to Breezewood lately to see if any new signs are up yet? A sign replacement project was supposed to start in July.

I like orange extruded aluminum signs but hate Clearview.  My one and only Clearview pic.
Are they adding capacity on I-95 at all in Philly with all the reconstruction?

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51500710946_4eef0927c1_c.jpg)[/url]

95revive, PennDOT's official name for their never ending project to make everyone hate 95 in Philly, has some spot safety, operational and capacity improvements, but I don't think any wholesale widening is involved.

It won't be widened significantly (e.g. to ten continuous through lanes), but they're widening through interchanges with lane drops and adding auxiliary lanes in a few places. Previously, I-95 was generally eight lanes between Vine Street and Academy Road, but dropped to six lanes at Girard, Aramingo, and Cottman Avenues. When finished, this entire section will have eight continuous lanes. A fifth auxiliary lane in each direction will also be added between I-676 and Girard Avenue, as well as I believe from Girard to Allegheny Avenue.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on September 25, 2021, 01:50:59 PM
(For PA 42)  PennDOT - District 3 News: Route 42 Closed in Montour Township, Columbia County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=3795)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on September 26, 2021, 10:41:45 PM
https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-8/ConstructionsProjectsAndRoadwork/DauphinCty/Pages/I-83-South-Bridge-Project.aspx

See that the I-83 Bridge in Harrisburg due for a possible toll bridge to replace it.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on September 27, 2021, 01:39:26 PM
(For PA 8)  PennDOT - District 1 News: Updates Made to Route 8 Southbound Detour in Venango County (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1576)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: snowc on September 27, 2021, 03:24:41 PM
Quote from: famartin on September 23, 2021, 04:42:42 PM
Quote from: Mergingtraffic on September 23, 2021, 04:39:55 PM
Anybody travel to Breezewood lately to see if any new signs are up yet? A sign replacement project was supposed to start in July.

I like orange extruded aluminum signs but hate Clearview.  My one and only Clearview pic.
Are they adding capacity on I-95 at all in Philly with all the reconstruction?

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51500710946_4eef0927c1_c.jpg)[/url]

95revive, PennDOT's official name for their never ending project to make everyone hate 95 in Philly, has some spot safety, operational and capacity improvements, but I don't think any wholesale widening is involved.
(https://storage13.openstreetcam.org/files/photo/2021/3/31/proc/3484297_57554b355606e41c3351bfdbf94032f4.jpg)

Still there as of Mar 2021
(https://storage13.openstreetcam.org/files/photo/2020/6/21/proc/2435850_10_f9b61_3.jpg)
Orange signs used on I95 during Exit 71 construction
(https://storage13.openstreetcam.org/files/photo/2021/9/22/proc/3855005_d00aefb4edd3e5de6c5735d3cba0586c.jpg)
Orange signs as of Sept 22 2021 during Exit 70 construction
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on September 27, 2021, 05:19:50 PM
(For PA 32)  PennDOT - District 6 News: Route 32 (River Road) Bridge Remains Closed in Upper Makefield Township (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7058)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jemacedo9 on September 27, 2021, 07:46:06 PM
PennDOT has launched a survey to gather opinions on "construction and maintenance services feedback...".

Press release:  https://www.penndot.gov/pages/all-news-details.aspx?newsid=878 (https://www.penndot.gov/pages/all-news-details.aspx?newsid=878)
Survey link:  https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/2021PDConstruction (https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/2021PDConstruction)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on September 28, 2021, 11:36:13 AM
(For PA 981) PennDOT - District 12 News: PennDOT to Conduct Laurel Valley Transportation Improvement Project Virtual Public Meeting Sept. 30 — Oct. 7 (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-12/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1647)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on September 28, 2021, 11:44:38 AM
PA and NJ have always used orange signs for exits during construction. Even NYSDOT has even done in Binghamton on I-81in 2012.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: thenetwork on September 28, 2021, 08:11:48 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on September 28, 2021, 11:44:38 AM
PA and NJ have always used orange signs for exits during construction. Even NYSDOT has even done in Binghamton on I-81in 2012.

IIRC, PennDOT covered up BGS with temporary green vinyl signs for some construction projects in Downtown Pittsburgh in the past.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jeffandnicole on September 28, 2021, 09:09:45 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on September 28, 2021, 11:44:38 AM
PA and NJ have always used orange signs for exits during construction. Even NYSDOT has even done in Binghamton on I-81in 2012.

Maybe NJ did in the past, or an occasional project. For the most part, NJDOT uses green signage for exits, even within construction zones.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Alps on September 29, 2021, 12:39:28 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on September 28, 2021, 09:09:45 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on September 28, 2021, 11:44:38 AM
PA and NJ have always used orange signs for exits during construction. Even NYSDOT has even done in Binghamton on I-81in 2012.

Maybe NJ did in the past, or an occasional project. For the most part, NJDOT uses green signage for exits, even within construction zones.
i agree with the person who is usually right (jeff)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: MASTERNC on September 29, 2021, 12:01:54 PM
Quote from: Mergingtraffic on September 23, 2021, 04:39:55 PM
Anybody travel to Breezewood lately to see if any new signs are up yet? A sign replacement project was supposed to start in July.

I like orange extruded aluminum signs but hate Clearview.  My one and only Clearview pic.
Are they adding capacity on I-95 at all in Philly with all the reconstruction?

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51500710946_4eef0927c1_c.jpg)[/url]

That orange sign might be gone soon with I-95 south reopening

Quote from: jemacedo9 on September 27, 2021, 07:46:06 PM
PennDOT has launched a survey to gather opinions on "construction and maintenance services feedback...".

Press release:  https://www.penndot.gov/pages/all-news-details.aspx?newsid=878 (https://www.penndot.gov/pages/all-news-details.aspx?newsid=878)
Survey link:  https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/2021PDConstruction (https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/2021PDConstruction)

Thanks.  I definitely expressed my opinion about the disparity between districts in reporting construction (compare District 12, for example, with Districts 6 & 11).  I also noted the DMS signs don't always warn of incidents ahead (they are blank), when other states are much better about warning drivers.  It's not as big a deal anymore with Waze and phone GPS, but it was even a problem before then.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: famartin on September 29, 2021, 06:36:57 PM
Quote from: Alps on September 29, 2021, 12:39:28 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on September 28, 2021, 09:09:45 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on September 28, 2021, 11:44:38 AM
PA and NJ have always used orange signs for exits during construction. Even NYSDOT has even done in Binghamton on I-81in 2012.

Maybe NJ did in the past, or an occasional project. For the most part, NJDOT uses green signage for exits, even within construction zones.
i agree with the person who is usually right (jeff)

There is one in current use in NJ, but it might be a DRJTBC install...
https://www.google.com/maps/@40.2682768,-74.8380422,3a,75y,217.71h,84.59t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s34sxBwl0_LX-enfr8u7p8g!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: akotchi on September 30, 2021, 12:04:23 AM
It was installed by the Commission's contractor.  Several others are (or have been) up on the Pennsylvania side.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on September 30, 2021, 02:43:21 PM
PennDOT - District 11 News: Northbound I-79 Ramp to Northbound Route 65 Long-term Closure Begins Monday in Allegheny County (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-11/pages/details.aspx?newsid=5449)  (For I-79 and PA 65)

(For PA 724)  PennDOT - District 6 News: Route 724 (Schuylkill Road) Bridge over Eckers Creek Closed Due to Flood Damage in North Coventry Township (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7068)

EDIT (10-1-2021):(For PA 8)  PennDOT - District 1 News: Route 8 Fully Open in Venango County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1580)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on October 03, 2021, 07:55:15 AM
(For PA 147)  PennDOT - District 3 News: Front Street and Veterans Bridge Closed in Sunbury, Northumberland County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=3809)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on October 03, 2021, 01:50:21 PM
From the Joe Biden Expressway thread:

Quote from: hbelkins on October 02, 2021, 02:04:10 PM
I still want to know if Pennsylvania is still using FHWA for new guide sign installations instead of Clearview on a statewide basis. It would be a major surprise if one of the innovators and early adopters and advocates for Clearview has now abandoned it.

I figure there's more likely to be a response here. I know PennDOT and the PTC returned to Clearview after the interim approval was reinstated, but haven't seen any new enough signage to say whether PennDOT actually went back to FHWA. All the signage overlays for the renaming are in FHWA Series, though I couldn't find a contract for the signage change on ECMS (https://www.ecms.penndot.gov/).
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: J N Winkler on October 03, 2021, 02:18:54 PM
Quote from: Roadsguy on October 03, 2021, 01:50:21 PMI figure there's more likely to be a response here. I know PennDOT and the PTC returned to Clearview after the interim approval was reinstated, but haven't seen any new enough signage to say whether PennDOT actually went back to FHWA. All the signage overlays for the renaming are in FHWA Series, though I couldn't find a contract for the signage change on ECMS (https://www.ecms.penndot.gov/).

I still collect pattern-accurate sign panel detail and sign elevation sheets through ECMS.  The majority of it has been in Clearview over the past couple of years, but quite a bit has been in FHWA, notably an I-79 sign replacement in District 1 last year.  I don't know enough about the Biden Expressway to comment specifically on that (I run scripts to select projects for download and then more scripts to select out the signing, so I'm pretty much oblivious to project scope aside from signing), but I suspect the signing changes were done in-house or procured through a framework contract (which the PTC does for much of its routine guide sign replacement).
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on October 04, 2021, 11:48:56 AM
(For PA 5/PA 290) PennDOT - District 1 News: Contract Awarded for 12th Street Corridor Project in the City of Erie (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1582)

(For PA 356)  PennDOT - District 12 News: Road Closure Route 356 (Leechburg Valley Road) Extended - Allegheny Township (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-12/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1649)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on October 06, 2021, 10:49:37 AM
PennDOT - District 8 News: Weekend Closure Scheduled on NB I-83 (South Bridge) in Harrisburg (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1521)

(For I-80/US 220)  PennDOT - District 2 News: Early October Update for Local Interchange Project (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2095)

PennDOT - District 11 News: Northbound I-79 Neville Island Bridge Weekend Closure October 8-11 (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-11/pages/details.aspx?newsid=5456)

(For US 322) PennDOT - District 2 News: PennDOT Announces Official Completion of Route 322/Potters Mills Gap Project (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2096)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: noelbotevera on October 07, 2021, 12:30:20 AM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on October 06, 2021, 10:49:37 AM
(For US 322) PennDOT - District 2 News: PennDOT Announces Official Completion of Route 322/Potters Mills Gap Project (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2096)
This was already done and I've driven it several times already. The most recent time I recall was in July, when I drove up to the Sheetz at PA 45/144. Unless they were working on tying old US 322 to the new road?

The next logical step is to connect this to Boalsburg, which should be a breeze - a few self storage businesses and a Harley-Davidson dealership. But it's PennDOT, which apparently thinks a bridge over the Susquehanna takes six (seven?) years to build.


Out of curiosity, when was the Walnut Street Bridge in Harrisburg closed to vehicle traffic? It definitely had to be before 1996, but I can't imagine two cars trying to pass each other on this (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.2593473,-76.8842992,3a,31.8y,217.88h,93.2t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sDx5aIAhXvQNf1fEBl1n_1A!2e0!7i16384!8i8192). I suspect the bridge was one way traffic only (contraflow system maybe?) or just a pedestrian bridge to the west shore.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on October 07, 2021, 10:00:14 AM
Quote from: noelbotevera on October 07, 2021, 12:30:20 AM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on October 06, 2021, 10:49:37 AM
(For US 322) PennDOT - District 2 News: PennDOT Announces Official Completion of Route 322/Potters Mills Gap Project (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2096)
This was already done and I've driven it several times already. The most recent time I recall was in July, when I drove up to the Sheetz at PA 45/144. Unless they were working on tying old US 322 to the new road?

The next logical step is to connect this to Boalsburg, which should be a breeze - a few self storage businesses and a Harley-Davidson dealership. But it's PennDOT, which apparently thinks a bridge over the Susquehanna takes six (seven?) years to build. 

Yeah, they were still doing work along the Old US 322 alignment.  At least a section of it had been closed to traffic since the new alignment opened until recently.
Quote
Out of curiosity, when was the Walnut Street Bridge in Harrisburg closed to vehicle traffic? It definitely had to be before 1996, but I can't imagine two cars trying to pass each other on this (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.2593473,-76.8842992,3a,31.8y,217.88h,93.2t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sDx5aIAhXvQNf1fEBl1n_1A!2e0!7i16384!8i8192). I suspect the bridge was one way traffic only (contraflow system maybe?) or just a pedestrian bridge to the west shore.

It was closed to vehicular traffic in 1972 after Agnes based on this link. (https://historicharrisburg.org/2019/06/19/walnut-street-bridge/)  The part west of City Island was just a pedestrian bridge before it got destroyed by the floods in 1996.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on October 07, 2021, 10:39:31 AM
PennDOT - District 6 News: I-76 East (Schuylkill Expressway) Lane Closure at Night Next Week for ITS Repair in Lower Merion Township (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7079)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Bitmapped on October 07, 2021, 01:07:51 PM
Quote from: noelbotevera on October 07, 2021, 12:30:20 AM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on October 06, 2021, 10:49:37 AM
(For US 322) PennDOT - District 2 News: PennDOT Announces Official Completion of Route 322/Potters Mills Gap Project (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2096)
This was already done and I've driven it several times already. The most recent time I recall was in July, when I drove up to the Sheetz at PA 45/144. Unless they were working on tying old US 322 to the new road?

The next logical step is to connect this to Boalsburg, which should be a breeze - a few self storage businesses and a Harley-Davidson dealership. But it's PennDOT, which apparently thinks a bridge over the Susquehanna takes six (seven?) years to build.

You have to maintain access for adjoining property owners. That means building frontage roads, or more likely here, building the road on a new alignment and keeping the existing road in place to serve local traffic.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on October 07, 2021, 02:48:51 PM
(For PA 152) PennDOT - District 6 News: Route 152 (Limekiln Pike) Lane Closure Begins Next Week for Final Bridge Construction Activities in Cheltenham, Abington Townships (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7082)

Statewide:  PennDOT Accepting Unsolicited Public-Private Partnership Proposals Until October 31 (https://www.penndot.gov/pages/all-news-details.aspx?newsid=884)

PennDOT - District 6 News: PennDOT to Reopen Right Lane on I-76 West Ramp to U.S. 202/U.S. 422 Following Sinkhole Remediation in Upper Merion Township (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7084)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Alps on October 07, 2021, 06:26:41 PM
Quote from: noelbotevera on October 07, 2021, 12:30:20 AM
Out of curiosity, when was the Walnut Street Bridge in Harrisburg closed to vehicle traffic? It definitely had to be before 1996, but I can't imagine two cars trying to pass each other on this (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.2593473,-76.8842992,3a,31.8y,217.88h,93.2t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sDx5aIAhXvQNf1fEBl1n_1A!2e0!7i16384!8i8192). I suspect the bridge was one way traffic only (contraflow system maybe?) or just a pedestrian bridge to the west shore.
Traffic standards were not modern in 1976. You still have bridges like Washington's Crossing that are at most 20' wide and still 2-way.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: rickmastfan67 on October 07, 2021, 09:22:00 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on October 07, 2021, 10:00:14 AM
Quote from: noelbotevera on October 07, 2021, 12:30:20 AM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on October 06, 2021, 10:49:37 AM
(For US 322) PennDOT - District 2 News: PennDOT Announces Official Completion of Route 322/Potters Mills Gap Project (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2096)
This was already done and I've driven it several times already. The most recent time I recall was in July, when I drove up to the Sheetz at PA 45/144. Unless they were working on tying old US 322 to the new road?

The next logical step is to connect this to Boalsburg, which should be a breeze - a few self storage businesses and a Harley-Davidson dealership. But it's PennDOT, which apparently thinks a bridge over the Susquehanna takes six (seven?) years to build. 

Yeah, they were still doing work along the Old US 322 alignment.  At least a section of it had been closed to traffic since the new alignment opened until recently.
Quote
Out of curiosity, when was the Walnut Street Bridge in Harrisburg closed to vehicle traffic? It definitely had to be before 1996, but I can't imagine two cars trying to pass each other on this (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.2593473,-76.8842992,3a,31.8y,217.88h,93.2t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sDx5aIAhXvQNf1fEBl1n_1A!2e0!7i16384!8i8192). I suspect the bridge was one way traffic only (contraflow system maybe?) or just a pedestrian bridge to the west shore.

It was closed to vehicular traffic in 1972 after Agnes based on this link. (https://historicharrisburg.org/2019/06/19/walnut-street-bridge/)  The part west of City Island was just a pedestrian bridge before it got destroyed by the floods in 1996.

StreetView has a good shot of the Historical placard on the Island side of the bridge: https://goo.gl/maps/8FNJKS25XTpceJLC7
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on October 08, 2021, 02:38:51 PM
(For PA 381)  PennDOT - District 12 News: PennDOT Multimodal Project Named Finalist for Improving Accessibility at Ohiopyle State Park (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-12/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1652)

(For PA 74/PA 641)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Route 74 Bridge over Letort Spring Run in Carlisle Borough, Cumberland County, Open to All Lanes (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1529)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on October 09, 2021, 10:51:54 PM
I heard on FB that PA 576 is now open south of US 22 to I-79.  Has anyone been on it who lives nearby?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: rickmastfan67 on October 09, 2021, 11:54:50 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on October 09, 2021, 10:51:54 PM
I heard on FB that PA 576 is now open south of US 22 to I-79.  Has anyone been on it who lives nearby?

I find that hard to believe to be honest, especially since they just had the open house today.
https://pittsburgh.cbslocal.com/2021/10/09/pedestrian-bicycles-southern-beltway-preview/
(And the article says the 15th still for opening.)

Also: https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=2294.0
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on October 09, 2021, 11:58:32 PM
Quote from: rickmastfan67 on October 09, 2021, 11:54:50 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on October 09, 2021, 10:51:54 PM
I heard on FB that PA 576 is now open south of US 22 to I-79.  Has anyone been on it who lives nearby?

I find that hard to believe to be honest, especially since they just had the open house today.
https://pittsburgh.cbslocal.com/2021/10/09/pedestrian-bicycles-southern-beltway-preview/
(And the article says the 15th still for opening.)

Also: https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=2294.0

I figured as much. That is why I asked.   People get overzealous and post photos just days before the actual openings.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: MASTERNC on October 10, 2021, 03:00:57 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on October 09, 2021, 10:51:54 PM
I heard on FB that PA 576 is now open south of US 22 to I-79.  Has anyone been on it who lives nearby?

It's supposed to open Friday, though not all ramps at I-79 will open this year.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on October 12, 2021, 04:52:20 PM
PennDOT - District 8 News: Reminder: NB I-83 (South Bridge) in Harrisburg to be Closed This Weekend (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1531)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on October 14, 2021, 05:20:19 PM
PennDOT - District 10 News: Changes in Traffic Patterns for PA 28/US 322 in Brookville Borough and Pine Creek Township, Jefferson County (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1121)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on October 18, 2021, 06:30:38 AM
PennDOT - District 8 News: Update: NB I-83 John Harris Memorial (South) Bridge in Harrisburg is Open to Traffic (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1539)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on October 19, 2021, 01:47:43 PM
Quote from: sbeaver44 on September 12, 2021, 09:02:33 AM
Wikipedia says that PA 235 has an unsigned concurrency with PA 17 and that they both end at US 11/15 in Liverpool

However when I pull the Perry County SLDs dated 12/31/20

Page 213 has SR 0235 ending at SR 0017.   I'd expect this anyway, since, for example, you'll see SR 0015 not really existing in these diagrams (as US 15 is entirely concurrent with US 11 in Perry County, so it will only be SR 0011).  In both cases, if PA 235 actually ended at PA 17, or if it didn't – the SR 0235 designation would end here, as PA 17 is a lower number of the same class, and so even a signed PA 17/235 concurrency would simply bear SR 0017.

Pages 253-254 have SR 0017 between SR 0235 and SR 0011 (US 11/15) but I can't tell how I would read if PA 235 is also existing (but not signed) along here.

Source:

https://www.dot.state.pa.us/public/Bureaus/BOMO/RM/RITS/Annual%20Electronic%20SLDs%20by%20County/District%208/Perry%20Without%20Pipes.pdf (https://www.dot.state.pa.us/public/Bureaus/BOMO/RM/RITS/Annual%20Electronic%20SLDs%20by%20County/District%208/Perry%20Without%20Pipes.pdf)


On this note, are there any other weird hidden concurrencies in PA like this?   For the record, I am not talking about not-signed-but-obviously-implied ones like US 30/PA 23 along the Lancaster Bypass, but here – why would PA 235 be extended along PA 17 just to end and not continue after?

I emailed District 8 on this (thankfully because I added a reminder to my phone for an unrelated subject that led me to being reminded of it), and they indicated to me that the PA 17/PA 235 concurrency is a Type 10 Map Error (https://gis.penndot.gov/BPR_PDF_FILES/Maps/GHS/ROADNAMES/Perry_GHSN.pdf) meaning that it does not actually exist.  PA 235 ends at PA 17 as it should.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: storm2k on October 22, 2021, 04:46:58 PM
Drove 80 end-to-end today. Someone needs to explain to PennDOT D1 how to properly do x-line height for the Clearview they sadly insist on doing. Too many signs have the lower case letters so small in comparison to their capitals that they're hard to read. I'll be some engineer didn't have the text settings right in SignCAD or whatever equivalent they use in PA, but ugh, the signs are ugly and hard to read.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on October 22, 2021, 06:28:40 PM
(For PA 8) PennDOT - District 1 News: Route 8 in Venango County Reopened as Reconstruction Project Enters the Final Phase of Work (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1591)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Alps on October 23, 2021, 12:06:34 AM
Quote from: storm2k on October 22, 2021, 04:46:58 PM
Drove 80 end-to-end today. Someone needs to explain to PennDOT D1 how to properly do x-line height for the Clearview they sadly insist on doing. Too many signs have the lower case letters so small in comparison to their capitals that they're hard to read. I'll be some engineer didn't have the text settings right in SignCAD or whatever equivalent they use in PA, but ugh, the signs are ugly and hard to read.
Classic problem: lowercase letters are 3/4 height of uppercase, so they specify 12" capitals and 9" lower case and you get 27/4" lowercase instead. Every plan I ever review, I say "just give the upper case text height only". (Note it's not 3/4 in C***view but I refuse to acknowledge it)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on October 25, 2021, 04:19:47 PM
PennDOT - District 5 News: PennDOT Invites Public to Comment on I-78 Lenhartsville Bridge Replacement Project (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-5/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2945)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ARMOURERERIC on October 25, 2021, 06:45:24 PM
As far as these proposed bridge tollings...they better have an air tight 75 guaranteed life span with no more than a 20-30 year toll.   Way to many on the proposed toll bridge list are way to new to be needing replacement.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: famartin on October 25, 2021, 06:49:36 PM
Quote from: ARMOURERERIC on October 25, 2021, 06:45:24 PM
As far as these proposed bridge tollings...they better have an air tight 75 guaranteed life span with no more than a 20-30 year toll.   Way to many on the proposed toll bridge list are way to new to be needing replacement.

I've always thought the "toll til its paid back" idea is mostly a bait and switch. They get used to it being tolled and then suddenly it needs more repairs or expansion which can only be funded by tolls.

Are there that many roads where they ever actually did as suggested, pay off the original bonds and then make it free? It seems more the exception than the norm.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ARMOURERERIC on October 25, 2021, 07:17:53 PM
The I 78 bridge here is only 36 years old, I would not trust an agency with tolling a new bridge when they did not do it right the last time.

As a digression, one never discussed aspect of the demise of the Pittsburgh trolley system was the conscious full knowlegde descision at the very beginning to build the system from 30 year life span parts paid for with 50 year bonds.   This seems like another such stunt.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on October 25, 2021, 07:36:36 PM
Quote from: ARMOURERERIC on October 25, 2021, 07:17:53 PM
The I 78 bridge here is only 36 years old, I would not trust an agency with tolling a new bridge when they did not do it right the last time.

It's actually 66 years old; it was only rehabbed in 1985.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Crown Victoria on October 26, 2021, 12:08:20 AM
Quote from: Roadsguy on October 25, 2021, 07:36:36 PM
Quote from: ARMOURERERIC on October 25, 2021, 07:17:53 PM
The I 78 bridge here is only 36 years old, I would not trust an agency with tolling a new bridge when they did not do it right the last time.

It's actually 66 years old; it was only rehabbed in 1985.

This is true. This stretch of I-78 was originally planned as a freeway for US 22 and built during the mid 1950s. The bridge itself was rehabilitated in 1985. And, whether it's 66 or 36 years old, the bridge needs major work to allow for extension of the ramps from Exit 35 (PA 143, Lenhartsville), which are woefully short.

While tolling this particular bridge will bring in decent revenues, the issue is how easy it will be to shunpike around the tolling point. One would only need to use Old 22, which parallels I-78, between Exits 35 and 40.

Quote from: ARMOURERERIC on October 25, 2021, 06:45:24 PM
As far as these proposed bridge tollings...they better have an air tight 75 guaranteed life span with no more than a 20-30 year toll.   Way to many on the proposed toll bridge list are way to new to be needing replacement.

All of the bridges proposed for tolling date to the 50's and 60's, making them all at least 50 years old, and quite a few of them over 60. Seems to me like that's a fairly decent age for bridges from that era, and many of them do need extensive work to bring them up to modern standards, if not outright replacement. For example, the I-79 Bridgeville, I-83 John Harris (South), and I-78 Lenhartsville bridges would need widening anyway, even without replacement.

Quote from: famartin on October 25, 2021, 06:49:36 PM
Are there that many roads where they ever actually did as suggested, pay off the original bonds and then make it free? It seems more the exception than the norm.

All of Kentucky's parkways have had their tolls removed, as have the Cross Island Parkway on Hilton Head Island in South Carolina (only a few months ago) and the Dallas-Fort Worth Turnpike, after the original bonds were retired. The Connecticut Turnpike is also an example of this, although other circumstances (a major accident at a toll booth and the use of federal funds for the Mianus River Bridge after its collapse, both in 1983) contributed to the abolition of tolls on that route. These are the exceptions to what seems to be the norm...
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: storm2k on October 26, 2021, 02:30:34 AM
Quote from: ARMOURERERIC on October 25, 2021, 06:45:24 PM
As far as these proposed bridge tollings...they better have an air tight 75 guaranteed life span with no more than a 20-30 year toll.   Way to many on the proposed toll bridge list are way to new to be needing replacement.

Given that they specifically call out maintenance and upkeep of the bridge in the proposal, combined with the sheer disastrous shortfall of funding versus needed work, I would say once that toll is in place, it's there to stay.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on October 26, 2021, 07:43:45 AM
Quote from: MASTERNC on April 21, 2021, 08:03:22 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on April 17, 2021, 06:05:50 PM
Quote from: jmd41280 on April 17, 2021, 05:49:33 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on April 15, 2021, 06:57:14 PMLooking at the Public Meeting (https://www.i-70projects.com/70-51-interchange-public-meeting.php), the new I-70/PA 51 interchange will be a DDI. Also Finley Rd will be relocated to a redone signalized intersection at PA 51 and PA 981.

This cannot come soon enough. Right now, both onramps from PA 51 to I-70 end at a stop sign (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.1558136,-79.7732042,3a,75y,48.7h,88.54t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sxfmsQV2JWOPKVYnrB7J7hQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) with absolutely no acceleration lane. You have to wait for a large enough opening (which can take awhile on this stretch of I-70) and then gun it as quickly as your vehicle will allow.

I have to do that right now getting onto I-83 from Union Deposit Rd due to the widening project. Yes, it is very much annoying. 

For some reason, PennDOT and the Turnpike have a love for stop signs on entrance ramps during construction projects, whereas other states almost always have enough room to permit a yield condition.

PennDOT's YouTube page now has a video showing the rendering of the proposed DDI at I-70/PA 51. 
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on October 26, 2021, 04:41:19 PM
PennDOT - District 9 News: Paving and Other Work to Take Place on Fourth Leg of Roundabout As Geistown Corridor Improvement Project Continues in Cambria County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-9/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1003)  (relates to PA 756)

EDIT (10-29-2021):  PennDOT - District 2 News: PennDOT Offers Look Ahead for the State Route 120 Connector Project in St Marys (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2111)

My understanding is that this will involve a relocation of PA 120 to eliminate the PA 255 concurrency.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on November 01, 2021, 01:19:39 PM
PennDOT - District 10 News: PennDOT Invites Public to Comment on I-80 Canoe Creek Bridge Replacement (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1125)

(For PA 228)  PennDOT - District 10 News: Old State Route 8 Road Closure on November 8 (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1127)

(For PA 286)  PennDOT - District 10 News: Route 286 Oakland Avenue Road Line Painting on Wednesday (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1128)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jmd41280 on November 01, 2021, 10:44:15 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on October 26, 2021, 07:43:45 AMPennDOT's YouTube page now has a video showing the rendering of the proposed DDI at I-70/PA 51. 


That is going to be such an improvement over the antiquated cloverleaf w/ no acceleration/deceleration lanes. The DDI 27 miles to the west of this interchange (at I-70/79 and US 19) has worked wonders over what used to be there.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on November 02, 2021, 05:00:00 PM
(For I-80/US 220)  PennDOT - District 2 News: Early November Update for Local Interchange Project (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2114)

EDIT (11-3-2021):
(For US 422) PennDOT - District 8 News: Lane Shifts on Route 422 in North Londonderry Township and Palmyra Borough, Lebanon County (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1557)
(For PA 288) PennDOT - District 11 News: Route 288 Zelienople Road, Route 1010 Lake Road Reopening Thursday in Franklin Township (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-11/pages/details.aspx?newsid=5531)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on November 08, 2021, 07:00:43 PM
PennDOT - District 1 News: PennDOT Starts Audio Outreach for the Bayfront Parkway Project (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1602)

PennDOT - District 4 News: PennDOT Invites Public to Comment on I-81 Susquehanna Project (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-4/pages/details.aspx?newsid=826)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on November 09, 2021, 02:51:22 PM
(For PA 981) ADVISORY — NORVELT — FRIDAY - PennDOT to Hold Groundbreaking Ceremony (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-12/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1665)

QuoteThe ceremony will open the Laurel Valley Transportation Improvement Project.

"Open" should be "begin construction"...
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: famartin on November 09, 2021, 04:41:33 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on November 09, 2021, 02:51:22 PM
(For PA 981) ADVISORY — NORVELT — FRIDAY - PennDOT to Hold Groundbreaking Ceremony (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-12/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1665)

QuoteThe ceremony will open the Laurel Valley Transportation Improvement Project.

"Open" should be "begin construction"...

I think they mean it will "open the project" (i.e., start it). But yes, somewhat confusing wording.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: NJRoadfan on November 09, 2021, 04:53:30 PM
Quote from: Crown Victoria on October 26, 2021, 12:08:20 AM
This is true. This stretch of I-78 was originally planned as a freeway for US 22 and built during the mid 1950s. The bridge itself was rehabilitated in 1985. And, whether it's 66 or 36 years old, the bridge needs major work to allow for extension of the ramps from Exit 35 (PA 143, Lenhartsville), which are woefully short.

Somehow PennDOT has enough funds to upgrade the old US-22 highway to Interstate standards INCLUDING the Schuylkill River bridge and interchanges, but has to toll this one smaller bridge?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: famartin on November 09, 2021, 06:26:56 PM
Quote from: NJRoadfan on November 09, 2021, 04:53:30 PM
Quote from: Crown Victoria on October 26, 2021, 12:08:20 AM
This is true. This stretch of I-78 was originally planned as a freeway for US 22 and built during the mid 1950s. The bridge itself was rehabilitated in 1985. And, whether it's 66 or 36 years old, the bridge needs major work to allow for extension of the ramps from Exit 35 (PA 143, Lenhartsville), which are woefully short.

Somehow PennDOT has enough funds to upgrade the old US-22 highway to Interstate standards INCLUDING the Schuylkill River bridge and interchanges, but has to toll this one smaller bridge?

Obviously, they are putting tolls in locations where they will make the most money off non-locals...
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ARMOURERERIC on November 09, 2021, 06:58:24 PM
Quote from: famartin on November 09, 2021, 04:41:33 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on November 09, 2021, 02:51:22 PM
(For PA 981) ADVISORY — NORVELT — FRIDAY - PennDOT to Hold Groundbreaking Ceremony (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-12/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1665)

QuoteThe ceremony will open the Laurel Valley Transportation Improvement Project.

"Open" should be "begin construction"...

I think they mean it will "open the project" (i.e., start it). But yes, somewhat confusing wording.

IIRC, 20 years ago, PennDOT contemplated an expressway type facility on this alignment, are they at least holding a 4 Lane row here?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on November 09, 2021, 08:15:09 PM
Quote from: ARMOURERERIC on November 09, 2021, 06:58:24 PM
Quote from: famartin on November 09, 2021, 04:41:33 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on November 09, 2021, 02:51:22 PM
(For PA 981) ADVISORY — NORVELT — FRIDAY - PennDOT to Hold Groundbreaking Ceremony (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-12/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1665)

QuoteThe ceremony will open the Laurel Valley Transportation Improvement Project.

"Open" should be "begin construction"...

I think they mean it will "open the project" (i.e., start it). But yes, somewhat confusing wording.

IIRC, 20 years ago, PennDOT contemplated an expressway type facility on this alignment, are they at least holding a 4 Lane row here?

No, PA 981 will remain two lanes, but it will be realigned in areas. (http://www.laurelvalleyproject.com/section-1/)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Bitmapped on November 09, 2021, 08:38:53 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on November 09, 2021, 08:15:09 PM
Quote from: ARMOURERERIC on November 09, 2021, 06:58:24 PM
Quote from: famartin on November 09, 2021, 04:41:33 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on November 09, 2021, 02:51:22 PM
(For PA 981) ADVISORY — NORVELT — FRIDAY - PennDOT to Hold Groundbreaking Ceremony (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-12/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1665)

QuoteThe ceremony will open the Laurel Valley Transportation Improvement Project.

"Open" should be "begin construction"...

I think they mean it will "open the project" (i.e., start it). But yes, somewhat confusing wording.

IIRC, 20 years ago, PennDOT contemplated an expressway type facility on this alignment, are they at least holding a 4 Lane row here?

No, PA 981 will remain two lanes, but it will be realigned in areas. (http://www.laurelvalleyproject.com/section-1/)

I drove PA 981 through this project area again this past weekend. This project seems like it would be a nice improvement, although I wish they were shooting for a 55mph design speed rather than 45mph. Two lanes seem adequate for the traffic volumes.

The big problem I see with this project is its southern endpoint. It still means having to crepe along through Mount Pleasant to get to US 119. Building a new connection to US 119, or at least a new bypass road to get to PA 31 to use its interchange with US 119, would make this corridor a lot more useful.

Right now, there's not a great way to get from Connellsville to the Latrobe area. PA 982 is good between US 119 but PA 31 but sort of falls apart north of there as a through route. PA 981 will be decent once these upgrades are complete, except for the southern part by Mount Pleasant. I'd love to see some sort of connection built between the two routes.

Two lanes are probably adequate, although I wish they aimed for a 55mph design speed. It looks like they're going for 45mph here.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Crown Victoria on November 10, 2021, 01:07:20 AM
Pennsylvania should expect an additional $4 billion from federal funds over the next five years for roads and bridges:

https://www.post-gazette.com/news/transportation/2021/11/08/infrastructure-bill-pennsylvania-roads-bridges-highways-penndot-funding-4-billion-dollars/stories/202111080106
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Rothman on November 10, 2021, 07:00:55 AM
Quote from: Crown Victoria on November 10, 2021, 01:07:20 AM
Pennsylvania should expect an additional $4 billion from federal funds over the next five years for roads and bridges:

https://www.post-gazette.com/news/transportation/2021/11/08/infrastructure-bill-pennsylvania-roads-bridges-highways-penndot-funding-4-billion-dollars/stories/202111080106
Careful with that word "additional."  Transportation funds were up for reauthorization anyway.  The truth will play out in the FHWA apportionment notices.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on November 10, 2021, 10:56:33 AM
(For PA 283) PennDOT - District 8 News: Lane Restrictions Next Week on Route 283 in Lancaster County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1563)

Yeah, PennDOT is just following the DRJTBC I guess here.   :-D

PennDOT - District 8 News: Rolling Stops Next Week on I-81/I-78 Split in Lebanon County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1564)

PennDOT - District 8 News: PennDOT Announces Online Plans Display for the Route 3012 Market Street Bridge Rehabilitation Project (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1566)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: snowc on November 10, 2021, 12:34:16 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on November 08, 2021, 07:00:43 PM
PennDOT - District 1 News: PennDOT Starts Audio Outreach for the Bayfront Parkway Project (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1602)

PennDOT - District 4 News: PennDOT Invites Public to Comment on I-81 Susquehanna Project (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-4/pages/details.aspx?newsid=826)
Oh here we go again, we now have tolls on i81!  :rolleyes:
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on November 10, 2021, 07:34:49 PM
(Related to the US 202 SB Markley St Project)  PennDOT - District 6 News: PennDOT Completes Barbadoes Street Extension Project, New Connector Roadway Opens Friday in Norristown (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7193)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on November 10, 2021, 09:30:38 PM
Quote from: snowc on November 10, 2021, 12:34:16 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on November 08, 2021, 07:00:43 PM
PennDOT - District 1 News: PennDOT Starts Audio Outreach for the Bayfront Parkway Project (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1602)

PennDOT - District 4 News: PennDOT Invites Public to Comment on I-81 Susquehanna Project (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-4/pages/details.aspx?newsid=826)
Oh here we go again, we now have tolls on i81!  :rolleyes:

Worth noting for anyone just skimming the thread and not reading the press releases: the I-81 bridge project linked above is for a relatively small bridge just below the New York state line, not the Wade Bridge in the Harrisburg area. That one has no replacement lined up and is still not being considered for tolling.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on November 11, 2021, 08:29:38 AM
Quote from: Roadsguy on November 10, 2021, 09:30:38 PM
Quote from: snowc on November 10, 2021, 12:34:16 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on November 08, 2021, 07:00:43 PM
PennDOT - District 1 News: PennDOT Starts Audio Outreach for the Bayfront Parkway Project (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1602)

PennDOT - District 4 News: PennDOT Invites Public to Comment on I-81 Susquehanna Project (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-4/pages/details.aspx?newsid=826)
Oh here we go again, we now have tolls on i81!  :rolleyes:

Worth noting for anyone just skimming the thread and not reading the press releases: the I-81 bridge project linked above is for a relatively small bridge just below the New York state line, not the Wade Bridge in the Harrisburg area. That one has no replacement lined up and is still not being considered for tolling.

Thank you for mentioning that.  They are most definitely two different bridges.   :D
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: snowc on November 11, 2021, 12:26:08 PM
Quote from: Roadsguy on November 10, 2021, 09:30:38 PM
Quote from: snowc on November 10, 2021, 12:34:16 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on November 08, 2021, 07:00:43 PM
PennDOT - District 1 News: PennDOT Starts Audio Outreach for the Bayfront Parkway Project (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1602)

PennDOT - District 4 News: PennDOT Invites Public to Comment on I-81 Susquehanna Project (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-4/pages/details.aspx?newsid=826)
Oh here we go again, we now have tolls on i81!  :rolleyes:

Worth noting for anyone just skimming the thread and not reading the press releases: the I-81 bridge project linked above is for a relatively small bridge just below the New York state line, not the Wade Bridge in the Harrisburg area. That one has no replacement lined up and is still not being considered for tolling.
I've been on 81 so many times, and they NEED to fix up the part from Scranton to NY line! It's very bumpy! :pan:  :banghead:
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Flyer78 on November 11, 2021, 05:47:10 PM
About 9 miles from the state line to Waverly have been repaved - I think they only did travel lanes; Mill & fill-type operation, not full depth repairs. However, it is much better than it was.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Rothman on November 11, 2021, 07:47:24 PM
Quote from: snowc on November 11, 2021, 12:26:08 PM
Quote from: Roadsguy on November 10, 2021, 09:30:38 PM
Quote from: snowc on November 10, 2021, 12:34:16 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on November 08, 2021, 07:00:43 PM
PennDOT - District 1 News: PennDOT Starts Audio Outreach for the Bayfront Parkway Project (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1602)

PennDOT - District 4 News: PennDOT Invites Public to Comment on I-81 Susquehanna Project (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-4/pages/details.aspx?newsid=826)
Oh here we go again, we now have tolls on i81!  :rolleyes:

Worth noting for anyone just skimming the thread and not reading the press releases: the I-81 bridge project linked above is for a relatively small bridge just below the New York state line, not the Wade Bridge in the Harrisburg area. That one has no replacement lined up and is still not being considered for tolling.
I've been on 81 so many times, and they NEED to fix up the part from Scranton to NY line! It's very bumpy! :pan:  :banghead:
I thought they were finally working on that.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on November 15, 2021, 10:54:43 AM
PennDOT - District 4 News: PennDOT Invites Public to Comment on I-80 Nescopeck Creek Bridges Project (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-4/pages/details.aspx?newsid=830)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on November 15, 2021, 03:08:42 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on September 22, 2021, 09:07:04 PM
(For PA 324) PennDOT - District 8 News: Long-term Closure Expected on Route 324 (Marticville Road) in Lancaster County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1515)

(For PA 324) PennDOT - District 8 News: Sinkhole Repair Completed on Route 324 (Marticville Road) in Lancaster County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1569)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on November 16, 2021, 11:20:28 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ulSNRf4OC88
Some contractor screwed up here and created icy conditions on US 1 in Philadelphia.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on November 17, 2021, 01:04:29 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on October 19, 2021, 01:47:43 PM
Quote from: sbeaver44 on September 12, 2021, 09:02:33 AM
Wikipedia says that PA 235 has an unsigned concurrency with PA 17 and that they both end at US 11/15 in Liverpool

However when I pull the Perry County SLDs dated 12/31/20

Page 213 has SR 0235 ending at SR 0017.   I'd expect this anyway, since, for example, you'll see SR 0015 not really existing in these diagrams (as US 15 is entirely concurrent with US 11 in Perry County, so it will only be SR 0011).  In both cases, if PA 235 actually ended at PA 17, or if it didn't – the SR 0235 designation would end here, as PA 17 is a lower number of the same class, and so even a signed PA 17/235 concurrency would simply bear SR 0017.

Pages 253-254 have SR 0017 between SR 0235 and SR 0011 (US 11/15) but I can't tell how I would read if PA 235 is also existing (but not signed) along here.

Source:

https://www.dot.state.pa.us/public/Bureaus/BOMO/RM/RITS/Annual%20Electronic%20SLDs%20by%20County/District%208/Perry%20Without%20Pipes.pdf (https://www.dot.state.pa.us/public/Bureaus/BOMO/RM/RITS/Annual%20Electronic%20SLDs%20by%20County/District%208/Perry%20Without%20Pipes.pdf)


On this note, are there any other weird hidden concurrencies in PA like this?   For the record, I am not talking about not-signed-but-obviously-implied ones like US 30/PA 23 along the Lancaster Bypass, but here – why would PA 235 be extended along PA 17 just to end and not continue after?

I emailed District 8 on this (thankfully because I added a reminder to my phone for an unrelated subject that led me to being reminded of it), and they indicated to me that the PA 17/PA 235 concurrency is a Type 10 Map Error (https://gis.penndot.gov/BPR_PDF_FILES/Maps/GHS/ROADNAMES/Perry_GHSN.pdf) meaning that it does not actually exist.  PA 235 ends at PA 17 as it should.

I emailed District 10 because PA 588 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pennsylvania_Route_588) has the same issue.  I got the same answer in that it is a Type 10 Map Error (https://gis.penndot.gov/BPR_PDF_FILES/Maps/GHS/ROADNAMES/Butler_GHSN.pdf) meaning that PA 588 ends at PA 288 instead of being concurrent with PA 288 to US 19/PA 68 in Zelienople.

Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on November 17, 2021, 02:23:18 PM
PennDOT - District 5 News: PennDOT Invites Public to Comment on I-80 Nescopeck Creek Bridges Project (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-5/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2968)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: famartin on November 17, 2021, 05:03:10 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on November 17, 2021, 02:23:18 PM
PennDOT - District 5 News: PennDOT Invites Public to Comment on I-80 Nescopeck Creek Bridges Project (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-5/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2968)

PeNNDOT wants to toll everything now, it seems. How exactly is that legal? Seems like a loophole. And yet... they still won't fix Breezewood...
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on November 18, 2021, 08:29:56 AM
PennDOT - District 10 News: PennDOT District 10 Requesting Construction Project Feedback (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1132)

(For US 422)PennDOT - District 6 News: U.S. 422 Overnight Closures Begin November 29 for Bridge Construction in Lower Pottsgrove Township (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7204)

(For PA 18)  PennDOT - District 11 News: PennDOT Announces Virtual Plans Presentation for Route 18 Rochester-Monaca Bridge Preservation Project (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-11/pages/details.aspx?newsid=5561)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on November 19, 2021, 02:20:49 PM
(For I-80, US 220, and PA 26) PennDOT - District 2 News: Winter Shutdown on Local Interchange Project (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2124)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: webny99 on November 20, 2021, 09:36:42 PM
Also in the State College area, but on a different note...

Does PennDOT have any plans to upgrade US 322 between Business 322 in State College and Potters Mills? It badly needs to be upgraded to four-lane divided or at least four lanes in some capacity. It seems to be a massive choke point for traffic on Penn State game days (like today) and with the completion of the Potters Mills project, I believe it's the only remaining two-lane section between State College and Harrisburg.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: famartin on November 20, 2021, 09:58:02 PM
Quote from: webny99 on November 20, 2021, 09:36:42 PM
Also in the State College area, but on a different note...

Does PennDOT have any plans to upgrade US 322 between Business 322 in State College and Potters Mills? It badly needs to be upgraded to four-lane divided or at least four lanes in some capacity. It seems to be a massive choke point for traffic on Penn State game days (like today) and with the completion of the Potters Mills project, I believe it's the only remaining two-lane section between State College and Harrisburg.
https://www.statecollege.com/penndot-to-hold-public-meetings-for-state-college-area-connector-project/
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: webny99 on November 21, 2021, 06:37:40 PM
Quote from: famartin on November 20, 2021, 09:58:02 PM
https://www.statecollege.com/penndot-to-hold-public-meetings-for-state-college-area-connector-project/

Interesting! I hadn't thought about a freeway along the PA 144 corridor as an alternate, but I'm starting to like it for a few reasons...

1) The interchange with I-99 already exists (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.885723,-77.7253241,15z).
2) It would provide MUCH better connectivity to I-80 not just from Lewistown and Harrisburg, but also the entire I-83 corridor down to Baltimore.
3) An upgraded US 322 would be great for traffic to/from State College, but in the bigger picture, it just shifts the traffic issues downstream and ensures that US 322 through Philipsburg/Clearfield is going to eventually need upgrades. You can avoid that by having traffic bypass State College entirely and use the PA 144 corridor/I-99 to access I-80.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on November 21, 2021, 07:51:20 PM
Quote from: webny99 on November 21, 2021, 06:37:40 PM
Quote from: famartin on November 20, 2021, 09:58:02 PM
https://www.statecollege.com/penndot-to-hold-public-meetings-for-state-college-area-connector-project/

Interesting! I hadn't thought about a freeway along the PA 144 corridor as an alternate, but I'm starting to like it for a few reasons...

1) The interchange with I-99 already exists (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.885723,-77.7253241,15z).
2) It would provide MUCH better connectivity to I-80 not just from Lewistown and Harrisburg, but also the entire I-83 corridor down to Baltimore.
3) An upgraded US 322 would be great for traffic to/from State College, but in the bigger picture, it just shifts the traffic issues downstream and ensures that US 322 through Philipsburg/Clearfield is going to eventually need upgrades. You can avoid that by having traffic bypass State College entirely and use the PA 144 corridor/I-99 to access I-80.

On the other hand, the Corridor O-1 proposal, while not currently active, is intended to provide a freeway link from Port Matilda northwest to I-80 for US 322, and the two-lane US 322 is still the quickest way to State College even if the freeway is completed up PA 144, due to that being so far out of the way.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Bitmapped on November 21, 2021, 09:38:06 PM
Quote from: Roadsguy on November 21, 2021, 07:51:20 PM
Quote from: webny99 on November 21, 2021, 06:37:40 PM
Quote from: famartin on November 20, 2021, 09:58:02 PM
https://www.statecollege.com/penndot-to-hold-public-meetings-for-state-college-area-connector-project/ (https://www.statecollege.com/penndot-to-hold-public-meetings-for-state-college-area-connector-project/)

Interesting! I hadn't thought about a freeway along the PA 144 corridor as an alternate, but I'm starting to like it for a few reasons...

1) The interchange with I-99 already exists (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.885723,-77.7253241,15z).
2) It would provide MUCH better connectivity to I-80 not just from Lewistown and Harrisburg, but also the entire I-83 corridor down to Baltimore.
3) An upgraded US 322 would be great for traffic to/from State College, but in the bigger picture, it just shifts the traffic issues downstream and ensures that US 322 through Philipsburg/Clearfield is going to eventually need upgrades. You can avoid that by having traffic bypass State College entirely and use the PA 144 corridor/I-99 to access I-80.

On the other hand, the Corridor O-1 proposal, while not currently active, is intended to provide a freeway link from Port Matilda northwest to I-80 for US 322, and the two-lane US 322 is still the quickest way to State College even if the freeway is completed up PA 144, due to that being so far out of the way.

US 322 already needs to be upgraded from Philipsburg to Clearfield. I'm not sure that a PA 144 alignment would divert enough traffic to really change that. Vehicles from State College and Altoona are still going to be using that Corridor O-1 part of US 322 in getting to I-80.

I'd love to see an origin-destination study for the corridor, but my gut feeling says that upgrading along the existing US 322 corridor is the best option. It ties State College to Harrisburg and avoids the expense/environmental concerns of going across Mount Nittany.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on November 22, 2021, 06:35:11 AM
So it looks like PennDOT is switching to one-way tolling for the I-80 bridges... (https://www.tnonline.com/20211117/one-way-tolls-proposed-for-i-80-bridge-in-carbon-open-house-set/)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: webny99 on November 22, 2021, 08:13:37 AM
Quote from: Roadsguy on November 21, 2021, 07:51:20 PM
On the other hand, the Corridor O-1 proposal, while not currently active, is intended to provide a freeway link from Port Matilda northwest to I-80 for US 322, and the two-lane US 322 is still the quickest way to State College even if the freeway is completed up PA 144, due to that being so far out of the way.

Absolutely. I am not disputing that, my only point is that a freeway along the PA 144 corridor would divert some of the truck traffic and reduce some of the burden along that part of the US 322 corridor. It would likely still need to be upgraded at some point anyways, but at least it would reduce the burden instead of adding to it in the short and medium term.


Quote from: Bitmapped on November 21, 2021, 09:38:06 PM
US 322 already needs to be upgraded from Philipsburg to Clearfield. I'm not sure that a PA 144 alignment would divert enough traffic to really change that. Vehicles from State College and Altoona are still going to be using that Corridor O-1 part of US 322 in getting to I-80.

I'd love to see an origin-destination study for the corridor, but my gut feeling says that upgrading along the existing US 322 corridor is the best option. It ties State College to Harrisburg and avoids the expense/environmental concerns of going across Mount Nittany.

I'd be interested in an origin/destination study as well. I could be wrong but my thought is that much of the truck traffic on US 322 is headed for the I-80 corridor. Any trucks headed for Clearfield or beyond could use I-80 to get to their destination instead of US 322. I'm also not sure how much truck traffic currently uses PA 144, although interestingly, trucks seem to be instructed NOT to use the new Potters Mills interchange (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.7938053,-77.6257255,3a,75y,314.17h,91.56t/data=!3m8!1e1!3m6!1sAF1QipPMYd0JGXKIFCbjJgmETZxWROZcabcvRW9wJbfE!2e10!3e11!6shttps:%2F%2Flh5.googleusercontent.com%2Fp%2FAF1QipPMYd0JGXKIFCbjJgmETZxWROZcabcvRW9wJbfE%3Dw203-h100-k-no-pi6.6834936-ya78.74159-ro1.3068833-fo100!7i7680!8i3840). I'm not sure what route they're supposed to use instead.

Obviously some truck traffic - and plenty of vehicle traffic - is headed for State College, so it's likely that US 322 is going to need improvements/widening at some point anyways. I think you could argue for the PA 144 connector freeway AND a widening of US 322 along its current alignment. There seems to be enough ROW for a widening along most of it. Certainly adding a lane eastbound for the first few miles after the Boal Ave interchange would provide immediate relief for some of the current issues.

Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: famartin on November 22, 2021, 11:41:24 AM
Quote from: webny99 on November 22, 2021, 08:13:37 AM
Quote from: Roadsguy on November 21, 2021, 07:51:20 PM
On the other hand, the Corridor O-1 proposal, while not currently active, is intended to provide a freeway link from Port Matilda northwest to I-80 for US 322, and the two-lane US 322 is still the quickest way to State College even if the freeway is completed up PA 144, due to that being so far out of the way.

Absolutely. I am not disputing that, my only point is that a freeway along the PA 144 corridor would divert some of the truck traffic and reduce some of the burden along that part of the US 322 corridor. It would likely still need to be upgraded at some point anyways, but at least it would reduce the burden instead of adding to it in the short and medium term.


Quote from: Bitmapped on November 21, 2021, 09:38:06 PM
US 322 already needs to be upgraded from Philipsburg to Clearfield. I'm not sure that a PA 144 alignment would divert enough traffic to really change that. Vehicles from State College and Altoona are still going to be using that Corridor O-1 part of US 322 in getting to I-80.

I'd love to see an origin-destination study for the corridor, but my gut feeling says that upgrading along the existing US 322 corridor is the best option. It ties State College to Harrisburg and avoids the expense/environmental concerns of going across Mount Nittany.

I'd be interested in an origin/destination study as well. I could be wrong but my thought is that much of the truck traffic on US 322 is headed for the I-80 corridor. Any trucks headed for Clearfield or beyond could use I-80 to get to their destination instead of US 322. I'm also not sure how much truck traffic currently uses PA 144, although interestingly, trucks seem to be instructed NOT to use the new Potters Mills interchange (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.7938053,-77.6257255,3a,75y,314.17h,91.56t/data=!3m8!1e1!3m6!1sAF1QipPMYd0JGXKIFCbjJgmETZxWROZcabcvRW9wJbfE!2e10!3e11!6shttps:%2F%2Flh5.googleusercontent.com%2Fp%2FAF1QipPMYd0JGXKIFCbjJgmETZxWROZcabcvRW9wJbfE%3Dw203-h100-k-no-pi6.6834936-ya78.74159-ro1.3068833-fo100!7i7680!8i3840). I'm not sure what route they're supposed to use instead.

Obviously some truck traffic - and plenty of vehicle traffic - is headed for State College, so it's likely that US 322 is going to need improvements/widening at some point anyways. I think you could argue for the PA 144 connector freeway AND a widening of US 322 along its current alignment. There seems to be enough ROW for a widening along most of it. Certainly adding a lane eastbound for the first few miles after the Boal Ave interchange would provide immediate relief for some of the current issues.

I wouldn't be surprised if the study for PA 144 was just to say "we looked at it" for Harris Township's many concerns (see article linked above). I haven't driven on the US 322 freeway section north of State College in a while, but I don't recall heavy truck traffic being a major issue, and I certainly didn't see trucks trying to use PA 144 when I drove it last month. So, I would expect that the US 322 portion is what will get bypassed with a new freeway alignment (which I'm sure is what both State College borough and PennDOT desire), and the PA 144 idea will be tossed at some point.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jemacedo9 on November 22, 2021, 12:02:34 PM
Quote from: webny99 on November 22, 2021, 08:13:37 AM
I'm also not sure how much truck traffic currently uses PA 144, although interestingly, trucks seem to be instructed NOT to use the new Potters Mills interchange (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.7938053,-77.6257255,3a,75y,314.17h,91.56t/data=!3m8!1e1!3m6!1sAF1QipPMYd0JGXKIFCbjJgmETZxWROZcabcvRW9wJbfE!2e10!3e11!6shttps:%2F%2Flh5.googleusercontent.com%2Fp%2FAF1QipPMYd0JGXKIFCbjJgmETZxWROZcabcvRW9wJbfE%3Dw203-h100-k-no-pi6.6834936-ya78.74159-ro1.3068833-fo100!7i7680!8i3840). I'm not sure what route they're supposed to use instead.

Trucks were prohibited from PA 144 north of PA 45, over the ridge/mountain there; that has been in place for years, long before this new Potters Mills interchange.

Also...before I-99 was completed, the freeway portion north of the PA 26/PA 64 interchange had existed, and there was a stub ending at PA 64 facing south.  The freeway was originally supposed to continue south from there, over the ridge, and connect to US 322.  When I-99 was built, the flyovers were added and the freeway was reconfigured to swing southwest towards State College.   

That being years ago...I'm studies need to be redone...but the idea was always there and far enough to originally have a stub.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on November 22, 2021, 02:20:06 PM
PennDOT - District 10 News: PennDOT Invites Public to Comment on I-80 North Fork Bridge Replacement (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1133)

PennDOT - District 8 News: Lane Restrictions Scheduled for Tomorrow on I-83 at Exit 18 (Mount Rose Avenue) in Springettsbury Township, York County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1574)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Bitmapped on November 23, 2021, 09:11:34 AM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on November 22, 2021, 06:35:11 AM
So it looks like PennDOT is switching to one-way tolling for the I-80 bridges... (https://www.tnonline.com/20211117/one-way-tolls-proposed-for-i-80-bridge-in-carbon-open-house-set/)

It's interesting that the article suggests one-way tolling will lower shunpike diversions. Given the relatively low tolls ($1 to $2, for cars at least), I would think diversions would be fairly minimal given the cost-to-benefit ratio with the extra time and hassle. Doubling the toll in one direction would, at least for me, make it a lot more likely that I would shunpike in that direction.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Mr_Northside on November 23, 2021, 04:25:13 PM
Quote from: Bitmapped on November 23, 2021, 09:11:34 AM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on November 22, 2021, 06:35:11 AM
So it looks like PennDOT is switching to one-way tolling for the I-80 bridges... (https://www.tnonline.com/20211117/one-way-tolls-proposed-for-i-80-bridge-in-carbon-open-house-set/)

It's interesting that the article suggests one-way tolling will lower shunpike diversions. Given the relatively low tolls ($1 to $2, for cars at least), I would think diversions would be fairly minimal given the cost-to-benefit ratio with the extra time and hassle. Doubling the toll in one direction would, at least for me, make it a lot more likely that I would shunpike in that direction.

I pretty much thought the same thing when I read that.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: vdeane on November 23, 2021, 09:46:16 PM
It's hard to tell because the article isn't very good about listing where the tolling points would be in terms that non-locals can understand (just googling Lehigh and Nescopeck yields places far away from the bridge the article appears to be talking about), but it sounds like the original plan was to have two tolling points each direction and this would consolidate those down to one each direction, such that the toll for each direction would be the same, just collected all at once instead of over two gantries.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jeffandnicole on November 23, 2021, 10:39:07 PM
Quote from: Bitmapped on November 23, 2021, 09:11:34 AM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on November 22, 2021, 06:35:11 AM
So it looks like PennDOT is switching to one-way tolling for the I-80 bridges... (https://www.tnonline.com/20211117/one-way-tolls-proposed-for-i-80-bridge-in-carbon-open-house-set/)

It's interesting that the article suggests one-way tolling will lower shunpike diversions. Given the relatively low tolls ($1 to $2, for cars at least), I would think diversions would be fairly minimal given the cost-to-benefit ratio with the extra time and hassle. Doubling the toll in one direction would, at least for me, make it a lot more likely that I would shunpike in that direction.

I can't imagine that the public's biggest concern was paying $1 each way versus $2 one way (or whatever the half vs full toll amounts would be).

But the article did hint at what I think PennDOT's actual concern was:  The infrastructure needed for 2 way tolling.  Basically, every cost would be doubled - twice as many gantries, cameras, transponder readers, no-read lookups, bills, mailings, etc, etc.  And they would be chasing $1 tolls vs. $2 tolls (or whatever the amount will be), so it would be quite a bit of money spent for not much in return. 

Could someone shunpike the toll...especially the one way toll?  Of course.  But the majority aren't going to bother.  Even as popular as bypassing the DE I-95 toll is, the actual number of people that bypass it is extremely low.  And when people see motorists exiting 95 before the plaza, there's often an incorrect assumption that everyone is doing so to avoid the toll plaza. There are actually people that live and shop in the area, and a reasonably large school people go to, that doesn't involve going thru the toll plaza!
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jemacedo9 on November 24, 2021, 08:53:57 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on November 23, 2021, 10:39:07 PM
Quote from: Bitmapped on November 23, 2021, 09:11:34 AM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on November 22, 2021, 06:35:11 AM
So it looks like PennDOT is switching to one-way tolling for the I-80 bridges... (https://www.tnonline.com/20211117/one-way-tolls-proposed-for-i-80-bridge-in-carbon-open-house-set/)
It's interesting that the article suggests one-way tolling will lower shunpike diversions. Given the relatively low tolls ($1 to $2, for cars at least), I would think diversions would be fairly minimal given the cost-to-benefit ratio with the extra time and hassle. Doubling the toll in one direction would, at least for me, make it a lot more likely that I would shunpike in that direction.

I can't imagine that the public's biggest concern was paying $1 each way versus $2 one way (or whatever the half vs full toll amounts would be).

But the article did hint at what I think PennDOT's actual concern was:  The infrastructure needed for 2 way tolling.  Basically, every cost would be doubled - twice as many gantries, cameras, transponder readers, no-read lookups, bills, mailings, etc, etc.  And they would be chasing $1 tolls vs. $2 tolls (or whatever the amount will be), so it would be quite a bit of money spent for not much in return. 

Could someone shunpike the toll...especially the one way toll?  Of course.  But the majority aren't going to bother.  Even as popular as bypassing the DE I-95 toll is, the actual number of people that bypass it is extremely low.  And when people see motorists exiting 95 before the plaza, there's often an incorrect assumption that everyone is doing so to avoid the toll plaza. There are actually people that live and shop in the area, and a reasonably large school people go to, that doesn't involve going thru the toll plaza!

And to add...truck shunpiking opportunities are just about non-existent or long/slow. 
For the Lehigh River bridge, there is a low underclearance warning for PA 940 in White Haven.
For the Nescopeck Creek bridge, it would be a somewhat long and slow detour on PA 93 and US 11.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on November 24, 2021, 01:36:02 PM
(For US 22/US 322 at PA 34)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Traffic Shift, Lane Restriction Planned for Route 22 Bridge Project at Route 34 in Perry County (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1575)

PennDOT - District 8 News: In-Person Open House for Route 3012 Market Street Bridge Rehabilitation Project Rescheduled (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1576)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ixnay on November 25, 2021, 11:43:33 AM
Quote from: jemacedo9 on November 24, 2021, 08:53:57 AM
And to add...truck shunpiking opportunities are just about non-existent or long/slow. 
For the Lehigh River bridge, there is a low underclearance warning for PA 940 in White Haven.
For the Nescopeck Creek bridge, it would be a somewhat long and slow detour on PA 93 and US 11.

Are you referring to this?

https://www.google.com/maps/@41.0610325,-75.7728081,3a,41.7y,320.68h,86.12t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s44QlXszqqxTbdBHRL_zl9g!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: MASTERNC on November 28, 2021, 08:39:20 PM
Either it is a contractor mistake or PA has changed its rules regarding flash mode for three lens left turn signals but a new installation with a FYA on Business US 1 in Penndel had a flashing red arrow and flashing yellow bulbs.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jemacedo9 on November 29, 2021, 01:06:42 PM
Quote from: ixnay on November 25, 2021, 11:43:33 AM
Quote from: jemacedo9 on November 24, 2021, 08:53:57 AM
And to add...truck shunpiking opportunities are just about non-existent or long/slow. 
For the Lehigh River bridge, there is a low underclearance warning for PA 940 in White Haven.
For the Nescopeck Creek bridge, it would be a somewhat long and slow detour on PA 93 and US 11.

Are you referring to this?

https://www.google.com/maps/@41.0610325,-75.7728081,3a,41.7y,320.68h,86.12t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s44QlXszqqxTbdBHRL_zl9g!2e0!7i13312!8i6656



Yes...and this is further back:
https://goo.gl/maps/VHRH27ytTmAwH9n86
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ekt8750 on November 29, 2021, 02:55:52 PM
Quote from: MASTERNC on November 28, 2021, 08:39:20 PM
Either it is a contractor mistake or PA has changed its rules regarding flash mode for three lens left turn signals but a new installation with a FYA on Business US 1 in Penndel had a flashing red arrow and flashing yellow bulbs.

Likely an error as PA doesn't do flashing red arrows except when the intersection is in full flash mode.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: MASTERNC on November 29, 2021, 03:13:41 PM
Quote from: ekt8750 on November 29, 2021, 02:55:52 PM
Quote from: MASTERNC on November 28, 2021, 08:39:20 PM
Either it is a contractor mistake or PA has changed its rules regarding flash mode for three lens left turn signals but a new installation with a FYA on Business US 1 in Penndel had a flashing red arrow and flashing yellow bulbs.

Likely an error as PA doesn't do flashing red arrows except when the intersection is in full flash mode.
It was in full flash mode.  I thought the standard in PA had been that turn arrows would be dark and that only thru signals would flash.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: akotchi on November 29, 2021, 04:08:42 PM
Quote from: MASTERNC on November 28, 2021, 08:39:20 PM
Either it is a contractor mistake or PA has changed its rules regarding flash mode for three lens left turn signals but a new installation with a FYA on Business US 1 in Penndel had a flashing red arrow and flashing yellow bulbs.
Where is this?  I am not on that section of U.S. 1 Business that much, but I am within about 10 minutes of Penndel and can go check this out. 
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: MASTERNC on November 29, 2021, 05:05:23 PM
Quote from: akotchi on November 29, 2021, 04:08:42 PM
Quote from: MASTERNC on November 28, 2021, 08:39:20 PM
Either it is a contractor mistake or PA has changed its rules regarding flash mode for three lens left turn signals but a new installation with a FYA on Business US 1 in Penndel had a flashing red arrow and flashing yellow bulbs.
Where is this?  I am not on that section of U.S. 1 Business that much, but I am within about 10 minutes of Penndel and can go check this out. 

It looks like it is around the Toyota dealer south of I-295.  I didn't drive through it but I saw it when turning left onto 295 South.  It looked like a FYA but there were definitely flashing turn arrows (the turn arrows would flash red, then the thru bulbs would flash yellow).

EDIT: From looking at Google Maps, then doing a search, it is a signal for a new Wawa.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: SignBridge on November 29, 2021, 08:05:28 PM
Quote from: MASTERNC on November 29, 2021, 03:13:41 PM
Quote from: ekt8750 on November 29, 2021, 02:55:52 PM
Quote from: MASTERNC on November 28, 2021, 08:39:20 PM
Either it is a contractor mistake or PA has changed its rules regarding flash mode for three lens left turn signals but a new installation with a FYA on Business US 1 in Penndel had a flashing red arrow and flashing yellow bulbs.

Likely an error as PA doesn't do flashing red arrows except when the intersection is in full flash mode.
It was in full flash mode.  I thought the standard in PA had been that turn arrows would be dark and that only thru signals would flash.

I believe the MUTCD prohibits completely dark signal heads.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: MASTERNC on November 29, 2021, 08:08:36 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on November 29, 2021, 08:05:28 PM
Quote from: MASTERNC on November 29, 2021, 03:13:41 PM
Quote from: ekt8750 on November 29, 2021, 02:55:52 PM
Quote from: MASTERNC on November 28, 2021, 08:39:20 PM
Either it is a contractor mistake or PA has changed its rules regarding flash mode for three lens left turn signals but a new installation with a FYA on Business US 1 in Penndel had a flashing red arrow and flashing yellow bulbs.

Likely an error as PA doesn't do flashing red arrows except when the intersection is in full flash mode.
It was in full flash mode.  I thought the standard in PA had been that turn arrows would be dark and that only thru signals would flash.

I believe the MUTCD prohibits completely dark signal heads.

There are definitely examples of dark signal heads in the Philly area when signals are in flash mode.  All of them are left turn signals.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Alps on November 30, 2021, 03:28:04 PM
Quote from: MASTERNC on November 29, 2021, 08:08:36 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on November 29, 2021, 08:05:28 PM
Quote from: MASTERNC on November 29, 2021, 03:13:41 PM
Quote from: ekt8750 on November 29, 2021, 02:55:52 PM
Quote from: MASTERNC on November 28, 2021, 08:39:20 PM
Either it is a contractor mistake or PA has changed its rules regarding flash mode for three lens left turn signals but a new installation with a FYA on Business US 1 in Penndel had a flashing red arrow and flashing yellow bulbs.

Likely an error as PA doesn't do flashing red arrows except when the intersection is in full flash mode.
It was in full flash mode.  I thought the standard in PA had been that turn arrows would be dark and that only thru signals would flash.

I believe the MUTCD prohibits completely dark signal heads.

There are definitely examples of dark signal heads in the Philly area when signals are in flash mode.  All of them are left turn signals.
Those should be flashing red arrows.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on December 01, 2021, 01:13:31 PM
I drove on N Hills Rd between I-83 (Exit 19)/PA 462 and US 30 on Sunday, and the widening to 2 lanes northbound has been completed.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on December 01, 2021, 10:30:58 PM
Is this a joke?
https://goo.gl/maps/At1sA9rp3UV3Myer9

A yellow TOLL banner on a toll road? I mean you paid a toll, though on credit through the Toll by Plate system, though nonetheless, you paid to get here to read this.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: webny99 on December 02, 2021, 08:24:37 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on December 01, 2021, 10:30:58 PM
Is this a joke?
https://goo.gl/maps/At1sA9rp3UV3Myer9

A yellow TOLL banner on a toll road? I mean you paid a toll, though on credit through the Toll by Plate system, though nonetheless, you paid to get here to read this.

NY is doing this as well now that the Thruway has gone to AET. I don't have a problem with it, it's simple, informational, and not really hurting anything.

I think it's also MUTCD standard, per Section 2F.11: https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/htm/2009/part2/part2f.htm
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on December 02, 2021, 08:49:34 AM
Quote from: sbeaver44 on April 01, 2021, 10:35:27 PM
Last night I drove all of PA 867, 868, and the section of PA 869 east of I-99 to clinch.   Going NB on 867, it takes a very odd route through Roaring Spring proper.  The turn from Sprang onto Main I missed partly because the 867 shield was missing for the left turn.  It is also a weird intersection and I couldn't tell which way the "left"  meant...and guessed wrong.   According to wiki, that is maintained by Roaring Spring Borough, not PennDOT.  And they could definitely have done a much better job with signage through the Borough.  I had to park and pull up Wiki + a map to figure out how it traversed the Borough.

Additionally, I feel like 868 would have been fine as a quadrant route. 

It's been a few years since I was on 869 west of I-99.  But I like the entire route.

I recently clinched PA 868, and I agree with you on that.  I do not see the point of it.

Also I emailed District 9 on the status of designating US 219 ALT north of Ebensburg, and the response was that there is not funding at this time to upgrade SR 4013.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: akotchi on December 02, 2021, 11:59:28 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on December 01, 2021, 10:30:58 PM
Is this a joke?
https://goo.gl/maps/At1sA9rp3UV3Myer9

A yellow TOLL banner on a toll road? I mean you paid a toll, though on credit through the Toll by Plate system, though nonetheless, you paid to get here to read this.
Technically, you have not paid anything yet . . . as a "ticket" system with plazas at the interchanges, the charge is on exit.

Several confirmation assemblies much further east on the Turnpike also have the toll banner.  These signs, in a manner of speaking, confirm that you are still within the ticket system.  In theory, on the exit side of mainline barrier plazas, confirmations would not have the toll banner unless another mainline barrier plaza is ahead, though older installations on the Turnpike do not follow that.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: famartin on December 02, 2021, 01:27:51 PM
Quote from: akotchi on December 02, 2021, 11:59:28 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on December 01, 2021, 10:30:58 PM
Is this a joke?
https://goo.gl/maps/At1sA9rp3UV3Myer9

A yellow TOLL banner on a toll road? I mean you paid a toll, though on credit through the Toll by Plate system, though nonetheless, you paid to get here to read this.
Technically, you have not paid anything yet . . . as a "ticket" system with plazas at the interchanges, the charge is on exit.

While that's true, you will have to pay to go either direction... you'll just pay less by going right versus left.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Bitmapped on December 02, 2021, 04:24:09 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on December 02, 2021, 08:49:34 AM
Also I emailed District 9 on the status of designating US 219 ALT north of Ebensburg, and the response was that there is not funding at this time to upgrade SR 4013.

My recollection is that PennDOT cited traffic counts as the justification for this project, but US 219 in northern Cambria county runs in the 3000-ish range outside of Northern Cambria borough. I don't recall the borough really being all that congested, either, on the times I've driven through. It's just a 4-mile long slog. Building a 2-lane bypass around the Spangler part of town strikes me as more useful than shuttling traffic over to PA 36.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on December 03, 2021, 12:27:24 PM
PennDOT - District 2 News: Wolf Administration, PennDOT Announce District 2 Construction Season Wrap-Up (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2130)

PennDOT - District 9 News: Wolf Administration Announces PennDOT District 9 Construction Season Results (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-9/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1006)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on December 05, 2021, 08:28:39 AM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on December 01, 2021, 01:13:31 PM
I drove on N Hills Rd between I-83 (Exit 19)/PA 462 and US 30 on Sunday, and the widening to 2 lanes northbound has been completed.

I even found this "FREEWAY ENTRANCE" (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.9746745,-76.693858,3a,75y,330.83h,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1seCuka8iywXwon_l13WqJSA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) sign in York, PA, along N Hills Rd to I-83 NB just north of PA 462.  (I am posting this in response to the New York Thread mentioning one (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=1487.msg2686699#msg2686699)).
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on December 07, 2021, 03:26:22 PM
PennDOT - District 8 News: Wolf Administration Highlights 2021 Construction Season in South Central PA (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1583)

PennDOT - District 1 News: Wolf Administration Reviews 2021 Construction Season for PennDOT's Northwest Region (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1616)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on December 08, 2021, 11:46:52 AM
(For I-90 and PA 18) PennDOT - District 1 News: Interstate 90 Ramps to Reopen in Erie County (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1618)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ixnay on December 08, 2021, 12:32:23 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on December 05, 2021, 08:28:39 AM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on December 01, 2021, 01:13:31 PM
I drove on N Hills Rd between I-83 (Exit 19)/PA 462 and US 30 on Sunday, and the widening to 2 lanes northbound has been completed.

I even found this "FREEWAY ENTRANCE" (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.9746745,-76.693858,3a,75y,330.83h,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1seCuka8iywXwon_l13WqJSA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) sign in York, PA, along N Hills Rd to I-83 NB just north of PA 462.

Yorkies (is that what residents of York city and county, PA call themselves, like in England?) can call that thoroughfare "the 83" now.  :)

All that's missing from the bottom of the sign is a "NORTH" sign and an I-83 shield, although the assembly across the street does the job just as well.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on December 08, 2021, 02:42:36 PM
(For US 30) PennDOT - District 6 News: PennDOT Encouraging Feedback on U.S. 30 (Coatesville-Downingtown Bypass) Reconstruction Project in Chester County (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7230)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: noelbotevera on December 08, 2021, 11:12:42 PM
Heading out to Pittsburgh tomorrow. Anyone want to suggest some scenic routes from Chambersburg?

A company is paying for this trip, so go nuts. Not too nuts since I'd like to reach Pittsburgh before nightfall.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on December 09, 2021, 05:06:05 AM
Quote from: noelbotevera on December 08, 2021, 11:12:42 PM
Heading out to Pittsburgh tomorrow. Anyone want to suggest some scenic routes from Chambersburg?

A company is paying for this trip, so go nuts. Not too nuts since I'd like to reach Pittsburgh before nightfall.

I'd say US 30 is scenic enough if you have not clinched it already.  Looking at your Travel Mapping (https://travelmapping.net/user/mapview.php?units=miles&u=noelbotevera&rg=PA), it is not clinched yet between Wilkensburg and Bedford.

PA 31 is also a fairly quick route out west of Bedford towards Mt Pleasant with it being mostly 55 minus the boroughs.  You may also want to consider a road like PA 915 with its newer bridge at its north end at PA 26.

Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Mr_Northside on December 09, 2021, 04:23:33 PM
Other than something really scenic and off the wall, there pretty much is either US 30 or PA-31 (using US-30 to get to it).

If you haven't been on that stretch of the Turnpike in a while, there's no better time than when you have a company paying those tolls. 
In the same vein, you could also dip down into MD and take I-70 -> I-68 and take US-40 or PA-TPK-43 into PA.

This time of year, nothing in particular stands out too much.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Mr_Northside on December 09, 2021, 04:24:17 PM
Also - since you said tomorrow, yesterday, that's probably too late to be of any use anyway.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on December 09, 2021, 04:38:49 PM
Actually I think that PA 31 is more comfortable for me to drive at night than US 30.  (mainly because US 30 is super-curvy between PA 711 and US 219)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Alps on December 09, 2021, 11:50:07 PM
PA 31 is far superior to US 30.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on December 10, 2021, 09:50:52 PM
(For US 22/US 322 at PA 34) PennDOT - District 8 News: Traffic Switch Planned for Route 22 Bridge Project at Route 34 in Perry County (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1588)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Bitmapped on December 12, 2021, 10:53:04 AM
PennDOT is contracting with the Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission to operate tolling gantries for its planned bridge tolls: https://www.post-gazette.com/news/transportation/2021/12/12/Pennsylvania-Turnpike-PennDOT-inter-agency-agreement-toll-collection-9-bridges/stories/202112120057
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: MASTERNC on December 12, 2021, 11:49:28 AM
Still amazing they're going to take more than 5 years to start removing toll plazas
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on December 13, 2021, 02:41:26 PM
PennDOT - District 6 News: Wolf Administration Highlights Productive 2021 Design, Construction Season Across Southeast Pennsylvania (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7243)

PennDOT Announces New 511PA Features: EV Charging Stations and Low-Bridge Locations, More Customizable Travel Alerts (https://www.penndot.gov/pages/all-news-details.aspx?newsid=901)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on December 14, 2021, 03:15:09 PM
(For US 30) PennDOT - District 8 News: PennDOT Announces Online Plans Display for Route 30 (Lincoln Highway) Project in Lancaster County (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1591)

PennDOT - District 11 News: Route 2006 East Washington Street Bridge Replacement Project Online Public Meeting Thursday Night (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-11/pages/details.aspx?newsid=5589)

EDIT (12-15-2021):  (For US 1)  PennDOT - District 6 News: PennDOT Reopens All Lanes on U.S. 1 (Baltimore Pike) Following Bridge Repair in Chadds Ford, Pennsbury Townships (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7248)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on December 16, 2021, 06:14:54 PM
(For PA 230) PennDOT - District 6 News: PennDOT Reopens 232-Year-Old Trinity Lane Bridge (Route 320) in Upper Merion Township (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7254)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on December 17, 2021, 04:35:21 PM
PennDOT - District 8 News: Updates Added to Route 3012 Market Street Bridge Rehabilitation Project Web Site (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1592)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on December 20, 2021, 11:35:29 AM
PennDOT - District 4 News: Wolf Administration Wraps Up 2021 Construction Season in Northeastern PA (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-4/pages/details.aspx?newsid=859)

(For PA 309)  PennDOT - District 4 News: PennDOT Announces Online Plans Display for the State Route 0309, Section 356, Bridge Removal Project over Ramp A in Kingstown Township, Courtdale Borough & Luzerne Borough, Luzerne County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-4/pages/details.aspx?newsid=858)

EDIT (12-21-2021):  (For PA 252)  PennDOT - District 6 News: PennDOT Completes Major Construction on Route 252 (Palmers Mill Road) Bridge Replacement over Crum Creek in Delaware County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7258)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on December 21, 2021, 02:54:23 PM
PennDOT - District 6 News: PennDOT to Begin Second Section of the Route 309 Connector Project in Montgomery County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7260)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on December 23, 2021, 07:59:30 PM
PennDOT - District 6 News: PennDOT Reopens U.S. 1 North Ramp to I-295 West in Middletown Township, Bucks County (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7264)

PennDOT - District 5 News: Wolf Administration Reviews 2021 Construction Season for PennDOT's East Central Region (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-5/pages/details.aspx?newsid=3000)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on December 26, 2021, 03:31:20 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on May 10, 2021, 06:13:05 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on August 27, 2020, 02:06:52 PM
From PennDOT District 8: Traffic to be Switched to New Ramp from Mount Rose Avenue to I-83 NB in Springettsbury Township, York County (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1209)

Well the I-83/PA 124 interchange should be completed eventually.

Update from District 8 on this project: Traffic Switch, Lane Restrictions Scheduled at I-83/Mount Rose Avenue, in Springettsbury Township, York County (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1385)

Well driving through the area on I-83 this afternoon, I did not see any work zone signs or any indication of a work zone at all.  Maybe this project is now complete.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on December 27, 2021, 10:21:23 AM
(For US 62)  PennDOT - District 1 News: Weight Limit Posted on Route 62 Bridge in Warren County (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1625)

Since work is planned in 2022, I see no reason to add the latest alternate truck route to Travel Mapping.   :clap:
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on December 29, 2021, 04:50:17 PM
PennDOT - District 6 News: Street Road Bridge Over Leech Run Closed Indefinitely in Lower Oxford Township (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7273)

QuoteThe Street Road bridge over Leach was built in 1924. The single-span, reinforced concrete T-beam bridge is 39 feet long, 18 feet wide and carries approximately 325 vehicles a day. The bridge was listed in poor condition prior to today's closing.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on December 30, 2021, 12:07:59 PM
PennDOT - District 12 News: Wolf Administration Announces 2021 Southwest Region Construction Season Wrap-up (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-12/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1682)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on January 03, 2022, 05:51:44 PM
PennDOT - District 3 News: Wolf Administration Reviews 2021 Construction Season for PennDOT's Northcentral Region (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=3888)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on January 06, 2022, 11:58:59 AM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on December 08, 2021, 02:42:36 PM
(For US 30) PennDOT - District 6 News: PennDOT Encouraging Feedback on U.S. 30 (Coatesville-Downingtown Bypass) Reconstruction Project in Chester County (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7230)

PennDOT - District 6 News: PennDOT Extends Deadline to February 4 for Public Feedback on U.S. 30 Reconstruction Project Eastern Section in Chester County (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7230)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on January 07, 2022, 03:57:28 AM
PennDOT - District 6 News: PennDOT Reduces Speed Limits on Several Philadelphia Area Roadways (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7284)

I obviously would not normally post this because it is related to the current winter storm impacting the northeast.  However, the southern freeway portion of PA 100 is mentioned here as PA 100 Spur for some reason.  The 2000 Chester County PA Type 10 Map (https://gis.penndot.gov/BPR_PDF_FILES/MAPS/Type_10_GHS_Historical_Scans/Chester_2000.pdf) before the PA 100 truncation to US 202 refers to it as SR 2023 and not PA 100 Spur.

QuotePennDOT is urging motorists to avoid unnecessary travel but those who must head out will see speeds reduced to 45 mph on the following highways:

Interstates 76, 95, 295, 476, 676;
U.S. Routes 1, 30, 202, 422; and
State Routes 63, 100 Spur and 309.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: vdeane on January 07, 2022, 12:46:17 PM
I wouldn't read too much into it.  They have to call it something for the article, and the general public isn't going to know what "SR 2023" even is much less where it is.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: MATraveler128 on January 07, 2022, 12:49:08 PM
The general public doesn't know about Pennsylvania's secret state routes anyway.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jemacedo9 on January 07, 2022, 01:05:01 PM
Before the truncation, PA 100 used to exit before the spur started (just south of the US 30 "bypass") as a continuation of Pottstown Pike, head into and through West Chester, then multiplex with PA 52 before breaking off on Creek Road, to eventually join with DE 100.  You can trace it by following SR 3100.

So..it actually was a spur.  It was never signed as a spur.  The exit on US 202 used to read TO PA 100 North / TO US 30 West.  I don't think that stretch has an official name so PA 100 Spur is a fill-in-the-blank.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: MATraveler128 on January 07, 2022, 01:09:18 PM
Why was PA 100 truncated anyway? I've always found that to be confusing since it no longer connects to the one in Delaware.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: MASTERNC on January 07, 2022, 01:17:29 PM
Quote from: BlueOutback7 on January 07, 2022, 01:09:18 PM
Why was PA 100 truncated anyway? I've always found that to be confusing since it no longer connects to the one in Delaware.

My understanding was to keep trucks off Creek Road because of it's design (narrow, some sharp curves, an old weight restricted bridge).
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jemacedo9 on January 07, 2022, 04:32:21 PM
Quote from: MASTERNC on January 07, 2022, 01:17:29 PM
Quote from: BlueOutback7 on January 07, 2022, 01:09:18 PM
Why was PA 100 truncated anyway? I've always found that to be confusing since it no longer connects to the one in Delaware.

My understanding was to keep trucks off Creek Road because of it's design (narrow, some sharp curves, an old weight restricted bridge).

I thought I read where West Chester wanted to keep trucks out of the borough.
But the Creek Road reason is possible too and very applicable.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on January 07, 2022, 08:23:32 PM
Quote from: vdeane on January 07, 2022, 12:46:17 PM
I wouldn't read too much into it.  They have to call it something for the article, and the general public isn't going to know what "SR 2023" even is much less where it is.

The problem is that it's not SR 2023 or "100 Spur" anymore; it's just PA 100, the southernmost segment of the mainline route. They may have just wanted to distinguish it from the non-freeway portion of 100 north of US 30, but chose to use an outdated term.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on January 11, 2022, 03:19:27 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on December 17, 2021, 04:35:21 PM
PennDOT - District 8 News: Updates Added to Route 3012 Market Street Bridge Rehabilitation Project Web Site (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1592)

PennDOT - District 8 News: Additional Session Added to In-Person Open House for Market Street Bridge Rehabilitation Project (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1609)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on January 13, 2022, 10:56:49 AM
PennDOT - District 10 News: Wolf Administration Reviews 2021 Construction Season for PennDOT's District 10 (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1145)
(For US 422) PennDOT - District 10 News: Route 422 Improvements to Advance with Nearly $25 Million Investment (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1146)
(For US 202)  PennDOT - District 6 News: Markley Street (U.S. 202 South), Main Street Travel Restrictions Next Week for Construction in Norristown (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7297)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on January 20, 2022, 04:52:32 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on December 27, 2021, 10:21:23 AM
(For US 62)  PennDOT - District 1 News: Weight Limit Posted on Route 62 Bridge in Warren County (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1625)

Since work is planned in 2022, I see no reason to add the latest alternate truck route to Travel Mapping.   :clap:

(For US 62)  PennDOT - District 1 News: Stop Signs in Place at Route 62 Bridge in Warren County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1657)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: SkyPesos on January 22, 2022, 05:57:48 PM
I've read somewhere that I-70, I-76 (or I-80S back then) and I-79 all used to pass through Downtown Pittsburgh at some point in its history, and it seems like that all three used the section of what is now I-376 between I-79 and I-279 to get to downtown from the south and west. Did all three interstates use that segment/go through downtown Pittsburgh at the same time? If so, that could most likely be the first 2di triplex in the interstate system's history, predating I-55/64/70 and I-39/90/94.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ixnay on January 22, 2022, 08:11:42 PM
Quote from: SkyPesos on January 22, 2022, 05:57:48 PM
I've read somewhere that I-70, I-76 (or I-80S back then) and I-79 all used to pass through Downtown Pittsburgh at some point in its history, and it seems like that all three used the section of what is now I-376 between I-79 and I-279 to get to downtown from the south and west. Did all three interstates use that segment/go through downtown Pittsburgh at the same time? If so, that could most likely be the first 2di triplex in the interstate system's history, predating I-55/64/70 and I-39/90/94.

Part of the (Penn Lincoln) Parkway West, and also 1) utilizing the Fort Pitt Bridge and Fort Pitt Tunnel(s) and 2) carrying US Routes 22 and 30.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: rickmastfan67 on January 22, 2022, 10:33:19 PM
Quote from: SkyPesos on January 22, 2022, 05:57:48 PM
I've read somewhere that I-70, I-76 (or I-80S back then) and I-79 all used to pass through Downtown Pittsburgh at some point in its history, and it seems like that all three used the section of what is now I-376 between I-79 and I-279 to get to downtown from the south and west. Did all three interstates use that segment/go through downtown Pittsburgh at the same time? If so, that could most likely be the first 2di triplex in the interstate system's history, predating I-55/64/70 and I-39/90/94.

According to PA Highways website, none of them were posted at the same time on the Parkway West.

I-70 (1960 - 1964):  Exit 64A to I-76/PA Turnpike
I-79 (1964 - 1972):  Exit 64A to Exit 70C
I-76 (1972 - 1973):  Exit 64A to Exit 70C
I-279 (1973 - 2009):  Exit 64A to Exit 70C
I-376 (2009 - current): Exit 64A to Exit 70C
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on January 23, 2022, 11:37:31 AM
Why does SB I-83 for Lowether Street sign Exit 6C for the loop ramp just south of PA  581?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on January 23, 2022, 12:41:38 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on January 23, 2022, 11:37:31 AM
Why does SB I-83 for Lowether Street sign Exit 6C for the loop ramp just south of PA  581?

That is because the ramp for Lowther St is part of the PA 581 EB ramp to I-83 SB (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.2373941,-76.8967483,3a,75y,78.59h,97.01t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sHWKtyCPufJofysrqiDTDvQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192).  There is no way to access this ramp from I-83 SB itself.

I-83 SB traffic must access Lowther St via Exit 41B here (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.2455946,-76.882836,3a,75y,239.76h,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1syrwBaGkyG8VuliIozGsvLQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192).
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on January 23, 2022, 02:17:05 PM
Then PA 581 uses sequential exit numbers then?  I guess not being interstate PennDOT don't see the need to convert.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: MATraveler128 on January 23, 2022, 02:33:35 PM
PA 378 I think uses sequential numbering. There's a split E-W suffix there.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on January 23, 2022, 02:41:11 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on January 23, 2022, 02:17:05 PM
Then PA 581 uses sequential exit numbers then?  I guess not being interstate PennDOT don't see the need to convert.

Well PA 581 is also only seven miles long.  You might would convert Exit 6, and they may be it.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: famartin on January 23, 2022, 02:51:33 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on January 23, 2022, 02:41:11 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on January 23, 2022, 02:17:05 PM
Then PA 581 uses sequential exit numbers then?  I guess not being interstate PennDOT don't see the need to convert.

Well PA 581 is also only seven miles long.  You might would convert Exit 6, and they may be it.

Speaking of 581, is there any practical benefit in having 11 follow 581 for the short distance it does? It seems like a pointless re-route.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on January 23, 2022, 02:54:39 PM
Quote from: famartin on January 23, 2022, 02:51:33 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on January 23, 2022, 02:41:11 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on January 23, 2022, 02:17:05 PM
Then PA 581 uses sequential exit numbers then?  I guess not being interstate PennDOT don't see the need to convert.

Well PA 581 is also only seven miles long.  You might would convert Exit 6, and they may be it.

Speaking of 581, is there any practical benefit in having 11 follow 581 for the short distance it does? It seems like a pointless re-route.

That was left over from when PA 581 ended at Carlisle Pike. There was no PA 581 and US 11 was its number plus a short PennDOT reference route between US 15 and I-83.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on January 23, 2022, 03:00:43 PM
^At this point, the US 11 reroute is probably still there to keep traffic from following Market St into US 11/US 15 in Camp Hill.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: famartin on January 23, 2022, 03:03:41 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on January 23, 2022, 02:54:39 PM
Quote from: famartin on January 23, 2022, 02:51:33 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on January 23, 2022, 02:41:11 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on January 23, 2022, 02:17:05 PM
Then PA 581 uses sequential exit numbers then?  I guess not being interstate PennDOT don't see the need to convert.

Well PA 581 is also only seven miles long.  You might would convert Exit 6, and they may be it.

Speaking of 581, is there any practical benefit in having 11 follow 581 for the short distance it does? It seems like a pointless re-route.

That was left over from when PA 581 ended at Carlisle Pike. There was no PA 581 and US 11 was its number plus a short PennDOT reference route between US 15 and I-83.

That's a pretty long reference route (2 miles). But OK, thanks for the history lesson.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: rickmastfan67 on January 23, 2022, 08:18:51 PM
Quote from: BlueOutback7 on January 23, 2022, 02:33:35 PM
PA 378 I think uses sequential numbering. There's a split E-W suffix there.

PA-28 is also sequential numbering.  If any of the state routes that still use sequential, PA-28 is the one route that should, no must, be converted to mileage due to the length of expressway it has.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: vdeane on January 23, 2022, 09:35:58 PM
Quote from: rickmastfan67 on January 23, 2022, 08:18:51 PM
Quote from: BlueOutback7 on January 23, 2022, 02:33:35 PM
PA 378 I think uses sequential numbering. There's a split E-W suffix there.

PA-28 is also sequential numbering.  If any of the state routes that still use sequential, PA-28 is the one route that should, no must, be converted to mileage due to the length of expressway it has.
PA 378 and PA 581 are close enough in my mind.  PA 28 and US 6 really should be converted.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on January 24, 2022, 09:14:25 PM
PennDOT - District 8 News: Public Hearing Scheduled for the Eisenhower Drive Extension Project in Adams and York Counties (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1612)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Hot Rod Hootenanny on January 24, 2022, 11:24:43 PM
Quote from: BlueOutback7 on January 23, 2022, 02:33:35 PM
PA 378 I think uses sequential numbering. There's a split E-W suffix there.

US 40 & US 422 just use letters.
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51566666163_228fb4941e_n.jpg)
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51842372450_7c0ccbb801_n.jpg)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on January 25, 2022, 12:07:49 AM
NCDOT uses mileage numbers on US Route freeways. I can see US 22 using mile based numbers on the Lehigh Valley Thruway and the freeway with US 322 and between Ebensburg and Duncansville.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: famartin on January 25, 2022, 01:27:59 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on January 25, 2022, 12:07:49 AM
NCDOT uses mileage numbers on US Route freeways. I can see US 22 using mile based numbers on the Lehigh Valley Thruway and the freeway with US 322 and between Ebensburg and Duncansville.

It seems like some states don't milepost non-interstates the same as interstates. For example, in Nevada, the only statewide mileposted routes are Interstates (at least when I was last there in 2016). US and state highways had mileposts which reset at county lines.  Interstates actually did too, but they were very small compared to the standard size state-wide mile markers. I've seen MD have an odd milepost set for US 1 in Harford County which doesn't follow the state mileage.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on January 25, 2022, 06:03:38 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on January 25, 2022, 12:07:49 AM
NCDOT uses mileage numbers on US Route freeways. I can see US 22 using mile based numbers on the Lehigh Valley Thruway and the freeway with US 322 and between Ebensburg and Duncansville.

You could basically do the entire route.  Even the non-freeway portions have interchanges on it  (PA 56, PA 403, PA 26 in Huntingdon, PA 72, PA 934, etc.).
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: storm2k on January 25, 2022, 10:32:53 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on January 25, 2022, 12:07:49 AM
NCDOT uses mileage numbers on US Route freeways. I can see US 22 using mile based numbers on the Lehigh Valley Thruway and the freeway with US 322 and between Ebensburg and Duncansville.

NJDOT does for pretty much all freeway segments that use exit numbering whether they're interstate, US route, or state route. They'll even just go with the on the books mileages in the case of a road like Route 18 which still starts at milepost 6 even though the plans to build south of 138 are basically dead and buried. Same for 21 even though the first 4ish miles of it are urban multilane arterial and it doesn't become freeway grade until the northern end of Newark.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jemacedo9 on January 25, 2022, 01:10:03 PM
PA is inconsistent at numbering exits on non-interstates:

Numbered Sequential:  PA 28 (District 11), PA 29 (District 4), PA 309 (District 4), US 6 (District 4), PA 581 (District 8), PA 378 (District 5).
Numbered Milepost*:  US 220 Lock-Haven to Jersey Shore only (District 4), US 15 north of Williamsport (District 3)
*I believe both use theoretical I-99 mileposts
A-B lettering:  US 40/PA 43 Brownstown cloverleaf (District 12), US 119/US 422 cloverleaf (District 10)

All of the other non-interstates are unnumbered.
All of the PA Turnpike extensions are numbered.

So even within Districts and/or on the same road, there are inconsistencies.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on January 25, 2022, 02:35:31 PM
QuoteA-B lettering:  US 40/PA 43 Brownstown cloverleaf (District 12), US 119/US 422 cloverleaf (District 10)

This applies to the US 422/PA 28/PA 66 interchange in Kittanning as well.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ekt8750 on January 26, 2022, 12:31:19 AM
Quote from: jemacedo9 on January 25, 2022, 01:10:03 PM
PA is inconsistent at numbering exits on non-interstates:

Numbered Sequential:  PA 28 (District 11), PA 29 (District 4), PA 309 (District 4), US 6 (District 4), PA 581 (District 8), PA 378 (District 5).
Numbered Milepost*:  US 220 Lock-Haven to Jersey Shore only (District 4), US 15 north of Williamsport (District 3)
*I believe both use theoretical I-99 mileposts
A-B lettering:  US 40/PA 43 Brownstown cloverleaf (District 12), US 119/US 422 cloverleaf (District 10)

All of the other non-interstates are unnumbered.
All of the PA Turnpike extensions are numbered.

So even within Districts and/or on the same road, there are inconsistencies.

It doesn't help that mileposts on non-interstates reset at county lines in PA.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on January 26, 2022, 12:49:10 AM
Quote from: ekt8750 on January 26, 2022, 12:31:19 AM
Quote from: jemacedo9 on January 25, 2022, 01:10:03 PM
PA is inconsistent at numbering exits on non-interstates:

Numbered Sequential:  PA 28 (District 11), PA 29 (District 4), PA 309 (District 4), US 6 (District 4), PA 581 (District 8), PA 378 (District 5).
Numbered Milepost*:  US 220 Lock-Haven to Jersey Shore only (District 4), US 15 north of Williamsport (District 3)
*I believe both use theoretical I-99 mileposts
A-B lettering:  US 40/PA 43 Brownstown cloverleaf (District 12), US 119/US 422 cloverleaf (District 10)

All of the other non-interstates are unnumbered.
All of the PA Turnpike extensions are numbered.

So even within Districts and/or on the same road, there are inconsistencies.

It doesn't help that mileposts on non-interstates reset at county lines in PA.

Math comes in handy to figure that one out. Caltrans does it on I-5.  The exit numbers and mileposts do not match, but math helped them determine where the interchange is in distance from its south end at Tijuana.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: rickmastfan67 on January 26, 2022, 12:52:59 AM
Quote from: ekt8750 on January 26, 2022, 12:31:19 AM
Quote from: jemacedo9 on January 25, 2022, 01:10:03 PM
PA is inconsistent at numbering exits on non-interstates:

Numbered Sequential:  PA 28 (District 11), PA 29 (District 4), PA 309 (District 4), US 6 (District 4), PA 581 (District 8), PA 378 (District 5).
Numbered Milepost*:  US 220 Lock-Haven to Jersey Shore only (District 4), US 15 north of Williamsport (District 3)
*I believe both use theoretical I-99 mileposts
A-B lettering:  US 40/PA 43 Brownstown cloverleaf (District 12), US 119/US 422 cloverleaf (District 10)

All of the other non-interstates are unnumbered.
All of the PA Turnpike extensions are numbered.

So even within Districts and/or on the same road, there are inconsistencies.

It doesn't help that mileposts on non-interstates reset at county lines in PA.

They don't on PA-28 expressway part.  They have the normal MM's all the way from the start to US-422 and don't reset leaving Allegheny County.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Alps on January 26, 2022, 06:59:32 PM
Quote from: famartin on January 25, 2022, 01:27:59 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on January 25, 2022, 12:07:49 AM
NCDOT uses mileage numbers on US Route freeways. I can see US 22 using mile based numbers on the Lehigh Valley Thruway and the freeway with US 322 and between Ebensburg and Duncansville.

It seems like some states don't milepost non-interstates the same as interstates. For example, in Nevada, the only statewide mileposted routes are Interstates (at least when I was last there in 2016). US and state highways had mileposts which reset at county lines.  Interstates actually did too, but they were very small compared to the standard size state-wide mile markers. I've seen MD have an odd milepost set for US 1 in Harford County which doesn't follow the state mileage.
Yeah that US 1 bypass is a weirdo. I think it was once considered for some other number but it's been 1 for decades and there's no reason not to repost it in line with the rest of the highway.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jemacedo9 on January 26, 2022, 07:54:55 PM
Quote from: ekt8750 on January 26, 2022, 12:31:19 AM
Quote from: jemacedo9 on January 25, 2022, 01:10:03 PM
PA is inconsistent at numbering exits on non-interstates:

Numbered Sequential:  PA 28 (District 11), PA 29 (District 4), PA 309 (District 4), US 6 (District 4), PA 581 (District 8), PA 378 (District 5).
Numbered Milepost*:  US 220 Lock-Haven to Jersey Shore only (District 4), US 15 north of Williamsport (District 3)
*I believe both use theoretical I-99 mileposts
A-B lettering:  US 40/PA 43 Brownstown cloverleaf (District 12), US 119/US 422 cloverleaf (District 10)

All of the other non-interstates are unnumbered.
All of the PA Turnpike extensions are numbered.

So even within Districts and/or on the same road, there are inconsistencies.

It doesn't help that mileposts on non-interstates reset at county lines in PA.

Incorrect.  PA only puts mileposts on freeways...and maybe not even all of them. But the ones where they do, the mileposts to not reset at county lines.

If you're thinking about the LWSs, those are segment markers, and segments are not exactly 1/2 mile.  They are varying length and are generally arbitrary.  They generally are around 1/2 mile but not exactly and can be much shorter or longer.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ixnay on January 27, 2022, 02:40:48 PM
What are PennDOT's color coded detour signs all about?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: MASTERNC on January 27, 2022, 03:26:29 PM
Quote from: ixnay on January 27, 2022, 02:40:48 PM
What are PennDOT's color coded detour signs all about?

If the road is closed, you would see these signs on the exit ramp.  Some are just small detour signs with the color.  Others will say the route number and then to follow the colored detour signs.

Example of the large route specific signs (some of which are folded over when not in use):

(https://www.gannett-cdn.com/authoring/2008/07/09/NBCT/ghows-PA-a9a5d759-aee0-4065-9f4b-6516a71baa80-c661ba98.jpeg?width=500&height=338&fit=crop&format=pjpg&auto=webp)

Example of the smaller guide signs:

(https://bloximages.newyork1.vip.townnews.com/lancasteronline.com/content/tncms/assets/v3/editorial/2/a5/2a56564b-b351-56de-894b-de2def5d56c9/52324cde6f2b8.image.jpg?resize=529%2C638)

There is actually a guide I found that explains the placement and even the color (color is normally based on direction).

https://studylib.net/doc/18682220/penndot-detour-signs-color-coded-signs-implementing-the
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jeffandnicole on January 27, 2022, 04:35:11 PM
Quote from: ixnay
link=topic=2410.msg2701848#msg2701848 date=1643312448

What are PennDOT's color coded detour signs all about?

While they're impressive and located throughout the state, THEY ARE NEVER USED. The amount of sign pollution and waste is obscene.  I've yet to hear about a road closure that indicates one should follow specific detour signage. More often that not, once someone has left the highway, there's no additional signage to guide them back to the highway.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on January 27, 2022, 04:37:13 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on January 27, 2022, 04:35:11 PM
Quote from: ixnay
link=topic=2410.msg2701848#msg2701848 date=1643312448

What are PennDOT's color coded detour signs all about?

While they're impressive and located throughout the state, THEY ARE NEVER USED. The amount of sign pollution and waste is obscene.  I've yet to hear about a road closure that indicates one should follow specific detour signage. More often that not, once someone has left the highway, there's no additional signage to guide them back to the highway.

In 2015, I was directed to follow them due to an accident closing I-81 south of PA 233.  I think I went over to US 11 instead.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: bwana39 on January 28, 2022, 09:39:12 AM
Bridge collapse into Pittsburgh's Frick Park.  200' (more or less) steel stringer bridge has TOTAL FAILURE AND COLLAPSE into ravine.

https://www.wtae.com/article/bridge-colla/38922716

https://pittsburgh.cbslocal.com/2022/01/28/frick-park-bridge-collapse-latest-updates/
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on January 28, 2022, 10:59:59 AM
Please post about the Pittsburgh bridge collapse in this thread.  (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=30935.0)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on January 29, 2022, 11:53:16 AM
Quote from: storm2k on January 25, 2022, 10:32:53 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on January 25, 2022, 12:07:49 AM
NCDOT uses mileage numbers on US Route freeways. I can see US 22 using mile based numbers on the Lehigh Valley Thruway and the freeway with US 322 and between Ebensburg and Duncansville.

NJDOT does for pretty much all freeway segments that use exit numbering whether they're interstate, US route, or state route. They'll even just go with the on the books mileages in the case of a road like Route 18 which still starts at milepost 6 even though the plans to build south of 138 are basically dead and buried. Same for 21 even though the first 4ish miles of it are urban multilane arterial and it doesn't become freeway grade until the northern end of Newark.

NJ 55 too for that matter. It's zero mile marker is implied to be at its proposed connection to the GSP in Cape May County.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: famartin on January 29, 2022, 12:45:11 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on January 29, 2022, 11:53:16 AM
Quote from: storm2k on January 25, 2022, 10:32:53 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on January 25, 2022, 12:07:49 AM
NCDOT uses mileage numbers on US Route freeways. I can see US 22 using mile based numbers on the Lehigh Valley Thruway and the freeway with US 322 and between Ebensburg and Duncansville.

NJDOT does for pretty much all freeway segments that use exit numbering whether they're interstate, US route, or state route. They'll even just go with the on the books mileages in the case of a road like Route 18 which still starts at milepost 6 even though the plans to build south of 138 are basically dead and buried. Same for 21 even though the first 4ish miles of it are urban multilane arterial and it doesn't become freeway grade until the northern end of Newark.

NJ 55 too for that matter. It's zero mile marker is implied to be at its proposed connection to the GSP in Cape May County.

We're getting a little ot but NJDOT should just give up on 55 and 18 and reset their ends to 0. They're never building the rest of either road.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: storm2k on January 29, 2022, 12:57:50 PM
Quote from: famartin on January 29, 2022, 12:45:11 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on January 29, 2022, 11:53:16 AM
Quote from: storm2k on January 25, 2022, 10:32:53 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on January 25, 2022, 12:07:49 AM
NCDOT uses mileage numbers on US Route freeways. I can see US 22 using mile based numbers on the Lehigh Valley Thruway and the freeway with US 322 and between Ebensburg and Duncansville.

NJDOT does for pretty much all freeway segments that use exit numbering whether they're interstate, US route, or state route. They'll even just go with the on the books mileages in the case of a road like Route 18 which still starts at milepost 6 even though the plans to build south of 138 are basically dead and buried. Same for 21 even though the first 4ish miles of it are urban multilane arterial and it doesn't become freeway grade until the northern end of Newark.

NJ 55 too for that matter. It's zero mile marker is implied to be at its proposed connection to the GSP in Cape May County.

We're getting a little ot but NJDOT should just give up on 55 and 18 and reset their ends to 0. They're never building the rest of either road.

I believe that would require changes to actual state law as those original ends still exist on the books in legislation. It's fine as is, no sense in NJDOT having to pay to redo all the exit numbering and EMMs and etc just to move the zero mile points for either road.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Alps on January 29, 2022, 08:15:31 PM
Quote from: storm2k on January 29, 2022, 12:57:50 PM
Quote from: famartin on January 29, 2022, 12:45:11 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on January 29, 2022, 11:53:16 AM
Quote from: storm2k on January 25, 2022, 10:32:53 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on January 25, 2022, 12:07:49 AM
NCDOT uses mileage numbers on US Route freeways. I can see US 22 using mile based numbers on the Lehigh Valley Thruway and the freeway with US 322 and between Ebensburg and Duncansville.

NJDOT does for pretty much all freeway segments that use exit numbering whether they're interstate, US route, or state route. They'll even just go with the on the books mileages in the case of a road like Route 18 which still starts at milepost 6 even though the plans to build south of 138 are basically dead and buried. Same for 21 even though the first 4ish miles of it are urban multilane arterial and it doesn't become freeway grade until the northern end of Newark.

NJ 55 too for that matter. It's zero mile marker is implied to be at its proposed connection to the GSP in Cape May County.

We're getting a little ot but NJDOT should just give up on 55 and 18 and reset their ends to 0. They're never building the rest of either road.

I believe that would require changes to actual state law as those original ends still exist on the books in legislation. It's fine as is, no sense in NJDOT having to pay to redo all the exit numbering and EMMs and etc just to move the zero mile points for either road.
I don't think the state law requires them to set zero in any one place. The thing is all structures (including signs, utilities, etc.) are indexed to a particular milepost, so if you're not making any actual changes to the roadway alignment, it's in your interest not to touch the numbering that screws up all the historical indexing.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: storm2k on January 31, 2022, 06:34:18 PM
Quote from: Alps on January 29, 2022, 08:15:31 PM
Quote from: storm2k on January 29, 2022, 12:57:50 PM
Quote from: famartin on January 29, 2022, 12:45:11 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on January 29, 2022, 11:53:16 AM
Quote from: storm2k on January 25, 2022, 10:32:53 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on January 25, 2022, 12:07:49 AM
NCDOT uses mileage numbers on US Route freeways. I can see US 22 using mile based numbers on the Lehigh Valley Thruway and the freeway with US 322 and between Ebensburg and Duncansville.

NJDOT does for pretty much all freeway segments that use exit numbering whether they're interstate, US route, or state route. They'll even just go with the on the books mileages in the case of a road like Route 18 which still starts at milepost 6 even though the plans to build south of 138 are basically dead and buried. Same for 21 even though the first 4ish miles of it are urban multilane arterial and it doesn't become freeway grade until the northern end of Newark.

NJ 55 too for that matter. It's zero mile marker is implied to be at its proposed connection to the GSP in Cape May County.

We're getting a little ot but NJDOT should just give up on 55 and 18 and reset their ends to 0. They're never building the rest of either road.

I believe that would require changes to actual state law as those original ends still exist on the books in legislation. It's fine as is, no sense in NJDOT having to pay to redo all the exit numbering and EMMs and etc just to move the zero mile points for either road.
I don't think the state law requires them to set zero in any one place. The thing is all structures (including signs, utilities, etc.) are indexed to a particular milepost, so if you're not making any actual changes to the roadway alignment, it's in your interest not to touch the numbering that screws up all the historical indexing.

Oh, I was just talking in terms that most of the unbuilt portions of some of those roads are still on the books legislatively even though in practicality they will never be built (and NJDOT has long since acknowledged this for 18 since they built the newer trumpet ramps at 138 that went over the mainline roadway). Either way, there is not really a practical reason in my mind to change this at this point. Then again, my thoughts don't always match up with many people here, because I also don't see the practical need for a red, white, and blue shield on every piece of interstate-grade freeway that's built everywhere.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jeffandnicole on January 31, 2022, 09:28:27 PM
Quote from: storm2k on January 31, 2022, 06:34:18 PM
Quote from: Alps on January 29, 2022, 08:15:31 PM
Quote from: storm2k on January 29, 2022, 12:57:50 PM
Quote from: famartin on January 29, 2022, 12:45:11 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on January 29, 2022, 11:53:16 AM
NJ 55 too for that matter. It's zero mile marker is implied to be at its proposed connection to the GSP in Cape May County.

We're getting a little ot but NJDOT should just give up on 55 and 18 and reset their ends to 0. They're never building the rest of either road.

I believe that would require changes to actual state law as those original ends still exist on the books in legislation. It's fine as is, no sense in NJDOT having to pay to redo all the exit numbering and EMMs and etc just to move the zero mile points for either road.
I don't think the state law requires them to set zero in any one place. The thing is all structures (including signs, utilities, etc.) are indexed to a particular milepost, so if you're not making any actual changes to the roadway alignment, it's in your interest not to touch the numbering that screws up all the historical indexing.

Oh, I was just talking in terms that most of the unbuilt portions of some of those roads are still on the books legislatively even though in practicality they will never be built (and NJDOT has long since acknowledged this for 18 since they built the newer trumpet ramps at 138 that went over the mainline roadway). Either way, there is not really a practical reason in my mind to change this at this point. Then again, my thoughts don't always match up with many people here, because I also don't see the practical need for a red, white, and blue shield on every piece of interstate-grade freeway that's built everywhere.

There has been one slight renumbering of NJ's Route 55 already, which if I remember correctly took place sometime in the later 80's, as or after the northern section was built.  It didn't affect all exits, but I recall a few exits in the Millville area were raised or lowered by 1. 

It may have something to do with that legislation mentioned.  Here's the original law that created Route 55...

Quote
27:6-1.  State highway routes set forth

The state highway system shall consist of the following routes...

ROUTE NO. 55 .  Beginning at a point in Route U.S. 130 in the vicinity of Westville in the county of Gloucester, thence in a general southeasterly direction passing west of Vineland in the county of Cumberland and east of Millville in the county of Cumberland to a point in Route U.S. 9 in the vicinity of Cape May Court House in the county of Cape May.  The route shall traverse the counties of Gloucester, Salem, Cumberland and Cape May.

L.1964, c. 16, s. 1

This shows a few things... It's original Milepost 0 starting point would've been on US 9, about 1/4 - 1/2 mile away from the Garden State Parkway.  At some point, it became decided on that, if built, it would continue the short additional distance to the Parkway. 

It also shows something more interesting - that its northern point with NJ 42 wasn't its originally proposed ending point either.

Its original northern terminus would've been at US 130 in Westville is in this general area:  https://goo.gl/maps/2jijKXy49Ji9bpqA8 .  Depending how that map appears on your screen, it should show Route 55's actual northern terminus with NJ 42. 

I've never seen an actual proposal of where Route 55 would've veered from its ultimate path and met up with US 130.  The legislation is nondescriptive regarding its route in the 30 or so miles between Vineland and US 130. While we're talking nearly 60 years later, there's nothing in the aerial views that dictates a reasonably clear pathway that would've been reserved to be used for this highway.  In the 1960's, it was fairly common for a state to rip thru existing housing to build what it wanted, so there may not have been any ROW reserved to begin with.

Going back to that renumbering - in the 1980's, while there was hope Route 55 would be constructed to the shore, it was fading hope even back then.  Its northern completion was mostly envisioned to be a commuter highway towards Philly, getting people off of 2 lane roadways that were already becoming congested with not much hope of being widened. 

The cheaper land would've been to the south towards the shore, which could've been the next phase, but was never pursued. 

It makes a little sense, in hindsight, that NJDOT could've decided that Route 55's fate was that a random rural town in the middle of South Jersey would ultimately become its southern terminus.  A complete renumbering at that time with the 19 miles of existing highway between NJ 47 in Maurice River and US 40 in Malaga would've been of little disruption for a "highway in the middle of nowhere", before it determined the exit numbering for the exits from US 40 to NJ 42.

But since it was still on the books, there was an assumption that, if built, it would be built to the Parkway.  NJDOT probably reset Route 55's then and still current ending point to MP 20.0, and did a minor milepost change and exit renumbering to compensate for the additional distance to the Parkway.

Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Ted$8roadFan on February 01, 2022, 06:41:42 AM
From the news that's not really news department:

https://www.governing.com/now/bridge-collapse-highlights-pennsylvanias-infrastructure-problems
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jeffandnicole on February 01, 2022, 08:03:29 AM
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on February 01, 2022, 06:41:42 AM
From the news that's not really news department:

https://www.governing.com/now/bridge-collapse-highlights-pennsylvanias-infrastructure-problems

Um, did the reporter prematurely blame the collapse on snow?

QuoteAs a storm swept the region, the bridge collapsed due to heavy snowfall.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: MATraveler128 on February 01, 2022, 08:26:16 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on February 01, 2022, 08:03:29 AM
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on February 01, 2022, 06:41:42 AM
From the news that's not really news department:

https://www.governing.com/now/bridge-collapse-highlights-pennsylvanias-infrastructure-problems

Um, did the reporter prematurely blame the collapse on snow?

QuoteAs a storm swept the region, the bridge collapsed due to heavy snowfall.

It looks like it. Pennsylvania has too many flaws with their bridges and they need to do some serious spending to get their bridges in proper shape.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on February 02, 2022, 08:11:42 AM
PennDOT - District 9 News: North Bound I-70 Welcome Center to be Temporarily Closed (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-9/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1029)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: famartin on February 02, 2022, 12:41:41 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on February 02, 2022, 08:11:42 AM
PennDOT - District 9 News: North Bound I-70 Welcome Center to be Temporarily Closed (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-9/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1029)

"northbound"?  :-D
I get what they mean, but they obviously don't really look at their own signs...
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on February 02, 2022, 01:36:42 PM
The bridge in Pittsburgh was built even poorly as it it had no concrete piers but angled cross beams that held it up. Beams that were obviously not inspected regularly and subject to rust and corrosion to add to that meant trouble. IMO built cheaply and for a four lane heavily used artery was a bad design choice to be even remotely considered.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on February 02, 2022, 01:53:30 PM
Quote from: famartin on February 02, 2022, 12:41:41 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on February 02, 2022, 08:11:42 AM
PennDOT - District 9 News: North Bound I-70 Welcome Center to be Temporarily Closed (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-9/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1029)


"northbound"?  :-D
I get what they mean, but they obviously don't really look at their own signs...
Yeah, I held off on posting this yesterday because I wanted to reclarify whether there was a potential typo or not.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Bitmapped on February 02, 2022, 10:33:07 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on February 02, 2022, 01:36:42 PM
The bridge in Pittsburgh was built even poorly as it it had no concrete piers but angled cross beams that held it up. Beams that were obviously not inspected regularly and subject to rust and corrosion to add to that meant trouble. IMO built cheaply and for a four lane heavily used artery was a bad design choice to be even remotely considered.

It was a rigid frame bridge, a style which isn't uncommon in Pennsylvania. There are some advantages to this approach. It doesn't mean it was built poorly or a bad design choice.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on February 03, 2022, 12:12:31 AM
That's the scary part.  What other rigid frames are on major arteries numbered or not.  To me it's cheap!
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ixnay on February 03, 2022, 09:10:46 AM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on February 02, 2022, 01:53:30 PM
Quote from: famartin on February 02, 2022, 12:41:41 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on February 02, 2022, 08:11:42 AM
PennDOT - District 9 News: North Bound I-70 Welcome Center to be Temporarily Closed (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-9/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1029)


"northbound"?  :-D
I get what they mean, but they obviously don't really look at their own signs...
Yeah, I held off on posting this yesterday because I wanted to reclarify whether there was a potential typo or not.

Pray that your you know whats hold out until you reach Breezewood in 20 miles...
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on February 09, 2022, 11:51:35 AM
(For PA 23)  PennDOT - District 6 News: PennDOT to Begin Project to Improve Travel and Safety on Route 23 (Conshohocken State Road) at Spring Mill Road in Lower Merion Township (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7331)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: MASTERNC on February 09, 2022, 12:06:17 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on February 09, 2022, 11:51:35 AM
(For PA 23)  PennDOT - District 6 News: PennDOT to Begin Project to Improve Travel and Safety on Route 23 (Conshohocken State Road) at Spring Mill Road in Lower Merion Township (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7331)

Definitely needed.  The travel lane becomes a right turn only lane, and what appears to be the left turn lane is actually the thru lane.  I've been stuck behind vehicles at that light when I'm trying to turn right, and then said vehicle almost causes an accident when it goes straight with the adjacent thru lane.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on February 11, 2022, 08:41:57 AM
(Related to US 202)  PennDOT - District 6 News: New Traffic Pattern Begins Next Weekend on Main Street for Roadway Construction in Norristown (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7337)

PennDOT - District 10 News: Travel Alert for State Route 3008 (Number Eight Road/Perry Street/Wehrle Way) in Punxsutawney (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1165)  (This is for a sinkhole.)

PennDOT - Statewide News: Wolf Administration Highlights Benefits of Bipartisan Infrastructure Law for Electric Vehicle Infrastructure, Unveils Equity Principles for Industry Development (https://www.penndot.gov/pages/all-news-details.aspx?newsid=919)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jemacedo9 on February 13, 2022, 12:36:51 PM
Apparently the US 13 redesignation and US 13 Business new designation in Chester is signed...

https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7346 (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7346)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on February 13, 2022, 12:38:15 PM
Quote from: jemacedo9 on February 13, 2022, 12:36:51 PM
Apparently the US 13 redesignation and US 13 Business new designation in Chester is signed...

https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7346 (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7346)

Yes, I clarified it yesterday and posted it in the AASHTO 2020 thread.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jeffandnicole on February 13, 2022, 01:29:09 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on February 13, 2022, 12:38:15 PM
Quote from: jemacedo9 on February 13, 2022, 12:36:51 PM
Apparently the US 13 redesignation and US 13 Business new designation in Chester is signed...

https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7346 (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7346)

Yes, I clarified it yesterday and posted it in the AASHTO 2020 thread.

It's redesignated. But did they actually do a good job of signing it?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on February 13, 2022, 03:25:57 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on February 13, 2022, 01:29:09 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on February 13, 2022, 12:38:15 PM
Quote from: jemacedo9 on February 13, 2022, 12:36:51 PM
Apparently the US 13 redesignation and US 13 Business new designation in Chester is signed...

https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7346 (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7346)

Yes, I clarified it yesterday and posted it in the AASHTO 2020 thread.

It's redesignated. But did they actually do a good job of signing it?

Yes, beyond a couple areas where US 13 and PA 291 shields are separate from one another.  Also US 13 BUS is still not posted from the south end of PA 352.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on February 14, 2022, 02:34:06 PM
(For PA 56)  PennDOT - District 9 News: Route 56 Safety Improvements Project to Begin in Bedford and Somerset Counties (https://www.penndot.gov/RegionalOffices/district-9/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1031)

PennDOT - District 12 News: PennDOT Announces Webpage for Layton Bridge Projects (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-12/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1711)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on February 15, 2022, 08:21:51 AM
Linked is the latest information I can find on the PA 320 (extended to Spring 2022) (https://www.umtownship.org/hanging-rock-construction-project/) and PA 611 (https://www.wfmz.com/news/area/lehighvalley/stretch-of-route-611-in-williams-twp-with-broken-culvert-to-stay-closed-as-penndot/article_b12bf09c-38e2-11ec-a667-675eb3486865.html) (indefinite due to sinkhole caused by the remnants of Hurricane Ida) closures.

(For PA 8)  PennDOT - District 1 News: PennDOT Announces Plans Display for Route 8 in the City of Franklin and Sandycreek Township, Venango County (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1707)

PennDOT - District 5 News: Northampton County: Upcoming Closure of PA 33 North (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-5/pages/details.aspx?newsid=3075)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on February 16, 2022, 11:21:38 AM
(For PA 36 and PA 164)  PennDOT - District 9 News: Public Meeting and Plans Display for the Route 36 and Route 164 Intersection Improvements Project (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-9/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1033)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on February 18, 2022, 04:23:12 PM
(For PA 33) PennDOT - District 5 News: Northampton County: PA 33 North Closure This Weekend (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-5/pages/details.aspx?newsid=3080)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: sbeaver44 on February 19, 2022, 06:11:24 PM
Quote from: jemacedo9 on February 13, 2022, 12:36:51 PM
Apparently the US 13 redesignation and US 13 Business new designation in Chester is signed...

https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7346 (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7346)
Rage, now I have to go back to Chester as I had all US Routes in PA besides 19 and 62 clinched.

Clinching US 13 was a whole thing and I missed a few turns back in 2018 due to lack of signage – one near UPenn and another in Chester, and potentially one near where it splits off Roosevelt
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: famartin on February 19, 2022, 08:04:55 PM
Quote from: sbeaver44 on February 19, 2022, 06:11:24 PM
Quote from: jemacedo9 on February 13, 2022, 12:36:51 PM
Apparently the US 13 redesignation and US 13 Business new designation in Chester is signed...

https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7346 (https://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7346)
Rage, now I have to go back to Chester as I had all US Routes in PA besides 19 and 62 clinched.

Clinching US 13 was a whole thing and I missed a few turns back in 2018 due to lack of signage – one near UPenn and another in Chester, and potentially one near where it splits off Roosevelt

I'm gonna try to do 13 in PA this year or next.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on February 22, 2022, 04:27:07 PM
(For PA 462)  PennDOT - District 8 News: New Schedule Set for Closure of Route 462 (Market Street) Bridge Over Mill Creek in Springettsbury and Spring Garden Townships, York County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1622)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Mr. Matté on February 24, 2022, 04:07:52 PM
Which one of us was this?  :D

https://money.yahoo.com/penndot-employee-gets-surprise-looking-182148385.html

(only kidding, we'd steal antique and/or button copy signs only, not modern retroreflective service or wrong way signs)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on February 24, 2022, 04:15:46 PM
These people picked the absolute worst place to steal a sign too.  Why would you pull over to secure it next to a stockpile?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: famartin on February 24, 2022, 05:28:04 PM
Who does that in broad daylight?  :-D
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: plain on February 24, 2022, 05:49:01 PM
On this episode of World's Dumbest...
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: empirestate on February 24, 2022, 11:23:02 PM
Now if they were installing the sign, that would be something.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on February 25, 2022, 12:35:43 PM
(For I-83 and PA 74)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Lane Restrictions on NB I-83 and SB Route 74 (Queen Street) at Exit 16A in York Township, York County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1625)

PennDOT - District 8 News: Update: SB Route 74 to be Closed at I-83 in York Township, York County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1626)

(For I-80, I-99, US 220, and PA 26)  PennDOT - District 2 News: Local Interchange Project Work Resumes Next Week (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2187)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on February 27, 2022, 03:39:00 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on February 25, 2022, 12:35:43 PM
(For I-83 and PA 74)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Lane Restrictions on NB I-83 and SB Route 74 (Queen Street) at Exit 16A in York Township, York County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1625)

PennDOT - District 8 News: Update: SB Route 74 to be Closed at I-83 in York Township, York County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1626)

PennDOT - District 8 News: Update on Emergency Bridge Repairs on SB Route 74 over I-83 in York Township, York County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1630)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ixnay on February 27, 2022, 06:50:17 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on February 22, 2022, 04:27:07 PM
(For PA 462)  PennDOT - District 8 News: New Schedule Set for Closure of Route 462 (Market Street) Bridge Over Mill Creek in Springettsbury and Spring Garden Townships, York County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1622)

One of those townships was named for William Penn's grandson. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spring_Garden_Township,_York_County,_Pennsylvania https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Springettsbury_Township%2C_York_County%2C_Pennsylvania

Why do I consider Springettsbury one of my favorite Keystone State toponyms?  Dunno.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: storm2k on February 27, 2022, 11:58:13 PM
I drove on the Schuylkill for the first time since they activated the VSLS system today (out in the Conshohocken and KOP area but thankfully I avoided the curve). Has there been any research on if the variable speed limits have helped reduce crashes in the area? I did get to see the limits change on a couple of them as we were in some stop and go heading for the blue route exit.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: sprjus4 on February 28, 2022, 12:04:45 AM
Not 100% sure, but I recall driving it back in June last year, the speed limit was set down to 35 mph though traffic was moving 55-60+ mph. Not sure how that's "helping"  things, if someone is going 35 mph in that flow, you are far more a hazard.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: famartin on February 28, 2022, 01:01:25 AM
Quote from: sprjus4 on February 28, 2022, 12:04:45 AM
Not 100% sure, but I recall driving it back in June last year, the speed limit was set down to 35 mph though traffic was moving 55-60+ mph. Not sure how that's "helping"  things, if someone is going 35 mph in that flow, you are far more a hazard.

Honestly not entirely sure what the use of it is if that's the case... in Philly, speed limits seem to be routinely blown past by 15-20 mph (especially on I-95). If they are not going to keep up with hazards, is it just a cash-grab? Is it being enforced?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on February 28, 2022, 02:10:16 AM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on February 27, 2022, 03:39:00 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on February 25, 2022, 12:35:43 PM
(For I-83 and PA 74)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Lane Restrictions on NB I-83 and SB Route 74 (Queen Street) at Exit 16A in York Township, York County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1625)

PennDOT - District 8 News: Update: SB Route 74 to be Closed at I-83 in York Township, York County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1626)

PennDOT - District 8 News: Update on Emergency Bridge Repairs on SB Route 74 over I-83 in York Township, York County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1630)

PennDOT - District 8 News: Emergency Repairs Complete, SB Route 74 over I-83 in York Township, York County is Open to Traffic (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1631)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on March 01, 2022, 02:28:27 PM
(For US 11 and PA 487) PennDOT - District 3 News:  Public Information Meeting for Bloomsburg Reconstruction Project: Route 11 and Route 487 (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=3961)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on March 03, 2022, 08:42:50 AM
(For PA 199) PennDOT - District 3 News:  Public Information Meeting for Route 199 Reconstruction in Sayre and Athens, Bradford County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=3965)

(For US 202) PennDOT - District 6 News:  Morris Road to Close at U.S. 202 (Dekalb Pike) Beginning March 14 for Roadway Construction in Whitpain Township (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7363)

(For PA 41 and PA 372) PennDOT - District 6 News: Route 372 (Lower Valley Road) Daytime Lane Closure Planned for Pipe Installation in Atglen Borough, West Sadsbury Township (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7364)

(For US 15) PennDOT - District 8 News: Resurfacing and Safety Improvement Project Resumes on Route 15 in Adams and York Counties (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1634)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on March 04, 2022, 01:53:24 PM
(For PA 26 and PA 45)  PennDOT - District 2 News: Intersection Improvement Project Underway near State College (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2189)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on March 04, 2022, 03:18:39 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on February 15, 2022, 08:21:51 AM
Linked is the latest information I can find on the PA 320 (extended to Spring 2022) (https://www.umtownship.org/hanging-rock-construction-project/) and PA 611 (https://www.wfmz.com/news/area/lehighvalley/stretch-of-route-611-in-williams-twp-with-broken-culvert-to-stay-closed-as-penndot/article_b12bf09c-38e2-11ec-a667-675eb3486865.html) (indefinite due to sinkhole caused by the remnants of Hurricane Ida) closures.

PennDOT - District 5 News: Northampton County: PA 611 in Williams Township is Now Open (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-5/pages/details.aspx?newsid=3097)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on March 07, 2022, 03:36:50 PM
(For US 522)  PennDOT - District 9 News: Project to Realign Route 522 (Great Cove Road) and Rehabilitate Cove Run Bridge to Begin in Fulton County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-9/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1038)

EDIT:  I am unsure what is actually going on here.  Maybe something at or near the US 522/PA 16 intersection, but I was unable to tell.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on March 08, 2022, 09:18:13 AM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on February 28, 2022, 02:10:16 AM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on February 27, 2022, 03:39:00 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on February 25, 2022, 12:35:43 PM
(For I-83 and PA 74)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Lane Restrictions on NB I-83 and SB Route 74 (Queen Street) at Exit 16A in York Township, York County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1625)

PennDOT - District 8 News: Update: SB Route 74 to be Closed at I-83 in York Township, York County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1626)

PennDOT - District 8 News: Update on Emergency Bridge Repairs on SB Route 74 over I-83 in York Township, York County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1630)

PennDOT - District 8 News: Emergency Repairs Complete, SB Route 74 over I-83 in York Township, York County is Open to Traffic (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1631)

(For PA 74) PennDOT - District 8 News: Closure Planned for SB Route 74 over I-83 in York Township, York County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1640)

(For I-70 and US 30 in Breezewood)  Concrete Pavement and Bridge Preservation Work to Continue on Interstate 70 and Route 30 in Bedford County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-9/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1039)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on March 09, 2022, 07:42:46 AM
(For PA 147)  PennDOT - District 3 News: Route 147 Closed in Northumberland County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=3971)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ixnay on March 09, 2022, 07:58:27 AM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on March 09, 2022, 07:42:46 AM
(For PA 147)  PennDOT - District 3 News: Route 147 Closed in Northumberland County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=3971)

I can see the rush hour backup on PA 890 getting up to 61.  Almost a mile long red line per Google Maps.  Backed up in all directions at the PA 890/Brush Valley Rd./7 Points Rd. intersection too.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jemacedo9 on March 09, 2022, 09:42:31 AM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on March 07, 2022, 03:36:50 PM
(For US 522)  PennDOT - District 9 News: Project to Realign Route 522 (Great Cove Road) and Rehabilitate Cove Run Bridge to Begin in Fulton County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-9/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1038)

EDIT:  I am unsure what is actually going on here.  Maybe something at or near the US 522/PA 16 intersection, but I was unable to tell.

I had the same confusion...especially since "the realignment and paving of Route 522 (Great Cove Road) from Route 1004 (Lincoln Way West) to Route 16 at the Franklin County line" doesn't make sense. 
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on March 09, 2022, 10:20:17 AM
Quote from: jemacedo9 on March 09, 2022, 09:42:31 AM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on March 07, 2022, 03:36:50 PM
(For US 522)  PennDOT - District 9 News: Project to Realign Route 522 (Great Cove Road) and Rehabilitate Cove Run Bridge to Begin in Fulton County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-9/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1038)

EDIT:  I am unsure what is actually going on here.  Maybe something at or near the US 522/PA 16 intersection, but I was unable to tell.

I had the same confusion...especially since "the realignment and paving of Route 522 (Great Cove Road) from Route 1004 (Lincoln Way West) to Route 16 at the Franklin County line" doesn't make sense. 

Looking at ECMS, I was unable to find much in the way of a realignment for PA 16 either.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: famartin on March 09, 2022, 10:35:52 AM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on March 09, 2022, 10:20:17 AM
Quote from: jemacedo9 on March 09, 2022, 09:42:31 AM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on March 07, 2022, 03:36:50 PM
(For US 522)  PennDOT - District 9 News: Project to Realign Route 522 (Great Cove Road) and Rehabilitate Cove Run Bridge to Begin in Fulton County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-9/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1038)

EDIT:  I am unsure what is actually going on here.  Maybe something at or near the US 522/PA 16 intersection, but I was unable to tell.

I had the same confusion...especially since "the realignment and paving of Route 522 (Great Cove Road) from Route 1004 (Lincoln Way West) to Route 16 at the Franklin County line" doesn't make sense. 

Looking at ECMS, I was unable to find much in the way of a realignment for PA 16 either.

Wonder if they got 522 and 16 mixed up, and they are actually doing the work on 16.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on March 09, 2022, 11:51:05 AM
(For PA 756)  PennDOT - District 9 News: Work Restarts on Geistown Corridor Improvement Project in Cambria County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-9/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1042)

(For PA 208) PennDOT - District 1 News: Restrictions Posted on Route 208 in Mercer County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1755) 

(Side Note:  If anyone notices that there is a truck route related to one of these in District 1 (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-1/Documents/District1%20Posted%20Bridges%20List.pdf), please let me know here or in the Travel Mapping forum.)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on March 10, 2022, 04:35:55 PM
(For I-80)  PennDOT - District 5 News: Carbon County: Long Term Lane Restriction on Interstate 80 East (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-5/pages/details.aspx?newsid=3103)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on March 11, 2022, 07:54:29 AM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on March 10, 2022, 04:35:55 PM
(For I-80)  PennDOT - District 5 News: Carbon County: Long Term Lane Restriction on Interstate 80 East (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-5/pages/details.aspx?newsid=3103)

(For I-80)  PennDOT - District 5 News: Carbon County: Interstate 80 East Lane Restriction Postponed Until Monday (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-5/pages/details.aspx?newsid=3107)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on March 11, 2022, 02:45:23 PM
(For US 220) PennDOT - District 3 News: Route 220 Safety Improvement Project Resumes Next Week (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=3978)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: sbeaver44 on March 12, 2022, 05:38:49 PM
Got ahold of a York County history by the York Daily Record.  This would be PA 177 (or its predecessor) between PA 74 and PA 382.

I don't feel like I've ever seen much about "Pinchot Roads"  but I'm really curious the history of other roads formed under this program.

Interestingly enough in 1958, Gifford Pinchot State Park was created, between Lewisberry and Rossville, and the one entrance is right off PA 177.


(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20220312/16082864a45431bbbf1dafa56b571c94.jpg)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on March 15, 2022, 08:45:19 AM
(For PA 228)  PennDOT - District 10 News: Lane Changes for the Ball's Bend Safety Improvement Project on State Route 228 Middlesex Township, Butler County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1190)

PennDOT - District 2 News: Next Round of Public Open House Meetings Set for State College Area Connector Study (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2200)

(For US 30)  PennDOT - District 9 News: Route 30 Resurfacing Project Begins in Somerset County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-9/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1045)

(For PA 970)  PennDOT - District 2 News: Route 970 to Close at I-80 Woodland Interchange (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2202)

Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on March 17, 2022, 12:40:10 PM
(For I-90) PennDOT - District 1 News: Projects to Improve Two Sections of Interstate 90 in Erie County Expected to Restart Next Month (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1765)

(For US 62, US 322, and PA 8) PennDOT - District 1 News: Liberty Street Streetscape Project Getting Underway Soon in the City of Franklin, Venango County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1767)

PennDOT - District 10 News: Evening and Weekend Road Construction on Freedom Road in Butler County (Cranberry Township) (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1191)

(For PA 241)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Work Scheduled Next Week at Roundabout at Route 241 (Colebrook Road) and Rocherty Road in Lebanon County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1649)

(For US 22)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Shoulder Closure, Brief Ramp Closures Planned on WB Route 22 Ramp to SB I-83 in Dauphin County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1651)

(For US 11 and PA 487)  PennDOT - District 3 News: Construction in Bloomsburg is Set to Resume March 28 (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=3990)

PennDOT - District 6 News: County Line Road to Close April 11 for One Year for Bridge Replacement and Roadway Reconstruction in Warrington, Horsham Townships (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7390)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on March 19, 2022, 10:18:05 PM
(For PA 28)  PennDOT - District 11 News: Northbound Route 28 Daylight Lane Restrictions Next Week in Aspinwall (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-11/pages/details.aspx?newsid=5699)

(For PA 208)  PennDOT - District 1 News: Restrictions Posted on Route 208 Bridge in Venango County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1772)

(For I-80/US 220 and PA 26)  PennDOT - District 2 News: Late March Update for Local Interchange Project (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2206)

(For US 422 and PA 553)  PennDOT - District 10 News: Mentch Bridge Replacement to Begin March 21 in Indiana County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1196)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: CanesFan27 on March 20, 2022, 01:12:45 PM
Quote from: sbeaver44 on March 12, 2022, 05:38:49 PM
Got ahold of a York County history by the York Daily Record.  This would be PA 177 (or its predecessor) between PA 74 and PA 382.

I don't feel like I've ever seen much about "Pinchot Roads"  but I'm really curious the history of other roads formed under this program.

Interestingly enough in 1958, Gifford Pinchot State Park was created, between Lewisberry and Rossville, and the one entrance is right off PA 177.


(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20220312/16082864a45431bbbf1dafa56b571c94.jpg)

Give me a few months - but challenge accepted.  I'll definitely do some research on these. Thanks for bringing it up.

–-Adam
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: CanesFan27 on March 20, 2022, 10:27:27 PM
Some good links on Pinchot Roads:

https://explorepahistory.com/hmarker.php?markerId=1-A-https://explorepahistory.com/odocument.php?docId=1-4-1DD
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ixnay on March 21, 2022, 10:31:12 PM
Quote from: CanesFan27 on March 20, 2022, 10:27:27 PM
Some good links on Pinchot Roads:

https://explorepahistory.com/hmarker.php?markerId=1-A-https://explorepahistory.com/odocument.php?docId=1-4-1DD

I just clicked on the link and got essentially a blank blue screen (plus the banner at the top).
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: davewiecking on March 22, 2022, 04:44:40 AM
Quote from: ixnay on March 21, 2022, 10:31:12 PM
Quote from: CanesFan27 on March 20, 2022, 10:27:27 PM
Some good links on Pinchot Roads:

https://explorepahistory.com/hmarker.php?markerId=1-A-https://explorepahistory.com/odocument.php?docId=1-4-1DD

I just clicked on the link and got essentially a blank blue screen (plus the banner at the top).

https://explorepahistory.com/search.php?keywords=Pinchot+road
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on March 23, 2022, 09:51:02 AM
PennDOT - District 4 News: Wolf Administration, Sen. Casey Preview Impact of Bipartisan Infrastructure Law Funding in Northeast Region's 2022 Construction Season (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-4/pages/details.aspx?newsid=946)

(For US 220)  PennDOT - District 3 News: Route 220 Safety Improvement Project Continues (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=3995)

(For US 22)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Lane Restrictions on EB Route 22 in Perry County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1655)

PennDOT - District 2 News: Wolf Administration Previews North Central Region 2022 Construction Season, Highlights Bipartisan Infrastructure Law Benefits and Celebrates Start of Local Improvement Project (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2208)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on March 24, 2022, 04:20:53 PM
PennDOT - District 6 News: PennDOT to Close Airport Road North for Bridge Repair in Valley Township (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7405)

(For US 202, PA 23, and PA 63)  PennDOT - District 6 News: U.S. 202, Route 23, Route 63 Periodic Lane Closures at Night Next Week for Ramp Meter Replacement in Chester and Montgomery Counties (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7406)

(For US 22 and PA 343) PennDOT - District 8 News: work Planned at Route 22 (William Penn Highway) and Route 343 (S. Grove Street) Intersection in Bethel Township, Lebanon County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1658)

(For US 119)  PennDOT - District 2 News: PennDOT Reminds Drivers Left Turns onto Route 119 Prohibited (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2210)

(For PA 228)  PennDOT - District 10 News: Lane Changes in Effect March 29 for the Ball's Bend Safety Improvement Project, Butler County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1201)

(For PA 82)  PennDOT - District 6 News: Route 82 South (1st Avenue) Lane Closure Monday for Digital Message Sign Repair in City of Coatesville (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7410)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on March 25, 2022, 08:57:20 AM
(For PA 64/PA 550) PennDOT - District 2 News: Update on Route 64/Route 550 Intersection Project (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2211)

(For PA 663) PennDOT - District 6 News: Route 663 (King Street) at Manatawny Street to Close Next Weekend for Bridge Construction in Pottstown Borough (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7413)

(For US 11 and PA 487)  PennDOT - District 3 News: Routes 11/487 Bloomsburg Reconstruction Project Update (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4006)

(For I-80, US 220, and PA 26)  PennDOT - District 2 News: End of Month Update for Local Interchange Project (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2212)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on March 28, 2022, 03:51:01 PM
(For PA 28/PA 66)  PennDOT - District 10 News: Goheenville Safety Improvement Project Begins March 28 in Armstrong County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1205)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on March 29, 2022, 10:20:16 AM
(For US 202)  PennDOT - District 6 News: Plymouth Road to Close at U.S. 202 (Dekalb Pike) Beginning Next Week for Roadway Construction in Whitpain Township (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7425)

(For I-99//US 220) PennDOT - District 9 News: Pavement Preservation Work to Restart on Interstate 99 in Bedford and Blair Counties (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-9/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1050)

(For US 22) PennDOT - District 9 News: Work to Start on Route 22 Summit Interchange in Cambria County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-9/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1049)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on March 30, 2022, 10:51:50 AM
(For PA 160)  PennDOT - District 9 News: Route 160 (Forest Hills Drive) Elton Intersection Road Work Continues in Cambria County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-9/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1051)

(For US 11 and PA 487) PennDOT - District 3 News: Construction Detour Set to Begin in Bloomsburg, Columbia County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4010)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on March 31, 2022, 09:57:24 AM
PennDOT - District 2 News: Reminder: Next Week Brings New Round of Public Open House Meetings for State College Area Connector Study (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2216)

PennDOT - District 8 News: Wolf Administration Previews Bipartisan Infrastructure Law Benefits in South Central Region 2022 Construction Season (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1663)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on April 01, 2022, 12:33:05 PM
(For US 220)  PennDOT - District 3 News: Route 220 Safety Improvement Project Continues Next Week (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4023)

(For I-80, I-99, US 220, and PA 26) PennDOT - District 2 News: Beginning of April Update for Local Interchange Project (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2219)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on April 04, 2022, 05:48:05 PM
(For I-90 and PA 18)  PennDOT - District 1 News: Closure Planned for I-90 Ramps at Route 18 Interchange in Erie County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1785)

PennDOT - District 9 News: Wolf Administration Previews Bipartisan Infrastructure Law Impact in Hollidaysburg-Region 2022 Construction Season (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-9/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1054)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on April 05, 2022, 11:32:45 AM
(For PA 309) PennDOT - District 4 News: PennDOT Announces Online Plans Display for the SR 1050, Section 351, over Toby Creek Bridge Project in Kingston Township, Luzerne County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-4/pages/details.aspx?newsid=953)

(This one is interesting as it affects residential access to a small subdivision off of PA 309.  For the sake of PA 309 traffic, I think it is best to close that connection and build a new connection to Hillside Rd.)

(For US 322)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Route 322 EB Closed at Reidenbach Road in Earl Township, Lancaster County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1672)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on April 06, 2022, 09:57:07 AM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on March 30, 2022, 10:51:50 AM
(For US 11 and PA 487) PennDOT - District 3 News: Construction Detour Set to Begin in Bloomsburg, Columbia County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4010)

(For US 11 and PA 487) PennDOT - District 3 News: Construction Detour Continues in Bloomsburg, Columbia County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4028)

(For I-81 and PA 29)  PennDOT - District 4 News: Exit 164 (Nanticoke) from Interstate 81 Northbound to State Route 29 in Luzerne County Closed Beginning April 7 (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-4/pages/details.aspx?newsid=954)

PennDOT - District 1 News: PennDOT Announces Virtual Plans Display for Leesburg Station Road Bridge Project in Springfield Township, Mercer County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1786)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: MASTERNC on April 08, 2022, 02:04:02 PM
PennDOT - District 6 News: Wolf Administration Previews Bipartisan Infrastructure Law Benefits and 2022 Philadelphia-Region Construction Season- Officials break ground on second phase of the Route 309 Connector Project (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7445)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on April 10, 2022, 04:58:12 PM
(For US 220)  PennDOT - District 3 News: Route 220 Safety Improvement Project Continues (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4035)

(For PA 26 and PA 45)  PennDOT - District 2 News: Intersection Work Continues near State College (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2222)

(For I-80, US 220, and PA 26)  PennDOT - District 2 News: Mid-April Update for Local Interchange Project (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2223)

(For US 22/US 322)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Work Scheduled for Market Street Bridge Over Route 22 In Greenwood Township, Perry County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1674)

(For PA 405)  PennDOT - District 3 News: Bridge Replacement to Start on Water Street in Muncy Borough, Lycoming County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4040)

(For US 222)  PennDOT - District 5 News: Work to Begin to Improve US 222 in Muhlenberg and Ontelaunee Townships, Berks County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-5/pages/details.aspx?newsid=3144)

(For PA 611)  PennDOT - District 5 News: Monroe County: PA 611 Closed in Delaware Water Gap (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-5/pages/details.aspx?newsid=3143)

(For PA 286)  PennDOT - District 10 News: Line Painting on Oakland Avenue and Indian Springs Road in Indiana County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1209)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: webny99 on April 10, 2022, 08:58:33 PM
On another PA-related note - does anyone know what ever became of this proposal to address US 22/322 north of the Clarks Ferry Bridge?

https://www.pennlive.com/perry-county-times/2018/07/left_turns_to_end_on_clarks_fe.html
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on April 11, 2022, 05:02:58 PM
Quote from: webny99 on April 10, 2022, 08:58:33 PM
On another PA-related note - does anyone know what ever became of this proposal to address US 22/322 north of the Clarks Ferry Bridge?

https://www.pennlive.com/perry-county-times/2018/07/left_turns_to_end_on_clarks_fe.html

I do not remember seeing anything else about it.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: DJStephens on April 11, 2022, 08:04:35 PM
Quote from: webny99 on April 10, 2022, 08:58:33 PM
On another PA-related note - does anyone know what ever became of this proposal to address US 22/322 north of the Clarks Ferry Bridge?

https://www.pennlive.com/perry-county-times/2018/07/left_turns_to_end_on_clarks_fe.html

The problem is expressway / freeway grade sections on either side of it.  Have been through there at least once, since it was "improved" with concrete pavements, curb and gutter, sidewalks and other "niceties".  Not pleasant or easy, but solution is "Jersey Freeway", with narrow footprint, MSE walls, elevation through area for main lanes, and parallel frontage, to access these businesses, which will need to be moved back.   
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Bitmapped on April 12, 2022, 05:30:31 PM
Quote from: DJStephens on April 11, 2022, 08:04:35 PM
Quote from: webny99 on April 10, 2022, 08:58:33 PM
On another PA-related note - does anyone know what ever became of this proposal to address US 22/322 north of the Clarks Ferry Bridge?

https://www.pennlive.com/perry-county-times/2018/07/left_turns_to_end_on_clarks_fe.html

The problem is expressway / freeway grade sections on either side of it.  Have been through there at least once, since it was "improved" with concrete pavements, curb and gutter, sidewalks and other "niceties".  Not pleasant or easy, but solution is "Jersey Freeway", with narrow footprint, MSE walls, elevation through area for main lanes, and parallel frontage, to access these businesses, which will need to be moved back.

It would be cheaper for PennDOT to just take the properties through eminent domain than to do that.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on April 12, 2022, 05:40:48 PM
(For I-81, US 22, and US 322)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Major Bridge Preservation Project to Begin on I-81 and Route 22 in Dauphin County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1682)

(For PA 31)  PennDOT - District 9 News: Work Begins to Rehabilitate Route 31 Kinton Bridge in Harrison and Napier Townships, Bedford County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-9/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1056)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on April 13, 2022, 10:02:48 AM
(For PA 915) PennDOT - District 9 News: Weight Limit Posting Placed on Route 915 (North Valley Road) Bridge in Fulton County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-9/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1057)

(For PA 26 and PA 45)  PennDOT - District 2 News: PennDOT Launches Webpage for Route 26/Route 45 Intersection Project (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2228)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: webny99 on April 13, 2022, 12:06:13 PM
Quote from: Bitmapped on April 12, 2022, 05:30:31 PM
Quote from: DJStephens on April 11, 2022, 08:04:35 PM
Quote from: webny99 on April 10, 2022, 08:58:33 PM
On another PA-related note - does anyone know what ever became of this proposal to address US 22/322 north of the Clarks Ferry Bridge?

https://www.pennlive.com/perry-county-times/2018/07/left_turns_to_end_on_clarks_fe.html

The problem is expressway / freeway grade sections on either side of it.  Have been through there at least once, since it was "improved" with concrete pavements, curb and gutter, sidewalks and other "niceties".  Not pleasant or easy, but solution is "Jersey Freeway", with narrow footprint, MSE walls, elevation through area for main lanes, and parallel frontage, to access these businesses, which will need to be moved back.

It would be cheaper for PennDOT to just take the properties through eminent domain than to do that.

What's really needed aside from a resolution to the left turns and cross traffic is a full interchange or better connectivity with PA 849. You currently can't turn left from PA 849 onto US 22/322 NB, and there's no interchange with US 11/15, which makes it a beast to get from Duncannon to US 11/15 NB.

Ironically, the lack of connectivity means that the fastest route is actually to double-cross the Clarks Ferry bridge and turn around at the PA 147 interchange!
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Bitmapped on April 13, 2022, 01:39:33 PM
Quote from: webny99 on April 13, 2022, 12:06:13 PM
Quote from: Bitmapped on April 12, 2022, 05:30:31 PM
Quote from: DJStephens on April 11, 2022, 08:04:35 PM
Quote from: webny99 on April 10, 2022, 08:58:33 PM
On another PA-related note - does anyone know what ever became of this proposal to address US 22/322 north of the Clarks Ferry Bridge?

https://www.pennlive.com/perry-county-times/2018/07/left_turns_to_end_on_clarks_fe.html

The problem is expressway / freeway grade sections on either side of it.  Have been through there at least once, since it was "improved" with concrete pavements, curb and gutter, sidewalks and other "niceties".  Not pleasant or easy, but solution is "Jersey Freeway", with narrow footprint, MSE walls, elevation through area for main lanes, and parallel frontage, to access these businesses, which will need to be moved back.

It would be cheaper for PennDOT to just take the properties through eminent domain than to do that.

What's really needed aside from a resolution to the left turns and cross traffic is a full interchange or better connectivity with PA 849. You currently can't turn left from PA 849 onto US 22/322 NB, and there's no interchange with US 11/15, which makes it a beast to get from Duncannon to US 11/15 NB.

Ironically, the lack of connectivity means that the fastest route is actually to double-cross the Clarks Ferry bridge and turn around at the PA 147 interchange!

Google Maps says it is 1.0 mile from the PA 849 intersection, over the Clarks Ferry Bridge, off the EB ramp, and back westbound. Considering that the loop ramp from US 11/15 NB to US 22/322 WB takes 0.6-mile to traverse, this doesn't really strike me as an unreasonable distance.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: webny99 on April 13, 2022, 04:44:58 PM
Quote from: Bitmapped on April 13, 2022, 01:39:33 PM
Quote from: webny99 on April 13, 2022, 12:06:13 PM
Quote from: Bitmapped on April 12, 2022, 05:30:31 PM
Quote from: DJStephens on April 11, 2022, 08:04:35 PM
Quote from: webny99 on April 10, 2022, 08:58:33 PM
On another PA-related note - does anyone know what ever became of this proposal to address US 22/322 north of the Clarks Ferry Bridge?

https://www.pennlive.com/perry-county-times/2018/07/left_turns_to_end_on_clarks_fe.html

The problem is expressway / freeway grade sections on either side of it.  Have been through there at least once, since it was "improved" with concrete pavements, curb and gutter, sidewalks and other "niceties".  Not pleasant or easy, but solution is "Jersey Freeway", with narrow footprint, MSE walls, elevation through area for main lanes, and parallel frontage, to access these businesses, which will need to be moved back.

It would be cheaper for PennDOT to just take the properties through eminent domain than to do that.

What's really needed aside from a resolution to the left turns and cross traffic is a full interchange or better connectivity with PA 849. You currently can't turn left from PA 849 onto US 22/322 NB, and there's no interchange with US 11/15, which makes it a beast to get from Duncannon to US 11/15 NB.

Ironically, the lack of connectivity means that the fastest route is actually to double-cross the Clarks Ferry bridge and turn around at the PA 147 interchange!

Google Maps says it is 1.0 mile from the PA 849 intersection, over the Clarks Ferry Bridge, off the EB ramp, and back westbound. Considering that the loop ramp from US 11/15 NB to US 22/322 WB takes 0.6-mile to traverse, this doesn't really strike me as an unreasonable distance.

It's not that far out of the way, but it just seems kind of ironically overindulgent to be forced to use that river crossing twice just to turn around, when most trips in that area have to go out of the way just to get to the river and get across once.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on April 13, 2022, 05:04:25 PM
PennDOT - District 3 News: Wolf Administration Previews 2022 North Central Region Construction Season, Highlights Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4046)

Quote from: 74/171FAN on April 05, 2022, 11:32:45 AM
(For US 322)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Route 322 EB Closed at Reidenbach Road in Earl Township, Lancaster County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1672)

(For US 322) PennDOT - District 8 News: EB Route 322 Now Open at Reidenbach Road in Earl Township, Lancaster County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1683)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on April 14, 2022, 07:42:37 AM
PennDOT - District 1 News: Old Route 8 Remains Closed in Irwin Township, Venango County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1792)

(For PA 764)  PennDOT - District 9 News: Public Meeting and Plans Display for the Route 764 6th Avenue and 7th Street Intersection Improvements (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-9/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1058)

(For PA 199)  PennDOT - District 3 News: Route 199 Reconstruction Project Continues Next Week in Sayre and Athens, Bradford County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4047)

QuoteDetour information:

Northbound cars will follow a 1.10 mile detour using Stevenson Street, North Elmer Avenue, and Mohawk Street.
Southbound cars will be maintained in the work zone.
Truck traffic will follow a 7.7-mile detour using Route 220 and Interstate 17 (Southern Tier Expressway).

Yeah, oops on that last one.

(For US 1)  PennDOT - District 6 News: U.S. 1 (Baltimore Pike) Lane Closures for Construction Work in Delaware, Chester Counties (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7456)

(For PA 663)  PennDOT - District 6 News: PennDOT Completes Route 663 (King Street) Bridge Replacement Project over Manatawny Creek in Pottstown Borough (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7455)

(For PA 147 and PA 225)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Building Demolition to Begin on Route 147 (Market Street) in Halifax Borough, Dauphin County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1685)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on April 15, 2022, 11:05:45 AM
PennDOT - District 1 News: Wolf Administration Previews 2022 Northwest Region Construction Season, Highlights Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1794)

(For US 220)  PennDOT - District 3 News: Route 220 Safety Improvement Project Continues (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4049)

(For I-80, US 220, and PA 26)  PennDOT - District 2 News: New Update for April on Local Interchange Project (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2230)

(For Old PA 8) PennDOT - District 1 News: Old Route 8 Closure Extended in Irwin Township, Venango County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1795)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on April 18, 2022, 12:41:59 PM
PennDOT - District 10 News: PennDOT Invites Public to Comment on I-80 North Fork Bridges Replacement (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1213)

PennDOT - District 5 News: Wolf Administration, Sen. Casey Preview Impact of Bipartisan Infrastructure Law Funding in East Central Region's 2022 Construction Season (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-5/pages/details.aspx?newsid=3153)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on April 19, 2022, 10:50:40 AM
PennDOT - District 10 News: PennDOT Invites Public to Comment on I-80 Canoe Creek Bridges Replacement (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1214)

(For US 202)  PennDOT - District 6 News: Sumneytown Pike to Close at U.S. 202 (Dekalb Pike) Beginning May 2 for Roadway Construction in Lower Gwynedd Township (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7464)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on April 20, 2022, 10:49:48 AM
PennDOT - District 6 News: PennDOT to Begin Preliminary Construction to Replace Warminster Road Bridge over Pennypack Creek in Montgomery County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7467)  (Bridge was 136 years old)

(For I-81)  PennDOT - District 4 News: Lane Restriction on Interstate 81 Southbound at Mile Marker 165.4 Due to Emergency Bridge Repair, Luzerne County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-4/pages/details.aspx?newsid=972)

(For US 219)  PennDOT - District 9 News: Wolf Administration Announces Bipartisan Infrastructure Law Accelerating Pre-Construction for U.S. 219 in Somerset County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-9/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1063)

PennDOT - District 2 News: I-80 Bridge Work to Start Soon in Clinton County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2233)

(For I-81)  PennDOT - District 4 News: Alternating Lane Restrictions on Interstate 81 Southbound in Lackawanna County Beginning Thursday, April 21st (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-4/pages/details.aspx?newsid=974)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on April 21, 2022, 12:41:10 PM
PennDOT - Statewide News: Gov. Wolf Announces $47.8 Million Investment in 56 Multimodal Projects to Improve Safety, Mobility, Local Economies (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/pages/all-news-details.aspx?newsid=938)

PennDOT - Statewide News: Public Invited to Learn About Progress on Bipartisan Infrastructure Law Investments in Electric Vehicle Charging (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/pages/all-news-details.aspx?newsid=936)

PennDOT - Statewide News: Governor Wolf Announces 64 Transportation Alternatives Projects Improving Mobility and Safety in 34 Counties (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/pages/all-news-details.aspx?newsid=937)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: MASTERNC on April 21, 2022, 01:03:40 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on April 21, 2022, 12:41:10 PM
PennDOT - Statewide News: Gov. Wolf Announces $47.8 Million Investment in 56 Multimodal Projects to Improve Safety, Mobility, Local Economies (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/pages/all-news-details.aspx?newsid=938)

PennDOT - Statewide News: Public Invited to Learn About Progress on Bipartisan Infrastructure Law Investments in Electric Vehicle Charging (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/pages/all-news-details.aspx?newsid=936)

PennDOT - Statewide News: Governor Wolf Announces 64 Transportation Alternatives Projects Improving Mobility and Safety in 34 Counties (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/pages/all-news-details.aspx?newsid=937)


Looks like one of these new projects is the loop roads at US 1 and US 202, which is severely congested.  Of course, an interchange or a CFI would be better, but at least this will give an alternative for southbound traffic (right now, the NW loop dead ends at US 1, requiring a left turn onto US 1 and a right into an office park to avoid the main intersection).
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on April 21, 2022, 02:37:12 PM
(For PA 199)  PennDOT - District 3 News: Route 199 Reconstruction Project Continues in Sayre and Athens, Bradford County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4075)

(For PA 74)  PennDOT - District 8 News: PennDOT Announces Online Plans Display for Route 74 (York Road) Bridge Replacement Project in Monroe Township, Cumberland County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1691)

(For PA 796 and PA 896) PennDOT - District 6 News: Route 896 (New London Road/Newark Road) Lane Closures Next Week for Resurfacing in Chester County- New traffic pattern planned at Route 896 (Newark Road) and Route 796 (Jennersville Road) Intersection (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7474)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on April 22, 2022, 03:14:14 PM
(For US 11 (and partly PA 92 since the southern terminus is in this area))  PennDOT - District 4 News: PennDOT Invites Public to an Open House for SR 11, Section 350 Bridge Project  (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-4/pages/details.aspx?newsid=976)

(For US 220)  PennDOT - District 3 News: Route 220 Safety Improvement Project Continues (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4079)

(For I-80, US 220, and PA 26)  PennDOT - District 2 News: Late April Update for Local Interchange Project (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2237)

(For PA 26 and PA 45) PennDOT - District 2 News: PennDOT Issues Update for Route 26/Route 45 Intersection Job (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2239)

Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on April 25, 2022, 04:02:15 PM
(For PA 957)  PennDOT - District 1 News: Restriction Posted on Route 957 in Warren County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1805)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on April 26, 2022, 12:29:41 PM
PennDOT - District 10 News: Wolf Administration Previews 2022 Construction Season, Highlights Bipartisan Infrastructure Law Benefits (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1219)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on April 27, 2022, 11:08:17 AM
(For US 322)  PennDOT - District 2 News: Work at Railroad Crossing on Route 322 Coming Up near Philipsburg (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2241)

(For I-80)  PennDOT - District 4 News: PennDOT Invites Public to Comment on I-80 Nescopeck Creek Bridges Replacement (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-4/pages/details.aspx?newsid=979)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on May 01, 2022, 02:06:39 PM
(For PA 18, PA 58, and PA 358)  PennDOT - District 1 News: PennDOT Announces Online Public Meeting for Proposed Improvements Near Thiel College in Greenville, Mercer County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1807)

(For PA 340)  PennDOT - District 6 News: Route 340 (Kings Highway) To Close for Bridge Repair in City of Coatesville, Valley Township (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7489)

(For PA 26 and PA 45)  PennDOT - District 2 News: Temporary Road at Shingletown Road Intersection to Open Tuesday (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2244)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: dzheng35 on May 01, 2022, 06:42:40 PM
I was wondering, is it better to take I-83 to DC or US 15 to I-270? Cause my family trip involves going from Hersheypark to DC as part of a route? Thanks.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: snowc on May 02, 2022, 12:49:45 PM
Quote from: dzheng35 on May 01, 2022, 06:42:40 PM
I was wondering, is it better to take I-83 to DC or US 15 to I-270? Cause my family trip involves going from Hersheypark to DC as part of a route? Thanks.
Take US 15 to I270.
Easier than going through Baltimore.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: cockroachking on May 02, 2022, 02:45:32 PM
Quote from: snowc on May 02, 2022, 12:49:45 PM
Quote from: dzheng35 on May 01, 2022, 06:42:40 PM
I was wondering, is it better to take I-83 to DC or US 15 to I-270? Cause my family trip involves going from Hersheypark to DC as part of a route? Thanks.
Take US 15 to I270.
Easier than going through Baltimore.
Just make sure to avoid I-270 during rush hour.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Ted$8roadFan on May 02, 2022, 06:41:21 PM
Quote from: cockroachking on May 02, 2022, 02:45:32 PM
Quote from: snowc on May 02, 2022, 12:49:45 PM
Quote from: dzheng35 on May 01, 2022, 06:42:40 PM
I was wondering, is it better to take I-83 to DC or US 15 to I-270? Cause my family trip involves going from Hersheypark to DC as part of a route? Thanks.
Take US 15 to I270.
Easier than going through Baltimore.
Just make sure to avoid I-270 during rush hour.

Yes, I recall being stuck in a traffic jam on US 15 from traffic waiting to get on I-70/I-270.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on May 03, 2022, 12:45:36 PM
PennDOT - District 5 News: PennDOT Invites Public to Comment on I-80 Over Lehigh River Bridge Project (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-5/pages/details.aspx?newsid=3168)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jmacswimmer on May 03, 2022, 12:57:00 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on February 28, 2022, 02:10:16 AM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on February 27, 2022, 03:39:00 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on February 25, 2022, 12:35:43 PM
(For I-83 and PA 74)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Lane Restrictions on NB I-83 and SB Route 74 (Queen Street) at Exit 16A in York Township, York County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1625)

PennDOT - District 8 News: Update: SB Route 74 to be Closed at I-83 in York Township, York County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1626)

PennDOT - District 8 News: Update on Emergency Bridge Repairs on SB Route 74 over I-83 in York Township, York County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1630)

PennDOT - District 8 News: Emergency Repairs Complete, SB Route 74 over I-83 in York Township, York County is Open to Traffic (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1631)

Bumping this quote-string to note I grabbed a pic of the temporary support truss added to the PA 74 overpass while passing thru York on I-83 last Thursday - reminds me of the reinforcements added to the old Champlain Bridge to keep it going until the replacement opened.

(https://i.imgur.com/deoQeUb.jpg)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on May 03, 2022, 01:24:28 PM
(For I-80) PennDOT - District 10 News: Long-Term Lane Closures for Interstate 80 Bridge Preservation Project in Clarion County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1226)

(For PA 228)  PennDOT - District 10 News: Traffic Alert for the Ball's Bend Safety Improvement Project, Butler County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1228)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on May 04, 2022, 12:29:36 PM
(For I-78)  PennDOT - District 5 News: PennDOT Invites Public to Comment on I-78 Lenhartsville Bridge Replacement Project (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-5/pages/details.aspx?newsid=3169)

QuoteThere has been an update to PennDOT's planned tolling approach for the I-78 Lenhartsville Project. Following community input and continued project analysis, PennDOT will pursue only westbound tolling at this bridge.

PennDOT - District 9 News: Notice of Public Involvement for T-434 (Maple Avenue) Bridge Replacement Project (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-9/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1072)

QuoteAdditional temporary impacts necessary to construct the bridge include the removal of the Frederick A. Buza veteran memorials and placement of temporary diversion structures in the West Branch of the Susquehanna River water trail. Both the veteran memorials and the water trail will be restored to their original condition upon construction completion. The Pennsylvania Department of Transportation has determined that the project impacts to the memorials and water trail will temporarily impact the activities, features, and attributes of the resources that qualifies them for protection and have determined that use of these resources constitutes Section 4f Temporary Occupancies.

Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on May 05, 2022, 09:03:26 AM
PennDOT - District 6 News: West Main Street to Close This Weekend for Grade Crossing Construction in Norristown (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7504)

(For US 22, US 322, and PA 34)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Nighttime Closures Planned on Route 34 in Perry County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1700)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on May 06, 2022, 11:16:40 AM
(For PA 26 and PA 45)  PennDOT - District 2 News: PennDOT Issues Update for Route 26/Route 45 Intersection Job (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2253)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on May 11, 2022, 04:07:27 PM
(For PA 228) PennDOT - District 10 News: Traffic Alert for the Ball's Bend Safety Improvement Project, Butler County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1234)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on May 13, 2022, 12:16:15 AM
(For US 6)  PennDOT - District 3 News: Construction to Begin Next Week on Route 6 in North Towanda Township, Bradford County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4115)

(For PA 64 and PA 550)  PennDOT - District 2 News: Traffic Change Coming on Route 64/Route 550 Intersection Project (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2259)

(For PA 23)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Rescheduled: Center Turn Lane Reconstruction on Route 23 in the Village of Leacock, Lancaster County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1709)

(For US 22)  PennDOT - District 9 News: Traffic Changes to Start at Lake Rowena Interchange on Route 22 as Part of Improvements Project Cambria County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-9/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1075)

(For US 222) PennDOT - District 5 News: PennDOT Announces Plans Display for US 222 Widening Project in Berks County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-5/pages/details.aspx?newsid=3178)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on May 16, 2022, 05:59:54 AM
(For PA 23)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Weekend Closure Rescheduled for Quarry Road at Route 23 in the Village of Leacock, Lancaster County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1711)

(For I-80, US 220, and PA 26)  PennDOT - District 2 News: PennDOT Issues Mid-May Update for Local Interchange Project (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2261)

(For I-70 and US 30)  PennDOT - District 9 News: Traffic Pattern Changes for Concrete Pavement and Bridge Preservation Work on Interstate 70 and Route 30 in Bedford County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-9/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1076)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on May 17, 2022, 09:27:21 AM
(For I-70)  PennDOT - District 9 News: North Bound I-70 Welcome Center Re-Opened (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-9/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1077)

(For I-80)  PennDOT - District 3 News: Lane Restrictions This Week on Interstate 80 WB in White Deer Township, Union County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4124)

(For US 1)  PennDOT - District 6 News: U.S. 1 Traffic Stoppages This Weekend for Construction in Bucks County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7528)

(For PA 28) PennDOT - District 10 News: PA 28 Upcoming Ramp Closures (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1236)

(For I-80)  PennDOT - District 10 News: I-80 Upcoming Ramp Closures (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1237)

(For PA 453)  PennDOT - District 9 News: Public Meeting and Plans Display for the Route 453 (Sink Run Culvert) Replacement Project in Blair County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-9/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1079)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: snowc on May 17, 2022, 02:02:11 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on May 16, 2022, 05:59:54 AM
(For PA 23)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Weekend Closure Rescheduled for Quarry Road at Route 23 in the Village of Leacock, Lancaster County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1711)

(For I-80, US 220, and PA 26)  PennDOT - District 2 News: PennDOT Issues Mid-May Update for Local Interchange Project (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2261)

(For I-70 and US 30)  PennDOT - District 9 News: Traffic Pattern Changes for Concrete Pavement and Bridge Preservation Work on Interstate 70 and Route 30 in Bedford County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-9/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1076)

So now that means I-99 is going on I-80?
Also, Breezewood gets closed off for paving? That pavement is kinda rough!
Bryce
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on May 17, 2022, 02:06:38 PM
Quote from: snowc on May 17, 2022, 02:02:11 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on May 16, 2022, 05:59:54 AM
(For PA 23)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Weekend Closure Rescheduled for Quarry Road at Route 23 in the Village of Leacock, Lancaster County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1711)

(For I-80, US 220, and PA 26)  PennDOT - District 2 News: PennDOT Issues Mid-May Update for Local Interchange Project (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2261)

(For I-70 and US 30)  PennDOT - District 9 News: Traffic Pattern Changes for Concrete Pavement and Bridge Preservation Work on Interstate 70 and Route 30 in Bedford County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-9/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1076)

So now that means I-99 is going on I-80?
Also, Breezewood gets closed off for paving? That pavement is kinda rough!
Bryce

The planned future route of I-99 follows I-80 between Exits 161 and 173.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: snowc on May 17, 2022, 02:14:58 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on May 17, 2022, 02:06:38 PM
Quote from: snowc on May 17, 2022, 02:02:11 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on May 16, 2022, 05:59:54 AM
(For PA 23)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Weekend Closure Rescheduled for Quarry Road at Route 23 in the Village of Leacock, Lancaster County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1711)

(For I-80, US 220, and PA 26)  PennDOT - District 2 News: PennDOT Issues Mid-May Update for Local Interchange Project (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2261)

(For I-70 and US 30)  PennDOT - District 9 News: Traffic Pattern Changes for Concrete Pavement and Bridge Preservation Work on Interstate 70 and Route 30 in Bedford County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-9/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1076)

So now that means I-99 is going on I-80?
Also, Breezewood gets closed off for paving? That pavement is kinda rough!
Bryce

The planned future route of I-99 follows I-80 between Exits 161 and 173.
Wow! That means that I-99 will be the first interstate in central PA to be duplexed? And that makes it the second along the US 220 corridor, which is in NC (I-85 I-40)
Bryce
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on May 17, 2022, 02:25:15 PM
^US 220 is currently concurrent with I-73, I-74, I-40, I-581, I-81, I-64, I-68, I-99, I-80, and I-180 (way more than just 2).  It is actually not concurrent with I-85.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Alps on May 17, 2022, 09:04:17 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on May 17, 2022, 02:25:15 PM
^US 220 is currently concurrent with I-73, I-74, I-40, I-581, I-81, I-64, I-68, I-99, I-80, and I-180 (way more than just 2).  It is actually not concurrent with I-85.
he said interstates duplexed
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: sprjus4 on May 17, 2022, 09:11:15 PM
Quote from: snowc on May 17, 2022, 02:14:58 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on May 17, 2022, 02:06:38 PM
Quote from: snowc on May 17, 2022, 02:02:11 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on May 16, 2022, 05:59:54 AM
(For PA 23)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Weekend Closure Rescheduled for Quarry Road at Route 23 in the Village of Leacock, Lancaster County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1711)

(For I-80, US 220, and PA 26)  PennDOT - District 2 News: PennDOT Issues Mid-May Update for Local Interchange Project (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2261)

(For I-70 and US 30)  PennDOT - District 9 News: Traffic Pattern Changes for Concrete Pavement and Bridge Preservation Work on Interstate 70 and Route 30 in Bedford County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-9/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1076)

So now that means I-99 is going on I-80?
Also, Breezewood gets closed off for paving? That pavement is kinda rough!
Bryce

The planned future route of I-99 follows I-80 between Exits 161 and 173.
Wow! That means that I-99 will be the first interstate in central PA to be duplexed? And that makes it the second along the US 220 corridor, which is in NC (I-85 I-40)
Bryce
US-220 is concurrent with I-73 / I-74 in NC.

US-220 never has a concurrency with I-85.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on May 18, 2022, 10:48:28 AM
PennDOT - District 6 News: PennDOT to Host Live Virtual Public Meetings on Third Section of Route 309 Connector in Montgomery, Bucks Counties (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7530)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: odditude on May 18, 2022, 05:47:38 PM
Quote from: sprjus4 on May 17, 2022, 09:11:15 PM
Quote from: snowc on May 17, 2022, 02:14:58 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on May 17, 2022, 02:06:38 PM
Quote from: snowc on May 17, 2022, 02:02:11 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on May 16, 2022, 05:59:54 AM
(For PA 23)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Weekend Closure Rescheduled for Quarry Road at Route 23 in the Village of Leacock, Lancaster County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1711)

(For I-80, US 220, and PA 26)  PennDOT - District 2 News: PennDOT Issues Mid-May Update for Local Interchange Project (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2261)

(For I-70 and US 30)  PennDOT - District 9 News: Traffic Pattern Changes for Concrete Pavement and Bridge Preservation Work on Interstate 70 and Route 30 in Bedford County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-9/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1076)

So now that means I-99 is going on I-80?
Also, Breezewood gets closed off for paving? That pavement is kinda rough!
Bryce

The planned future route of I-99 follows I-80 between Exits 161 and 173.
Wow! That means that I-99 will be the first interstate in central PA to be duplexed? And that makes it the second along the US 220 corridor, which is in NC (I-85 I-40)
Bryce
US-220 is concurrent with I-73 / I-74 in NC.

US-220 never has a concurrency with I-85.

again, he wasn't saying it was duplexed WITH US 220, but was an interstate duplex in the US 220 corridor. your additional info would make it the third along the US 220 corridor (I-40 & I-85, I-73 & I-74, I-80 & I-99).
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on May 18, 2022, 05:55:36 PM
PennDOT - District 5 News: CANCELLED - PennDOT Invites Public to Comment on I-80 Over Lehigh River Bridge Project (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-5/pages/details.aspx?newsid=3189)

Was the in-person meeting cancelled?  Maybe....  This is odd since it came out after the meeting time began.  You should still be able to comment online.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: MASTERNC on May 18, 2022, 06:54:12 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on May 18, 2022, 05:55:36 PM
PennDOT - District 5 News: CANCELLED - PennDOT Invites Public to Comment on I-80 Over Lehigh River Bridge Project (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-5/pages/details.aspx?newsid=3189)

Was the in-person meeting cancelled?  Maybe....  This is odd since it came out after the meeting time began.  You should still be able to comment online.

This may be why

https://www.post-gazette.com/news/transportation/2022/05/18/penndot-commonwealth-court-preliminary-injunction-bridge-tolling-bridgeville-tolls/stories/202205180145
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Alps on May 18, 2022, 07:32:12 PM
https://www.dailyitem.com/news/northern-csvt-will-be-open-to-traffic-in-july-work-on-southern-section-to-start/article_940845d6-d2e0-11ec-a84f-2fa3bd24a9de.html?fbclid=IwAR3QNeAbjFlGByAjVo_D9I4DSQMJ7NjD1e24oII7j9pRttrhsZI5xigxyv8

QuoteFor the general public, the northern section will be open on a Saturday to be determined in June where pedestrians and bicyclists can visit the bridge before traffic is allowed on it.

So... road meet?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on May 18, 2022, 07:58:38 PM
Quote from: Alps on May 18, 2022, 07:32:12 PM
https://www.dailyitem.com/news/northern-csvt-will-be-open-to-traffic-in-july-work-on-southern-section-to-start/article_940845d6-d2e0-11ec-a84f-2fa3bd24a9de.html?fbclid=IwAR3QNeAbjFlGByAjVo_D9I4DSQMJ7NjD1e24oII7j9pRttrhsZI5xigxyv8 (https://www.dailyitem.com/news/northern-csvt-will-be-open-to-traffic-in-july-work-on-southern-section-to-start/article_940845d6-d2e0-11ec-a84f-2fa3bd24a9de.html?fbclid=IwAR3QNeAbjFlGByAjVo_D9I4DSQMJ7NjD1e24oII7j9pRttrhsZI5xigxyv8)

QuoteFor the general public, the northern section will be open on a Saturday to be determined in June where pedestrians and bicyclists can visit the bridge before traffic is allowed on it.


So... road meet?
Well I plan to go to both Lynchburg and NW Indiana so I better hope that they choose June 18th.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on May 19, 2022, 09:15:36 AM
Quote from: MASTERNC on May 18, 2022, 06:54:12 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on May 18, 2022, 05:55:36 PM
PennDOT - District 5 News: CANCELLED - PennDOT Invites Public to Comment on I-80 Over Lehigh River Bridge Project (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-5/pages/details.aspx?newsid=3189)

Was the in-person meeting cancelled?  Maybe....  This is odd since it came out after the meeting time began.  You should still be able to comment online.

This may be why

https://www.post-gazette.com/news/transportation/2022/05/18/penndot-commonwealth-court-preliminary-injunction-bridge-tolling-bridgeville-tolls/stories/202205180145

Just saw the same thing for I-78 so probably.  I presume that they would have stopped comments then.

PennDOT - District 5 News: CANCELLED - PennDOT Invites Public to Comment on I-78 Lenhartsville Bridge Replacement Project (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-5/pages/details.aspx?newsid=3190)

(For US 1)  PennDOT - District 6 News: U.S. 1 Lane Closures at Night Next Week for Construction in Bucks County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7534)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on May 20, 2022, 10:02:42 AM
(For PA 309) PennDOT - District 6 News: Route 309 (Sellersville Bypass) Daytime, Nighttime Lane Closures Scheduled for Construction in West Rockhill Township (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7541)

(For US 220)  PennDOT - District 3 News: Route 220 Safety Improvement Project Continues (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4134)

(For PA 199)  PennDOT - District 3 News: Route 199 Reconstruction Project Continues in Sayre and Athens, Bradford County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4136)

PennDOT - District 6 News: PennDOT to Begin Preliminary Construction on Bristol Road Improvement Project in Bensalem Township (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7542)

(For I-80, US 220, and PA 26)  PennDOT - District 2 News: PennDOT Issues End of May Update for Local Interchange Project (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2264)

PennDOT - District 8 News: Online Plans Display, In-Person Public Meeting Set for Route 3012 Market Street Bridge Rehabilitation Project (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1716)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on May 22, 2022, 04:21:51 PM
(For US 6) PennDOT - District 1 News: Route 6 Bridge Closed in Wayne Township, Erie County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1825)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on May 23, 2022, 04:57:08 PM
(Related US 22/US 322 and PA 17) PennDOT - District 8 News: Work Scheduled for Market Street Bridge Over Route 22 In Greenwood Township, Perry County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1718)

(For PA 97) PennDOT - District 8 News: PennDOT Announces Online Plans Display for Route 97 (Baltimore Pike) Project near Littlestown, Adams County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1719)

(Interesting for this project is that the PA 97 detour continues south into Maryland)

PennDOT - District 8 News: WB Union Deposit Road to be Closed in Susquehanna Township, Dauphin County Due to Pipe Failure (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1720)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ixnay on May 24, 2022, 08:30:19 AM
Whose responsibility for maintenance is US 209 and US 611 within Del. Water Gap NRA?  PennDOT's or the Park Service's?

I ask this because Google Maps shows US 611 as closed within DWG NRA.  Thorough reconstruction of the stretch?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Chris19001 on May 24, 2022, 08:42:03 AM
Quote from: ixnay on May 24, 2022, 08:30:19 AM
Whose responsibility for maintenance is US 209 and US 611 within Del. Water Gap NRA?  PennDOT's or the Park Service's?

I ask this because Google Maps shows US 611 as closed within DWG NRA.  Thorough reconstruction of the stretch?
According to a few news articles I've seen, PennDOT:
https://www.lehighvalleylive.com/northampton-county/2022/04/fingers-crossed-route-611-could-reopen-by-the-end-of-spring-penndot-says.html
That's a rough area for a detour though, not a lot of easy free options for that stretch.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on May 24, 2022, 12:11:32 PM
(For I-78)  PennDOT - District 5 News: Berks County: Interstate 78 Road Work (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-5/pages/details.aspx?newsid=3198)

PennDOT - District 1 News: I-90 Welcome Center to be Closed for Paving (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1828)

(For PA 27) PennDOT - District 1 News: PennDOT - District 1 News: Project to Pave Route 27 and Replace a Bridge in Warren County to Begin Soon (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1830)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on May 25, 2022, 04:29:17 PM
PennDOT - District 2 News: Replacement Work to Begin June 1 on Bridge in Allegany Township (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2269)

QuoteOn Wednesday, June 1, PennDOT expects that State Route 4013 will be closed at the bridge and a detour will be in place. The detour will make use of Route 49, Route 44, and Route 6/East 2nd Street in Coudersport. All construction is anticipated to be completed while the detour is in place. Construction is expected to finish by mid-October.

Replacing the bridge will improve its rating from poor to good. The 66-foot bridge dates from 1917 and carries an average of 477 vehicles each day. 

PennDOT - District 5 News: ADVISORY — THURSDAY — LEHIGH COUNTY — PennDOT to Hold Ribbon Cutting for Tilghman Street (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-5/pages/details.aspx?newsid=3200)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on May 26, 2022, 02:33:01 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on April 10, 2022, 04:58:12 PM
(For PA 611)  PennDOT - District 5 News: Monroe County: PA 611 Closed in Delaware Water Gap (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-5/pages/details.aspx?newsid=3143)

Quote from: Chris19001 on May 24, 2022, 08:42:03 AM
Quote from: ixnay on May 24, 2022, 08:30:19 AM
Whose responsibility for maintenance is US 209 and US 611 within Del. Water Gap NRA?  PennDOT's or the Park Service's?

I ask this because Google Maps shows US 611 as closed within DWG NRA.  Thorough reconstruction of the stretch?
According to a few news articles I've seen, PennDOT:
https://www.lehighvalleylive.com/northampton-county/2022/04/fingers-crossed-route-611-could-reopen-by-the-end-of-spring-penndot-says.html
That's a rough area for a detour though, not a lot of easy free options for that stretch.

(For PA 611)  Monroe County: PA 611 is Open in Delaware Water Gap (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-5/pages/details.aspx?newsid=3201)

PennDOT - District 5 News: PennDOT Announces Tilghman Street Bridge is Open in the City of Allentown, Lehigh County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-5/pages/details.aspx?newsid=3202)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on May 27, 2022, 10:51:44 AM
(For US 1)  PennDOT - District 6 News: U.S. 1 Lane Closures, Traffic Stoppages at Night Next Week for Construction in Bucks County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7559)

(For US 220)  PennDOT - District 3 News: Route 220 Safety Improvement Project Continues (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4146)

PennDOT - District 6 News: PennDOT to Replace Cherry Road Culvert Over Branch of Tohickon Creek in Richland Township (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7562)

(For US 11 and PA 487) PennDOT - District 3 News: Construction Detour Continues in Bloomsburg, Columbia County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4147)

(For PA 663)  PennDOT - District 6 News: PennDOT to Begin Construction on Route 663 (North Charlotte Street) Intersection Improvement Project in New Hanover Township (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7565)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on May 31, 2022, 02:05:47 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on May 24, 2022, 12:11:32 PM
PennDOT - District 1 News: I-90 Welcome Center to be Closed for Paving (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1828)

PennDOT - District 1 News: I-90 Welcome Center Closure Rescheduled (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1837)  (will be done Friday now instead of tomorrow)

(For PA 56 and PA 66)  PennDOT - District 10 News: Road Closure for North Warren Avenue (State Route 56/River Road) in Kiskiminetas Township, Armstrong County Indiana, PA (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1249)

(For PA 28)  PennDOT - District 10 News: PA 28 Upcoming Ramp Closures (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1236)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on June 01, 2022, 10:22:11 AM
(For US 322)  PennDOT - District 2 News: Railroad Crossing Work on Route 322 Scheduled for Next Week near Philipsburg (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2276)

PennDOT - District 8 News: Reminder: In-Person Public Meeting Tomorrow for Route 3012 Market Street Bridge Rehabilitation Project (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1723)

PennDOT - District 1 News: I-79 Rest Stops in Crawford County to be Closed for Work (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1840)

(For I-80)  PennDOT - District 10 News: I80 Upcoming Ramp Closures in Clarion and Jefferson Counties (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1251)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on June 02, 2022, 12:38:42 PM
(For US 1)  PennDOT - District 6 News: U.S. 1 Lane Closures, Traffic Stoppages at Night Next Week for Construction in Bucks County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7569)

(For US 220) PennDOT - District 3 News: Route 220 Safety Improvement Project Continues (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4156)

(For PA 339) PennDOT - District 3 News: Route 339 Project Continues Next Week in Columbia and Luzerne Counties (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4155)

(For US 15)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Median Work Begins Tomorrow on Route 15 in York County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1725)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on June 03, 2022, 12:04:04 PM
(For PA 23)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Reminder: Closure Begins Tonight for Quarry Road at Route 23 in the Village of Leacock, Lancaster County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1727)

(For US 15)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Schedule Update for Bridge Approach Reconstruction on Route 15 in York County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1729)

(For I-90 and PA 18)  PennDOT - District 1 News: Interchange of I-90 and Route 18 in Erie County to be Closed (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1842)

(For PA 23)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Reminder: Center Turn Lane Reconstruction Begins Next Week on Route 23 in the Village of Leacock, Lancaster County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1730)

(For I-80, US 220, and PA 26)  PennDOT - District 2 News: PennDOT Issues Early June Update for Local Interchange Project (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2281)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on June 06, 2022, 03:12:26 PM
(For PA 61)  PennDOT - District 3 News: Veterans Memorial Bridge Detour, Sunbury, Northumberland County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4163)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on June 07, 2022, 10:54:31 AM
PennDOT - District 4 News: Pennsylvania Department of Transportation Wins 2021 Perpetual Pavement Award for Route 3022 (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-4/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1001)

(For I-80)  PennDOT - District 3 News: Roadwork Continues on I-80 EB/WB in Columbia County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4165)

(For PA 392) PennDOT - District 8 News: New Stop Sign Configuration at Route 392/Red Mill Road Intersection in Newberry Township, York County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1731)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on June 08, 2022, 08:48:18 AM
(For US 15)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Bridge Approach Reconstruction Continues on Route 15 in York County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1733)

(For PA 199) PennDOT - District 3 News: Route 199 Reconstruction Project Continues in Sayre and Athens, Bradford County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4168)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: TheGrassGuy on June 08, 2022, 11:08:23 PM
During the period between the construction of the Southern Tier Expressway and the federal designation of I-86, were there two PA 17s in PA?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: MATraveler128 on June 09, 2022, 07:07:24 AM
Quote from: TheGrassGuy on June 08, 2022, 11:08:23 PM
During the period between the construction of the Southern Tier Expressway and the federal designation of I-86, were there two PA 17s in PA?

Yes there were indeed two PA 17s. The existing one has been in use since 1928 while the one along I-86 was decommissioned in 1999 when I-86 was designated. It is similar to the existing case of there being two PA 29s and two US 422s. PennDOT doesn't seem to have an issue with duplicate numbers however, the state route duplicates are given a different secret route number. Although the former PA 295 was renumbered to PA 297 when I-295 was extended into the state.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Bitmapped on June 09, 2022, 08:36:31 AM
Quote from: BlueOutback7 on June 09, 2022, 07:07:24 AM
Quote from: TheGrassGuy on June 08, 2022, 11:08:23 PM
During the period between the construction of the Southern Tier Expressway and the federal designation of I-86, were there two PA 17s in PA?

Yes there were indeed two PA 17s. The existing one has been in use since 1928 while the one along I-86 was decommissioned in 1999 when I-86 was designated. It is similar to the existing case of there being two PA 29s and two US 422s. PennDOT doesn't seem to have an issue with duplicate numbers however, the state route duplicates are given a different secret route number. Although the former PA 295 was renumbered to PA 297 when I-295 was extended into the state.

The extension of I-86 led to two Route 86s in Pennsylvania. PennDOT's solution to that was to change PA 86's internal designation to SR 0886, but it is still signed as PA 86 in the field.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: famartin on June 09, 2022, 10:35:53 AM
Quote from: Bitmapped on June 09, 2022, 08:36:31 AM
Quote from: BlueOutback7 on June 09, 2022, 07:07:24 AM
Quote from: TheGrassGuy on June 08, 2022, 11:08:23 PM
During the period between the construction of the Southern Tier Expressway and the federal designation of I-86, were there two PA 17s in PA?

Yes there were indeed two PA 17s. The existing one has been in use since 1928 while the one along I-86 was decommissioned in 1999 when I-86 was designated. It is similar to the existing case of there being two PA 29s and two US 422s. PennDOT doesn't seem to have an issue with duplicate numbers however, the state route duplicates are given a different secret route number. Although the former PA 295 was renumbered to PA 297 when I-295 was extended into the state.

The extension of I-86 led to two Route 86s in Pennsylvania. PennDOT's solution to that was to change PA 86's internal designation to SR 0886, but it is still signed as PA 86 in the field.

Not only that, but the two 86's are only 26 miles apart.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on June 09, 2022, 09:56:44 PM
PennDOT - District 6 News: I-95 Lane Closures at Night Next Week, Continuous Next Weekend for Construction in Delaware County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7579)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on June 10, 2022, 08:45:03 PM
PennDOT - District 4 News: PennDOT District 4 Road Report for Week of June 13 to June 17, 2022 (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-4/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1003)  (Note US 6 closure in Milford)

(Note PA 33/PA 248 interchange closures)  PennDOT - District 5 News: Northampton County: Upcoming Road Work (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-5/pages/details.aspx?newsid=3219)

PennDOT - District 1 News: PennDOT Announces Plans to Build Temporary Crossing, Reopen Route 6 in Wayne Township, Erie County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1854)

Quote from: 74/171FAN on June 08, 2022, 08:48:18 AM
(For US 15)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Bridge Approach Reconstruction Continues on Route 15 in York County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1733)

(For US 15)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Schedule Update for Bridge Approach Reconstruction on Route 15 in York County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1736)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on June 13, 2022, 04:36:35 PM
PennDOT - District 1 News: Project to Replace the Springfield Church Road Bridge in Findley Township, Mercer County to Start Soon (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1856)

PennDOT - District 10 News: PA 28 Upcoming Ramp Closure (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1269)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on June 14, 2022, 11:19:13 AM
(For PA 286)  PennDOT - District 10 News: Line Painting and Traffic Pattern Changes on Oakland Avenue in Indiana County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1270)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on June 15, 2022, 08:15:19 AM
(For PA 286)  PennDOT - District 10 News: Traffic Alert —Oakland Avenue Entrance to Indiana Mall (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1271)

(For I-80)  PennDOT - District 10 News: I80 Upcoming Ramp Closure in Clarion County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1273)

(For PA 321)  PennDOT - District 2 News: Start Delayed for Route 321 Roadwork and Southbound Detour (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2288)

(For US 15)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Bridge Approach Reconstruction Continues Friday on Route 15 in York County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1738)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on June 16, 2022, 09:22:47 AM
(For US 6)  PennDOT - District 3 News: Construction Continues Next Week on Route 6 in North Towanda Township, Bradford County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4181)

(For US 219)  PennDOT - District 9 News: Public Meeting and Plans Display for the US 219 Meyersdale, PA to Old Salisbury Road, MD (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-9/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1092)

(For US 202)  PennDOT - District 6 News: New Traffic Pattern Begins Next Week on Main Street for Construction in Norristown (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7595)

(For US 1)  PennDOT - District 6 News: U.S. 1 Continuous Lane Closures Next Weekend for Construction in Bucks County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7596)

PennDOT - District 6 News: I-95 Lane Closures at Night Next Week, Continuous Next Weekend for Construction in Delaware County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7598)

(For US 6N)  PennDOT - District 1 News: Project to Replace Route 6N Bridge in Conneaut Township, Erie County Rescheduled (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1860)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on June 21, 2022, 08:45:00 AM
PennDOT - District 1 News: PennDOT Announces Plans Display for the Erie Downtown Active Transportation Project in the City of Erie, Erie County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1863)

PennDOT - District 6 News: PennDOT Completes Project to Rehabilitate Gulph Road Pavement Within Valley Forge National Historical Park (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7606)

(For I-90 and US 20)  PennDOT - District 1 News: Interstate 90 Eastbound Ramp to Route 20 to be Closed (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1864)

(For PA 87)  PennDOT - District 4 News: State Route 87 is Closed for Emergency Repairs in Wyoming County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-4/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1015)

(For US 6)  PennDOT - District 1 News: Work Underway to Construct Temporary Stream Crossing for Route 6 in Erie County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1867)

(For PA 199)  PennDOT - District 3 News: Route 199 Reconstruction Project Continues in Sayre and Athens, Bradford County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4189)

(For PA 248)  PennDOT - District 5 News: Northampton County: PA 248 Closure in Lehigh Township (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-5/pages/details.aspx?newsid=3226)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: MASTERNC on June 23, 2022, 03:03:32 PM
Local traffic report mentioned PA 320 off I-76 near Gulph Mills is finally open.  No press release from District 6 though.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jemacedo9 on June 23, 2022, 04:57:58 PM
Quote from: MASTERNC on June 23, 2022, 03:03:32 PM
Local traffic report mentioned PA 320 off I-76 near Gulph Mills is finally open.  No press release from District 6 though.

Press release eventually came out:
https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7610 (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7610)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: J N Winkler on June 24, 2022, 12:40:51 AM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on June 16, 2022, 09:22:47 AM(For US 219)  PennDOT - District 9 News: Public Meeting and Plans Display for the US 219 Meyersdale, PA to Old Salisbury Road, MD (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-9/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1092)

The Johnstown Tribune-Democrat has initial coverage of this public meeting:

Curious, concerned property owners weigh in on proposed US 219 paths (https://www.tribdem.com/news/curious-concerned-property-owners-weigh-in-on-proposed-u-s-219-paths/article_560c860c-f356-11ec-88ce-c766a5516114.html)

I have been following this project with interest since the proposed alignments run east of Salisbury, in a part of Elk Lick Township where my Scottish second great-grandparents farmed from the early 1880's to 1916.  I don't know precisely where their farm was (we have pictures of the farmhouse, but most of the people who would have known how to get to it are now dead), and it doesn't look like there are buildings in any of the potential land take envelopes (https://kci-nepa.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=654a0bdb40b448469518d1601edab997).  Nevertheless, there's certainly the strong possibility of farmland--including my ancestors'--becoming highway ROW.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on June 24, 2022, 05:32:51 AM
(For PA 28) PennDOT - District 10 News: PA 28 Upcoming Ramp Closure (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1280)

(For I-80)  PennDOT - District 10 News: I80 Upcoming Ramp Closures in Jefferson County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1281)

PennDOT - District 10 News: Road Closure on US 119 for Railroad Grade Crossing Replacement in Jefferson County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1282)

(For US 219) PennDOT - District 2 News: Route 219/Bradford Bypass Work Will Bring Northbound Lane Restrictions (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2299)

(For PA 64 and PA 550)  PennDOT - District 2 News: Early Summer Update as Work Continues on Route 64/Route 550 Intersection Project (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2301)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on June 24, 2022, 07:24:56 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on June 24, 2022, 05:32:51 AM
(For I-80)  PennDOT - District 10 News: I80 Upcoming Ramp Closures in Jefferson County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1281)

(For I-80)  PennDOT - District 10 News: UPDATE to Detour for I-80 Ramp Closures in Jefferson County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1286)

(For I-80, US 220, and PA 26)  PennDOT - District 2 News: PennDOT Issues End-of-Month Update for Local Interchange Project (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2305)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on June 25, 2022, 07:14:21 AM
As a note, as of Wednesday night, mile markers have been placed for US 22 along US 22/US 322 from PA 34 near Newport (I do not think I saw any west of here.) to I-81.  The numbers also seemed to have been corrected from the previous erroneous ones near I-81.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Crown Victoria on June 25, 2022, 08:50:16 AM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on June 25, 2022, 07:14:21 AM
As a note, as of Wednesday night, mile markers have been placed for US 22 along US 22/US 322 from PA 34 near Newport (I do not think I saw any west of here.) to I-81.  The numbers also seemed to have been corrected from the previous erroneous ones near I-81.

Wouldn't it make more sense to use mile markers for US 322 (especially if the end goal is to place them all the way to Potters Mills and eventually to State College)?

Ordinarily US 22 takes precedence along the concurrency, but the majority of the long-distance traffic on that freeway is using US 322 to/from Centre County and beyond.

If US 22 mile markers are used east of Lewistown and US 322 used its own west of there, travelers following US 322 would see the mile markers repeat for about 25 miles or so in either direction, which could cause confusion.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: famartin on June 25, 2022, 09:11:50 AM
Quote from: Crown Victoria on June 25, 2022, 08:50:16 AM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on June 25, 2022, 07:14:21 AM
As a note, as of Wednesday night, mile markers have been placed for US 22 along US 22/US 322 from PA 34 near Newport (I do not think I saw any west of here.) to I-81.  The numbers also seemed to have been corrected from the previous erroneous ones near I-81.

Wouldn't it make more sense to use mile markers for US 322 (especially if the end goal is to place them all the way to Potters Mills and eventually to State College)?

Ordinarily US 22 takes precedence along the concurrency, but the majority of the long-distance traffic on that freeway is using US 322 to/from Centre County and beyond.

If US 22 mile markers are used east of Lewistown and US 322 used its own west of there, travelers following US 322 would see the mile markers repeat for about 25 miles or so in either direction, which could cause confusion.

Fair, but if used by current standards (including the US 22 shield on the MM), that should lessen the problem.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: cl94 on June 25, 2022, 09:31:50 PM
Quote from: Crown Victoria on June 25, 2022, 08:50:16 AM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on June 25, 2022, 07:14:21 AM
As a note, as of Wednesday night, mile markers have been placed for US 22 along US 22/US 322 from PA 34 near Newport (I do not think I saw any west of here.) to I-81.  The numbers also seemed to have been corrected from the previous erroneous ones near I-81.

Wouldn't it make more sense to use mile markers for US 322 (especially if the end goal is to place them all the way to Potters Mills and eventually to State College)?

Ordinarily US 22 takes precedence along the concurrency, but the majority of the long-distance traffic on that freeway is using US 322 to/from Centre County and beyond.

If US 22 mile markers are used east of Lewistown and US 322 used its own west of there, travelers following US 322 would see the mile markers repeat for about 25 miles or so in either direction, which could cause confusion.

There's also the little issue of ADHS corridors here. Corridor M follows 22, not 322, and the corridor takes precedence for some things. Allegedly, 22 will eventually be 4-laned between Duncansville and Lewistown, which would make that the preferred long-distance route to Pittsburgh.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Crown Victoria on June 25, 2022, 11:27:07 PM
Quote from: cl94 on June 25, 2022, 09:31:50 PM
Quote from: Crown Victoria on June 25, 2022, 08:50:16 AM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on June 25, 2022, 07:14:21 AM
As a note, as of Wednesday night, mile markers have been placed for US 22 along US 22/US 322 from PA 34 near Newport (I do not think I saw any west of here.) to I-81.  The numbers also seemed to have been corrected from the previous erroneous ones near I-81.

Wouldn't it make more sense to use mile markers for US 322 (especially if the end goal is to place them all the way to Potters Mills and eventually to State College)?

Ordinarily US 22 takes precedence along the concurrency, but the majority of the long-distance traffic on that freeway is using US 322 to/from Centre County and beyond.

If US 22 mile markers are used east of Lewistown and US 322 used its own west of there, travelers following US 322 would see the mile markers repeat for about 25 miles or so in either direction, which could cause confusion.

There's also the little issue of ADHS corridors here. Corridor M follows 22, not 322, and the corridor takes precedence for some things. Allegedly, 22 will eventually be 4-laned between Duncansville and Lewistown, which would make that the preferred long-distance route to Pittsburgh.

Cost considerations aside, the best route from Harrisburg to Pittsburgh would still be the PA Turnpike, even with a fully 4-laned US 22. Indeed, even from Lewistown, the quickest route to Pittsburgh (at least currently) involves using US 322 to I-99 to US 22.

Also, PA doesn't put mile markers on non-freeways, unless you count the little white signs as such.

As far as Corridor M, most of the general public is probably unaware of US 22's status as such.

Taking all of this into account, I still think the Harrisburg-State College freeway corridor is best signed with US 322 mile markers. In the end, though, any mile markers, whether for US 22 or US 322, are helpful.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on June 28, 2022, 08:15:38 AM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on June 25, 2022, 07:14:21 AM
As a note, as of Wednesday night, mile markers have been placed for US 22 along US 22/US 322 from PA 34 near Newport (I do not think I saw any west of here.) to I-81.  The numbers also seemed to have been corrected from the previous erroneous ones near I-81.

I drove through here again last night and can clarify that they went as far west as PA 17.  It must have been a District 8 thing so it would make sense to end them at the Juniata-Perry County line.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on June 28, 2022, 10:58:13 AM
(For PA 26 and PA 45) PennDOT - District 2 News: PennDOT Issues End-of-June Update for Route 26/Route 45 Intersection Job (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2306)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on June 29, 2022, 02:37:20 PM
(For PA 144)  PennDOT - District 2 News: Reminder for Route 144 Detour on Bridge Replacement in Potter County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2307)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: MASTERNC on June 30, 2022, 12:18:47 PM
Looks like the bridge tolling is dead for now

https://www.post-gazette.com/news/state/2022/06/30/pa-bridge-tolling-plan-blocked-commonwealth-court-judges-governor-tom-wolf-penndot/stories/202206300111
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: vdeane on June 30, 2022, 12:53:49 PM
^ It seems like it would be relatively straightforward to bring back, re-submitting basically the same plan but with the currently proposed bridges to toll as the ones specifically to toll (instead of leaving it vague and coming up with the list later, which is what the court found issue with)... except for the governor leaving office soon and neither of his successors supporting it.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Ketchup99 on June 30, 2022, 04:46:34 PM
Quote from: cl94 on June 25, 2022, 09:31:50 PM
Quote from: Crown Victoria on June 25, 2022, 08:50:16 AM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on June 25, 2022, 07:14:21 AM
As a note, as of Wednesday night, mile markers have been placed for US 22 along US 22/US 322 from PA 34 near Newport (I do not think I saw any west of here.) to I-81.  The numbers also seemed to have been corrected from the previous erroneous ones near I-81.

Wouldn't it make more sense to use mile markers for US 322 (especially if the end goal is to place them all the way to Potters Mills and eventually to State College)?

Ordinarily US 22 takes precedence along the concurrency, but the majority of the long-distance traffic on that freeway is using US 322 to/from Centre County and beyond.

If US 22 mile markers are used east of Lewistown and US 322 used its own west of there, travelers following US 322 would see the mile markers repeat for about 25 miles or so in either direction, which could cause confusion.

There's also the little issue of ADHS corridors here. Corridor M follows 22, not 322, and the corridor takes precedence for some things. Allegedly, 22 will eventually be 4-laned between Duncansville and Lewistown, which would make that the preferred long-distance route to Pittsburgh.

Allegedly - but it shouldn't. Living nearby and having spent a good chunk of time on that portion of 22, there's no demand for it. Three-laning the road in a 2+1 style would be great, and a bypass of Hollidaysburg would too, but ultimately State College to Harrisburg is the critical corridor in the region, and that's what the mile markers should reflect. I also wouldn't mind exit numbers on it.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: famartin on June 30, 2022, 09:43:49 PM
Quote from: Ketchup99 on June 30, 2022, 04:46:34 PM
Quote from: cl94 on June 25, 2022, 09:31:50 PM
Quote from: Crown Victoria on June 25, 2022, 08:50:16 AM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on June 25, 2022, 07:14:21 AM
As a note, as of Wednesday night, mile markers have been placed for US 22 along US 22/US 322 from PA 34 near Newport (I do not think I saw any west of here.) to I-81.  The numbers also seemed to have been corrected from the previous erroneous ones near I-81.

Wouldn't it make more sense to use mile markers for US 322 (especially if the end goal is to place them all the way to Potters Mills and eventually to State College)?

Ordinarily US 22 takes precedence along the concurrency, but the majority of the long-distance traffic on that freeway is using US 322 to/from Centre County and beyond.

If US 22 mile markers are used east of Lewistown and US 322 used its own west of there, travelers following US 322 would see the mile markers repeat for about 25 miles or so in either direction, which could cause confusion.

There's also the little issue of ADHS corridors here. Corridor M follows 22, not 322, and the corridor takes precedence for some things. Allegedly, 22 will eventually be 4-laned between Duncansville and Lewistown, which would make that the preferred long-distance route to Pittsburgh.

Allegedly - but it shouldn't. Living nearby and having spent a good chunk of time on that portion of 22, there's no demand for it. Three-laning the road in a 2+1 style would be great, and a bypass of Hollidaysburg would too, but ultimately State College to Harrisburg is the critical corridor in the region, and that's what the mile markers should reflect. I also wouldn't mind exit numbers on it.

A lot of the ADHS routes have little demand. Their purpose is to help generate demand. (Development, like the name says). Now, unlike some states which participate in ADHS, PA has plenty of real problems to spend money on. ADHS upgrades probably shouldn't be a big priority.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on July 01, 2022, 08:20:32 AM
PennDOT - District 10 News: Weekend Road Closure on Freedom Road in Butler County (Cranberry Township) (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1291)  (note that this has been cancelled and will be rescheduled)

(For US 30)  PennDOT - District 9 News: 24-Hour Traffic Detour on Route 30 to Start As Part of Resurfacing Project in Somerset County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-9/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1096)

(For I-80, US 220, and PA 26)  PennDOT - District 2 News: PennDOT Issues Beginning of July Update for Local Interchange Project (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2311)

(For PA 756)  PennDOT - District 9 News: Paving Upgrades Begin in Next Phase of the Geistown Corridor Improvement Project in Cambria County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-9/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1097)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on July 01, 2022, 10:39:49 AM
https://goo.gl/maps/5994uuC6y9X5Ha4v5
This is odd. You have a mast arm here, but the important US 202 South trailblazer is not on it.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Flyer78 on July 01, 2022, 12:30:02 PM
That would have had the left-/ right-turn only signs, typically no other signs on those installs
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on July 01, 2022, 09:21:10 PM
Quote from: Flyer78 on July 01, 2022, 12:30:02 PM
That would have had the left-/ right-turn only signs, typically no other signs on those installs

According to historical Street View imagery, those signs were there in 2008, but by 2012 they had fallen down or were removed and they never noticed/bothered replacing them.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on July 02, 2022, 12:57:47 AM
It should have turn arrows and a shield both. FDOT does it so can PennDOT do it.  Makes sense.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on July 02, 2022, 08:24:33 AM
Do Pennsylvania residents call the NE Extension in common talk: The Turnpike? Or is it colloquially referred as " The Extension?"


I would imagine the latter as the former would seem logical for the Mainline only.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: MATraveler128 on July 02, 2022, 08:54:08 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on July 02, 2022, 08:24:33 AM
Do Pennsylvania residents call the NE Extension in common talk: The Turnpike? Or is it colloquially referred as " The Extension?"


I would imagine the latter as the former would seem logical for the Mainline only.

My grandparents who live in the area call it the Turnpike. I've never heard anyone call it the Extension. Almost no one refers to it by its number. Same with 276.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jeffandnicole on July 02, 2022, 08:59:20 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on July 02, 2022, 08:24:33 AM
Do Pennsylvania residents call the NE Extension in common talk: The Turnpike? Or is it colloquially referred as " The Extension?"


I would imagine the latter as the former would seem logical for the Mainline only.

In the Philly area, it's usually called the Extension.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on July 02, 2022, 09:03:42 AM
Quote from: BlueOutback7 on July 02, 2022, 08:54:08 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on July 02, 2022, 08:24:33 AM
Do Pennsylvania residents call the NE Extension in common talk: The Turnpike? Or is it colloquially referred as " The Extension?"


I would imagine the latter as the former would seem logical for the Mainline only.

My grandparents who live in the area call it the Turnpike. I've never heard anyone call it the Extension. Almost no one refers to it by its number. Same with 276.


Or 76 either.  It's all The Turnpike, or the official name.  I think most don't call the 70 overlap either as I-70 but most likely the Turnpike as well.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on July 02, 2022, 11:40:25 AM
Speaking of the NE Extension, the mileage sign north of the Lehigh Valley Interchange always followed PTC protocol and listed the next two exits by name. 

Being Route 903 has no interchange name, I assume that is why it is omitted on this:

https://goo.gl/maps/ZwyYH7THvJpAGPZTA

Technically Pocono is number three and should not be listed anymore.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: rickmastfan67 on July 02, 2022, 05:21:20 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on July 02, 2022, 11:40:25 AM
Speaking of the NE Extension, the mileage sign north of the Lehigh Valley Interchange always followed PTC protocol and listed the next two exits by name. 

Being Route 903 has no interchange name, I assume that is why it is omitted on this:

https://goo.gl/maps/ZwyYH7THvJpAGPZTA

Technically Pocono is number three and should not be listed anymore.

It's because that sign hasn't been 'replaced' since the PA-903 interchange opened.  If you look at historical StreetView, it's been there since 2008, well before the interchange with PA-903 opened.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ixnay on July 02, 2022, 08:57:42 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on July 02, 2022, 08:59:20 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on July 02, 2022, 08:24:33 AM
Do Pennsylvania residents call the NE Extension in common talk: The Turnpike? Or is it colloquially referred as " The Extension?"


I would imagine the latter as the former would seem logical for the Mainline only.

In the Philly area, it's usually called the Extension.

Same in my household (consisting entirely of Delaware Valley natives, although we long ago moved out of the Philly area), as well.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: MASTERNC on July 02, 2022, 10:50:17 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on July 02, 2022, 11:40:25 AM
Speaking of the NE Extension, the mileage sign north of the Lehigh Valley Interchange always followed PTC protocol and listed the next two exits by name. 

Being Route 903 has no interchange name, I assume that is why it is omitted on this:

https://goo.gl/maps/ZwyYH7THvJpAGPZTA

Technically Pocono is number three and should not be listed anymore.

It might also be that the interchange was E-ZPass Only until AET and they wanted to not confuse cash paying drivers. The EB sign after Morgantown still omits the PA 29 former slip ramp.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: VTGoose on July 02, 2022, 10:58:01 PM
Made a visit back to the 'Burgh for the holiday and I'm curious about a section of I-79 north of Waynesburg, starting around MP 17. The speed limit drops from 70 to 55 and stays that way for several miles. There are some curves in that stretch but they aren't any worse than other curves on either side. Does the township that section runs through have some special pull with PennDOT to get the speed lowered? Or was there an accident at one time and the lower speed limit is the result?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: rickmastfan67 on July 03, 2022, 04:10:19 PM
Quote from: VTGoose on July 02, 2022, 10:58:01 PM
Made a visit back to the 'Burgh for the holiday and I'm curious about a section of I-79 north of Waynesburg, starting around MP 17. The speed limit drops from 70 to 55 and stays that way for several miles. There are some curves in that stretch but they aren't any worse than other curves on either side. Does the township that section runs through have some special pull with PennDOT to get the speed lowered? Or was there an accident at one time and the lower speed limit is the result?

Longwall mining issues in that area.  It's only for 2 miles (and only NB), as it goes back 70 just after MP 19 till just after Exit 30, where it goes back to 55.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: rickmastfan67 on July 03, 2022, 04:13:08 PM
Quote from: MASTERNC on July 02, 2022, 10:50:17 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on July 02, 2022, 11:40:25 AM
Speaking of the NE Extension, the mileage sign north of the Lehigh Valley Interchange always followed PTC protocol and listed the next two exits by name. 

Being Route 903 has no interchange name, I assume that is why it is omitted on this:

https://goo.gl/maps/ZwyYH7THvJpAGPZTA

Technically Pocono is number three and should not be listed anymore.

It might also be that the interchange was E-ZPass Only until AET and they wanted to not confuse cash paying drivers. The EB sign after Morgantown still omits the PA 29 former slip ramp.

The sign that is mentioned was installed before 2008, well before they even started construction on the PA-903 interchange.  Hence why the exit it isn't mentioned.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: sprjus4 on July 03, 2022, 07:54:36 PM
Quote from: rickmastfan67 on July 03, 2022, 04:10:19 PM
Quote from: VTGoose on July 02, 2022, 10:58:01 PM
Made a visit back to the 'Burgh for the holiday and I'm curious about a section of I-79 north of Waynesburg, starting around MP 17. The speed limit drops from 70 to 55 and stays that way for several miles. There are some curves in that stretch but they aren't any worse than other curves on either side. Does the township that section runs through have some special pull with PennDOT to get the speed lowered? Or was there an accident at one time and the lower speed limit is the result?

Longwall mining issues in that area.  It's only for 2 miles (and only NB), as it goes back 70 just after MP 19 till just after Exit 30, where it goes back to 55.
A speed limit that seemingly has zero effect on traffic... traveling through there a few months ago, traffic stayed at 75-80 mph through that 55 mph zone as they were doing in the 70 mph zone.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: famartin on July 03, 2022, 08:43:07 PM
Quote from: sprjus4 on July 03, 2022, 07:54:36 PM
Quote from: rickmastfan67 on July 03, 2022, 04:10:19 PM
Quote from: VTGoose on July 02, 2022, 10:58:01 PM
Made a visit back to the 'Burgh for the holiday and I'm curious about a section of I-79 north of Waynesburg, starting around MP 17. The speed limit drops from 70 to 55 and stays that way for several miles. There are some curves in that stretch but they aren't any worse than other curves on either side. Does the township that section runs through have some special pull with PennDOT to get the speed lowered? Or was there an accident at one time and the lower speed limit is the result?

Longwall mining issues in that area.  It's only for 2 miles (and only NB), as it goes back 70 just after MP 19 till just after Exit 30, where it goes back to 55.
A speed limit that seemingly has zero effect on traffic... traveling through there a few months ago, traffic stayed at 75-80 mph through that 55 mph zone as they were doing in the 70 mph zone.

You can say similarly for most freeways around Philly...
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jeffandnicole on July 03, 2022, 10:01:45 PM
Quote from: famartin on July 03, 2022, 08:43:07 PM
Quote from: sprjus4 on July 03, 2022, 07:54:36 PM
Quote from: rickmastfan67 on July 03, 2022, 04:10:19 PM
Quote from: VTGoose on July 02, 2022, 10:58:01 PM
Made a visit back to the 'Burgh for the holiday and I'm curious about a section of I-79 north of Waynesburg, starting around MP 17. The speed limit drops from 70 to 55 and stays that way for several miles. There are some curves in that stretch but they aren't any worse than other curves on either side. Does the township that section runs through have some special pull with PennDOT to get the speed lowered? Or was there an accident at one time and the lower speed limit is the result?

Longwall mining issues in that area.  It's only for 2 miles (and only NB), as it goes back 70 just after MP 19 till just after Exit 30, where it goes back to 55.
A speed limit that seemingly has zero effect on traffic... traveling through there a few months ago, traffic stayed at 75-80 mph through that 55 mph zone as they were doing in the 70 mph zone.

You can say similarly for most freeways around Philly...

Or anywhere, for that matter
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: VTGoose on July 04, 2022, 02:59:41 PM
Quote from: sprjus4 on July 03, 2022, 07:54:36 PM
Quote from: rickmastfan67 on July 03, 2022, 04:10:19 PM
Quote from: VTGoose on July 02, 2022, 10:58:01 PM
Made a visit back to the 'Burgh for the holiday and I'm curious about a section of I-79 north of Waynesburg, starting around MP 17. The speed limit drops from 70 to 55 and stays that way for several miles. There are some curves in that stretch but they aren't any worse than other curves on either side. Does the township that section runs through have some special pull with PennDOT to get the speed lowered? Or was there an accident at one time and the lower speed limit is the result?

Longwall mining issues in that area.  It's only for 2 miles (and only NB), as it goes back 70 just after MP 19 till just after Exit 30, where it goes back to 55.
A speed limit that seemingly has zero effect on traffic... traveling through there a few months ago, traffic stayed at 75-80 mph through that 55 mph zone as they were doing in the 70 mph zone.

It didn't slow me down by much. What is the lower speed limit supposed to do, produce less vibration through the ground? How is that the only section through there that might be affected by mining?

Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: MASTERNC on July 04, 2022, 08:33:12 PM
Quote from: rickmastfan67 on July 03, 2022, 04:10:19 PM
Quote from: VTGoose on July 02, 2022, 10:58:01 PM
Made a visit back to the 'Burgh for the holiday and I'm curious about a section of I-79 north of Waynesburg, starting around MP 17. The speed limit drops from 70 to 55 and stays that way for several miles. There are some curves in that stretch but they aren't any worse than other curves on either side. Does the township that section runs through have some special pull with PennDOT to get the speed lowered? Or was there an accident at one time and the lower speed limit is the result?

Longwall mining issues in that area.  It's only for 2 miles (and only NB), as it goes back 70 just after MP 19 till just after Exit 30, where it goes back to 55.

The speed limit had been reduced in that area for a long time because of one curve prior to the Ruff Creek exit. I know they had been doing long wall mining south of Waynesburg.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on July 05, 2022, 08:08:15 AM
Why is the segment of I-70 east of Breezewood still 55? 

Also why is I-80 between PA 115 and I-380 still 65?  This stretch is totally rural and exit less for 10 miles.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: famartin on July 05, 2022, 08:21:38 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on July 05, 2022, 08:08:15 AM
Why is the segment of I-70 east of Breezewood still 55? 

Not entirely sure, but I've noticed a few sharper-than-they-should-be curves and shorter-than-they-should-be acceleration lanes in  that stretch. It may not justify such a long stretch of low speed limit, though, and as with many 55's, its mostly ignored.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Ted$8roadFan on July 05, 2022, 08:35:09 AM
Also why is I-80 between PA 115 and I-380 still 65?  This stretch is totally rural and exit less for 10 miles.
[/quote]

I wonder if it's due to the spillover Pocono vacation traffic and truck traffic, with the intent of slowing traffic heading into the substandard Stroudsbu4g stretch of I-80.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Bitmapped on July 05, 2022, 11:10:01 AM
Quote from: MASTERNC on July 04, 2022, 08:33:12 PM
Quote from: rickmastfan67 on July 03, 2022, 04:10:19 PM
Quote from: VTGoose on July 02, 2022, 10:58:01 PM
Made a visit back to the 'Burgh for the holiday and I'm curious about a section of I-79 north of Waynesburg, starting around MP 17. The speed limit drops from 70 to 55 and stays that way for several miles. There are some curves in that stretch but they aren't any worse than other curves on either side. Does the township that section runs through have some special pull with PennDOT to get the speed lowered? Or was there an accident at one time and the lower speed limit is the result?

Longwall mining issues in that area.  It's only for 2 miles (and only NB), as it goes back 70 just after MP 19 till just after Exit 30, where it goes back to 55.

The speed limit had been reduced in that area for a long time because of one curve prior to the Ruff Creek exit. I know they had been doing long wall mining south of Waynesburg.

The reduced speed limit is because of the curve northbound. Southbound remains 70mph throughout. PennDOT rebuilt the curve circa 2003 which greatly improved superelevation. It seems like they never reevaluated the speed limit after the reconstruction.

There isn't any active longwall mining under I-79 at this time. North of Ruff Creek was undermined in the 1980s. South of Waynesburg, especially around Exit 7, was done 10+ years ago. There is some active longwall mining under I-70 around the PA/WV state line.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on July 05, 2022, 01:36:40 PM
(For US 30)  PennDOT - District 9 News: Route 30 Pavement Preservation Project to Begin Next Week (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-9/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1098)  (mainly posting only due to weekend closure for US 30 the weekend of July 15th)

QuoteOn Friday, July 15, a 20.8-mile detour will be in place through Sunday, July 17, for a pipe replacement. The roadway will be closed between Harrisonville and Breezy Point Road. The signed detour will follow: Route 655 (Pleasant Ridge Road), Route 475 (Waterfall Road), and Route 522 (Great Cove Road).

(For PA 309)  PennDOT - District 4 News: PennDOT Announces Online Plans Display for the SR 1014, Section 370, over SR 309 (Memorial Highway) Bridge Replacement Project in Dallas Township, Luzerne County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-4/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1020)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: bluecountry on July 05, 2022, 01:52:02 PM
Are they ever going to build a full real interchange at Breezewood?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Rothman on July 05, 2022, 01:53:16 PM
Quote from: bluecountry on July 05, 2022, 01:52:02 PM
Are they ever going to build a full real interchange at Breezewood?
No.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: bluecountry on July 05, 2022, 01:55:42 PM
Quote from: Rothman on July 05, 2022, 01:53:16 PM
Quote from: bluecountry on July 05, 2022, 01:52:02 PM
Are they ever going to build a full real interchange at Breezewood?
No.
:banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead:
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: rickmastfan67 on July 06, 2022, 11:12:14 AM
Quote from: bluecountry on July 05, 2022, 01:52:02 PM
Are they ever going to build a full real interchange at Breezewood?

Maybe in the year 3000. LOL!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yhuleEXuULg
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on July 06, 2022, 11:37:03 AM
Quote from: rickmastfan67 on July 06, 2022, 11:12:14 AM
Quote from: bluecountry on July 05, 2022, 01:52:02 PM
Are they ever going to build a full real interchange at Breezewood?

Maybe in the year 3000. LOL!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yhuleEXuULg

According to the Jonas Brothers, we will all be underwater though.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: sprjus4 on July 06, 2022, 02:25:58 PM
Quote from: famartin on July 05, 2022, 08:21:38 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on July 05, 2022, 08:08:15 AM
Why is the segment of I-70 east of Breezewood still 55? 

Not entirely sure, but I've noticed a few sharper-than-they-should-be curves and shorter-than-they-should-be acceleration lanes in  that stretch. It may not justify such a long stretch of low speed limit, though, and as with many 55's, its mostly ignored.
One interesting thing I noticed, is that a lot of the curves on that absurdly-low 55 mph segment also seem to be under posted. Most of them have "advisory speeds"  of 50 mph, yet they can easily be taken at 65 mph without any crazy maneuvering to maintain.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: famartin on July 06, 2022, 03:08:47 PM
Quote from: sprjus4 on July 06, 2022, 02:25:58 PM
Quote from: famartin on July 05, 2022, 08:21:38 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on July 05, 2022, 08:08:15 AM
Why is the segment of I-70 east of Breezewood still 55? 

Not entirely sure, but I've noticed a few sharper-than-they-should-be curves and shorter-than-they-should-be acceleration lanes in  that stretch. It may not justify such a long stretch of low speed limit, though, and as with many 55's, its mostly ignored.
One interesting thing I noticed, is that a lot of the curves on that absurdly-low 55 mph segment also seem to be under posted. Most of them have "advisory speeds"  of 50 mph, yet they can easily be taken at 65 mph without any crazy maneuvering to maintain.

Well... I've found I can handle most curves at 15 mph above their advisory speed. The advisory speeds are intended for large trucks, IIRC.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on July 06, 2022, 04:35:05 PM
(For PA 321)  PennDOT - District 2 News: Southbound Detour for Route 321 Roadwork Extended Through July (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2314)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: sbeaver44 on July 06, 2022, 08:47:14 PM
Saw this (Image credit to Google Street View) on I-83 North next to the Exit 10 2 miles sign.  I also remember seeing one like this on I-81 North just before the PA 581 exit.  1) what are these and 2) are they only found in PA?(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20220707/463261e8680871620dd3ee9493bf388e.jpg)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: sbeaver44 on July 06, 2022, 09:20:07 PM
I think I may have solved this.  On the FHWA site, on the LTPP (Long Term Pavement Program site) there is a site 42-1610 in that location.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on July 07, 2022, 04:47:07 PM
(For US 202) PennDOT - District 6 News: Markley Street (U.S. 202 South), Dannehower Bridge Lane Closures Next Week for Construction in Norristown (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7647)

(For PA 441) PennDOT - District 8 News: Box Culvert Project to Begin on Route 441 (River Road) in Conoy Township, Lancaster County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1749)

(For US 22, US 322, and I-81)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Closure Planned for EB Route 22 Ramp to NB I-81 in Dauphin County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1750)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on July 08, 2022, 09:43:44 AM
(For US 220)  PennDOT - District 3 News: Route 220 Safety Improvement Project Continues (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4221)

(For US 1)  PennDOT - District 6 News: U.S. 1 North Lane Closures at Night Next Week for Construction in Bucks County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7648)

PennDOT - District 2 News: Mahantango Creek Covered Bridge Repair to Begin July 18 (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2318)

(For PA 33)  PennDOT - District 5 News: Wolf Administration Highlights Local Improvements Accelerated by Federal Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-5/pages/details.aspx?newsid=3239)

(For PA 64 and PA 550) PennDOT - District 2 News: Early July Update as Work Continues on Route 64/Route 550 Intersection Project (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2320)

PennDOT - District 8 News: Online Plans Display Available, In-Person Public Meeting Planned for Route 3022 Maclay Street Bridge Replacement Project in the City of Harrisburg (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1752)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jemacedo9 on July 08, 2022, 10:29:22 AM
Yesterday, the PA House has overwhemingly passed the latest budget.  Included in that is the restoration of $175M annually out of the annual $500M of the Motor License Fund that goes to the State Police.  Now waiting for the PA Senate...
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: MASTERNC on July 08, 2022, 10:26:54 PM
Quote from: jemacedo9 on July 08, 2022, 10:29:22 AM
Yesterday, the PA House has overwhemingly passed the latest budget.  Included in that is the restoration of $175M annually out of the annual $500M of the Motor License Fund that goes to the State Police.  Now waiting for the PA Senate...

Sounds like it is a done deal and the Governor signed

https://www.post-gazette.com/news/state/2022/07/08/governor-wolf-45-2-billion-budget-spending-plan-pennsylvania-education-community-safety/stories/202207080120
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Crown Victoria on July 10, 2022, 11:12:24 AM
Quote from: MASTERNC on July 08, 2022, 10:26:54 PM
Quote from: jemacedo9 on July 08, 2022, 10:29:22 AM
Yesterday, the PA House has overwhemingly passed the latest budget.  Included in that is the restoration of $175M annually out of the annual $500M of the Motor License Fund that goes to the State Police.  Now waiting for the PA Senate...

Sounds like it is a done deal and the Governor signed

https://www.post-gazette.com/news/state/2022/07/08/governor-wolf-45-2-billion-budget-spending-plan-pennsylvania-education-community-safety/stories/202207080120

It will be interesting to see what PennDOT does with the extra $175 million...more resurfacing projects certainly, but that money can also be used to provide better matching of federal funds for larger projects.

Also included in the budget package were new laws regarding P3s...particularly where tolling is concerned. New proposals involving tolling would need to provide much more detail before approval, must have a public comment period, and must be approved unanimously by the board governing P3 projects, before finally being subject to disapproval by the legislature. Any tolls would also have to be optional, meaning tolling of all lanes is out, but managed lanes are ok. The bridge tolling projects can still be advanced, but tolling would only be allowed if the projects are resubmitted under the new law.

*Senate Bill 382 is the P3 reform in question here. It is still awaiting the Governor's signature but passed the Senate unanimously and passed the House with a large majority in its current form.
https://www.legis.state.pa.us/cfdocs/billInfo/billInfo.cfm?sYear=2021&sInd=0&body=S&type=B&bn=0382


Edit: Governor Wolf signed the bill on 7/11/22.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: bluecountry on July 11, 2022, 07:17:22 AM
Quote from: rickmastfan67 on July 06, 2022, 11:12:14 AM
Quote from: bluecountry on July 05, 2022, 01:52:02 PM
Are they ever going to build a full real interchange at Breezewood?

Maybe in the year 3000. LOL!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yhuleEXuULg
Why?

Also, how come the PATP compared to I-68 sucks so much in terms of not really climbing mountain ridges?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on July 11, 2022, 08:55:37 AM
(For I-81 and PA 581)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Nighttime Closure Planned for NB I-81 Ramp to EB Route 581 in Cumberland County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1753)

(For PA 8)  PennDOT - District 10 News: Traffic Alert for Barrier Removal and Painting on State Route 8 in Butler County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1299)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Crown Victoria on July 11, 2022, 11:27:12 PM
Quote from: bluecountry on July 11, 2022, 07:17:22 AM
Quote from: rickmastfan67 on July 06, 2022, 11:12:14 AM
Quote from: bluecountry on July 05, 2022, 01:52:02 PM
Are they ever going to build a full real interchange at Breezewood?

Maybe in the year 3000. LOL!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yhuleEXuULg
Why?

Also, how come the PATP compared to I-68 sucks so much in terms of not really climbing mountain ridges?

From what I understand, the locals around the Breezewood area, and/or their representatives in Harrisburg, believe that a proper interchange would cause the businesses in the area to close, causing too much harm to the area's economy.

As far as the Turnpike not climbing as many ridges as I-68, it's mainly because the route chosen back in the 1930s for the Turnpike used tunnels started by the South Pennsylvania Railroad back in the 1880s to pass through some of the mountains. In some other areas, the Turnpike uses gaps in the ridges, such as near Everett and Bedford. I'm not sure that the PA Turnpike "sucks" because of this, but to each their own.

Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on July 12, 2022, 03:41:11 PM
PennDOT - District 8 News: New Traffic Configuration to be Implemented for WB I-78 Merge to SB I-81 in Lebanon County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1755)

(For US 422 BUS (Indiana)) PennDOT - District 10 News: Traffic Alert for the Closure of State Route 4422 (Philadelphia Street West Extension)) for Bridge Replacement in Indiana County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1303)

(For US 220)  PennDOT - District 2 News: More Bridge Work Coming in Clinton County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2323)

(For US 6)  PennDOT - District 1 News: Route 6 Opened in Wayne Township, Erie County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1883)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Mr_Northside on July 12, 2022, 05:01:48 PM
Quote from: Crown Victoria on July 11, 2022, 11:27:12 PM
As far as the Turnpike not climbing as many ridges as I-68, it's mainly because the route chosen back in the 1930s for the Turnpike used tunnels started by the South Pennsylvania Railroad back in the 1880s to pass through some of the mountains. In some other areas, the Turnpike uses gaps in the ridges, such as near Everett and Bedford. I'm not sure that the PA Turnpike "sucks" because of this, but to each their own.

I also don't know how that would make the Turnpike "suck"
If anything, it's probably a major reason a significantly higher portion of traffic (especially trucks) doesn't shift to I-68 to avoid the tolls.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: thenetwork on July 12, 2022, 07:32:08 PM
Quote from: Crown Victoria on July 11, 2022, 11:27:12 PM
Quote from: bluecountry on July 11, 2022, 07:17:22 AM
Quote from: rickmastfan67 on July 06, 2022, 11:12:14 AM
Quote from: bluecountry on July 05, 2022, 01:52:02 PM
Are they ever going to build a full real interchange at Breezewood?

Maybe in the year 3000. LOL!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yhuleEXuULg
Why?

Also, how come the PATP compared to I-68 sucks so much in terms of not really climbing mountain ridges?

From what I understand, the locals around the Breezewood area, and/or their representatives in Harrisburg, believe that a proper interchange would cause the businesses in the area to close, causing too much harm to the area's economy.

As far as the Turnpike not climbing as many ridges as I-68, it's mainly because the route chosen back in the 1930s for the Turnpike used tunnels started by the South Pennsylvania Railroad back in the 1880s to pass through some of the mountains. In some other areas, the Turnpike uses gaps in the ridges, such as near Everett and Bedford. I'm not sure that the PA Turnpike "sucks" because of this, but to each their own.



How many true mom & pop businesses are in Breezewood anymore?  Most of those restaurants and hotels that were there 50 years ago have either sold out to the national chains or sold their property altogether.  And most of these brands set up shop at much smaller interstate exits around the country. 

It will always be in a remote enough area where there will always be traffic that will purposely travel that strip to get needed services.  Building an interstate to interstate connection there will only make Breezewood a less-crowded, less stressful thoroughfare.

That's my argument and I'm sticking to it!
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: famartin on July 13, 2022, 01:08:22 AM
Quote from: thenetwork on July 12, 2022, 07:32:08 PM
Quote from: Crown Victoria on July 11, 2022, 11:27:12 PM
Quote from: bluecountry on July 11, 2022, 07:17:22 AM
Quote from: rickmastfan67 on July 06, 2022, 11:12:14 AM
Quote from: bluecountry on July 05, 2022, 01:52:02 PM
Are they ever going to build a full real interchange at Breezewood?

Maybe in the year 3000. LOL!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yhuleEXuULg
Why?

Also, how come the PATP compared to I-68 sucks so much in terms of not really climbing mountain ridges?

From what I understand, the locals around the Breezewood area, and/or their representatives in Harrisburg, believe that a proper interchange would cause the businesses in the area to close, causing too much harm to the area's economy.

As far as the Turnpike not climbing as many ridges as I-68, it's mainly because the route chosen back in the 1930s for the Turnpike used tunnels started by the South Pennsylvania Railroad back in the 1880s to pass through some of the mountains. In some other areas, the Turnpike uses gaps in the ridges, such as near Everett and Bedford. I'm not sure that the PA Turnpike "sucks" because of this, but to each their own.



How many true mom & pop businesses are in Breezewood anymore?  Most of those restaurants and hotels that were there 50 years ago have either sold out to the national chains or sold their property altogether.  And most of these brands set up shop at much smaller interstate exits around the country. 

It will always be in a remote enough area where there will always be traffic that will purposely travel that strip to get needed services.  Building an interstate to interstate connection there will only make Breezewood a less-crowded, less stressful thoroughfare.

That's my argument and I'm sticking to it!

Its a nice idea, but these days, if doing something has potential to take away local jobs, you can pretty much forget about it...
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on July 13, 2022, 10:37:44 AM
(For US 220)  PennDOT - District 2 News: PennDOT Announces Likely Delays Tomorrow for Route 220 Bridge Work (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2324)

PennDOT - Statewide News: Governor Wolf Announces Nearly $38 Million in Green Light-Go Grant Funds to Improve Traffic Safety (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/pages/all-news-details.aspx?newsid=965)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Mr_Northside on July 13, 2022, 03:31:56 PM
Quote from: thenetwork on July 12, 2022, 07:32:08 PM
How many true mom & pop businesses are in Breezewood anymore?  Most of those restaurants and hotels that were there 50 years ago have either sold out to the national chains or sold their property altogether.  And most of these brands set up shop at much smaller interstate exits around the country. 

It will always be in a remote enough area where there will always be traffic that will purposely travel that strip to get needed services.  Building an interstate to interstate connection there will only make Breezewood a less-crowded, less stressful thoroughfare.

That's my argument and I'm sticking to it!

I pretty much agree with that sentiment.   
These days I don't know if it's so much active opposition, as it is local apathy. 

For the most part these days PennDOT - if economically feasible - mostly hears what locals (regionals?) would like, and see what they can do to accommodate it.  (For example - the locals in the Cranberry area really wanted to get rid of the indirect connection between the TPK and I-79, and wanted the direct connection that ended up getting built in the early 2000's).
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on July 14, 2022, 09:12:16 AM
(For PA 49)  PennDOT - District 2 News: Box Culvert Work to Start Soon in Potter County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2327)

QuoteBeginning July 25, the box culvert will be closed, and a detour will be in place. The detour will direct drivers to use Route 1008 (Empson Road), Route 1001 (Fox Hill Road), and Route 1003 (Main Street). This detour will be used for two weeks, July 25 through August 11. After the two-week detour is lifted, construction will be completed using roadway flaggers and an alternating traffic pattern.

This work will be a partnership project between Potter County PennDOT Maintenance and Glenn O. Hawbaker, Inc. of State College. PennDOT will remove the existing structure, prepare the new box, and place back fill after the new box culvert is in place. The contractor will set the new box culvert, rebuild the roadway, install guiderail, and drainage updates, and perform line painting. PennDOT expects project completion by mid-August. All work is weather and schedule dependent. 

(For PA 413)  PennDOT - District 6 News: CSX Railroad to Close Route 413 (Bellevue Avenue) for Track Maintenance in Middletown Township (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7659)

(For PA 113)  PennDOT - District 6 News: PennDOT To Host Open House for Route 113 (Souderton Road)/Minsi Trail Intersection Safety Improvement Project in Hilltown Township (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7660)

(For US 202)  PennDOT - District 6 News: Sumneytown Pike to Close at U.S. 202 (Dekalb Pike) Beginning August 1 for Roadway Construction in Lower Gwynedd Township (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7661)

(For PA 173)  PennDOT Announces Plans Display for a Route 173 Intersection Improvement Project in Sandy Lake Township, Mercer County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1885)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: LilianaUwU on July 14, 2022, 02:09:32 PM
It seems like the Goat Path Expressway might actually be partially built?!

https://www.wgal.com/article/abandoned-road-project-goat-path-will-be-finished-lancaster-county-pennsylvania/40615160?fbclid=IwAR1vgOHeckl8Yt4ZY757AGrNhaPxnetqMXHg0IcT6J1a_F8WqvPyO9kwogw

(Correction: only 1.2 miles will be built as a 2-lane highway according to the article. Still, it's surprising it's getting done in any capacity.)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Alps on July 14, 2022, 10:47:39 PM
Quote from: LilianaUwU on July 14, 2022, 02:09:32 PM
It seems like the Goat Path Expressway might actually be partially built?!

https://www.wgal.com/article/abandoned-road-project-goat-path-will-be-finished-lancaster-county-pennsylvania/40615160?fbclid=IwAR1vgOHeckl8Yt4ZY757AGrNhaPxnetqMXHg0IcT6J1a_F8WqvPyO9kwogw

(Correction: only 1.2 miles will be built as a 2-lane highway according to the article. Still, it's surprising it's getting done in any capacity.)
As long as they don't get rid of the stub interchange on 772.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on July 15, 2022, 01:27:17 PM
(For US 220)  PennDOT - District 3 News: Route 220 Safety Improvement Project Continues (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4236)

(For I-90 and PA 18)  PennDOT - District 1 News: Construction at Interstate 90-Route 18 Interchange in Girard Township, Erie County Nearing Completion (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1886)

(For I-80, US 220, and PA 26)  PennDOT - District 2 News: PennDOT Issues Late July Update for Local Interchange Project (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2332)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on July 18, 2022, 07:41:52 AM
(For PA 18)  PennDOT - District 1 News: Route 18 Closure in Albion, Erie County Rescheduled (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1890)

PennDOT - District 2 News: Mahantango Creek Covered Bridge Closure Postponed Until August 1 (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2336)

(For US 11 and PA 487)  PennDOT - District 3 News: Construction Detour Continues in Bloomsburg, Columbia County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4242)

(For US 119)  PennDOT - District 10 News: Road Closure Extended on US 119 for Railroad Grade Crossing Replacement in Jefferson County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1307)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on July 20, 2022, 10:35:48 AM
(For PA 724)  PennDOT - District 6 News: PennDOT to Begin Project to Replace Route 724 (Schuylkill Road) Bridge Over Eckers Creek in North Coventry Township (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7674)

(For PA 74)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Route 74 to be Closed for Roundabout Construction Project at Intersection of B Street and N. College Street in Carlisle Borough, Cumberland County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1758)

(For PA 73)  PennDOT - District 6 News: Texas Eastern Transmission LP to Close Eastbound Route 73 (Church Road) for Pipeline Inspection in Cheltenham Township (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7676)

PennDOT - District 6 News: Sellers Avenue Bridge Over Amtrak Closed Indefinitely in Ridley Park Borough Due to Poor Condition (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7677)

(For PA 23)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Emergency Pipe Replacement Planned on Route 23 in Lancaster County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1759)

PennDOT - District 9 News: Public Meeting and Plans Display for the Route 1009 (Frankstown Road) Safety Improvement Project (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-9/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1103)

PennDOT - District 6 News: Route 113 (Souderton Road) to Close for Pipe Repair in Hilltown Township (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7679)

Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on July 21, 2022, 08:00:25 AM
Looking through the CE Expert System, this morning I found plans to make some changes to the I-476 interchange at PA 3 (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec852587ab0059502e?OpenDocument).

Quote
The project involves improvements to the existing West Chester Pike Interchange with Interstate 476 (I-476).  The proposed improvements include the delineation/separation of the westbound West Chester Pike (SR 0003) Off-Ramp to northbound I-476 On-Ramp from the signalized intersection at South Lawrence Road.  The lane will no longer be controlled by the traffic signal and will be free-flowing.  The northbound I-476 On-Ramp will be restriped and signed to carry two lanes up to the existing ramp metering.  South Lawrence Road will be restriped to include dual left-turn lanes and a right-turn only lane.  A new channelized right-turn lane will be constructed at the intersection of West Chester Pike & I-476 Northbound Off-Ramp/On-Ramp to accommodate vehicles from South Lawrence Road needing to access I-476 Northbound.

A new cantilever overhead lane designation sign structure will be installed along westbound West Chester Pike in the grass median, east of North Lawrence Road.  There are no anticipated temporary or permanent right-of-way acquisitions for this project.  The existing traffic signals at I-476 Northbound Off-Ramp/On-Ramp, South Lawrence Road, North Lawrence Road will be modified as necessary.  The ADA and pedestrian facilities along the corridor will be evaluated and updated, as necessary, to meet current ADA standards.

Work associated with the West Chester Pike bridge over Darby Creek includes removal of the existing concrete median and longitudinal joint deck between Beams B9 and B11; replacement of deck between Beams B9 to B11; and installation of median above beams B4 and B11. Also proposed is the repair of the existing approach slabs; construction of approach slab extensions; and cleanout of scuppers. See attached TS&L Plans for additional details

(For I-81, PA 115, and PA 309) PennDOT - District 4 News: ​Major Traffic Disruptions Expected Today on Interstate 81, SR 115 and SR 309 in Lackawanna and Luzerne Counties (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-4/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1025)

(For US 220)  PennDOT - District 3 News: Route 220 Safety Improvement Project Continues (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4252)

(For PA 199)  PennDOT - District 3 News: Route 199 Reconstruction Project Continues in Sayre and Athens, Bradford County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4254)

(For PA 216)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Emergency Pipe Replacement Planned on Route 216 (Seaks Run Road) in York County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1760)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on July 22, 2022, 03:59:08 PM
(For I-81)  PennDOT - District 4 News: PennDOT Announces Public Open House and Comment Period for Partnership 81 Project in Luzerne County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-4/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1027)

(For PA 216)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Detour Set on Westbound Route 216 (Seaks Run Road) in York County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1761)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on July 25, 2022, 02:05:38 PM
(For US 6N)  PennDOT - District 1 News: Closure Planned for Route 6N in Conneaut Township, Erie County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1899)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on July 27, 2022, 10:15:57 AM
(For PA 64)  PennDOT - District 2 News: Traffic Switch Coming Soon on Route 64 Bridge Job in Lamar (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2346)

(For PA 215)  PennDOT - District 1 News: Road Closure Scheduled for Railroad Work in Springfield Township (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1901)

(For I-70)  PennDOT - District 9 News: Public Meeting and Plans Display for the Interstate 70 Amaranth Off-Ramp Bridge Replacement Project (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-9/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1105)

(For US 522)  PennDOT - District 3 News: Utility Work to Close Portion of Route 522 Next Week in Snyder County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4263)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on July 28, 2022, 05:19:22 PM
(For PA 23)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Emergency Pipe Replacement Complete, Route 23 Open in Lancaster County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1768)

PennDOT - District 6 News: I-95 Lane Closures at Night Next Week for Roadway Construction in Delaware County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7701)

(For US 202) PennDOT - District 6 News: Markley Street (U.S. 202 South), Dannehower Bridge Lane Closures Next Thursday for Traffic Pattern Change in Norristown (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7708)

(For US 1 BUS)  PennDOT - District 6 News: PennDOT to Begin Business U.S. 1 (Lincoln Highway) Intersection Improvement Project in Penndel Borough Daytime lane closure planned next week on Business U.S. 1 approaching Hulmeville Avenue (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7702)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on July 30, 2022, 06:58:42 AM
(For US 220)  PennDOT - District 3 News: Route 220 Safety Improvement Project Continues (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4269)

(For PA 321)  PennDOT - District 2 News: Southbound Detour for Route 321 Roadwork Extended Through Mid-August (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2353)

(For PA 64 and PA 550)  PennDOT - District 2 News: Early August Update for Route 64/Route 550 Intersection Project (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2354)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on August 01, 2022, 06:14:58 PM
(For PA 340)  PennDOT - District 6 News: PennDOT Reopens Route 340 (Kings Highway) Bridge in City of Coatesville, Valley Township (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7713)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on August 02, 2022, 09:35:59 AM
(For PA 618)  PennDOT - District 1 News: PennDOT Announces a Public Meeting for the Route 618 Bridge Project in Sadsbury Township, Crawford County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1906)

PennDOT - District 4 News: PennDOT Announces Public Open House and Online Plans Display for the SR 2002, Section D50 Sans Souci Parkway Reconstruction in Hanover Township, Luzerne County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-4/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1040)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: sbeaver44 on August 02, 2022, 10:03:05 AM
When PennDOT renumbered to mileage-based exits, I'm pretty sure I-283 reversed the direction in which the exit numbers increased.  I believe PA 283 was exits 2W and 2E, PA 441 was Exit 1, and I-83 (in the old PennDOT manner of interstate-to-interstate junctions) was unnumbered.

The way I-283 is makes sense now, PA 283 is the southernmost exit, which is 1A and 1B.  PA 441 is Exit 2, and I-83/US 322 is 3A/3B/3C.

What was the reason that the exit numbering increased going southbound before the switch?  Is this a weird US 230 remnant or something?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: vdeane on August 02, 2022, 12:57:32 PM
Quote from: sbeaver44 on August 02, 2022, 10:03:05 AM
When PennDOT renumbered to mileage-based exits, I'm pretty sure I-283 reversed the direction in which the exit numbers increased.  I believe PA 283 was exits 2W and 2E, PA 441 was Exit 1, and I-83 (in the old PennDOT manner of interstate-to-interstate junctions) was unnumbered.

The way I-283 is makes sense now, PA 283 is the southernmost exit, which is 1A and 1B.  PA 441 is Exit 2, and I-83/US 322 is 3A/3B/3C.

What was the reason that the exit numbering increased going southbound before the switch?  Is this a weird US 230 remnant or something?
I'm guessing it's because some states number exits/mileage on 3dis with the 0 point being the interchange with the parent rather than the western/southern end (see: I-581 in VA, PA 378).  PennDOT may have decided to change methodologies when they went mile-based.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: The Ghostbuster on August 02, 2022, 06:12:43 PM
I wish the PA 28 freeway and the US 6 freeway east of Scranton, and PA 581 were converted along with the other routes that were converted to mileage-based exit numbers in 2001.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: MATraveler128 on August 02, 2022, 06:17:42 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on August 02, 2022, 06:12:43 PM
I wish the PA 28 freeway and the US 6 freeway east of Scranton, and PA 581 were converted along with the other routes that were converted to mileage-based exit numbers in 2001.

This was because the MUTCD at the time only required Interstates to be renumbered if I recall correctly. So PA 28 and the others you mentioned weren't renumbered. I don't see PennDOT ever renumbering these freeways any time soon if ever.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on August 02, 2022, 06:38:08 PM
Quote from: BlueOutback7 on August 02, 2022, 06:17:42 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on August 02, 2022, 06:12:43 PM
I wish the PA 28 freeway and the US 6 freeway east of Scranton, and PA 581 were converted along with the other routes that were converted to mileage-based exit numbers in 2001.

This was because the MUTCD at the time only required Interstates to be renumbered if I recall correctly. So PA 28 and the others you mentioned weren't renumbered. I don't see PennDOT ever renumbering these freeways any time soon if ever.

For the record, I have not heard anything on any rumors about PA 28 potentially receiving an interstate designation from I-279 to Kittanning after the reconstruction of the Highland Park Interchange.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: vdeane on August 02, 2022, 09:00:02 PM
IMO PA 28 an US 6 should be converted.  PA 581 is close enough; not much point in changing 1A/B, 2, 3, 4, 5A/B, 6A/B to 1A/B, 1C, 2, 4, 5A/B, 7A/B.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ran4sh on August 02, 2022, 09:07:52 PM
Quote from: BlueOutback7 on August 02, 2022, 06:17:42 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on August 02, 2022, 06:12:43 PM
I wish the PA 28 freeway and the US 6 freeway east of Scranton, and PA 581 were converted along with the other routes that were converted to mileage-based exit numbers in 2001.

This was because the MUTCD at the time only required Interstates to be renumbered if I recall correctly. So PA 28 and the others you mentioned weren't renumbered. I don't see PennDOT ever renumbering these freeways any time soon if ever.

The MUTCD didn't require mile-based numbers until 2009. The prior MUTCDs listed both the mile-based and sequential systems as options (however in the MUTCD they are known as "reference location" and "consecutive" respectively), it recommended distance-based but didn't require it.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: sbeaver44 on August 02, 2022, 09:31:51 PM
Quote from: vdeane on August 02, 2022, 12:57:32 PM
Quote from: sbeaver44 on August 02, 2022, 10:03:05 AM
When PennDOT renumbered to mileage-based exits, I'm pretty sure I-283 reversed the direction in which the exit numbers increased.  I believe PA 283 was exits 2W and 2E, PA 441 was Exit 1, and I-83 (in the old PennDOT manner of interstate-to-interstate junctions) was unnumbered.

The way I-283 is makes sense now, PA 283 is the southernmost exit, which is 1A and 1B.  PA 441 is Exit 2, and I-83/US 322 is 3A/3B/3C.

What was the reason that the exit numbering increased going southbound before the switch?  Is this a weird US 230 remnant or something?
I'm guessing it's because some states number exits/mileage on 3dis with the 0 point being the interchange with the parent rather than the western/southern end (see: I-581 in VA, PA 378).  PennDOT may have decided to change methodologies when they went mile-based.
Ah.  Yes, that makes sense.  Thanks!
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on August 04, 2022, 12:04:01 PM
PennDOT - District 6 News: I-95 Lane Closures at Night Next Week for Roadway Construction in Delaware County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7715)

PennDOT - District 6 News: PennDOT to Begin Project to Improve Safety on I-476 Interchange, McDade Boulevard in Ridley Township (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7722)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadgeek2500 on August 04, 2022, 08:28:01 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on August 04, 2022, 12:04:01 PM
PennDOT - District 6 News: PennDOT to Begin Project to Improve Safety on I-476 Interchange, McDade Boulevard in Ridley Township (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7722)

Wow, this is interesting and unexpected. That left turn from McDade Blvd East to Bullens is currently a disaster, so that added left turn lane is huge. As for the part about changing the ramp from 476 North to McDade, if it's how I've drawn it up I don't see how this is an improvement, plus it adds a signal.

Here's a link to my shoddy OneNote drawing (https://1drv.ms/u/s!Ar_rjMdBTtUYqqpGr_qc9lzDfeiqhQ?e=AaaEpt)

Lastly, for the 'auxiliary lane' between McDade and US 1, I assume that's just a variable shoulder lane right? I guess anything will help there.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ekt8750 on August 05, 2022, 12:22:38 PM
Quote from: Roadgeek2500 on August 04, 2022, 08:28:01 PM

Lastly, for the 'auxiliary lane' between McDade and US 1, I assume that's just a variable shoulder lane right? I guess anything will help there.

Could be like that one lane on 476 south between PA 3 and US 1.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jemacedo9 on August 05, 2022, 05:08:39 PM
The SB added lane bet PA 3 and US 1 is a truck/hill climbing lane.

I'm curious too what these two new NB "auxiliary lanes" will be too, "in the existing footprint".  When I hear "auxiliary lane" I picture a third lane between the exits that become Exit Only lanes.  I didn't think there was enough room on the Crum Creek bridge just north of Exit 1 to squeeze in a third lane.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on August 05, 2022, 09:17:44 PM
(For PA 23)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Work Scheduled on Route 23 (Walnut Street) at Route 30 Interchange in East Lampeter Township, Lancaster County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1775)

(For PA 26/PA 45)  PennDOT - District 2 News: PennDOT Issues Update for Route 26/Route 45 Intersection Job Ahead of Ag Progress Days (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2362)

PennDOT - District 6 News: PennDOT Completes New Hanover Square Road Bridge Replacement Project, Reopens Highway in New Hanover Township (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7728)

(For US 1 and PA 132)   PennDOT - District 6 News: U.S. 1, Street Road Lane, Ramp Restrictions at Night Next Week for Paving in Bensalem Township (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7729)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on August 08, 2022, 02:54:53 PM
(For US 522)  PennDOT - District 9 News: Public Meeting and Plans Display for U.S. 522 White Oak Run Bridge Replacement Project (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-9/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1107)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on August 09, 2022, 10:05:15 AM
(For US 202)  PennDOT - District 6 News: Swedesford to Close at U.S. 202 (Dekalb Pike) Beginning August 22 for Construction in Upper Gwynedd, Lower Gwynedd Townships (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7730)

(For PA 32)  PennDOT - District 6 News: Moving Road Closure on Route 32 (River Road) for Base Repair in Solebury Township (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7731)

The story behind the PA 44 Highway to the Stars Designation (https://pawilds.com/pa-route-44-highway-stars/?fbclid=IwAR3G1l8Ta6VYTAyu-XDjfJYFBzfuDxwIh1HKliTPlIHINRI1Zvk1jnGl8Lw)

PennDOT - District 1 News: PennDOT Announces Virtual Plans Display for Valley Road Bridge Replacement Project in Jefferson Township, Mercer County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1914)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on August 10, 2022, 11:32:09 AM
(For US 219)  PennDOT - District 2 News: Detour Coming on Route 219/Bradford Bypass Work (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2365)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: MASTERNC on August 10, 2022, 05:27:41 PM
Anyone know if there is a place where traffic signal improvement plans might be posted? My township just got a grant to update signals near me and I wanted to find out more details on what they're doing. Not sure if this type of project is posted in ECMS.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on August 10, 2022, 06:10:40 PM
Quote from: MASTERNC on August 10, 2022, 05:27:41 PM
Anyone know if there is a place where traffic signal improvement plans might be posted? My township just got a grant to update signals near me and I wanted to find out more details on what they're doing. Not sure if this type of project is posted in ECMS.

I think the ones more focused on state roads are, but probably not if it is generally township roads having signal upgrades.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on August 11, 2022, 09:14:21 AM
PennDOT - District 6 News: I-95 Lane Closures at Night Next Week for Roadway Construction in Delaware County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7737)

(For PA 413)  PennDOT - District 6 News: CSX Railroad to Close Route 413 (Bellevue Avenue) for Track Maintenance in Middletown Township (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7745)

(For US 22)  PennDOT - District 9 News: Traffic Pattern Change on the Route 22 Summit Interchange Project in Cambria County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-9/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1108)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on August 12, 2022, 07:05:11 AM
(For I-84)  PennDOT - District 4 News: Interstate 84 Westbound is Closed at Exit 26 in Pike County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-4/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1045)

(For US 1)  PennDOT - District 6 News: U.S. 1, Street Road Lane, Ramp Restrictions at Night Next Week for Construction in Bensalem Township (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7747)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Mr. Matté on August 12, 2022, 08:20:37 PM
Old film from the 1950s of the US 22 Easton-Phillipsburg Toll Bridge, the then-brief stretch of expressway on the west side, and the original approach and toll booth on the NJ side:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XqNgtcvxLtg
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Rothman on August 12, 2022, 08:54:26 PM
Quote from: Mr. Matté on August 12, 2022, 08:20:37 PM
Old film from the 1950s of the US 22 Easton-Phillipsburg Toll Bridge, the then-brief stretch of expressway on the west side, and the original approach and toll booth on the NJ side:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XqNgtcvxLtg
Ugh.  Even in the 1980s, traffic was horrible through there. 
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: tylert120 on August 14, 2022, 09:36:51 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on August 10, 2022, 06:10:40 PM
Quote from: MASTERNC on August 10, 2022, 05:27:41 PM
Anyone know if there is a place where traffic signal improvement plans might be posted? My township just got a grant to update signals near me and I wanted to find out more details on what they're doing. Not sure if this type of project is posted in ECMS.

I think the ones more focused on state roads are, but probably not if it is generally township roads having signal upgrades.

If it is a township project, then the plans would be accessible from the township because they need to be put out to bid.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on August 15, 2022, 12:13:41 PM
(For US 322 BUS (State College)) PennDOT - District 2 News: Work on Atherton Street Project to Resume August 22 (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2370)

PennDOT - District 1 News: PennDOT Announces Updated Plans Available for Valley Road Bridge Replacement Project in Jefferson Township, Mercer County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1921)

PennDOT - District 1 News: Work Expected to Start Next Week to Remove the South Perry Street Bridge in the City of Titusville, Crawford County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1922)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on August 16, 2022, 08:09:18 AM
So I found plans this morning on the CE Expert System to widen Centerville Rd (SR 4057 at the US 30 bridge, but otherwise a township road) between PA 462 and PA 23 (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec85258895004e714d?OpenDocument).

QuoteThe proposed project involves the reconstruction of the S.R. 4057 (U.S. 30/T-408 Centerville Road) Interchange in East Hempfield and Manor Townships, Lancaster County, including; ramp intersection reconfiguration, improvements to acceleration and deceleration lanes along U.S. 30, and replacement of the structure carrying Centerville Road over U.S. 30. The structure replacement will provide a bridge with an increased clearance to meet design criteria.
Additionally, the project involves the widening of T-408 (Centerville Road) to add thru lanes and a continuous center left turn lane from just south of PA 462 (Columbia Avenue) to just north of PA 23 (Marietta Avenue) in East Hempfield and Manor Townships. PA 23 (Marietta Avenue) will be widened, adding an additional westbound lane from Stony Battery Road to just east of T-408 (Centerville Road). The project will also include upgrades to traffic signals, pedestrian access, stormwater management systems, and guide rail, as necessary.

(For PA 321) PennDOT - District 2 News: Southbound Detour for Route 321 Has Been Lifted (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2371)

(For PA 208)  PennDOT - District 1 News: PennDOT Announces Virtual Plans Display for Route 208 Bridge Replacement Project in Clintonville, Venango County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1923)

PennDOT - District 6 News: PennDOT Reopens Flint Hill Road Following Sinkhole Repair in Upper Merion Township (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7751)

(For PA 504/US 220 ALT (Milesburg))  PennDOT - District 2 News: Traffic Delays Expected as Contractor Places Box Culvert (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2372)

(For US 322)  PennDOT - District 2 News: Milling/Paving to Start This Week on Route 322 Project near Philipsburg (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2373)

(For PA 5) PennDOT - District 1 News: Restriction Posted on Route 5 in Erie County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1925)

PennDOT - District 8 News: Weekend Work Scheduled on SB I-83 John Harris Memorial (South) Bridge (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1790)

(I-83 at PA 74)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Nighttime Lane Restrictions Scheduled on I-83 at Route 74 (Queen Street) Bridge in York County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1791)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: akotchi on August 16, 2022, 10:34:57 AM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on August 15, 2022, 12:13:41 PM
(For US 322 BUS (State College)) PennDOT - District 2 News: Work on Atherton Street Project to Resume August 22 (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2370)

Just in time for move-in weekends at Penn State for the fall semester . . .
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ixnay on August 17, 2022, 07:49:53 AM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on August 16, 2022, 08:09:18 AM
(For US 322)  PennDOT - District 2 News: Milling/Paving to Start This Week on Route 322 Project near Philipsburg (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2373)

Elsewhere on US 322 (Delaware County, specifically), the newly dualized section between Clayton Park on the Bethel/Concord Twp. line and US 1 in Concordville is a beaut.  When will dualization begin on 322 between Clayton Park and the existing dual just before PA 452 in Upper Chichester Twp.?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on August 17, 2022, 08:04:24 AM
Quote from: ixnay on August 17, 2022, 07:49:53 AM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on August 16, 2022, 08:09:18 AM
(For US 322)  PennDOT - District 2 News: Milling/Paving to Start This Week on Route 322 Project near Philipsburg (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2373)

Elsewhere on US 322 (Delaware County, specifically), the newly dualized section between Clayton Park on the Bethel/Concord Twp. line and US 1 in Concordville is a beaut.  When will dualization begin on 322 between Clayton Park and the existing dual just before PA 452 in Upper Chichester Twp.?

From the US 322 Website:  http://us322conchester.com/news/construction-update-winter-2020-21/

QuoteThe next location along the U.S. 322 corridor to be addressed will be Section CSX, which will replace the bridge over the CSX railroad and Bethel Road, and reconstruct the adjacent Bethel Road Interchange. Construction on Section CSX is scheduled to begin late 2021.
QuoteSection 103, scheduled for construction beginning in 2023, will widen the highway and reconstruct the four-lane section from Chelsea Parkway/Bethel Avenue through the Route 452/Market Street Interchange.

Section 102, scheduled for construction in 2024, will widen and improve U.S. 322 between Garnet Mine Road and Chelsea Parkway/Bethel Avenue in Bethel Township, including its intersections and the Foulk Road Interchange.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on August 17, 2022, 10:06:00 AM
https://goo.gl/maps/fz9vmSfPV52fkLQr6

I see the latest pass of the Google Car shows the shield replacements in progress at US 1.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on August 17, 2022, 03:28:22 PM
(For PA 405)  PennDOT - District 3 News: Construction Continues in Muncy Borough, Lycoming County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4307)

(For PA 154)  PennDOT - District 3 News: Embankment Repair Project Set to Begin in September on Route 154 in Sullivan County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4308)

(For US 22)  PennDOT - District 9 News: Traffic Switch for the Route 22 Interchanges Project in Cambria County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-9/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1111)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on August 18, 2022, 11:33:05 AM
(For I-81 at US 22/US 322 WB)  PennDOT - District 8 News: I-81 North Ramp to Route 22 West in Dauphin County to be Closed Friday Night (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1792)

(For I-95)  PennDOT - District 6 News: I-95 Lane Closures at Night Next Week for Roadway Construction in Delaware County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7755)

Quote from: 74/171FAN on August 16, 2022, 08:09:18 AM
(For US 322)  PennDOT - District 2 News: Milling/Paving to Start This Week on Route 322 Project near Philipsburg (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2373)

(For US 322)  PennDOT - District 2 News: Overnight Work on Route 322 Project Near Philipsburg Rescheduled (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2378)

Quote from: akotchi on August 16, 2022, 10:34:57 AM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on August 15, 2022, 12:13:41 PM
(For US 322 BUS (State College)) PennDOT - District 2 News: Work on Atherton Street Project to Resume August 22 (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2370)

PennDOT - District 2 News: Public Reminded of Coming Closures and Detours on Atherton Street Project (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2379)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on August 19, 2022, 11:49:15 AM
(For PA 64 at PA 550) PennDOT - District 2 News: Work on Route 64/Route 550 Intersection Project to Wrap Monday (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2383)

PennDOT - District 6 News: Secretary Highlights Bipartisan Infrastructure Law Funding for Philadelphia Region (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7756)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on August 20, 2022, 12:35:55 AM
In response to this post:  https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=15363.msg2764074#msg2764074

I also do not remember seeing any of the "Do 6" shields on that stretch or the I-81/I-476 concurrencies.  I have not clinched US 6 BUS (Carbondale) to see if they are on that route.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadgeek Adam on August 20, 2022, 07:16:19 AM
Do 6 goes on US 6 Business in Carbondale
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on August 22, 2022, 05:03:37 PM
PennDOT - District 3 News: Route 15 On-Ramp Delays in White Deer Township, Union County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4315)

On PA 132 (from April 2022), the sign for I-276 EB has a control city of New York City (https://www.facebook.com/photo/?fbid=10217477892939733&set=a.10216218268569911).
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: famartin on August 22, 2022, 09:24:29 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on August 22, 2022, 05:03:37 PM
PennDOT - District 3 News: Route 15 On-Ramp Delays in White Deer Township, Union County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4315)

On PA 132 (from April 2022), the sign for I-276 EB has a control city of New York City (https://www.facebook.com/photo/?fbid=10217477892939733&set=a.10216218268569911).

Makes sense. While I get it, I've never been fond of "New Jersey" as a control city... either pick a real city or just use NYC.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on August 22, 2022, 10:19:34 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on August 22, 2022, 05:03:37 PM
PennDOT - District 3 News: Route 15 On-Ramp Delays in White Deer Township, Union County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4315)

On PA 132 (from April 2022), the sign for I-276 EB has a control city of New York City (https://www.facebook.com/photo/?fbid=10217477892939733&set=a.10216218268569911).

Interesting that they include the word City. Since the I-95/Turnpike connection, PennDOT and the PTC have consistently signed it as just "New York" on I-95 and the Turnpike.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: famartin on August 22, 2022, 10:50:38 PM
Quote from: Roadsguy on August 22, 2022, 10:19:34 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on August 22, 2022, 05:03:37 PM
PennDOT - District 3 News: Route 15 On-Ramp Delays in White Deer Township, Union County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4315)

On PA 132 (from April 2022), the sign for I-276 EB has a control city of New York City (https://www.facebook.com/photo/?fbid=10217477892939733&set=a.10216218268569911).

Interesting that they include the word City. Since the I-95/Turnpike connection, PennDOT and the PTC have consistently signed it as just "New York" on I-95 and the Turnpike.

I can see several good reasons for it:
1) The old control was likely New Jersey, so this distinguishes they mean a city, not another state.
2) NYC probably isn't a sanctioned control for 276 by AASHTO, so there's that need to be more specific.
3) If you want to go to upstate New York, you very possibly want to take 276 west to 476 north.

PennDOT is using NYC on 476 northbound approaching 276...
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ekt8750 on August 22, 2022, 11:49:46 PM
Quote from: famartin on August 22, 2022, 10:50:38 PM
Quote from: Roadsguy on August 22, 2022, 10:19:34 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on August 22, 2022, 05:03:37 PM
PennDOT - District 3 News: Route 15 On-Ramp Delays in White Deer Township, Union County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4315)

On PA 132 (from April 2022), the sign for I-276 EB has a control city of New York City (https://www.facebook.com/photo/?fbid=10217477892939733&set=a.10216218268569911).

Interesting that they include the word City. Since the I-95/Turnpike connection, PennDOT and the PTC have consistently signed it as just "New York" on I-95 and the Turnpike.

I can see several good reasons for it:
1) The old control was likely New Jersey, so this distinguishes they mean a city, not another state.
2) NYC probably isn't a sanctioned control for 276 by AASHTO, so there's that need to be more specific.
3) If you want to go to upstate New York, you very possibly want to take 276 west to 476 north.

PennDOT is using NYC on 476 northbound approaching 276...

That signage you're referring to has 276 to 95 shields on them though. As you alluded to above, I don't think you can sign 276 for NYC without referencing 95.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: famartin on August 23, 2022, 12:30:38 AM
Quote from: ekt8750 on August 22, 2022, 11:49:46 PM
Quote from: famartin on August 22, 2022, 10:50:38 PM
Quote from: Roadsguy on August 22, 2022, 10:19:34 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on August 22, 2022, 05:03:37 PM
PennDOT - District 3 News: Route 15 On-Ramp Delays in White Deer Township, Union County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4315)

On PA 132 (from April 2022), the sign for I-276 EB has a control city of New York City (https://www.facebook.com/photo/?fbid=10217477892939733&set=a.10216218268569911).

Interesting that they include the word City. Since the I-95/Turnpike connection, PennDOT and the PTC have consistently signed it as just "New York" on I-95 and the Turnpike.

I can see several good reasons for it:
1) The old control was likely New Jersey, so this distinguishes they mean a city, not another state.
2) NYC probably isn't a sanctioned control for 276 by AASHTO, so there's that need to be more specific.
3) If you want to go to upstate New York, you very possibly want to take 276 west to 476 north.

PennDOT is using NYC on 476 northbound approaching 276...

That signage you're referring to has 276 to 95 shields on them though.

Not this one
https://www.google.com/maps/@40.1043877,-75.2897143,3a,75y,19.47h,86t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1servOHJiz5fjGLDPhj0-4wg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
(but yeah, the next one does, and the previous one mentions NJ Turnpike without I-95 shields)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on August 23, 2022, 09:06:31 AM
(For PA 601)  The CE Expert System (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec8525860a0046d077?OpenDocument) (as of August 16th) is showing a planned replacement of the one-lane bridge west of PA 403 (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/ByUNID/85257FC4007728EC8525860A0046D09E/$File/SR%200601-10B_Hollsopple%20Plan%20Sheet.pdf?OpenElement) that will also result in a slight realignment.

(Affects US 30)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Bridge Repair Project Planned on Malleable Road in W. Hempfield Township and Columbia Borough, Lancaster County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1799)

PennDOT - District 8 News: Sidewalk Closed on Market Street Bridge Between Lemoyne/Wormleysburg in Cumberland County and City Island in Dauphin County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1801)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: MASTERNC on August 23, 2022, 01:39:23 PM
Quote from: tylert120 on August 14, 2022, 09:36:51 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on August 10, 2022, 06:10:40 PM
Quote from: MASTERNC on August 10, 2022, 05:27:41 PM
Anyone know if there is a place where traffic signal improvement plans might be posted? My township just got a grant to update signals near me and I wanted to find out more details on what they're doing. Not sure if this type of project is posted in ECMS.

I think the ones more focused on state roads are, but probably not if it is generally township roads having signal upgrades.

If it is a township project, then the plans would be accessible from the township because they need to be put out to bid.

These are state roads but the township got the grant, so not sure if the township runs the project or if PennDOT does.

If it helps, the project is on SR 252 in Tredyffrin Township, Chester County.  Nothing in ECMS or the township's bid portal yet.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on August 23, 2022, 06:45:53 PM
Quote from: famartin on August 23, 2022, 12:30:38 AM
Quote from: ekt8750 on August 22, 2022, 11:49:46 PM
Quote from: famartin on August 22, 2022, 10:50:38 PM
Quote from: Roadsguy on August 22, 2022, 10:19:34 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on August 22, 2022, 05:03:37 PM
PennDOT - District 3 News: Route 15 On-Ramp Delays in White Deer Township, Union County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4315)

On PA 132 (from April 2022), the sign for I-276 EB has a control city of New York City (https://www.facebook.com/photo/?fbid=10217477892939733&set=a.10216218268569911).

Interesting that they include the word City. Since the I-95/Turnpike connection, PennDOT and the PTC have consistently signed it as just "New York" on I-95 and the Turnpike.

I can see several good reasons for it:
1) The old control was likely New Jersey, so this distinguishes they mean a city, not another state.
2) NYC probably isn't a sanctioned control for 276 by AASHTO, so there's that need to be more specific.
3) If you want to go to upstate New York, you very possibly want to take 276 west to 476 north.

PennDOT is using NYC on 476 northbound approaching 276...

That signage you're referring to has 276 to 95 shields on them though.

Not this one
https://www.google.com/maps/@40.1043877,-75.2897143,3a,75y,19.47h,86t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1servOHJiz5fjGLDPhj0-4wg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
(but yeah, the next one does, and the previous one mentions NJ Turnpike without I-95 shields)

It seems then that the plain "New York" was mainly used in the initial wave of sign changes as part of the 95/Turnpike connection, and more recent one-off changes as well as the AET signage changes use "New York City".
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on August 24, 2022, 09:56:03 AM
(For PA 601)  PennDOT - District 9 News: Bridge Replacement Project on Route 601 to Start in Somerset County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-9/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1116)

(For US 15)  PennDOT - District 3 News: Rolling Roadblock on Route 15 NB/SB Next Week in Gregg Township, Union County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4317)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on August 25, 2022, 09:35:14 AM
(For US 422 and PA 28)  PennDOT - District 10 News: PA 28 and U.S. 422 West Upcoming Ramp Closures (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1341)

(For I-95)  PennDOT - District 6 News: I-95 Lane Closures at Night Next Week for Roadway Construction in Delaware County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7767)

(For I-81)  PennDOT - District 4 News: ​Lane Restrictions on Interstate 81 North and Southbound in Lackawanna and Susquehanna Counties (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-4/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1052)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jmacswimmer on August 25, 2022, 11:14:47 AM
Quote from: jmacswimmer on May 03, 2022, 12:57:00 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on February 28, 2022, 02:10:16 AM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on February 27, 2022, 03:39:00 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on February 25, 2022, 12:35:43 PM
(For I-83 and PA 74)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Lane Restrictions on NB I-83 and SB Route 74 (Queen Street) at Exit 16A in York Township, York County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1625)

PennDOT - District 8 News: Update: SB Route 74 to be Closed at I-83 in York Township, York County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1626)

PennDOT - District 8 News: Update on Emergency Bridge Repairs on SB Route 74 over I-83 in York Township, York County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1630)

PennDOT - District 8 News: Emergency Repairs Complete, SB Route 74 over I-83 in York Township, York County is Open to Traffic (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1631)

Bumping this quote-string to note I grabbed a pic of the temporary support truss added to the PA 74 overpass while passing thru York on I-83 last Thursday - reminds me of the reinforcements added to the old Champlain Bridge to keep it going until the replacement opened.

{image snipped}

Bumping this string yet again - the overpass, which still has the temporary support truss while awaiting permanent repairs this fall, was struck for a 2nd time yesterday afternoon. I-83 & PA 74 currently remain closed while the (additional) damage is assessed.

https://www.ydr.com/story/news/local/2022/08/24/interstate-83-closed-after-truck-strikes-queen-street-overpass-again/65418552007/
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on August 25, 2022, 01:52:15 PM
Quote from: jmacswimmer on August 25, 2022, 11:14:47 AM
Quote from: jmacswimmer on May 03, 2022, 12:57:00 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on February 28, 2022, 02:10:16 AM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on February 27, 2022, 03:39:00 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on February 25, 2022, 12:35:43 PM
(For I-83 and PA 74)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Lane Restrictions on NB I-83 and SB Route 74 (Queen Street) at Exit 16A in York Township, York County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1625)

PennDOT - District 8 News: Update: SB Route 74 to be Closed at I-83 in York Township, York County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1626)

PennDOT - District 8 News: Update on Emergency Bridge Repairs on SB Route 74 over I-83 in York Township, York County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1630)

PennDOT - District 8 News: Emergency Repairs Complete, SB Route 74 over I-83 in York Township, York County is Open to Traffic (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1631)

Bumping this quote-string to note I grabbed a pic of the temporary support truss added to the PA 74 overpass while passing thru York on I-83 last Thursday - reminds me of the reinforcements added to the old Champlain Bridge to keep it going until the replacement opened.

{image snipped}

Bumping this string yet again - the overpass, which still has the temporary support truss while awaiting permanent repairs this fall, was struck for a 2nd time yesterday afternoon. I-83 & PA 74 currently remain closed while the (additional) damage is assessed.

https://www.ydr.com/story/news/local/2022/08/24/interstate-83-closed-after-truck-strikes-queen-street-overpass-again/65418552007/

And JD Eckman leaves the South Bridge for the emergency repair

PennDOT - District 8 News: Weekend Work on SB I-83 John Harris Memorial (South) Bridge is Postponed (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1802)

QuotePennDOT bridge contractor JD Eckman, Inc., is directing crews to perform emergency repairs on the Route 74 (Queen Street) bridge spanning I-83 in York County.

EDIT:  My coworker noticed that the 14'-2" height restriction sign was posted SB (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.9330283,-76.6892195,3a,75y,269.5h,73.23t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1svuqI_o1I-ltUfMAFKtec3Q!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) on the overpass but not NB (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.9325338,-76.68985,3a,75y,78.62h,87.11t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s5EvLE_CLsAth6_0GCFcF-Q!2e0!7i16384!8i8192).

(For PA 339)  PennDOT-District 3 News: Route 339 Project Continues Next Week in Columbia and Luzerne Counties (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4322)

(For US 322 BUS (State College))  PennDOT - District 2 News: Closures and Detours Continue on Atherton Street Project (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2388)

(For PA 462)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Closure Planned for Route 462 (Market Street) Bridge Over Mill Creek in Springettsbury and Spring Garden Townships, York County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1804)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on August 25, 2022, 07:53:32 PM
Quote from: jmacswimmer on August 25, 2022, 11:14:47 AM
Quote from: jmacswimmer on May 03, 2022, 12:57:00 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on February 28, 2022, 02:10:16 AM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on February 27, 2022, 03:39:00 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on February 25, 2022, 12:35:43 PM
(For I-83 and PA 74)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Lane Restrictions on NB I-83 and SB Route 74 (Queen Street) at Exit 16A in York Township, York County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1625)

PennDOT - District 8 News: Update: SB Route 74 to be Closed at I-83 in York Township, York County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1626)

PennDOT - District 8 News: Update on Emergency Bridge Repairs on SB Route 74 over I-83 in York Township, York County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1630)

PennDOT - District 8 News: Emergency Repairs Complete, SB Route 74 over I-83 in York Township, York County is Open to Traffic (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1631)

Bumping this quote-string to note I grabbed a pic of the temporary support truss added to the PA 74 overpass while passing thru York on I-83 last Thursday - reminds me of the reinforcements added to the old Champlain Bridge to keep it going until the replacement opened.

{image snipped}

Bumping this string yet again - the overpass, which still has the temporary support truss while awaiting permanent repairs this fall, was struck for a 2nd time yesterday afternoon. I-83 & PA 74 currently remain closed while the (additional) damage is assessed.

https://www.ydr.com/story/news/local/2022/08/24/interstate-83-closed-after-truck-strikes-queen-street-overpass-again/65418552007/

I-83 has reopened as of 2:20 PM. (https://www.wgal.com/article/stretch-of-interstate-83-in-york-county-closed-after-truck-hits-bridge/40981898)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Mr. Matté on August 25, 2022, 08:02:15 PM
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/fe/US_202_construction_site%2C_PA%2C_COVID_safety_plan_in_effect%2C_Aug_2022.jpg)

I guess the COVID safety plan is still in effect and then some- workers are spaced >>>6 feet apart (US 202 in Whitpain, tbf it was a Sunday late afternoon)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on August 26, 2022, 09:13:22 AM
PennDOT - District 6 News: PennDOT to Begin Worthington Mill Road Bridge Replacement Project in Wrightstown, Northampton Townships (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7770)

PennDOT - District 6 News: South Gulph Road to Close for Local Trail Project in Upper Merion Township (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7773)

PennDOT - District 6 News: Curly Hill Road, Taylorsville Road to Close for Construction Operations in Plumstead, Upper Makefield Townships (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7777)

(For US 11 and PA 487)  PennDOT - District 3 News: Construction Detour Continues in Bloomsburg, Columbia County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4324)

PennDOT - District 2 News: Reminder--Chester Hill Bridge Remains Closed (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2395)

(For PA 663)  PennDOT - District 6 News: PennDOT Completes Route 663 (Charlotte Street) Intersection Improvement Project, Reopens Highway in New Hanover Township (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7782)

(For PA 902)  PennDOT - District 5 News: PA 902/South Ninth Street Closures in Lehighton (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-5/pages/details.aspx?newsid=3299)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on August 29, 2022, 11:52:00 AM
(For I-81, PA 115, and PA 309)  PennDOT - District 4 News: Major Traffic Disruptions Expected Tomorrow on Interstate 81, SR 115, SR 309 in Lackawanna and Luzerne Counties (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-4/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1057)

(For PA 414) PennDOT - District 3 News: Retaining Wall Project on Route 414 in Morris Township, Tioga County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4328)

(For PA 501)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Railroad Crossing Work Planned on Route 501 (Broad Street) in Lititz Borough, Lancaster County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1806)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on August 30, 2022, 08:17:42 AM
The CE 2 Reevaluation for the PA 329 Cementon Bridge Replacement (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec85258892007c6503?OpenDocument) over the Lehigh River was posted on August 29th.  This bridge replacement puts PA 329 on a slightly new alignment and will remove the current Truck Route in the area that diverts you all the way down to US 22.

Another CE 2 Reevaluation for the replacement of the PA 183 SB (Schuylkill Ave) Bridge (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec85258884005ee444?OpenDocument) in reading over the Norfolk Southern Railroad was posted on August 29th as well.

PA 183 NB will temporarily be two-way to account for the detour on PA 183 SB.

QuoteThe recommended posted 0.6-mile car detour would utilize Greenwich Street, Front Street (SR 183 North) and Buttonwood Streets. The traffic pattern on Front Street would be temporarily changed from two lanes one direction northbound to one lane bidirectional flow. This is the shortest detour route and the preferred alternative by Reading Police and Fire Department to minimize the detour length and emergency access to the neighborhood

An updated CE 1b evaluation has also been posted for the US 422/PA 724 intersection realignment (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec8525855b004c3b98?OpenDocument) in Sinking Spring.

A CE 1a evaluation has been posted for safety improvements along the solo US 322 portion of the West Chester Bypass (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec85258883005d5010?OpenDocument).

QuoteThe proposed scope of work includes vehicle and pedestrian safety improvements along a 2.87 mile stretch of West Chester Bypass (SR 322) in East Bradford and West Goshen Townships, Chester County.  The improvements begin at the intersection of Downingtown Pike and West Chester Bypass and continue east to the intersection with the SR 202 interchange. This corridor was identified as having a high frequency of angle, fixed-object, and rear-end crashes.  The following improvements to the corridor are proposed:

-Throughout Project Corridor
◦Narrowing of travel lanes from 12'-13' to 11' in areas along project corridor to ensure a minimum shoulder width of 5'. Slightly narrower shoulders (4') are present through intersections to accommodate turn lanes.
◦Installation of bicycle-tolerable shoulders and centerline rumble strips through project corridor
◦Replacement and addition of guide rail to Manual for Assessing Safety Hardware (MASH) standards with approved end treatments, removal of turndowns, and protection of bridge wing walls through the project corridor

-North New Street Intersection◦Replacement of existing signal mast arm and signals with new mast arms and signals including overhead street lighting on the northwest and southeast corners
◦Installation of curved guide rail at northwest corner dependent on placement of mast arm
◦Installation of retroreflective backplates on signals
◦Addition of exclusive left turn lanes from SR 322 onto New Street

-Pottstown Pike Interchange◦Removal of passing lanes from road segment 0520/0-1443 to 0521/1425 through pavement markings
◦Extension of the acceleration lane of the Pottstown Pike off-ramp to EB West Chester Bypass to 780' (plus 300' lane taper) through pavement markings
◦Extension of the deceleration lanes of the WB West Chester Bypass off-ramp to NB Pottstown Pike to 410' (plus 255' taper) through pavement markings
◦Implementation of wrong way countermeasures at the Pottstown Pike on- and off-ramps
◦Extension of guide rails along bridge abutment of Pottstown Pike overpass

-Penn Drive Overpass◦Installation of guide rail on the east and west sides of the southern bridge abutment

-Phoenixville Pike Intersection◦Replacement of mast arms to include overhead street lighting on all four corners of the intersection

- SR 202 Interchange◦Implementation of wrong way countermeasures at the bottom of the off-ramp from SR 202 North to SR 322 west


PennDOT - District 9 News: Route 4010 (17th Street) High Friction Surface Treatment to be Placed (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-9/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1117)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadgeekteen on August 31, 2022, 02:53:28 AM
I just went on vacation and spend a good ammount of time in Pennsylvania. State is great, but many of the highways, especially I-78, are in very rough shape.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: MATraveler128 on August 31, 2022, 07:00:30 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on August 31, 2022, 02:53:28 AM
I just went on vacation and spend a good ammount of time in Pennsylvania. State is great, but many of the highways, especially I-78, are in very rough shape.

When I went to Virginia a couple weeks ago, we took I-78 and it was being extensively worked on due to what appeared to have been widening going on west of Allentown. The freeway really could use a good widening due to all the trucks. At one point, we were slowed down to 35 mph behind a semi in one of the work zones. Although Pennsylvania is known for bad roads.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Ted$8roadFan on August 31, 2022, 07:25:49 AM
I wonder which route is better through PA: I-78, I-80, or I-84 to I-81.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Rothman on August 31, 2022, 08:25:14 AM
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on August 31, 2022, 07:25:49 AM
I wonder which route is better through PA: I-78, I-80, or I-84 to I-81.
For what?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on August 31, 2022, 08:38:43 AM
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on August 31, 2022, 07:25:49 AM
I wonder which route is better through PA: I-78, I-80, or I-84 to I-81.

I would think that most people driving from MA to PA that want to get on I-81 would just take I-84.  I do not see much of a debate here.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Crown Victoria on August 31, 2022, 08:43:00 AM
Quote from: BlueOutback7 on August 31, 2022, 07:00:30 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on August 31, 2022, 02:53:28 AM
I just went on vacation and spend a good ammount of time in Pennsylvania. State is great, but many of the highways, especially I-78, are in very rough shape.

When I went to Virginia a couple weeks ago, we took I-78 and it was being extensively worked on due to what appeared to have been widening going on west of Allentown. The freeway really could use a good widening due to all the trucks. At one point, we were slowed down to 35 mph behind a semi in one of the work zones. Although Pennsylvania is known for bad roads.

Unfortunately, I-78 is not receiving a full six-lane widening in the section currently being reconstructed, only climbing lanes. Any other widening is simply to upgrade the road to current standards, not to provide more capacity. I agree that I-78 needs to be fully widened to six lanes (as does most of I-81), but it won't happen anytime soon.

The next I-78 segment to be reconstructed is from the Berks/Lehigh line to PA 100. Hopefully that section will be fully widened, but I'm not counting on it.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on August 31, 2022, 10:14:26 AM
^I doubt it considering that the right shoulder WB is now an exit-only lane for PA 100 NB.

I do remember hearing about a planned interchange at Adams Rd (https://www.mcall.com/news/pennsylvania/capitol-ideas/mc-nws-pa-interstate-funds-20191126-efs2kcwrhfcwplttdtkdeb4hya-story.html), but I do not remember hearing anything further about it recently.

Quote
Browne: State agrees to $374 million funding plan for I-78 work in Lehigh County, including new interchange  (Nov 26, 2019 at 8:23 pm)

He said about $394 million in federal and state money ― including about $20 million within Northampton County ― will be earmarked for I-78 projects in the two counties. The state made the decision to replace a 12-year plan that had $233 million earmarked for state and local road projects in both counties with the new, interstate project-only plan.

The numbers point to a 12-year funding increase of more than $160 million over what was previously anticipated.

If there was a downside in the news, Browne said it was that state and local road projects that previously were expected to get funds through the state's plan, would not.

"Some sacrifices had to be made,"  Browne said. "We see this as a significant win."

Tony Iannelli, president of the Greater Lehigh Valley Chamber of Commerce, applauded Browne's work.

But, he said, attention still must be paid to roads in outlying communities.

"We have had tremendous growth in this valley, which has led to increased traffic on state and local roads,"  Iannelli said.

He and Michelle Young, executive vice president for government and external affairs at the Chamber, were not aware of the new plan. Young said a prime example of a state road that needed attention was Route 22.

Becky Bradley, secretary of the Lehigh Valley Transportation Study, said she learned of the state decisions on its new 12-year plan in a confidential phone call late Tuesday.

She would not identify the caller. And she declined to comment on specifics outlined by Browne to the newspaper until she had seen the state's list herself.

She stressed that LVTS had its own, separate transportation plan. The two plans, she said, "work in tandem"  but PennDOT decisions on the state plan do not dictate decisions in the LVTS plan.

Beyond that, she said, LVTS receives federal transportation money separately from the state.

The most recent LVTS plan was completed near the end of September, Bradley said, when the federal fiscal year ended. It included, she said, "many, many underfunded needs."

The 12-year figures outlined by Browne involve an 80%-20% split of funding supplied by federal and state governments.

Earlier this year, officials revealed expectations of a statewide, massive cut in funds for local roads projects.

PennDOT's hand was forced by a welter of problems. They included the expiration of a five-year federal transportation funding plan and the reluctance of federal lawmakers to approve any larger, more sustainable source of money than the gasoline tax, which has not increased since 1993.

On Tuesday, Campbell, the PennDOT press secretary, said there was less transportation funding available across the board.

Pennsylvania, she said, has more than 1,300 miles of interstate highways. Twenty-four percent of statewide traffic is logged on the interstates.

In recent years, she said, "We had hoped for more robust investment from the federal government, and that has not happened."

The less-than-anticipated federal flow of money puts extra pressure on the state, according to Campbell. The need to keep interstates in good condition, she said, meant "we need to kind of realign how the funds we get are distributed locally."

The Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority, or SEPTA, announced last week that Richards, the PennDOT secretary, has been hired as SEPTA's next general manager. She will start in January.

A breakdown of Richards' approved 12-year spending plan, provided by Browne, showed that the vast majority of Lehigh County money ― about $336 million ― will be devoted to the stretch of I-78 between the Berks County line and the Route 100 interchange.

That work is to include rebuilding the road, a new interchange at Adams Road and reconstruction of the Route 100 interchange.

Another stretch of I-78 between Lehigh Street and the Route 309 South exit is slated for spending of about $20.8 million.

In Northampton County, the details released by Browne show that a stretch of I-78 between Easton Road and Route 33 will be the focus of about $20.5 million in spending.

The figures, Browne said, show that there is "a lot of need" in the Lehigh County section.

He called I-78 through western Lehigh County a very important corridor, and said he would defend targeting the stretch between Route 100 and Berks as "the biggest need."
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on August 31, 2022, 10:41:34 AM
(For PA 199)  PennDOT - District 3 News: Route 199 Reconstruction Project Continues in Sayre and Athens, Bradford County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4330)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: vdeane on August 31, 2022, 12:48:14 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on August 31, 2022, 08:38:43 AM
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on August 31, 2022, 07:25:49 AM
I wonder which route is better through PA: I-78, I-80, or I-84 to I-81.

I would think that most people driving from MA to PA that want to get on I-81 would just take I-84.  I do not see much of a debate here.
Depends on where on I-81.  Getting directions from Google from a point on I-90 east of I-84 to a point on I-81 south of I-78, the suggested route is actually I-84/I-684/Saw Mill River Parkway/I-287/I-78, with I-84 to I-81 being about 12 minutes longer.  This is probably because I-84 travels a decent distance close to due north after the I-684 interchange.  Using I-684 all the way to I-287 is not much different.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on August 31, 2022, 12:53:14 PM
Quote from: vdeane on August 31, 2022, 12:48:14 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on August 31, 2022, 08:38:43 AM
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on August 31, 2022, 07:25:49 AM
I wonder which route is better through PA: I-78, I-80, or I-84 to I-81.

I would think that most people driving from MA to PA that want to get on I-81 would just take I-84.  I do not see much of a debate here.
Depends on where on I-81.  Getting directions from Google from a point on I-90 east of I-84 to a point on I-81 south of I-78, the suggested route is actually I-84/I-684/Saw Mill River Parkway/I-287/I-78, with I-84 to I-81 being about 12 minutes longer.  This is probably because I-84 travels a decent distance close to due north after the I-684 interchange.  Using I-684 all the way to I-287 is not much different.

Fair point.  I would still think that most people would rather avoid the NYC area entirely, but with the newer Gov. Mario M. Cuomo Bridge being 8 lanes that probably helps the I-684/I-287/I-80 or I-78 route quite a bit.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on September 01, 2022, 07:51:00 AM
Note that I had to make a correction (bolded) to my 10:14 AM post from yesterday.

A CE 1b Reevaluation has been posted yesterday for a project adding a center-turn lane on PA 313 on a segment northwest of PA 611 (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec85258894006e37e0?OpenDocument).  I remember PA 313 being very crowded between PA 309 and US 202 when I clinched it back in April so any relief would be helpful.

QuoteThis project involves the reconstruction and widening to add a center left turn lane on SR 0313 (Swamp Road) from just west of T-413 (Broad Street) to just west of the SR 0313 Bridge over the North Branch of the Neshaminy Creek and from approximately 2700 feet northwest of the SR 0313 intersection with SR 1016 (Ferry Road) to approximately 800 feet northwest of the SR 0313 intersection with SR 1016 (Ferry Road).  At all other locations between Broad Street and approximately 800 feet northwest of the SR 0313 intersection with SR 1016 (Ferry Road), a two lane section will be maintained and the roadway will be reconstructed. 

Storm water will be collected along SR 0313 in a closed system and managed through proposed storm water management facilities along the project corridor.

Two structures are to be replaced within the project limits:  One existing structure is an earth filled spandrel arch bridge over the North Branch of Neshaminy Creek and over the existing structure is a plank bridge over an Unnamed Tributary to North Branch of Neshaminy Creek.

Traffic signal improvements and the addition of left turn lanes on all approaches will be constructed at the SR 0313/SR 1010 (Stump Road) intersection.

PennDOT District 6 News: I-95 Lane Closures at Night Next Week for Roadway Construction in Delaware County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7785)

(For US 15) PennDOT District 3 News: Work on Route 15 Railroad Crossing in Winfield, Union County to Begin Next Week (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4333)

PennDOT District 6 News: PennDOT to Begin Project to Repair 17 Bridges Across Philadelphia Region Damaged by Ida (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7787)

(For US 22/US 322 at PA 34) PennDOT District 8 News: Traffic Switch Planned for Route 22 Bridge Project at Route 34 in Perry County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1808)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: MATraveler128 on September 01, 2022, 12:49:48 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on September 01, 2022, 07:51:00 AM
Note that I had to make a correction (bolded) to my 10:14 AM post from yesterday.

A CE 1b Reevaluation has been posted yesterday for a project adding a center-turn lane on PA 313 on a segment northwest of PA 611 (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec85258894006e37e0?OpenDocument).  I remember PA 313 being very crowded between PA 309 and US 202 when I clinched it back in April so any relief would be helpful.

QuoteThis project involves the reconstruction and widening to add a center left turn lane on SR 0313 (Swamp Road) from just west of T-413 (Broad Street) to just west of the SR 0313 Bridge over the North Branch of the Neshaminy Creek and from approximately 2700 feet northwest of the SR 0313 intersection with SR 1016 (Ferry Road) to approximately 800 feet northwest of the SR 0313 intersection with SR 1016 (Ferry Road).  At all other locations between Broad Street and approximately 800 feet northwest of the SR 0313 intersection with SR 1016 (Ferry Road), a two lane section will be maintained and the roadway will be reconstructed. 

Storm water will be collected along SR 0313 in a closed system and managed through proposed storm water management facilities along the project corridor.

Two structures are to be replaced within the project limits:  One existing structure is an earth filled spandrel arch bridge over the North Branch of Neshaminy Creek and over the existing structure is a plank bridge over an Unnamed Tributary to North Branch of Neshaminy Creek.

Traffic signal improvements and the addition of left turn lanes on all approaches will be constructed at the SR 0313/SR 1010 (Stump Road) intersection.

I usually use PA 313 when traveling between the northern suburbs of Philly to the Lehigh Valley when I travel down that way. That section in Doylestown really does need safety improvements especially at Ferry Rd. I usually use the 276/476 combo on the Turnpike if traffic is bad.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on September 02, 2022, 09:41:56 AM
(For US 220)  PennDOT - District 3 News: Route 220 Safety Improvement Project Continues (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4337)

(For PA 532)  PennDOT - District 6 News: Moving Road Closure on Route 532 (Washington Crossing Road) for Base Repair in Newtown, Upper Makefield, Lower Makefield Townships (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7793)

(For US 322 BUS (State College))  PennDOT - District 2 News: As Summer Winds Down, Atherton Street Project Continues (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2402)

(For PA 462)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Schedule Update: Closure Planned for Route 462 (Market Street) Bridge Over Mill Creek in Springettsbury and Spring Garden Townships, York County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1812)

(For PA 32)  PennDOT - District 6 News: Advanced Tree Care to Close Route 32 (River Road) for Tree Removal in Tinicum Township (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7796)

(For PA 26 and PA 45)  PennDOT - District 2 News: Traffic Pattern at Route 26/45 Intersection to Change Mid-Week (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2404)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Crown Victoria on September 03, 2022, 12:54:09 PM
Apparently some progress has been made detailing potential improvements to the I-81 corridor from Maryland to I-78. I don't recall seeing any of this being publicized in the media or discussed in this forum, but here it is.

https://www.i81southcentralpa.com/

Highlights include numerous interchange improvements, auxiliary lanes between interchanges (particularly around Carlisle), possible use of shoulders for travel lanes, and southbound only widening between I-78 and I-83.

Also...the plan includes studying a new direct interchange between I-81 and the PA Turnpike east of Carlisle AND a new interchange on the Turnpike west of Carlisle.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on September 03, 2022, 01:16:37 PM
I am not sure how I am about removing the PA 74 Exit (Exit 48), but if it is really doable to restripe the George Wade Bridge, I think it should be done ASAP.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Crown Victoria on September 03, 2022, 03:15:06 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on September 03, 2022, 01:16:37 PM
I am not sure how I am about removing the PA 74 Exit (Exit 48), but if it is really doable to restripe the George Wade Bridge, I think it should be done ASAP.

Agree on the George Wade Bridge restriping. Actually a good number of the potential projects should be relatively easy to do. There's not too many major undertakings planned, besides the potential widening mentioned above and the possible Turnpike interchange. The overall plan reminds me of Virginia's approach to improving I-81 (longer accel/decel lanes, auxiliary lanes, better signage and communication of road conditions) but with less widening (because PA).

As for that PA 74 interchange...I guess something had to go. There's a lot of interchanges in that area. I'm not familiar with the local traffic patterns in Carlisle other than US 11 between I-81 and the Turnpike and of course traveling past Carlisle on I-81 so I can't really say if losing that interchange is good or bad.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on September 03, 2022, 03:54:07 PM
One other thing worth mentioning is that I-81 SB may be reconfigured to make the I-83 exit/entrance be on the right instead of the left. 

It looks like the Exit 69 exit would also be served by the I-83 exit if this reconfiguration happens.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: sbeaver44 on September 03, 2022, 09:39:31 PM
Losing exit 48 kind of sucks for anyone in like, Dillsburg or Boiling Springs area connecting to South 81, but I suppose making the trade with a full PA 641 exit and a new direct turnpike interchange is worth it.

I have noticed a new road being built between PA 641 and PA 74 about 3/4 mile maybe out from I-81 called "Connector Road"

I wonder if this is to alleviate people who use the Target shopping center road to counteract the partial interchanges at Exits 48 and 49

Also, the NB merge from PA 34 (Exit 47) sucks...no merge area, and that light is long.  I always thought between 47-48 should be a third, exit only lane.

Turnpike absolutely needs a West Carlisle exit near Plainfield for all the warehouses.  It should remove some traffic off I-81 between Exits 44-52.  Imagine being a truck coming from Pittsburgh to one of the warehouses by PA 465/PA 641.  Having to either do all that backtracking around Carlisle now...or taking Exit 201/PA 997 down to PA 696/PA 641 seems like a pain.

I feel like a West Carlisle exit could also, if done right, benefit Newville residents who use the Turnpike.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Alps on September 03, 2022, 10:59:58 PM
Quote from: Crown Victoria on September 03, 2022, 12:54:09 PM
Apparently some progress has been made detailing potential improvements to the I-81 corridor from Maryland to I-78. I don't recall seeing any of this being publicized in the media or discussed in this forum, but here it is.

https://www.i81southcentralpa.com/

Highlights include numerous interchange improvements, auxiliary lanes between interchanges (particularly around Carlisle), possible use of shoulders for travel lanes, and southbound only widening between I-78 and I-83.

Also...the plan includes studying a new direct interchange between I-81 and the PA Turnpike east of Carlisle AND a new interchange on the Turnpike west of Carlisle.
I'll take the Carlisle interchange and widening BOTH sides of 81 please
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Crown Victoria on September 04, 2022, 08:20:02 AM
Quote from: Alps on September 03, 2022, 10:59:58 PM
Quote from: Crown Victoria on September 03, 2022, 12:54:09 PM
Apparently some progress has been made detailing potential improvements to the I-81 corridor from Maryland to I-78. I don't recall seeing any of this being publicized in the media or discussed in this forum, but here it is.

https://www.i81southcentralpa.com/

Highlights include numerous interchange improvements, auxiliary lanes between interchanges (particularly around Carlisle), possible use of shoulders for travel lanes, and southbound only widening between I-78 and I-83.

Also...the plan includes studying a new direct interchange between I-81 and the PA Turnpike east of Carlisle AND a new interchange on the Turnpike west of Carlisle.
I'll take the Carlisle interchange and widening BOTH sides of 81 please

Yes, it would be nice if both sides of I-81 were widened. But I guess we'll take what we can get at this point.

Looking at that potential I-81/Turnpike interchange, it's rather close to the existing Exit 52 so I'm not sure the configuration shown would work, at least not without C/D lanes. There's also the matter of the warehouse located immediately adjacent to that location. It will be interesting to see if the interchange actually gets built (years from now of course), and how it looks when it's finished, as no doubt the design will change between now and then (it's just some lines on a map now...).
Title: Re: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on September 04, 2022, 12:49:15 PM
Quote from: sbeaver44 on September 03, 2022, 09:39:31 PM
Turnpike absolutely needs a West Carlisle exit near Plainfield for all the warehouses.  It should remove some traffic off I-81 between Exits 44-52.  Imagine being a truck coming from Pittsburgh to one of the warehouses by PA 465/PA 641.  Having to either do all that backtracking around Carlisle now...or taking Exit 201/PA 997 down to PA 696/PA 641 seems like a pain.

Between this and a direct Turnpike/81 connection, it's likely only one will be built any time soon. I think the direct connection is the much bigger need, though I'd love to see a western Carlisle exit connecting to PA 465.

Quote from: Crown Victoria on September 04, 2022, 08:20:02 AM
Yes, it would be nice if both sides of I-81 were widened. But I guess we'll take what we can get at this point.

While only southbound has a full widening lined up in the near future, northbound is still being considered for a peak-use left shoulder lane. I'd also prefer a true widening of both directions, but I'll take it.

I'll also note that I drive northbound I-81 into Lebanon County fairly regularly on my commute back from work in the Harrisburg area. I often see southbound in stop-and-go conditions, while northbound remains freely flowing (albeit dense and truck-heavy). This is in the evening outbound rush, mind you, when you'd expect it to be the other way around.

What's unclear is whether a fourth lane will be added between I-83 and Mountain Road, whether just southbound or in both directions. This is where a third lane was added a few years ago in both directions.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on September 06, 2022, 02:16:56 PM
(For US 15)  PennDOT - District 3 News: UPDATE: Work on Route 15 Railroad Crossing in Winfield, Union County to Begin Next Week (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4340)

(For I-81 and PA 29)  PennDOT - District 4 News: Interstate 81 Ramp Detours and State Route 29 (South Cross Valley Expressway) Lane Closures Scheduled for Seal Coat Project in Luzerne County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-4/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1069)

PennDOT - District 10 News: Weekend Road Closure on Freedom Road in Butler County (Cranberry Township) (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1354)

(For US 422 and PA 28)  PennDOT - District 10 News: PA 28 and U.S. 422 Upcoming Ramp Closures (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1355)

Also a CE2 Evaluation has been posted for the rehab to the PA 378 Hill to Hill Bridge (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec85258737005add2b?OpenDocument) and the PA 72 Bridge Replacement over Swatara Creek (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec852583a10055b359?OpenDocument) (planned to be a yearlong detour of PA 72 in this area).

A CE1a Scoping has been posted for safety improvements to PA 3 on the east side of West Chester (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec852587e50051c4cb?OpenDocument).

(For US 1)  PennDOT - District 6 News: Rockhill Drive Ramp to U.S. 1 South to Close Next Tuesday for Two Years for Bridge Construction in Bensalem Township (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7799)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on September 06, 2022, 05:25:29 PM
Wow 74/171 didn't know it's a mortal sin to talk about Philly here.  Excuse me, like I'm the first to post like that and Pennsylvania is where Philly is at. I


It's not like I asked a question about Southern California here. Yes I am aware now of a Philly thread, but you made it sound like it was a major deal.  It's not that urgent to mention removal to another thread. Yeah, I admit it could have been posted there, but it's not that like hey it's go to be removed pronto.  Just a little friendly reminder will suffice such.  All you have to do is say " Just FYI we do have a Philly Thread and you could mention it there next time."
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Alps on September 06, 2022, 07:14:13 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on September 06, 2022, 05:25:29 PM
Wow 74/171 didn't know it's a mortal sin to talk about Philly here.  Excuse me, like I'm the first to post like that and Pennsylvania is where Philly is at. I


It's not like I asked a question about Southern California here. Yes I am aware now of a Philly thread, but you made it sound like it was a major deal.  It's not that urgent to mention removal to another thread. Yeah, I admit it could have been posted there, but it's not that like hey it's go to be removed pronto.  Just a little friendly reminder will suffice such.  All you have to do is say " Just FYI we do have a Philly Thread and you could mention it there next time."
It was moved because it was convenient to move. Just learn from it and move on.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: VTGoose on September 07, 2022, 11:54:26 AM
Quote from: Crown Victoria on September 03, 2022, 12:54:09 PM
Apparently some progress has been made detailing potential improvements to the I-81 corridor from Maryland to I-78. I don't recall seeing any of this being publicized in the media or discussed in this forum, but here it is.

This has only been years in the making, probably going back to the late '90s (it would take some digging to find out). At any rate, I-81 was a known problem from Tennessee to New York and the various states got together to discuss solutions. West Virginia (with only a short section) was the most proactive, widening sections of the interstate and making other improvements. Virginia entertained some public/private solutions (such as separate truck lanes, etc.) but didn't act until just recently. It appears that Pennsylvania is also finally doing something these many years later. Had the various proposals been acted on way back then, travel on I-81 would probably be much better today. Hindsight is wonderful.

Bruce in Blacksburg
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on September 07, 2022, 02:19:10 PM
A CE2 Reevaluation has been posted for improvements to PA 715 that will realign it so that PA 611 and PA 715 intersect at one intersection (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec8525881a004fa7ea?OpenDocument) eliminating the current concurrency.

(For I-80)  PennDOT - District 10 News: I80 Upcoming Ramp Closures in Jefferson County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1356)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: BrianP on September 07, 2022, 02:53:58 PM
Quote from: VTGoose on September 07, 2022, 11:54:26 AM
Quote from: Crown Victoria on September 03, 2022, 12:54:09 PM
Apparently some progress has been made detailing potential improvements to the I-81 corridor from Maryland to I-78. I don't recall seeing any of this being publicized in the media or discussed in this forum, but here it is.

This has only been years in the making, probably going back to the late '90s (it would take some digging to find out). At any rate, I-81 was a known problem from Tennessee to New York and the various states got together to discuss solutions. West Virginia (with only a short section) was the most proactive, widening sections of the interstate and making other improvements. Virginia entertained some public/private solutions (such as separate truck lanes, etc.) but didn't act until just recently. It appears that Pennsylvania is also finally doing something these many years later. Had the various proposals been acted on way back then, travel on I-81 would probably be much better today. Hindsight is wonderful.

Bruce in Blacksburg
Maryland did phase 1 of I-81 widening a couple of years back which was to widen the Potomac River crossing and exit 1.  Next the state is going to try and get some RURAL & INFRA grants to go towards phase 2 which covers exits 2, 4 and 5. The last two phases are exit 6 and then the rest to the PA line.  But only phase 2 is in the current draft 5 year plan. And it was added thanks to the infrastructure bill.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: seicer on September 07, 2022, 03:34:35 PM
As someone posted elsewhere, those I-81 improvements in southern Pennsylvania don't really address any widening. It's mostly short term improvements and the site mentions nothing of long term work.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Crown Victoria on September 07, 2022, 08:58:13 PM
Quote from: VTGoose on September 07, 2022, 11:54:26 AM
Quote from: Crown Victoria on September 03, 2022, 12:54:09 PM
Apparently some progress has been made detailing potential improvements to the I-81 corridor from Maryland to I-78. I don't recall seeing any of this being publicized in the media or discussed in this forum, but here it is.

This has only been years in the making, probably going back to the late '90s (it would take some digging to find out). At any rate, I-81 was a known problem from Tennessee to New York and the various states got together to discuss solutions. West Virginia (with only a short section) was the most proactive, widening sections of the interstate and making other improvements. Virginia entertained some public/private solutions (such as separate truck lanes, etc.) but didn't act until just recently. It appears that Pennsylvania is also finally doing something these many years later. Had the various proposals been acted on way back then, travel on I-81 would probably be much better today. Hindsight is wonderful.

Bruce in Blacksburg

You do realize that I was referring to the current list of improvements being pursued by PennDOT as listed on the site linked to directly below my statement that you quoted, right? There's been very little publicity about any of it, probably because there's not much widening involved.

I am most certainly aware of efforts over decades to improve I-81. It would be great to see I-81 at six lanes all the way from I-77 to I-84, but I also realize that won't happen anytime soon.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on September 07, 2022, 09:13:16 PM
Quote from: Crown Victoria on September 07, 2022, 08:58:13 PM
It would be great to see I-81 at six lanes all the way from I-77 to I-84

Honestly, I think I-78 should be six-laned over to Allentown before 81 is widened north from 78. From I-80 north to Scranton, though, could really use it.

Fortunately, there is also a project (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/ProjectAndPrograms/p3forpa/Pages/Partnership81.aspx) to widen I-81 in Luzerne County through the Wilkes-Barre area. This one is actually supposed to go to construction in the next few years, and will probably be the first "proper" widening (i.e. through multiple interchanges, not just a glorified auxiliary lane) of 81 in the state.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Crown Victoria on September 07, 2022, 09:18:22 PM
Quote from: Roadsguy on September 07, 2022, 09:13:16 PM
Quote from: Crown Victoria on September 07, 2022, 08:58:13 PM
It would be great to see I-81 at six lanes all the way from I-77 to I-84

Honestly, I think I-78 should be six-laned over to Allentown before 81 is widened north from 78. From I-80 north to Scranton, though, could really use it.

Fortunately, there is also a project (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/ProjectAndPrograms/p3forpa/Pages/Partnership81.aspx) to widen I-81 in Luzerne County through the Wilkes-Barre area. This one is actually supposed to go to construction in the next few years, and will probably be the first "proper" widening (i.e. through multiple interchanges, not just a glorified auxiliary lane) of 81 in the state.

Of course. The section of I-81 between I-78 and I-80 could wait until I-78 itself is widened. But I figure, I-81 in Schuylkill County could use truck lanes anyway, so we may as well include that section and take the six-lane all the way to I-84 (or even to I-476 at Clarks Summit).

Maybe PennDOT should have pursued tolling I-81 instead of I-80 (and also dropped the mass transit funding idea). And maybe VDOT should have chosen tolls on I-81. But that's a whole other discussion...
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on September 08, 2022, 04:08:16 PM
(For I-95)  PennDOT - District 6 News: I-95 Lane Closures at Night Next Week for Roadway Construction in Delaware County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7804)

(For PA 443)   PennDOT - District 5 News: New Traffic Patterns for PA 443 Reconstruction Project in Lehighton (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-5/pages/details.aspx?newsid=3313)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ARMOURERERIC on September 08, 2022, 05:22:40 PM
FWIW, the PA Turnpike Scranton Beltway plan is rapidly moving up their capital improvement plans
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on September 09, 2022, 08:52:49 AM
(For PA 64)  PennDOT - District 2 News: Traffic Delays Expected for Beam Setting on Route 64 Bridge in Lamar (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2406)

(For US 422 and PA 28)  PennDOT - District 10 News: Rescheduled - PA 28 and U.S. 422 Upcoming Ramp Closures (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1362)

(For US 1)  PennDOT - District 6 News: U.S. 1 Reduced to One Lane Each Direction at Night Next Week for Traffic Shift Preparation in Bensalem Township (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7807)

PennDOT - District 2 News: Save the Date for Next Round of Public Meetings on State College Area Connector Study (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2407)

(For US 220)  PennDOT - District 3 News: Route 220 Safety Improvement Project Continues (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4344)

(For PA 282)  PennDOT - District 6 News: Route 282 (Creek Road) to Close Tomorrow for Pipe Replacement in Wallace Township (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7808)

(For PA 26 and PA 45)  PennDOT - District 2 News: Lane Closure Coming on Route 26/45 Intersection Project (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2409)

(For PA 56)  PennDOT - District 9 News: Weekend Detour to be Placed for the PA 56 Culvert over a Tributary to Barefoot Run in Bedford County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-9/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1121)

(For US 422 BUS (Indiana) and PA 286)  PennDOT - District 10 News: Traffic Pattern Changes and Birchwood Drive Intersection Closed on Indian Springs Road in Indiana County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1364)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on September 12, 2022, 12:17:12 PM
PennDOT - District 10 News: Weekend Road Closure on Freedom Road in Butler County (Cranberry Township) Postponed One Week (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1366)

(For PA 75)  PennDOT - District 2 News: PennDOT Announces Start Date for Port Royal Bridge Project (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2412)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on September 13, 2022, 07:54:06 AM
Looking through the CE Expert System this morning, I saw some interesting traffic control for planned bridge replacements on PA 903 (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec8525851300613d8a?OpenDocument) and PA 97 (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec8525869b00520b65?OpenDocument).

PA 903:  (seems to be a one way temporary bridge)
QuoteA temporary run around for northbound traffic on S.R. 903 will be in place during construction. The run around will carry traffic through a temporary bridge over Mud Run, east of S.R. 903.

PA 97:  (detour goes into MD) (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/ByUNID/85257FC4007728EC8525869B00520B75/$File/SR%200097-010%20Proposed%20Detour.pdf?OpenElement)

(For PA 611) PennDOT - District 6 News: PECO to Close Southbound Route 611 (Old York Road) at Night for Utility Improvement in Abington Township (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7814)

PennDOT - District 1 News: Pymatuning State Park Trail Extension Project in Crawford County Marks Milestone with Reassembly of the Messerall Truss Bridge (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1937)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on September 14, 2022, 01:00:01 PM
PennDOT - District 1 News: PennDOT Announces a Public Meeting for State Street Bridge Preservation Project in Oil City, Venango County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1938)

(For US 22)  PennDOT - District 9 News: West Ebensburg Interchange Detour for the Route 22 Interchanges Project in Cambria County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-9/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1123)

Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on September 15, 2022, 07:51:36 AM
The CE Expert System is showing an updated BRPA Evaluation for the replacement of the PA 74 Bridge over Yellow Breeches Creek between York and Carlisle. (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec852584ce00442432?OpenDocument)

PennDOT - District 6 News: I-95 Lane Closures at Night Next Week for Roadway Construction in Delaware County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7818)

(For PA 403)  PennDOT - District 9 News: Public Meeting and Plans Display for the Route 403 - U.S. 219 to PA 985 Safety Improvements Project (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-9/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1124)

PennDOT - District 2 News: Recommended Alternatives for the State College Area Connector Study Available for Review (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2415)

Looking through the recommended alternatives, the PA 144 alternatives have been eliminated.  Out of the US 322 alternatives, US 322-1OEX, US 322-1S, and US 322-5 advance.

(For I-80) PennDOT - District 10 News: I80 Upcoming Ramp Closures in Jefferson County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1368)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Crown Victoria on September 15, 2022, 09:46:04 PM
Six of the nine bridges formerly considered for tolling have resumed planning, including those on I-78, I-80, and I-81:

https://www.post-gazette.com/news/transportation/2022/09/15/penndot-bridge-replacements-tolling-interstate-79-bridgeville-australian-developer/stories/202209150145
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on September 16, 2022, 03:41:34 PM
(For US 22, US 322, and I-81)  PennDOT - District 8 News: EB Route 22 Ramp to NB I-81 in Dauphin County to Reopen Sunday (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1825)

(For PA 26 and PA 45) PennDOT - District 2 News: Two Way Traffic Coming to Route 26 Project Midweek (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2418)

(For I-81 and PA 29)  PennDOT - District 4 News: Interstate 81 Ramp Detours and State Route 29 (South Cross Valley Expressway) Lane Closures Scheduled for Seal Coat Project in Luzerne County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-4/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1075)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on September 19, 2022, 09:23:49 AM
(For I-80)  PennDOT - District 2 News: Traffic Change for Bridge Work on Interstate 80 in Clearfield County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2421)

(For US 11 and PA 487)  PennDOT - District 3 News: Construction Detour Continues in Bloomsburg, Columbia County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4359)

PennDOT - District 6 News: PennDOT Completes Little Washington Road Bridge Replacement Project, Reopens Highway in East Brandywine Township (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7833)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on September 22, 2022, 10:12:13 AM
PennDOT - District 10 News: PennDOT Resumes Environmental Reviews for I-80 Canoe Creek Bridges Project (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1377)

PennDOT - District 10 News: PennDOT Resumes Environmental Reviews for I-80 North Fork Bridges Project (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1378)

(For I-80)  PennDOT - District 10 News: I80 Upcoming Ramp Closures in Jefferson County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1379)

PennDOT - District 6 News: I-95 Lane Closures at Night Next Week for Roadway Construction in Delaware County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7838)

PennDOT - District 10 News: Weekend Road Closure on Freedom Road in Butler County (Cranberry Township) (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1380)

(For PA 32)  PennDOT - District 6 News: Route 32 (River Road) Weekday Closures for Pipe Replacement in Bucks County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7840)

(For US 220)  PennDOT - District 2 News: Traffic Pattern to Change at Route 220 Salona Bridge Work Zone (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2426)

(For US 15)  PennDOT - District 3 News: Sign Upgrade Project to Begin Next Week on Route 15 in Tioga County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4363)

PennDOT - District 6 News: MacDade Boulevard Lane Closure for Safety Improvement Project in Ridley Township (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7844)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on September 23, 2022, 08:37:53 AM
(For I-79)  PennDOT - District 10 News: Upcoming Lane Restrictions on Interstate 79 Southbound over North Boundary Road (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1382)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: MASTERNC on September 25, 2022, 02:10:29 PM
Interesting use of four section left turn signals outside Philly in Upper Darby. Newer installations along Landsdowne Ave and US 1 have the setup for flashing yellow arrows but they aren't using the flashing signal. The sequence of the lenses is the same but there is no flashing phase and they use a Left Turn Signal sign for protected turns instead of a FYA sign.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on September 26, 2022, 09:01:42 AM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on September 02, 2022, 09:41:56 AM
(For PA 462)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Schedule Update: Closure Planned for Route 462 (Market Street) Bridge Over Mill Creek in Springettsbury and Spring Garden Townships, York County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1812)

(For PA 462)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Reminder: Closure Planned for Route 462 (Market Street) Bridge Over Mill Creek in Springettsbury and Spring Garden Townships, York County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1833)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on September 28, 2022, 03:36:46 PM
(For PA 239)  PennDOT - District 4 News: PennDOT Announces In-Person and Online Plans Display for the SR 239, Section 351, over Pine Creek Bridge Replacement in Huntington Township, Luzerne County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-4/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1079)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on September 29, 2022, 02:47:07 PM
(For I-80)  PennDOT - District 5 News: PennDOT Resumes Environmental Reviews for I-80 Over Lehigh River Bridge Project (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-5/pages/details.aspx?newsid=3328)

(For I-78)  PennDOT - District 5 News: PennDOT Resumes Environmental Reviews for I-78 Lenhartsville Bridge Replacement Project (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-5/pages/details.aspx?newsid=3329)

(For I-80)  PennDOT - District 4 News: PennDOT Resumes Environmental Reviews for I-80 Nescopeck Creek Bridges Project (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-4/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1080)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on September 30, 2022, 11:53:05 AM
(For PA 32)  PennDOT - District 6 News: Route 32 (River Road), Point Pleasant Pike Weekday Closures for Maintenance Work in Bucks County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7853)

(For PA 26 and PA 45)  PennDOT - District 2 News: Traffic Shift for Route 26/45 Intersection Project Announced (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2439)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on October 03, 2022, 02:00:43 PM
PennDOT - District 10 News: Weekend Road Closure on Freedom Road in Butler County (Cranberry Township) Postponed Due to Weather (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1390)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on October 04, 2022, 12:57:04 PM
PennDOT - District 4 News: PennDOT Resumes Environmental Reviews for I-81 Susquehanna Bridges Project (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-4/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1085)

(For US 11, PA 307, and the President Biden Expressway) PennDOT Announces Online Plans Displays for the SR 3023 (Cedar Ave) Section D50, over Roaring Brook Bridge Rehabilitation, SR 8025 Section 250, over Roaring Brook Bridge Rehabilitation, and SR 8025 Section PRS, over Ramp D in the City of Scranton, Lackawanna County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-4/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1086)

(For US 119)  PennDOT - District 10 News: Traffic Alert - US 119 Ramp Closure for Repairs (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1392)

PennDOT - District 8 News: Repairs Planned on SB I-83 John Harris Memorial (South) Bridge (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1838)

CE Expert System Links:

September 30, 2022:
US 6/US 209 Bridge over Delaware River (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec8525838300515c79?OpenDocument)

QuoteBridge rehabilitation on State Route 6 (Pike Street) over the Delaware River in Matamoras Borough, Pike County. The existing structure is a two-span steel thru truss bridge built in 1939. Existing bridge deck will be replaced with a reinforced concrete deck. Other work activities consist of blast clean and painting of truss members, structural steel repairs, steel member repair, concrete substructure repairs, open grid deck replacement and approach milling and paving. Full depth roadway pavement reconstruction will be limited to the immediate bridge approaches only, where grade adjustments will be needed for the new bridge deck. New guide rail, signing, and pavement markings will also be provided throughout the project limits. The majority of the bridge work can be accomplished from the approaches within existing legal right-of-way. The need for new ROW acquisition is being evaluated. Temporary construction easements will be provided, as necessary, for construction access or to accommodate erosion and sedimentation control measures.

I-83 SB at PA 238 (Exit 24) Offramp (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec852588070071638a?OpenDocument)

QuoteThe project includes widening of the Exit 24 South Bound Ramp of I-83 to create a separate right turn lane for traffic turning onto westbound Church Road (S.R. 0238) to reduce congestion. The project is located in Manchester Township, York County. The project will also include traffic signal improvements to both the signal at the ramp intersection with Church Road and at the Church Road/Board Road/Exit 24 northbound ramp intersection. A retaining wall is proposed west of the ramp to limit the cut slope. The ramp will be closed during construction and traffic will be detoured.

October 3, 2022:

PA 403 between US 219 and PA 985 (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec852588c400444bb8?OpenDocument)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on October 06, 2022, 09:27:55 AM
(For I-95)  PennDOT - District 6 News: I-95 Lane Closures at Night Next Week for Roadway Construction in Delaware County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7863)

(For US 22 and US 322)  PennDOT - District 8 News: PennDOT Announces Open House/Online Plans Display for the Route 22/322 Clark's Ferry Improvement Project (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1839)  (The public meeting will be viewable on October 20th. (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1841)) 

(For US 62)  PennDOT - District 1 News: PennDOT Announces Virtual Plans Display for Route 62 Bridge Project in Pleasant Township, Warren County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1947) 

PennDOT - District 2 News: Next Round of Public Meetings Set for State College Area Connector Study (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2446)

(For PA 162)  PennDOT - District 6 News: PennDOT to Begin Project to Replace Route 162 (Embreeville Road) Bridge Over West Branch of Brandywine Creek in Newlin Township (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7872)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on October 07, 2022, 09:02:01 AM
(For I-83 and US 322)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Route 322 Bridge Inspection Planned for Tomorrow at Eisenhower Interchange in Dauphin County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1842)  (Correction (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1843))
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on October 07, 2022, 04:40:01 PM
Speaking of the above link, I noticed the Paxton Street detour for I-83 northbound brought me onto GSV.
https://goo.gl/maps/dmkwJgqfvJr8V7kb6
I can't help notice that Paxton is four lanes and has a raised curb median that was typical of four lane highways in PA decades ago.  I assume this part of Paxton was once US 322 before the current Eisenhower interchange got built.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on October 07, 2022, 10:18:50 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on October 07, 2022, 04:40:01 PM
I can't help notice that Paxton is four lanes and has a raised curb median that was typical of four lane highways in PA decades ago.  I assume this part of Paxton was once US 322 before the current Eisenhower interchange got built.

Yes, it was. To the east, it fed directly into the current 322 alignment where Paxton Street turns north as Rupp Hill Road (note: Google Maps' name labels are wrong here past the turn). Back then, all of 322 heading over to Hummelstown was like that section of Paxton.

To the west, it originally fed directly into the rest of Paxton Street, which carried 322 into Harrisburg. It had a signalized intersection with Eisenhower Blvd, which continued north from the intersection as the same four-lane expressway it is now and fed seamlessly into what's now I-83 before ending at US 22. This is why that weird little expressway section of Eisenhower Blvd exists, built to more or less the same standards as the rest of I-83 was to the north prior to its reconstruction.

You can see all of this in the various years of Historic Aerials' imagery (https://historicaerials.com/location/40.25329577031721/-76.8124499540291/1956/15).
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Gnutella on October 08, 2022, 03:57:56 AM
Apparently, reconstruction of I-80 in the Stroudsburg area (https://www.constructionjournal.com/projects/details/db8b51ee47174b6a8b23ae84f42c1e41.html) is close to final design. Contracts are expected to be let in December 2024, with the start of reconstruction in February 2025.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on October 08, 2022, 08:05:43 AM
Quote from: Roadsguy on October 07, 2022, 10:18:50 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on October 07, 2022, 04:40:01 PM
I can't help notice that Paxton is four lanes and has a raised curb median that was typical of four lane highways in PA decades ago.  I assume this part of Paxton was once US 322 before the current Eisenhower interchange got built.

Yes, it was. To the east, it fed directly into the current 322 alignment where Paxton Street turns north as Rupp Hill Road (note: Google Maps' name labels are wrong here past the turn). Back then, all of 322 heading over to Hummelstown was like that section of Paxton.

To the west, it originally fed directly into the rest of Paxton Street, which carried 322 into Harrisburg. It had a signalized intersection with Eisenhower Blvd, which continued north from the intersection as the same four-lane expressway it is now and fed seamlessly into what's now I-83 before ending at US 22. This is why that weird little expressway section of Eisenhower Blvd exists, built to more or less the same standards as the rest of I-83 was to the north prior to its reconstruction.

You can see all of this in the various years of Historic Aerials' imagery (https://historicaerials.com/location/40.25329577031721/-76.8124499540291/1956/15).

I remember before the Jersey Barrier median on US 322 east of the Eisenhower exchange, the median was, as I remember it, like that part of Paxton.  We used to stay at the hotel on PA 441 and go to Hersheypark in the 70s and 80s.  There were only two stoplights between I-83 and PA 39, and those two still today are the original span wire that PennDOT has been phasing out for decades.

I remember outside of Philly span wires were very common in PA. In SE PA it was either ground mounts or mast arms. I believe the district or region that handles all of SE PA was influenced by NJ, that never too was gung ho on span wires except Burlington County and parts of Ocean County and here and there in municipalities throughs the Garden State in those times.

I also remember when US 22 was signal less east of Paxtonia before 1980 when the PA 39 intersection got signalized, and of course now, there are a few signals all the way to I-78.  In addition from PA 39 eastward the speed limit was 55 on US 22 as well.  Even through Fredericksburg it was 55. I was shocked that it was 40 mph there in 2000, but informed here on the forum it was raised since.

I also figured out long before cybernet that the part of US 22 that is named Allentown Blvd. in Dauphin County is a realigned US 22 as that the original US Route followed todays Jonestown Road east of the split in Paxtonia.  The way Allentown Blvd looks is how all of US 22 looked between Exit 8 on I-78 and PA 100 in Fogelsville. The birth of I-78 upgraded US 22 to full freeway and removed many intersections along it and forced Roadside America to sever its entrances from US 22 ( as my dad used to tell me that attraction was directly on US 22 with driveways) for its own frontage road.
That explains why the substandard I-78 east of Hamburg due to it not being built from scratch.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jemacedo9 on October 08, 2022, 11:26:21 AM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on October 06, 2022, 09:27:55 AM
(For US 22 and US 322)  PennDOT - District 8 News: PennDOT Announces Open House/Online Plans Display for the Route 22/322 Clark's Ferry Improvement Project (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1839)  (The public meeting will be viewable on October 20th. (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1841)) 

It's about time!  But curious to see exactly what the plans are.

QuoteAdditional improvements include signing and pavement markings and lighting for a westbound frontage lane that would serve local traffic right turning movements.

A frontage "lane" seems like it's not going to be separated physically?  And what will happen eastbound with the newer Rutters?  And the PA 849 intersection? 

Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: seicer on October 08, 2022, 12:46:46 PM
It has been so hard to get out of any of those gas stations on that stretch - even at night.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Alps on October 08, 2022, 07:12:26 PM
Quote from: Gnutella on October 08, 2022, 03:57:56 AM
Apparently, reconstruction of I-80 in the Stroudsburg area (https://www.constructionjournal.com/projects/details/db8b51ee47174b6a8b23ae84f42c1e41.html) is close to final design. Contracts are expected to be let in December 2024, with the start of reconstruction in February 2025.
wasn't it supposed to start in 2022
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: famartin on October 08, 2022, 08:53:03 PM
Quote from: Alps on October 08, 2022, 07:12:26 PM
Quote from: Gnutella on October 08, 2022, 03:57:56 AM
Apparently, reconstruction of I-80 in the Stroudsburg area (https://www.constructionjournal.com/projects/details/db8b51ee47174b6a8b23ae84f42c1e41.html) is close to final design. Contracts are expected to be let in December 2024, with the start of reconstruction in February 2025.
wasn't it supposed to start in 2022

They are just now working on exit 308 in East Stroudsburg, that's how far behind they are.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: interstate73 on October 09, 2022, 06:06:54 PM
Quote from: Gnutella on October 08, 2022, 03:57:56 AM
Apparently, reconstruction of I-80 in the Stroudsburg area (https://www.constructionjournal.com/projects/details/db8b51ee47174b6a8b23ae84f42c1e41.html) is close to final design. Contracts are expected to be let in December 2024, with the start of reconstruction in February 2025.

This stretch (and the first 4 miles in NJ along the river) were the bane of my existence when I was going to school in Upstate New York, so glad to see they're finally doing something about it! What's really needed is a bypass route connecting directly from 380 to exit 4 in NJ, fat chance of that ever happening if they can barely get this much more limited project off the ground though...
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on October 09, 2022, 06:21:53 PM
Quote from: interstate73 on October 09, 2022, 06:06:54 PM
Quote from: Gnutella on October 08, 2022, 03:57:56 AM
Apparently, reconstruction of I-80 in the Stroudsburg area (https://www.constructionjournal.com/projects/details/db8b51ee47174b6a8b23ae84f42c1e41.html) is close to final design. Contracts are expected to be let in December 2024, with the start of reconstruction in February 2025.

This stretch (and the first 4 miles in NJ along the river) were the bane of my existence when I was going to school in Upstate New York, so glad to see they're finally doing something about it! What's really needed is a bypass route connecting directly from 380 to exit 4 in NJ, fat chance of that ever happening if they can barely get this much more limited project off the ground though...

Problem is the Kitattany Mountain is in the way.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: vdeane on October 10, 2022, 03:29:31 PM
What is with the milemarkers on US 30?  Around Lancaster, they stop at 270.6 (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.0305613,-76.2388933,3a,75y,113.95h,76.52t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1shXrheneSqPkNQ0Edkr4bwQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) at the end of the freeway.  About 17 miles later, the Downingtown/Coatesvill bypass begins a milemarker 267.3 (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.9841341,-75.9166948,3a,54.4y,261.16h,90.13t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1suxrgJNiDYvi9HhBzcNNC0w!2e0!7i16384!8i8192), which not only doesn't include the surface mileage, but actually goes down.  WTF?

What makes this especially interesting is that the Lancaster ones aren't quite right either, assuming I was at my usual levels of accuracy in measuring the route when I did the photo page for my site.  My measured mileage is about two miles lower than the posted markers, which is a greater divergence than I would expect from measurement error.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on October 10, 2022, 03:40:00 PM
Quote from: vdeane on October 10, 2022, 03:29:31 PM
What is with the milemarkers on US 30?  Around Lancaster, they stop at 270.6 (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.0305613,-76.2388933,3a,75y,113.95h,76.52t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1shXrheneSqPkNQ0Edkr4bwQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) at the end of the freeway.  About 17 miles later, the Downingtown/Coatesvill bypass begins a milemarker 267.3 (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.9841341,-75.9166948,3a,54.4y,261.16h,90.13t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1suxrgJNiDYvi9HhBzcNNC0w!2e0!7i16384!8i8192), which not only doesn't include the surface mileage, but actually goes down.  WTF?

What makes this especially interesting is that the Lancaster ones aren't quite right either, assuming I was at my usual levels of accuracy in measuring the route when I did the photo page for my site.  My measured mileage is about two miles lower than the posted markers, which is a greater divergence than I would expect from measurement error.

This has been an ongoing discussion.  I want to think that the new US 22 mile markers in Perry and Dauphin Counties on the freeway northwest of Harrisburg are accurate unlike the previous ones near the I-81 interchange.

Also US 30 has recently been realigned east of the WV/PA Border (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-11/pages/details.aspx?newsid=6179) though I am unsure if that means anything here.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: vdeane on October 10, 2022, 03:51:46 PM
I did all the measurements for my site (aside from photos added since, obviously) a couple years ago and some of the affected photos are from 2016, so the new alignment there wouldn't explain that.  As for US 22, my photo at this location (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.329362,-76.8953436,3a,56.6y,137.8h,88.62t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1ssqzDD8vRaGnAjxvyk1i05g!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) is tagged 238.8 and the posted marker is 239.2, so those seem reasonably accurate.  It would be on the high side for error on my part, but PA is fairly windy, so that's not exactly unexpected.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jemacedo9 on October 10, 2022, 04:03:33 PM
Quote from: vdeane on October 10, 2022, 03:29:31 PM
What is with the milemarkers on US 30?  Around Lancaster, they stop at 270.6 (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.0305613,-76.2388933,3a,75y,113.95h,76.52t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1shXrheneSqPkNQ0Edkr4bwQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) at the end of the freeway.  About 17 miles later, the Downingtown/Coatesvill bypass begins a milemarker 267.3 (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.9841341,-75.9166948,3a,54.4y,261.16h,90.13t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1suxrgJNiDYvi9HhBzcNNC0w!2e0!7i16384!8i8192), which not only doesn't include the surface mileage, but actually goes down.  WTF?

What makes this especially interesting is that the Lancaster ones aren't quite right either, assuming I was at my usual levels of accuracy in measuring the route when I did the photo page for my site.  My measured mileage is about two miles lower than the posted markers, which is a greater divergence than I would expect from measurement error.
My guess has to do with the 22/30 concurrency in the Pittsburgh area.  Does the Lancaster County mileposts include the concurrent mileage but the Chester County mileposts exclude the concurrent mileage?

Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on October 10, 2022, 04:25:55 PM
I meant to add earlier that US 30 has a one-way section in Chambersburg (US 11 does as well).  Maybe both directions of US 30 are included there...
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on October 10, 2022, 04:36:30 PM
https://goo.gl/maps/TU763VH8uE6HmPAm7
Why hasn't PennDOT raised the speed limit to 70 on I-84?

From Lords Valley to Milford is a long exit less stretch, and would be prime for 70 mph. Yet it's still 65 through here.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on October 10, 2022, 06:38:23 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on October 10, 2022, 04:36:30 PM
https://goo.gl/maps/TU763VH8uE6HmPAm7
Why hasn't PennDOT raised the speed limit to 70 on I-84?

From Lords Valley to Milford is a long exit less stretch, and would be prime for 70 mph. Yet it's still 65 through here.

I would not be surprised if the main reason for it is simply because of the cattlechute sections that have been there in one place or another along this stretch for a while for the reconstruction project. 
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on October 10, 2022, 07:27:01 PM
I-80 too is 65 in the Poconos east of Hazleton.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on October 11, 2022, 02:38:09 AM
https://goo.gl/maps/bscS6ovcyuWtRMp2A

Another thing I'm noticing is these ENTER HERE signs are quite prominent in NE PA at freeway ramps.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Rothman on October 11, 2022, 06:07:54 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on October 11, 2022, 02:38:09 AM
https://goo.gl/maps/bscS6ovcyuWtRMp2A

Another thing I'm noticing is these ENTER HERE signs are quite prominent in NE PA at freeway ramps.
I prefer them to the large freeway entrance signs NYSDOT has been installing.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on October 11, 2022, 07:15:50 AM
Quote from: Rothman on October 11, 2022, 06:07:54 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on October 11, 2022, 02:38:09 AM
https://goo.gl/maps/bscS6ovcyuWtRMp2A

Another thing I’m noticing is these ENTER HERE signs are quite prominent in NE PA at freeway ramps.
I prefer them to the large freeway entrance signs NYSDOT has been installing.

I see they didn’t use these on I-78 though.

Oh, and I see in Berks County on I-78  they replaced the PA 61 overpass and removed the loop ramp from WB to SB as part of the Schuykill River Viaduct widening project to add auxiliary lanes between Exits 29 and 30.

They also replaced the PA 737 Pony Plate Truss bridge over I-78 as well as the Mountain Road overpass at Shartlesville.

I see District Five is very busy on I-78 ridding the old 1950 era bridges from the scenes.

https://www.aaroads.com/pa/078/i-078-e-exit-030-3.jpg

https://goo.gl/maps/2NBG4YoGo2ciuM1n9
Old and new of the Fourth Street overpass in Hamburg.


https://www.einnews.com/pr_news/593463751/penndot-resumes-environmental-reviews-for-i-78-lenhartsville-bridge-replacement-project
And now the Lenhartsville Viaduct to be replaced which IMO needs it especially for the exit ramps at the end.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on October 11, 2022, 04:46:03 PM
PennDOT - District 10 News: Weekend Road Closure on Freedom Road in Butler County (Cranberry Township) (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1393)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Mr. Matté on October 12, 2022, 12:03:25 AM
Quote from: jemacedo9 on October 10, 2022, 04:03:33 PM
Quote from: vdeane on October 10, 2022, 03:29:31 PM
What is with the milemarkers on US 30?  Around Lancaster, they stop at 270.6 (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.0305613,-76.2388933,3a,75y,113.95h,76.52t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1shXrheneSqPkNQ0Edkr4bwQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) at the end of the freeway.  About 17 miles later, the Downingtown/Coatesvill bypass begins a milemarker 267.3 (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.9841341,-75.9166948,3a,54.4y,261.16h,90.13t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1suxrgJNiDYvi9HhBzcNNC0w!2e0!7i16384!8i8192), which not only doesn't include the surface mileage, but actually goes down.  WTF?

What makes this especially interesting is that the Lancaster ones aren't quite right either, assuming I was at my usual levels of accuracy in measuring the route when I did the photo page for my site.  My measured mileage is about two miles lower than the posted markers, which is a greater divergence than I would expect from measurement error.
My guess has to do with the 22/30 concurrency in the Pittsburgh area.  Does the Lancaster County mileposts include the concurrent mileage but the Chester County mileposts exclude the concurrent mileage?

Pulling out the GIS data I downloaded from PennDOT in I believe Aug. 2020, if I select all of the segments of SR 0030 with a DIR_IND of either 'B' (both) or 'E' directions  from WV to the end of the east end of the Lancaster bypass, do a sum of all the lengths in feet, and divide by 5280, it ends up being only about 248.380 miles. If I then add in the approximate eastbound segments of SR 0020 and SR 0376 where 30 is concurrent (not exact since some segment ends begin/end after overpasses, this also does take into account onramps), the mileage comes out to 270.485, pretty close to the 270.6 milepost there.

As to what's going on with the Downingtown bypass, Beets Me (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S7gTjFtVTBM&t=53s). My only other guess is that the MPs on the Downingtown part were based on US 30 before it was routed on the bypasses around York and Lancaster- comparing the distances between that and PA 462, the difference is 2.6 mi.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on October 12, 2022, 12:00:59 PM
(For US 11 and PA 487)  PennDOT - District 3 News: Construction Detour Continues in Bloomsburg, Columbia County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4386)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on October 13, 2022, 07:56:12 AM
CE Expert System Update 10/12/2022:

District 5:
CE 1b Reevaluations for PA 33 Bushkill Creek Bridges (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec852588ca00618cd0?OpenDocument) and US 209 at Schafers Schoolhouse Rd (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec852587c30057d11a?OpenDocument).

District 8:  CE1b Scoping for PA 124 at Freysville Rd (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec8525887100029a83?OpenDocument)

(For I-95 and I-476)  PennDOT - District 6 News: Paving, Bridge Repair Scheduled Next Week on I-95, I-476 in Delaware County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7884)

(For US 1)  PennDOT - District 6 News: Bridge Construction Planned at Night Next Week on U.S. 1, Rockhill Drive in Bensalem Township (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7886)

(For I-83 and US 322)  PennDOT - District 8 News: NB I-83 Bridge Inspection Planned for Saturday at Eisenhower Interchange in Dauphin County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1849)

(For I-90 and PA 18)  PennDOT - District 1 News: I-90 Westbound Exit 9 Reopened in Erie County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1951)

(For I-83)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Weekend Repairs on SB I-83 John Harris Memorial (South) Bridge Postponed (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1850)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on October 14, 2022, 09:39:55 AM
(For PA 550)  PennDOT - District 2 News: Paving in Bellefonte to Bring One-way Detour Next Week (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2453)

(For I-79)  PennDOT - District 10 News: Sign Structure Replacement Project on I-79 in Butler County (Jackson Township) Will Have Evening Closure (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1394)

(For PA 32)  PennDOT - District 6 News: Bridge Repair to Begin on Route 32 (River Road) in Tinicum Township, Bucks County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7892)

(For PA 26 and PA 45)  PennDOT - District 2 News: Traffic Pattern at Route 26/45 Intersection Project to Shift Monday (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2457)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: billpa on October 14, 2022, 03:44:31 PM
MMMM, purple...(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20221014/717c415af7f8c863fcd625320729eacf.jpg)

Pixel 7

Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ixnay on October 14, 2022, 08:12:37 PM
Quote from: billpa on October 14, 2022, 03:44:31 PM
MMMM, purple...(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20221014/717c415af7f8c863fcd625320729eacf.jpg)

Pixel 7

Where is this?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on October 14, 2022, 08:16:42 PM
^PA 903 SB approaching I-476 (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.9855333,-75.6276403,3a,75y,218.62h,96.72t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s_fWyMf7bRl3MvX9Lkm5RZA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192). 
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: SignBridge on October 14, 2022, 08:20:09 PM
Looks like a clear violation of MUTCD standards. See Sec.2F-03 re: toll road signing. If I'm reading it right, only the section of the sign with the toll pass restriction can be purple.

The section reads in part: Purple shall not be used as a background color to display a destination, action message, or other legend that is not a display of the requirement for all vehicles to have a registered ETC account.

How could PTC or PennDOT have screwed that up so badly?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: rickmastfan67 on October 14, 2022, 08:30:41 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on October 14, 2022, 08:20:09 PM
Looks like a clear violation of MUTCD standards. See Sec.2F-03 re: toll road signing. If I'm reading it right, only the section of the sign with the toll pass restriction can be purple.

The section reads in part: Purple shall not be used as a background color to display a destination, action message, or other legend that is not a display of the requirement for all vehicles to have a registered ETC account.

How could PTC or PennDOT have screwed that up so badly?

I think it was from when the Turnpike still accepted Cash.  This was a completely new interchange and they made it Ez-Pass only.  Thus, the purple signage.  If you entered this exit as a Cash only person, and exited via a toll booth, you'd be hit with the lost ticket fee.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: SignBridge on October 14, 2022, 08:33:32 PM
Well, unless these signs were erected before the 2009 Manual took effect, it is still a clear violation of the standard.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: rickmastfan67 on October 14, 2022, 08:36:03 PM
Additionally, the other side HAD purple signage too, but it's since been replaced with normal green signage since the entire Turnpike is cashless now.

Purple - Aug '19 (https://goo.gl/maps/s3QbiwBQRq6AFEy66)
Green - Nov '21 (https://goo.gl/maps/mTdiyGpKDWH8SozN8)

Quote from: ixnay on October 14, 2022, 08:12:37 PM
Quote from: billpa on October 14, 2022, 03:44:31 PM
MMMM, purple...(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20221014/717c415af7f8c863fcd625320729eacf.jpg)

Where is this?

Replaced with green signage as well. https://goo.gl/maps/1TCDXKRgFFctm7Rn8
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: rickmastfan67 on October 14, 2022, 08:38:03 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on October 14, 2022, 08:33:32 PM
Well, unless these signs were erected before the 2009 Manual took effect, it is still a clear violation of the standard.

Opened on June 30th, 2015.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on October 14, 2022, 09:46:41 PM
The PTC had used "BPSes" for their E-ZPass-only interchanges when signed from the intersecting road (though not on the Turnpike itself), but as far as I know all of these have since been replaced with standard green signage now that the Turnpike uses AET and these interchanges are open to all traffic.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on October 15, 2022, 08:25:24 AM
The PA 29 ones have been replaced too.  (NB-2019 (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.0682523,-75.536704,3a,75y,340.74h,90t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sKXXRE2ehTfgCrFBay2hSkg!2e0!5s20190901T000000!7i16384!8i8192), 2021 (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.0682453,-75.5367074,3a,75y,340.74h,90t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1szz7sLfS_m3Tb3RnPHlGm-g!2e0!5s20210701T000000!7i16384!8i8192))  (SB-2019 (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.0707022,-75.5362449,3a,75y,221.71h,93.42t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1selIul-XIUVTAbCO9twvCww!2e0!5s20190901T000000!7i16384!8i8192), 2021 (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.0707048,-75.5362143,3a,75y,221.71h,93.42t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1stOu0q2TIiuxFslCThyogfQ!2e0!5s20210801T000000!7i16384!8i8192))
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on October 15, 2022, 09:24:52 AM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on October 15, 2022, 08:25:24 AM
The PA 29 ones have been replaced too.  (NB-2019 (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.0682523,-75.536704,3a,75y,340.74h,90t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sKXXRE2ehTfgCrFBay2hSkg!2e0!5s20190901T000000!7i16384!8i8192), 2021 (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.0682453,-75.5367074,3a,75y,340.74h,90t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1szz7sLfS_m3Tb3RnPHlGm-g!2e0!5s20210701T000000!7i16384!8i8192))  (SB-2019 (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.0707022,-75.5362449,3a,75y,221.71h,93.42t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1selIul-XIUVTAbCO9twvCww!2e0!5s20190901T000000!7i16384!8i8192), 2021 (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.0707048,-75.5362143,3a,75y,221.71h,93.42t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1stOu0q2TIiuxFslCThyogfQ!2e0!5s20210801T000000!7i16384!8i8192))

Also they replaced Philly with Valley Forge too.

https://goo.gl/maps/M5cfEftoNnB5QXo88
Not to mention TOLL I-76 TO TOLL I-276.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: sprjus4 on October 15, 2022, 08:00:23 PM
^ Why would anyone going to Valley Forge get on the Turnpike? Removing Philadelphia makes zero sense.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: MATraveler128 on October 15, 2022, 08:16:16 PM
Quote from: sprjus4 on October 15, 2022, 08:00:23 PM
^ Why would anyone going to Valley Forge get on the Turnpike? Removing Philadelphia makes zero sense.

Pennsylvania can be very hit or miss when it comes to control cities sometimes. It kind of reminds me of I-81 at the I-78 junction where they use Hazleton instead of Scranton, which is larger and more significant than Hazleton.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: sprjus4 on October 15, 2022, 08:26:02 PM
The thing is though, small city or big city, it doesn't make much sense to get on the Turnpike to go to Valley Forge.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: famartin on October 15, 2022, 08:55:56 PM
Both the free segment of 76 (Schuykill) and the free segment of 476 (Mid-County/Blue Route) have control cities which are useless but represent the locations where the road joins the turnpike system. Its... well, at this point its stupid, but I can see how it happened.

That said, they were very quick to replace "Trenton" with "New York" as the I-95 control city, so maybe its time all the "Valley Forge" and "Plymouth Meeting" references go away and are replaced with cities which make more sense. There's no reason not to use "Harrisburg" along the Schuylkill Expressway westbound. 476 is a little more murky but Allentown would be fine.

King of Prussia is such a major commercial center that it could work for both.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Rothman on October 15, 2022, 09:06:14 PM
Quote from: BlueOutback7 on October 15, 2022, 08:16:16 PM
Quote from: sprjus4 on October 15, 2022, 08:00:23 PM
^ Why would anyone going to Valley Forge get on the Turnpike? Removing Philadelphia makes zero sense.

Pennsylvania can be very hit or miss when it comes to control cities sometimes. It kind of reminds me of I-81 at the I-78 junction where they use Hazleton instead of Scranton, which is larger and more significant than Hazleton.
I don't see how using one or the other is somehow better.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on October 15, 2022, 09:30:24 PM
I can understand why Valley Forge is used westbound on the Schuylkill, since in practice the Valley Forge Interchange on the Turnpike is less a case of one road merging with another and more a case of the Schuylkill ending at the Turnpike, with each road having its own distinct identity separate from I-76. Plus, the King of Prussia interchange complex is where a significant amount of Schuylkill traffic (possibly more than half) splits off to US 202 (especially to the west), 422, and the rest of the connecting roads. I do think using Valley Forge itself is silly, though, and that King of Prussia would make far more sense, ideally with Harrisburg as a secondary control city wherever practical.

Eastbound on the Turnpike, though, I have no idea why Valley Forge is now used. It was originally only Philadelphia, with Valley Forge only turning up at PA 100 within the past decade and PA 29 since the move to AET. (From Morgantown west, it's still signed for Philadelphia.) I guess the idea might be that by this point, Philadelphia-bound traffic might be starting to fan out to get to various areas of the city, much like how New York City disappears as a control city from the northbound NJTP? This doesn't really make sense, though, as PA 100 and 29 only really serve the far Philadelphia suburbs, and don't even feed into the actual city in any way.

Interestingly, Valley Forge is never used at all on I-276 westbound; it's all just Harrisburg (and Allentown where "To I-476" is signed). This is even the case on the newest signs.

As for I-476, I imagine Plymouth Meeting is used for a similar reason to Valley Forge on the Schuylkill, especially since I-476 ended at the Turnpike until 1996. Now, though, while the Blue Route and Northeast Extension definitely have distinct identities like the Schuylkill and the Turnpike mainline, they do feed seamlessly into one another, making this less of a factor. A comparable situation would be if I-76 instead fed seamlessly onto the US 422 expressway. Signing Pottstown from Center City would make sense then, as signing Allentown from I-95 makes sense now. If a local control city must be used, though, I would prefer Conshohocken, with Allentown as a secondary control city wherever practical. North of the Schuylkill, Allentown could then be used exclusively.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: storm2k on October 16, 2022, 03:29:05 AM
Never was quite sure why they loved Valley Forge so much since it's more the historical site than anything else. Why not use King of Prussia for a local destination, especially since so many highways intersect there?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jemacedo9 on October 16, 2022, 09:40:04 AM
King of Prussia wasn't much of anything until the late 60s/early 70s.  Since Valley Forge that is where "free" 76 ends, and meets the Turnpike and 202 and the County Line Expressway (now 422), my guess is thats when they picked Valley Forge as the control city for 76 West and it hasn't ever been updated. All of those highways were around back then.

202 North in Chester County uses King of Prussia.  So does 422 East in Berks and Montgomery Counties. And 422 has a direct exit for Valley Forge NHP.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on October 16, 2022, 10:26:26 AM
Pennsylvania also uses Carlisle out of Harrisburg for I-81 despite it still being within the metro of Harrisburg. 

Even from the PA-MD border to Chambersburg uses Chambersburg and then Carlisle before Harrisburg is even used NB on I-81. Meanwhile MDSHA use Harrisburg as NB I-81 from I-70 in Hagerstown. So PennDOT skips over that twice and only signs the Capital once in the Capital metro.

PennDOT and LaDOTD both have strange control city uses.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Bitmapped on October 16, 2022, 10:51:44 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on October 16, 2022, 10:26:26 AM
Pennsylvania also uses Carlisle out of Harrisburg for I-81 despite it still being within the metro of Harrisburg. 

Even from the PA-MD border to Chambersburg uses Chambersburg and then Carlisle before Harrisburg is even used NB on I-81. Meanwhile MDSHA use Harrisburg as NB I-81 from I-70 in Hagerstown. So PennDOT skips over that twice and only signs the Capital once in the Capital metro.

PennDOT and LaDOTD both have strange control city uses.

Using small cities and Interstate junctions is largely in keeping with PennDOT practice. New Stanton (I-70) and Carlisle (I-81) get the nod because of their interchanges with the PA Turnpike. Chambersburg is similar to all the small control cities along I-80.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ixnay on October 16, 2022, 06:58:15 PM
Speaking of control cities, prior to the opening of the Parkway North/I-279, was Pittsburgh used as a control city on SB I-79 all the way down to PA 65, PA 51, or maybe all the way down to the Parkway West/current I-376 (by which point it's all but overshot Pittsburgh)?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ARMOURERERIC on October 16, 2022, 07:16:19 PM
Oddly enough, I rode my bicycle on the unopened I-79 wayyyyyy back in 1976 at age 12, all the way from Ivory Ave in Pittsburgh, the BGS still said Washington back then, traffic bound for downtown Pittsburgh was directed to us US 19 and McKnight Rd, in fact, IIRC, the complete I-79 north of the ohio river, did not, could not open until the bridge itself opened.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on October 17, 2022, 01:30:41 PM
(For PA 309)  PennDOT - District 4 News: Rolling Roadblock on State Route 309 Southbound in Luzerne County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-4/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1094)

Quote from: 74/171FAN on October 06, 2022, 09:27:55 AM
(For US 22 and US 322)  PennDOT - District 8 News: PennDOT Announces Open House/Online Plans Display for the Route 22/322 Clark's Ferry Improvement Project (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1839)  (The public meeting will be viewable on October 20th. (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1841)) 

(For US 22 and US 322)  PennDOT - District 8 News: PennDOT Announces Online Plans Display for the Route 22/322 Clark's Ferry Improvement Project in Reed Township, Dauphin County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1853)

QuoteProposed improvements include replacing the existing center turn lane on Route 22/322 within the project limits with a continuous median barrier.  Additional improvements include signing and pavement markings and lighting for a westbound frontage lane that would serve local traffic right turning movements.

This does include the closing of the left-turn WB to PA 849 WB from US 22/US 322 WB.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: VTGoose on October 17, 2022, 04:57:23 PM
Quote from: ARMOURERERIC on October 16, 2022, 07:16:19 PM
Oddly enough, I rode my bicycle on the unopened I-79 wayyyyyy back in 1976 at age 12, all the way from Ivory Ave in Pittsburgh, the BGS still said Washington back then, traffic bound for downtown Pittsburgh was directed to us US 19 and McKnight Rd, in fact, IIRC, the complete I-79 north of the ohio river, did not, could not open until the bridge itself opened.

For the longest time, one had to travel to Warrendale to get on I-79 north since the section from there to the Coraopolis side of the Neville Island Bridge wasn't open for the longest time. You could get on at PA 51 and go south but only as far as PA 60. It took a trip to Heidleburg to get on I-79 to go south (and even that was spotty in places through the '70s).

Bruce in Blacksburg (but a native of the 'Burgh, Moon High '73)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ARMOURERERIC on October 17, 2022, 06:48:56 PM
I heard stories that the section of I-79 from Mt Nebo Rd to Wexford, sans the respective interchange over crossings we're actually built as early as 1969
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: CentralPAGal on October 18, 2022, 01:01:49 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on October 17, 2022, 01:30:41 PM
This does include the closing of the left-turn WB to PA 849 WB from US 22/US 322 WB.

Yes, it shows the median barrier going through the whole area. It explicitly shows US 22/322 WB traffic to 849 has to turn around at the US 11/15 interchange and get back on 22/322 EB to access it.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Bitmapped on October 18, 2022, 01:23:54 PM
Quote from: ARMOURERERIC on October 17, 2022, 06:48:56 PM
I heard stories that the section of I-79 from Mt Nebo Rd to Wexford, sans the respective interchange over crossings we're actually built as early as 1969

PennDOT's pavement history web app shows parts of I-79 immediately north of Mt. Nebo Road were built in 1965-1966. The area closest to I-279 was 1969-1970. North of I-279 and south of Mt. Nebo Road were 1972ish.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on October 18, 2022, 02:44:33 PM
Quote from: CentralPAGal on October 18, 2022, 01:01:49 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on October 17, 2022, 01:30:41 PM
This does include the closing of the left-turn WB to PA 849 WB from US 22/US 322 WB.

Yes, it shows the median barrier going through the whole area. It explicitly shows US 22/322 WB traffic to 849 has to turn around at the US 11/15 interchange and get back on 22/322 EB to access it.

Indeed, the plans are posted early. Somewhat maddeningly, the project is so close to a proper freeway upgrade (albeit a fairly substandard one a la PA 28 in Pittsburgh), but there are a small handful of driveways left on the eastbound side. (Westbound has a barrier-separated one-way frontage road.)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on October 18, 2022, 04:08:53 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on October 11, 2022, 04:46:03 PM
PennDOT - District 10 News: Weekend Road Closure on Freedom Road in Butler County (Cranberry Township) (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1393)

PennDOT - District 10 News: Date Update for Weekend Road Closure on Freedom Road in Butler County (Cranberry Township) (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1395)

(For PA 426)  PennDOT - District 1 News: PennDOT Announces Virtual Plans Display for the Route 426 Bridge Project in Spring Creek Township, Warren County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1953)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ARMOURERERIC on October 18, 2022, 04:23:08 PM
Quote from: Bitmapped on October 18, 2022, 01:23:54 PM
Quote from: ARMOURERERIC on October 17, 2022, 06:48:56 PM
I heard stories that the section of I-79 from Mt Nebo Rd to Wexford, sans the respective interchange over crossings we're actually built as early as 1969

PennDOT's pavement history web app shows parts of I-79 immediately north of Mt. Nebo Road were built in 1965-1966. The area closest to I-279 was 1969-1970. North of I-279 and south of Mt. Nebo Road were 1972ish.

Yet, it did not open to traffic until 1977, another local road geek urban legend was that the ROW between Mt Nebo and Nicholson was actually acquired by the PA Turnpike Commission  in 1954 for the Pittsburgh to Erie extension.  I once saw an old road project report at Northland Public Library from 1955 showing a project to extend McKnight Rd up the pine creek valley to a trumpet exit between what is now 279 and 910
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on October 20, 2022, 09:30:22 AM
PennDOT - District 6 News: Paving, Bridge Repair Scheduled Next Week on I-95, I-476 in Delaware County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7898)

(For PA 53)  PennDOT - District 2 News: Roadway Repair to Bring One-Day Detour in Philipsburg (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2461)

(For US 1)  PennDOT - District 6 News: Bridge Construction Planned at Night Next Week on U.S. 1, Rockhill Drive in Bensalem Township (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7901)

PennDOT - District 8 News: Deck Repairs this Weekend on NB I-81 (George N. Wade) Bridge in Dauphin County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1857)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on October 23, 2022, 06:58:12 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on October 20, 2022, 09:30:22 AM
PennDOT - District 8 News: Deck Repairs this Weekend on NB I-81 (George N. Wade) Bridge in Dauphin County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1857)

This was postponed to today as Penn State had a home game last night. (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1859)

Anyway, on to the other news from Friday:

(For PA 199)  PennDOT - District 3 News: Route 199 Reconstruction Project Continues in Sayre and Athens, Bradford County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4401)

PennDOT - District 6 News: PennDOT to Host Virtual Public Meeting for Jacksonville Road Intersection Improvement Project in Northampton Township (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7904)

PennDOT - District 1 News: Petroleum Center Truss Bridge in Oil Creek State Park Closed (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1954)

(For US 220)  PennDOT - District 3 News: Route 220 Safety Improvement Project Continues (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4404)

PennDOT - District 4 News: PennDOT District 4 Road Report for the Week of October 24 to October 28, 2022 (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-4/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1096)  (mainly here due to parade closures on US 6 and US 11)

(For I-79)  PennDOT - District 10 News: Sign Structure Replacement Project on I-79 in Butler County (Jackson Township) Postponed Until October 29 (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1399)

(For US 30)  PennDOT - District 6 News: Sinkhole Repair Scheduled on U.S. 30 (Exton Bypass) in West Whiteland Township (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7908)

PennDOT - District 2 News: Motorists Reminded of Closure on Oriental Covered Bridge (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2466)

PennDOT - District 6 News: Safety Improvement Work on MacDade Boulevard in Ridley Township (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7909)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on October 24, 2022, 11:15:48 AM
I thought Trenton was bad on US 1 at former I-95 in Oxford Valley directing motorists onto I-95 north, but the same PennDOT does it this time again.  Different district but same signing practice.
https://goo.gl/maps/gqLbki3PJUJBFvTt6

Direct motorists onto a freeway from a road that already is heading into a specific city.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on October 24, 2022, 03:49:16 PM
PennDOT - District 1 News: I-90 Eastbound Construction in Western Erie County Wrapping Up (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1956)

(For PA 64)  PennDOT - District 2 News: Lamar Bridge Job on Route 64 Nearing Completion (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2469)

PennDOT - District 8 News: Weekend Closure of I-83 at Paxton Street Bridge in Swatara Township Planned for Nov. 4-7 (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1862)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on October 25, 2022, 08:21:26 AM
CE Expert System Update:

District 5: 
PA 115 Safety Improvements (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec852588b8004af3e6?OpenDocument)
PA 339 over Rattling Run CMP Replacements (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec852588e10043f54b?OpenDocument) (resulting from Ida flooding)
Farmersville Rd Bridge over US 22 (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec852587dc004cba9f?OpenDocument)
I-78 EB/PA 309 SB east of Lehigh St (Exit 57) (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec8525867300525ec1?OpenDocument)

QuoteIncorporation of a hard shoulder running lane will be investigated.

Shiffers Rd over PA 33 (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec852587c800057384?OpenDocument)

District 8: 
Laudermilch Rd Bridge over Norfolk Southern RR (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec852587f700553008?OpenDocument)  (was originally part of the P3 bridge project but not anymore)

District 9:
SR 2019 over US 22 (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec852588230069b91e?OpenDocument)
QuoteBridge has restricted under clearance and does not meet current standards over SR 0022. Large vehicles have hit the underside of the bridge in the past.

District 10:
PA 208 over Turkey Run (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec852588850055f01f?OpenDocument)
PA 403 over US 22 (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec852588a100577432?OpenDocument)
QuotePA 403 over US 22 eastbound and westbound; East Wheatfield Township; Bridge Rehabilitation including beam repair by heat straightening.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Bitmapped on October 25, 2022, 04:01:13 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on October 25, 2022, 08:21:26 AM
CE Expert System Update:
District 9:
SR 2019 over US 22 (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec852588230069b91e?OpenDocument)
QuoteBridge has restricted under clearance and does not meet current standards over SR 0022. Large vehicles have hit the underside of the bridge in the past.

This bridge is actually missing its outermost concrete beam on US 22 westbound from being hit, and it had been patched before then. It has 14' 4" clearance so it's not particularly low.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on October 26, 2022, 03:21:50 PM
PennDOT - District 8 News: Deck Repairs this Weekend on NB I-81 (George N. Wade) Bridge in Dauphin County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1863)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on October 27, 2022, 09:15:29 AM
(For US 1) PennDOT - District 6 News: Bridge Construction Planned at Night Next Week on U.S. 1, Rockhill Drive in Bensalem Township (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7917)

(For US 6 and PA 89) PennDOT - District 1 News: Route 6 Bridge to Reopen in Wayne Township, Erie County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1959) (yes, I realized that this bridge Saturday was actually on the US 6/PA 89 concurrency) 

PennDOT - District 6 News: Paving, Bridge Repair Scheduled Next Week on I-95, I-476 in Delaware County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7919)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on October 28, 2022, 08:18:01 AM
(For PA 46)  PennDOT - District 2 News: Route 46 Resurfacing Project Nears Completion in McKean County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2471)

(For PA 724)  PennDOT - District 6 News: PennDOT Completes Route 724 (Schuylkill Road) Bridge Replacement, Reopens Highway Over Eckers Creek in North Coventry Township (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7924)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on October 28, 2022, 05:32:12 PM
https://goo.gl/maps/SJBsLHDPYYmYnWvA7

Didn't this used to be an at grade intersection?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Alps on October 28, 2022, 06:21:43 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on October 28, 2022, 05:32:12 PM
https://goo.gl/maps/SJBsLHDPYYmYnWvA7

Didn't this used to be an at grade intersection?
Nope. https://www.historicaerials.com/viewer
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on October 28, 2022, 06:55:27 PM
I do remember a second at grade along the route between PA 33 and I-80.  The Beaver Valley RIRO is too fuzzy in aerials to see if that had a break in the median.

I'm going to say that was the second intersection.  Being too close to the PA 33 interchange it would seem plausible that an intersection get closed off due to sight lines. 
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on October 28, 2022, 10:19:28 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on October 28, 2022, 06:55:27 PM
I do remember a second at grade along the route between PA 33 and I-80.  The Beaver Valley RIRO is too fuzzy in aerials to see if that had a break in the median.

I'm going to say that was the second intersection.  Being too close to the PA 33 interchange it would seem plausible that an intersection get closed off due to sight lines.

I took a look myself and it was definitely a full intersection. 1999 and 2004 show it most clearly; the northbound left turn lane is very clear in the former and the latter is in color, so you can see the break in the old grass median. (The same outline of the median break can be seen in all earlier imagery going back to 1970, the earliest that shows the expressway completed.) By 2005, the intersection was removed when they added the concrete jersey barrier and paved inside shoulders.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on October 29, 2022, 07:39:38 AM
The at-grade on US 209 at Schafers Schoolhouse Rd is planned to become a RIRO at some point.

Other Friday News:

(For I-80, US 220, and PA 26)  PennDOT - District 2 News: PennDOT Issues Start-of-November Update for Local Interchange Project (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2473)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Bitmapped on October 30, 2022, 10:54:11 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on October 28, 2022, 08:18:01 AM
(For PA 724)  PennDOT - District 6 News: PennDOT Completes Route 724 (Schuylkill Road) Bridge Replacement, Reopens Highway Over Eckers Creek in North Coventry Township (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7924)

The bridge might be open, but they didn't bother to take down any of the signage about the road being closed. The detour was still fully signed, including warnings on US 422 that PA 724 is closed. "Bridge Out" signage is still in place on PA 724 at River Bridge Road where the detour begins on the west end.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on October 31, 2022, 01:51:56 PM
(For US 6 and PA 8)  PennDOT - District 1 News: Railroad Crossing Improvements Planned in Union City, Erie County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1962)

(For US 11 and PA 487) PennDOT - District 3 News: Construction Detour Continues in Bloomsburg, Columbia County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4413)

QuoteWork on this project is expected to be completed by November 15th.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on November 01, 2022, 10:06:19 AM
(For US 422)  PennDOT - District 10 News: Route 422 — Margaret Road Intersection Improvements to Begin (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1403)

PennDOT - District 4 News: Wolf Administration Wraps Up 2022 Construction Season in Northeastern PA (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-4/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1101)

(For PA 462)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Open to Traffic: Route 462 (Market Street) Bridge Over Mill Creek in Springettsbury and Spring Garden Townships, York County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1866)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on November 01, 2022, 03:05:58 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on October 29, 2022, 07:39:38 AM
The at-grade on US 209 at Schafers Schoolhouse Rd is planned to become a RIRO at some point.

Other Friday News:

(For I-80, US 220, and PA 26)  PennDOT - District 2 News: PennDOT Issues Start-of-November Update for Local Interchange Project (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2473)


I never understood why anyway those at grades were there in the first place.  It's a road between two freeways, it should also be freeway as well.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on November 01, 2022, 03:20:44 PM
^If I remember correctly, District 5 was trying to close the intersection completely back in 2016, but it did not go through due to heavy opposition.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on November 02, 2022, 08:42:18 AM
(For PA 58/PA 173)  PennDOT - District 1 News: PennDOT Announces Virtual Plans Display for the Route 58 Bridge Project in Grove City Borough, Mercer County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1965)

(For PA 443 and PA 902)  PennDOT - District 5 News: Carbon County: Update on PA 443 Reconstruction Project (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-5/pages/details.aspx?newsid=3358)

(For I-80 and PA 970) PennDOT - District 2 News: PennDOT Announces Completion of I-80 Woodland Interchange (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2475)

PennDOT - District 8 News: Reminder: Weekend Closure of I-83 at Paxton Street Bridge in Swatara Township Planned for Nov. 4-7 (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1867)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on November 03, 2022, 12:54:42 PM
PennDOT - District 6 News: Paving, Bridge Repair Scheduled on I-95, I-476 in Delaware County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7930)

(For PA 339)  PennDOT - District 3 News: Route 339 Project Continues Next Week in Columbia and Luzerne Counties (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4417)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on November 04, 2022, 10:17:53 AM
(For US 11/US 15)  PennDOT - District 8 News: PennDOT Announces Online Plans Display for Route 11 (Enola Road) Bridge Project in Wormleysburg Borough and E. Pennsboro Township, Cumberland County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1868)

(For US 22/US 322)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Overnight Rolling Stops Planned for WB Route 22/322 in Dauphin County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1869)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on November 05, 2022, 08:36:56 AM
(For US 220 and PA 287) PennDOT - District 3 News: Route 220 Safety Improvement Project Continues (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4421)

(For PA 199)  PennDOT - District 3 News: Route 199 Reconstruction Project Continues in Sayre and Athens, Bradford County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4420)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: sbeaver44 on November 05, 2022, 06:06:16 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on October 04, 2022, 12:57:04 PM
PennDOT - District 4 News: PennDOT Resumes Environmental Reviews for I-81 Susquehanna Bridges Project (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-4/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1085)

(For US 11, PA 307, and the President Biden Expressway) PennDOT Announces Online Plans Displays for the SR 3023 (Cedar Ave) Section D50, over Roaring Brook Bridge Rehabilitation, SR 8025 Section 250, over Roaring Brook Bridge Rehabilitation, and SR 8025 Section PRS, over Ramp D in the City of Scranton, Lackawanna County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-4/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1086)

(For US 119)  PennDOT - District 10 News: Traffic Alert - US 119 Ramp Closure for Repairs (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1392)

PennDOT - District 8 News: Repairs Planned on SB I-83 John Harris Memorial (South) Bridge (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1838)

CE Expert System Links:

September 30, 2022:
US 6/US 209 Bridge over Delaware River (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec8525838300515c79?OpenDocument)

QuoteBridge rehabilitation on State Route 6 (Pike Street) over the Delaware River in Matamoras Borough, Pike County. The existing structure is a two-span steel thru truss bridge built in 1939. Existing bridge deck will be replaced with a reinforced concrete deck. Other work activities consist of blast clean and painting of truss members, structural steel repairs, steel member repair, concrete substructure repairs, open grid deck replacement and approach milling and paving. Full depth roadway pavement reconstruction will be limited to the immediate bridge approaches only, where grade adjustments will be needed for the new bridge deck. New guide rail, signing, and pavement markings will also be provided throughout the project limits. The majority of the bridge work can be accomplished from the approaches within existing legal right-of-way. The need for new ROW acquisition is being evaluated. Temporary construction easements will be provided, as necessary, for construction access or to accommodate erosion and sedimentation control measures.

I-83 SB at PA 238 (Exit 24) Offramp (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec852588070071638a?OpenDocument)

QuoteThe project includes widening of the Exit 24 South Bound Ramp of I-83 to create a separate right turn lane for traffic turning onto westbound Church Road (S.R. 0238) to reduce congestion. The project is located in Manchester Township, York County. The project will also include traffic signal improvements to both the signal at the ramp intersection with Church Road and at the Church Road/Board Road/Exit 24 northbound ramp intersection. A retaining wall is proposed west of the ramp to limit the cut slope. The ramp will be closed during construction and traffic will be detoured.

October 3, 2022:

PA 403 between US 219 and PA 985 (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec852588c400444bb8?OpenDocument)
That PA 238 interchange is woefully substandard.  I agree that right turn lane needs to exist.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: sbeaver44 on November 05, 2022, 06:08:53 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on October 10, 2022, 03:40:00 PM
Quote from: vdeane on October 10, 2022, 03:29:31 PM
What is with the milemarkers on US 30?  Around Lancaster, they stop at 270.6 (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.0305613,-76.2388933,3a,75y,113.95h,76.52t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1shXrheneSqPkNQ0Edkr4bwQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) at the end of the freeway.  About 17 miles later, the Downingtown/Coatesvill bypass begins a milemarker 267.3 (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.9841341,-75.9166948,3a,54.4y,261.16h,90.13t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1suxrgJNiDYvi9HhBzcNNC0w!2e0!7i16384!8i8192), which not only doesn't include the surface mileage, but actually goes down.  WTF?

What makes this especially interesting is that the Lancaster ones aren't quite right either, assuming I was at my usual levels of accuracy in measuring the route when I did the photo page for my site.  My measured mileage is about two miles lower than the posted markers, which is a greater divergence than I would expect from measurement error.

This has been an ongoing discussion.  I want to think that the new US 22 mile markers in Perry and Dauphin Counties on the freeway northwest of Harrisburg are accurate unlike the previous ones near the I-81 interchange.

Also US 30 has recently been realigned east of the WV/PA Border (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-11/pages/details.aspx?newsid=6179) though I am unsure if that means anything here.
They had better be accurate!  A few years ago I wrote Penndot District 8 asking why they were 200.0 from I-81 which seemed awfully convenient.  They said next time they replace them they'll be correct.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Bitmapped on November 05, 2022, 09:49:13 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on October 10, 2022, 03:40:00 PM
Quote from: vdeane on October 10, 2022, 03:29:31 PM
What is with the milemarkers on US 30?  Around Lancaster, they stop at 270.6 (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.0305613,-76.2388933,3a,75y,113.95h,76.52t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1shXrheneSqPkNQ0Edkr4bwQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) at the end of the freeway.  About 17 miles later, the Downingtown/Coatesvill bypass begins a milemarker 267.3 (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.9841341,-75.9166948,3a,54.4y,261.16h,90.13t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1suxrgJNiDYvi9HhBzcNNC0w!2e0!7i16384!8i8192), which not only doesn't include the surface mileage, but actually goes down.  WTF?

What makes this especially interesting is that the Lancaster ones aren't quite right either, assuming I was at my usual levels of accuracy in measuring the route when I did the photo page for my site.  My measured mileage is about two miles lower than the posted markers, which is a greater divergence than I would expect from measurement error.

This has been an ongoing discussion.  I want to think that the new US 22 mile markers in Perry and Dauphin Counties on the freeway northwest of Harrisburg are accurate unlike the previous ones near the I-81 interchange.

Also US 30 has recently been realigned east of the WV/PA Border (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-11/pages/details.aspx?newsid=6179) though I am unsure if that means anything here.

The realigned portion is a half-mile long and straightens a couple curves. The actual difference in distance is less than 0.1-mile, so any impact on statewide mileage is negligible.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on November 07, 2022, 04:59:39 PM
I noticed that PennDOT recently reconfigured the US 1 and PA 132 cloverleaf interchange in Trevose  into a folded diamond exchange.  Also The Red Roof Inn had it's driveway moved from US 1 to PA 132. 


https://goo.gl/maps/utdWearQ1sCuX6W37
This sign assembly really sucks.  Not so much Sesame Place is a theme park, but two panels for one exit.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on November 07, 2022, 06:56:01 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on November 07, 2022, 04:59:39 PM
I noticed that PennDOT recently reconfigured the US 1 and PA 132 cloverleaf interchange in Trevose  into a folded diamond exchange.  Also The Red Roof Inn had it's driveway moved from US 1 to PA 132. 


https://goo.gl/maps/utdWearQ1sCuX6W37
This sign assembly really sucks.  Not so much Sesame Place is a theme park, but two panels for one exit.

Before the auxiliary lane was added, the sign on the left was the only sign, with the "Oxford Valley" control city being above a dividing line. The newer EXIT ONLY sign on the right was added in 2018 when the auxiliary lane was completed, but I don't know why they didn't just keep Sesame Place on the main exit sign.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on November 08, 2022, 08:53:39 AM
PennDOT - District 1 News: PennDOT, Erie County Technical School Holding Public Open House to Mark Completion of the Oliver Road Roundabout (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1967)

CE Expert System (10/27/2022-11/8/2022):

District 1: US 62 over Lenhart Run Bridge Replacement (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec8525880c00474aeb?OpenDocument)

District 4: PA 706 over East Branch Wyalusing Creek (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec8525857e004fcd01?OpenDocument)

I-80 over PA 93 (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec852582cd00441898?OpenDocument)

District 6:  Leftover Ida Repairs (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec8525878e005465ea?OpenDocument)

District 8: PA 74 over I-83 (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec852588d100662b23?OpenDocument)

District 9:  US 219 from SR 4013 (Sunset Road) to Nixon Avenue (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec8525889a005372e9?OpenDocument)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on November 09, 2022, 04:03:44 PM
(For PA 403)  PennDOT - District 9 News: Public Meeting and Plans Display for the Route 403 — U.S. 219 to PA 985 Safety Improvements Project (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-9/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1135)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on November 10, 2022, 09:47:43 AM
(For PA 997)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Bridge Replacement Project Begins Next Week on Mont Alto Road (Route 2031) in Guilford Township, Franklin County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1879)

QuoteThe project also includes replacing the existing single span concrete slab bridge on Route 997 spanning the West Branch of Antietam Creek in Quincy Township with a precast reinforced concrete box culvert. This work is expected to begin next spring.

Looking at ECMS, SR 2031 will be part of the detour route for PA 997 in the spring.

PennDOT - Statewide News: Gov. Wolf Highlights Significant Infrastructure Investments in First Year of Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/pages/all-news-details.aspx?newsid=1002)

PennDOT - District 6 News:  Paving, Bridge Repair Scheduled at Night Next Week on I-95, I-476 Ramp in Delaware County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7941)

(For I-80)  PennDOT - District 3 News: Roadwork Continues on I-80 EB/WB in Columbia County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4430)

(For PA 286)  PennDOT - District 10 News: Traffic Alert for Oakland Avenue in Indiana County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1406)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on November 14, 2022, 01:09:03 PM
PennDOT - District 9 News: Wolf Administration Wraps up 2022 Construction Season in PennDOT District 9, Highlights Federal Investments (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-9/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1136)

PennDOT - District 8 News: PennDOT District 8 Wraps Up 2022 Construction Season in South Central PA (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1883)

(For US 22/US 322)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Schedule Update: Overnight Rolling Stops Planned for WB Route 22/322 in Dauphin County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1884)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on November 15, 2022, 08:29:27 AM
CE Expert System:

District 9: 

PA 36/PA 164 eastern intersection in Roaring Spring (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec852586e7004809bd?OpenDocument)

District 10: 

PA 403 over US 22 (due to beam hit)  (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec852588e000604224?OpenDocument)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on November 16, 2022, 03:27:07 PM
PennDOT - District 6 News: PennDOT Awarded Preservation Honors for Two Historic Bridges in Delaware, Bucks Counties (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7953)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on November 17, 2022, 12:00:45 PM
(For US 202 BUS)  PennDOT - District 6 News: SEPTA Improvement to Close Butler Avenue in New Britain and Chalfont Boroughs (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7956)

(For PA 419)  PennDOT - District 5 News: PennDOT Announces Plans Display for PA 419 Culvert Project in Berks County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-5/pages/details.aspx?newsid=3379)

(For US 1)  PennDOT - District 6 News: U.S. 1 Bridge Construction Nearing Completion in Middletown Township, Bucks County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7959)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on November 18, 2022, 02:36:59 PM
(For PA 26 and PA 45)  PennDOT - District 2 News: Update on Route 26/45 Intersection Project as Work Winds Down (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2492)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on November 21, 2022, 01:04:04 PM
(For US 22/US 322 at PA 34)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Traffic Switch Planned for Route 22 Bridge Project at Route 34 in Perry County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1887)

(For PA 10)  PennDOT - District 5 News: PennDOT Announces Plans Display for PA 10 Bridge Project in Caernarvon Township and New Morgan Borough, Berks County (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-5/pages/details.aspx?newsid=3387)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on November 22, 2022, 07:55:00 AM
CE Expert System:

District 4:

PA 435 over Lackawanna County Railroad Authority (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec8525881d00488153?OpenDocument) and Roaring Brook (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec8525882c004ad631?OpenDocument) 

District 9:

PA 655 over Barnett's Run (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec8525881b0050801c?OpenDocument)

PA 160 Slide North of Wilmore (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec852588e3000a183a?OpenDocument)

PennDOT - District 2 News: PennDOT to Hold Public Open House and Plans Display for River Road Bridge (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2495)

(For US 202 SB)  PennDOT - District 6 News: Markley Street/Main Street Intersection Reconstruction Begins December 2 in Norristown (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7964)

(For US 1)  PennDOT - District 6 News: Construction Wrapping Up on New U.S. 1 North Bridge in Middletown Township, Bucks County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7967)

PennDOT - District 6 News: Roadway Construction Scheduled at Night Next Week on I-95 in Delaware County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7968)

PennDOT - District 8 News: Inspection Tomorrow on the Market Street Bridge Between Lemoyne/Wormleysburg in Cumberland County and City Island in Dauphin County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1888)

(For US 322 BUS (West Chester))  PennDOT - District 6 News: PennDOT to Host Virtual Public Meeting for High Street Pedestrian Safety Improvement Project in West Chester (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7971)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on November 23, 2022, 12:03:54 PM
(For PA 32)  PennDOT - District 6 News: PennDOT Completes Route 32 (River Road) Bridge Repair, Reopens Highway Over Ridge Creek in Tinicum Township, Bucks County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7973)

PennDOT - District 8 News: Latimore Valley Road (Route 1005) Bridge in Latimore Township, Adams County, is Open to Traffic (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1889)

EDIT (11-24-2022):I also want to mention that there is a warehouse currently being built along PA 163 west of I-81.  I went this direction last night to avoid some congestion in Hagerstown, MD.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on November 29, 2022, 09:15:39 AM
CE Expert System:

District 4:  I-81/PA 424 Interchange (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec8525873a0052b51c?OpenDocument)

(For US 119)  PennDOT - District 10 News: Traffic Alert for U.S. 119 in Lucerne Mines, Indiana County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1409)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on December 01, 2022, 08:18:11 AM
CE Expert System:

District 10:  PA 68 west of Butler (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec852588fd005596be?OpenDocument)

PennDOT - District 6 News: Roadway Construction Scheduled at Night Next Week on I-95 in Delaware County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7982)

PennDOT - District 6 News: PennDOT to Begin Roundabout Safety Improvement Project in Milford, Richland Townships (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7990)

PennDOT - District 2 News: PennDOT Details District 2 Construction Season Wrap-Up (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2504)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on December 02, 2022, 01:16:38 PM
PennDOT - District 6 News: Wolf Administration Recaps Robust 2022 Construction Season Across Southeast Pennsylvania (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7997)

(For I-90)  PennDOT - District 1 News: PennDOT Announces Public Meeting for Beckman Road Bridge Feasibility Study, I-90 Reconstruction Project in Erie County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1989)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on December 06, 2022, 08:05:07 AM
CE Expert System:

District 2:  PA 333 over Tributary of the Juniata River (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec852585610048ba1d?OpenDocument)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on December 07, 2022, 02:32:39 PM
PennDOT - District 5 News: PennDOT Wraps Up 2022 Construction Season in East Central PA (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-5/pages/details.aspx?newsid=3403)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on December 07, 2022, 03:36:55 PM
(For PA 420)  PennDOT - District 6 News: Route 420 South (Wanamaker Avenue) Bridge over Darby Creek to Close Indefinitely in Prospect Park Borough, Tinicum Township (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8002)

This bridge currently has a weight limit with an ALT TRUCK Route.

(For PA 611)  PennDOT - District 5 News: Monroe County: PA 611 Closed in Delaware Water Gap (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-5/pages/details.aspx?newsid=3404)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ixnay on December 07, 2022, 06:45:25 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on December 07, 2022, 03:36:55 PM
(For PA 420)  PennDOT - District 6 News: Route 420 South (Wanamaker Avenue) Bridge over Darby Creek to Close Indefinitely in Prospect Park Borough, Tinicum Township (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8002)

This bridge currently has a weight limit with an ALT TRUCK Route.

Found that out via a rush hour report on KYW News Radio during my homeward commute tonight, on the 5:22 update.

Quote(For PA 611)  PennDOT - District 5 News: Monroe County: PA 611 Closed in Delaware Water Gap (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-5/pages/details.aspx?newsid=3404)

From the linked statement: 
QuotePA 611 was closed last night due to a rock slide caused by recent heavy rain. Traffic is being detoured on PA 512, PA 33, US 209, Interstate 80, and Business Route 209.

This section of PA 611 will remain closed until further notice.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: PHLBOS on December 07, 2022, 07:08:55 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on December 07, 2022, 03:36:55 PM
(For PA 420)  PennDOT - District 6 News: Route 420 South (Wanamaker Avenue) Bridge over Darby Creek to Close Indefinitely in Prospect Park Borough, Tinicum Township (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8002)

This bridge currently has a weight limit with an ALT TRUCK Route.
This bridge is about a mile from where I live and will impact access to I-95 (especially northbound) & PHL big time.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: jeffandnicole on December 07, 2022, 07:34:16 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on December 07, 2022, 07:08:55 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on December 07, 2022, 03:36:55 PM
(For PA 420)  PennDOT - District 6 News: Route 420 South (Wanamaker Avenue) Bridge over Darby Creek to Close Indefinitely in Prospect Park Borough, Tinicum Township (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8002)

This bridge currently has a weight limit with an ALT TRUCK Route.
This bridge is about a mile from where I live and will impact access to I-95 (especially northbound) & PHL big time.

These bridges get inspected once a year.  How did it manage to deteriorate so badly in a year's span that it required a closure? That simply isn't normal.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ixnay on December 08, 2022, 08:14:00 AM
Quote from: PHLBOS on December 07, 2022, 07:08:55 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on December 07, 2022, 03:36:55 PM
(For PA 420)  PennDOT - District 6 News: Route 420 South (Wanamaker Avenue) Bridge over Darby Creek to Close Indefinitely in Prospect Park Borough, Tinicum Township (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8002)

This bridge currently has a weight limit with an ALT TRUCK Route.
This bridge is about a mile from where I live and will impact access to I-95 (especially northbound) & PHL big time.

Yep, another bridgemageddon (this one of the half variety, and I'm looking at you, L.A.).  Memphis had a full one last year with I-40.  North Jersey had its half one with the Pulaski Skyway.  The Newark, DE area is currently having a full one where Otts Chapel Rd. crosses I-95.

Philly's biggest bridgemageddon may have been 40 years ago when the Platt Bridge (PA 291) was closed for three years for redecking.  It reopened at the same time the missing link of I-95 opened.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on December 08, 2022, 09:13:44 AM
(For US 1)  PennDOT - District 6 News: Bridge Construction, Core Borings Planned at Night Next Week on U.S. 1 Improvement Project in Bucks County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8004)

PennDOT - District 1 News: Wolf Administration Reviews 2022 Construction Season for PennDOT's Northwest Region (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1991)

(For PA 32)  PennDOT - District 6 News: Tree Removal to Close Route 32 (River Road) Next Thursday in New Hope Borough, Solebury Township (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8007)

(For US 202)  PennDOT - District 6 News: Roadway Reconstruction Continues Through 2023 Under $54.3 Million U.S. 202 Widening Project in Montgomery County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8009)

PennDOT - District 6 News: Route 309 Connector Construction to Close Township Line Road Beginning January 3 in Franconia, Hatfield Townships (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8010)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: famartin on December 08, 2022, 09:38:37 AM
Quote from: ixnay on December 08, 2022, 08:14:00 AM
Quote from: PHLBOS on December 07, 2022, 07:08:55 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on December 07, 2022, 03:36:55 PM
(For PA 420)  PennDOT - District 6 News: Route 420 South (Wanamaker Avenue) Bridge over Darby Creek to Close Indefinitely in Prospect Park Borough, Tinicum Township (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8002)

This bridge currently has a weight limit with an ALT TRUCK Route.
This bridge is about a mile from where I live and will impact access to I-95 (especially northbound) & PHL big time.

Yep, another bridgemageddon (this one of the half variety, and I'm looking at you, L.A.).  Memphis had a full one last year with I-40.  North Jersey had its half one with the Pulaski Skyway.  The Newark, DE area is currently having a full one where Otts Chapel Rd. crosses I-95.

Philly's biggest bridgemageddon may have been 40 years ago when the Platt Bridge was closed for three years for redecking.

I'm mildly surprised they haven't considered restriping the northbound bridge to one-lane each direction for the short-term. Maybe they'll do that in the coming days. Or maybe they're afraid traffic will back up onto I-95, though I didn't get the impression traffic was that heavy to cause such a problem.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ixnay on December 08, 2022, 11:01:51 AM
Quote from: famartin on December 08, 2022, 09:38:37 AM
Quote from: ixnay on December 08, 2022, 08:14:00 AM
Quote from: PHLBOS on December 07, 2022, 07:08:55 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on December 07, 2022, 03:36:55 PM
(For PA 420)  PennDOT - District 6 News: Route 420 South (Wanamaker Avenue) Bridge over Darby Creek to Close Indefinitely in Prospect Park Borough, Tinicum Township (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8002)

This bridge currently has a weight limit with an ALT TRUCK Route.
This bridge is about a mile from where I live and will impact access to I-95 (especially northbound) & PHL big time.

Yep, another bridgemageddon (this one of the half variety, and I'm looking at you, L.A.).  Memphis had a full one last year with I-40.  North Jersey had its half one with the Pulaski Skyway.  The Newark, DE area is currently having a full one where Otts Chapel Rd. crosses I-95.

Philly's biggest bridgemageddon may have been 40 years ago when the Platt Bridge was closed for three years for redecking.

I'm mildly surprised they haven't considered restriping the northbound bridge to one-lane each direction for the short-term. Maybe they'll do that in the coming days. Or maybe they're afraid traffic will back up onto I-95, though I didn't get the impression traffic was that heavy to cause such a problem.

It's in the same part of Delco as the Ward Ave. bridge closure in downtown Ridley Park.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on December 09, 2022, 02:04:17 PM
(For PA 26 at PA 45)  PennDOT - District 2 News: PennDOT Gives Final Update on Route 26/45 Intersection Project (http://www.penndot.gov/regionaloffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2508)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on December 11, 2022, 04:15:32 PM
https://goo.gl/maps/5Rpff2w9M4AV6Ryd9
This is odd. US 30 mainline drops to one lane while the unnumbered route into the city gets two lanes.

This always got me with PennDOT with freeway bypasses at the ends. In some places the freeway starts from a default where the main route becomes the freeway and the old alignment is from an exit, then in others the existing alignment is the main body and the the through route must exit.

Plus the lack of a Business US 30 designated is another issue. As US 220 has a business route through the same city. Why designate one and not both.


https://goo.gl/maps/K2bchyeUpokfbbha8
Then the unusual white faced Turnpike shields, which I like, seem common in some areas over others.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on December 11, 2022, 04:39:30 PM
^Actually, US 30 does have a business route here.  It is not fully posted though. (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.0191415,-78.5014555,3a,75y,91.45h,77.23t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1scrLVP899JxwQdLxaMzYPHg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on December 11, 2022, 11:20:07 PM
Still US 220 gets better attention despite the PA 56 interchange on I-99 which is supposed to be its northern terminus.

https://goo.gl/maps/kpCjEznPtHKp4Fg7A
Also what is the route number for the freeway connector between I-99 Exit 28 and US 22 here?
https://goo.gl/maps/UaPuzejsEvKQfdU67 https://goo.gl/maps/UaPuzejsEvKQfdU67
US 22 exits the freeway at PA 764 so that freeway is unnumbered and acts as a glorified ramp between the two.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on December 12, 2022, 06:29:37 AM
Quick clicks on the VideoLog (https://gis.penndot.gov/Videolog/) show the ramps here as SR 8004 (usually ramps have a SR 8XXX number).
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on December 12, 2022, 09:31:38 AM
I take someday they plan to extend the US 22 freeway to the east and bypass Holidaysburg?


https://goo.gl/maps/kNXanZPV2TNgKC796
Also I saw this unusual mileage sign on a local road in Breezewood for points along I-70.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on December 12, 2022, 10:02:08 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on December 12, 2022, 09:31:38 AM
I take someday they plan to extend the US 22 freeway to the east and bypass Holidaysburg?

I am unsure that is even necessary.  Taking I-99 NB to Frankstown Rd or PA 453 is what I see on GPS units to do to get around US 22.

Quote
https://goo.gl/maps/kNXanZPV2TNgKC796
Also I saw this unusual mileage sign on a local road in Breezewood for points along I-70.

That road connects to an interchange on I-70 to the south as an alternate into and out of Breezewood for those coming to/from US 30 to the west.

Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on December 12, 2022, 10:04:53 AM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on December 12, 2022, 10:02:08 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on December 12, 2022, 09:31:38 AM
I take someday they plan to extend the US 22 freeway to the east and bypass Holidaysburg?

I am unsure that is even necessary.  Taking I-99 NB to Frankstown Rd or PA 453 is what I see on GPS units to do to get around US 22.

Quote
https://goo.gl/maps/kNXanZPV2TNgKC796
Also I saw this unusual mileage sign on a local road in Breezewood for points along I-70.

That road connects to an interchange on I-70 to the south as an alternate into and out of Breezewood for those coming to/from US 30 to the west.



Well the trumpet for Exit 28 leaves room for extension. Plus EB to NB crosses under I-99 with NB to WB above it.  So I'm sure they've examined that aspect during design.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Bitmapped on December 12, 2022, 10:43:44 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on December 11, 2022, 04:15:32 PM
https://goo.gl/maps/5Rpff2w9M4AV6Ryd9
This is odd. US 30 mainline drops to one lane while the unnumbered route into the city gets two lanes.

This always got me with PennDOT with freeway bypasses at the ends. In some places the freeway starts from a default where the main route becomes the freeway and the old alignment is from an exit, then in others the existing alignment is the main body and the the through route must exit.

My assumption about the left exit configuration here is that it minimized impacts from earthmoving on Raystown Branch Juniata River. As for why the lanes are striped like that with US 30 existing off itself, I don't know.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on December 12, 2022, 11:04:58 AM
On the west end of that bypass, they do give US 30 the advantage though with an at grade.

I do know the US 30 exiting itself at Lancaster and Coatesville has to do with planned freeways between the two that never got built due to NIMBYs in both Lancaster and Chester Counties.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on December 12, 2022, 01:11:28 PM
PennDOT - District 9 News: Road Closure on Route 3003 (Draketown Road) Bridge in Somerset County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-9/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1137)

QuoteHollidaysburg, PA — The Pennsylvania Department of Transportation (PennDOT) is implementing a bridge closure on Route 3003 (Draketown Road) at the intersection with T-393 (Conn Road) in Lower Turkeyfoot Township due to undermining of the stone abutment.

This restriction is being implemented in the interest of safety and will be effective immediately. At this time, a date to be able to make repairs has not been determined, however, repairs will likely not be able to be completed until spring due to high water and the winter season.

Traffic will be detoured using Route 3003 (Draketown Road) and Route 281.

Motorists can check conditions on major roadways by visiting www.511PA.com. 511PA, which is free and available 24 hours a day, provides traffic delay warnings, weather forecasts, traffic speed information and access to more than 1,000 traffic cameras.

511PA is also available through a smartphone application for iPhone and Android devices, by calling 5-1-1, or by following regional Twitter alerts accessible on the 511PA website.

Subscribe to Penndot news in Bedford, Blair, Cambria, Fulton, Huntingdon and Somerset Counties at www.penndot.pa.gov/District9.

Follow local PennDOT information on Twitter at www.twitter.com/511PAAltoona.

Media contact: Tara M Callahan-Henry, 814-696-7101   
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: rickmastfan67 on December 12, 2022, 09:32:22 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on December 12, 2022, 10:02:08 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on December 12, 2022, 09:31:38 AM
I take someday they plan to extend the US 22 freeway to the east and bypass Holidaysburg?

I am unsure that is even necessary.  Taking I-99 NB to Frankstown Rd or PA 453 is what I see on GPS units to do to get around US 22.

All that needs to be done honestly, is just connect it directly to US-220 Business there (Plank Road).  That's it.  That way, they can bypass Duncansville, which is the major problem there.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on December 13, 2022, 04:59:11 AM
What's really odd is the turnpike like trumpet to trumpet interchange in Duncansville at US 22 and PA 764. Usually they're created for closed ticket tolling.

One of the rare non tolled freeway use of such an interchange.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on December 13, 2022, 07:50:02 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on December 12, 2022, 11:04:58 AM
On the west end of that bypass, they do give US 30 the advantage though with an at grade.

I do know the US 30 exiting itself at Lancaster and Coatesville has to do with planned freeways between the two that never got built due to NIMBYs in both Lancaster and Chester Counties.

I forgot to mention this yesterday, but I remember seeing a reconfiguration of the west end of the Coatesville Bypass going east on US 30 when I drove that way on November 12th.  It was dark so no photo or even myself truly remembering what the change was.  It was not related to the plans related to improving the Coatesville-Downingtown Bypass.  It seems to be related to the Sadbury Commons expansion (https://www.us30-chesco.com/2300-2/).  I think it can be somewhat seen in August 2022 GSV. (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.9827293,-75.9263354,3a,75y,106.01h,91.02t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1siEKEQ7lF74xbd5cLLWdNGQ!2e0!5s20220801T000000!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Bitmapped on December 13, 2022, 09:19:12 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on December 12, 2022, 11:04:58 AM
On the west end of that bypass, they do give US 30 the advantage though with an at grade.

There's a big disparity in traffic counts east and west of Bedford. East of Bedford, US 30 has about 18,000 VPD with about 7100 taking the business route into town. You'd need to signalize to handle those values. On the west side of town, US 30 has 6800 VPD with 3600 VPD on the business route, which functions unsignalized.

Quote from: rickmastfan67 on December 12, 2022, 09:32:22 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on December 12, 2022, 10:02:08 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on December 12, 2022, 09:31:38 AM
I take someday they plan to extend the US 22 freeway to the east and bypass Holidaysburg?

I am unsure that is even necessary.  Taking I-99 NB to Frankstown Rd or PA 453 is what I see on GPS units to do to get around US 22.

All that needs to be done honestly, is just connect it directly to US-220 Business there (Plank Road).  That's it.  That way, they can bypass Duncansville, which is the major problem there.

While that would be an incremental improvement, Hollidaysburg is just as much of a slog as Duncansville. You really need something that bypasses the both and reconnects to US 22 around Frankstown Road.

Quote from: roadman65 on December 13, 2022, 04:59:11 AM
What's really odd is the turnpike like trumpet to trumpet interchange in Duncansville at US 22 and PA 764. Usually they're created for closed ticket tolling.

The interchange makes sense when you look at what's going on around it. The trumpet on the freeway mainline is basically forced to give some distance from the I-99 interchange.  If you don't want to signalize the 3-leg intersection at PA 764, the trumpet is the style that makes the most sense there.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on December 13, 2022, 01:51:20 PM
(For PA 309)  PennDOT - District 6 News: Roadway Construction, Traffic Shift Next Week on Route 309 (Sellersville Bypass) in West Rockhill Township

Quote
King of Prussia, PA — The Pennsylvania Department of Transportation (PennDOT) announced today that roadway construction will continue next week on Route 309 (Sellersville Bypass) in West Rockhill Township, Bucks County under a project to rehabilitate the pavement and repair several structures on a 9.1-mile section of the expressway.
Motorists are advised of the following travel restriction:
-   Monday, December 19, through Wednesday, December 21, from 9:00 AM to 3:00 PM, lane closures are scheduled on northbound and southbound Route 309 (Sellersville Bypass) between Route 563 (Ridge Road) and Rich Hill Road for barrier relocation and pavement marking installation.
Once the operations are completed, PennDOT's contractor will shift northbound and southbound Route 309 (Sellersville Bypass) traffic to the outer lanes to begin work on the left lanes.
Periodic weekday lane closures will also remain in place through early 2023 on northbound and/or southbound Route 309 (Sellersville Bypass) from Route 152 (State Road) to just north of Reliance Road for the rehabilitation of two bridges.
Motorists are advised to allow extra time when traveling through the work areas because backups and delays will occur. All scheduled activities are weather dependent.
Under this project, PennDOT's contractor will reconstruct and rehabilitate the Route 309 corridor (Sellersville Bypass) from Unionville Pike in Hatfield Township, Montgomery County, to just north of Rich Hill Road in Richland Township, Bucks County. The improvement plan includes the following:
-   Milling and overlay;
-   Reconstructing shoulders;
-   Installing new guide rail and median barrier;
-   Replacing two bridge superstructures;
-   Rehabilitating eight Route 309 bridges, four overhead bridges and four culverts;
-   Repairing concrete ditches;
-   Installing drainage improvements, new pavement markings and signs; and
-   Integrating Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS).
James D. Morrissey, Inc. of Philadelphia is the general contractor on the $54.6 million project, which is financed with 80 percent federal and 20 percent state funds. The entire project is scheduled to finish in summer 2024.
Motorists can check conditions on more than 40,000 roadway miles, including color-coded winter conditions on 2,900 miles, by visiting www.511PA.com. 511PA, which is free and available 24 hours a day, provides traffic delay warnings, weather forecasts, traffic speed information and access to more than 1,000 traffic cameras.
For a complete list of construction projects impacting state-owned highways in Bucks, Chester, Delaware, Montgomery and Philadelphia counties, visit the District 6 Traffic Bulletin.
Information about infrastructure in District 6, including completed work and significant projects, is available at www.penndot.pa.gov/D6Results. Find PennDOT's planned and active construction projects at www.projects.penndot.gov.
Subscribe to PennDOT District 6 news and traffic alerts at www.penndot.pa.gov/District6.
Follow PennDOT on Twitter and like the department on Facebook and Instagram.

MEDIA CONTACT: Brad Rudolph, 610-205-6800

(For US 202 SB)  PennDOT - District 6 News: PennDOT Reopens Markley Street/Main Street Intersection Following Reconstruction in Norristown

QuoteKing of Prussia, PA -- The Pennsylvania Department of Transportation (PennDOT) announced today that the Markley Street (U.S. 202 South) and Main Street Intersection in Norristown, Montgomery County has reopened to traffic. The intersection had been closed since Friday, December 2 for reconstruction under the ongoing Markley Street (U.S. 202 South) Improvement Project.

PennDOT's contractor rebuilt the intersection by removing the existing pavement and applying precast concrete slabs. New stormwater facilities were also installed to improve drainage.

Reconstruction of the southbound side of Markley Street (U.S. 202 South) is currently underway and expected to be completed in spring 2023. Construction on the entire improvement project is expected to finish in late 2023.

Allan Myers, LP, of Worcester, Montgomery County is the general contractor on the $25.7 million project, which is financed with 80% federal and 20% state funds.

Motorists can check conditions on more than 40,000 roadway miles, including color-coded winter conditions on 2,900 miles, by visiting www.511PA.com. 511PA, which is free and available 24 hours a day, provides traffic delay warnings, weather forecasts, traffic speed information and access to more than 1,000 traffic cameras.

For a complete list of construction projects impacting state-owned highways in Bucks, Chester, Delaware, Montgomery and Philadelphia counties, visit the District 6 Traffic Bulletin.

Information about infrastructure in District 6, including completed work and significant projects, is available at www.penndot.pa.gov/D6Results. Find PennDOT's planned and active construction projects at www.projects.penndot.gov.

Subscribe to PennDOT District 6 news and traffic alerts at www.penndot.pa.gov/District6.

Follow PennDOT on Twitter and like the department on Facebook and Instagram.

MEDIA CONTACT: Brad Rudolph, 610-205-6800
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on December 15, 2022, 08:44:08 AM
Here we go again...

(For I-80)  PennDOT - District 3 News: Multi-Vehicle Crash Closes Interstate 80 WB in Northumberland and Union Counties (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4433)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ixnay on December 15, 2022, 09:29:17 AM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on December 15, 2022, 08:44:08 AM
Here we go again...

(For I-80)  PennDOT - District 3 News: Multi-Vehicle Crash Closes Interstate 80 WB in Northumberland and Union Counties (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4433)

Looking at Google Maps traffic, all bets seem to be off between Milton and Strattanville (about 145 miles).
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: MASTERNC on December 15, 2022, 10:38:45 AM
It's bad enough all trucks have been banned on I-80 between I-79 and I-99.  You should see the trucks parked at the I-99 interchange.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on December 19, 2022, 12:44:53 PM
https://goo.gl/maps/Ts1GX55Nu41AVpeS7
Does US 220 ALT still exist?

See it's no longer signed on I-80.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on December 19, 2022, 12:55:46 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on December 19, 2022, 12:44:53 PM
https://goo.gl/maps/Ts1GX55Nu41AVpeS7
Does US 220 ALT still exist?

See it's no longer signed on I-80.

Yes, it is signed on the I-80 WB ramp to PA 150 SB.  (https://www.facebook.com/photo/?fbid=10218015636502986&set=a.10218015778106526)

Someone may be able to convince me to remove the I-80/US 220 ALT concurrency in Travel Mapping though.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on December 19, 2022, 01:10:20 PM
https://goo.gl/maps/NhSzxYpM8dmVT6tZ8
I'm noticing this unusual signing of State College on I-80 West. It shows it 16 miles on the mileage sign, but it exits off I-80 just beyond the sign.

I'm not complaining, but pointing out the oddity of this. Yes US 220 is present here on I-80 so it should receive recognition with mileage controls as much as I-80 it is paired, I just think it's a freak coincidence this ended up here like it.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Bitmapped on December 19, 2022, 01:59:01 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on December 19, 2022, 12:44:53 PM
https://goo.gl/maps/Ts1GX55Nu41AVpeS7
Does US 220 ALT still exist?

See it's no longer signed on I-80.

AFAIK, it's never been fully signed on any of the BGS along its route. What signage exists seems to be an afterthought. IMHO, downgrade it to a traffic route (probably in the x50 family) and move on. There's no reason for it to be signed as an alternate for US 220.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on December 19, 2022, 06:56:49 PM
I have an old photo of it at PA 150. Gribblenation featured it before it got closed and revamped later on. It has the ALT banner on top as PennDOT did it cheap when US 220 mainline was changed to ALT US 220 at Exit 158.

Before I-99 US 220 stayed one exit west on I-80 to Milesburg. So rather than order a new sign ( or signs) they added the banner next to the exit tab.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: famartin on December 19, 2022, 07:43:17 PM
US 220 Alt exists for the same reason most alt and bus routes exist - to keep some traffic going on the old road for local business, and to keep some historical continuity going for locals. Will it eventually go away?  Possibly. But its not THAT old yet, so I can see it hanging around a bit longer.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: amroad17 on December 19, 2022, 11:36:02 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on December 19, 2022, 01:10:20 PM
https://goo.gl/maps/NhSzxYpM8dmVT6tZ8
I'm noticing this unusual signing of State College on I-80 West. It shows it 16 miles on the mileage sign, but it exits off I-80 just beyond the sign.

I'm not complaining, but pointing out the oddity of this. Yes US 220 is present here on I-80 so it should receive recognition with mileage controls as much as I-80 it is paired, I just think it's a freak coincidence this ended up here like it.
It appears this sign has been recently put up--maybe as a post interchange mileage sign for the recently opened Exit 163.  State College should be posted on the post interchange mileage sign west of Exit 178 in place of Clearfield (Milesburg 21/Bellefonte 22/State College 31).  No need to change the one west of Exit 173.

A question: will PA 26 be re-routed onto I-80 between Exits 161 and 163 when the I-80/I-99 West Interchange is complete?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: famartin on December 20, 2022, 12:01:10 AM
Quote from: amroad17 on December 19, 2022, 11:36:02 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on December 19, 2022, 01:10:20 PM
https://goo.gl/maps/NhSzxYpM8dmVT6tZ8
I'm noticing this unusual signing of State College on I-80 West. It shows it 16 miles on the mileage sign, but it exits off I-80 just beyond the sign.

I'm not complaining, but pointing out the oddity of this. Yes US 220 is present here on I-80 so it should receive recognition with mileage controls as much as I-80 it is paired, I just think it's a freak coincidence this ended up here like it.
It appears this sign has been recently put up--maybe as a post interchange mileage sign for the recently opened Exit 163.  State College should be posted on the post interchange mileage sign west of Exit 178 in place of Clearfield (Milesburg 21/Bellefonte 22/State College 31).  No need to change the one west of Exit 173.

A question: will PA 26 be re-routed onto I-80 between Exits 161 and 163 when the I-80/I-99 West Interchange is complete?

A google search reveals schematics that would suggest it will be, but they don't make it explicit.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on December 20, 2022, 06:34:15 AM
Quote from: famartin on December 20, 2022, 12:01:10 AM
Quote from: amroad17 on December 19, 2022, 11:36:02 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on December 19, 2022, 01:10:20 PM
https://goo.gl/maps/NhSzxYpM8dmVT6tZ8
I'm noticing this unusual signing of State College on I-80 West. It shows it 16 miles on the mileage sign, but it exits off I-80 just beyond the sign.

I'm not complaining, but pointing out the oddity of this. Yes US 220 is present here on I-80 so it should receive recognition with mileage controls as much as I-80 it is paired, I just think it's a freak coincidence this ended up here like it.
It appears this sign has been recently put up--maybe as a post interchange mileage sign for the recently opened Exit 163.  State College should be posted on the post interchange mileage sign west of Exit 178 in place of Clearfield (Milesburg 21/Bellefonte 22/State College 31).  No need to change the one west of Exit 173.

A question: will PA 26 be re-routed onto I-80 between Exits 161 and 163 when the I-80/I-99 West Interchange is complete?

A google search reveals schematics that would suggest it will be, but they don't make it explicit.

I believe so, but I question why it was not done now.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on December 20, 2022, 07:49:25 AM
According to local news sources, it was originally put on the back burner until two politicians who lived in the area put a push just to get this far.
https://wjactv.com/news/local/first-phase-of-interstate-99i-80-interchange-project-complete
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Bitmapped on December 20, 2022, 05:34:43 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on December 20, 2022, 06:34:15 AM
Quote from: famartin on December 20, 2022, 12:01:10 AM
Quote from: amroad17 on December 19, 2022, 11:36:02 PM
A question: will PA 26 be re-routed onto I-80 between Exits 161 and 163 when the I-80/I-99 West Interchange is complete?

A google search reveals schematics that would suggest it will be, but they don't make it explicit.

I believe so, but I question why it was not done now.

Why complicate the routing by entering and exiting a freeway and adding a turn when staying straight gets you to the exact same place in a comparable amount of time? I don't see any advantage to re-routing PA 26 before I-99 is disconnected from the local road network.

Quote from: roadman65 on December 20, 2022, 07:49:25 AM
According to local news sources, it was originally put on the back burner until two politicians who lived in the area put a push just to get this far.
https://wjactv.com/news/local/first-phase-of-interstate-99i-80-interchange-project-complete

They're not just random local politicians, they're two of the most powerful legislators in their respective houses which I'm sure didn't hurt. That being said, I'd take anything a politician says about taking credit for construction with a large grain of salt.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on December 21, 2022, 01:05:46 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on December 07, 2022, 03:36:55 PM
(For PA 420)  PennDOT - District 6 News: Route 420 South (Wanamaker Avenue) Bridge over Darby Creek to Close Indefinitely in Prospect Park Borough, Tinicum Township (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8002)

This bridge currently has a weight limit with an ALT TRUCK Route.

(For PA 420)  PennDOT - District 6 News: PennDOT Reopens Route 420 South Bridge over Darby Creek in Prospect Park Borough, Tinicum Township (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7950)

PennDOT - District 3 News: Wolf Administration Wraps Up 2022 Construction Season for PennDOT's Northcentral Region (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4441)

(For US 322)  PennDOT - District 2 News: PennDOT Announces Virtual Plans Display for the Clarion River Arch Preservation Project in Clarion and Paint Townships, Clarion County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1408)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on December 21, 2022, 05:34:12 PM
Quote from: Bitmapped on December 20, 2022, 05:34:43 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on December 20, 2022, 06:34:15 AM
Quote from: famartin on December 20, 2022, 12:01:10 AM
Quote from: amroad17 on December 19, 2022, 11:36:02 PM
A question: will PA 26 be re-routed onto I-80 between Exits 161 and 163 when the I-80/I-99 West Interchange is complete?

A google search reveals schematics that would suggest it will be, but they don't make it explicit.

I believe so, but I question why it was not done now.

Why complicate the routing by entering and exiting a freeway and adding a turn when staying straight gets you to the exact same place in a comparable amount of time? I don't see any advantage to re-routing PA 26 before I-99 is disconnected from the local road network.

Quote from: roadman65 on December 20, 2022, 07:49:25 AM
According to local news sources, it was originally put on the back burner until two politicians who lived in the area put a push just to get this far.
https://wjactv.com/news/local/first-phase-of-interstate-99i-80-interchange-project-complete

They're not just random local politicians, they're two of the most powerful legislators in their respective houses which I'm sure didn't hurt. That being said, I'd take anything a politician says about taking credit for construction with a large grain of salt.

I never said they weren't big names.

I said that originally the interchange project was low priority. If anything, you complimented my point that these two politicians have gotten it done, which is the nature of the news report.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on December 26, 2022, 09:27:46 AM
https://goo.gl/maps/eD1FTHmDvuRRH7no8
This here intersection on SB 3rd Street at US 22 and PA 248 was once a major highway terminus in PA.

PA Route 115 used to travel further south of US 209 via a wrong way overlap to Snydersville and then a bunch of other roads to Easton and end here.

It was the present PA 33 freeway that forced PennDOT to truncate PA 115 to where it ends today and relinquish it to local control.  In fact some old maps show PA 33 was to be numbered PA 115 when first built, however it was later changed.

https://goo.gl/maps/batqubwaHYTKZAuP7
This is WB on PA 248 still with a copied guide from when PA 115 existed in Easton, PA. Notice the Stroudsburg reference. Obviously it considered US 209 north of Snydersville as a route to there and PennDOT hasn't noticed it still.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on December 27, 2022, 08:58:33 AM
CE Expert System Update:

District 1:

PA 426 Bridge Replacement (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec8525863200595fb9?OpenDocument) (approved 12/16/2022)

District 3:

PA 87 Truss Replacement over Loyalsock Creek (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec8525891a004f2a80?OpenDocument) 

District 6:

PA 401 over Pickering Creek (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec85258161004a0024?OpenDocument)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on December 28, 2022, 01:17:07 PM
(For PA 75)  PennDOT - District 2 News: PennDOT Announces Closure Date for Port Royal Bridge (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2507)

(For PA 8)  PennDOT - District 1 News: Weight Limit Posted on Route 8 in Crawford County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1988)

(For PA 320)  PennDOT - District 6 News: PECO Utility Improvement to Close Route 320 (Spring Mill Road) Weekdays in Lower Merion Township (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7959)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Crown Victoria on December 31, 2022, 07:22:38 AM
You may be paying just a few cents more for gas and diesel in PA starting tomorrow...

Act 89 of 2013 provides for an annual calculation of the average wholesale price of gas and diesel each year, with a floor of $2.99 per gallon, from which the fuel taxes are calculated. For the first time since Act 89 came into effect, that price has exceeded the floor, so taxes are going up.

I believe California and Illinois are also increasing their fuel taxes, so this will still leave PA at #3 for gasoline taxes.

https://www.pennlive.com/news/2022/12/blame-rise-in-pa-gas-tax-for-likely-increase-at-the-pump-in-january.html

https://www.pacodeandbulletin.gov/Display/pabull?file=/secure/pabulletin/data/vol52/52-50/1906.html
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on January 03, 2023, 10:19:27 AM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on December 28, 2022, 01:17:07 PM
(For PA 75)  PennDOT - District 2 News: PennDOT Announces Closure Date for Port Royal Bridge (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2507)

(For PA 75)  PennDOT - District 2 News: PennDOT Delays Closure of Port Royal Bridge Until Thursday (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2509)

(For PA 113) PennDOT - District 6 News: PennDOT To Host Virtual Public Meeting for Route 113 (Souderton Road)/Minsi Trail Intersection Improvement Project in Hilltown Township (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7962)

PennDOT - District 4 News: Bridge Closing on SR 2035 over Interstate 81 in Luzerne County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-4/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1119)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on January 04, 2023, 10:32:41 AM
PennDOT - District 10 News: Utility Work to Begin on Next Stage of Freedom Road Expansion in Butler County (Cranberry Township) (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1412)

PennDOT - Statewide News: Governor Wolf Announces 32 Municipalities to Improve Traffic Safety with Red Light Enforcement Funds (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/pages/all-news-details.aspx?newsid=1011)

Quote​Harrisburg, PA — Governor Tom Wolf today announced that the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation (PennDOT) will distribute approximately $15 million in Automated Red-Light Enforcement (ARLE) funding to 32 municipalities statewide to fund 36 safety projects.

Pennsylvania's ARLE program aims to improve safety at signalized intersections by providing automated enforcement at locations where data shows red-light running has been an issue.

"This program helps communities across the state make important investments in traffic flow and safety," Gov. Wolf said. "These improvements complement the many road, bridge and multimodal projects happening in Pennsylvania."

Grant funding is supplied by fines from red light violations at 36 intersections in Philadelphia. State law specifies that projects improving safety, enhancing mobility and reducing congestion can be considered for funding. Municipalities submitted 151 applications, totaling $46 million in requests.

Projects were selected by an eight-member committee based on criteria such as safety benefits and effectiveness, cost, and local and regional impact. This investment brings the total dollars awarded through the ARLE funding program to $127.79 million, funding 537 transportation enhancement projects since 2010.

The 36 approved projects are as follows:

Adams County

Conewago Township - $55,094 for guide rail safety improvements.
Allegheny County

Carnegie Borough - $10,422 to install radar feedback signs on Forsythe Road.
Coraopolis Borough - $298,250 for traffic signal replacement to include overhead signals to reduce redlight running and pedestrian accommodations.
Hampton Township - $175,000 for S. Pioneer Road roadway safety improvements to include replacing out of date guiderail.
McCandless Township - $451,483 for signal component updates project at 21 locations throughout the municipality. Upgrades include accessible pedestrian signals, equipment for flashing yellow arrow operations, controller replacements and rewiring of existing signal equipment.
Penn Hills Township - $565,292 for traffic signal replacement at Frankstown Road (SR 0400) & Beulah Road (SR 0130).
Butler County

Butler Township - $249,504 for Pittsburgh Street & McCalmont Road/Vogel Road traffic signal modernization. Improvements include new mast arms to replace strain poles, new signal heads and reflectorized back plates.
Cranberry Township - $350,000 for Route 19 and Short Street traffic signal upgrade and modernization. Improvements include new mast arms to support additional signal heads, new controller to allow for advanced signal timings.
Penn Township - $446,706 for signal replacement and reconfiguration at Route 8 and Airport Road to include new mast arms to replace strain poles.
Dauphin County

Londonderry Township - $32,421 for Colebrook Road (SR 341) and Schoolhouse Road (T-494) intersection warning signals.
Delaware County

Chester City - $115,831 to improve PA 291 and 322 off-ramp/Jeffrey Street Traffic Signal. This project will convert the intersection from a flashing red/yellow configuration to a fully signalized intersection.
Radnor Township - $120,350 for a bridge height warning system at the SEPTA underpass on King of Prussia Road.
Yeadon Borough — $287,000 for MacDade Boulevard & Church Lane traffic signal and pedestrian accommodation improvements.
Erie County

Erie City - $395,769 for installation of 30 accessible pedestrian signal buttons to improve pedestrian safety.
Fayette County

Fayette County - $352,000 for Bullskin Township signal upgrades at three intersections along US 119. Improvements include radar detection systems to allow for more streamlined flows of traffic, siren preemption systems and battery back-up systems to allow the equipment to operate during outages which frequently happen along this roadway due to flooding.
Franklin County

Waynesboro Borough - $49,000 for the replacement of flashing school signs and the installation of speed limit driver feedback signs.
Lancaster County

East Petersburg Borough - $113,600 for traffic signal upgrades at SR 72/Enterprise Road and SR 72/Miller Road. Improvements include stop bar radar detection, advanced radar detection, pedestrian countdown timers and reflectorized back plates.
Ephrata Borough - $222,400 for intersection safety and signal improvements at three intersections in the Borough. Improvements include radar detection, pedestrian improvements and new mast arms.
Lebanon County

Heidelberg Township - $12,823 to install solar radar speed signs at the approaches to the intersection of Route 501 and East and West Reistville Road.
Lycoming County

Montoursville Borough - $465,000 for SR 2014 and Walnut Street traffic signal replacement.
Muncy Borough - $162,000 for pedestrian crosswalks safety improvements. This project will implement pedestrian activated rectangular rapid flash beacons (RRFB), high-visibility pavement markings, flexible post pedestrian crosswalk signs, approach crossing signage and LED in-roadway warning light (IRWL) crosswalk system.
Mercer County

Sharon City - $400,000 for State Street traffic signal and pedestrian improvements, including performing a traffic timings study, implementing a coordination plan, and updating intersections to include pedestrian pushbuttons and GPS timeclocks as required.
Springfield Township - $413,500 for signal equipment improvements including replacement of the existing flashing beacons, emergency vehicle preemption, radar vehicular detection, battery backup power supply, and vehicular signal heads with retroreflective backplates.
Mifflin County

Derry Township - $306,500 for Electric Avenue/Logan Boulevard Corridor Signal Upgrades to include coordinating 5 traffic signals.
Monroe County

Delaware Water Gap Borough - $52,725 for the placement of three electronic radar speed limit display signs.
Montgomery County

Cheltenham Township - $420,250 for traffic signal equipment upgrades at three intersections to include installation of ADA compliant pedestrian pushbuttons and countdown pedestrian signal heads.
Cheltenham Township - $343,700 for traffic signal equipment and pavement marking upgrades at the intersection of Rices Mill Road and Glenside Avenue.
Lansdale Borough - $156,000 to install two (2) ground mounted controllers, perform traffic counts, update timings, new pedestrian signal heads and push buttons and retroreflective backplates.
Northampton County

Northampton Borough - $156,538 for the installation of the Main Street/10th Street/Nor-Bath Trail pedestrian rectangular rapid flashing beacon.
Philadelphia County

Philadelphia City - $7,000,000.00 for the following 4 programs in the city: Citywide Intersection Modifications, Modern Roundabouts, Bike Network Curb Separation and Citywide Traffic Calming.
Pike County

Milford Borough - $19,080 to purchase and install electronic speed display signs at the four (4) main entrances to the Borough.
Westmoreland County

Salem Township - $389,000 for US 22 Traffic Signal Safety Upgrade Project to include LED vehicular signals with reflectorized backplates, LED "SIGNAL AHEAD" over the road warning flashers, LED pedestrian count down signals and Pedestrian latching push buttons.
York County

Hanover Borough - $487,287 for Downtown Route 94/116/194 Traffic Congestion & Pedestrian Safety Improvements. To include modernizing the intersections to include APS pedestrian signals, 3-second advance pedestrian phasing, flashing yellow arrow signals, 12-inch signals, and high visibility crosswalks at both intersections, and a new controller cabinet/assembly and signal mast arm poles at the Center Square intersection to accommodate the flashing yellow arrow signals.

For more information, visit PennDOT's website.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on January 05, 2023, 08:16:29 AM
CE Expert System:

District 9:  SR 2019 over US 22 (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec852588e3003f313d?OpenDocument)

(For US 6/US 209)  PennDOT - District 4 News: PennDOT Announces Online Plans Display for the SR 6, Section 451 over Delaware River Bridge Rehabilitation Project in Matamoras Borough, Pike County, PA & City of Port Jervis, Orange County, NY (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-4/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1120)

QuoteDunmore, PA — The Pennsylvania Department of Transportation (PennDOT) invites the public to a plans display regarding the SR 6, Section 451, over Delaware River Bridge Rehabilitation Project. This plans display will be held online.

The purpose of the project is to provide a sustainable crossing over the Delaware River that provides a two-lane bridge, addresses structural deficiencies, and provides continued access to local residents, businesses, and emergency services.

The SR 6 Section 451 project involves improvements to the crossing of SR 6 over the Delaware River in Matamoras Borough, Pike County, PA and the City of Port Jervis, Orange County, NY. The project proposes to replace the deck and sidewalks of the existing bridge with a new concrete deck and sidewalks. Additional structure work being proposed includes structural steel repairs, complete painting of the bridge, installation of new expansion joints, and repair to deteriorated portions of the substructures. Roadway improvements associated with the project include full-depth reconstruction only in the vicinity of the bridge, providing lane and shoulder widths meeting current design criteria. Additionally, new pavement markings will be provided throughout the project limits. Utility conflicts are not anticipated for this project. New drainage features will be added to the bridge deck and off-structure roadway drainage updated as necessary.
The existing bridge is not historic and does not contribute to any adjacent historic districts. No significant historical or cultural resources are present within the project site. There are no wetlands present within the project limits and no other environmentally sensitive resources will be affected by the project.

The bridge rehabilitation is expected to be constructed in three stages while maintaining both lanes of traffic at all times. Access to adjacent driveways and intersections will be maintained throughout the duration of the project, however, some turning movements associated with Delaware Drive will be restricted during certain stages of the project. Construction is expected to begin during the summer of 2024 and extend through 2025.
The plans display will be held online and will be available from January 6, 2023 to February 3, 2023. Online information, including detailed project information and comment form can be found by visiting the following PennDOT District 4-0 website: SR 6 Section 451 Bridge Project (pa.gov).
The purpose of the plans display is to introduce the project, display and describe the planned traffic control, and receive public input regarding questions or concerns with the project.
The project documents can be made available in alternative languages or formats if requested. If you need translation/interpretation services or have special needs or have special concerns that require individual attention, contact Summer Koziel, PennDOT Project Manager, at 570-963-4048 or skoziel@pa.gov.

Pursuant to Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, PennDOT does not discriminate on the basis of race, color, national origin, gender, age, or disability. If you feel that you have been denied the benefits of, or participation in a PennDOT program or activity, you may contact the PennDOT, Bureau of Equal Opportunity, DBE/Title VI Division at 717-787-5891.
Motorists can check conditions on major roadway miles by visiting www.511PA.com. 511PA, which is free and available 24 hours a day, provides traffic delay warnings, weather forecasts, traffic speed information, and access to more than 1,000 traffic cameras.

511PA is also available through a smartphone application for iPhone and Android devices, by calling 5-1-1, or by following regional Twitter alerts accessible on the 511PA website.
Subscribe to PennDOT news and traffic alerts in Lackawanna, Luzerne, Pike, Susquehanna, Wayne and Wyoming counties at www.penndot.gov/District4.
Information about infrastructure in District 4, including completed work and significant projects, is available at www.penndot.gov/D4Results.
Follow local PennDOT news on Twitter and like the department on Facebook and Instagram.

MEDIA CONTACT: Jessica Ruddy, 570-963-4044

Quote from: 74/171FAN on January 03, 2023, 10:19:27 AM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on December 28, 2022, 01:17:07 PM
(For PA 75)  PennDOT - District 2 News: PennDOT Announces Closure Date for Port Royal Bridge (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2507)

(For PA 75)  PennDOT - District 2 News: PennDOT Delays Closure of Port Royal Bridge Until Thursday (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2513)

QuoteAs the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation (PennDOT) and the Norfolk Southern Railroad continue coordination for repair work on a Route 75 bridge in Port Royal, a second delay for closing the bridge has become necessary. No new date has been set for the closure. PennDOT will issue an update on this project before the bridge is closed and the detour goes into effect.
Once closed, PennDOT anticipates the bridge remaining closed through June 30 while the contractor demolishes and replaces portions of the superstructure, which spans the Norfolk Southern Railroad in Port Royal.

Preliminary work started last September with the demolition of a two-story building on Second Street in Port Royal. Overall work on the project involves partial removal of the existing structure and construction of its replacement, approach paving, drainage improvements, water and sewer line replacements, sidewalk and guide rail replacement, pavement marking and miscellaneous construction. HRI, Inc. of State College is the contractor on this $4 million project.

Motorists are encouraged to "Know Before They Go" by checking conditions on more than 40,000 roadway miles by visiting www.511PA.com. 511PA, which is free and available 24 hours a day, provides traffic delay warnings, weather forecasts, traffic speed information and access to more than 1,000 traffic cameras.

511PA is also available through a smartphone application for iPhone and Android devices, by calling 5-1-1, or by following regional Twitter alerts accessible on the 511PA website.
                                 
Subscribe to PennDOT news in Cameron, Centre, Clearfield, Clinton, Elk, Juniata, McKean, Mifflin, and Potter counties at www.penndot.gov/District2.

Information about infrastructure in District 2, including completed work and significant projects, is available at www.penndot.gov/D2Results.

Find PennDOT's planned and active construction projects at www.projects.penndot.gov.
Follow PennDOT on Twitter and like the department on Facebook and Instagram.


MEDIA CONTACT:  Marla Fannin, 814-765-0423  mfannin@pa.gov

(For PA 82 ALT TRUCK) PennDOT - District 6 News: Bridge Repair to Begin on Gum Tree Road in Highland Township (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7965)

QuoteKing of Prussia, PA — The Pennsylvania Department of Transportation (PennDOT) announced today that construction will begin on the Gum Tree Road bridge over branch of Doe Run in Highland Township, Chester County under a project to repair 17 bridges in Bucks, Chester, Montgomery, and Philadelphia counties that sustained serious damage from the remnants of Hurricane Ida in September 2021.

Motorists are advised of the following travel restriction:

Friday, January 20, through early February, a 24/7 road closure is scheduled on Gum Tree Road between Friends Meeting House Road and Gibble Road. During the closure, motorists are directed to use Route 10 (Limestone Road/Church Street), Route 372 (First Avenue/Valley Road/Strasburg Road), and southbound Route 82 (Doe Run Road).
Motorists are advised to allow extra time when traveling through the work area because backups and delays will occur. Local access will be maintained up to the construction zone. The schedule is weather dependent.

Loftus Construction, Inc. of Cinnaminson, NJ, is the general contractor on this $3.2 million bridge repair project, which is financed with 80% federal and 20% state funds.

PennDOT's contractor will address undermining or scour by repairing and reinforcing the support systems and foundations of the 17 damaged structures to maintain them as safe and efficient crossings for the traveling public.

Motorists can check conditions on major roadways by visiting www.511PA.com or downloading the 511PA mobile application. 511PA, which is free and available 24 hours a day, provides traffic delay warnings, weather forecasts, traffic speed information and access to more than 1,000 traffic cameras.

For a complete list of construction projects impacting state-owned highways in Bucks, Chester, Delaware, Montgomery, and Philadelphia counties, visit the District 6 Traffic Bulletin.

Information about infrastructure in District 6, including completed work and significant projects, is available at www.penndot.pa.gov/D6Results. Find PennDOT's planned and active construction projects at www.projects.penndot.gov.

Subscribe to PennDOT District 6 news and traffic alerts at www.penndot.pa.gov/District6.

Follow PennDOT on Twitter and like the department on Facebook and Instagram.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on January 06, 2023, 10:25:35 AM
PennDOT - District 6 News: Roadway Construction Planned on Reeceville Road in West Brandywine Township (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7974)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on January 09, 2023, 09:00:42 AM
(For PA 32)  PennDOT - District 6 News: Tree Removal to Close Route 32 (River Road) Next Thursday in New Hope Borough, Solebury Township (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7979)

(For PA 441)  PennDOT - District 8 News: PennDOT Announces Online Plans Display for Sycamore Street/Paxton Street Intersection Improvement Project in Swatara Township and the City of Harrisburg, Dauphin County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1894)

(For US 422, PA 28, and PA 66)  PennDOT - District 10 News: PennDOT Announces Virtual Plans Display for Infantry Bridge Rehabilitation Project (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1413)

PennDOT - District 10 News: PennDOT Announces Virtual Plans Display for Graff Bridge Preservation Project (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1414)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on January 10, 2023, 09:31:17 AM
CE Expert System: 

District 6: PA 63 Intersection Improvements (most notably at PA 563) (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec852587a4004f5e24?OpenDocument)

PA 309 Connector Phase 3 (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec8525881300607e1c?OpenDocument)

(For PA 611)  PennDOT - District 5 News: Monroe County: Update on PA 611 Road Closure (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-5/pages/details.aspx?newsid=3406)

(For I-83 and US 322)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Rolling Stop Planned for Sunday on SB I-83 in Swatara Township, Dauphin County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1895)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on January 11, 2023, 09:24:43 AM
(For PA 160)  PennDOT - District 9 News: Public Meeting and Plans Display for the Route 160 Superstructure Replacement Projects (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-9/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1150)

(For US 11)  PennDOT - District 4 News: PennDOT Announces In-Person and Online Plans Display for the SR 11, Section 357, over Hunlock Creek Bridge Superstructure Replacement in Hunlock Township, Luzerne County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-4/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1122)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on January 12, 2023, 10:30:32 AM
PennDOT - District 5 News: PennDOT Announces Plans Display for Lincoln Drive Bridge Project in Rush Township, Schuylkill County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-5/pages/details.aspx?newsid=3408)

(For US 202) PennDOT - District 6 News: New Traffic Pattern Planned Next Week on U.S. 202, Johnson Highway Under Widening Project in Montgomery County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7987)

(For PA 18 and PA 358)  PennDOT - District 1 News: PennDOT Announces Online Plans Display for Route 18 and Routes 18/358 Intersection Improvements in Greenville, Mercer County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1994)

(For PA 443)  PennDOT - District 5 News: Schuylkill County: Upcoming Road Work (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-5/pages/details.aspx?newsid=3413)

QuoteCounty:  Schuylkill
Municipality:  Schuylkill Haven Borough
Road name:  PA 443/Columbia Street
Between:  Main Street   and St. James Street
Type of work:  Bridge Repair
Work being done by:  PennDOT Contractor
Type of restriction:  Daytime
Restriction:  There will be several short term (10-15 min) traffic stoppages for bridge beam setting. This work is related to the ongoing PA 443 Bridge Replacement project. Please use caution and expect delays.
Start date:  1/16/23
Est completion date:  1/17/23
Restrictions in effect (time of day):  09:00 AM To 05:00 PM
Will rain cause delays?  No
Change/Update: 

(For PA 724) PennDOT - District 5 News: PennDOT Announces Plans Display for PA 724 Bridge Project in Robeson Township, Berks County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-5/pages/details.aspx?newsid=3414)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on January 13, 2023, 03:49:49 PM
(For PA 162)  PennDOT - District 6 News: PennDOT Completes Route 162 (Embreeville Road) Bridge Rehabilitation, Reopens Highway Over West Branch of Brandywine Creek in Newlin Township (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=7994)

PennDOT - District 5 News: Monroe County: Long Term Restriction on Lincoln Avenue in East Stroudsburg Starts Tuesday (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-5/pages/details.aspx?newsid=3415)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on January 17, 2023, 09:16:42 AM
CE Expert System:

District 1:

US 20: Schiley Rd to Harborcreek (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec852589090048267f?OpenDocument)

Mainly mentioned for this:

QuoteThe intersection of US 20 and SR 430 (PA 430) will be evaluated due to vehicles striking the pole on the Southeast corner.

US 62 Bridge over Fox Run (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec8525891e00521807?OpenDocument)

District 4:

West Lackawanna Ave. Bridge over Conrail Railroad (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec8525857d005be519?OpenDocument)

District 6:

PA 32 o/Trib Delaware River (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec8525887c0042a86a?OpenDocument)

(For PA 23 and PA 113)  SR 23 Corridor Safety Improvments Chester Co. (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec8525890c004e4f59?OpenDocument)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on January 17, 2023, 02:47:36 PM
(For US 30 and PA 23) PennDOT - District 8 News: Monroe County: Blasting Planned at Walnut Street Extension Project in Lancaster County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1898)

1/18/2023:
(For US 22 and PA 403)  PennDOT - District 10 News: PennDOT Announces Virtual Plans Display for the Structure Carrying PA 403 over U.S. 22 Project (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1415)

(For PA 125)  PennDOT - District 3 News: Stop Sign to be Installed Next Week at the Intersection of Route 125 and Upper Road in East Cameron Township, Northumberland County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4488)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on January 19, 2023, 11:13:56 AM
(For US 22)  PennDOT - District 10 News: U.S. 22 Rolling Closure for Utility Installation (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1416)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Mr_Northside on January 19, 2023, 05:16:46 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on January 19, 2023, 11:13:56 AM
(For US 22)  PennDOT - District 10 News: U.S. 22 Rolling Closure for Utility Installation (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1416)

A little interesting in that press release that they refer to those un-numbered exists with what would (I'm assuming) be their exit numbers based on mileage if they were to number the exits.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on January 24, 2023, 12:06:05 PM
(For I-81) PennDOT District 4 News: Interstate 81 Northbound will be Closed Tonight, Tuesday January 24th, in Luzerne County  (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-4/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1133)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: famartin on January 24, 2023, 03:22:19 PM
Quote from: Mr_Northside on January 19, 2023, 05:16:46 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on January 19, 2023, 11:13:56 AM
(For US 22)  PennDOT - District 10 News: U.S. 22 Rolling Closure for Utility Installation (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1416)

A little interesting in that press release that they refer to those un-numbered exists with what would (I'm assuming) be their exit numbers based on mileage if they were to number the exits.

Maybe there's a secret plan to install exit numbers? 😂
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on January 25, 2023, 01:37:20 PM
(For PA 32)  PennDOT - District 6 News: Tree Removal to Close Route 32 (River Road) February 16 in New Hope Borough, Solebury Township (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8011)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on January 26, 2023, 09:10:42 AM
PennDOT - District 6 News: Traffic Signal, Curb Ramp Construction Begins Next Week on Main Street in Doylestown Township (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8013)(but this is not US 202 BUS)

(For Sheard's Mill Covered Bridge) PennDOT - District 6 News: Bridge Repair Scheduled on Covered Bridge Road in Haycock, East Rockhill Townships (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8016)

(For I-81)  PennDOT - District 4 News: Interstate 81 Southbound will be Closed Tonight, Thursday January 26th, in Luzerne County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-4/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1138)

PennDOT - District 10 News: Nighttime Tree Trimming to Begin on Next Stage of Freedom Road Expansion in Butler County (Cranberry Township) (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1428)

(For PA 441)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Emergency Closure on Route 441 Just South of Columbia Borough in Manor Township, Lancaster County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1903)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on January 27, 2023, 12:31:55 PM
(For PA 926)  PennDOT - District 6 News: Bridge Repair to Begin on Route 926 (Street Road) in London Grove, West Marlborough Townships (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8022)

Quote from: 74/171FAN on January 26, 2023, 09:10:42 AM
(For PA 441)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Emergency Closure on Route 441 Just South of Columbia Borough in Manor Township, Lancaster County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1903)

PennDOT - District 8 News: Route 441 (Water Street) in Lancaster County Expected to Reopen by Early Next Week (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1904)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: sbeaver44 on January 29, 2023, 02:13:57 AM
Quote from: famartin on January 24, 2023, 03:22:19 PM
Quote from: Mr_Northside on January 19, 2023, 05:16:46 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on January 19, 2023, 11:13:56 AM
(For US 22)  PennDOT - District 10 News: U.S. 22 Rolling Closure for Utility Installation (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1416)

A little interesting in that press release that they refer to those un-numbered exists with what would (I'm assuming) be their exit numbers based on mileage if they were to number the exits.

Maybe there's a secret plan to install exit numbers?
I wish PA would number major non-interstate freeways with exit numbers.  Ohio does it. 
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on January 29, 2023, 06:13:55 AM
Quote
Quote from: 74/171FAN on January 26, 2023, 09:10:42 AM
(For PA 441)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Emergency Closure on Route 441 Just South of Columbia Borough in Manor Township, Lancaster County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1903)

PennDOT - District 8 News: Route 441 (Water Street) in Lancaster County Expected to Reopen by Early Next Week (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1904)

PennDOT - District 8 News: Route 441 (Water Street) in Lancaster County is Open to Traffic (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1905)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: tylert120 on January 29, 2023, 10:37:21 AM
Quote from: sbeaver44 on January 29, 2023, 02:13:57 AM
Quote from: famartin on January 24, 2023, 03:22:19 PM
Quote from: Mr_Northside on January 19, 2023, 05:16:46 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on January 19, 2023, 11:13:56 AM
(For US 22)  PennDOT - District 10 News: U.S. 22 Rolling Closure for Utility Installation (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1416)

A little interesting in that press release that they refer to those un-numbered exists with what would (I'm assuming) be their exit numbers based on mileage if they were to number the exits.

Maybe there's a secret plan to install exit numbers?
I wish PA would number major non-interstate freeways with exit numbers.  Ohio does it.

A handful around the state exist. For example, SR 28 is numbered from Pittsburgh to Kittanning.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: MATraveler128 on January 29, 2023, 10:42:02 AM
Quote from: tylert120 on January 29, 2023, 10:37:21 AM
Quote from: sbeaver44 on January 29, 2023, 02:13:57 AM
Quote from: famartin on January 24, 2023, 03:22:19 PM
Quote from: Mr_Northside on January 19, 2023, 05:16:46 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on January 19, 2023, 11:13:56 AM
(For US 22)  PennDOT - District 10 News: U.S. 22 Rolling Closure for Utility Installation (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1416)

A little interesting in that press release that they refer to those un-numbered exists with what would (I'm assuming) be their exit numbers based on mileage if they were to number the exits.

Maybe there's a secret plan to install exit numbers?
I wish PA would number major non-interstate freeways with exit numbers.  Ohio does it.

A handful around the state exist. For example, SR 28 is numbered from Pittsburgh to Kittanning.

I'd like to see PA 28 and US 6 northeast of Scranton switch to mileage based numbers, but I don't see that happening anytime soon.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: tylert120 on January 30, 2023, 09:10:52 PM
Me too. I was hoping with all the various construction projects on SR 28 (from Highland Park bridge all the way to Creighton) this year, they might consider that change since all the signage in that large stretch was going to be replaced anyway. 
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on January 31, 2023, 07:37:50 AM
CE Expert System:

District 2:

PA 346 Bridge over Tram Hollow Run (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec8525892c004b340b?OpenDocument)

District 4:

PA 61 St Clair to Frackville Reconstruction (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec8525876b005538d6?OpenDocument)

District 6:

US 322 Ida Slope Failure (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec852588e70048ad38?OpenDocument)

(For PA 849) PennDOT - District 8 News: SB Route 849 Closed Today in Newport for Emergency Bridge Repairs (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1907)

(For PA 985)  PennDOT - District 9 News: Public Meeting and Plans Display for the Route 985 Somerset Pike Slide Repair Project (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-9/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1155)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on February 02, 2023, 03:12:13 PM
(For PA 29)  PennDOT - District 6 News: PennDOT to Begin Project to Rehabilitate the Route 29 (Main Street) Bridge in Pennsburg, Red Hill Boroughs (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8033)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on February 03, 2023, 10:22:55 AM
(For PA 113)  PennDOT - District 6 News: Apple Studios, LLC Filming to Close Route 113 (Bedminster Road) in Bedminster, Tinicum Townships (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8035)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: sbeaver44 on February 03, 2023, 08:08:09 PM
Re: numbered exits in PA, the road I specifically had in mind is US 15.  It now has exit numbers north of Williamsport, presumably because of the Future I-99.  But I would love them south of Harrisburg/Camp Hill as well.

I wish PA 33, US 22's expressways WV-Pittsburgh, Ebensburg-Duncansville, Lewistown-Harrisburg, and Allentown-Easton, all of US 15, US 219 south of Ebensburg, US 30's expressways York-Lancaster and Coatesville-Exton, and expressway portions of US 202, PA 283, US 6, US 119, US 222, US 322, and US 422 had numbered exits.

It's so much easier to tell someone "hey go to Exit 8"  instead of "take the PA 97 Baltimore Street exit"

PA 581 has exit numbers, and they're technically sequential but so close to mileage based anyway, as it's 6 exits over 7-8 miles.  So I sort of forgot some of the other state highways that have exits are sequential.

Anyway, on this subject, what's the deal with Western PA doing the "Exit A"  and "Exit B"  with no number like on the Indiana Bypass?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Mr_Northside on February 06, 2023, 05:53:34 PM
Quote from: sbeaver44 on February 03, 2023, 08:08:09 PM
Anyway, on this subject, what's the deal with Western PA doing the "Exit A"  and "Exit B"  with no number like on the Indiana Bypass?

That's just to identify the different ramps in the single cloverleaf interchange.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: BrianP on February 07, 2023, 11:25:55 AM
Quote from: sbeaver44 on February 03, 2023, 08:08:09 PM
Anyway, on this subject, what's the deal with Western PA doing the "Exit A"  and "Exit B"  with no number like on the Indiana Bypass?
I think it's labelled for signs like this:
https://goo.gl/maps/99Ga9MHV2KYa25748
I'd rather that sign say 'use 119 south'.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: The Ghostbuster on February 07, 2023, 03:34:09 PM
Maybe the exits on US 422W (and other highways without exit numbers) should get numbered. Then the exits would be numbered 61A and 61B.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on February 08, 2023, 10:46:31 AM
(For PA 320)  PennDOT - District 6 News: PECO Utility Improvement to Close Route 320 (Spring Mill Road) Weekdays in Lower Merion Township (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8046)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on February 09, 2023, 07:22:35 AM
CE Expert System:

(For PA 160 in District 9)  (Bridge Replacement 1 (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec852585570062ac45?OpenDocument) and 2 (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec8525855700639120?OpenDocument))
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on February 09, 2023, 08:17:53 AM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on January 31, 2023, 07:37:50 AM
(For PA 34 and PA 849) PennDOT - District 8 News: SB Route 849 Closed Today in Newport for Emergency Bridge Repairs (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1907)

(For PA 34 and PA 849) PennDOT - District 8 News: SB Route 34 Open to Traffic in Newport (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1911)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on February 10, 2023, 09:32:51 AM
PennDOT - District 4 News: PennDOT Hosting an In-Person Public Meeting and Online Plans Display for Public Comment on the Proposed Improvements for the I-81 Reconstruction Project from Avoca to Scranton (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-4/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1143)

PennDOT - District 8 News: Traffic Stops Next Week on Centerville Road at Interchange Improvement Project in Lancaster County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1912)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on February 12, 2023, 02:18:40 PM
I drove PA 272 SB in Willow Street yesterday morning, and I thought it was odd that SB completely bypassed the business district while NB went straight through it.  I guess a full bypass of Willow Street could not be justified when the SB alignment was built.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on February 12, 2023, 02:38:06 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on February 12, 2023, 02:18:40 PM
I drove PA 272 SB in Willow Street yesterday morning, and I thought it was odd that SB completely bypassed the business district while NB went straight through it.  I guess a full bypass of Willow Street could not be justified when the SB alignment was built.

US 202 in Bridgeport.
NB goes through its business district on Dekalb Street, but SB is on a mini freeway that bypasses it.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: famartin on February 12, 2023, 04:09:29 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on February 12, 2023, 02:38:06 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on February 12, 2023, 02:18:40 PM
I drove PA 272 SB in Willow Street yesterday morning, and I thought it was odd that SB completely bypassed the business district while NB went straight through it.  I guess a full bypass of Willow Street could not be justified when the SB alignment was built.

US 202 in Bridgeport.
NB goes through its business district on Dekalb Street, but SB is on a mini freeway that bypasses it.

Still can't quite understand the reasoning for that...
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on February 12, 2023, 04:12:36 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on February 12, 2023, 02:38:06 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on February 12, 2023, 02:18:40 PM
I drove PA 272 SB in Willow Street yesterday morning, and I thought it was odd that SB completely bypassed the business district while NB went straight through it.  I guess a full bypass of Willow Street could not be justified when the SB alignment was built.

US 202 in Bridgeport.
NB goes through its business district on Dekalb Street, but SB is on a mini freeway that bypasses it.

That is a different situation IMO because US 202 SB still goes through downtown Norristown.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on February 12, 2023, 05:15:46 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on February 12, 2023, 04:12:36 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on February 12, 2023, 02:38:06 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on February 12, 2023, 02:18:40 PM
I drove PA 272 SB in Willow Street yesterday morning, and I thought it was odd that SB completely bypassed the business district while NB went straight through it.  I guess a full bypass of Willow Street could not be justified when the SB alignment was built.

US 202 in Bridgeport.
NB goes through its business district on Dekalb Street, but SB is on a mini freeway that bypasses it.

That is a different situation IMO because US 202 SB still goes through downtown Norristown.

That and Markley Street is entirely two-way, unlike Dekalb Street through downtown Norristown.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on February 13, 2023, 04:03:31 PM
PennDOT - District 1 News: PennDOT Announces Online Plans Display for Niemeyer Road Bridge Project in Waterford Township, Erie County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2011)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on February 14, 2023, 01:29:34 PM
(For I-80 and PA 66) PennDOT - District 10 News: PennDOT Announces Virtual Plans Display for Clarion River Bridge Preservation in Monroe and Paint Townships, Clarion County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1433)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on February 15, 2023, 04:04:26 PM
(For PA 611)  PennDOT - District 5 News: PennDOT Announces Virtual Plans Display for Route 611 Retaining Wall Project in Williams Township, Northampton County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-5/pages/details.aspx?newsid=3450)

(For PA 29)  PennDOT - District 6 News: Improvement Project to Close Route 29 (Main Street) in Pennsburg, Red Hill Boroughs (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8061)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on February 16, 2023, 01:55:56 PM
PennDOT - District 6 News: County Line Road Improvement Project Shifts to Stage 2 Construction in Horsham, Warrington Townships (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8070)

Quote from: 74/171FAN on February 15, 2023, 04:04:26 PM
(For PA 29)  PennDOT - District 6 News: Improvement Project to Close Route 29 (Main Street) in Pennsburg, Red Hill Boroughs (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8061)

PennDOT - District 6 News: Temporary Traffic Signal Installation for Route 29 (Main Street) Improvement Project in Pennsburg, Red Hill Boroughs (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8071)

PennDOT - District 4 News:  ICYMI: PennDOT Introduced Plans for the Proposed I-81 Reconstruction Project from Avoca in Luzerne County to Scranton in Lackawanna County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-4/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1145)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ixnay on February 16, 2023, 09:11:48 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on February 15, 2023, 04:04:26 PM
(For PA 611)  PennDOT - District 5 News: PennDOT Announces Virtual Plans Display for Route 611 Retaining Wall Project in Williams Township, Northampton County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-5/pages/details.aspx?newsid=3450)

They sure could use a retaining wall (of stone, of course) for the slide-prone stretch of 611 in Del. Water Gap NRA.  Who's paying for the clearing of 611 there, PennDOT or the NPS?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on February 16, 2023, 11:54:00 PM
Quote from: ixnay on February 16, 2023, 09:11:48 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on February 15, 2023, 04:04:26 PM
(For PA 611)  PennDOT - District 5 News: PennDOT Announces Virtual Plans Display for Route 611 Retaining Wall Project in Williams Township, Northampton County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-5/pages/details.aspx?newsid=3450)

They sure could use a retaining wall (of stone, of course) for the slide-prone stretch of 611 in Del. Water Gap NRA.  Who's paying for the clearing of 611 there, PennDOT or the NPS?

None of PA 611 is maintained by the NPS so PennDOT AFAIK
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on February 17, 2023, 10:46:56 PM
(For US 422)  PennDOT - District 10 News: Margaret Road Intersection Opened Ahead of Schedule (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1434)

PennDOT - District 3 News: Roadwork Continues Next Week on I-80 EB in Columbia County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4517)

PennDOT - District 8 News: Lane Restrictions Next Week on the I-83 John Harris Memorial (South) Bridge (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1916)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on February 22, 2023, 10:38:20 AM
PennDOT - District 1 News: Crawford County Trail Expansion, Bridge Project Receives Award (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2014)

(For US 522) PennDOT - District 9 News: Public Meeting and Plans Display for the Route 522 Corridor Study Project (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-9/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1158)

(For US 322 BUS (State College)) PennDOT - District 2 News: Work to Re-start Next Week on Atherton Street (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2546)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: tckma on February 23, 2023, 10:50:24 AM
I moved to Philly "officially" in October 2021, but prior to that I was commuting here from Maryland, staying in hotels during the work week and going home on weekends, since 2018.  I've also done a lot of side hustle work in the area like Doordash and Amazon Flex, the latter taking me all over southeastern PA and southern NJ.

This has bothered me ever since I started being up in this area.

Why does this exit ramp (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.065859,-75.3235713,3a,26.6y,239.18h,88.7t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1skSZj3LcNQrDNwda28RXATA!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DkSZj3LcNQrDNwda28RXATA%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D53.139587%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192) (southbound I-476 "Blue Route" to PA-23, split from the ramps to I-76) have a tab but no number?  I *suspect* it's because prior to milepost-based exit numbering, PA had a weird habit of not numbering interstate-to-interstate junction exits.  When they went milepost, I guess these tabs were put up, but why was this one forgotten?  It could easily be 16C.  Was this ramp numbered prior to the switch to milepost-based exit numbers, and just never re-numbered, with the exit number removed?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: MASTERNC on February 23, 2023, 11:06:45 AM
Quote from: tckma on February 23, 2023, 10:50:24 AM
I moved to Philly "officially" in October 2021, but prior to that I was commuting here from Maryland, staying in hotels during the work week and going home on weekends, since 2018.  I've also done a lot of side hustle work in the area like Doordash and Amazon Flex, the latter taking me all over southeastern PA and southern NJ.

This has bothered me ever since I started being up in this area.

Why does this exit ramp (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.065859,-75.3235713,3a,26.6y,239.18h,88.7t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1skSZj3LcNQrDNwda28RXATA!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DkSZj3LcNQrDNwda28RXATA%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D53.139587%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192) (southbound I-476 "Blue Route" to PA-23, split from the ramps to I-76) have a tab but no number?  I *suspect* it's because prior to milepost-based exit numbering, PA had a weird habit of not numbering interstate-to-interstate junction exits.  When they went milepost, I guess these tabs were put up, but why was this one forgotten?  It could easily be 16C.  Was this ramp numbered prior to the switch to milepost-based exit numbers, and just never re-numbered, with the exit number removed?

That exit tab shouldn't be there.  Northbound signs both as Exit 16A and then there is a split between I-76 EB and PA 23 with no exit numbers.  There is no exit number from I-476 assigned to PA 23.  Even on I-76 EB, the ramp to PA 23 doesn't use the same exit number as westbound - it shares the same exit number as I-476 North.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on February 23, 2023, 03:07:44 PM
(For PA 341)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Bridge Wing Wall Repair Planned on Route 341 at Route 743 in Conewago Township, Dauphin County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1923)

PennDOT - District 6 News: Allentown Road Bridge over Licking Creek Closed Indefinitely in Milford Township Due to Railing Damage (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8085)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: interstate73 on February 23, 2023, 05:35:00 PM
Today there was a major crash and fuel spill on the S curves just over the Jersey state line, closing the eastbound roadway for much of the day. Since 611 is still closed due to a rockslide months ago (which PennDOT isn't in the mood to reopen until at least August), the only available detour was PA-191 all the way down to Bangor then back up PA-512 to the Portland-Columbia Bridge. Obviously this led to huge backups all the way up the ridge, and apparently big rigs got stuck on 611 not realizing it was closed. Really wish something could be done about this stretch between Exit 309 and Exit 4 in NJ, it's a nightmare even in the best of times!!
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on February 24, 2023, 10:34:55 AM
(For PA 374)  PennDOT - District 4 News: PennDOT Announces an Online Plans Display for the SR 374, Section 553, over the Outlet of Lowe Lake Bridge Replacement Project in Herrick Township, Susquehanna County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-4/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1154)

Quote(For PA 341)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Bridge Wing Wall Repair Planned on Route 341 at Route 743 in Conewago Township, Dauphin County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1923)

PennDOT - District 8 News: Detour Update: Bridge Wing Wall Repair Planned on Route 341 at Route 743 in Conewago Township, Dauphin County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1924)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on February 28, 2023, 07:44:56 AM
CE Expert System: 

District 8:  Sycamore/Paxton Intersection Imp (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec852588480044058a?OpenDocument)

Will result in a realignment of PA 441:

QuoteThe existing SR 441 section of Sycamore St. between the current Paxton/Sycamore intersection east to 28th Street will be turned over to the township. SR 441 will begin at the 28th/Paxton Street intersection and travel east. It was determined that the pavement on existing SR 441 between the Paxton/Sycamore and 28th Street did not require milling and overlay. PennDOT will update signs and pavement markings.

The section of 28th Street located between the Sycamore Street/28th Street intersection and 28th Street/Paxton Street intersection will be acquired by PennDOT. No improvements are proposed for this section of roadway. It will become part of SR 441.

PA 741 at PA 283 EB Ramps (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec852587f90053af1c?OpenDocument)

District 10:

PA 66 1/112th Infantry Bridge/Graff Ramp Rehabilitation (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec85258828003f7dc7?OpenDocument)

PennDOT - District 10 News: PennDOT Announces Plans Display for the I-80 Brookville East Reconstruction Project in Jefferson County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1439)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on March 01, 2023, 09:12:37 AM
PennDOT - District 3 News: Shapiro Administration Highlights Upcoming Transportation Improvements in North Central Region (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4524)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on March 03, 2023, 05:43:10 AM
(For US 11)  PennDOT - District 4 News: PennDOT Announces Public Meeting and Virtual Plans Display for the SR 11, Section D53, Structure Replacement Project in Clinton Township, Wyoming County   (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-4/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1161)

(For PA 228)  PennDOT - District 10 News: Clearing for Utility Moves Beginning on Three Degree Road Intersection Project in Butler County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1440)


(For US 322 BUS (State College)   PennDOT - District 2 News: Detours Expected Next Week on Atherton Street (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2553)

(For US 15)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Resurfacing and Safety Improvement Project Resumes on Route 15 in Adams and York Counties (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1932)


(For US 1)  PennDOT - District 6 News: PennDOT to Begin U.S. 1 Widening, Improvement Project in Kennett, East Marlborough Townships (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8111)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on March 05, 2023, 03:08:17 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on February 28, 2023, 07:44:56 AM
District 8:  Sycamore/Paxton Intersection Imp (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec852588480044058a?OpenDocument)

Will result in a realignment of PA 441:

QuoteThe existing SR 441 section of Sycamore St. between the current Paxton/Sycamore intersection east to 28th Street will be turned over to the township. SR 441 will begin at the 28th/Paxton Street intersection and travel east. It was determined that the pavement on existing SR 441 between the Paxton/Sycamore and 28th Street did not require milling and overlay. PennDOT will update signs and pavement markings.

The section of 28th Street located between the Sycamore Street/28th Street intersection and 28th Street/Paxton Street intersection will be acquired by PennDOT. No improvements are proposed for this section of roadway. It will become part of SR 441.

Finally! I've thought for a long time that this new routing would make far more sense.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on March 06, 2023, 12:33:44 PM
(For PA 488)  PennDOT - District 10 News: Replacement of Portersville Bridge Begins March 20 in Butler County  (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1441)

(For US 522, or PA 522?)  PennDOT - District 9 News: PennDOT - District 9 News: Tree Trimming and Removal Along PA Route 522 to Start Ahead of Paving Project in Huntingdon County  (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-9/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1162)

PennDOT - District 6 News: PennDOT Repairs, Reopens Allentown Road Bridge over Licking Creek in Milford Township (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8113)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on March 08, 2023, 01:02:51 PM
(For PA 413)  PennDOT - District 6 News: Bucks County Water and Sewer Authority Utility Improvement to Close Route 413 (Langhorne Newtown Road/Pine Street) in Langhorne Borough, Middletown Township  (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8115)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on March 09, 2023, 05:52:59 PM
(For PA 645)  PennDOT - District 5 News: PennDOT Announces Virtual Plans Display for Route 645 Bridge Project in Bethel and Tulpehocken Townships, Berks County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-5/pages/details.aspx?newsid=3480)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on March 10, 2023, 09:06:52 AM
(For PA 611) PennDOT - District 6 News: PECO Utility Improvement to Close Route 611 (Old York Road) Beginning March 27 in Abington Township (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8126)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on March 10, 2023, 03:34:17 PM
https://goo.gl/maps/5ECLPgJc3KfdYvRc8
What's up with the black signal heads along US 202 in Bucks and Montgomery Counties?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: MASTERNC on March 10, 2023, 03:58:12 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on March 10, 2023, 03:34:17 PM
https://goo.gl/maps/5ECLPgJc3KfdYvRc8
What's up with the black signal heads along US 202 in Bucks and Montgomery Counties?

I don't mind them but they need the yellow backplates. I do think it is aesthetic related due to the construction of that parkway.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on March 11, 2023, 04:09:15 PM
Virginia in the Hampton Roads area has gone black. SE Texas has.

I don't mind em as Florida went black in the eighties.  It's just odd for PA to use them.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: plain on March 12, 2023, 11:00:45 PM
PA has a few black signals sprinkled throughout the state. But they're especially common in the Pittsburgh area.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: storm2k on March 13, 2023, 10:45:21 AM
Quote from: MASTERNC on March 10, 2023, 03:58:12 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on March 10, 2023, 03:34:17 PM
https://goo.gl/maps/5ECLPgJc3KfdYvRc8
What's up with the black signal heads along US 202 in Bucks and Montgomery Counties?

I don't mind them but they need the yellow backplates. I do think it is aesthetic related due to the construction of that parkway.

At the time this section of 202 Parkway was designed, the yellow backplates were not required, hence they did not do them. If the signals have to be replaced at some point I'm sure they'll get yellow backplates, but not until then.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on March 13, 2023, 01:49:45 PM
(For PA 138) PennDOT - District 10 News: PennDOT Announces Public Meeting for the Southwest of Euclid Bridge Replacement project in Clay Township, Butler County, PA. (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1444)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on March 13, 2023, 09:06:40 PM
How come US 292 Business does not go into Doylestown? I noticed it ends at PA 611 thus not looping back to its parent.

Might as well number it all the way. Even if the borough maintains the old 202 through it, just post signs anyway.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on March 13, 2023, 09:47:14 PM
The old 202 through Doylestown was that way since the 1970s when that US 202 Bypass was built.  US 202 BUS was only intended to cover the portion replaced by the parkway.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: famartin on March 13, 2023, 11:30:51 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on March 13, 2023, 09:47:14 PM
The old 202 through Doylestown was that way since the 1970s when that US 202 Bypass was built.  US 202 BUS was only intended to cover the portion replaced by the parkway.

My understanding is that there never was a 202 Bus before the parkway was built in order to discourage thru traffic from going into downtown Doylestown. 202 Bus only came about because the boroughs bypassed complained that they lost business when the new parkway was built earlier this century. At least, that's what I recall hearing.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on March 14, 2023, 04:19:24 AM
Still they can sign it for continuity purposes.

https://goo.gl/maps/yQMhRjLyKct9G8QW7
On another subject, I noticed that the ramp from the Walt Whitman Bridge to I-95 Southbound has an at grade signalized intersection with Front Street thus creating the same situation as further north as between I-80 and I-476
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: famartin on March 14, 2023, 11:42:36 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on March 14, 2023, 04:19:24 AM
Still they can sign it for continuity purposes.

At this point, there's no reason not to. In fact, when I clinched 202 BUS last fall, I plotted out the route through Doylestown, presuming it WAS part of 202 Bus. I was mildly surprised to find that it wasn't, but I understand why it isn't.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on March 15, 2023, 10:03:29 AM
(For PA 199)  PennDOT - District 3 News: Public Information Meeting for Route 199 Reconstruction in Sayre and Athens, Bradford County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4536)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on March 16, 2023, 09:41:12 AM
CE Expert System Update:

District 1:

PA 18 and PA 358 in Greenville (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec852586ea004281ca?OpenDocument)

District 6:

PA 401 & Valley Hill Rd Improvement (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec85258597000eb450?OpenDocument)

Doe Run Road (PA 82) over Buck Run (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec85257da30050ad86?OpenDocument)

District 8:

MaClay Street Bridge in Harrisburg (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec852588da0049af84?OpenDocument)

PA 97 over Tributary to Piney Creek (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec8525892d00614f4d?OpenDocument)  (Detour goes south into MD)

District 9:

PA 31/PA 96 over Buffalo Run in Manns Choice (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec8525829c004f075a?OpenDocument)

PA 985 Slide Correction (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec85258966005c86c1?OpenDocument)

District 10:

US 322 Clarion River Bridge Arch Bearings (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec8525885c0049ddf3?OpenDocument)

(For US 422) PennDOT - District 10 News: Mentch Bridge Replacement to Begin March 20 in Indiana County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1446)

(For US 322) PennDOT - District 6 News: PennDOT to Begin U.S. 322 (West Chester Bypass) Safety Improvement Project in Chester County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8142)

(For PA 75) PennDOT - District 2 News: PennDOT Announces New Date for Port Royal Bridge Closure (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2564)

PennDOT - District 6 News: Safety Improvement Work Continues at the I-476 North, MacDade Boulevard Interchange in Ridley Township (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8150)

PennDOT - District 3 News: Roadwork Continues Next Week on I-80 EB in Columbia County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4539)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on March 17, 2023, 10:25:55 AM
(For US 220)  PennDOT - District 3 News: Route 220 Safety Improvement Project Resumes (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4544)

PennDOT - District 3 News: Route 220 Bridge Improvement Project Set to Begin (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4545)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on March 20, 2023, 02:35:29 PM
PennDOT - District 1 News: Work to Restart on I-90 Project in Western Erie County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2024)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on March 21, 2023, 08:13:31 AM
CE Expert System:

District 6:  PA 452 at I-95 (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec85258917005ebd95?OpenDocument)

(For PA 419)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Box Culvert Replacement on Route 419 (Schaeffer Road) in Lebanon County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1946)

(For US 6)  PennDOT - District 3 News: Route 6 Road Closure Tomorrow in Sullivan Township, Tioga County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4551)

(For PA 82)  PennDOT - District 6 News: PennDOT to Begin Route 82 (Manor Road) Roundabout Safety Improvement Project in West Brandywine Township (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8163)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on March 22, 2023, 11:18:05 AM
(For I-81, US 22, and US 322)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Major Bridge Preservation Project to Resume on I-81 and Route 22 in Dauphin County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1948)

PennDOT - District 10 News: PennDOT District 10 Receives ASHE 2022 Outstanding Highway Engineering Award for Brady's Run Project in Armstrong County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1452)

(For PA 99 (SR 699))  PennDOT - District 1 News: Work to Replace the Route 699 Bridge in Erie County to Start Soon (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2025)

(For US 6 BUS (Warren))  PennDOT - District 1 News: Construction Set to Begin for the Roundabout in the City of Warren (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2026)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ARMOURERERIC on March 22, 2023, 06:57:56 PM
Curious at to why it is PA 699, instead of just PA99
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on March 22, 2023, 07:02:02 PM
Quote from: ARMOURERERIC on March 22, 2023, 06:57:56 PM
Curious at to why it is PA 699, instead of just PA99

It is SR 0699 because SR 0099 is used for I-99.  Why was it not renumbered to PA 699?  I have no idea.

I-86 and PA 86 (SR 0886) are much closer to each other, yet both stay.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: sprjus4 on March 23, 2023, 03:24:01 AM
I'm confused - it's SR 699 but also PA 99?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: famartin on March 23, 2023, 04:10:08 AM
Quote from: sprjus4 on March 23, 2023, 03:24:01 AM
I'm confused - it's SR 699 but also PA 99?
PA does a few weird things with internal vs external numbers. I believe PA 283 also has a different internal number (300?)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on March 23, 2023, 06:14:06 AM
Quote from: famartin on March 23, 2023, 04:10:08 AM
Quote from: sprjus4 on March 23, 2023, 03:24:01 AM
I'm confused - it's SR 699 but also PA 99?
PA does a few weird things with internal vs external numbers. I believe PA 283 also has a different internal number (300?)

That is correct.

Quote from: 74/171FAN on March 22, 2023, 11:18:05 AM
(For PA 99 (SR 699))  PennDOT - District 1 News: Work to Replace the Route 699 Bridge in Erie County to Start Soon (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2025)

CE Expert System Update regarding this project. (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec852589740056905d?OpenDocument)

(For US 1) PennDOT - District 6 News: Ramp, Roadway Construction Planned Next Week, Next Weekend on U.S. 1, Rockhill Drive in Bensalem Township (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8169)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on March 24, 2023, 09:38:57 AM
(For PA 474)  PennDOT - District 1 News: Work to Start Soon on Pipe Replacement Project in Erie County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2027)

PennDOT - District 6 News: Safety Improvement Work Continues at the I-476 North, MacDade Boulevard Interchange in Ridley Township (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8175)

(For PA 339)  PennDOT - District 3 News: Route 339 Project Will Resume Next Week in Columbia and Luzerne Counties (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4564)

(For US 22 and US 322)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Overnight Rolling Stops Planned for WB Route 22/322 in Dauphin County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1953)

(For PA 462 and PA 624)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Traffic Restrictions Next Week in Wrightsville Borough, York County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1954)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on March 27, 2023, 07:46:23 AM
CE Expert System:

District 1:  PA 8 at PA 77 (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec852585af00671d54?OpenDocument) (looks to be all but a no-build in Travel Mapping)

PennDOT - District 5 News: Shapiro Administration Highlights Upcoming PennDOT Construction in East Central Region (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-5/pages/details.aspx?newsid=3503)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on March 28, 2023, 03:04:22 PM
(For US 62)  PennDOT - District 1 News: PennDOT Announces Virtual Plans Display for the Route 62 Bridge Project in Jackson Township, Mercer County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2032)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on March 29, 2023, 10:22:01 AM
PennDOT - Statewide News: PennDOT Invites Pennsylvanians to Join the Conversation (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/pages/all-news-details.aspx?newsid=1035)

(For PA 100)  PennDOT - District 6 News: PECO Utility Construction Scheduled April 2 on Route 100 in West Whiteland Township (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8185)

(For I-80)  PennDOT - District 5 News: Monroe County: Interstate 80 Traffic Stoppages (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-5/pages/details.aspx?newsid=3504)

(For PA 255)  PennDOT - District 2 News: Signals at Intersection of Route 255 and Shaffer Road Set to Flash (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2577)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on March 30, 2023, 08:17:36 AM
CE Expert System:

District 4: I-81 Exit 165 SB offramp (will have 2 left turn lanes) (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec85258963005cf8ec?OpenDocument)

District 8:  PA 72 at Graystone Rd (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec8525893a0056ea02?OpenDocument)

(For US 1) PennDOT - District 6 News: Traffic Shift, Paving Begins Sunday Night on U.S. 1 in Bensalem, Middletown Townships (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8187)

(For I-80)  PennDOT - District 3 News: Roadwork Continues Next Week on I-80 EB in Columbia County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4572)

(For PA 8)  PennDOT - District 1 News: New Traffic Lights on Route 8 in Sandycreek Township, Venango County to be Turned on Soon (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2035)

(For US 11/US 15)  PennDOT - District 3 News: Rest Area to Open Tomorrow on Routes 11/15 in Snyder County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4577)

(For US 220)  PennDOT - District 3 News: Route 220 Bridge Improvement Project Continues (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4578)

PennDOT - District 8 News: Wago Road (Route 1019) Bridge Closed in E. Manchester Township, York County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1964)

(For I-80)  PennDOT - District 1 News: Rolling Stops Planned Tonight for Both Directions of Interstate 80 in Mercer County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2037)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: tckma on March 30, 2023, 03:00:18 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on March 22, 2023, 07:02:02 PM
Quote from: ARMOURERERIC on March 22, 2023, 06:57:56 PM
Curious at to why it is PA 699, instead of just PA99

It is SR 0699 because SR 0099 is used for I-99.  Why was it not renumbered to PA 699?  I have no idea.


Meanwhile, in 2018, when portions of I-95 (SR 0095) were renumbered to I-295... PennDOT took pains to renumber PA 295 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pennsylvania_Route_297) (in York County, almost two hours' drive away) to PA 297, just so I-295 could be SR 0295 internally.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: famartin on March 30, 2023, 05:33:20 PM
Quote from: tckma on March 30, 2023, 03:00:18 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on March 22, 2023, 07:02:02 PM
Quote from: ARMOURERERIC on March 22, 2023, 06:57:56 PM
Curious at to why it is PA 699, instead of just PA99

It is SR 0699 because SR 0099 is used for I-99.  Why was it not renumbered to PA 699?  I have no idea.


Meanwhile, in 2018, when portions of I-95 (SR 0095) were renumbered to I-295... PennDOT took pains to renumber PA 295 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pennsylvania_Route_297) (in York County, almost two hours' drive away) to PA 297, just so I-295 could be SR 0295 internally.

I thnk it matters more to PennDOT that the Interstates have the official numbers.

That said, I find it odd that they didn't just resign PA 283 as PA 300, which I believe is its internal number. 283 isn't directly continuous with I-283, so why keep the same number?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on March 31, 2023, 11:38:05 AM
PennDOT - District 5 News: Northampton County: Upcoming US 22 Road Closures and Restrictions (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-5/pages/details.aspx?newsid=3510)

(For US 202) PennDOT - District 6 News: Roadway Reconstruction Begins April 17 at Swede Road Intersection in Whitpain Township (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8194)

PennDOT - District 6 News: PennDOT, State Officials Celebrate Southeastern Regional Traffic Management Center Grand Opening in Upper Merion Township (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8195)

(For I-90 and PA 99)  PennDOT - District 1 News: Rolling Closures, Short-Term Lane Restrictions Planned for Bridge Removal over Interstate 90 (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2040)

(For US 6 BUS (Warren) and US 62)  PennDOT - District 1 News: Stage 1 of Roundabout Construction to Start Monday (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2041)

(For PA 228)  PennDOT - District 10 News: Long-term Traffic Control Installation Beginning on the Three Degree Road Intersection Project in Butler County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1459)

(For PA 150)  PennDOT - District 2 News: Bridge Preservation Work Begins Monday in Clinton County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2581)

(For PA 32)  PennDOT - District 6 News: Pipe Replacement Scheduled on Route 32 (River Road) in Tinicum, Plumstead Townships, Bucks County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8200)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: tckma on March 31, 2023, 11:51:45 AM
Quote from: famartin on March 30, 2023, 05:33:20 PM
That said, I find it odd that they didn't just resign PA 283 as PA 300, which I believe is its internal number. 283 isn't directly continuous with I-283, so why keep the same number?

PA-283 is a fairly reasonable extension of I-283, though if the whole thing were an Interstate, I'd think it should have an odd first digit -- since it would then not be connected to interstate highways at both sides, but rather would become a Frankenspur from I-83 into Lancaster.  It would just require some reconfiguration of the interchange with the PA Turnpike, changing existing exit numbers on the current I-283 segment, and adding exit numbers to the current PA-283 segment.  Maybe PennDOT once anticipated the whole thing would be approved into the Interstate system.

My opinion (and I don't know how doable this is) -- eliminate the PA-283/I-283 interchange with the PA Turnpike and construct a new interchange between the PA Turnpike and Airport Connector.  The current PA-283/I-283/PA Turnpike interchange configuration is horrible.  This solution would both get rid of that mess, AND provide more direct access from the PA Turnpike to MDT airport.

Problem is, the current I-283/PA Turnpike interchange provides access from the Turnpike to PTC HQ, so I doubt the PTC would go for it.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Chris19001 on March 31, 2023, 01:01:33 PM
Quote from: tckma on March 31, 2023, 11:51:45 AM
Quote from: famartin on March 30, 2023, 05:33:20 PM
That said, I find it odd that they didn't just resign PA 283 as PA 300, which I believe is its internal number. 283 isn't directly continuous with I-283, so why keep the same number?

My opinion (and I don't know how doable this is) -- eliminate the PA-283/I-283 interchange with the PA Turnpike and construct a new interchange between the PA Turnpike and Airport Connector.  The current PA-283/I-283/PA Turnpike interchange configuration is horrible.  This solution would both get rid of that mess, AND provide more direct access from the PA Turnpike to MDT airport.

Problem is, the current I-283/PA Turnpike interchange provides access from the Turnpike to PTC HQ, so I doubt the PTC would go for it.
That's actually a pretty good suggestion.  A downgrade of the current "Harrisburg East" to an "Official Use Only" exit would require a bit of work and the current I-283/PA-283 interchange could be significantly simplified with little traffic heading to the current interchange. (yes it was just updated)  The Airport connector has good sized field to the northwest that could work well for the ramps to and from a new PATP electronic interchange.  The big problem is the I-76 eastbound service plaza (Highspire) would require a heavy merge point with the I-283 ramp acceleration lane.  That service plaza may be due for a redo with 3rd lane designs eventually coming along in that section, whenever that may happen.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: famartin on March 31, 2023, 01:34:01 PM
We're straying more into PA Turnpike topics, but what's the estimated time frame for widening that section? Is there one?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: tckma on April 03, 2023, 03:24:54 PM
Quote from: Chris19001 on March 31, 2023, 01:01:33 PM
That's actually a pretty good suggestion.  A downgrade of the current "Harrisburg East" to an "Official Use Only" exit would require a bit of work and the current I-283/PA-283 interchange could be significantly simplified with little traffic heading to the current interchange. (yes it was just updated)  The Airport connector has good sized field to the northwest that could work well for the ramps to and from a new PATP electronic interchange.  The big problem is the I-76 eastbound service plaza (Highspire) would require a heavy merge point with the I-283 ramp acceleration lane.  That service plaza may be due for a redo with 3rd lane designs eventually coming along in that section, whenever that may happen.

(Is there a PA Turnpike discussion topic here?  I didn't see one.  The NJTP has one separate from New Jersey, but...)

Looking more closely at GM satellite view of the PA Turnpike / Airport Connector area (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.2120178,-76.7504178,1707m/data=!3m1!1e3), it seems that Highspire is pretty boxed in by industrial/commercial property and can't expand.  However, looks like any interchange construction would have to be done in the form of a double trumpet interchange to the northwest of the Airport Connector overpass across the Turnpike... so you'd have at least SOME separation between the merge point of the onramp(s) from Airport Connector to the eastbound Turnpike.  Perhaps the entire service plaza can be relocated a bit to the east, such as here (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.2069426,-76.6962392,1015m/data=!3m1!1e3) (also a good alternate spot for an interchange with PA-283/I-283 if that doesn't work out).  I'm sure the industrial park would be quite interested in buying up the existing Highspire Service Area property.

Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on April 03, 2023, 04:53:40 PM
Quote from: tckma on April 03, 2023, 03:24:54 PM
Quote from: Chris19001 on March 31, 2023, 01:01:33 PM
That's actually a pretty good suggestion.  A downgrade of the current "Harrisburg East" to an "Official Use Only" exit would require a bit of work and the current I-283/PA-283 interchange could be significantly simplified with little traffic heading to the current interchange. (yes it was just updated)  The Airport connector has good sized field to the northwest that could work well for the ramps to and from a new PATP electronic interchange.  The big problem is the I-76 eastbound service plaza (Highspire) would require a heavy merge point with the I-283 ramp acceleration lane.  That service plaza may be due for a redo with 3rd lane designs eventually coming along in that section, whenever that may happen.

(Is there a PA Turnpike discussion topic here?  I didn't see one.  The NJTP has one separate from New Jersey, but...) 

Looking more closely at GM satellite view of the PA Turnpike / Airport Connector area (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.2120178,-76.7504178,1707m/data=!3m1!1e3), it seems that Highspire is pretty boxed in by industrial/commercial property and can't expand.  However, looks like any interchange construction would have to be done in the form of a double trumpet interchange to the northwest of the Airport Connector overpass across the Turnpike... so you'd have at least SOME separation between the merge point of the onramp(s) from Airport Connector to the eastbound Turnpike.  Perhaps the entire service plaza can be relocated a bit to the east, such as here (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.2069426,-76.6962392,1015m/data=!3m1!1e3) (also a good alternate spot for an interchange with PA-283/I-283 if that doesn't work out).  I'm sure the industrial park would be quite interested in buying up the existing Highspire Service Area property.

You posted there just last week.  (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=419.msg2831189#msg2831189)   :-D
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on April 04, 2023, 11:42:09 AM
(For PA 92)  PennDOT - District 4 News: PennDOT Announces Online Plans Display for the SR 92, Section 772 over Monroe Creek Bridge Project in Nicholson Township, Wyoming County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-4/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1183)

(For PA 228)  PennDOT - District 10 News: Upgrade to Drainage System on State Route 228 in Middlesex and Clinton Townships, Butler County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1461)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on April 05, 2023, 12:32:56 PM
PennDOT - District 4 News: Shapiro Administration Previews 2023 Northeast Region Construction Season, Highlights Projects (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-4/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1184)

PennDOT - District 10 News: Shapiro Administration Highlights 2023 District 10 Construction Season Projects (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1463)

(For US 1)  PennDOT - District 6 News: Ramp, Roadway Construction Planned Next Week, Next Weekend on U.S. 1 in Bensalem, Middletown Township (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8210)

PennDOT - District 5 News: Northampton County: US 22 Road Restriction and Closure Tonight for Bridge Work (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-5/pages/details.aspx?newsid=3513)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on April 06, 2023, 07:38:29 AM
PennDOT - District 3 News: Restrooms at I-80 WB Rest Areas in Columbia County Closed for Repair (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4582)

CE Expert System:

District 5:

PA 611 Closure in Delaware Water Gap (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec852589350052a875?OpenDocument)  (I am surprised that I have PA 611 clinched considering this closure and the one south of Easton after Hurricane Ida in 2021.)

(For PA 255)  PennDOT - District 2 News: Signals Now Operating at Intersection of Route 255 and Shaffer Road (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2585)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on April 07, 2023, 10:04:04 AM
(For US 202 and PA 491)  PennDOT - District 6 News: PennDOT to Begin U.S. 202, Route 491 (Naamans Creek Road)/Beaver Valley Road Intersection Improvement Project in Concord Township (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8222)

PennDOT - District 2 News: Shapiro Administration Previews 2023 Construction Season in Northcentral PA (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2587)

(For I-79 and PA 488) PennDOT - District 10 News: Portersville Bridge Replacement Project in Muddy Creek Township, Butler County Begins April 13 (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1464) 
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ixnay on April 07, 2023, 01:33:54 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on April 07, 2023, 10:04:04 AM
(For US 202 and PA 491)  PennDOT - District 6 News: PennDOT to Begin U.S. 202, Route 491 (Naamans Creek Road)/Beaver Valley Road Intersection Improvement Project in Concord Township (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8222)

Budgetwise, it will take a mere $8,263.00 of overruns for this project to be a million dollar baby.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on April 10, 2023, 09:22:09 AM
(For PA 408)  PennDOT - District 1 News: Project to Preserve the Route 408 Bridge in Hydetown Borough, Crawford County to Begin Next Week (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2045)

(For PA 93)  PennDOT - District 3 News:  Bridge Lighting Removal Project Tomorrow on Route 93 in Columbia County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4598) 

(For PA 462) PennDOT - District 8 News: Traffic impacts this Week at Centerville Road Interchange Improvement Project in Lancaster County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1968)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on April 11, 2023, 09:37:42 AM
(For PA 64)  PennDOT - District 2 News: Railroad Crossing Work on Route 64 Scheduled for This Week in Mill Hall (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2590)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on April 13, 2023, 09:00:03 AM
 PennDOT - District 8 News: Shapiro Administration Previews South Central Region 2023 Construction Season (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1972)

(For PA 73)  PennDOT - District 6 News: PennDOT to Host Virtual Public Meeting for Route 73 (Church Road) Intersection Improvement Project in Cheltenham Township (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8229)

PennDOT - District 6 News: PennDOT - District 6 News: Resurfacing Scheduled on Route 73 (Skippack Pike) in Skippack Township (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8233)

(For US 1)  PennDOT - District 6 News: Ramp, Roadway Construction Planned This Weekend, Next Week on U.S. 1 in Bensalem Township (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8230)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on April 14, 2023, 11:21:11 AM
(For PA 73)  PennDOT - District 6 News: Aqua Pennsylvania Utility Improvement to Close Route 73 (Church Road) in Cheltenham Township (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8238)

(For PA 44) PennDOT - District 3 News: Pipe Replacement Project Next Week on Route 44 in Delaware Township, Northumberland County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4613)

(For PA 997) PennDOT - District 8 News: Bridge Replacement Project to Begin on Route 997 in Quincy Township, Franklin County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1974)

(For US 11, US 15, and I-81) (For PA 997) PennDOT - District 8 News: Ramp Closures Scheduled at I-81 and Route 11/15 Interchange in Cumberland County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1975)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on April 17, 2023, 09:14:29 AM
CE Expert System:

District 4:  PA 239 over Pine Creek  (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec8525853b0064a335?OpenDocument)

PennDOT - District 6 News: Shapiro Administration Previews 2023 Southeast Region Construction Season, Stresses Work Zone Safety (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8248)

PennDOT - District 9 News: Shapiro Administration Previews 2023 Laurel Highlands Region Construction Season (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-9/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1170)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on April 18, 2023, 12:03:27 PM
PennDOT - District 1 News: Shapiro Administration Previews 2023 Northwest Region Construction Season, Work Zone Safety (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2049)

(For PA 741)  PennDOT - District 8 News: PennDOT Announces Online Plans Display for Route 741 (Millersville Road) Bridge Preservation Project in Lancaster and Pequea Townships, Lancaster County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1980)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on April 19, 2023, 12:01:17 PM
(For I-90 and PA 99) PennDOT - District 1 News: Rolling Closures, Short-Term Lane Restrictions Today for Bridge Removal over Interstate 90 (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2050)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on April 20, 2023, 06:17:19 AM
(For US 22/US 322 and US 11/US 15)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Ramp Closures Scheduled at Resurfacing Project on Route 22/322 in Perry County, Route 11/15 in Dauphin County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1982)

CE Expert System:

District 1:  US 6/US 19 French Creek Pkwy (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec8525863700496990?OpenDocument) (reconstruction from PA 27 to north end with plans to decrease lanes from 4 to 2)

District 4:  Blackman St SB Ramp from I-81 (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec8525899200506f17?OpenDocument) (also affects PA 309)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Bitmapped on April 20, 2023, 06:58:09 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on April 20, 2023, 06:17:19 AM
CE Expert System:

District 1:  US 6/US 19 French Creek Pkwy (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec8525863700496990?OpenDocument) (reconstruction from PA 27 to north end with plans to decrease lanes from 4 to 2)

This project is going to eliminate the stub interchange with US 6/US 19 with its previous routing north of Meadville. US 6/US 19 will become the through movement.

Does anyone know where French Creek Parkway was intended to continue from its stub end? I-79 parallels US 19 closely through here, so I can't imagine PennDOT was also planning to upgrade it to a new alignment.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ARMOURERERIC on April 20, 2023, 07:05:12 PM
When I was at Edinboro c1982, the old timer claim was it going to Union City or Corry
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: vdeane on April 20, 2023, 08:29:16 PM
Quote from: Bitmapped on April 20, 2023, 06:58:09 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on April 20, 2023, 06:17:19 AM
CE Expert System:

District 1:  US 6/US 19 French Creek Pkwy (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec8525863700496990?OpenDocument) (reconstruction from PA 27 to north end with plans to decrease lanes from 4 to 2)

This project is going to eliminate the stub interchange with US 6/US 19 with its previous routing north of Meadville. US 6/US 19 will become the through movement.

Does anyone know where French Creek Parkway was intended to continue from its stub end? I-79 parallels US 19 closely through here, so I can't imagine PennDOT was also planning to upgrade it to a new alignment.
Interesting.  Is there a way to see what the final alignment will look like?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on April 21, 2023, 03:44:19 PM
(For I-99/US 220)  PennDOT - District 9 News: Two Bridge Rehabilitation Projects to Start in Bedford County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-9/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1171)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on April 24, 2023, 09:11:28 AM
Quote from: vdeane on April 20, 2023, 08:29:16 PM
Quote from: Bitmapped on April 20, 2023, 06:58:09 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on April 20, 2023, 06:17:19 AM
CE Expert System:

District 1:  US 6/US 19 French Creek Pkwy (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec8525863700496990?OpenDocument) (reconstruction from PA 27 to north end with plans to decrease lanes from 4 to 2)

This project is going to eliminate the stub interchange with US 6/US 19 with its previous routing north of Meadville. US 6/US 19 will become the through movement.

Does anyone know where French Creek Parkway was intended to continue from its stub end? I-79 parallels US 19 closely through here, so I can't imagine PennDOT was also planning to upgrade it to a new alignment.
Interesting.  Is there a way to see what the final alignment will look like?

If you are referring to this project, you should be able to see it via the Document List.

Quote from: 74/171FAN on April 19, 2023, 12:01:17 PM
(For I-90 and PA 99) PennDOT - District 1 News: Rolling Closures, Short-Term Lane Restrictions Today for Bridge Removal over Interstate 90 (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2050)

(For PA 99 and I-90)  PennDOT - District 1 News: Rolling Closures, Short-Term Lane Restrictions This Week for Bridge Removal over Interstate 90 (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2051)

(For I-90)  PennDOT - District 1 News: PennDOT Announces Update to Plans for the Beckman Road Bridge in Erie County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2052)

(For PA 98)  PennDOT - District 1 News: Project to Replace the Route 98 Bridge in Vernon Township, Crawford County to Begin Next Week (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2053)

(For PA 32)  PennDOT - District 6 News: Pipe Replacement Scheduled on Route 32 (River Road) in Lower Makefield Township (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8261)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: vdeane on April 24, 2023, 08:39:10 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on April 24, 2023, 09:11:28 AM
Quote from: vdeane on April 20, 2023, 08:29:16 PM
Quote from: Bitmapped on April 20, 2023, 06:58:09 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on April 20, 2023, 06:17:19 AM
CE Expert System:

District 1:  US 6/US 19 French Creek Pkwy (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec8525863700496990?OpenDocument) (reconstruction from PA 27 to north end with plans to decrease lanes from 4 to 2)

This project is going to eliminate the stub interchange with US 6/US 19 with its previous routing north of Meadville. US 6/US 19 will become the through movement.

Does anyone know where French Creek Parkway was intended to continue from its stub end? I-79 parallels US 19 closely through here, so I can't imagine PennDOT was also planning to upgrade it to a new alignment.
Interesting.  Is there a way to see what the final alignment will look like?

If you are referring to this project, you should be able to see it via the Document List.
Neat.  Looks like US 6/19 will be following something very close to the existing SB alignment.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on April 25, 2023, 01:20:34 PM
(For PA 286)  PennDOT - District 10 News: Traffic Alert for Milling and Paving on Oakland Avenue in Indiana County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1469)

(For PA 34)  PennDOT - District 8 News: PennDOT Announces Online Plans Display for Route 34 (Carlisle Road) Project near Bendersville, Adams County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1986)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: seicer on April 25, 2023, 03:07:32 PM
I couldn't follow along with the website about the French Creek Parkway bidding but I did find this: https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-1/PublicMeetings/CrawfordCounty/Documents/210525%20French%20Creek%20Parkway%20Revised%20Presentation_Newest.pdf

It really doesn't seem like four lanes are justified and with the roadway in poor condition, reconstructing with two lanes is the best alternative. The multi-use trail will be a nice addition for the unused lanes.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on April 25, 2023, 03:33:44 PM
Quote from: seicer on April 25, 2023, 03:07:32 PM
I couldn't follow along with the website about the French Creek Parkway bidding but I did find this: https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-1/PublicMeetings/CrawfordCounty/Documents/210525%20French%20Creek%20Parkway%20Revised%20Presentation_Newest.pdf

It really doesn't seem like four lanes are justified and with the roadway in poor condition, reconstructing with two lanes is the best alternative. The multi-use trail will be a nice addition for the unused lanes.

It was not a bidding.  Just the latest Categorical Exclusion documentation. 

You should be able to access the Doc List here under Part A:  https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/PopUpDocList?OpenForm&PackNo=31705
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on April 26, 2023, 10:24:12 AM
(For PA 467)  PennDOT - District 3 News: Pipe Replacement Project Set to Begin Next Week on Route 467 in LeRaysville Borough, Bradford County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4642)

(For PA 208)  PennDOT - District 10 News: PennDOT Announces Virtual Plans Display for Pilgrimham Bridge #1 Bridge Replacement in Salem Township, Clarion County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1470)

(For US 15)  PennDOT - District 3 News: Route 15 Paving Project Continues Next Week in Covington and Richmond Townships, Tioga County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4644)

(For US 22/US 322)  PennDOT - District 2 News: Walnut Street Off Ramp to Close Starting Monday (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2607)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: seicer on April 26, 2023, 11:27:55 AM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on April 25, 2023, 03:33:44 PM
Quote from: seicer on April 25, 2023, 03:07:32 PM
I couldn't follow along with the website about the French Creek Parkway bidding but I did find this: https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-1/PublicMeetings/CrawfordCounty/Documents/210525%20French%20Creek%20Parkway%20Revised%20Presentation_Newest.pdf

It really doesn't seem like four lanes are justified and with the roadway in poor condition, reconstructing with two lanes is the best alternative. The multi-use trail will be a nice addition for the unused lanes.

It was not a bidding.  Just the latest Categorical Exclusion documentation. 

You should be able to access the Doc List here under Part A:  https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/PopUpDocList?OpenForm&PackNo=31705

Thanks!
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on April 27, 2023, 04:38:32 PM
PennDOT - District 2 News: PennDOT to Partner with State College Borough on West Park Avenue Utility Work (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2610)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on April 28, 2023, 11:18:24 AM
(For US 220)  PennDOT - District 3 News: Route 220 Safety Improvement Project Continues (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4653)

PennDOT - District 3 News: Route 220 Bridge Improvement Project Continues in Lycoming County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4654)

PennDOT - District 1 News: Kane Road Bridge Closed in Pittsfield Township, Warren County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2061)

Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on May 01, 2023, 07:46:45 AM
CE Expert System: 

District 2:  PA 504 Steel Arch over One Mile Run (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec8525899d0069bf6e?OpenDocument)

(For PA 253)  PennDOT - District 9 News: Work to Replace Two Box Culverts on Route 253 (Executive Drive) Set to Start in Cambria County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-9/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1174)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on May 02, 2023, 11:07:03 AM
(For I-80 and US 220)  PennDOT - District 2 News: PennDOT Announces Rolling Roadblocks on I-80 in Centre County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2613)

PennDOT - District 3 News: Rolling Roadblocks on I-80 WB/EB this Sunday in Montour and Columbia Counties (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4668)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on May 03, 2023, 08:45:48 AM
(For US 220)  PennDOT - District 3 News: Route 220 Bridge Improvement Project Continues in Lycoming County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4673)

(For US 322)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Traffic Restrictions Next Week on EB Route 322 Ramp to Penhar Drive, Penhar Drive Ramp to EB Route 322, in Dauphin County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1995)

(For PA 462)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Weekend Closure Planned for Route 462 (Market Street) Bridge Over Mill Creek in Springettsbury and Spring Garden Townships, York County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1996)

PennDOT - Statewide News: Michael B. Carroll Confirmed as Secretary of Pennsylvania Department of Transportation (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/pages/all-news-details.aspx?newsid=1043)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on May 04, 2023, 08:24:41 AM
CE Expert System: 
District 4: PA 590 Pipes (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec8525899f006848c1?OpenDocument)

District 5:  US 209 at Schafers-Schoolhouse Rd (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec85258951007291ee?OpenDocument)

Quote from: 74/171FAN on March 16, 2023, 09:41:12 AM
(For PA 75) PennDOT - District 2 News: PennDOT Announces New Date for Port Royal Bridge Closure (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2564)

PennDOT - District 2 News: PennDOT Provides Update on Port Royal Bridge Project (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2618)

(For PA 32) PennDOT - District 6 News: Pipe Replacement Continues on Route 32 (River Road) in Tinicum, Plumstead Townships, Bucks County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8287)

(For I-79 and PA 488)  PennDOT - District 10 News: Beam Setting for the Portersville Bridge Replacement Project in Muddy Creek Township Begins May 15 (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1480)

(For US 322 BUS (State College))  PennDOT - District 2 News: Atherton Street Update for Early May (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2622)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on May 05, 2023, 10:33:50 AM
(For PA 339)  PennDOT - District 3 News: Pipe Replacement Project Next Week on Route 339 in Main Township, Columbia County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4680)

(For I-80)  PennDOT - District 3 News: Rolling Roadblocks on I-80 WB/EB Sunday in Montour and Columbia Counties (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4683)

(For PA 642)  PennDOT - District 3 News: Railroad Crossing Work to Close a Portion of Broad Street in West Milton, Union County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4684)

(For PA 150)  PennDOT - District 2 News: PennDOT Gives Update on Clinton County Bridge Preservation Work (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2624)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on May 08, 2023, 07:38:48 PM
Update on US 322 widening from an email I received today:

QuoteSection CSX, the second phase of the project, is expected to begin in 2024 and will replace the U.S. 322 (Conchester Highway) bridge over the CSX railroad and Bethel Road as well as improvements to the adjacent Bethel Road Interchange.

Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ARMOURERERIC on May 08, 2023, 09:55:02 PM
What part of the state is this in?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on May 08, 2023, 10:04:45 PM
Ultimately, the portion between US 1 and I-95 is slowly being widened from 2 to 4 lanes.  (http://us322conchester.com/project-information/)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ixnay on May 09, 2023, 08:58:13 AM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on May 08, 2023, 10:04:45 PM
Ultimately, the portion between US 1 and I-95 is slowly being widened from 2 to 4 lanes.  (http://us322conchester.com/project-information/)

The link was last updated on 04.03.2023 with http://us322conchester.com/news/section-csx-slideshow/ .

I drove the entire Conchester wb last summer after meeting a flight at PHL and IMO what they did to 322 between Clayton Park and US 1 is a beaut - and unrecognizable from when I was growing up in Boothwyn during the '70s.

Oh, and where is this project, Eric?  Here you go...

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.8637036,-75.4761822,12.54z
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ARMOURERERIC on May 09, 2023, 03:47:10 PM
Thank you
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on May 09, 2023, 06:50:31 PM
(For US 1)  PennDOT - District 6 News: Ramp Construction Planned Thursday Night on U.S. 1 in Bensalem Township (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8299)

(For PA 113)  PennDOT - District 6 News: Debris Removal Scheduled Under the Route 113 (Souderton Road) Bridge Over Morris Run in Hilltown Township (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8300)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ixnay on May 10, 2023, 09:08:05 PM
Quote from: ARMOURERERIC on May 09, 2023, 03:47:10 PM
Thank you

You're quite welcome.

Here's how that dualized section looks as it approaches the beginning of 322's multiplex with US 1...

https://tinyurl.com/39d4ve3n

... this was the south end of the initial dualization project when it was in progress...

https://tinyurl.com/9zechru8

...and here is a major bottleneck along the remaining 2-lane stretch.

https://tinyurl.com/4rrhkrmc
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on May 11, 2023, 07:39:32 AM
(For PA 997)   PennDOT - District 8 News: Bridge Project to Begin on Route 997 (Black Gap Road) in Franklin County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2001)

(For PA 304)  PennDOT - District 3 News: Resurfacing Project on Route 304 and Maple Street in Mifflinburg Borough, Union County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4693)

(For US 1)  PennDOT - District 6 News: Ramp Construction Planned Next Weekend on U.S. 1 in Bensalem Township (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8309)

(For PA 372)  PennDOT - District 6 News: PennDOT Completes Route 372 (Lower Valley Road) Bridge Replacement Project in Atglen Borough, West Sadsbury Township (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8310)

(For US 322 BUS (State College))  PennDOT - District 2 News: Atherton Street Update for mid-May (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2631)

(For US 222, PA 272, and I-76)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Nighttime Ramp Closures Planned for Route 222 Resurfacing Project in Lancaster County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2002)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on May 12, 2023, 08:07:07 PM
(For I-81) PennDOT - District 5 News: Schuylkill County: Road Closure on Interstate 81 North Today (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-5/pages/details.aspx?newsid=3554)

(For PA 283)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Resurfacing Project Planned on Toll House Road (Route 2023) in Dauphin County  (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2005)

(For PA 420)  PennDOT - District 6 News: PennDOT to Begin Route 420 (Wanamaker Avenue) Bridge Replacements over Darby Creek in Delaware County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8321)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on May 15, 2023, 12:10:34 PM
CE Expert System:  District 5:  (For PA 419)  Rehrersburg Road over Mill Creek (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec8525888a005b02ae?OpenDocument)

District 9: PA 160 over Otto Run (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec852589500058ca0e?OpenDocument)

(For US 322)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Traffic Restrictions This Wednesday on EB Route 322 Ramp to Penhar Drive, Penhar Drive Ramp to EB Route 322, in Dauphin County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2007)

(For PA 72)  PennDOT - District 8 News: PennDOT Announces Online Plans Display for Route 72 (South Main Street) Superstructure Replacement Project in Manheim Borough and Penn Township, Lancaster County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2008)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on May 16, 2023, 01:04:40 PM
(For PA 32)  PennDOT - District 6 News: Tree Removal Planned May 22 on Route 32 (Main Street) in New Hope Borough (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8324)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on May 17, 2023, 02:56:25 PM
(For PA 36)  PennDOT - District 9 News: Public Meeting and Plans Display for the Route 36 (Mill Run Bridge) Replacement and Roadway Resurfacing Project in Blair County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-9/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1176)

(For PA 154) PennDOT - District 3 News: Route 154 is Open to Traffic in Forks Township, Sullivan County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4703)

(For PA 98)  PennDOT - District 1 News: Route 98 Bridge Reopens in Vernon Township, Crawford County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2071)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on May 18, 2023, 07:45:56 AM
CE Expert System:

District 4:  PA 309 North Luzerne Interchange (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec8525873b005474c0?OpenDocument)

District 9:  PA 160 South Fork Little Conemaugh River (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec852589500058d6bd?OpenDocument)

(For I-99/US 220)  I-99 Plank Rd Intchg to Tyrone (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec852588d3005fa858?OpenDocument)

QuoteAn auxiliary lane will be constructed between the 17th Street and Frankstown interchanges in the southbound direction.

PA 56 in Johnstown (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec852588a000626736?OpenDocument)

QuoteAn eastbound auxiliary lane is being designed between the Bedford Street (Dale) and Widman Street ramps.

(For PA 997)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Culvert Replacement Project to Begin on Route 997 (Roxbury Road) in Cumberland County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2012)

(For PA 82)  PennDOT - District 6 News: Roundabout Construction to Close Reeceville Road Intersection, Restrict Route 82 (Manor Road) in West Brandywine Township (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8340)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on May 22, 2023, 07:57:18 AM
CE Expert System: 

District 6:  I-476 Advance Travel Management (include variable speed limits from I-95 to US 30) (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec852589170055ac21?OpenDocument)

District 9:   PA 994 Trib to Great Trough Creek (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec852588230057266a?OpenDocument)

(For I-70)   PennDOT - District 9 News: Interstate 70 Eastbound Rest Area to Close Temporarily (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-9/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1177)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on May 23, 2023, 12:14:59 PM
(For PA 150)   PennDOT - District 2 News: Detours Coming for Vehicles and Bicycles During Flemington Bridge Closure and Work (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2644) 
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on May 25, 2023, 02:25:50 PM
(For US 220) PennDOT - District 3 News: Route 220 Bridge Improvement Project Continues in Lycoming County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4720)

QuoteAs of Friday, May 12, 2023, the Route 220 northbound off ramp servicing Fourth Street has been reopened.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on May 26, 2023, 08:05:37 AM
(For PA 8, PA 68, and PA 356) PennDOT - District 10 News: Work to Continue on the PA 8/Main Street Signal Improvement Project (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1503)

Note that I have photographed these signals when I drove through Butler on May 13th.

(For PA 75) PennDOT - District 2 News: PennDOT Providing Traffic Control for Port Royal Speedway Events (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2648)

(For I-80 and PA 487)  PennDOT - District 3 News: Lane Restriction to Begin Next Week on Interstate 80 in Hemlock Township, Columbia County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4726)

(For PA 164) PennDOT - District 3 News: Improvement Work along Route 164 to Start in Cambria County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-9/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1182)

(For I-83)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Ramp Closures Scheduled on Resurfacing Project on I-83 Near Harrisburg (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2023)

(For PA 216)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Bridge on Route 216 (Sticks Road) on Codorus Township, York County, is Open (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2026)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on May 30, 2023, 12:24:08 PM
(For PA 718)  PennDOT - District 1 News: Route 718 Closure Planned in City of Sharon, Mercer County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2077)

(For US 30)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Rolling Stops Tonight and Thursday Night on Route 30 at Centerville Road Interchange in E. Hempfield Township, Lancaster County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2027)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on May 31, 2023, 02:29:26 PM
(For US 322)  PennDOT - District 2 News: Route 322 Bridge Preservation Work Starts Next Week in Clearfield (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2651)

(For PA 772)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Box Culvert Replacement Project to Begin Next Week on Route 772 in Lancaster County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2029)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on June 01, 2023, 07:32:24 AM
CE Expert System: 

District 5: Tilden Road One-Lane Bridge (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec85258705006170df?OpenDocument)

QuoteThe proposed project consists of the replacement of the bridge carrying SR 4015 over an unnamed tributary to Irish Creek and approach roadway reconstruction. The existing 13-foot span bridge, which carries one lane of traffic, is structurally deficient and does not meet current design standards. It will be replaced with a precast box culvert that carries two lanes of traffic. Guide rail will be added in all quadrants of the structure as there is currently none in place. No utility work is anticipated during the project. A detour will be implemented during construction.

District 10:  PA 208 Pilgrimham Bridge #1 (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec852588e000525413?OpenDocument)

QuoteA 10-day detour will be utilized for traffic control.

(For PA 449)  PennDOT - District 2 News: Potter County Bridge Replacement and Detour Begin June 8 (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2654)

(For PA 420)  PennDOT - District 6 News: Shapiro Administration Marks Start of Route 420 (Wanamaker Avenue) Bridge Replacement Project over Darby Creek in Delaware County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8365)

(For PA 271)  PennDOT - District 9 News: Pavement Preservation Work on Route 271 Taking Place in Cambria County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-9/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1186)

(For PA 56)   PennDOT - District 9 News: Traffic to be Re-routed for Repairs on Route 56 Eastbound Near Point Stadium in Cambria County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-9/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1185)

(For I-476)  PennDOT - District 6 News: Construction Activities Scheduled at I-476 North, MacDade Boulevard Interchange in Ridley Township (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8378)

Quote from: 74/171FAN on May 30, 2023, 12:24:08 PM
(For US 30)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Rolling Stops Tonight and Thursday Night on Route 30 at Centerville Road Interchange in E. Hempfield Township, Lancaster County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2027)

PennDOT - District 8 News: Postponed: Rolling Stops Tonight on WB Route 30 at Centerville Road Interchange in E. Hempfield Township, Lancaster County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2033)

Currently scheduled for the night of June 2nd.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on June 02, 2023, 10:37:33 AM
(For US 222 and PA 272) PennDOT - District 8 News: SB Ramp Closures Tonight for Route 222 Resurfacing Project in Lancaster County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2035)

(For PA 851) PennDOT - District 8 News: Arch Culvert Replacement Project Begins Next Week on Route 851 in York County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2036)

Quote
Quote from: 74/171FAN on May 30, 2023, 12:24:08 PM
(For US 30)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Rolling Stops Tonight and Thursday Night on Route 30 at Centerville Road Interchange in E. Hempfield Township, Lancaster County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2027)

PennDOT - District 8 News: Postponed: Rolling Stops Tonight on WB Route 30 at Centerville Road Interchange in E. Hempfield Township, Lancaster County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2033)

Currently scheduled for the night of June 2nd.

PennDOT - District 8 News: Nighttime Lane Restrictions Next Week on EB Route 30 at Centerville Road Interchange in E. Hempfield Township, Lancaster County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2037) 

QuoteRolling stops for beam setting planned for tonight cancelled 

(For PA 104)  PennDOT - District 3 News: Bridge Replacement Project Set to Begin Next Week on Route 104 in Chapman Township, Snyder County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4751)

Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on June 03, 2023, 09:56:58 AM
https://goo.gl/maps/AaeRaUB5XHgPRV2j9
Is this the northern terminus of PA 743?

I thought someone on here mentioned it travels north to end at I-81. Yet signage indicates not on US 22.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on June 03, 2023, 09:59:16 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on June 03, 2023, 09:56:58 AM
https://goo.gl/maps/AaeRaUB5XHgPRV2j9
Is this the northern terminus of PA 743?

I thought someone on here mentioned it travels north to end at I-81. Yet signage indicates not on US 22.

Yes, all of the shields north of there without "TO" banners are in error and have been for a long time.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Dough4872 on June 03, 2023, 05:07:05 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on June 03, 2023, 09:59:16 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on June 03, 2023, 09:56:58 AM
https://goo.gl/maps/AaeRaUB5XHgPRV2j9
Is this the northern terminus of PA 743?

I thought someone on here mentioned it travels north to end at I-81. Yet signage indicates not on US 22.

Yes, all of the shields north of there with out "TO" banners are in error and have been for a long time.

Looking at GSV there appear to be PA 743 reassurance markers along Laudermilch Road north of the official terminus between US 22 and Jonestown Road, which is state-maintained as SR 2025. North of there, locally-maintained Bow Creek Road doesn't have any PA 743 markers and only TO signs.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on June 05, 2023, 07:56:33 AM
(For I-90 and PA 99 (SR 0699))  PennDOT - District 1 News: Rolling Closures, Short-Term Lane Restrictions Scheduled for Bridge Removal over Interstate 90 (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2081)

(and yes, I will count this as my 699 whenever I clinch it)

PennDOT - District 4 News: PennDOT/BPD-I to Host I-81 Susquehanna Bridge Stakeholder Update Webinar- June 15, 2023 (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-4/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1223)

(For PA 215)  PennDOT - District 1 News: Project to Replace Route 215 Bridge in Springfield Township, Erie County to Begin Soon (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2083)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on June 06, 2023, 02:02:08 PM
(For US 6 BUS (Warren) and US 62)  PennDOT - District 1 News: Warren Roundabout Project Advancing to Stage 2 (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2085)

(For PA 340)  PennDOT - District 6 News: Tree Removal Planned Next Week on Route 340 (West Kings Highway) in West Caln Township (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8390)

(For PA 18)  PennDOT - District 1 News: Project Underway to Replace the Route 18 Bridge in Spring Township, Crawford County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2086)

PennDOT - District 6 News: Northbound Crooked Lane Closed at Church Road Intersection Due to Sinkhole in Upper Merion Township (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8392)

(For US 322)  PennDOT - District 6 News: Caln Township to Close U.S. 322 (Horseshoe Pike) for Utility Improvement in Chester County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8393)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on June 07, 2023, 08:31:32 AM
(For US 6N and PA 99)  PennDOT - District 1 News: Work to Improve Edinboro Intersection in Erie County to Start Soon (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2088)

(For PA 199)  PennDOT - District 3 News: Route 199 Reconstruction Project Continues in Sayre and Athens, Bradford County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4758)

(For US 6 and PA 660)  PennDOT - District 3 News: Intersection Improvement Project at Routes 6, 660 and 4002 will Begin This Week in Charleston Township, Tioga County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4760)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: MASTERNC on June 07, 2023, 02:41:36 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on June 07, 2023, 08:31:32 AM
(For US 6N and PA 99)  PennDOT - District 1 News: Work to Improve Edinboro Intersection in Erie County to Start Soon (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2088)

(For PA 199)  PennDOT - District 3 News: Route 199 Reconstruction Project Continues in Sayre and Athens, Bradford County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4758)


Interstate 17? Where's the proofreader?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Dough4872 on June 07, 2023, 07:18:58 PM
Quote from: MASTERNC on June 07, 2023, 02:41:36 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on June 07, 2023, 08:31:32 AM
(For US 6N and PA 99)  PennDOT - District 1 News: Work to Improve Edinboro Intersection in Erie County to Start Soon (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2088)

(For PA 199)  PennDOT - District 3 News: Route 199 Reconstruction Project Continues in Sayre and Athens, Bradford County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4758)


Interstate 17? Where's the proofreader?

Apparently PennDOT morphed Interstate 86 and NY 17 into one road designation
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on June 08, 2023, 08:16:59 AM
CE Expert System: 

District 5:  Hecktown Road Bridge over US 22 (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec852587d10057c2a8?OpenDocument)

QuoteThe abutments will be moved back to allow for future widening of US 22 and the bridge will be elevated to allow for proper vertical clearance over US 22.

District 10:  US 219/PA 28 Brockway Intersection (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec852589a40066e18c?OpenDocument)

QuotePurpose: The purpose of the project is the realignment of Evergreen St. along the north approach of US 0219. It will also include signal upgrades, improvements to traffic flow through the intersection with improved turning radius, signing, sidewalk reconstruction and drainage updates within the Limits of Work.Need(s):
The offset intersection alignment of Evergreen St. is a safety concern with a substandard turning radius. The existing signals do not provide full pedestrian controls. The turning radius of the intersection approaches results in damage to signage.

(For PA 309) PennDOT - District 6 News: Route 309 Connector Construction to Close Elroy Road Beginning July 10 in Franconia, Hatfield Townships (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8398)

(For PA 32) PennDOT - District 6 News: Resurfacing Scheduled on Route 32 (River Road) in Nockamixon, Bridgeton Townships (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8397)

(For US 1)  PennDOT - District 6 News: Construction Planned Next Week on Old Lincoln Highway, Rockhill Drive in Bensalem, Middletown Townships (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8401)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on June 09, 2023, 05:31:47 PM
(For PA 246)  PennDOT - District 2 News: Pipe Work on Route 246 to Bring Closure and Detour in McKean County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2664)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on June 12, 2023, 05:56:49 PM
(For US 222 and PA 272) PennDOT - District 8 News: Rescheduled: SB Ramp Closures Tonight for Route 222 Resurfacing Project in Lancaster County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2040)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on June 13, 2023, 10:03:26 AM
(For PA 99)  PennDOT - District 1 News: Project to Replace the Route 699 (Route 99/Edinboro Road) Bridge in Summit Township, Erie County to Begin Soon (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2094)

Quote from: 74/171FAN on June 06, 2023, 02:02:08 PM
PennDOT - District 6 News: Northbound Crooked Lane Closed at Church Road Intersection Due to Sinkhole in Upper Merion Township (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8392)

PennDOT - District 6 News: PennDOT Reopens Northbound Crooked Lane at Church Road Intersection Following Sinkhole Repair in Upper Merion Township (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8412)

Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on June 15, 2023, 05:24:05 AM
(For US 322)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Nighttime Lane Restrictions Planned for Next Week at Route 322 Intersection Project in Dauphin County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2043)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on June 15, 2023, 01:53:39 PM
(For US 30)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Early Morning Stops Tomorrow on Route 30 Ramps at Centerville Road Interchange in E. Hempfield Township, Lancaster County  (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2046)

(For PA 462)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Reminder: Route 462 (Market Street) Bridge Over Mill Creek in Springettsbury and Spring Garden Townships, York County, to be Closed this Weekend  (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2044)

(For US 15)  PennDOT - District 3 News: Rolling Roadblocks on Route 15 NB/SB Next Thursday in Lycoming County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4785)

(For PA 414)  PennDOT - District 3 News: Pipe Extension & Embankment Work Begins Next Week on Route 414 in Union Township, Tioga County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4789)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on June 17, 2023, 08:40:06 AM
(For PA 611) PennDOT - District 6 News: PECO Utility Improvement to Close Route 611 (York Road) in Abington Township (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8420)

(For US 30) PennDOT - District 8 News: Work Continues Next Week Centerville Road Interchange Improvement Project in E. Hempfield Township, Lancaster County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2049)

(For PA 372) PennDOT - District 8 News: Pipe Replacement Project Scheduled on Route 372 in Lancaster County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2048)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on June 20, 2023, 06:53:27 PM
(For I-83 and PA 238) PennDOT - District 8 News: PennDOT Announces Online Plans Display for the SB I-83 Exit 24 Off-Ramp Widening Project in Manchester Township, York County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2050)

(For PA 238) PennDOT - District 8 News: PennDOT Announces Online Plans Display for Route 238 (Church Road) and Susquehanna Trail (Route 4005) Intersection Improvements Project in Manchester Township, York County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2051)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on June 22, 2023, 03:40:03 PM
(For US 1) PennDOT - District 6 News: Construction Planned at Night Next Week on U.S. 1, Rockhill Drive in Bensalem, Middletown Townships (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8430)

QuoteSunday, June 25, from 8:00 PM to 6:00 AM the following morning, northbound U.S.1 will be reduced to a single lane between the Street Road and Penndel/Business U.S.1 interchanges for a traffic pattern change to accommodate the opening of a new ramp to replace the existing on-ramp to northbound U.S.1 at the Neshaminy Interchange

(For PA 601 and PA 403) PennDOT - District 9 News: Public Meeting and Plans Display for the Route 601 (Hollsopple Bridge) Replacement Project in Somerset County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-9/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1188)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: MASTERNC on June 22, 2023, 03:44:07 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on June 22, 2023, 03:40:03 PM
(For US 1) PennDOT - District 6 News: Construction Planned at Night Next Week on U.S. 1, Rockhill Drive in Bensalem, Middletown Townships (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8430)

QuoteSunday, June 25, from 8:00 PM to 6:00 AM the following morning, northbound U.S.1 will be reduced to a single lane between the Street Road and Penndel/Business U.S.1 interchanges for a traffic pattern change to accommodate the opening of a new ramp to replace the existing on-ramp to northbound U.S.1 at the Neshaminy Interchange

Maybe that will coincide with the removal of the stop sign on the ramp from the Turnpike that causes major backups
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on June 23, 2023, 03:44:25 PM
(For US 422) PennDOT - District 10 News: U.S. Route 422 Ramp Preservation Project to Begin June 26 in Manor and Rayburn Townships, Armstrong County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1540)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on June 26, 2023, 10:33:58 AM
(For I-81)  PennDOT - District 4 News: Interstate 81 Northbound and Southbound will be Closed in Luzerne County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-4/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1245)

(For PA 729)  PennDOT - District 2 News: PennDOT Announces Start Date for Gulich Township Bridge Project (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2677)

CE Expert System:

District 1: US 62 over Fox Run (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec852589360069ae67?OpenDocument)

District 4:  PA 239 over Pine Creek (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec8525899600475554?OpenDocument)

District 8:  PA 34 over Juniata River (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec8525890a006eee76?OpenDocument)

(For PA 150)  PennDOT - District 2 News: PennDOT Extends Detour for Flemington Bridge Project (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2678)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on June 28, 2023, 04:40:24 PM
(For I-81, US 11, and US 15)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Ramp Closures to Continue at I-81 and Route 11/15 Interchange in Cumberland County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2059)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on June 29, 2023, 01:39:37 PM
(For PA 100)  PennDOT - District 6 News: North Coventry Township Road Improvement to Close Route 100 (Pottstown Pike) in Chester County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8442)

PennDOT - District 8 News: Online Plans Display Available, In-Person Public Meeting Planned for Route 3012 Market Street Bridge Rehabilitation Project (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2060)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ixnay on June 29, 2023, 05:22:40 PM
What's with the closure through July 11 of PA 611 between Richmond Road and Mount Pleasant Road in Northampton County?  That's two stretches of 611 closed between Easton and DWG.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on June 29, 2023, 06:32:54 PM
Quote from: ixnay on June 29, 2023, 05:22:40 PM
What's with the closure through July 11 of PA 611 between Richmond Road and Mount Pleasant Road in Northampton County?  That's two stretches of 611 closed between Easton and DWG.

The 511PA site states that it is due to a downed utility as of 9:35 AM today.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on June 30, 2023, 09:49:52 AM
(For PA 146)  PennDOT - District 2 News: McKean County Box Culvert Replacement to Begin July 14 (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2680)

(For I-80 and PA 93)  PennDOT - District 4 News: PennDOT Announces an Open House and Online Plans Display for Interstate 80, Section 353 over Route 93 in Sugarloaf Township, Luzerne County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-4/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1246)

(For US 220)  PennDOT - District 3 News: Route 220 Safety Improvement Project Continues (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4845)

Quote(New) Motorists are advised that the speed limit has been restored between the Northway Road intersection and Route 287 intersection to the pre-construction speed limit. 

(For I-80 and I-81)  PennDOT - District 4 News: PennDOT Announces an Open House and Online Plans Display for Interstate 80 Eastbound over Interstate 81 Bridge Replacement Project in Butler Township, Luzerne County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-4/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1248)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on July 03, 2023, 01:18:37 PM
(For US 22 and PA 403)  PennDOT - District 10 News: Repairs to Begin on the Cramer Pike/State Route 403 bridge over U.S. Route 22 in East Wheatfield Township, Indiana County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1544)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on July 05, 2023, 07:30:09 AM
(For I-81) PennDOT - District 4 News: UPDATE -Interstate 81 Northbound and Southbound will be Closed in Luzerne County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-4/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1249)

(For PA 915)  PennDOT - District 9 News: Public Meeting and Plans Display for the Route 915 (North Valley Road) Bridge Replacement Project in Fulton County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-9/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1194)

(For PA 660 and US 6) PennDOT - District 3 News: Intersection Improvement Project at Routes 6, 660 and 4002 Continues in Charleston Township, Tioga County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4853)

PennDOT - District 3 News: Utility Project to Temporarily Close I-80 WB Rest Area in Montour County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4855)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Rothman on July 05, 2023, 12:13:17 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on July 05, 2023, 07:30:09 AM
(For I-81) PennDOT - District 4 News: UPDATE -Interstate 81 Northbound and Southbound will be Closed in Luzerne County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-4/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1249)

(For PA 915)  PennDOT - District 9 News: Public Meeting and Plans Display for the Route 915 (North Valley Road) Bridge Replacement Project in Fulton County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-9/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1194)
Huh.  Nighttime closure on I-81.  Interesting.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on July 06, 2023, 01:40:45 PM
(For I-81)   PennDOT - District 4 News: PennDOT/BPD-I Set to Begin Interstate 81 Susquehanna Bridge and Roadway Reconstruction in Susquehanna County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-4/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1250)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on July 07, 2023, 03:17:10 PM
(For I-79 and PA 488)  PennDOT - District 10 News: Ramp Detours for the Portersville Bridge Replacement Project in Muddy Creek Township, Butler County Begin July 19 (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1560)

(For US 220)  PennDOT - District 3 News: Route 220 Safety Improvement Project Continues (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4874)

(For US 30)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Work Continues Next Week at Centerville Road Interchange Improvement Project in E. Hempfield Township, Lancaster County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2066)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: seicer on July 07, 2023, 08:25:36 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on July 06, 2023, 01:40:45 PM
(For I-81)   PennDOT - District 4 News: PennDOT/BPD-I Set to Begin Interstate 81 Susquehanna Bridge and Roadway Reconstruction in Susquehanna County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-4/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1250)

It doesn't look like they are tearing out the original concrete from the plans that I saw, but it seems they will at least do full-depth repairs and many layers of new asphalt. What is superpave and how is that different in this case?

Regardless, that was one of the worst interstates I've had to drive. Giant potholes galore. Patches everywhere. Strips of asphalt to resolve extreme rutting that just made the issue worse in wet weather. And when things got repaved (like south of New Milford), it would come apart within a year.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on July 08, 2023, 11:07:17 AM
(For PA 997)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Pipe Replacement Project Begins Next Week on Route 997 in Franklin County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2068)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on July 10, 2023, 07:57:50 AM
CE Expert System:

District 2:  PA 346 over Gates Hollow Run (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec852589b400455ce8?OpenDocument)

PennDOT - District 5 News: Lehigh County: Race Street Bridge is Closed in Whitehall and Catasauqua (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-5/pages/details.aspx?newsid=3619)

(For PA 66)  PennDOT - District 10 News: Pipe Replacement to Close State Route 66 (River Road) in Parks Township, Armstrong (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1565)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on July 11, 2023, 11:32:56 AM
(For PA 994) PennDOT - District 9 News: Detour for Slope Stabilization Work on Route 994 (Old Plank Road) (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-9/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1199)

(For US 15) PennDOT - District 3 News: Sign Replacement Project to Begin Next Week on Route 15 in Tioga County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4880)

(For PA 997)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Bridge on Route 997 (Black Gap Road) in Franklin County is Open to Traffic (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2073)

PennDOT - District 6 News: Swamp Creek Road Bridge over Unami Creek Closed in Marlborough Township Due to Storm Damage (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8477)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: MASTERNC on July 12, 2023, 09:28:55 AM
Quote from: seicer on July 07, 2023, 08:25:36 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on July 06, 2023, 01:40:45 PM
(For I-81)   PennDOT - District 4 News: PennDOT/BPD-I Set to Begin Interstate 81 Susquehanna Bridge and Roadway Reconstruction in Susquehanna County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-4/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1250)

It doesn't look like they are tearing out the original concrete from the plans that I saw, but it seems they will at least do full-depth repairs and many layers of new asphalt. What is superpave and how is that different in this case?

Regardless, that was one of the worst interstates I've had to drive. Giant potholes galore. Patches everywhere. Strips of asphalt to resolve extreme rutting that just made the issue worse in wet weather. And when things got repaved (like south of New Milford), it would come apart within a year.

Superpave is a really long-life asphalt tailored for heavy duty use.  The first batches when it came out were terrible but they have really refined it since.

https://www.globalgilson.com/blog/superpave-mix-design-method-resource
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on July 12, 2023, 03:09:29 PM
(For PA 244)  PennDOT - District 2 News: Box Culvert Replacement to Begin in Potter County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2691)

(For I-83)  PennDOT - District 8 News: PennDOT Resumes Environmental Studies for Interstate 83 South Bridge Project (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2077)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on July 13, 2023, 08:01:15 AM
CE Expert System:

District 1:  US 20 over Twenty Mile Creek Br (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec852589860047fe0f?OpenDocument)

Quote from: 74/171FAN on July 05, 2023, 07:30:09 AM
(For PA 660 and US 6) PennDOT - District 3 News: Intersection Improvement Project at Routes 6, 660 and 4002 Continues in Charleston Township, Tioga County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4853)

(For PA 660 and US 6) PennDOT - District 3 News: 7/13/2023 UPDATE: Intersection Improvement Project at Routes 6, 660 and 4002 Continues in Charleston Township, Tioga County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4888)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on July 14, 2023, 12:22:52 PM
(For US 220)  PennDOT - District 3 News: Route 220 Safety Improvement Project Continues (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4893)

(For PA 100) PennDOT - District 6 News: North Coventry Township Road Improvement to Close Route 100 (Pottstown Pike) July 17 in Chester County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8489)

(For US 11/US 15 and US 22/US 322)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Ramps at Route 22/322 and 11/15 in Dauphin County are Open (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2084)

(For VA 419)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Route 419 (Schaeffer Road) Open to Traffic in Heidelberg Township, Lebanon County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2086)

(For PA 372)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Route 372 is Open in East Drumore Township, Lancaster County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2088)

PennDOT - District 6 News: Smithbridge Road Bridge over Webb Creek Closed in Concord Township Due to Structure Condition (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8494)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Mergingtraffic on July 15, 2023, 05:28:13 PM
I found this beauty in Reading, PA and noticed it's on River Rd at a stub.  Recent sat images show a bike lane or trail built along River Rd but I can't tell if that sign's still there as in GSV looking down from the Buttonwood St Bridge it looks right near the trees. It's.......

......A button copy sign up for basically no traffic.

https://www.google.com/maps/@40.339602,-75.9418588,3a,75y,166.54h,84.02t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1stsTs89HS_S7xbEoplPTgcw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?entry=ttu

This is from the Buttonwood St bridge in 2021, but before the road was redone with a bike lane or trail.
https://www.google.com/maps/@40.3396981,-75.9421617,3a,75y,129.85h,76.99t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sZWjh8pM9hMfLsErRRg7Y2g!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu

and finally the sat image and you can't really tell:
https://www.google.com/maps/dir//Frederick,+Maryland/@40.3396427,-75.9414469,121m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m8!4m7!1m0!1m5!1m1!1s0x89c9c50c8cbdaee3:0xda6247bdbd111c99!2m2!1d-77.4105409!2d39.4142688?entry=ttu

Anybody frequest the Reading, PA area and can tell if it's still there?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on July 15, 2023, 10:22:25 PM
(For PA 32, PA 232, and PA 532)  PennDOT - District 6 News: Four Bucks County State Highways Closed Due to Flooding (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8497)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: seicer on July 16, 2023, 03:01:08 PM
Quote from: Mergingtraffic on July 15, 2023, 05:28:13 PM
I found this beauty in Reading, PA and noticed it's on River Rd at a stub.  Recent sat images show a bike lane or trail built along River Rd but I can't tell if that sign's still there as in GSV looking down from the Buttonwood St Bridge it looks right near the trees. It's.......

......A button copy sign up for basically no traffic.

https://www.google.com/maps/@40.339602,-75.9418588,3a,75y,166.54h,84.02t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1stsTs89HS_S7xbEoplPTgcw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?entry=ttu

This is from the Buttonwood St bridge in 2021, but before the road was redone with a bike lane or trail.
https://www.google.com/maps/@40.3396981,-75.9421617,3a,75y,129.85h,76.99t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sZWjh8pM9hMfLsErRRg7Y2g!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu

and finally the sat image and you can't really tell:
https://www.google.com/maps/dir//Frederick,+Maryland/@40.3396427,-75.9414469,121m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m8!4m7!1m0!1m5!1m1!1s0x89c9c50c8cbdaee3:0xda6247bdbd111c99!2m2!1d-77.4105409!2d39.4142688?entry=ttu

Anybody frequest the Reading, PA area and can tell if it's still there?

That area has a lot of interesting signs: https://goo.gl/maps/R8CmhohrJjo1LrYf6
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on July 16, 2023, 03:11:49 PM
Speaking of Reading, what is up with the TO Pa 61 shield. Isn’t this PA 61 proper beginning here?
https://goo.gl/maps/Jn5eKirRtPVi3GxJ7
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on July 16, 2023, 03:53:19 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on July 16, 2023, 03:11:49 PM
Speaking of Reading, what is up with the TO Pa 61 shield. Isn't this PA 61 proper beginning here?
https://goo.gl/maps/Jn5eKirRtPVi3GxJ7

It is a bit debatable because you can get to/from there via Greenwich St up ahead.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Dough4872 on July 16, 2023, 07:27:17 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on July 16, 2023, 03:53:19 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on July 16, 2023, 03:11:49 PM
Speaking of Reading, what is up with the TO Pa 61 shield. Isn't this PA 61 proper beginning here?
https://goo.gl/maps/Jn5eKirRtPVi3GxJ7

It is a bit debatable because you can get to/from there via Greenwich St up ahead.

PA 61 is officially signed beginning at US 222 Business at Greenwich Street and following Greenwich Street west before turning north onto Centre Avenue. Greenwich Street is city-maintained. The portion of Centre Avenue between US 222 Business and Greenwich Street is designated by PennDOT as SR 2087.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on July 16, 2023, 08:13:44 PM
Quote from: Dough4872 on July 16, 2023, 07:27:17 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on July 16, 2023, 03:53:19 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on July 16, 2023, 03:11:49 PM
Speaking of Reading, what is up with the TO Pa 61 shield. Isn't this PA 61 proper beginning here?
https://goo.gl/maps/Jn5eKirRtPVi3GxJ7

It is a bit debatable because you can get to/from there via Greenwich St up ahead.

PA 61 is officially signed beginning at US 222 Business at Greenwich Street and following Greenwich Street west before turning north onto Centre Avenue. Greenwich Street is city-maintained. The portion of Centre Avenue between US 222 Business and Greenwich Street is designated by PennDOT as SR 2087.

Yeah, I looked at the VideoLog a bit and saw that.  I am hesitant to change what I have in Travel Mapping as long as the TO PA 61 Shields are before the Centre Ave turn.  Right now I am splitting the difference between Centre Ave and Greenwich St.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on July 17, 2023, 12:05:47 AM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on July 16, 2023, 08:13:44 PM
Quote from: Dough4872 on July 16, 2023, 07:27:17 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on July 16, 2023, 03:53:19 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on July 16, 2023, 03:11:49 PM
Speaking of Reading, what is up with the TO Pa 61 shield. Isn’t this PA 61 proper beginning here?
https://goo.gl/maps/Jn5eKirRtPVi3GxJ7

It is a bit debatable because you can get to/from there via Greenwich St up ahead.

PA 61 is officially signed beginning at US 222 Business at Greenwich Street and following Greenwich Street west before turning north onto Centre Avenue. Greenwich Street is city-maintained. The portion of Centre Avenue between US 222 Business and Greenwich Street is designated by PennDOT as SR 2087.

Yeah, I looked at the VideoLog a bit and saw that.  I am hesitant to change what I have in Travel Mapping as long as the TO PA 61 Shields are before the Centre Ave turn.  Right now I am splitting the difference between Centre Ave and Greenwich St.

Yeah I’ve seen that part as I brought GSV to Greenwhich, especially that Centre Ave is one way, SB PA 61 must use 4th to Greenwich to reach US 222 Business.


On another note, why does PennDOT traditionally use one control city on rural freeway guides?   Even on I-80 at PA 115, where Wilkes- Barre is on a supplemental for PA 115, PennDOT just signs Blakeslee.  Other states would sign both Blakslee and Wilkes- Barre as primary controls and FDOT would use a southern PA town along PA 115 with Blakeslee as a supplemental.

Just curious as that always caught my eye. Only PTC signs two with some select interstate exits, but most use one city only.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on July 17, 2023, 03:47:07 AM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on July 15, 2023, 10:22:25 PM
(For PA 32, PA 232, and PA 532)  PennDOT - District 6 News: Four Bucks County State Highways Closed Due to Flooding (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8497)

(For PA 32 and PA 532)  PennDOT - District 6 News: Three State Highways Remain Closed Due to Flooding in Bucks County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8498)  (PA 232 has apparently reopened.)

CE Expert System:

District 4: I-80/I-81 Interchange (specifically I-80 EB over I-81) (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec852582cd00443efd?OpenDocument)

(For I-79 and PA 488)  PennDOT - District 10 News: Ramp Detours Delayed for the Portersville Bridge Replacement Project in Muddy Creek Township, Butler County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1572)

(For PA 462)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Weight Limit Posted on Route 462 Veterans Memorial (Columbia-Wrightsville) Bridge in Lancaster County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2090)

(I will be out of town the next two weekends so if anyone wants check the signage for me in regard to the detour, please do so.)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on July 18, 2023, 08:23:21 AM
(For PA 228)  PennDOT - District 10 News: New Lane Alignment on State Route 228 for the Ball's Bend Safety Improvement Project, Butler County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1573)

(For US 6N and PA 99)  PennDOT - District 1 News: Detour Planned for Edinboro Intersection Project in Erie County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2120)

(For US 22 and PA 403)  PennDOT - District 10 News: Westbound Closure on U.S Route 22 to Begin for the Cramer Pike/State Route 403 Bridge Repair in East Wheatfield Township, Indiana County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1574)

(For I-81 and PA 465)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Pavement Repairs Tomorrow on NB I-81 in Cumberland County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2091)

(For PA 32 and PA 532)  PennDOT - District 6 News: PennDOT Reopens Route 32 (River Road) Following Flood Damage Repair in Bucks County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8502)


Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on July 19, 2023, 09:26:37 AM
(For I-79 and PA 488)  PennDOT - District 10 News: Second Stage of the Portersville Bridge Replacement Project in Muddy Creek Township, Butler County Begins August 9 (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1575)

(For PA 928)  PennDOT - District 9 News: Public Meeting and Plans Display for the Route 928 (Big Cove Tannery Road) Bridge Replacement Project in Fulton County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-9/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1200)

(For PA 271)  PennDOT - District 9 News: Culvert Repairs to Start on Route 271 (Menoher Boulevard) in Cambria County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-9/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1201)

(For PA 948)  PennDOT - District 2 News: Pipe Work on Route 948 to Bring Closure and Detour in Elk County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2695)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on July 20, 2023, 09:58:37 AM
(For PA 228)  PennDOT - District 10 News: Harbison Road to Close as Construction Continues on the Balls Bend Safety Improvement Project in Butler County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1577)

PennDOT - Statewide News: Shapiro Administration, Transportation Stakeholders Discuss Transportation Investments, Highlight 2023 Progress (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/pages/all-news-details.aspx?newsid=1058)

(For PA 23)  PennDOT - District 6 News: Aqua Pennsylvania Utility Improvement to Close Route 23 (Conshohocken State Road) in Lower Merion Township (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8509)

(For I-180 and US 220) PennDOT - District 3 News: Resurfacing Project Continues on Interstate 180 in Lycoming County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4909)

(For PA 63)  PennDOT - District 6 News: Reconstruction, Widening to Close Route 63 (Sumneytown Pike) Slip Ramp to I-476 South in Towamencin Township (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8512)

(For I-83) PennDOT - District 8 News: Traffic Switch Planned on I-83 Over Tolna Road in Shrewsbury Township, York County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2095)

(For PA 532) PennDOT - District 6 News: PennDOT Reopens Section of Taylorsville Road Following Flood Damage Repair in Bucks County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8513)

(For US 6N and PA 99) PennDOT - District 1 News: Traffic Control Plan Revised for Edinboro Intersection Project in Erie County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2123)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on July 21, 2023, 04:57:57 PM
(For US 422, PA 28, and PA 66)  PennDOT - District 10 News: U.S. Route 422 Ramp Preservation Project Continues with Kittanning Off Ramp Closure in Armstrong County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1583)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on July 24, 2023, 10:06:50 AM
CE Expert System: 

District 2:  PA 75 Bridge over Juniata River (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec8525896600597bee?OpenDocument) (due to bridge hit)

District 5:  I-78/PA 61 Interchange and I-78 Schuylkill River Bridge Replacement (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec852587e500644c40?OpenDocument)

District 10:  US 119/US 422 BUS Interchange in Indiana (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec8525885b00486b2d?OpenDocument)

(For PA 420) PennDOT - District 6 News: SEPTA to Close Route 420 (Kedron Avenue/Woodland Avenue) for Rail Improvements in Morton Borough (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8520)

PennDOT - District 8 News: In-Person Open House Planned in Harrisburg for Route 3012 Market Street Bridge Rehabilitation Project (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2099)

PennDOT - District 9 News: Weight Posting Implemented on Route 1012 (East 10th Street) Bridge in Blair County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-9/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1202)

(For I-80, PA 970, US 322, and PA 879)  PennDOT - District 2 News: PennDOT Suggests Alternate Route for Fair Traffic (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2700)

(For I-90 and PA 18)  PennDOT - District 1 News: Short-Term Closures Planned for Interstate 90 Ramps for Route 18 (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2126)

(For US 6 BUS (Warren) and US 62)  PennDOT - District 1 News: Warren Roundabout Project Advancing to Stage 3; Intersection Closed to All Truck, Large Vehicle Traffic (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2127)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on July 25, 2023, 10:47:27 AM
(For PA 718)  PennDOT - District 1 News: Route 718 to be Closed for Railroad Work in City of Sharon, Mercer County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2128)

(For US 6/US 19)  PennDOT - District 1 News: PennDOT Announces Online Plans Display for Route 6 Bridge over French Creek in Crawford County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2129)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: hobsini2 on July 25, 2023, 11:47:20 AM
I am generally not on the Northeast board however I saw something on Google sat maps that makes one question come to mind.
PA 26 northeast of State College looks like it was a freeway stub off I-99. Did any proposed plans exist for making the stub into a bypass of State College or a spur heading southeast? Just curious.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on July 25, 2023, 12:23:18 PM
Quote from: hobsini2 on July 25, 2023, 11:47:20 AM
I am generally not on the Northeast board however I saw something on Google sat maps that makes one question come to mind.
PA 26 northeast of State College looks like it was a freeway stub off I-99. Did any proposed plans exist for making the stub into a bypass of State College or a spur heading southeast? Just curious.

It may have been incorporated into the State College Area Connector had one of the PA 144 alternatives been chosen.  See this thread for more:  https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=32522.0

(For I-80 and PA 487)  PennDOT - District 3 News: 7/25/2023 UPDATE: (Project is Complete) Lane Restriction Continues Next Week on Interstate 80 in Hemlock Township, Columbia County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4922)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on July 26, 2023, 05:40:44 PM
(For PA 532)  PennDOT - District 6 News: PennDOT Reopens Route 532 (Washington Crossing Road) Following Flood Damage Repair in Upper Makefield Township (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8523)

(For PA 462)  PennDOT - District 8 News: 10-Ton Weight Limit is Posted on Route 462 Veterans Memorial Bridge in Lancaster County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2104)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on July 27, 2023, 07:59:19 AM
CE Expert System:

District 1: PA 127 Bridge/Allegheny River (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec8525884b004564b5?OpenDocument)

District 4: US 11 over Branch of Tunkhannock Creek (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec852589320044fda8?OpenDocument)

PennDOT - District 8 News: Bridge on Good Road (Route 2071) in Lower Chanceford Township, York County, is Closed to Traffic (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2105)

(For PA 82) PennDOT - District 6 News: Kennett Square Borough Utility Improvement to Close Route 82 (South Street) in Chester County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8529)

(For PA 66) PennDOT - District 10 News: Closure on State Route 66 (River Road) in Parks Township, Armstrong Extended Through August 4 Due to Weather (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1584)

(For US 62) PennDOT - District 1 News: Bridge Replacement and Paving Project Underway on Route 62 in Pleasant Township, Warren County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2132)

(For US 11/US 15) PennDOT - District 8 News: Sign Structure Work Today on NB Route 11/15 Ramp to SB I-81 in Cumberland County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2106)

(For I-84, I-380, and PA 435)  PennDOT - District 4 News: PennDOT will Close Interstate 84 Eastbound and Interstate 380 Southbound in Lackawanna County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-4/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1264)

(For I-78/PA 309 and PA 29)  PennDOT - District 5 News: Lehigh County: Upcoming Road Work (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-5/pages/details.aspx?newsid=3636)

(For PA 252)  PennDOT - District 6 News: PECO Utility Improvements Scheduled on Two State Highways in Chester, Delaware Counties (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8532)

(For I-81)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Overnight Closures Planned on the NB I-81 Ramps to Front Street in Dauphin County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2107)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on July 28, 2023, 08:26:23 AM
(For US 422)  PennDOT - District 10 News: Detour Beginning August 4 on Margaret Road in Armstrong County as Progress Continues on the Intersection Improvement Project (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1585)

Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: wilbur_the_goose on July 28, 2023, 09:47:10 AM
What's with all the oil and chip work on PA state highways this year?   Many such projects in Chester County in 2023.

I don't remember this type of work being done in PA since I moved here 30+ years ago.

PS - PennDOT FINALLY repaved PA345 in Chester County between 401 and 23.   It had become a pothole navigation course and numerous reports to PennDot resulted in that awful spray patch technique which, of course, did nothing to help.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: MASTERNC on July 28, 2023, 11:44:28 AM
Quote from: wilbur_the_goose on July 28, 2023, 09:47:10 AM
What's with all the oil and chip work on PA state highways this year?   Many such projects in Chester County in 2023.

I don't remember this type of work being done in PA since I moved here 30+ years ago.

PS - PennDOT FINALLY repaved PA345 in Chester County between 401 and 23.   It had become a pothole navigation course and numerous reports to PennDot resulted in that awful spray patch technique which, of course, did nothing to help.

There were a bunch in Allegheny County this year as well.  It involved a bunch of major roads that were connected to each other.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on July 28, 2023, 11:59:00 AM
Quote from: MASTERNC on July 28, 2023, 11:44:28 AM
Quote from: wilbur_the_goose on July 28, 2023, 09:47:10 AM
What's with all the oil and chip work on PA state highways this year?   Many such projects in Chester County in 2023.

I don't remember this type of work being done in PA since I moved here 30+ years ago.

PS - PennDOT FINALLY repaved PA345 in Chester County between 401 and 23.   It had become a pothole navigation course and numerous reports to PennDot resulted in that awful spray patch technique which, of course, did nothing to help.

There were a bunch in Allegheny County this year as well.  It involved a bunch of major roads that were connected to each other.

I thought that my rental car back in May got a chip on the windshield from one on PA 528 between I-79 and PA 68, but the rental car company showed that it was already there before I picked it up when I turned on the car back in.

PennDOT - Statewide News: PennDOT Reopens Key State Roads in Bucks, Northampton Counties Weeks Ahead of Schedule (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/pages/all-news-details.aspx?newsid=1059)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Roadsguy on July 28, 2023, 01:03:04 PM
Quote from: MASTERNC on July 28, 2023, 11:44:28 AM
Quote from: wilbur_the_goose on July 28, 2023, 09:47:10 AM
What's with all the oil and chip work on PA state highways this year?   Many such projects in Chester County in 2023.

I don't remember this type of work being done in PA since I moved here 30+ years ago.

PS - PennDOT FINALLY repaved PA345 in Chester County between 401 and 23.   It had become a pothole navigation course and numerous reports to PennDot resulted in that awful spray patch technique which, of course, did nothing to help.

There were a bunch in Allegheny County this year as well.  It involved a bunch of major roads that were connected to each other.

A bunch of roads in the northwest of Lebanon County were oil-and-chipped as well (Ono Rd, Heilmandale Rd, Thompson Ave, etc.). How long does it typically take them to stripe a road after oil-and-chipping it? It's been almost two months and none of these roads have been striped yet.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Mr. Matté on July 28, 2023, 08:21:37 PM
There's a random QR in the Yardley/Newtown area that was chipsealed recently though it was previously asphalt surface before and I don't recall being in particularly bad shape. When I'm out that way, I'm on my bike, but I expect chipseal on the random municipal and county roads of Hunterdon County or Hopewell Township, not of roads south of the fall line.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: wilbur_the_goose on July 29, 2023, 10:22:24 AM
The chipped roads are quite a bit noisier, both when in the car and not.   

I hope this doesn't go down as another crazy idea like the 3' wide strips that were dug-out and repaved.   Those never worked - big potholes along the edges.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on July 29, 2023, 07:11:10 PM
(For I-83 and I-283) PennDOT - District 8 News: Weekend Closure Scheduled for I-83 Resurfacing Project  Near Harrisburg (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2113)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on August 01, 2023, 01:06:47 PM
(For US 222/PA 272)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Closure This Thursday on Route 222 North (Lime Street) at Resurfacing Project in Lancaster City, Lancaster County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2115)

(For PA 449)  PennDOT - District 2 News: PennDOT Lifts Detour Along Route 449 in Potter County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2711)

PennDOT - District 1 News: PennDOT, in conjunction with the Erie Western PA Port Authority, Announces a Public Meeting for the East Side Active Transportation Study in the City of Erie (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2138)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on August 02, 2023, 10:46:19 AM
(For US 19)  PennDOT - District 1 News: PennDOT Announces an Updated Online Plans Display for Route 19 Bridge Replacement Project in Springfield Township, Mercer County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2139)

(For PA 160)  PennDOT - District 9 News: Route 160 (South Wilmore Road) Bridge Replacement to Start in Cambria County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-9/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1206)

(For PA 32 and PA 532)  PennDOT - District 6 News: PennDOT Announces All Bucks County Roadways Reopened Ahead of Schedule After Flooding (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8544)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on August 03, 2023, 08:00:31 AM
CE Expert System:

District 4:  PA 367 over Branch Tuscarora Creek  (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec852589b700449149?OpenDocument)

District 5:  PA 611 Emergency Rock-Slope Mitigation (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec8525899f00482d89?OpenDocument)

District 8:  PA 74 Resurfacing (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec852589650050a8af?OpenDocument)

District 9:  PA 56 - PA 96 to SR 4032 (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec852588ee005fc77e?OpenDocument)

District 10: PA 228 Ekastown West 3R (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec8525885a0043148f?OpenDocument)

(For US 322) PennDOT - District 2 News: PennDOT Announces Shoulder Cutting Operations on Route 322 (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2714)

(For I-84/I-380 and PA 435) PennDOT - District 4 News: PennDOT will Close Interstate 84 Eastbound and Interstate 380 Southbound in Lackawanna County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-4/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1272)

(For US 1)  PennDOT - District 6 News: Construction Planned Wednesday Night on U.S. 1 North in Bensalem Township (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8553)

(For PA 61 and PA 405)  PennDOT - District 3 News: Motorists are advised that a resurfacing project continues on Route 405 / 61 (Front Street) in the City of Sunbury and Route 11 in Northumberland Borough, Northumberland County. (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4954)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on August 04, 2023, 10:54:26 AM
(For PA 332)  PennDOT - District 6 News: Roadway Construction Planned Next Week on Route 332 (Yardley Newtown Road) in Lower Makefield Township (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8556)

(For US 422, PA 28, and PA 66)  PennDOT - District 10 News: U.S. Route 422 Ramp Preservation Project Continues with Ramp Detours in Armstrong County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1599)

(For PA 66)  PennDOT - District 10 News: Closure on State Route 66 (River Road) in Parks Township, Armstrong Extended Through August 11 (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1600)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on August 07, 2023, 10:55:29 AM
CE Expert System:

District 1:  PA 59 James Morrison Bridge Rehabilitation Phase 2 (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec852589b10070a94b?OpenDocument)

District 3:  PA 414 over W Mill Creek  (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec852589a300581283?OpenDocument)

District 5:  State Hill Rd from Colony Dr. to US 222 SB Ramps (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec85258800006dabb6?OpenDocument)  (US 222 is concurrent with US 422 here.)

(For PA 45)  PennDOT - District 2 News: Oversize Load to Close a Portion of Route 45 Tomorrow in Buffalo Township, Union County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4956)

(For US 6 and US 6 BUS (Carbondale))  PennDOT - District 4 News: Lane Closures on Route 6 Eastbound in Dickson City, Lackawanna County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-4/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1277)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on August 08, 2023, 02:43:56 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on August 03, 2023, 08:00:31 AM
(For US 322) PennDOT - District 2 News: PennDOT Announces Shoulder Cutting Operations on Route 322 (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2714)

PennDOT - District 2 News: PennDOT Postpones Shoulder Cutting Operations on Route 322 (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2720)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on August 09, 2023, 06:26:17 AM
PennDOT - District 6 News: New Traffic Pattern Planned Thursday Night, Next Monday Night on I-95 in Delaware County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8563)

PennDOT - District 1 News: Petroleum Center Truss Bridge in Oil Creek State Park to be Reopened to Pedestrians and Bicyclists (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2143)

(For I-81 and I-83)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Nighttime Closures Planned for Overhead Sign Installation on I-81 Ramps to Front Street in Dauphin County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2123)

PennDOT - District 4 News: Rest Area Site 56 on Interstate 81 Southbound in Susquehanna County Closed (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-4/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1281)

(For PA 244)  PennDOT - District 2 News: PennDOT Reopens Route 244 Near Oswayo (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2723)

(For PA 66)  PennDOT - District 10 News: State Route 66 (River Road) in Parks Township, Armstrong County is Open (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1602)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on August 10, 2023, 09:50:56 AM
(For I-476)  PennDOT - District 6 News: Construction Scheduled on I-476 North Ramp to MacDade Boulevard in Ridley Township (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8566)

(For I-83 and I-283)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Closure this Weekend on SB I-83 in the Harrisburg Region (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2124)

(For I-81 and PA 174)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Rolling Stops Tomorrow on I-81 Near Shippensburg, Cumberland County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2125)

(For PA 73)  PennDOT - District 6 News: Pipeline Inspection, Repair Planned on Route 73 (Skippack Pike) in Whitemarsh Township (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8571)

PennDOT - Statewide News: PennDOT Announces New 511PA Features Ahead of the Little League World Series (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/pages/all-news-details.aspx?newsid=1063)

PennDOT - District 5 News: Northampton County: Upcoming Road Work (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-5/pages/details.aspx?newsid=3653)

QuoteCounty:  Northampton
Municipality:  -
Road name:  PA 191 to PA 33 South Ramp
Between:  - and -
Type of work:  Construction
Work being done by:  PennDOT Contractor
Type of restriction:  24 Hours
Restriction:  Ramp will be closed and detoured for pavement rehabilitation work. Work begins on Friday at 7pm  and runs until Monday at 6am. Detour will utilize PA 33 North to Belfast Exit to PA 33 South.
Start date:  8/11/23
Est completion date:  8/14/23
Restrictions in effect (time of day):  07:00 PM To 06:00 AM
Will rain cause delays?  No
Change/Update: 
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on August 11, 2023, 10:09:08 AM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on August 08, 2023, 02:43:56 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on August 03, 2023, 08:00:31 AM
(For US 322) PennDOT - District 2 News: PennDOT Announces Shoulder Cutting Operations on Route 322 (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2714)

PennDOT - District 2 News: PennDOT Postpones Shoulder Cutting Operations on Route 322 (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2720)

PennDOT - District 2 News: Shoulder Cutting Operations on Route 322 Postponed to October (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2727)

(For I-180)  PennDOT - District 3 News: Resurfacing Project Continues on Interstate 180 in Lycoming County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4964)

(For US 6)  PennDOT - District 4 News: Overnight Closures Planned for Exit 5 (Jermyn/Mayfield) and Exit 6 (Meredith Street) on Route 6 (Casey Highway) in Lackawanna County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-4/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1284)

(For US 11 and PA 307)  PennDOT - District 4 News: Ramp Closures Planned for the Route 11 (North Scranton Expressway) in Lackawanna County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-4/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1285)

(For US 220)  PennDOT - District 3 News: Bridge Replacement Project Continues on Route 220 in Towanda Township, Bradford County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4969)

PennDOT - Statewide News: Governor Shapiro Announces Nearly $36 Million in Green Light-Go Grant Funds to Communities Across the Commonwealth to Improve Traffic Safety (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/pages/all-news-details.aspx?newsid=1064)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on August 14, 2023, 07:52:07 AM
CE Expert System:

District 4:  PA 347 over Kennedy Creek  (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec852589570049d14d?OpenDocument)

(For US 62)  PennDOT - District 1 News: Paving Scheduled on Route 62 in Coolspring Township, Mercer County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2145)

(For PA 985)  PennDOT - District 9 News: Route 985 (Somerset Pike) Slide Repair Work to Begin in Somerset County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-9/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1210)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on August 15, 2023, 12:01:37 PM
(For I-81 and PA 174)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Rolling Stop Tomorrow on SB I-81 Near Shippensburg, Cumberland County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2130)

PennDOT - District 3 News: Senator Casey and Shapiro Administration Provides Update on Lycoming Mall Drive Improvements (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4980)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on August 16, 2023, 12:22:13 PM
(For PA 27)  PennDOT - District 1 News: Weight Limit Posted on Route 27 Bridge in Sugar Grove Township, Warren County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2147)

(For PA 150)  PennDOT - District 2 News: PennDOT Announces Delay in Reopening the Flemington Bridge (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2731)

PennDOT - District 6 News: PennDOT to Host Virtual Public Meeting for Rockhill Drive/Neshaminy Boulevard Intersection Improvement Project in Bensalem Township (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8582)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on August 17, 2023, 08:49:37 AM
CE Expert System:

District 6:  PA 32 over Delaware Canal (One-Lane Bridge) (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec8525823d0078f6e4?OpenDocument)

(For US 1 and US 1 BUS (Penndel))  PennDOT - District 6 News: Construction Planned Next Week on Old Lincoln Highway in Middletown Township, Bucks County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8589)

(For I-180 and US 220)  PennDOT - District 3 News: Resurfacing Project Continues on Interstate 180 in Lycoming County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4985)

(For US 219)  PennDOT - District 9 News: Public Meeting and Plans Display for the U.S. 219 Roadway and Bridge Preservataion Project in Somerset County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-9/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1213)

(For PA 75)  PennDOT - District 2 News: PennDOT Announces Extension of Port Royal Bridge Closure (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2735)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on August 18, 2023, 07:25:35 AM
(For I-81 and PA 174)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Rolling Stop on SB I-81 Near Shippensburg, Cumberland County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2138)

PennDOT - District 6 News: Sign Installation Scheduled at I-476 North, MacDade Boulevard Interchange in Ridley Township (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8594)

(For US 322)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Traffic Shift Planned on Milroy Road at Route 322/Chambers Hill Road Intersection Reconstruction Project in Swatara Township, Dauphin County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2140)

(For US 220)  PennDOT - District 3 News: Route 220 Bridge Improvement Project Continues in Lycoming County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=4996)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on August 21, 2023, 11:59:01 AM
(For PA 191)  PennDOT - District 4 News: Rolling Roadblocks on Route 191 in Wayne County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-4/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1299)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on August 22, 2023, 01:46:48 PM
PennDOT - District 8 News: Rolling Stop Tomorrow on SB I-81 Near Shippensburg, Cumberland County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2143)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on August 23, 2023, 01:50:49 PM
(For US 6 and PA 660)  PennDOT - District 3 News: Intersection Improvement Project at Routes 6, 660 and 4002 Continues in Charleston Township, Tioga County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=5001)

(For US 62) PennDOT - District 1 News: Weekend Detour Scheduled for Route 62 Bridge Project in Pleasant Township, Warren County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2154)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on August 24, 2023, 07:59:57 AM
CE Expert System:

District 2:  PA 346 Bridge on Tram Hollow Run (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec85258a120051fc5f?OpenDocument)

District 4:  PA 92 over Monroe Creek (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec852589b7006a9bae?OpenDocument)

US 6/US 209 over Delaware River (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec852588d10051b33a?OpenDocument)

District 5:  PA 611 Williams Twp Canal Wall Replacements (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec8525873900450a12?OpenDocument)

PennDOT - District 6 News: Construction Scheduled on I-476 North Ramp to MacDade Boulevard in Ridley Township (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8606)

PennDOT - Statewide News: Governor Shapiro Invests Nearly $50 Million in 58 Transportation Projects to Improve Safety, Mobility, and Local Economies Across the Commonwealth (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/pages/all-news-details.aspx?newsid=1068)

PennDOT - District 8 News: Rolling Stop Tomorrow on SB I-81 Near Shippensburg, Cumberland County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2147)

PennDOT - District 5 News: PennDOT/BPD-I to Host I-80 Over Lehigh River Bridge Public Meeting- August 28, 2023 (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-5/pages/details.aspx?newsid=3665)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on August 25, 2023, 08:10:48 AM
(For US 22 and PA 403)  PennDOT - District 10 News: Repairs Continue on the Cramer Pike/State Route 403 bridge over U.S. Route 22 in East Wheatfield Township, Indiana County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1615)

(For PA 309)  PennDOT - District 6 News: PECO Utility Improvement to Close Route 309 (Cheltenham Avenue) in Cheltenham Township (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8612)

(For US 1 and US 1 BUS (Penndel))  PennDOT - District 6 News: Construction Planned Next Week on U.S. 1, Old Lincoln Highway in Bensalem, Middletown Townships (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8616)

(For US 220)  PennDOT - District 3 News: Route 220 Bridge Improvement Project Continues in Lycoming County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=5009)

(For PA 150)  PennDOT - District 2 News: PennDOT Plans to Reopen Flemington Bridge on September 25 (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2740)

PennDOT - District 1 News: Petroleum Center Bridge Reopened to Pedestrians and Bicyclists (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2160)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on August 28, 2023, 08:15:10 AM
CE Expert System:

District 2: 

US 22/US 322 over Pine Hollow Rd (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec852589fe00493aa8?OpenDocument)

PA 235 Stoney Run Bridge (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec852589fe004836ad?OpenDocument)

PennDOT - District 8 News: Rolling Stop Today on SB I-81 Near Shippensburg, Cumberland County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2150)

PennDOT - District 8 News: Rolling Stop Tomorrow on SB I-81 Near Shippensburg, Cumberland County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2153)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on August 29, 2023, 12:03:18 PM
(For US 22, US 322, PA 35, PA 75, and PA 333)  PennDOT - District 2 News: Message Boards/Flaggers to Aide Juniata County Fair Traffic (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2741)

PennDOT - District 8 News: Rolling Stop Wednesday on SB I-81 Near Shippensburg, Cumberland County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2154)

(For PA 73)  PennDOT - District 6 News: Aqua Pennsylvania Utility Improvement to Close Route 73 (Church Road) in Cheltenham Township (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8624)

PennDOT - District 1 News: I-80 Welcome Center and Rest Area to be Closed Starting Next Month (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2161)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on August 30, 2023, 10:21:22 AM
(For US 62)  PennDOT - District 1 News: Short-Term Closure on Route 62 Rescheduled for Next Week (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2162)

PennDOT - District 8 News: Rolling Stop Thursday on SB I-81 Near Shippensburg, Cumberland County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2156)

PennDOT - District 6 News: Maintenance Activities Scheduled on Taylorsville Road, Highland Avenue, Greenhill Road in Bucks County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8627)

(For PA 228)  PennDOT - District 10 News: Balls Bend Safety Improvement Project Continues to Show Progress in Middlesex Township, Butler County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1620)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on August 31, 2023, 01:22:47 PM
(For US 1)  PennDOT - District 6 News: Construction Planned Next Week on Old Lincoln Highway in Middletown Township, Bucks County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8632)

(For US 15)  PennDOT - District 3 News: Facility Energy Efficiency Project to Temporarily Close Keystone Welcome Center at Tioga, Three PennDOT District 3 Facilities and Selinsgrove Driver License Center (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=5022)

(For I-83) PennDOT - District 8 News: Upcoming Weekend Lane Restrictions on I-83 in York County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2159)

PennDOT - District 4 News: PennDOT/BPD-I to Host I-81 Susquehanna Bridge Public Meeting Webinar- September 13th, 2023 (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-4/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1306)

PennDOT - District 8 News: Bushong Road (Route 1003) Bridge Reopens in Lancaster County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2160)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on September 01, 2023, 11:07:47 AM
PennDOT - District 5 News: Berks County: Upcoming Road Work (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-5/pages/details.aspx?newsid=3670)

QuoteCounty:  Berks
Municipality:  City of Reading
Road name:  PA 12 at Monroe Street
Between:  - and -
Type of work:  Utility Work
Work being done by:  Local Utility
Type of restriction:  Nighttime
Restriction:  There will be several traffic stoppages/rolling roadblocks for utility line work. Please use caution and expect delays.
Start date:  9/13/23
Est completion date:  9/13/23
Restrictions in effect (time of day):  12:00 AM To 06:00 AM
Will rain cause delays?  No
Change/Update:
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on September 05, 2023, 10:40:24 AM
PennDOT - District 8 News: Rolling Stop Wednesday on SB I-81 Near Shippensburg, Cumberland County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2162)

(For I-79 and PA 488)  PennDOT - District 10 News: Beam Setting for the Portersville Bridge Replacement Project in Muddy Creek Township Begins September 18 (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1628)

PennDOT - District 5 News: Monroe County: Traffic Pattern Change at Intersection of US 209 and PA 115
(https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-5/pages/details.aspx?newsid=3677)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on September 06, 2023, 10:20:20 AM
PennDOT - District 8 News: Rolling Stop Thursday on SB I-81 Near Shippensburg, Cumberland County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2164)

(For I-83 and PA 181)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Traffic Restrictions Begin Next Week at N. George Street/Exit 22 Improvement Project in York County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2165)

PennDOT - District 9 News: I-70 Southbound (Crystal Spring, Fulton County) Welcome Center to be Closed for Repairs (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-9/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1217)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Mr_Northside on September 06, 2023, 05:44:32 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on September 06, 2023, 10:20:20 AM
PennDOT - District 9 News: I-70 Southbound (Crystal Spring, Fulton County) Welcome Center to be Closed for Repairs (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-9/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1217)

Hehe..... "Southbound" - the roadway(s) are clearly north/south between Breezewood & Maryland - but it would still be I-70 eastbound.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on September 07, 2023, 08:06:51 AM
CE Expert System:

District 5: West Shore (US 422) Reconstruction Phase 2 (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec852584ea0064f752?OpenDocument)  (in Reading)

District 8: PA 34 (Carlisle Road) over a Tributary to Opossum Creek (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec852589a4006ba894?OpenDocument)

PennDOT - District 8 News: Rolling Stop Friday on SB I-81 Near Shippensburg, Cumberland County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2169)

(For PA 851)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Route 851 Culvert Open to Traffic in Peach Bottom Township, York County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2170)

(For PA 82)  PennDOT - District 6 News: Kennett Square Borough Utility Improvement to Close Route 82 (South Street) in Chester County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8643)

Quote from: 74/171FAN on August 31, 2023, 01:22:47 PM
(For I-83) PennDOT - District 8 News: Upcoming Weekend Lane Restrictions on I-83 in York County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2159)

PennDOT - District 8 News: Upcoming Weekend Work on I-83 in York County Postponed (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2172)

PennDOT - District 5 News: Berks County: Upcoming Road Work (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-5/pages/details.aspx?newsid=3678)

QuoteCounty:  Berks
Municipality:  Greenwich Township
Road name:  Interstate 78
Between:  Exit 40 (PA 737) and Exit 35 (PA 143)
Type of work:  Construction
Work being done by:  PennDOT Contractor
Type of restriction:  24 Hours
Restriction:  Interstate 78 will be lane restricted eastbound for construction work related to the ongoing Interstate 78 Reconstruction Project. Work will occur 7pm on Friday night through 6am on Monday morning.
Start date:  9/15/23
Est completion date:  9/18/23
Restrictions in effect (time of day):  07:00 PM To 06:00 AM
Will rain cause delays?  No
Change/Update: 
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on September 08, 2023, 07:00:03 AM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on August 30, 2023, 10:21:22 AM
(For PA 228)  PennDOT - District 10 News: Balls Bend Safety Improvement Project Continues to Show Progress in Middlesex Township, Butler County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1620)

WPXI update (https://www.wpxi.com/news/local/major-road-construction-project-underway-route-228-butler-county/7NAOSVDLX5ASRD6EF2CU24KPHI/) noting that these changes are in place.  I plan to field check this tomorrow.

(For PA 199)  PennDOT - District 3 News: Emergency Pipe Replacement Closes Portion of North Main Street in Athens Borough, Bradford County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=5039)

(For US 6 BUS and US 62)  PennDOT - District 1 News: Warren Roundabout Project Advancing to Stage 4; Intersection to Be Opened to All Traffic Next Week (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2168)

(For US 30 and US 222)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Work to Begin on Route 222/Route 30 Interchange Improvement Project in Lancaster County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2173)

PennDOT - District 8 News: Rolling Stop Monday on SB I-81 Near Shippensburg, Cumberland County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2174)


Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on September 11, 2023, 10:19:10 AM
As an update on the PA 286 widening project in Indiana, it was basically all but complete when I drove through Saturday.  All of the pavement markings were even in place even though the new lanes were still closed.

(For US 322 and PA 82)  PennDOT - District 6 News: PennDOT to Begin U.S. 322 (Horseshoe Pike) Safety Improvement Project in West Brandywine Township (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8658)

PennDOT - District 8 News: Rolling Stop Tomorrow on SB I-81 Near Shippensburg, Cumberland County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2177)

(For PA 441)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Detour to Begin for Route 441 (Water Street) Bridge Replacement in Manor Township, Lancaster County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2176)

(For US 322)  PennDOT - District 2 News: PennDOT Updates Timetable for Goldenrod Bridge Project (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2748)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on September 12, 2023, 02:43:52 PM
PennDOT - District 8 News: Rolling Stop Wednesday on SB I-81 Near Shippensburg, Cumberland County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2179)

(For PA 82)  PennDOT - District 6 News: PennDOT Completes Major Construction on Route 82 (Manor Road) Roundabout, Reopens Intersection in West Brandywine Township (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8663)

(For PA 32)  PennDOT - District 6 News: Pipe Replacement Scheduled on Route 32 (River Road) in Lower Makefield, Upper Makefield Townships (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8665)

PennDOT - District 6 News: Pedestrian Bridge Construction Begins Wednesday on Sellers Avenue Bridge Project in Ridley Park Borough (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8666)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on September 13, 2023, 07:47:29 AM
CE Expert System:

District 5:  PA 724 Gibraltar Bridge (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec852587aa005f57ae?OpenDocument)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on September 14, 2023, 12:49:24 PM
(For US 119, US 422, and PA 56)  PennDOT - District 10 News: Ramp Closures Beginning for Phase 2 of Bridge Rehabilitation on U.S. Route 422 over Two Lick Creek in Indiana County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1634)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on September 15, 2023, 03:03:18 PM
PennDOT - District 6 News: County Line Road to Reopen Next Week Under Improvement Project Scheduled to Finish Two Years Early in Horsham, Warrington Townships (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8677)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on September 18, 2023, 07:37:32 AM
CE Expert System:

District 8:  PA 394 over Conewago Creek  (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec8525896d00504672?OpenDocument)

PA 641 (Newburg Road) over Paxtons Run (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec8525897100434e5b?OpenDocument)

PennDOT - District 4 News: Route 4036 Bridge Opened Ahead of Schedule in Lackawanna County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-4/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1335)

(For US 422)  PennDOT - District 10 News: Margaret Road Opening on September 24 as Work Continues on the Intersection Improvement Project in Armstrong County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1642)

PennDOT - Statewide News: PennDOT Data Shows Pennsylvania Roundabouts Reducing Fatalities, Injuries, and Crashes (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/pages/all-news-details.aspx?newsid=1074)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on September 18, 2023, 12:52:55 PM
Has the long awaited Trumpet reconfiguration began in Lancaster County at US 30 and 222?

An outdated article has been posted on Social Media from Lancaster online that it's about to commence even though the article was posted for a 2022 start.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on September 18, 2023, 01:00:12 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on September 18, 2023, 12:52:55 PM
Has the long awaited Trumpet reconfiguration began in Lancaster County at US 30 and 222?

An outdated article has been posted on Social Media from Lancaster online that it's about to commence even though the article was posted for a 2022 start.

Quote(For US 30 and US 222)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Work to Begin on Route 222/Route 30 Interchange Improvement Project in Lancaster County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2173)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on September 19, 2023, 10:04:37 AM
(For PA 286)  PennDOT - District 10 News: Lanes Opening on Oakland Avenue and Indian Springs Road in Indiana County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1643)

My recent photos showing the lanes on PA 286 being all but opened can be seen here (https://www.facebook.com/photo/?fbid=10219387109908964&set=a.10219387161270248).

(For PA 462)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Ramp from Market Street (Route 462) to SB I-83 Bridge to be Closed in York County Due to Damaged Beam (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2188)


Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on September 20, 2023, 09:18:59 AM
PennDOT - District 8 News: Lane Restrictions Sept. 29-Oct. 2 on I-83 in York County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2189)

(For PA 56)  PennDOT - District 9 News: Public Meeting and Plans Display for the Route 56 (Quaker Valley Road) Improvements Project in Bedford County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-9/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1218)

Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on September 21, 2023, 09:17:49 AM
(For PA 77) PennDOT - District 1 News: Short-Term Closure Planned for Route 77 in City of Meadville, Crawford County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2175)

PennDOT - District 1 News: Project to Replace the Fisherman's Cove Bridge in Victory Township, Venango County to Begin Next Week (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2176)

PennDOT - District 6 News: Safety Improvement Work Continues at I-476 North, MacDade Boulevard Interchange in Ridley Township (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8691)

(Also for PA 87) PennDOT - District 3 News: Resurfacing Project Continues on Interstate 180 in Lycoming County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=5088)

(For PA 462)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Lane Restriction Friday on Market Street (Route 462) at I-83 Bridge in York County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2191)

(For US 15 and many other routes)  PennDOT - District 3 News: Crack Sealing Project Continues Next Week on Multiple Routes in Lycoming and Tioga Counties  (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=5090)

(For US 1)  PennDOT - District 6 News: Bridge Construction Planned Next Week on U.S. 1, Old Lincoln Highway in Middletown Township (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8694)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on September 22, 2023, 12:37:12 PM
(For PA 150)  PennDOT - District 2 News: PennDOT Confirms Flemington Bridge to Reopen Monday Afternoon (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2755)

(For PA 74) PennDOT - District 8 News: Nighttime Lane Restrictions to Begin Sunday on I-83 at Queen Street (Route 74) in York County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2194)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on September 25, 2023, 02:40:53 PM
PennDOT - District 4 News: Route 4004 Blooming Grove Road Bridge in Pike County Has Been Reopened (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-4/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1343)

(For PA 228) PennDOT - District 10 News: New Alignment and Connection to State Route 228 is Beginning for Davis Road for the Balls Bend Safety Improvement Project in Middlesex Township, Butler County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1651)

(For US 322) PennDOT - District 8 News: Traffic Shift Planned on Witmer Drive at Route 322/Chambers Hill Road Intersection Reconstruction Project in Swatara Township, Dauphin County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2197)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on September 29, 2023, 08:39:08 AM
(For PA 926)  PennDOT - District 6 News: Bridge Repair to Begin on Route 926 (Street Road) in West Marlborough Township (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8704)

PennDOT - District 6 News: Safety Improvement Work Continues on I-476 North, MacDade Boulevard Interchange in Ridley Township (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8711)

(For US 15)  PennDOT - District 3 News: Resurfacing Project Wraps Up Next Week on Route 15 in South Williamsport and Armstrong Township, Lycoming County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=5101)

QuoteBeginning Monday, October 2, 2023, the contractor will be working in the northbound lanes of Route 15 to remove an existing overhead sign structure and will then perform general cleanup of the entire project work zone throughout the remainder of the week.

(For PA 150)  PennDOT - District 2 News: Overnight Closures Coming for Flemington Bridge Project (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2758)

(For US 62)  PennDOT - District 1 News: Weekend Detour Scheduled for Route 62 Bridge Project in Pleasant Township, Warren County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2182)

(For PA 146)  PennDOT - District 2 News: Paving Project to Bring Daylight Closures to Route 146 Next Week (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2759)

CE Expert System:

District 1:  PA 27: Matthews Run Bridge (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec852589bb004f55fb?OpenDocument)

District 4:  Elm Street Bridge over Lackawanna River (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec85258a1a006832b5?OpenDocument)

District 5:  PA 248 at Northface Business Park (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec852588af005f469e?OpenDocument)

District 8:  PA 914 over I-81 (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec8525894e005d0ae9?OpenDocument)

District 9:  PA 26 over Ravers Run (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec852589a5004460df?OpenDocument)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on October 02, 2023, 09:13:44 AM
CE Expert System:

District 5:  RATS Bridge Preservation #8 (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec85258a2f004c391e?OpenDocument)  (includes a detour for PA 143)

PennDOT - District 10 News: PennDOT Announces Plans Display for I-80 Brookville West Reconstruction Project in Jefferson County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1653)

(For I-84 and PA 435)  PennDOT - District 4 News: Rolling Roadblocks on Interstate 84 Eastbound and Westbound in Lackawanna County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-4/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1349)

(For US 30 and US 222)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Traffic Shift to Be Implemented Tonight on EB Route 30 at Interchange Improvement Project in Lancaster County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2208)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on October 03, 2023, 11:44:46 AM
(For PA 347)  PennDOT - District 4 News: PennDOT Announces Public Meeting and Online Plans Display for the Route 347, Section 253 Culvert Replacement Project in Lackawanna County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-4/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1352)

PennDOT - District 1 News: Shapiro Administration Announces Rogers Ferry Road Bridge in Hayfield Township Reopening Early Following Preservation Work (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2185)

(For PA 150)  PennDOT - District 2 News: Flemington Bridge Overnight Closure Schedule Extended (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2760)

Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: ixnay on October 03, 2023, 08:06:20 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on October 02, 2023, 09:13:44 AM
CE Expert System:

District 5:  RATS Bridge Preservation #8 (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec85258a2f004c391e?OpenDocument)  (includes a detour for PA 143)

They obviously shopped at Acronyms R Us.  What does RATS stand for?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on October 03, 2023, 08:08:04 PM
Quote from: ixnay on October 03, 2023, 08:06:20 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on October 02, 2023, 09:13:44 AM
CE Expert System:

District 5:  RATS Bridge Preservation #8 (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec85258a2f004c391e?OpenDocument)  (includes a detour for PA 143)

They obviously shopped at Acronyms R Us.  What does RATS stand for?

Reading Area Transportation Study, it is the MPO for Berks County.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on October 04, 2023, 10:31:02 AM
(For PA 63)  PennDOT - District 6 News: PennDOT to Reopen Route 63 (Sumneytown Pike) Slip Ramp to I-476 South in Towamencin Township (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8729)

(For PA 150)  PennDOT - District 2 News: Overnight Work at Flemington Bridge Complete (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2763)

(For I-81, US 22, and US 322)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Nighttime Closures Planned for NB I-81 Ramp to WB Route 22/322 in Dauphin County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2211)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on October 05, 2023, 07:32:00 AM
CE Expert System:

District 5:  I-380 at PA 940 (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec852589a200543db1?OpenDocument)

(For I-81)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Rolling Stop Friday on SB I-81 Near Shippensburg, Cumberland County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2212)

(For PA 99)  PennDOT - District 1 News: Route 699 Bridge Over Interstate 90 to Reopen (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2186)

(For US 11, US 15, US 22, and US 322)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Ramp Closures Scheduled at Resurfacing Project on Route 22/322 in Perry County, Route 11/15 in Dauphin County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2213)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: seicer on October 05, 2023, 02:29:43 PM
The reconstruction of I-78 at Krumsville is just about complete. It involved rebuilding every bridge on the highway, reconstruction of the roadway base, and adding truck lanes on the steepest of grades. On both of the weekdays that we traveled on the segment, traffic was moving fairly well.

The concrete pavement by Wescosville/Fogelsville looks to be ready for an asphalt overlay. The concrete has been diamond-ground by what looks like a full inch, leaving a considerable lip between the mainline pavement and the shoulder.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on October 05, 2023, 02:52:51 PM
Quote from: seicer on October 05, 2023, 02:29:43 PM
The reconstruction of I-78 at Krumsville is just about complete. It involved rebuilding every bridge on the highway, reconstruction of the roadway base, and adding truck lanes on the steepest of grades. On both of the weekdays that we traveled on the segment, traffic was moving fairly well.

The concrete pavement by Wescosville/Fogelsville looks to be ready for an asphalt overlay. The concrete has been diamond-ground by what looks like a full inch, leaving a considerable lip between the mainline pavement and the shoulder.

I am just waiting on the final word that it is complete for me to do a redrive of I-78 west of I-95/NJTP.

(For PA 187)  PennDOT - District 3 News: Embankment Failure to Reduce a Portion of Route 187 to a Single Lane in Wilmont Township, Bradford County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=5118)

PennDOT - District 6 News: PennDOT to Begin Boot Road Bridge Replacement Project Next Week in East Caln Township (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8738)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Crown Victoria on October 05, 2023, 08:03:01 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on October 05, 2023, 02:52:51 PM
Quote from: seicer on October 05, 2023, 02:29:43 PM
The reconstruction of I-78 at Krumsville is just about complete. It involved rebuilding every bridge on the highway, reconstruction of the roadway base, and adding truck lanes on the steepest of grades. On both of the weekdays that we traveled on the segment, traffic was moving fairly well.

The concrete pavement by Wescosville/Fogelsville looks to be ready for an asphalt overlay. The concrete has been diamond-ground by what looks like a full inch, leaving a considerable lip between the mainline pavement and the shoulder.

I am just waiting on the final word that it is complete for me to do a redrive of I-78 west of I-95/NJTP.

Looks like they'll be closing lanes on 78 this weekend again, presumably for sign installation, as the regular green mile markers are not up yet (the orange work zone markers are still in place). There were a lot of trucks on the road today, and we did have a bit of a slowdown where the new climbing lane ends westbound just east of 737. We'll have to make do with what we got, but this really should have been six lanes throughout.

I can also verify that the asphalt overlay around Fogelsville has begun and when complete will extend all the way from there to PA 309 South.

Also, poking around the PennDOT site recently, it looks like the Lenhartsville Bridge project will get going soon...
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on October 06, 2023, 09:29:09 PM
(For PA 181)  PennDOT - District 8 News: New Ramp from N. George Street to NB I-83 to Open to Traffic at Exit 22 in York County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2216)

QuoteWeather permitting, the ramp will open to traffic the afternoon of Tuesday, October 10. The existing ramp from North George Street to northbound I-83 will be closed when the new ramp is open.

(For PA 462)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Repairs Planned for Next Week on SB I-83 Bridge Over Market Street (Route 462) in York County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2217)

(For PA 74)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Repairs to Begin Weekend of Oct.13-16 on Queen Street (Route 74) Bridge Over I-83 in York County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2218)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on October 09, 2023, 06:51:02 AM
https://maps.app.goo.gl/UJUEDcradrrE4Lfp7
Why is there a STOP sign here for a ramp that has a proper merge and acceleration lane?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on October 09, 2023, 06:57:08 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on October 09, 2023, 06:51:02 AM
https://maps.app.goo.gl/UJUEDcradrrE4Lfp7
Why is there a STOP sign here for a ramp that has a proper merge and acceleration lane?

If you zoom in, the acceleration lane is fairly short.  Now if only the railroad bridge would be expanded to allow for an auxiliary lane.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: The Ghostbuster on October 09, 2023, 12:00:08 PM
I agree that the overpass (it is not a railroad bridge, it is for Tilghman St.) should be replaced and widened to allow an auxiliary lane between Tilghman St. and Interstate 476. As everyone probably knows, the US 22 freeway was the original alignment for Interstate 78 though Allentown (PA 378 being former Interstate 378 is proof of this). However, due to the substandard nature of the freeway, and opposition to completing the freeway though Phillipsburg, the southern realignment was constructed.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on October 09, 2023, 12:05:58 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on October 09, 2023, 12:00:08 PM
I agree that the overpass (it is not a railroad bridge, it is for Tilghman St.) should be replaced and widened to allow an auxiliary lane between Tilghman St. and Interstate 476. As everyone probably knows, the US 22 freeway was the original alignment for Interstate 78 though Allentown (PA 378 being former Interstate 378 is proof of this). However, due to the substandard nature of the freeway, and opposition to completing the freeway though Phillipsburg, the southern realignment was constructed.

It probably will be replaced. The PA 737 overpass  ( several miles to the west) was also once a pony truss bridge like Tilghman Street is here but got replaced with many others along US 22. I'm sure this abnormally will be corrected. However, a yield sign will still suffice here rather than a Stop sign as there still is enough room for a safe merge.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on October 10, 2023, 10:33:42 AM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on October 04, 2023, 10:31:02 AM
(For PA 63)  PennDOT - District 6 News: PennDOT to Reopen Route 63 (Sumneytown Pike) Slip Ramp to I-476 South in Towamencin Township (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8729)

(For PA 63)  PennDOT - District 6 News: PennDOT to Reopen Route 63 (Sumneytown Pike) Slip Ramp to I-476 South Thursday Morning in Towamencin Township (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8746)

(For PA 82)  PennDOT - District 6 News: Kennett Square Borough Utility Improvement to Close Route 82 (South Street) in Chester County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8747)

(For PA 75)  PennDOT - District 2 News: Port Royal Bridge Closure Extended Three More Weeks (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-2/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2769)

(For PA 283)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Strickler Road Bridge Spanning Route 283 in Lancaster County is Closed Due to Vehicle Strike (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2220)

(For I-83 and PA 181)  PennDOT - District 8 News: New Ramp from N. George Street to NB I-83 is Open to Traffic at Exit 22 Improvement Project in York County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2221)

(For US 322)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Rolling Stops Planned for Thursday Night on Route 322 at Chambers Hill Road in Swatara Township, Dauphin County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2222)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: thenetwork on October 11, 2023, 10:03:49 PM
I'll probably get flamed for this, but here goes a simple request.  Perhaps others can chime in with their opinions as well:

Why not create an additional subforum for Pennsylvania *specifically* for all the road projects that bombard.the various PA & Penna Tpk threads?

1.  The vast majority of these posts are for little day or week long projects.
2.  The vast majority of these posts get no responses or replies.
3.  For those of us who.click on unread threads that we once posted on, we open these up to see mostly these project posts that fit points 1. & 2.  and we spend time.usually backing out of them instead of clicking on the links.
4.  In nearly all the other state (Sub) Forums, threads are about general, non-daily project reports.  If it is about a larger scale long-term road project, there is usually a.seperate thread for it with lots of responses.

Wouldn't it make more logical sense to put all PA road projects in its own subforum or thread and leave the general PA.state,  PA Turnpike and PA regional subforums/threads to just that -- meaningful topics that will garner noticeable replies?

Come on -- is a posting of "PennDOT Announces Two-way traffic East of Harrisburg today only"  really necessary on a general State or Turnpike Forum?

Asbestos suit is on...
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on October 11, 2023, 10:58:52 PM
^A question like this better fits in the Suggestions and Questions Board.  I am open to further discussion on this, but it really does not belong in this thread.

Beyond that, does it really matter whether people respond to something or not?  You are allowed to avoid any thread you choose to.

You could arguably make this same point in regard to the I-69 in Indiana thread where it is mainly just someone continually looking at the traffic cameras and posting photos from them showing daily progress.  I do not expect any complaints from that.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: thenetwork on October 12, 2023, 01:00:25 AM
Because I once made a post or several in the Indiana thread. that also shows up
Quote from: 74/171FAN on October 11, 2023, 10:58:52 PM
^A question like this better fits in the Suggestions and Questions Board.  I am open to further discussion on this, but it really does not belong in this thread.

Beyond that, does it really matter whether people respond to something or not?  You are allowed to avoid any thread you choose to.

You could arguably make this same point in regard to the I-69 in Indiana thread where it is mainly just someone continually looking at the traffic cameras and posting photos from them showing daily progress.  I do not expect any complaints from that.

Interesting...Since I have occasionally posted in the Indiana thread over the years, that forum will show up from time to time when I select  "Show New Replies From Your Posts", and quite honestly, I have not seen countless posts of I-69 photos, nae, I don't ever recalling seeing even one post with the minutiae, as it is likely a single thread WITHIN the general Indiana Forum and not directly placed ON the primary Indiana thread. 

The copious lists of petty projects are NOT in their own sub-thread on the main PA/Tpk/Regional threads.   Just this little tweak (a PennDot/PA Tpk Projects standalone thread) can make a HUGE difference to those interested in larger, more replied threads.

Just sayin'...
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Scott5114 on October 12, 2023, 01:16:55 AM
Quote from: thenetwork on October 11, 2023, 10:03:49 PM
Why not create an additional subforum for Pennsylvania *specifically* for all the road projects that bombard.the various PA & Penna Tpk threads?

Because then we would have to create subforums for every other state and DC, meaning that as an admin my front page would have 73 forums and subforums on it. That would be absolutely unmanageable to administrate. It will absolutely never happen under any circumstances ever.

NOTABUG WONTFIX
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Rothman on October 12, 2023, 07:07:40 AM
*applauds*
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on October 12, 2023, 07:44:12 AM
Anyway, back to regularly scheduled programming:

CE Expert System:

District 2: PA 477 Bridge over Long Run (https://www.dotdom2.state.pa.us/ceea/ceeamain03.nsf/18c042d1dacb327c85256c010051898b/85257fc4007728ec85258a2200655834?OpenDocument)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Hot Rod Hootenanny on October 12, 2023, 10:56:26 AM
Quote from: Scott5114 on October 12, 2023, 01:16:55 AM
Quote from: thenetwork on October 11, 2023, 10:03:49 PM
Why not create an additional subforum for Pennsylvania *specifically* for all the road projects that bombard.the various PA & Penna Tpk threads?

Because then we would have to create subforums for every other state and DC, meaning that as an admin my front page would have 73 forums and subforums on it. That would be absolutely unmanageable to administrate. It will absolutely never happen under any circumstances ever.

NOTABUG WONTFIX


I have a better idea.
Have all of 74/171's PA twitter, errr, X, updates in a separate thread on here. 98% of those posts have little to no barring on conversation around here.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on October 12, 2023, 12:53:34 PM
Quote from: Hot Rod Hootenanny on October 12, 2023, 10:56:26 AM
Quote from: Scott5114 on October 12, 2023, 01:16:55 AM
Quote from: thenetwork on October 11, 2023, 10:03:49 PM
Why not create an additional subforum for Pennsylvania *specifically* for all the road projects that bombard.the various PA & Penna Tpk threads?

Because then we would have to create subforums for every other state and DC, meaning that as an admin my front page would have 73 forums and subforums on it. That would be absolutely unmanageable to administrate. It will absolutely never happen under any circumstances ever.

NOTABUG WONTFIX


I have a better idea.
Have all of 74/171's PA twitter, errr, X, updates in a separate thread on here. 98% of those posts have little to no barring on conversation around here.

I decided to move forward with a thread that I will title "General PA Design/Construction News" for these items starting with the next one, and then basically keep this thread, SW PA, and Philly for the more major stuff.  (Of course, you can always look for an item that seems not important, and consider it important enough to be moved here or in its own thread.  For instance, I consider the PA 228 and PA 981 information important though I never saw general interest from the forum on it specifically because I maintain PA in Travel Mapping.)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: vdeane on October 12, 2023, 08:40:13 PM
Quote from: Hot Rod Hootenanny on October 12, 2023, 10:56:26 AM
Quote from: Scott5114 on October 12, 2023, 01:16:55 AM
Quote from: thenetwork on October 11, 2023, 10:03:49 PM
Why not create an additional subforum for Pennsylvania *specifically* for all the road projects that bombard.the various PA & Penna Tpk threads?

Because then we would have to create subforums for every other state and DC, meaning that as an admin my front page would have 73 forums and subforums on it. That would be absolutely unmanageable to administrate. It will absolutely never happen under any circumstances ever.

NOTABUG WONTFIX


I have a better idea.
Have all of 74/171's PA twitter, errr, X, updates in a separate thread on here. 98% of those posts have little to no barring on conversation around here.
Personally I don't think that's really necessary.  These general threads are supposed to be for anything not major enough to warrant its own thread, not just "major stuff".  If they weren't, the Nova Scotia Major Road Projects thread would be pinned as the official Nova Scotia thread, but it isn't.  It's not exactly news that the PA, SW PA, Philadelphia, and Delaware threads have these types of posts.  If it's that upsetting to "back out", just queue them up in separate tabs and don't get expectations high.  It's not like this results in tons of long posts to slog through like MMM threads did.  But what's done is done, I suppose. :rolleyes:

EDIT: For reference, the Indiana thread mentioned earlier is the I-69 extension thread (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=4855.4850).
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on October 17, 2023, 01:28:37 PM
(For US 15)  PennDOT - District 3 News: 10/17/2023 UPDATE: (Keystone Welcome Center to Open 10/20/2023) Facility Energy Efficiency Project to Temporarily Close Keystone Welcome Center at Tioga, Three PennDOT District 3 Facilities and Selinsgrove Driver License Center (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-3/pages/details.aspx?newsid=5141)

PennDOT - Statewide News: Shapiro Administration Outlines Winter Preparations, Guidance for Public Readiness, and Employment Opportunities (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/pages/all-news-details.aspx?newsid=1085)  (mentions variable speed limit signs on I-80 and I-81)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on October 19, 2023, 06:41:19 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on October 06, 2023, 09:29:09 PM
(For PA 74)  PennDOT - District 8 News: Repairs to Begin Weekend of Oct.13-16 on Queen Street (Route 74) Bridge Over I-83 in York County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2218)

PennDOT - District 8 News: Beam Setting Scheduled for Oct. 27-30 on Queen Street (Route 74) Bridge Over I-83 in York County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2241)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Flyer78 on October 19, 2023, 06:49:10 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on October 17, 2023, 01:28:37 PM
(mentions variable speed limit signs on I-80 and I-81)

Interesting the linked map and count don't seem to include the existing I-76 VSLs in Montgomery County.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on October 19, 2023, 07:26:21 PM
Quote from: Flyer78 on October 19, 2023, 06:49:10 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on October 17, 2023, 01:28:37 PM
(mentions variable speed limit signs on I-80 and I-81)

Interesting the linked map and count don't seem to include the existing I-76 VSLs in Montgomery County.

I guess that is because the I-76 VSLs are intended to be more about traffic congestion than winter weather.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: MASTERNC on October 20, 2023, 08:25:50 AM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on October 19, 2023, 07:26:21 PM
Quote from: Flyer78 on October 19, 2023, 06:49:10 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on October 17, 2023, 01:28:37 PM
(mentions variable speed limit signs on I-80 and I-81)

Interesting the linked map and count don't seem to include the existing I-76 VSLs in Montgomery County.

I guess that is because the I-76 VSLs are intended to be more about traffic congestion than winter weather.

Agree with that comment, though it would be nice to have all the VSLs and message signs shown on the 511 page.

Also wish the Turnpike would consider VSLs in the mountains over the winter, and PennDOT would do the same up in the lake-effect snow belt.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Flyer78 on October 20, 2023, 11:00:56 AM
Sure, in the context of winter use then I guess the "statewide" map makes sense; but seems like the congestion speed limit signs could potentially be used for the same reason. Hey, if the drivers on 76 actually slowed down for inclement weather, the speeds should adjust for the slower detected traffic... (It... could happen, right?)

Agreed, I would also like to see the statewide VMS on 511. Seems new (additional) signs are going up in the Philly area (again, not just replacements)... messes up the ID plates, that have a sequence as part of the ID.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on October 25, 2023, 02:21:53 PM
PennDOT - District 10 News: PennDOT/BPD-I Set to begin I-80 Canoe Creek Bridge Reconstruction Early November in Clarion County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-10/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1657)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on October 26, 2023, 03:03:21 PM
(For US 322)  PennDOT - District 6 News: PennDOT to Host Virtual Public Meeting for U.S. 322 Reconstruction, Widening Project in Upper Chichester Township (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8801)

Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on November 02, 2023, 09:51:21 AM
PennDOT - District 4 News: PennDOT/BPC Enters Second Phase of I-81 Susquehanna Bridge Project (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-4/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1379)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on November 06, 2023, 11:59:20 AM
(For I-90)  PennDOT - District 1 News: Interstate 90 Eastbound Rest Area to be Closed for Renovations (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-1/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2211)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: seicer on November 06, 2023, 02:03:23 PM
Nice. It looks to be more of a rebuild than a renovation.

"As needed, travelers can use the rest stop facilities on Interstate 79 northbound and southbound just across the Erie County line in Crawford County. The I-90 rest stop for westbound traffic near the New York border remains open."

That's not close at all. There are much closer gas stations that offer decent restrooms.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: MASTERNC on November 06, 2023, 03:27:08 PM
Quote from: seicer on November 06, 2023, 02:03:23 PM
Nice. It looks to be more of a rebuild than a renovation.

"As needed, travelers can use the rest stop facilities on Interstate 79 northbound and southbound just across the Erie County line in Crawford County. The I-90 rest stop for westbound traffic near the New York border remains open."

That's not close at all. There are much closer gas stations that offer decent restrooms.

Including two truck stops in the Erie area (and another just across the NY line before the Thruway begins).
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Alps on November 06, 2023, 07:03:26 PM
Quote from: seicer on November 06, 2023, 02:03:23 PM
Nice. It looks to be more of a rebuild than a renovation.

"As needed, travelers can use the rest stop facilities on Interstate 79 northbound and southbound just across the Erie County line in Crawford County. The I-90 rest stop for westbound traffic near the New York border remains open."

That's not close at all. There are much closer gas stations that offer decent restrooms.
but those aren't PennD'oh!
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on November 07, 2023, 08:55:12 AM
(For I-84, I-380, and PA 435)  PennDOT - District 4 News: PennDOT Plans Closure of Route 435 Southbound in Dunmore, Lackawanna County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-4/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1383)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on November 08, 2023, 02:18:13 PM
(For US 202)  PennDOT - District 6 News: PennDOT Announces Completion of Major Construction on U.S. 202 Widening Project in Montgomery County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8844)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on November 09, 2023, 01:22:24 PM
(For PA 424)  PennDOT - District 4 News: Shapiro Administration Opens Route 424 (Chamber of Commerce Beltway) a Year Ahead of Schedule (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-4/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1386)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on December 07, 2023, 04:53:25 PM
PennDOT - District 8 News: Weekend Closure Planned Dec. 15-18 on SB I-83 John Harris Memorial (South) Bridge Over Susquehanna River Between Dauphin and Cumberland Counties
(https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2300)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: MASTERNC on December 16, 2023, 09:02:53 AM
So PA made permanent the existing work zone speed cameras but also moved the signage to before the work zone (so there may not be warning right before the vehicle) but it sounds like there may be more signs placed in the work zone (including a Photo Enforced speed limit sign). They also did a one-time reset of violation counts and prevented someone from accruing multiple violations before receiving the first one (15-day grace period from mailing date).

They also extended the Roosevelt Blvd speed cameras and allowed five more corridors for cameras plus five school zones as a pilot.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Crown Victoria on December 20, 2023, 05:26:50 PM
PA's gax tax will decrease, dropping back to 57.6 cents per gallon from 61.1 cents per gallon, for 2024...

https://www.pennlive.com/politics/2023/12/pa-motorists-will-see-savings-at-the-pump-as-state-gas-tax-falls.html

*The file photo used for the article is clearly not from PA... 85 octane gas!
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: MASTERNC on December 22, 2023, 05:20:29 PM
Looks like PennDOT may have green lighted dual right turn flashing yellow arrows. Wasn't going that direction but saw two four lens signal heads on the new signal for I-295 West and PA 332 in Yardley.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on December 22, 2023, 05:40:39 PM
Quote from: MASTERNC on December 22, 2023, 05:20:29 PM
Looks like PennDOT may have green lighted dual right turn flashing yellow arrows. Wasn't going that direction but saw two four lens signal heads on the new signal for I-295 West and PA 532 in Yardley.

I think you mean PA 332.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: MASTERNC on December 22, 2023, 08:28:23 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on December 22, 2023, 05:40:39 PM
Quote from: MASTERNC on December 22, 2023, 05:20:29 PM
Looks like PennDOT may have green lighted dual right turn flashing yellow arrows. Wasn't going that direction but saw two four lens signal heads on the new signal for I-295 West and PA 532 in Yardley.

I think you mean PA 332.

Yep. Too many routes around there
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on December 27, 2023, 03:48:04 PM
(For PA 41 and PA 926)  PennDOT - District 6 News: PennDOT to Begin Route 41 (Gap Newport Pike), Route 926 (Street Road), Roundabout Safety Improvement Project in Londonderry Township, Chester County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=8970)

Map of planned roundabout is here:  https://pa41.com/project-information/pa-41-at-route-926-intersection/ 
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on January 08, 2024, 12:36:34 PM
(For I-80)   PennDOT - District 4 News: PennDOT/BPC to Prepare for I-80 Nescopeck Creek Bridges Construction – Spring 2024 (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-4/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1453)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Mr. Matté on January 08, 2024, 04:21:24 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on January 08, 2024, 12:36:34 PM
(For I-80)   PennDOT - District 4 News: PennDOT/BPC to Prepare for I-80 Nescopeck Creek Bridges Construction – Spring 2024 (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-4/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1453)
QuoteIn August 2022, PennDOT chose to move the I-80 Nescopeck Creek Bridges project forward under the Major Bridge P3 (MBP3) program, without tolling.

Bet they're still bitter about that
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on January 11, 2024, 12:05:30 PM
(For US 202 BUS, PA 309, and PA 463)  PennDOT - District 6 News: PennDOT to Begin Construction on Five-Points Intersection Improvement Project in Montgomery Township (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=9007)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on February 14, 2024, 09:05:26 AM
(For US 202 and PA 491)  PennDOT - District 6 News: PennDOT Completes U.S. 202, Route 491 (Naamans Creek Road)/Beaver Valley Road Intersection Improvement Project in Concord Township (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=9056) 

Photos from 11/18/2023 taking US 202 SB to PA 491 EB (https://www.facebook.com/photo/?fbid=10219681079858029&set=pcb.10219681206501195)

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53529199375_acda20cb5b_c.jpg)

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53527866947_3fc589c942_c.jpg)

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53527866937_0b3e3e2db6_c.jpg)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: MASTERNC on February 14, 2024, 10:22:27 AM
Odd they stuck on a non-matching signal for the second turn lane.  Looks very haphazard.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: tmoore952 on February 17, 2024, 12:08:43 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on February 14, 2024, 09:05:26 AM
(For US 202 and PA 491)  PennDOT - District 6 News: PennDOT Completes U.S. 202, Route 491 (Naamans Creek Road)/Beaver Valley Road Intersection Improvement Project in Concord Township (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=9056) 

Photos from 11/18/2023 taking US 202 SB to PA 491 EB (https://www.facebook.com/photo/?fbid=10219681079858029&set=pcb.10219681206501195)

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53529199375_acda20cb5b_c.jpg)

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53527866947_3fc589c942_c.jpg)

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53527866937_0b3e3e2db6_c.jpg)
Within three miles of where I grew up in Delaware - the state line is about a mile south of here (if that).
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: plain on February 19, 2024, 02:14:04 PM
Quote from: MASTERNC on February 14, 2024, 10:22:27 AM
Odd they stuck on a non-matching signal for the second turn lane.  Looks very haphazard.

I've seen this happen quite a few times. It's usually because something happened to the original signal and they needed a quick replacement, but they might have decided to open a 2nd turn lane and an exact signal housing (in this case, black) wasn't readily available.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on February 23, 2024, 08:21:23 AM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on January 08, 2024, 12:36:34 PM
(For I-80)   PennDOT - District 4 News: PennDOT/BPC to Prepare for I-80 Nescopeck Creek Bridges Construction – Spring 2024 (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-4/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1453)

PennDOT - District 4 News: PennDOT/BPD-I to Host I-80 Nescopeck Creek Bridges Pre-Construction Public Meeting – February 29, 2024 (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-4/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1514)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on February 26, 2024, 11:58:22 AM
(For I-81) PennDOT - District 4 News: PennDOT Announces Public Hearing and Comment Period for Interstate 81 Section 316 Ashley to Arena Project (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-4/pages/details.aspx?newsid=1516)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on March 05, 2024, 04:27:44 PM
PennDOT - Statewide News: PennDOT, PA Turnpike Announce the Start of Work Zone Speed Safety Camera Program (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/pages/all-news-details.aspx?newsid=1117)

PennDOT - District 5 News: PennDOT/BPD-I to Host I-80 Over Lehigh River Bridge Pre-Construction Public Meeting – March 7, 2024 (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-5/pages/details.aspx?newsid=3858)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: MASTERNC on March 05, 2024, 09:55:28 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on March 05, 2024, 04:27:44 PM
PennDOT - Statewide News: PennDOT, PA Turnpike Announce the Start of Work Zone Speed Safety Camera Program (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/pages/all-news-details.aspx?newsid=1117)

Complete with new (non-compliant) fluorescent yellow warning signs
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on March 11, 2024, 02:39:33 PM
(For I-83 and PA 74) PennDOT - District 8 News: All Lanes Open on Queen Street (Route 74) Bridge in York County (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/regionaloffices/district-8/pages/details.aspx?newsid=2369)
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: mariethefoxy on March 15, 2024, 05:46:59 AM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on February 14, 2024, 09:05:26 AM
(For US 202 and PA 491)  PennDOT - District 6 News: PennDOT Completes U.S. 202, Route 491 (Naamans Creek Road)/Beaver Valley Road Intersection Improvement Project in Concord Township (https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-6/pages/details.aspx?newsid=9056) 

Photos from 11/18/2023 taking US 202 SB to PA 491 EB (https://www.facebook.com/photo/?fbid=10219681079858029&set=pcb.10219681206501195)

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53529199375_acda20cb5b_c.jpg)

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53527866947_3fc589c942_c.jpg)

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53527866937_0b3e3e2db6_c.jpg)

That red arrow under the sign for PA 491, is that an abbreviated version of the Red Detour signs?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on March 15, 2024, 11:47:49 AM
^I honestly have no idea.   Neither US 1, US 202, or US 322 is a freeway in this immediate area. 

PennDOT - Statewide News: Shapiro Administration Shares Resources for Visitors, Motorists Ahead of April 8 Solar Eclipse

QuoteNew traveler information page established to help visitors planning trips to northwest PA for unique viewing opportunity.

Harrisburg, PA – In advance of the solar eclipse that will darken skies across all of Pennsylvania on April 8, the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation (PennDOT), the Pennsylvania Emergency Management Agency (PEMA), the Pennsylvania State Police (PSP), Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission (PTC), and Pennsylvania Department of Conservation and Natural Resources (DCNR) are advising residents to plan ahead, especially those living in or traveling to the Northwest Region.

"Pennsylvania is lucky to be one of only 13 states in the path of totality for this eclipse, bringing residents and visitors a unique viewing opportunity in our own backyard. The high number of expected visitors is an opportunity to showcase our state and also requires partnership among state agencies and travelers alike," said PennDOT Secretary Mike Carroll. "We are coordinating across agencies as well as with local governments and regional organizations to plan for the likelihood of traffic congestion that day with an emphasis on safety for our residents and eclipse tourists."

Nearly 435,000 Pennsylvanians live in the path of totality for the 2024 solar eclipse, which will impact Crawford and Erie counties as well as portions of Mercer and Warren counties. Upwards of 200,000 people are expected to journey into the City of Erie alone to watch the astronomical event, which could lead to travel challenges in different portions of the state throughout the day.

The path of the eclipse will impact Pennsylvania starting at approximately 2:00 PM as the moon travels in front of the sun. At approximately 3:16 PM to 3:20 PM totality will occur in northwest region. At the same time, the remainder of the state will see the moon covering 90% to 99% of the sun. The eclipse will conclude at approximately 4:30 PM.

The Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission will be keeping all lanes of traffic open heading to and from Erie on I-79 via the Cranberry Interchange (Exit #28) and adding additional maintenance personnel in the event of an emergency.

"We would like drivers to pay attention to posted speed limits and keep their eyes on the road as traffic is expected to be heavier than normal here during this timeframe," said PA Turnpike Chief Operating Officer Craig Shuey.

PSP will remove disabled vehicles from interstates in northwestern Pennsylvania and post troopers at each exit to keep traffic moving. People gathered at rest stops will be directed to view the eclipse elsewhere.

"Our primary concern is public safety," said Colonel Christopher Paris, Commissioner of the Pennsylvania State Police. "Troopers will have an increased presence in the area and zero tolerance for distracted, aggressive, and intoxicated drivers. This eclipse should be a once-in-a-lifetime event with fond memories, not an experience marred by tragedy." 

To assist Pennsylvania residents and out-of-state visitors traveling to the City of Erie, which will experience one of the longest period of darkness, PennDOT has developed an event specific 511PA page – www.511pa.com/eclipse24. The page offers various suggested routes to help drivers traveling to the area during what is expected to be a high traffic period.

To help find a location to watch the eclipse or learn about related events happening in the City of Erie and throughout Erie County, go to the VisitErie Eclipse 2024 page.

Along with using the webpage, eclipse travelers are reminded of the following safety tips:

Plan ahead for longer than usual travel times to and from destinations.
Exit the highway to view the eclipse.
Turn on your headlights.
Be alert for vehicles on the shoulder and increased pedestrian traffic.
Put down the phone and never take pictures or videos while driving.
Take off eclipse glasses while driving.
Keep Pennsylvania Beautiful and don't litter.

Four state parks are within the path of the total eclipse:

Presque Isle State Park (Erie County)
Erie Bluffs State Park (Erie County)
Pymatuning State Park (Crawford County)
Maurice K. Goddard State Park (Crawford County)
"Visitors are welcome in all of Pennsylvania's state parks and forests to view the eclipse, or the view from your local park or even your backyard will be excellent," DCNR Secretary Cindy Adams Dunn said. "Crowds are expected at state parks, especially in the northwest, so visitors should plan around sharing viewing spaces and anticipate traffic."

Those interested in viewing the eclipse outdoors should be prepared by bringing the following items:

Solar-safe glasses, pinhole viewer, solar-safe viewing lenses for binoculars, cameras, or telescopes.
Water.
Snacks or a meal.
Appropriate layers for sunny, cold, or rainy conditions and comfortable walking shoes.
Sunscreen.
Bug repellent.
Camp chairs, a blanket, or other seating.
Necessary medications.
"It's important to realize that if you know an event is going to happen, you can plan to minimize its impact," said PEMA Director Randy Padfield. "Make sure that you've taken care of routine errands before April 8 or take care of them the next day. Anyone who lives or works in northwest Pennsylvania needs to think ahead about how they will get to work, handle childcare and attend to any important medical appointments the day of the eclipse. It is highly recommended that any unnecessary travel be delayed or rescheduled."

Many state parks are holding educational programs leading up to the eclipse. Additional information on viewing the eclipse from any state park through the state, visit the DCNR website's 2024 Total Solar Eclipse page.

For additional transportation safety information and resources, including sharable social media graphics and a printable handout, go online to PennDOT's Media Center. 

Follow PennDOT news and find #eclipse24 related traffic updates on X and the department's regional Facebook group.

MEDIA CONTACTS: Jill Harry, PennDOT, 814-678-5035, jharry@pa.gov or Erin Waters-Trasatt, ewaterstra@pa.gov

Wesley Robinson, DCNR, 717-877-6315, werobinson@pa.gov 
Myles Snyder, PSP, 717-783-5556 or ra-pspcomm@pa.gov
Ruth A. Miller, PEMA, ruthmiller@pa.gov 
Renee Colborn, PTC, 724-755-5260 

PennDOT - District 8 News: NB I-81 Rest Area at Newville, Cumberland County, to be Closed Next Week

QuoteContractor to install new HVAC system

Harrisburg, PA – The Pennsylvania Department of Transportation (PennDOT) announced today that the northbound Interstate 81 (Newville) rest area in Cumberland County will be closed next week so a contractor can install a new heating, ventilation and air conditioning (HVAC) system in the rest area facility. The rest area is located just north of Exit 37 (Route 233/Newville) in Penn Township.

This work is scheduled for 6:00 AM Tuesday, March 19, to 4:00 PM Thursday, March 21. The building and parking area will be closed during this time.

The next available rest area is just south of Exit 80 (Grantville/Hershey) in Dauphin County.

Motorists can check conditions on major roadways by visiting www.511PA.com. 511PA, which is free and available 24 hours a day, provides traffic delay warnings, weather forecasts, traffic speed information and access to more than 1,000 traffic cameras.

511PA is also available through a smartphone application for iPhone and Android devices, by calling 5-1-1, or by following local alerts on X.

Subscribe to PennDOT news and traffic alerts in Adams, Cumberland, Dauphin, Franklin, Lancaster, Lebanon, Perry and York counties at PennDOT District 8.

Information about infrastructure in District 8, including completed work and significant projects, is available at District 8 Results. Find PennDOT's planned and active construction projects at PennDOT Projects.

Find PennDOT news on X, Facebook, and Instagram.

Contact: Dave Thompson, dmthompson@pa.gov, 717-418-5018
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: roadman65 on March 17, 2024, 09:40:44 PM
https://historicbridges.org/bridges/browser/?bridgebrowser=pennsylvania/westinghouse/
Never knew this bridge existed along US 30 in East Pittsburgh.  Looks more impressive from Braddock Avenue below.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Alps on March 17, 2024, 10:38:14 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on March 17, 2024, 09:40:44 PM
https://historicbridges.org/bridges/browser/?bridgebrowser=pennsylvania/westinghouse/
Never knew this bridge existed along US 30 in East Pittsburgh.  Looks more impressive from Braddock Avenue below.
Been down there many times, it's a great half-dead industrial area to explore.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: 74/171FAN on March 21, 2024, 08:05:32 PM
PennDOT - District 9 News: PennDOT Announces Update for Automated School Bus Enforcement

QuoteUpdated when Gov. Shapiro signed SB 851, law now allows vehicle owners to contest liability virtually or in-person with a PennDOT Hearing Officer

Harrisburg, PA – The Pennsylvania Department of Transportation (PennDOT) has published updated Program Guidelines for School Bus Side Stop Signal Arm Enforcement Systems to the PennDOT website, with further instructions for vendors on the hearing process, as well as other guidance and key reminders related to the program. Frequently Asked Questions and a list of PA Approved School Bus Side Stop Signal Arm Enforcement Systems can also be found online.

Pennsylvania law, updated by Act 19 of 2023, allows school districts to install and operate automated camera systems for the purpose of enforcing Pennsylvania's School Bus Stopping Law and increasing safety for children riding school buses across the state. Violations identified by a camera system are reviewed by police under agreement with the school district. After that review the school district may issue a violation to the vehicle owner, including a $300 fine. These violations are civil penalties only and no points will be assessed to driver's licenses.

Under the law, motor vehicle owners may request a hearing to contest liability before a PennDOT hearing officer, at no cost to the vehicle owner. This was updated by Act 19. Previously, an owner could contest liability by requesting a hearing with the magisterial district judge where the violation occurred and paying the applicable civil filing fees. Beginning this week, notices of violation will include instructions for requesting a hearing with a PennDOT hearing officer.

The updated law also includes additional transparency with the requirement of an annual report. Schools with an active program are required to submit information to PennDOT and Pennsylvania State Police (PSP) annually by July 1. The agencies will jointly prepare a report that will be posted to the schools' publicly available website by December 31. Reports are required to include:

The name of the system administrator.
The number of school buses equipped with a side stop signal arm enforcement system.
The number of notices of violation issued.
The amount of fines imposed and collected.
The amounts paid under agreements authorized under the law.
The results of contested violations.
Use of additional revenue funds and any grants awarded from the program.
According to data from Operation Safe Stop 2023, participating school districts and law enforcement agencies reported witnessing 176 violations of the law on one day alone. Operation Safe Stop, held annually in October during School Bus Safety Week, is a school bus enforcement and education initiative aimed at enhancing school bus safety for students across Pennsylvania.

"This program is about increasing the safety of children riding school buses across the state," said PennDOT Secretary Mike Carroll. "Please stop for – and never pass – stopped school buses with their red lights flashing and stop arm extended. The safety of our children is in your hands."

Of the $300 fine assessed to violators under the program, $250 is paid to the school district where the violation occurred; $25 is paid to the primary police department that reviewed the submitted evidence as required by law; and $25 is paid to PennDOT to be used for the School Bus Safety Grant Program.

The School Bus Safety Grant Program can be used to promote and increase school bus safety, education, and training, as well as pay for education, training, and other associated costs related to an individual earning their commercial learner's permit, commercial driver's license, or school bus endorsement for the purpose of driving a school bus in Pennsylvania. Independent school bus contractors, school entities, and municipalities will be eligible to apply for grants from the program. PennDOT will announce the program once it is active.

Act 19 required new regulations be issued for the School Bus Side Stop Signal Arm Enforcement Systems. Temporary regulations were published in the PA Bulletin on Feb. 17.

PennDOT's media center offers social media-sized graphics highlighting topics such as aggressive driving, speeding, distracted driving, and seat belts for organizations, community groups, or others who share safety information with their stakeholders. Visit our website for an animated graphic on the School Bus Stopping Law.

School districts with questions about the program can contact PennDOT at PD-BUS@pa.gov.

For more information on school bus safety, visit www.PennDOT.pa.gov/Safety.
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Gnutella on March 26, 2024, 04:34:05 PM
Just brainstorming which PennDOT highways could stand to be expanded to six lanes, and this is what I've come up with:


I-70 from the West Virginia state line to I-79, and from the Pennsylvania Turnpike to the Maryland state line
I-76 from the Pennsylvania Turnpike to the New Jersey state line (yep)
All of I-78
I-79 from I-70 to I-376, and from I-90 to PA 5
I-80 from I-380 to the New Jersey state line
I-81 from the Maryland state line to I-78, and from I-80 to the Northeast Extension (north junction)
All of I-83
I-84 concurrent with I-380 (consider truncating I-380)
I-90 from I-79 to I-86
I-99 from U.S. 22 to U.S. 322 (east junction)
I-180 from U.S. 15 (west junction) to U.S. 220 (east junction)
I-279 from U.S. 19 to I-79
I-295 from I-95/the Pennsylvania Turnpike to the New Jersey state line
I-376 from Pittsburgh International Airport to the Pennsylvania Turnpike (east junction) (yep)
I-380 concurrent with I-84 (consider truncating I-380)
I-476 from I-95 to I-76

U.S. 15 from the Pennsylvania Turnpike to PA 581
U.S. 22 from I-78 to PA 33
U.S. 222 from U.S. 30 to U.S. 422 (east junction)
U.S. 422 from U.S. 222 (east junction) to the Pennsylvania Turnpike


Any others that should be added? Any above that aren't needed?
Title: Re: Pennsylvania
Post by: Rothman on March 26, 2024, 04:40:44 PM
Didn't we just have a Fictional thread on this?