I-95/Penna Turnpike Interchange

[Interstate 69 Fan]

I think so.

[cpzilliacus]

It's still on schedule to be complete in 2018, isn't it?

According to this, "Stage 1" (which completes I-95 but does not complete the other interchange movements and does not add any capacity at the Delaware River) should be done in 2018.  From that Web site is this:

The PA Turnpike/I-95 Interchange Project has been split into three stages. The majority of Stage 1 is either already complete, under construction, or in final design. The main components of Stage 1 construction will be complete in late 2018.

[Steve D]

It's still on schedule to be complete in 2018, isn't it?

According to this, "Stage 1" (which completes I-95 but does not complete the other interchange movements and does not add any capacity at the Delaware River) should be done in 2018.  From that Web site is this:

The PA Turnpike/I-95 Interchange Project has been split into three stages. The majority of Stage 1 is either already complete, under construction, or in final design. The main components of Stage 1 construction will be complete in late 2018.

Well, after after about thirty years of planning and barely any construction, now the entire project may be in jeopardy:
http://philadelphia.cbslocal.com/2016/11/19/pennsylvania-turnpike-projects-could-fall-victim-to-debt/

[jeffandnicole]

It's still on schedule to be complete in 2018, isn't it?

According to this, "Stage 1" (which completes I-95 but does not complete the other interchange movements and does not add any capacity at the Delaware River) should be done in 2018.  From that Web site is this:

The PA Turnpike/I-95 Interchange Project has been split into three stages. The majority of Stage 1 is either already complete, under construction, or in final design. The main components of Stage 1 construction will be complete in late 2018.

Well, after after about thirty years of planning and barely any construction, now the entire project may be in jeopardy:
http://philadelphia.cbslocal.com/2016/11/19/pennsylvania-turnpike-projects-could-fall-victim-to-debt/

The Turnpike has a gazillion other projects going on.  Something tells me the Turnpike commission is trying to get PennDOT to fund this project.  Are there any projects solely benefiting the Turnpike, such as widening in rural areas where congestion may occur on just the few busiest travel days of the year, on the chopping block?

[cpzilliacus]

Well, after after about thirty years of planning and barely any construction, now the entire project may be in jeopardy:
http://philadelphia.cbslocal.com/2016/11/19/pennsylvania-turnpike-projects-could-fall-victim-to-debt/

IMO, this project is too far along to stop (at least the ramps that complete I-95), though this may also be a strategic way of putting heat on the appropriate elected officials, and asking them to explain why this massive and partly completed interchange is standing there.

[cpzilliacus]

The Turnpike has a gazillion other projects going on.  Something tells me the Turnpike commission is trying to get PennDOT to fund this project.  Are there any projects solely benefiting the Turnpike, such as widening in rural areas where congestion may occur on just the few busiest travel days of the year, on the chopping block?

My guess is it is a way to ask the Pennsylvania legislature to grant relief from the massive hemorrhage of money from the Turnpike Commission to PennDOT to fund Act 44 and Act 89 subsidies (since Act 89 was passed in 2013, all of those subsidies from PTC to PennDOT have been for transit service and other modes of transport having little or nothing to do with the Turnpike system).

Having said that, given the revealed behavior of the Turnpike when it comes to breezewoods (and its failure to remediate most of them), I do suspect that the Turnpike Commission bitterly resents being forced to remediate at least some of the missing movements between the E-W Mainline and the Delaware Expressway.

[jeffandnicole]

Well, after after about thirty years of planning and barely any construction, now the entire project may be in jeopardy:
http://philadelphia.cbslocal.com/2016/11/19/pennsylvania-turnpike-projects-could-fall-victim-to-debt/

IMO, this project is too far along to stop (at least the ramps that complete I-95), though this may also be a strategic way of putting heat on the appropriate elected officials, and asking them to explain why this massive and partly completed interchange is standing there.

Since the currently under-construction ramps are already funded, they wouldn't be affected.  This suggestion appears to be solely related to the other ramps that aren't scheduled to be constructed for at least a few years, at minimum.

[vdeane]

Well, after after about thirty years of planning and barely any construction, now the entire project may be in jeopardy:
http://philadelphia.cbslocal.com/2016/11/19/pennsylvania-turnpike-projects-could-fall-victim-to-debt/

IMO, this project is too far along to stop (at least the ramps that complete I-95), though this may also be a strategic way of putting heat on the appropriate elected officials, and asking them to explain why this massive and partly completed interchange is standing there.

Since the currently under-construction ramps are already funded, they wouldn't be affected.  This suggestion appears to be solely related to the other ramps that aren't scheduled to be constructed for at least a few years, at minimum.

If it's that, I'm not at all surprised.  I suspected Phases 2 and 3 of the project would never happen.  Even though those ramps would be logical connections for the PTC by incentivising its use over local roads for trips to/from future I-295.  They'd better not cancel the already in progress work.

[The Ghostbuster]

As long as Interstate 95 is finally continuous between Philadelphia and New York, I could live with them not constructing the other ramps.

[Mr_Northside]

Are there any projects solely benefiting the Turnpike, such as widening in rural areas where congestion may occur on just the few busiest travel days of the year, on the chopping block?

There are a few full-reconstruction/widening projects in the rural "middle" of the pike that are going on or planned.  Their general effect on congestion can be up for debate.  The local articles here in Pittsburgh on this issue mentioned that they are prioritizing projects on their "core asset" (which I read to mean "Mainline").  The in-perpetual-limbo-yet-still-planned-construction of the Mon-Fayette section to Monroeville, and the remaining Southern Beltway sections are 2 projects on this side of the state that are categorized the same way as the remaining I-95 interchange  (And I agree, this would apply to movements other than the direct I-95 movements, since that's pretty under way)

This seems like it will be an ugly mix of true plans/needs prioritization, and some ugly politics/money going forward.

[odditude]

imho, the S-W and E-N movements should be the ones first sacrificed if things do go downhill; those movements are already nicely handled by US 1 (a divided, limited-access highway between I-95 and the Turnpike mainline). south of the Turnpike (technically, south of PA 132/Street Rd a few hundred feet later), US 1 becomes the soul-devouring Roosevelt Blvd, a dual-dual arterial which in 2001 gained the dubious recognition of housing the second- and third-most dangerous intersections in the country; given that the directions from the Turnpike to reach I-95 S instruct drivers to take US 1 S to PA 63 E/Woodhaven Rd, I feel that this is a Bad Idea^TM for nonlocals.

as for actual progress: the median barrier on I-95NB has been shifted to the left of the reconstructed/widened(?) portion approaching exit 40/PA 413, and new temporary orange signage indicating "95 NORTH Trenton <" has gone up. my best guess is they're going to move the exit split up a bit, turning exit 40 into more of a cattle chute, and shifting all I-95NB traffic to the newly reconstructed portion to allow reconstruction of the right lanes/shoulder/drainage.

on I-95SB, the area being reconstructed between the exit 40 ramp and the incoming traffic from PA 413 appears to be nearing completion. a large portion of the landscaping is done, and the concrete looks ready for striping (assuming that an asphalt wear surface isn't going to be overlaid).

the majority of the support piers for the W-S movement are completed, and several spans of the bridge have been installed closer to the Turnpike end.

additionally, new median lights have been installed on I-95; they're high-rise vertical posts with a cluster of 4 lamps at the top. presumably, the lamp cluster can be brought down the pole for easier maintenance, as that is how they were initially installed.

[jwolfer]

I see on differnet threads and in real life the progress of construction that goes from plans to completion within 5 years.. And this one interchange has taken 30...

LGMS428

[cpzilliacus]

Are there any projects solely benefiting the Turnpike, such as widening in rural areas where congestion may occur on just the few busiest travel days of the year, on the chopping block?

There are a few full-reconstruction/widening projects in the rural "middle" of the pike that are going on or planned.  Their general effect on congestion can be up for debate.

I agree, though with the exception of adding climbing lanes on mountain grades where they do not currently exist.

The local articles here in Pittsburgh on this issue mentioned that they are prioritizing projects on their "core asset" (which I read to mean "Mainline").  The in-perpetual-limbo-yet-still-planned-construction of the Mon-Fayette section to Monroeville, and the remaining Southern Beltway sections are 2 projects on this side of the state that are categorized the same way as the remaining I-95 interchange  (And I agree, this would apply to movements other than the direct I-95 movements, since that's pretty under way)

Completing Mon-Fayette would seem to be a worthy goal.  If that means that there is "induced" demand for the highway, then so be it.  This (the PA-43 Corridor) is a part of the world that benefits from "induced" demand. 

If it were my call (obviously it is not), I would cut-back on the "total reconstruction" projects where the Turnpike is in reasonably decent condition, though there are some expensive projects on the mainline (dealing with the Allegheny Mountain Tunnel problem either with a bypass or third tube) and getting rid of the Turnpike's many breezewoods that should take priority.

This seems like it will be an ugly mix of true plans/needs prioritization, and some ugly politics/money going forward.

Agreed.

[cpzilliacus]

imho, the S-W and E-N movements should be the ones first sacrificed if things do go downhill; those movements are already nicely handled by US 1 (a divided, limited-access highway between I-95 and the Turnpike mainline). south of the Turnpike (technically, south of PA 132/Street Rd a few hundred feet later), US 1 becomes the soul-devouring Roosevelt Blvd, a dual-dual arterial which in 2001 gained the dubious recognition of housing the second- and third-most dangerous intersections in the country; given that the directions from the Turnpike to reach I-95 S instruct drivers to take US 1 S to PA 63 E/Woodhaven Rd, I feel that this is a Bad Idea^TM for nonlocals.

I disagree regarding the incomplete interchange - IMO with very  few exceptions, Interstate-Interstate interchanges should have all movements.

I very  much agree with  you about U.S. 1/Roosevelt Boulevard.  That's a miserable, miserable section of road (and keep in mind I drive in the District of Columbia a lot, not known  for having the best streets and highways).

[cpzilliacus]

I see on differnet threads and in real life the progress of construction that goes from plans to completion within 5 years.. And this one interchange has taken 30...

In the PTC's defense, the presence of the ticket system on the E-W Mainline and the lack of space for their preferred trumpet-to-trumpet interchange has made matter much more difficult and complex, and moving the east end of the ticket system west was complex and expensive.

[jwolfer]

I see on differnet threads and in real life the progress of construction that goes from plans to completion within 5 years.. And this one interchange has taken 30...

In the PTC's defense, the presence of the ticket system on the E-W Mainline and the lack of space for their preferred trumpet-to-trumpet interchange has made matter much more difficult and complex, and moving the east end of the ticket system west was complex and expensive.

True about difficulties and ticket system.  New Jersey should have built Somerset Freeway and this would not have been an issue...

LGMS428

[SignBridge]

Even with the Somerset Fwy, there still should always have been a complete interchange between I-95 and the Penna. Tpk. It is inexcusable that it was not built by the PTC back in 1970's or whenever I-95 was built.

[qguy]

In the PTC's defense, the presence of the ticket system on the E-W Mainline and the lack of space for their preferred trumpet-to-trumpet interchange has made matter much more difficult and complex, and moving the east end of the ticket system west was complex and expensive.

The PTC didn't change the design of the interchange from the original double trumpet because of a lack of space. The change was made due to intervention by Congress.

The PTC had acquired the ROW and had actually begun construction on the toll plaza for the original design when Congress completely upended the chessboard by dedesignating the Somerset Expressway and requiring a high-speed interchange instead of the low-speed double trumpet.

[jeffandnicole]

I see on differnet threads and in real life the progress of construction that goes from plans to completion within 5 years.. And this one interchange has taken 30...

In the PTC's defense, the presence of the ticket system on the E-W Mainline and the lack of space for their preferred trumpet-to-trumpet interchange has made matter much more difficult and complex, and moving the east end of the ticket system west was complex and expensive.

True about difficulties and ticket system.  New Jersey should have built Somerset Freeway and this would not have been an issue...

LGMS428

You do realize it's practically the same thing they did in the western part of the state, right?

Besides, is building a single new plaza and interchange so much more difficult than building 45 miles of highway thru developed land? 

[jwolfer]

I see on differnet threads and in real life the progress of construction that goes from plans to completion within 5 years.. And this one interchange has taken 30...

In the PTC's defense, the presence of the ticket system on the E-W Mainline and the lack of space for their preferred trumpet-to-trumpet interchange has made matter much more difficult and complex, and moving the east end of the ticket system west was complex and expensive.

True about difficulties and ticket system.  New Jersey should have built Somerset Freeway and this would not have been an issue...

LGMS428

You do realize it's practically the same thing they did in the western part of the state, right?

Besides, is building a single new plaza and interchange so much more difficult than building 45 miles of highway thru developed land? 

It should not have taken this long either way..

LGMS428

[Alps]

In the PTC's defense, the presence of the ticket system on the E-W Mainline and the lack of space for their preferred trumpet-to-trumpet interchange has made matter much more difficult and complex, and moving the east end of the ticket system west was complex and expensive.

The PTC didn't change the design of the interchange from the original double trumpet because of a lack of space. The change was made due to intervention by Congress.

The PTC had acquired the ROW and had actually begun construction on the toll plaza for the original design when Congress completely upended the chessboard by dedesignating the Somerset Expressway and requiring a high-speed interchange instead of the low-speed double trumpet.

Source? I never heard that they began construction on anything related to a 276/95 connection.

[Duke87]

imho, the S-W and E-N movements should be the ones first sacrificed if things do go downhill; those movements are already nicely handled by US 1 (a divided, limited-access highway between I-95 and the Turnpike mainline).

For this exact reason, PTC already has no plans of building ramps to accommodate those movements.

[cpzilliacus]

The PTC had acquired the ROW and had actually begun construction on the toll plaza for the original design when Congress completely upended the chessboard by dedesignating the Somerset Expressway and requiring a high-speed interchange instead of the low-speed double trumpet.

You  speak of the half-trumpet (actually more of a half-directional) that was built, and is signed as I-95 Exit 40 to PA-413?  Was that going to use the transmission line right-of-way to reach the E-W Mainline (currently signed as I-276)?

I do not believe that Congress mandated the type of interchange to be used to directly connect I-95 and the east-west mainline of the Turnpike.  However, I recall reading (years ago) that a conventional trumpet-to-trumpet interchange (or similar) at that location could not have handled the projected traffic volumes that would result.  There may also have been impacts on the old eastern mainline toll barrier between the bridge over the Delaware River and U.S. 13 (now signed as Exit 358).

Even with the Somerset Fwy, there still should always have been a complete interchange between I-95 and the Penna. Tpk. It is inexcusable that it was not built by the PTC back in 1970's or whenever I-95 was built.

That sort of inexcusable design and engineering can  be seen all over the PTC ticket system.  The Turnpike even  built a relatively new breezewood near Denver (exit 286) to  provide access to upgraded U.S. 222

[jeffandnicole]

Even with the Somerset Fwy, there still should always have been a complete interchange between I-95 and the Penna. Tpk. It is inexcusable that it was not built by the PTC back in 1970's or whenever I-95 was built.

That sort of inexcusable design and engineering can  be seen all over the PTC ticket system.  The Turnpike even  built a relatively new breezewood near Denver (exit 286) to  provide access to upgraded U.S. 222

Why blame PTC?  Shouldn't PennDOT have been the lead agency on such a project, since they were the ones building 95?

Doesn't excuse any in-action since, but to solely blame PTC isn't fair either.

[vdeane]

I agree about the "turnpike reconstruction" projects.  The road doesn't seem like it's to the point of needing a reconstruction.  Resurfacing with climbing lanes added as needed would be MUCH cheaper.

I'm guessing the PTC is in charge of the interchange project because states with toll authorities usually have the toll authority in charge of any project that touches their facility.

imho, the S-W and E-N movements should be the ones first sacrificed if things do go downhill; those movements are already nicely handled by US 1 (a divided, limited-access highway between I-95 and the Turnpike mainline).

For this exact reason, PTC already has no plans of building ramps to accommodate those movements.

Did the design change?  The website graphics show all movements not carrying I-95 would be constructed in Phase II, with none missing.