News:

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

Main Menu

Why would they build I-95 and I-476 like this?

Started by Tonytone, September 11, 2018, 09:34:28 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Tonytone

As I know there are posts about I-95 and I-476, but this is about a specific point, from the Delaware Line on I-95 to the I-476 Exit (aka the blue route). I just have a list of questions and opinions about this.

1.Why would traffic planners think that merging I-495 and I-95 together into Pa into a 3 lane roadway. When I-495 is 3 lanes and I-95 is 2 lanes, they could have at least made I-95, a Interstate highway which is handling a big load of traffic 4 LANES! I understand it costs money to build things but you really have to look at numbers and planning in order to do things right I guess planning ahead is a thing of the future.

2. Were there different routes that 95 was gonna take? was it always supposed to go through the heart of Chesters riverfront? Because the only way they could expand to 4 lanes from exit 1 to exit 7, it will require a hell of a lot of gutting of houses and roadway, Im surprised that part of 95 is even legal.

3.I understand Chester is a poor city but Pa needs to step in and help, this is a main area and I'm pretty sure that fixing the highway will help the area around it. I understand at one point that 495 would have been the connection to 476, Crazy thinking*. But if it did, I could imagine the free flowing traffic of I-476 without the stopping of traffic every half of mile.

4.Would 476 be fixed if a third lane was added in both directions? it seems like the only problem is merging traffic and the amount of cars on the road is over capacity, they should make it a law that people have to move over when driving by on and off ramps, so traffic will not stop flowing and cars can merge easily.
Promoting Cities since 1998!


Beltway

Quote from: Tonytone on September 11, 2018, 09:34:28 PM
1.Why would traffic planners think that merging I-495 and I-95 together into Pa into a 3 lane roadway. When I-495 is 3 lanes and I-95 is 2 lanes, they could have at least made I-95, a Interstate highway which is handling a big load of traffic 4 LANES! I understand it costs money to build things but you really have to look at numbers and planning in order to do things right I guess planning ahead is a thing of the future.

Two separate states involved.  I-95 was completed by 1968 between Maryland and the north edge of Chester.  Six lanes in PA probably looked adequate at that point.  I-495 was already planned at that point but the lane number was probably not determined, I surmise that it may have been planned with 4 lanes (2 each way).  I-495 was completed in 1977 with 6 lanes (3 each way).

Quote from: Tonytone on September 11, 2018, 09:34:28 PM
2. Were there different routes that 95 was gonna take? was it always supposed to go through the heart of Chesters riverfront? Because the only way they could expand to 4 lanes from exit 1 to exit 7, it will require a hell of a lot of gutting of houses and roadway, Im surprised that part of 95 is even legal.

I don't believe so.  Other than bypassing just north of Marcus Hook and Chester, where it was built, I don't see another logical direct routing.
http://www.roadstothefuture.com
http://www.capital-beltway.com

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

Alps

1. I think the stretch through Chester was built in a 6 lane bathtub with no chance to widen it to 8 lanes. It was built well before I-476 was completed, back when traffic volumes were much lighter overall. There's no good way to take care of it right now, unless your crazy thinking brought a parallel I-495 north.
2. Grandfathered in - built before modern standards. I'm sure different routes were studied, but others can weigh in.
3. Enough other places need help. A city needs strong leadership from within to change - see New York and Newark.
4. Absolutely, but the law allowing 476 requires it to be two lanes down there. Such is life. You can't make a law requiring people to move over. That is far worse for congestion than letting traffic sort itself out.

PHLBOS

#3
When I-95 through Chester was first built, not only did I-476 not yet exist (I-476 between there and Mac Dade Blvd. opened circa 1988 and I-476 north of Mac Dade opened Dec. 1991) but the Commodore Barry Bridge wasn't yet built & open either (the bridge opened circa 1974).  A ferry carrying US 322 traffic across the Delaware existed back then. 

Six lanes of I-95 through Chester sans the I-476 & US 322 eastbound interchanges probably wasn't as problematic as it is today.  A sizable chunk of traffic between those two interchanges is, no doubt, through-traffic between the bridge & I-476.  Why DRPA & PennDOT either didn't coordinate nor agree on a common alignment between the bridge approach & I-476 aren't known (i.e. had such happened, the Blue Route would've crossed over I-95 and directly connected to the Commodore Barry Bridge).  Such would've reduced/eliminated most of the I-95-associated bottlenecks in the area.

As many here know, the alignment of I-476 & its Blue Route moniker dates back decades earlier when the highway was first planned, the blue alignment was the one that was ultimately chosen (other alignments colored in green, red & yellow also existed in the proposal as well).  I'm not sure which one of the other color-keyed alignments would've been better in-synch with the Commodore Barry Bridge.  Additionally, it's worth noting that the southernmost part of I-476 (between Mac Dade Blvd. & I-95) was constructed as a 6-laner.  The misguided scale-down to 4-lanes occurs just north of there. 

That said, the widening of the 4-lane portion of I-476 to a 6-laner between Exits 1 (Mac Dade Blvd.) & Exit 9 (PA 3/West Chester Pike) would not impact nor involve any alteration of its interchange with I-95.  Such a widening could be theoretically done without any additional land-takings/right-of-way acquisitions.  The reason being that the corridor could be widened from the inside.  The 4-lane stretch was designed with a future inward-widening in mind.  A fully six-lane Blue Route in this area would not only smooth out or eliminate the northbound bottlenecks at/just north of Mac Dade but such would likely address any related spill-over backups at I-95... at least near/at the Exit 7 ramps.

Another issue with the I-95/476 interchange (which was built roughly 20 years prior to I-476 opening) is that fact that the through-I-95 corridor is only four lanes; it's six lanes south of it & eight lanes north of it.  Even prior to I-476 opening, the interchange was always a traffic bottle-neck during rush hours (the occurrences/duration of that bottleneck has worsened during the past decade).  In hindsight and at the very least, the 4-lane portion through the interchange should've been built as a six-laner.

Regarding the I-95/495 merge; there is a short stretch just north of the merge where I-95 northbound is four lanes (it drops to three just prior to the Welcome Center exit).  IIRC that short widening of the northbound stretch took place circa 1991-1992; around the same time that most of the current BGS' were erected.  In hindsight, that widening could've went a little further.  Interestingly, the southbound stretch was never widened.
GPS does NOT equal GOD

jeffandnicole

Quote from: Tonytone on September 11, 2018, 09:34:28 PM
2. Were there different routes that 95 was gonna take? was it always supposed to go through the heart of Chesters riverfront? Because the only way they could expand to 4 lanes from exit 1 to exit 7, it will require a hell of a lot of gutting of houses and roadway, Im surprised that part of 95 is even legal.

What would make it illegal?  I-95 in this area met all the standards when built.  One area of issue is the very short stretch of highway Northbound between the onramp at Interchange 1 and the offramp at Interchange 2, where an auxiliary lane should've been used.  The US 322 interchange is a clusterfuck as well, and while PennDOT has looked at it and came up with some solutions, they greatly relaxed the timeline for this project to be completed.  As you mentioned, between Exits 3 and 7, it's squeezed in that area, but there's certainly nothing illegal about it.

Quote from: PHLBOS on September 12, 2018, 10:21:37 AM
Six lanes of I-95 through Chester sans the I-476 & US 322 eastbound interchanges probably wasn't as problematic as it is today.  A sizable chunk of traffic between those two interchanges is, no doubt, through-traffic between the bridge & I-476.  Why DRPA & PennDOT either didn't coordinate nor agree on a common alignment between the bridge approach & I-476 aren't known (i.e. had such happened, the Blue Route would've crossed over I-95 and directly connected to the Commodore Barry Bridge).  Such would've reduced/eliminated most of the I-95-associated bottlenecks in the area.

Personally, the DVRPC is largely at fault for this.  As their name indicates for those that don't know (Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission), they are supposed to be responsible for the REGIONAL transportation network.  If a project occurs in one area, they should be looking at how it affects traffic in other areas, well prior to any funding being provided.  All projects funded in the 5 county Philly area and 4 county NJ suburbs for Philly need to be approved by the DVRPC.  In the case of I-476 (among many others), they solely looked at that highway and approved funding for that highway without any consideration whatsoever as to how it would affect other highways.  At the very minimum, they should've shoe-horned in a 4th lane between 476 and the Commodore Barry Bridge, knowing that I-476 to US 322 into NJ would be serving as an efficient bypass of I-76 and NJ 42.

Unfortunately, with the railroad tracks and neighborhood in that area, along with the neighborhood along the short concurrent stretch of I-95 and US 322, any widening would be at the expense of the neighborhood, or they would have to triple-deck I-95 over the existing overpasses.

froggie

Quote from: PHLBOSAnother issue with the I-95/476 interchange (which was built roughly 20 years prior to I-476 opening) is that fact that the through-I-95 corridor is only four lanes; it's six lanes south of it & eight lanes north of it.  Even prior to I-476 opening, the interchange was always a traffic bottle-neck during rush hours (the occurrences/duration of that bottleneck has worsened during the past decade).  In hindsight and at the very least, the 4-lane portion through the interchange should've been built as a six-laner.

Northbound, yes.  But southbound this would have created a just-as-bad (if not worse) bottleneck due to the volume of traffic that enters from 476 and the lack of space to construct additional lanes south of the merge as Jeff noted.

Tonytone

Quote from: jeffandnicole on September 12, 2018, 10:42:51 AM
Quote from: Tonytone on September 11, 2018, 09:34:28 PM
2. Were there different routes that 95 was gonna take? was it always supposed to go through the heart of Chesters riverfront? Because the only way they could expand to 4 lanes from exit 1 to exit 7, it will require a hell of a lot of gutting of houses and roadway, Im surprised that part of 95 is even legal.

What would make it illegal?  I-95 in this area met all the standards when built.  One area of issue is the very short stretch of highway Northbound between the onramp at Interchange 1 and the offramp at Interchange 2, where an auxiliary lane should've been used.  The US 322 interchange is a clusterfuck as well, and while PennDOT has looked at it and came up with some solutions, they greatly relaxed the timeline for this project to be completed.  As you mentioned, between Exits 3 and 7, it's squeezed in that area, but there's certainly nothing illegal about it.

Quote from: PHLBOS on September 12, 2018, 10:21:37 AM
Six lanes of I-95 through Chester sans the I-476 & US 322 eastbound interchanges probably wasn't as problematic as it is today.  A sizable chunk of traffic between those two interchanges is, no doubt, through-traffic between the bridge & I-476.  Why DRPA & PennDOT either didn't coordinate nor agree on a common alignment between the bridge approach & I-476 aren't known (i.e. had such happened, the Blue Route would've crossed over I-95 and directly connected to the Commodore Barry Bridge).  Such would've reduced/eliminated most of the I-95-associated bottlenecks in the area.

Personally, the DVRPC is largely at fault for this.  As their name indicates for those that don't know (Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission), they are supposed to be responsible for the REGIONAL transportation network.  If a project occurs in one area, they should be looking at how it affects traffic in other areas, well prior to any funding being provided.  All projects funded in the 5 county Philly area and 4 county NJ suburbs for Philly need to be approved by the DVRPC.  In the case of I-476 (among many others), they solely looked at that highway and approved funding for that highway without any consideration whatsoever as to how it would affect other highways.  At the very minimum, they should've shoe-horned in a 4th lane between 476 and the Commodore Barry Bridge, knowing that I-476 to US 322 into NJ would be serving as an efficient bypass of I-76 and NJ 42.

Unfortunately, with the railroad tracks and neighborhood in that area, along with the neighborhood along the short concurrent stretch of I-95 and US 322, any widening would be at the expense of the neighborhood, or they would have to triple-deck I-95 over the existing overpasses.

Woo a triple deck. I thought of that, is it even possible? & there is a post on this forum that shows pictures of the alignments of 476. One of which went directly to the Commodore barry.


iPhone
Promoting Cities since 1998!

Tonytone

Quote from: Tonytone on September 12, 2018, 11:27:21 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on September 12, 2018, 10:42:51 AM
Quote from: Tonytone on September 11, 2018, 09:34:28 PM
2. Were there different routes that 95 was gonna take? was it always supposed to go through the heart of Chesters riverfront? Because the only way they could expand to 4 lanes from exit 1 to exit 7, it will require a hell of a lot of gutting of houses and roadway, Im surprised that part of 95 is even legal.

What would make it illegal?  I-95 in this area met all the standards when built.  One area of issue is the very short stretch of highway Northbound between the onramp at Interchange 1 and the offramp at Interchange 2, where an auxiliary lane should've been used.  The US 322 interchange is a clusterfuck as well, and while PennDOT has looked at it and came up with some solutions, they greatly relaxed the timeline for this project to be completed.  As you mentioned, between Exits 3 and 7, it's squeezed in that area, but there's certainly nothing illegal about it.

Quote from: PHLBOS on September 12, 2018, 10:21:37 AM
Six lanes of I-95 through Chester sans the I-476 & US 322 eastbound interchanges probably wasn't as problematic as it is today.  A sizable chunk of traffic between those two interchanges is, no doubt, through-traffic between the bridge & I-476.  Why DRPA & PennDOT either didn't coordinate nor agree on a common alignment between the bridge approach & I-476 aren't known (i.e. had such happened, the Blue Route would've crossed over I-95 and directly connected to the Commodore Barry Bridge).  Such would've reduced/eliminated most of the I-95-associated bottlenecks in the area.

Personally, the DVRPC is largely at fault for this.  As their name indicates for those that don't know (Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission), they are supposed to be responsible for the REGIONAL transportation network.  If a project occurs in one area, they should be looking at how it affects traffic in other areas, well prior to any funding being provided.  All projects funded in the 5 county Philly area and 4 county NJ suburbs for Philly need to be approved by the DVRPC.  In the case of I-476 (among many others), they solely looked at that highway and approved funding for that highway without any consideration whatsoever as to how it would affect other highways.  At the very minimum, they should've shoe-horned in a 4th lane between 476 and the Commodore Barry Bridge, knowing that I-476 to US 322 into NJ would be serving as an efficient bypass of I-76 and NJ 42.

Unfortunately, with the railroad tracks and neighborhood in that area, along with the neighborhood along the short concurrent stretch of I-95 and US 322, any widening would be at the expense of the neighborhood, or they would have to triple-deck I-95 over the existing overpasses.

Woo a triple deck. I thought of that, is it even possible? & there is a post on this forum that shows pictures of the alignments of 476. One of which went directly to the Commodore barry.


iPhone


" Pictures Courtesy of another user"

By my understanding Route C was choose.







iPhone
Promoting Cities since 1998!

froggie

^ From the long ago thread...

QuoteBy my understanding Route C was choose.

Actually, something closer to "Route B".

Roadsguy

We can only hope that the people living along I-95 northeast of the Bridge are as eager to move out as the people southwest of the bridge were when PennDOT announced their still-delayed widening project.

Also, while I agree that it should feed directly into the bridge, the Blue Route was never planned to.

The Green Route was. :bigass:
Mileage-based exit numbering implies the existence of mileage-cringe exit numbering.

PHLBOS

Quote from: froggie on September 12, 2018, 11:19:37 AM
Quote from: PHLBOSAnother issue with the I-95/476 interchange (which was built roughly 20 years prior to I-476 opening) is that fact that the through-I-95 corridor is only four lanes; it's six lanes south of it & eight lanes north of it.  Even prior to I-476 opening, the interchange was always a traffic bottle-neck during rush hours (the occurrences/duration of that bottleneck has worsened during the past decade).  In hindsight and at the very least, the 4-lane portion through the interchange should've been built as a six-laner.

Northbound, yes.  But southbound this would have created a just-as-bad (if not worse) bottleneck due to the volume of traffic that enters from 476 and the lack of space to construct additional lanes south of the merge as Jeff noted.
IIRC, we had this discussion before on either another thread and/or on FB.  While the stretch of I-95 south of the Bullens Lane indeed restricts even a temporary widening to four southbound lanes beyond the I-476 merge; in retrospect, the geometry of the I-95/476 interchange could have been slightly re-aligned (did the I-95 ramps from I-476 southbound really need to 'bow' to the west or was such indeed the only choice (I'm not fully convinced)?) to have the onramp to I-95 southbound from I-476 meet the mainline I-95 earlier and maintain a six-lane I-95 mainline within the interchange.
GPS does NOT equal GOD

jeffandnicole

Quote from: Tonytone on September 12, 2018, 11:27:21 AM
Woo a triple deck. I thought of that, is it even possible?...

Anything's possible.  Just takes money, political will, and resident will!

I say Triple Deck because of the numerous cross streets going over I-95 in the Chester Area.  Since they couldn't be raised due to the surrounding area, the only feasible solution would be to put 95 (north or south) over those overpasses, over 95 (south or north), if a direct widening wasn't possible.

Tonytone

Quote from: jeffandnicole on September 12, 2018, 01:45:15 PM
Quote from: Tonytone on September 12, 2018, 11:27:21 AM
Woo a triple deck. I thought of that, is it even possible?...

Anything's possible.  Just takes money, political will, and resident will!

I say Triple Deck because of the numerous cross streets going over I-95 in the Chester Area.  Since they couldn't be raised due to the surrounding area, the only feasible solution would be to put 95 (north or south) over those overpasses, over 95 (south or north), if a direct widening wasn't possible.
So basically a upper & lower deck like gwb


iPhone
Promoting Cities since 1998!

jeffandnicole

Quote from: Tonytone on September 12, 2018, 01:47:13 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on September 12, 2018, 01:45:15 PM
Quote from: Tonytone on September 12, 2018, 11:27:21 AM
Woo a triple deck. I thought of that, is it even possible?...

Anything's possible.  Just takes money, political will, and resident will!

I say Triple Deck because of the numerous cross streets going over I-95 in the Chester Area.  Since they couldn't be raised due to the surrounding area, the only feasible solution would be to put 95 (north or south) over those overpasses, over 95 (south or north), if a direct widening wasn't possible.
So basically a upper & lower deck like gwb


iPhone

Upper deck, cross streets, lower deck.  I'm trying to think of something like that off-hand.

BrianP

The example of a triple decker is quite close really.  Though it's not completed yet.  And it's for a shorter distance.  But it's how I-295 will go over I-76 and Browning Road in New Jersey. 

But granted it's not one route on two of the three levels.

But in my idea you could have I-476 use the third deck and run on top of I-95 and have it tie into the bridge over to NJ. I-476 would in effect end at US 322 and I-95. And then traffic from I476 would not join I-95 south until after the exit for the bridge.  But that's pure fictional.

Flyer78

Quote from: jeffandnicole on September 12, 2018, 01:56:28 PM
Upper deck, cross streets, lower deck.  I'm trying to think of something like that off-hand.

I give you, the LBJ TEXpress lanes in Dallas (which, ok, is bi-directional raceway HOT lanes, cross streets, regular bi-directional Interstate at some locations)


jeffandnicole

Quote from: BrianP on September 12, 2018, 03:12:47 PM
The example of a triple decker is quite close really.  Though it's not completed yet.  And it's for a shorter distance.  But it's how I-295 will go over I-76 and Browning Road in New Jersey. 

But granted it's not one route on two of the three levels.

But in my idea you could have I-476 use the third deck and run on top of I-95 and have it tie into the bridge over to NJ. I-476 would in effect end at US 322 and I-95. And then traffic from I476 would not join I-95 south until after the exit for the bridge.  But that's pure fictional.

I was thinking about that.  Although that's actually going to be a 4 decker (almost): 

Bottom tier (Below Ground level): 295 South to 42 South. 
2nd Tier (Ground level): I-76/NJ 42, some ramps
3rd Tier: Browning Road
4th Tier: I-295, some ramps.

But otherwise, exactly the concept I was thinking about.

Tonytone

Quote from: jeffandnicole on September 12, 2018, 03:40:16 PM
Quote from: BrianP on September 12, 2018, 03:12:47 PM
The example of a triple decker is quite close really.  Though it's not completed yet.  And it's for a shorter distance.  But it's how I-295 will go over I-76 and Browning Road in New Jersey. 

But granted it's not one route on two of the three levels.

But in my idea you could have I-476 use the third deck and run on top of I-95 and have it tie into the bridge over to NJ. I-476 would in effect end at US 322 and I-95. And then traffic from I476 would not join I-95 south until after the exit for the bridge.  But that's pure fictional.

I was thinking about that.  Although that's actually going to be a 4 decker (almost): 

Bottom tier (Below Ground level): 295 South to 42 South. 
2nd Tier (Ground level): I-76/NJ 42, some ramps
3rd Tier: Browning Road
4th Tier: I-295, some ramps.

But otherwise, exactly the concept I was thinking about.
As I see it Pa would never approve of something so smart. They would make the lanes skinner & try to fit a 4th lane in before that. The probably only logical way would be so dig into the shoulder of both sides of I-95 after exit 1 when no more middle median in left . Then reconfigure the 322 & 476 interchanges with a new connector so traffic will not impede 95 traffic.


iPhone
Promoting Cities since 1998!

Alps

Quote from: Flyer78 on September 12, 2018, 03:32:19 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on September 12, 2018, 01:56:28 PM
Upper deck, cross streets, lower deck.  I'm trying to think of something like that off-hand.

I give you, the LBJ TEXpress lanes in Dallas (which, ok, is bi-directional raceway HOT lanes, cross streets, regular bi-directional Interstate at some locations)


Austin has a better one.

Tonytone

Actually now that I think about it. Would a new bridge from where the current 476 interchange is that would span to new jersey be a option? The amount of traffic around in the whole tristate area has increased tremendously. A new bridge would reduce traffic on the old bridge & highway. Maybe making it even cheaper then making the whole highway 4 lanes each way. All they would have to do is repave & just do some safety upgrades & boom you got a freeflowing I-95, I-476 kinda.


iPhone
Promoting Cities since 1998!

Alps

Quote from: Tonytone on September 12, 2018, 08:50:48 PM
Actually now that I think about it. Would a new bridge from where the current 476 interchange is that would span to new jersey be a option? The amount of traffic around in the whole tristate area has increased tremendously. A new bridge would reduce traffic on the old bridge & highway. Maybe making it even cheaper then making the whole highway 4 lanes each way. All they would have to do is repave & just do some safety upgrades & boom you got a freeflowing I-95, I-476 kinda.

There's really not much on the NJ side is the issue.

Beltway

Quote from: Tonytone on September 12, 2018, 08:50:48 PM
Actually now that I think about it. Would a new bridge from where the current 476 interchange is that would span to new jersey be a option? The amount of traffic around in the whole tristate area has increased tremendously. A new bridge would reduce traffic on the old bridge & highway. Maybe making it even cheaper then making the whole highway 4 lanes each way. All they would have to do is repave & just do some safety upgrades & boom you got a freeflowing I-95, I-476 kinda.

The Commodore Barry Bridge carries about 35,000 AADT on 5 lanes, the middle lane reversible with a Zipper barrier.  Really no need for any more capacity for far into the future.
http://www.roadstothefuture.com
http://www.capital-beltway.com

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

Tonytone



Well from what AA Roads 476 page. This information says that a 6 lane highway will be done by 2021


iPhone
Promoting Cities since 1998!

PHLBOS

Quote from: Tonytone on September 13, 2018, 12:43:46 AM


Well from what AA Roads 476 page. This information says that a 6 lane highway will be done by 2021
Good to know, but that's the Northeast Extension part of I-476 that's being widened not the Blue Route (free) portion.  To borrow from the Frontier Airlines slogan; that's a whole different animal.
GPS does NOT equal GOD

Roadsguy

PennDOT clearly designed the southern half of the Blue Route for a future widening into the median, though I don't think there have been any serious talks to actually do it yet.
Mileage-based exit numbering implies the existence of mileage-cringe exit numbering.



Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.