I-95/Penna Turnpike Interchange

[webny99]

What's clear is that Pennsylvania loved constructing non-connections, aka "Breezewoods", when building the Turnpike.

That makes it sound like action was involved.  When in fact it was -lack of action-.

I didn't think it was very bold to assume deliberate action was involved. Wrong assumption, apparently.

They didn't add new interchanges.  Take I-81 and I-76.  The interchange between US 11 and I-76 was always there.  When I-81 came in, PennDOT built an interchange with US 11.  No new interchange was added to the Turnpike.

So I guess the real question is what would have happened if I-81 crossed the Turnpike in the middle of nowhere, far removed from an existing interchange. Eventually, a connection would have to be built, and chances are it would have been a proper connection.

[briantroutman]

The topic of federal funding of Interstate/turnpike connections came up a few months ago in the Breezewood thread, but that discussion became such a scheiß-fest that I didn't desire to hang around.

But yes, as has been mentioned upthread, there was a restriction written into the Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1956 that prevented the use of federal funds on direct interchanges with toll roads. States could use their own funds, but considering that every dollar that a state spent on an unapproved Interstate project was a lost opportunity to have that dollar matched nine times over by the federal government on an approved project, they had a major disincentive to do so–particularly in an era when the loudest public outcry (excluding the freeway resistance in urban cores) was to simply get more Interstate mileage open to traffic as quickly as possible.

The exception to the above prohibition, listed under Section 129(d) of the 1956 Act, was that a state could use the 90% federal funds to build a direct to a connection to a toll road if (and only if) the state agreed to remove tolls from the toll road when existing bond obligations had been retired. And so the Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission, not wishing to cease toll collection, did not exercise this option for I-70 at Breezewood, I-95 in Bristol, or anywhere else. The scenario is explained in this article by the FHWA.

In the other thread, this point–and even the truthfulness of the FHWA article–was challenged: If that was true, how did a number of other states build direct connections?

Wanting to know the answer myself, I wrote to Richard Weingroff, the FHWA employee who authored the above article. To my surprise, I got a detailed answer from him right away (on a weekend, no less). Here's an excerpt from that email:

We entered into Section 129(d) agreements with nine toll authorities for approaches to toll roads involving captive approaches:

Calumet Skyway (1961)
Kansas Turnpike (1974/1988)
Massachusetts Turnpike (1964)
Ohio Turnpike (1964)
Tri-State Tollway (date unknown)
Indiana Toll Road (1961/62/63)
Maine Turnpike (1964 & 1965)
Richmond-Petersburg Turnpike (1964/1971)*
I-65 Louisville-Elizabethtown, KY (1961*)

(I won't swear that there aren't others, but I think that list is correct.)

Some of those facilities did remove tolls (asterisks).  However, when the time came to remove tolls, the other toll authorities changed their minds.  They went to their congressional delegation to secure legislation allowing continuation of the tolls.  Congress included exceptions in periodic bills reauthorizing the Federal-aid highway program.  As a result, none of the other facilities is required to cease toll collection.

In other words, the facilities listed above (without asterisks) took federal funds with the promise that they'd cease collecting tolls under the terms of the agreement, but when "toll-free"  day finally drew near, they reneged on their pledges. And as you can see, that list includes most long-distance toll roads in E-ZPass Land with the notable exceptions of Pennsylvania, New York, and New Jersey.

Where PA, NY, and NJ have built direct Interstate connections to their toll roads, it was either by self-funding (during the years of original Interstate construction) or through one-off funding appropriations for individual projects. For example, the PA Turnpike's direct connection to I-79 was given approximately 45% federal funding with the remaining 55% split between the PTC and PennDOT (according to the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette).

And getting back to the question as to when this prohibition in the 1956 Act was repealed or rescinded, from what I've read, it appears that it wasn't. The prohibition merely became irrelevant since projects are no longer being funded under the terms of the 1956 Act (and therefore, the 1956 Act's restrictions don't apply). New projects receive funding through one-off authorizations in new legislation, with the federal share determined by that new legislation–likely much less than the 1956 Act's generous 90/10 split, as the 45/55 of the I-79 interchange project mentioned above suggests.

So I guess the real question is what would have happened if I-81 crossed the Turnpike in the middle of nowhere, far removed from an existing interchange. Eventually, a connection would have to be built, and chances are it would have been a proper connection.

No, as far as the federal government is concerned, nothing would have changed. The 90% federal funds could not be used, even if that meant there would be no connection whatsoever. The difference is this: If I-81 traffic had absolutely no way to access the Turnpike, the Turnpike would lose all of that revenue-generating traffic that otherwise would have entered there, so the PTC would be in a better fiscal position to spend its own funds to build an interchange. The interchange would possibly have paid for itself through increased toll revenue.

But since the PTC had already self-funded an interchange with US 11 in 1940–which eventually afforded access to I-81 as well, even if less than optimally–the hypothetical cost/benefit analysis above didn't exist. Perhaps traffic volumes (and therefore toll revenue) might have increased very very slightly if I-81 access was more convenient, but it certainly wouldn't recover a meaningful portion of the construction cost.

[NJRoadfan]

NJ's connection between toll roads and interstates received special funding arrangements too. The "missing moves" project at I-78 and the Garden State Parkway received TEA-21 funding even though it clearly connected a toll road to a free interstate.

[Beltway]

That is very interesting, so that explains how different states addressed the connection of Interstates to turnpikes.  Some followed the 1956 system for federal aid, some gamed the system, and some built the connections without federal funds or perhaps with other lower level funds such as 50:50 primary funding.

As far as when the 1956 funding system no longer was relevant to this issue, that was probably upon the enactment of the federal transportation bill ISTEA of 1991.

[vdeane]

So I guess the real question is what would have happened if I-81 crossed the Turnpike in the middle of nowhere, far removed from an existing interchange. Eventually, a connection would have to be built, and chances are it would have been a proper connection.

It would probably be similar to I-95, with a non-connection for a long time, with eventual plans to build a double trumpet.  Except unlike I-95, presumably it would have been built, since I-95's plans were restarted from scratch when it was rerouted.

[Beltway]

So I guess the real question is what would have happened if I-81 crossed the Turnpike in the middle of nowhere, far removed from an existing interchange. Eventually, a connection would have to be built, and chances are it would have been a proper connection.

It would probably be similar to I-95, with a non-connection for a long time, with eventual plans to build a double trumpet.  Except unlike I-95, presumably it would have been built, since I-95's plans were restarted from scratch when it was rerouted.

There is ample space there today, I could come up with 2 or 3 different designs to connect I-81 to the turnpike.

https://www.google.com/maps/@40.2281227,-77.1411967,2786m/data=!3m1!1e3

[Rothman]

I'd like to see those.  I also wonder if it would affect the cloverleaf, though, given how close the ramps would probably be and the notorious truck traffic.

[Beltway]

I'd like to see those.  I also wonder if it would affect the cloverleaf, though, given how close the ramps would probably be and the notorious truck traffic.

It would connect to I-81 2,000 to 4,000 feet south of the turnpike.

[J N Winkler]

Has the Interstate Construction fund been wound down?  I don't remember reading anything to that effect, though it has become an irrelevance for nearly all Interstate construction because the eligible unbuilt Interstate mileage is now very small.

Another example of a state obtaining an exception to Interstate funding arrangements include I-287 in New Jersey, which was built in the 1980's with 100% (not 90%) federal funding.

[vdeane]

So I guess the real question is what would have happened if I-81 crossed the Turnpike in the middle of nowhere, far removed from an existing interchange. Eventually, a connection would have to be built, and chances are it would have been a proper connection.

It would probably be similar to I-95, with a non-connection for a long time, with eventual plans to build a double trumpet.  Except unlike I-95, presumably it would have been built, since I-95's plans were restarted from scratch when it was rerouted.

There is ample space there today, I could come up with 2 or 3 different designs to connect I-81 to the turnpike.

https://www.google.com/maps/@40.2281227,-77.1411967,2786m/data=!3m1!1e3

I was speaking to webny99's hypothetical, not to today.  But as we now seem to be discussing that, it's worth noting that double trumpets will be the most efficient design as long as cash is still used on the PA Turnpike ticket system.  Plus there's a large industrial building to work around.

[webny99]

Was the PA Turnpike/US 11interchange always a double-trumpet, or was the junction with US 11 at-grade prior to I-81's construction?

The latter seems plausible, since there wouldn't have been a need for a full trumpet on US 11 (a surface street) prior to its function as a connector to I-81.

[J N Winkler]

Was the PA Turnpike/US 11interchange always a double-trumpet, or was the junction with US 11 at-grade prior to I-81's construction?

The latter seems plausible, since there wouldn't have been a need for a full trumpet on US 11 (a surface street) prior to its function as a connector to I-81.

I suspect the eastern terminus of the original Irwin-Carlisle length of the Turnpike was at US 11.  HistoricAerials.com shows a jump from a flat (but very skewed) tee intersection in the 1952 map (same as that shown in the 1944 map) to the present double-trumpet configuration in the 1958 map.

[briantroutman]

Was the PA Turnpike/US 11interchange always a double-trumpet, or was the junction with US 11 at-grade prior to I-81's construction?

I suspect the eastern terminus of the original Irwin-Carlisle length of the Turnpike was at US 11.

This topic was the subject of a thread I began a few years ago regarding the PA Turnpike's original termini.

Yes, US 11 was the original eastern terminus, and this interchange was then known as Middlesex since there was a separate Carlisle interchange (since removed) that served the borough directly. Cave Hill Drive in Carlisle and the nearby oblong roundabout are the remnants of that interchange still visible today.

But getting back to US 11: The overpass that until recently carried the Turnpike mainline across US 11 dated from 1940. The PTC already had plans for the extension to Philadelphia, so the overpass was built wide enough to accommodate four lanes, but it carried a single eastbound lane (perhaps two with lane drop in progress) between 1940 and 1950 in its original configuration. It was used to connect the Turnpike eastbound to US 11 northbound, which was essentially the through movement for the overall Pittsburgh-to-Harrisburg route.

When PTC started work on the Philadelphia Extension after WWII, a new trumpet was built along the Turnpike mainline just west of the US 11 overpass, and it was connected to a second new trumpet on US 11 just north of the overpass. Then once the new twin trumpets were open to traffic, the original ramps connecting the mainline's terminal end to US 11 were removed, and the overpass was repurposed for through traffic to/from the Philadelphia Extension.

The western end has a different story. In the original 1940 configuration, all four lanes of the Turnpike's mainline went straight into the Irwin toll plaza, which was in the same location as it is today. This is apparent as you drive on the Turnpike mainline westbound there: It looks like you're heading straight toward the toll plaza, but the through lanes bank rather sharply to the right just prior.

When the PTC expanded westward, a new trumpet was built on the mainline just before the terminus (like at Carlisle), but that trumpet was used to connect to the existing 1940 trumpet on US 30, and new four-lane overpass was constructed to carry the extended mainline across US 30. I can't remember where I found it, but somewhere, I stumbled upon this terrific aerial photo showing the Irwin interchange as it was being reconstructed. You can easily see the original through movement (going straight into the toll plaza near the center of the photo) as well as the new through movement (curving to the north–toward the left in this photo).

[cpzilliacus]

There is ample space there today, I could come up with 2 or 3 different designs to connect I-81 to the turnpike.

https://www.google.com/maps/@40.2281227,-77.1411967,2786m/data=!3m1!1e3

I do not  like  the non-connection at Carlisle any better than the one at Breezewood, but  given that PTC has officially  and on-the-record said they are converting to all-electronic tolling in the fairly near future for the entire network, it would seem that engineering and designing a conventional interchange (with no double trumpets) would be easier and presumably less expensive. 

[Beltway]

There is ample space there today, I could come up with 2 or 3 different designs to connect I-81 to the turnpike.

I do not  like  the non-connection at Carlisle any better than the one at Breezewood, but  given that PTC has officially  and on-the-record said they are converting to all-electronic tolling in the fairly near future for the entire network, it would seem that engineering and designing a conventional interchange (with no double trumpets) would be easier and presumably less expensive. 

Ample space for a conventional interchange where I-76 crosses I-81, except for the southeast quadrant with the large commercial building and complex very close to the highways.

[seicer]

How was the Carlisle interchange handled? It's not a trumpet - but a...? (https://historicaerials.com/location/40.21863444796521/-77.19041347503662/T1952/15)

[roadman65]

It was the 1940 terminus until it was extended eastward.  Also Carlisle had another interchange as that one was called the New Middlesex Interchange. 

But yeah, it looked like a directional interchange for the end of the freeway.

[briantroutman]

How was the Carlisle interchange handled? It's not a trumpet - but a...?

Jeff Kitsko has a diagram of the interchange on his site (also covered earlier in the thread I linked above). Unfortunately the scan is pretty low-res, but you should get the idea.

This Interchange is located north and adjacent to the historic town of Carlisle which in reality is the gateway to the west for traffic from all points east, as shown above.  The 4-lane ticket office is located directly across the Turnpike proper, as is the ticket office at Irwin.  Traffic desiring to proceed westward from this Interchange will follow the directional arrows as noted.  (MILE 157)

Middlesex didn't have a toll plaza (i.e. "ticket office" ), so the PTC had constructed a barrier toll at Carlisle to service both interchanges.

I remember reading a story in Dan Cupper's PA Turnpike book about a motorist in 1940 who entered at the Middlesex entrance ramp without realizing that he had entered a toll road. When he got to the Carlisle toll plaza, he apparently argued with the toll taker and threatened to sue the PTC, but a state trooper ordered him to "..pay the dime toll and leave via the Carlisle exit ramp."

So as that story would seem to confirm, the long off-ramp loop (westbound-to-Carlisle) was situated so that it would be impossible to drive from Middlesex to Carlisle without paying a toll–which, apparently, was 10¢. But I have to wonder: How many people would use the Turnpike to get from Middlesex to Carlisle? And if Middlesex to Carlisle was 10¢, would the toll taker give you a different ticket (with a 10¢ price difference) based on where you entered? Likewise for eastbound exiting traffic–would they charge a different toll depending on whether you took the Carlisle exit ramp or continued on to US 11? If so, I suppose they'd have needed to channelize the lanes on the east side of toll plaza to separate Carlisle and Middlesex traffic.

[PHLBOS]

Update & an effort to steer the focus of this thread back to the project at-hand:

Drove round-trip from Philly to TTN for a job-related task yesterday (July 5) and noticed the that I-95 to I-295 conversion along the PA stretch north of the Turnpike interchange is essentially complete.  All the interchange numbers have changed (new numerals plates placed on existing exit tabs in most instances) and all of the old 2000-era OLD EXIT XX signs have been replaced with brand-new ones bearing the old I-95 mile-marker numbers.  The I-295 reassurance markers are large bbubble-like shields with large Series C numerals.

All of the mile markers along the PA stretch have changed to the new I-295 ones as well although the shield & numeral design (bubble-shields with elongated Series D numerals) doesn't look as nice IMHO as the ones along the NJ stretch (standard 3-digit shield with Series C numerals).

The travel-time on the VMS' along the Delaware Expressway (I-95/295) in PA now display the new highway designations where applicable.  Example: one VMS along northbound I-95 lists the travel time to the US 1 interchange (new Exit 5/old Exit 46) as US 1 VIA I-295 EB.  Conversely another VMS along the southbound Delaware Expressway (I-295 westbound) lists a travel time to the PA 63 (Exit 35 off I-95) as PA 63 VIA I-95 SB.

The NJ stretch up to Scotch Road (where I existed, Exit 73/Old Exit 3) I didn't see any changes beyond the Scudder Falls Bridge project compared to when I was last there a month ago.  There are still some remaining I-95 mile markers and even one northbound reassurance marker still present.  One smaller supplemental sign for Trenton-Mercer Airport along I-295 northbound/former I-95 southbound) still displays an EXIT 2 tab.

[Beltway]

The travel-time on the VMS' along the Delaware Expressway (I-95/295) in PA now display the new highway designations where applicable.  Example: one VMS along northbound I-95 lists the travel time to the US 1 interchange (new Exit 5/old Exit 46) as US 1 VIA I-295 EB.  Conversely another VMS along the southbound Delaware Expressway (I-295 westbound) lists a travel time to the PA 63 (Exit 35 off I-95) as PA 63 VIA I-95 SB.

Per Wikipedia --
Interstate 95 (I-95) is an Interstate highway running from Miami, Florida, north to Houlton, Maine.  In the U.S. state of Pennsylvania, the route is known by many as the Delaware Expressway, but is officially named the Vietnam Veterans Memorial Highway.
....

Is it true that Delaware Expressway is not the official name?

[akotchi]

There is still one I-95 reassurance marker northbound up by Exit 68.  There are also a handful of old designations throughout the New Jersey section, mostly old exit numbers on specific service signs.  There is a JCT/95 assembly still up on Princeton Pike (right outside my office).

It also does not appear that the Delaware River Joint Toll Bridge Commission replaced all of the I-95 trailblazing outside the Scudder Falls Bridge work area.  They did get the big stuff at the Route 29 interchange.

I was also on the PA Turnpike on Wednesday, and some signing eastbound approaching U.S. 1 has been changed to reflect access to I-95 South and I-295 East from that exit.
One sign was covered, presumably for I-95 north after the ramps open.  Photos this weekend, since it was dark when I first saw them.

[Roadsguy]

Is the transition from 95 to 295 at the interchange site signed at all, or do you just suddenly find yourself on 295? Is the transition point just the bridge over the Turnpike?

[jeffandnicole]

Is the transition from 95 to 295 at the interchange site signed at all, or do you just suddenly find yourself on 295? Is the transition point just the bridge over the Turnpike?

The transition point will be the takeoff/touchdown point of the ramps to/from the PA Turnpike. 

They probably should have temporary signage there until the ramps open.

[Roadsguy]

Is the transition from 95 to 295 at the interchange site signed at all, or do you just suddenly find yourself on 295? Is the transition point just the bridge over the Turnpike?

The transition point will be the takeoff/touchdown point of the ramps to/from the PA Turnpike. 

They probably should have temporary signage there until the ramps open.

I know where it will be, but I was wondering how it's signed now while it's not yet open.

[PHLBOS]

Per Wikipedia --
Interstate 95 (I-95) is an Interstate highway running from Miami, Florida, north to Houlton, Maine.  In the U.S. state of Pennsylvania, the route is known by many as the Delaware Expressway, but is officially named the Vietnam Veterans Memorial Highway.
....

Is it true that Delaware Expressway is not the official name?

Given that portions of I-95 in PA existed before & during the Vietnam War; it probably was a more official/former name than the Blue Route moniker is for I-476 (which is officially named Veterans Memorial Highway).  Many of the now-gone original BGS' at the I-95 ramp entrances in Northeast Philadelphia included Delaware Expwy button-copy text on the signage.  Scroll down for pics of the old signage.

Is the transition from 95 to 295 at the interchange site signed at all, or do you just suddenly find yourself on 295? Is the transition point just the bridge over the Turnpike?

At present, there's no signage alerting one heading along the northbound Delaware Expressway that I-95 north becomes I-295 east.  Just beyond the construction zone, there is a portable VMS that alerts of the subsequent exit number changes; I believe the message reads I-95 EXIT CHANGES AHEAD.

Southbound approaching the new fly-over ramp to the left (still under construction); there is a propped-up BGS the reads END 295 BEGIN 95 that looks similar to the one that used to be at the US 1 interchange in NJ; it's placed further off to the left (obviously such is not in its final/permanent location).  There are some covered-up overhead pull-through BGS' w/downward arrows that likely read 95 SOUTH Philadelphia.  While those particular BGS' could be uncovered; the switching around of the through lanes during construction phases makes such unwise.