I-283/PA-283

[TMETSJETSYT]

Hi, so I know that I-283 is a short highway that ends at a state highway named PA-283, which I don't get why it ends. One reason I can assume is that I-283 is a north/south interstate (for the like mile length that it is), and PA-283 is east/west route, but why couldn't they just make it an east/west route because it only is north/south for like a mile. Another reason why this could be is because PA_283 is not up to interstate standards, which is probably the more likely story. Anyways, if anyone has the correct answer to this, that would be great. Thanks.

[Ted$8roadFan]

Knowing Pennsylvania, I would guess that PA-283, while a freeway, is likely not up to interstate standards, and I'm not sure anyone has an interest in making it an interstate.

[MATraveler128]

Even if it were, I doubt PennDOT would want to make it an Interstate. Lancaster didn't have the population it has now, so there wasn't really a thought to do it. Besides, it would be an odd 3di, like I-383.

[jemacedo9]

I-283 doesn't end at PA 283; it ends at the PA Turnpike/I-76.

If PA 283 is not up to interstate standards, most of it is pretty close, excluding the I-283/PA 283 interchange and the portion near Lancaster, which has no left shoulder. 

PA 283 carries a SR designation of SR 0300 to avoid duplication.

[The Ghostbuster]

I think PA 283 should have been a relocation of PA (old US) 230. 230 could have followed its present alignment to Eisenhower Blvd., headed north on Eisenhower, and then headed east on present-day 283 to the US 30 freeway in Lancaster. Existing 230 could have become a three-digit state highway with a number that currently is not in use, such as PA 330.

[cockroachking]

I think PA 283 should have been a relocation of PA (old US) 230. 230 could have followed its present alignment to Eisenhower Blvd., headed north on Eisenhower, and then headed east on present-day 283 to the US 30 freeway in Lancaster. Existing 230 could have become a three-digit state highway with a number that currently is not in use, such as PA 330.

PA-283 east of the current PA-230 interchange in Mt. Joy used to be US-230, hence why that section is substandard.

[sbeaver44]

And yet that doesn't stop PennDOT from signing all of 283 except the last 2 miles or so approaching Lancaster at 65.  Yet 30 between York and Lancaster is always 55.

[sbeaver44]

I wish the PA 283/I-283 interchange would be reconfigured so that Harrisburg-to-Lancaster and vice versa were the natural through movements.  I know PennDOT already did some work.

I-283 SB to PA 283 EB is a miserable slog in the morning commute, because the ramp backs up sometimes almost back to PA 441.  PennDOT tried to fix this by making PA 283 WB to I-283 SB/To I-76 a left turn, which eliminated the weaving on I-283 SB.  But there is still the merging onto PA 283 EB.  They should have made one lane EB from Eisenhower Blvd instead of 2, and then had the ramp from I-283 form the second lane.  They did this for PA 283 WB to I-283 NB and I think it was a good change.

Thankfully most mornings I'm coming off the Turnpike bridge, to PA 283 EB, which is very easy.  And the PA 283 WB to Turnpike movement is fine too.  I haven't ever had to wait at the left turn light for more than a cycle.

At the other end of I-283, I really hate the I-283 NB to I-83 SB double merge.  I hope they fix this with all the upcoming I-83 projects.  If I am on I-83 SB/US 322 EB coming from I-81, US 22, or Union Deposit Rd, I usually take the US 322 EB exit, then take that road's I-83 SB/Paxton St exit, and merge back onto I-83 SB at Paxton St/Exit 45.

[TMETSJETSYT]

Hi again, I would like to see PA-283 as an interstate because the interstate shield would definitely attract more attention to Lancaster, PA and points south and in between. I also think it is work breaking the law for I-283 between PA Tpke and Lancaster because it would connect 2 cities (Harrisburg and Lancaster) that need to be connected by an interstate, and I-83 is the answer.

[webny99]

I also think it is work breaking the law for I-283

Yes, it would be work for someone to break the law for I-283.. 

[Mapmikey]

Sequence of events:

US 230 bypass of Lancaster built about 1953.  The eastern end was partly Super-2 and west of PA 72 there were multiple at-grade intersections, which were still there in 1969.

In 1958, Pennsylvania proposes I-283 to run as it does now, plus north all the way to I-81 (thus I-83 was to end at I-283).  AASHO thinks I-283 was supposed to be part of I-81 north out of Harrisburg but in clearing up the confusion it is decided to end I-283 at I-83 which would continue north to I-81.

In 1960, Pennsylvania removes US 230 Bypass from I-83.

In 1965, US 230 is decommissioned entirely.  The Lancaster Bypass portion is designated PA 230 along with what is still PA 230.  When US 30's freeway was connected to it, PA 230 was truncated to that location.

In 1969 or so, the current-PA 283 freeway was built westward from PA 230 near Mt Joy.  The 1970 Official shows the freeway open from PA 230 Mt Joy to PA 743 Elizabethtown but does not label it as anything. 

In 1971 or 1972, the rest of the PA 283 freeway is built.  1972 county maps show the whole thing from Lancaster to I-283 labeled as PA 283.

[Alps]

I would sign the east-west highway as 300. Why not?

[74/171FAN]

I would sign the east-west highway as 300. Why not?

That is my position for all of the duplicate PA routes.  (PA 197 for the northern PA 97, PA 699 for PA 99, PA 400 for PA 380, PA 886 for PA 86 (which I think should be decommissioned))

[TMETSJETSYT]

Don't forget about the old PA-NY 17 and the PA-17 duplication roads.

[74/171FAN]

Don't forget about the old PA-NY 17 and the PA-17 duplication roads.

That does not count as the section of NY 17 that enters PA is still maintained by NYSDOT.

[TMETSJETSYT]

Talking about on the PA line near Erie. Its technically I-86 now, but the old 17 mileposts still remain.

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.130223,-79.7617902,3a,15y,318.73h,84.62t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s-BJvh4VaL8xNhS8LFPiknA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?authuser=1

[74/171FAN]

The 17 reference there is an old NYSDOT Reference Marker that has nothing to do with PA at all.

[epzik8]

Hi again, I would like to see PA-283 as an interstate because the interstate shield would definitely attract more attention to Lancaster, PA and points south and in between. I also think it is work breaking the law for I-283 between PA Tpke and Lancaster because it would connect 2 cities (Harrisburg and Lancaster) that need to be connected by an interstate, and I-83 is the answer.

Even if it's not an interstate, Harrisburg and Lancaster have a freeway connection regardless. Plus, on 83 nominally northbound approaching the Eisenhower, Lancaster is listed two rows below an I-283 shield, without a PA 283 shield, meaning drivers are likely to simply know "283 to Lancaster" disregarding the fact 283 is two separate highways.

[TMETSJETSYT]

The 17 reference there is an old NYSDOT Reference Marker that has nothing to do with PA at all.

Ohhh ok I get that.

[Henry]

Hi again, I would like to see PA-283 as an interstate because the interstate shield would definitely attract more attention to Lancaster, PA and points south and in between. I also think it is work breaking the law for I-283 between PA Tpke and Lancaster because it would connect 2 cities (Harrisburg and Lancaster) that need to be connected by an interstate, and I-83 is the answer.

Even if it's not an interstate, Harrisburg and Lancaster have a freeway connection regardless. Plus, on 83 nominally northbound approaching the Eisenhower, Lancaster is listed two rows below an I-283 shield, without a PA 283 shield, meaning drivers are likely to simply know "283 to Lancaster" disregarding the fact 283 is two separate highways.

I say keep I-283 and PA 283 as they are. Besides, when you go past Lancaster, US 30 downgrades to a surface highway anyway. Then after that, it doesn't become a freeway again until Coatesville.