I-95/Penna Turnpike Interchange

[jwolfer]

the Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission has a shitload of other expensive and time-consuming things to do as well, and nearly twice as many miles of highway to do them on as The Almighty New Jersey Turnpike Authority (*genuflect*) does.

Considering New Jersey has probably 400% more traffic on the Turnpike versus Pennsylvania's, the NJTA does a damn good job to ensure millions of people can be moved efficiently.

EDIT: And are you seriously comparing Pittsburgh to Philadelphia or New York City's metro area?   

Pennsylvania has all these projects and its taking them over a decade to build one interchange.. I appreciate PA is a much bigger state and NJ really should have built the Somerset freeway. ( i have no sympathy for towns like Hopewell and Princeton dealing with horrible traffic and trucks on roads like 206)

But from what I understand the PA turnpike i95 interchange was agreed upon over 30 years ago as the solution. Should have been finished years ago

[jwolfer]

Once the interchange is completed, will there be a much larger volume using i95 thru Philadelphia? The NJTP is a more direct route so I know GPS, waze etc will recommend staying on Turnpike. And should NJ do like Maryland on the tunnel thruway make the southern NJTP i695 or 895 to make it part of the 95 family.

[wanderer2575]

Look at I-94 in IL and WI between Chicago and Milwaukee.  You travel North on Westbound I-94 to get to Milwaukee and travel South on Eastbound I-94 to get to Chicago for almost 80 miles.  They look at it as I-94 going between rural Montana to Port Huron, MI and not the regional heading between Chicago and Milwaukee which is a fraction of the whole routing.  Why does Michigan change I-69 from N-S to E-W  between Lansing and Port Huron for a shorter change in direction then that of I-94's N-S change in IL and WI, is a bigger mystery. 

Because unlike the I-94 example you cited, I-69 ends in Port Huron and does not make another turn to resume a N-S alignment.

[cl94]

Look at I-94 in IL and WI between Chicago and Milwaukee.  You travel North on Westbound I-94 to get to Milwaukee and travel South on Eastbound I-94 to get to Chicago for almost 80 miles.  They look at it as I-94 going between rural Montana to Port Huron, MI and not the regional heading between Chicago and Milwaukee which is a fraction of the whole routing.  Why does Michigan change I-69 from N-S to E-W  between Lansing and Port Huron for a shorter change in direction then that of I-94's N-S change in IL and WI, is a bigger mystery. 

Because unlike the I-94 example you cited, I-69 ends in Port Huron and does not make another turn to resume a N-S alignment.

When/if I-69 ever gets finished, it'll have a couple other east-west sections

[wanderer2575]

Look at I-94 in IL and WI between Chicago and Milwaukee.  You travel North on Westbound I-94 to get to Milwaukee and travel South on Eastbound I-94 to get to Chicago for almost 80 miles.  They look at it as I-94 going between rural Montana to Port Huron, MI and not the regional heading between Chicago and Milwaukee which is a fraction of the whole routing.  Why does Michigan change I-69 from N-S to E-W  between Lansing and Port Huron for a shorter change in direction then that of I-94's N-S change in IL and WI, is a bigger mystery. 

Because unlike the I-94 example you cited, I-69 ends in Port Huron and does not make another turn to resume a N-S alignment.

When/if I-69 ever gets finished, it'll have a couple other east-west sections

I don't see the relevancy.  Yes, when finished I-69 will have other E-W sections, but they will all be between N-S sections so those sections as a whole are N-S.  Whereas the E-W section between Lansing and Port Huron is the end of the road.

[AsphaltPlanet]

Are there any updated photos of this interchange anywhere online?

[vdeane]

...you seem to be a little short-sighted on the construction projects of the PA Turnpike.  They have about a dozen projects going on at this very moment.  And there are always projects going on...some needed...some seemingly done just to keep people working (I point out the multiple median barriers that have been built over the years as some very wasteful spending).  Regardless if the project is an underused highway near Pittsburgh or pavement repair on the NE Extension, that's all PA Turnpike revenue that's being spent.

And yes, the PA Turnpike has dragged their feet.  They stated the interchange would be built by now.

First of all, I know exactly what's going on with construction on the Pennsylvania Turnpike: they're reconstructing, widening and modernizing all 360 goddamn miles of it, plus another 30 miles of the Northeast Extension. And it's necessary because much of the highway is 75 goddamn years old, and the parts that aren't have too much goddamn traffic to only have four lanes now. Gee, no wonder the I-95 interchange is taking longer than you'd prefer: the Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission has a shitload of other expensive and time-consuming things to do as well, and nearly twice as many miles of highway to do them on as The Almighty New Jersey Turnpike Authority (*genuflect*) does.



Holy shit, look at all that work being done and resources being spread out! Reconstruction reconstruction reconstruction bridge replacement reconstruction reconstruction reconstruction tunnel replacement reconstruction reconstruction reconstruction bridge replacement reconstruction reconstruction reconstruction new interchange reconstruction reconstruction reconstruction...

Just...wow.

I would go so far as to say that that PTC should not have been allowed to construct so much as a millimeter of expressways in Pittsburgh before this interchange is fully completed.

You mean the 576 and 43 boondoggles?

Never mind that a) neither highway connects to Interstates on both ends yet, thereby reducing their use until the connections are made; b) the commercial real estate market in the area of Pittsburgh International Airport has become hot ever since the first tiny leg of the South Beltway opened, and in spite of the airport being de-hubbed, no less; c) I-376 needs all the traffic relief it can get, or d) there's a shitload of abandoned brownfields up and down the Monongahela River Valley that haven't been redeveloped because the road infrastructure in the area is piss-poor and can't even handle large trucks.

Seriously, has anybody bitching about any of this shit ever even been to the Monongahela River Valley? It's connected by a bunch of fucking two-lane back roads. And east/west mobility across the valley between Pittsburgh and I-70 is especially bad. Canonsburg and McKeesport are 18 miles apart as the crow flies, but it's literally impossible to get from one to the other in less than 45 minutes. Half the time you need an hour or more. It's a complete pain in the ass to get anywhere else from the Monongahela River Valley, or to there from anywhere else, and there's literally no chance of any substantial reinvestment in the valley without serious upgrades to the road infrastructure there.

So go ahead and throw an entire quadrant of the Pittsburgh area under the bus because you're pissed off that a fucking interchange at the other end of the state isn't being built fast enough for your taste. No, nothing petty about that at all.

Got a link to wherever the PTC traffic counts would be?  I want to verify just how much "too much goddam traffic" is.

And why should those Pittsburgh freeways be the PTC's problem in the first place?  They aren't even logically a part of PTC's network!  Make PennDOT build them.

Interchanges don't take much time, at least not if you're not dragging your feet on it.  This should have been built when I-95 was first constructed.  It is criminal that it wasn't built within 10 years of the decision to move I-95.  If I were the FHWA, I would have revoked PA's highway money at that point until the interchange got built.  ALL of it.  I bet you would have seen this done decades ago had that happened.  At the rate they're going, they'll have that new toll plaza built just in time to rip it up again for AET.

[Duke87]

Northbound I-25 runs southeast for about 55 miles in New Mexico, and nobody has their panties in a wad over it. so what's the big deal if northbound I-295 is going to run southwest for a brief time in New Jersey?

being in the Princeton area and seeing signs for "I-295 North - Philadelphia" would be completely absurd.

Indeed, the direction the road heads at any given point is not what's important for the signed direction, it's the overall direction and the destination. For the stretch that I-25 heads off-compass, there isn't much there. From Santa Fe the control city on I-25 north is Las Vegas, which is as the crow flies close to due east of Santa Fe. Meanwhile any traffic heading to southerly destinations on I-25 north is likely to follow US 285, which is signed as south. The situation is managed reasonably without changing the signed directions on I-25

With I-295, the control point of Philadelphia is quite south of Trenton. Having the road signed as north to it is problematic not because I-295 is physically heading south, but because the destination is south of the signs for it.

[Zeffy]

Got a link to wherever the PTC traffic counts would be?  I want to verify just how much "too much goddam traffic" is.

I found these:
http://www.dot.state.pa.us/Internet/Bureaus/pdPlanRes.nsf/infoBPRPermanentTrafficCountSiteLocationCountyMap
http://www.dot.state.pa.us/Internet/Bureaus/pdPlanRes.nsf/infoBPRPermanentTrafficCountSiteLocationMapLL

[ixnay]

Got a link to wherever the PTC traffic counts would be?  I want to verify just how much "too much goddam traffic" is.

I found these:
http://www.dot.state.pa.us/Internet/Bureaus/pdPlanRes.nsf/infoBPRPermanentTrafficCountSiteLocationCountyMap
http://www.dot.state.pa.us/Internet/Bureaus/pdPlanRes.nsf/infoBPRPermanentTrafficCountSiteLocationMapLL

There's also this...

http://www.penndot.gov/ProjectAndPrograms/Planning/Maps/Pages/Traffic-Volume.aspx#.ViRKwjZdEpF

(the traffic stats are from 2013 but fwiw...)

ixnay

[odditude]

Once the interchange is completed, will there be a much larger volume using i95 thru Philadelphia?

unlikely, even if there wasn't 8 miles of construction from Center City to the Bucks county line. however, it will make make life much easier for truck traffic from Philadelphia heading north and vice-versa.

And should NJ do like Maryland on the tunnel thruway make the southern NJTP i695 or 895 to make it part of the 95 family.

i'd consider that even less likely than the ACE being redesignated.

[SignBridge]

I think adding an x95 number to the south end of the NJT will just create more confusion. I never liked the idea of so many confusing x numbers of this sort. The NJT logo is well known and can stand on its own. No need to further complicate things.

[jeffandnicole]

Once the interchange is completed, will there be a much larger volume using i95 thru Philadelphia?

unlikely, even if there wasn't 8 miles of construction from Center City to the Bucks county line. however, it will make make life much easier for truck traffic from Philadelphia heading north and vice-versa.

Personally, I think there will be a significant increase on traffic. Traffic going South on the NJ Turnpike looks for those I-95 markers, and will simply follow them right into Philly.

Northbound, I'm not sure. If the signage in Delaware stays the same, traffic will probably continue to use 295 to the NJ Turnpike.

A big wildcard is the traffic between Wilmington & Philly. Many know they have to cross into NJ and get to the Turnpike via local roads if they want to go North towards NYC. Much of that traffic would probably use the new 95 connection. The biggest issue is the most significant congestion issues can be found on 95 North of Philly.

[bzakharin]

Personally, I think there will be a significant increase on traffic. Traffic going South on the NJ Turnpike looks for those I-95 markers, and will simply follow them right into Philly.

Northbound, I'm not sure. If the signage in Delaware stays the same, traffic will probably continue to use 295 to the NJ Turnpike.

If all they're doing is looking for I-95 markers, why are they taking 295 to the Turnpike Northbound today? Because it says "NY/NJ" on the sign? Then how will that be different from following the Turnpike South because it says "Wilmington" instead of exiting to where it says "Philadelphia"? Actually, I wonder if the Pull-Through at exit 6 southbound will add more control cities, like Baltimore, to further discourage exiting for I-95.

[vdeane]

I FINALLY found the Turnpike traffic counts.  Apparently PA's "too much goddam traffic" is NY's "you'd be laughed out of the state for even thinking of widening the road" (though I do grant that conditions aren't 1:1... NY is much flatter than PA and the Turnpike truck percentages are high by NY standards).

[Mr_Northside]

And why should those Pittsburgh freeways be the PTC's problem in the first place?  They aren't even logically a part of PTC's network!  Make PennDOT build them.

Cause due to PA Act 61 of 1985 and Act 26 of 1991, it became the law.

[CentralPAGal]

The Somerset Freeway should have been built when I-95 was first constructed.  It is criminal that it wasn't built within 10 years of the rest of I-95.  If I were the FHWA, I would have revoked NJ's highway money at that point until the freeway got built.  ALL of it.

FTFY

[Zeffy]

Ha. The federal government can't revoke our highway funding just because enough wealthy people were able to successfully block the construction of an interstate highway through their towns.

[cl94]

Ha. The federal government can't revoke our highway funding just because enough wealthy people were able to successfully block the construction of an interstate highway through their towns.

He's right. With the level of opposition the Somerset Freeway received, it would have been very unwise to construct. In the engineering world, we're taught (at least nowadays) to consider public opinion. People quite obviously didn't want it. The United States isn't like certain European or Asian nations, where the government can just come in and built something regardless of public opinion. Eminent domain here is restricted and it would be counterproductive to revoke all of the funding. By that logic, no state would have any funding because the wealthy would still be putting their effort toward blocking such projects.

[noelbotevera]

Well...here's a bit of an idea to at least boost the money a bit - lower the tolls. If the tolls are lowered, more people travel on the turnpike. The toll money goes to funding the interchange. I'd say a respectable rate would be something like 7 cents a mile for cash, 4 cents a mile for EZPass. For the NE Extension, maybe something like 6 and a half cents a mile for cash, 3 and a half for EZPass. Common sense would be to encourage people to take the turnpike, because of low toll rates. However, more maintenance is needed - that's the whole catch. 

[vdeane]

The Somerset Freeway should have been built when I-95 was first constructed.  It is criminal that it wasn't built within 10 years of the rest of I-95.  If I were the FHWA, I would have revoked NJ's highway money at that point until the freeway got built.  ALL of it.

FTFY

Another person from PA who's upset about the Somerset Freeway?  Well guess what... interstate cancellations are/were, in fact, allowed, and PA agreed to build the interchange in order to keep I-95.  If they didn't want to build the interchange in a timely manner, then they should have suggested that I-95 be removed from PA and routed down the NJ Turnpike to Delaware.  They moment they agreed to build the interchange, PA took responsibility from NJ for finishing I-95.

And why should those Pittsburgh freeways be the PTC's problem in the first place?  They aren't even logically a part of PTC's network!  Make PennDOT build them.

Cause due to PA Act 61 of 1985 and Act 26 of 1991, it became the law.

Just because it's in law doesn't make it logical.

[Alps]

rage

Whoa, chill.

I feel like Gnutella works for PTC, but most definitely not in the PR department. Seriously. Mon Valley Expressway is a complete, utter waste of money. It's not brownfields wanting for better roads. It's bumfuck nowhere wanting to stay bumfuck nowhere. Why locate nowhere when you can locate somewhere?

[Alps]

Ha. The federal government can't revoke our highway funding just because enough wealthy people were able to successfully block the construction of an interstate highway through their towns.

He's right. With the level of opposition the Somerset Freeway received, it would have been very unwise to construct. In the engineering world, we're taught (at least nowadays) to consider public opinion. People quite obviously didn't want it. The United States isn't like certain European or Asian nations, where the government can just come in and built something regardless of public opinion. Eminent domain here is restricted and it would be counterproductive to revoke all of the funding. By that logic, no state would have any funding because the wealthy would still be putting their effort toward blocking such projects.

People did want it. The people in the path of the freeway didn't want it. Holy shit, who'd have guessed that?

[jeffandnicole]

The Somerset Freeway should have been built when I-95 was first constructed.  It is criminal that it wasn't built within 10 years of the rest of I-95.  If I were the FHWA, I would have revoked NJ's highway money at that point until the freeway got built.  ALL of it.

FTFY

Why?  The FHWA is who agreed to the change. 

Maybe the FHWA should've revoked all of PA's Funding because they didn't complete the Interstate highway system around the Philadelphia area.

[Zeffy]

Pennsylvanians are just mad that they have to help another state to establish a connection to the most major highway in the country in order to facilitate better transit between New York and Philadelphia. One interchange is a lot easier than building an entire freeway too. And while I wish there was some sort of freeway at least between Bound Brook and Trenton, I can't blame the residents for opposing it. A lot of the areas are peaceful towns with some good natural preservation.