AARoads Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

The AARoads Wiki is live! Come check it out!

Author Topic: Central Susquehanna Valley Transportation Project  (Read 90991 times)

Beltway

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 6782
  • Roads to the Future

  • Location: Richmond, VA
  • Last Login: August 04, 2020, 05:54:39 PM
Central Susquehanna Valley Transportation Project
« on: November 16, 2011, 03:56:38 PM »

Nice to have, but at $604 million would be fantastically expensive, on a cost-benefit basis.

I see that they did get it added to the ADHS system, but at the deletion of Corridor O-1.

http://www.csvt.com/

Welcome to the Central Susquehanna Valley Transportation Project Web Page 
These pages were last updated on March 15, 2011
 
January 2011 Project Funding Update

Significant action has recently occurred related to identifying the remaining funding needed for the Central Susquehanna Valley Transportation (CSVT) Project, although additional steps must be taken to fully fund the project and advance it to construction.

On December 2, 2010, the Appalachian Regional Commission (ARC) approved the establishment of a new Appalachian Development Highway System (ADHS) corridor, as shown on the map available at the link below. This new corridor, designated as Corridor P-1, is located between the interchange of Interstates 80 and 180 north of Milton (at the southeastern terminus of existing Corridor P) and the interchange of US Routes 11/15 and 22/322 north of Harrisburg (near the eastern terminus of existing Corridor M).

This new corridor designation included the transfer of 12.5 ADHS participating miles to the CSVT Project from a portion of Corridor O-1, located along US Route 322 between Interstate 80 and Phillipsburg. The transfer makes the CSVT Project eligible for the ADHS funding that was previously allocated to that portion of Corridor O-1. However, previous Congressional action limited or “capped”  that funding allocation to an amount (based on a 2007 cost estimate to complete the ADHS within Pennsylvania) that is less than the currently estimated $604 million cost of the CSVT Project. As a result, unless other funding sources are identified, further Congressional action will be required to remove or adjust the funding cap in order to fully fund the project with ADHS funds.

Furthermore, based on current legislation, ADHS funds can only be used for 80 percent of the project costs, and the remaining 20 percent must be funded by a state or local matching contribution. To advance the project to construction, amended federal legislation is needed to allow toll credits to be used as the matching contribution on ADHS-funded projects. Such action would allow additional ADHS funds and/or other federal funds to be used in lieu of a state or local contribution, thereby allowing ADHS and/or other federal funds to be used for 100 percent of the project costs (assuming that the funding cap is removed or adjusted as described above).



 
Logged
http://www.roadstothefuture.com
http://www.capital-beltway.com

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

mightyace

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3235
  • Age: 59
  • Last Login: October 04, 2012, 01:36:29 PM
    • My Flickr Photos
Re: Central Susquehanna Valley Transportation Project
« Reply #1 on: December 06, 2011, 01:10:22 PM »

You might think the cost/benefit was worth it if you saw the backups on the Selinsgrove strip (north end of Selinsgrove bypass to US 11/15 split) on the Sunday after Thanksgiving like I did!  It was pretty much all bumper to bumper traffic for miles.
Logged
My Flickr Photos: http://www.flickr.com/photos/mightyace

I'm out of this F***KING PLACE!

NE2

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 14422
  • fuck

  • Age: 1
  • Location: central Florida
  • Last Login: February 25, 2024, 03:05:46 PM
Re: Central Susquehanna Valley Transportation Project
« Reply #2 on: December 06, 2011, 02:29:26 PM »

I see that they did get it added to the ADHS system, but at the deletion of Corridor O-1.
Not quite. O-1 still exists, but doesn't get funding.
Logged
pre-1945 Florida route log

I accept and respect your identity as long as it's not dumb shit like "identifying as a vaccinated attack helicopter".

hbelkins

  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 19259
  • It is well, it is well, with my soul.

  • Age: 62
  • Location: Kentucky
  • Last Login: February 23, 2024, 03:02:29 PM
    • Millennium Highway
Re: Central Susquehanna Valley Transportation Project
« Reply #3 on: December 06, 2011, 09:19:12 PM »


This new corridor designation included the transfer of 12.5 ADHS participating miles to the CSVT Project from a portion of Corridor O-1, located along US Route 322 between Interstate 80 and Phillipsburg. The transfer makes the CSVT Project eligible for the ADHS funding that was previously allocated to that portion of Corridor O-1.

And didn't that section get the money that was originally slated for US 220 (I-99) between Bedford and Cumberland?
Logged


Government would be tolerable if not for politicians and bureaucrats.

Beltway

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 6782
  • Roads to the Future

  • Location: Richmond, VA
  • Last Login: August 04, 2020, 05:54:39 PM
Re: Central Susquehanna Valley Transportation Project
« Reply #4 on: December 06, 2011, 10:58:04 PM »

You might think the cost/benefit was worth it if you saw the backups on the Selinsgrove strip (north end of Selinsgrove bypass to US 11/15 split) on the Sunday after Thanksgiving like I did!  It was pretty much all bumper to bumper traffic for miles.

I don't think it is worth anywhere near $600 million to build a 4-lane rural arterial bypass to handle Thanksgiving Sunday traffic.  That is the busiest day of the year for long-distance traffic.
Logged
http://www.roadstothefuture.com
http://www.capital-beltway.com

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

froggie

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 12895
  • Location: Greensboro, VT
  • Last Login: Today at 08:11:55 AM
    • Froggie's Place
Re: Central Susquehanna Valley Transportation Project
« Reply #5 on: December 07, 2011, 07:04:21 AM »

No, but it might be worth "near $600 million to build a 4-lane rural arterial bypass" to handle what is typically near-saturation or saturation far beyond just Thanksgiving Sunday.  Volumes in Shamokin Dam peak at 47K AADT on what is a 5-lane undivided street.  I'm not sure what the peak loading is, but 47K is a very high volume for a 5-lane urban street.
Logged

qguy

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 650
  • Age: 61
  • Location: Lebanon, PA
  • Last Login: February 17, 2024, 07:22:42 PM
Re: Central Susquehanna Valley Transportation Project
« Reply #6 on: December 07, 2011, 07:21:10 AM »

This project is needed very much.

When I worked at PennDOT I traveled through that area many times at various times of the year and various times of the day. It's part of a major north-south corridor that runs from Baltimore to central and western upstate New York. It's a key link between I-83 in Harrisburg and US 15 (I-99) in Williamsport.

It's never a good scene. Traffic pours up and down US 11/15 and chokes at Hummels Wharf. It's also jammed in Northumberland (if you take PA 147 up the east side of the west branch of the Susquehanna River) and in Lewisburg (if you take US 15 up the west side of the west branch of the Susquehanna River).
Logged

qguy

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 650
  • Age: 61
  • Location: Lebanon, PA
  • Last Login: February 17, 2024, 07:22:42 PM
Re: Central Susquehanna Valley Transportation Project
« Reply #7 on: December 07, 2011, 09:25:23 AM »

Widening to 6 lanes could handle that.  Most of the cost would be in the river crossing.  Widening alternatives to the existing US-15 could be done for 1/3 of that cost.

So you'd still have to spend "most of the cost" because of needing to build the crossing and you'd still be left with a string of signal lights.
Logged

Beltway

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 6782
  • Roads to the Future

  • Location: Richmond, VA
  • Last Login: August 04, 2020, 05:54:39 PM
Re: Central Susquehanna Valley Transportation Project
« Reply #8 on: December 07, 2011, 10:11:27 AM »

Widening to 6 lanes could handle that.  Most of the cost would be in the river crossing.  Widening alternatives to the existing US-15 could be done for 1/3 of that cost.

So you'd still have to spend "most of the cost" because of needing to build the crossing and you'd still be left with a string of signal lights.

No crossing ... widen US-15 up to I-80.

Realistically, a sum of $600 million won't become available for a project of the currently proposed type and length.  Unless you want to put a stiff toll on it.
Logged
http://www.roadstothefuture.com
http://www.capital-beltway.com

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

froggie

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 12895
  • Location: Greensboro, VT
  • Last Login: Today at 08:11:55 AM
    • Froggie's Place
Re: Central Susquehanna Valley Transportation Project
« Reply #9 on: December 07, 2011, 10:54:40 AM »

Beltway, you're obviously not familliar with this segment of road.  As I mentioned before, US 11/15 is a city street through Shamokin Dam.  Widening to 6 lanes is not an option unless you're comfortable with major right-of-way acquisition and destroying numerous businesses and houses along that street.
Logged

hbelkins

  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 19259
  • It is well, it is well, with my soul.

  • Age: 62
  • Location: Kentucky
  • Last Login: February 23, 2024, 03:02:29 PM
    • Millennium Highway
Re: Central Susquehanna Valley Transportation Project
« Reply #10 on: December 07, 2011, 11:36:23 AM »

What was the original plan for US 15 in this area? The stub ramp at US 522 indicates something was on tap.
Logged


Government would be tolerable if not for politicians and bureaucrats.

qguy

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 650
  • Age: 61
  • Location: Lebanon, PA
  • Last Login: February 17, 2024, 07:22:42 PM
Re: Central Susquehanna Valley Transportation Project
« Reply #11 on: December 07, 2011, 12:20:04 PM »

No crossing ... widen US-15 up to I-80.

Unfortunately, the crossing is needed as much as, or more than, any other element of the project. This is because you can't widen US 15 through Lewisburg. It's also because one of the major issues is the traffic through Northumberland. Even if you widen the US 11 bridge across the West Branch on the south side of Northumberland, you can't widen through town.

What was the original plan for US 15 in this area? The stub ramp at US 522 indicates something was on tap.

Interestingly enough, the original plan was pretty close to the current one. PennDOT seriously looked at a number of different alternatives, but the data supported the chosen alternative and the local communities are very supportive of it.
Logged

froggie

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 12895
  • Location: Greensboro, VT
  • Last Login: Today at 08:11:55 AM
    • Froggie's Place
Re: Central Susquehanna Valley Transportation Project
« Reply #12 on: December 07, 2011, 12:48:55 PM »

Quote
I've driven it many times.  Adding a 12-foot lane each way will not destroy any buildings.

It will in Shamokin Dam.  4 houses in particular that are right up to the street.  Furthermore, you don't necessarily have to destroy the building in order to destroy a business.

Or houses, for that matter.  Just ask those who live along Patrick and Henry Streets in Old Town Alexandria.
Logged

Beltway

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 6782
  • Roads to the Future

  • Location: Richmond, VA
  • Last Login: August 04, 2020, 05:54:39 PM
Re: Central Susquehanna Valley Transportation Project
« Reply #13 on: December 07, 2011, 01:54:29 PM »

Quote
I've driven it many times.  Adding a 12-foot lane each way will not destroy any buildings.
It will in Shamokin Dam.  4 houses in particular that are right up to the street.  Furthermore, you don't necessarily have to destroy the building in order to destroy a business.

Or houses, for that matter.  Just ask those who live along Patrick and Henry Streets in Old Town Alexandria.

You're right ... after reviewing it on Google Maps, I see there are about 4 medium-sized buildings that would be in the way.  There is enough buffer space that I question whether any other business would be "destroyed".  The current CSVT alignment would remove some number of buildings greater than zero...

With regard to Lewisburg, upgrading to a modern 4-lane arterial should be sufficient.

The current CSVT ... it would be great from a traffic engineering standpoint, but they need at least $300 if not $400 million in toll revenue bonds and tolls to assemble the needed funding package ... IMHO.

US-1 through Alexandria VA ... 12 feet of widening would wipe out dozens of buildings with historical plaques from the 19th century.  No comparison...
« Last Edit: December 07, 2011, 05:34:49 PM by Beltway »
Logged
http://www.roadstothefuture.com
http://www.capital-beltway.com

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

froggie

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 12895
  • Location: Greensboro, VT
  • Last Login: Today at 08:11:55 AM
    • Froggie's Place
Re: Central Susquehanna Valley Transportation Project
« Reply #14 on: December 07, 2011, 02:41:27 PM »

There is a comparison with Old Town Alexandria.  The city widened both Patrick and Henry Streets in the 1950s.  While it didn't "destroy buildings", it has put those buildings that much closer to traffic..to the point where numerous buildings along both streets are having cracking and shifting foundation issues due to vibrations from traffic.

Businesses, especially smaller retail businesses, can easily be destroyed by such widening projects, even if their building isn't physically razed.  If construction-related difficult access doesn't kill them, often the access redesign and/or loss of parking (i.e. space taken for the widened road) will.  If the corridor is slated or proposed for redevelopment, it's not as big of a long-term impact on the local jurisdiction's tax base.  But the small businesses are most prone to suffer both short term and long term.  We have similar issues being presented with the proposed widening of Richmond Hwy here.
Logged

Beltway

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 6782
  • Roads to the Future

  • Location: Richmond, VA
  • Last Login: August 04, 2020, 05:54:39 PM
Re: Central Susquehanna Valley Transportation Project
« Reply #15 on: December 07, 2011, 05:32:39 PM »

There is a comparison with Old Town Alexandria.  The city widened both Patrick and Henry Streets in the 1950s.  While it didn't "destroy buildings", it has put those buildings that much closer to traffic..to the point where numerous buildings along both streets are having cracking and shifting foundation issues due to vibrations from traffic.

Businesses, especially smaller retail businesses, can easily be destroyed by such widening projects, even if their building isn't physically razed.  If construction-related difficult access doesn't kill them, often the access redesign and/or loss of parking (i.e. space taken for the widened road) will.  If the corridor is slated or proposed for redevelopment, it's not as big of a long-term impact on the local jurisdiction's tax base.  But the small businesses are most prone to suffer both short term and long term.  We have similar issues being presented with the proposed widening of Richmond Hwy here.

I agree with everything you said, but other than possibly a few buildings (which could be acquired if need be) I don't see it applying to the site of this thread.

Also, those 19th century buildings, for the most part, are built to much lower structural standard than those built since 1950.
Logged
http://www.roadstothefuture.com
http://www.capital-beltway.com

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

mightyace

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3235
  • Age: 59
  • Last Login: October 04, 2012, 01:36:29 PM
    • My Flickr Photos
Re: Central Susquehanna Valley Transportation Project
« Reply #16 on: December 08, 2011, 01:42:10 AM »

Also, those 19th century buildings, for the most part, are built to much lower structural standard than those built since 1950.

Don't be so sure of that.  If you're talking 1950, I think you're right.  If you're talking about the junk that's built today, I don't think so.  How many houses built in 2011 will still be standing in 2111 or 2211.  I can't say but it will probably be a lower percentage than the number of house from 1811 or 1911 still standing.

__________________________________________________________________

Anyway back to topic.  The growth along 11/15 between Selinsgrove and Shamokin Dam has been phenomenal in the last few years.  There's a huge plaza with Best Buy, Target, Giant (grocery store) that wasn't there just a few years ago.

So, traffic wise, think of a major shopping area near where you live.  Then, dump an interstate's worth of through traffic on it!

But, Beltway has put his finger on the rub.  Is the project needed, there is little doubt.  However, can the $600 million or whatever it will be when the plans go ahead be raised?  At the present time, I have my doubts.

Now, if the yahoos in Harrisburg had promised things like:
We'll built the CSVT, finish I-99, replace aging Susquehanna River bridges, etc.
They might have gotten northern PA's support for tolling I-80.
Logged
My Flickr Photos: http://www.flickr.com/photos/mightyace

I'm out of this F***KING PLACE!

Beltway

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 6782
  • Roads to the Future

  • Location: Richmond, VA
  • Last Login: August 04, 2020, 05:54:39 PM
Re: Central Susquehanna Valley Transportation Project
« Reply #17 on: December 08, 2011, 06:18:12 AM »

Also, those 19th century buildings, for the most part, are built to much lower structural standard than those built since 1950.

Don't be so sure of that.  If you're talking 1950, I think you're right.  If you're talking about the junk that's built today, I don't think so.  How many houses built in 2011 will still be standing in 2111 or 2211.  I can't say but it will probably be a lower percentage than the number of house from 1811 or 1911 still standing.

__________________________________________________________________

Anyway back to topic.  The growth along 11/15 between Selinsgrove and Shamokin Dam has been phenomenal in the last few years.  There's a huge plaza with Best Buy, Target, Giant (grocery store) that wasn't there just a few years ago.

So, traffic wise, think of a major shopping area near where you live.  Then, dump an interstate's worth of through traffic on it!

But, Beltway has put his finger on the rub.  Is the project needed, there is little doubt.  However, can the $600 million or whatever it will be when the plans go ahead be raised?  At the present time, I have my doubts.

Now, if the yahoos in Harrisburg had promised things like:
We'll built the CSVT, finish I-99, replace aging Susquehanna River bridges, etc.
They might have gotten northern PA's support for tolling I-80.

The foundations of those 19th century buildings in particular.

CSVT ... several small towns on a rural arterial highway ... not an Interstate
Logged
http://www.roadstothefuture.com
http://www.capital-beltway.com

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

froggie

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 12895
  • Location: Greensboro, VT
  • Last Login: Today at 08:11:55 AM
    • Froggie's Place
Re: Central Susquehanna Valley Transportation Project
« Reply #18 on: December 08, 2011, 06:27:17 AM »

Quote
Now, if the yahoos in Harrisburg had promised things like:
We'll built the CSVT, finish I-99, replace aging Susquehanna River bridges, etc.
They might have gotten northern PA's support for tolling I-80.

But they still wouldn't have gotten FHWA's...

Quote
CSVT ... several small towns on a rural arterial highway ... not an Interstate

But volumes higher than many Interstates, even within PA.
Logged

Beltway

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 6782
  • Roads to the Future

  • Location: Richmond, VA
  • Last Login: August 04, 2020, 05:54:39 PM
Re: Central Susquehanna Valley Transportation Project
« Reply #19 on: December 08, 2011, 05:57:02 PM »

Quote
Now, if the yahoos in Harrisburg had promised things like:
We'll built the CSVT, finish I-99, replace aging Susquehanna River bridges, etc.
They might have gotten northern PA's support for tolling I-80.

But they still wouldn't have gotten FHWA's...
After 3 failed attempts, I think it has finally sunk in to PA !!

Quote
Quote
CSVT ... several small towns on a rural arterial highway ... not an Interstate

But volumes higher than many Interstates, even within PA.

Most of that traffic is local from within about 20 miles, and the local large truck percentage is low.

The rural segments of US-15 between US-22 and I-80, have volumes and large truck percentages that are in the range of that of a rural 4-lane arterial highway.

PA I-80, for instance, has total volumes that are not much higher, but the large truck percentages are far higher, average trip lengths are far longer, and the highway is far more strategic than the aforementioned segment of US-15, which I think would function well in the network with a rural arterial design.

Roadgeeks are always talking about adding new Interstate mileage ...

Has anyone yet mentioned the obvious fact that if the CSVT project is built, that I-180 could be extended down PA-147, along the new highway, and along the Selinsgrove Bypass?  Actually it would be a simplified way to designate that 20 miles of freeway, whether the existing routes are left to overlap on the freeway or are routed back onto their old surface routes.
Logged
http://www.roadstothefuture.com
http://www.capital-beltway.com

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

PAHighways

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1520
  • Not affiliated with PennDOT nor the PTC

  • Location: SWPA!
  • Last Login: February 18, 2024, 11:41:38 AM
    • Pennsylvania Highways
Re: Central Susquehanna Valley Transportation Project
« Reply #20 on: December 08, 2011, 06:05:58 PM »

<<< After 3 failed attempts, I think it has finally sunk in to PA !!>>>

More like 40 years of failed attempts.
Logged

Beltway

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 6782
  • Roads to the Future

  • Location: Richmond, VA
  • Last Login: August 04, 2020, 05:54:39 PM
Re: Central Susquehanna Valley Transportation Project
« Reply #21 on: December 08, 2011, 06:07:43 PM »

<<< After 3 failed attempts, I think it has finally sunk in to PA !!>>>

More like 40 years of failed attempts.

I was thinking of the 3 recent ones under the TEA-21 pilot program for tolling 3 Interstates for reconstruction ...
Logged
http://www.roadstothefuture.com
http://www.capital-beltway.com

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

mightyace

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3235
  • Age: 59
  • Last Login: October 04, 2012, 01:36:29 PM
    • My Flickr Photos
Re: Central Susquehanna Valley Transportation Project
« Reply #22 on: December 08, 2011, 06:08:24 PM »

Quote
Now, if the yahoos in Harrisburg had promised things like:
We'll built the CSVT, finish I-99, replace aging Susquehanna River bridges, etc.
They might have gotten northern PA's support for tolling I-80.

But they still wouldn't have gotten FHWA's...

That is true.  However my point was more on placating opposition in Northern PA.  If you say that the money will help build/fix roads where you live, you're more likely to support it than for transit systems 100 or 200 miles away.

Of course, that is dead horse.
Logged
My Flickr Photos: http://www.flickr.com/photos/mightyace

I'm out of this F***KING PLACE!

PAHighways

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1520
  • Not affiliated with PennDOT nor the PTC

  • Location: SWPA!
  • Last Login: February 18, 2024, 11:41:38 AM
    • Pennsylvania Highways
Re: Central Susquehanna Valley Transportation Project
« Reply #23 on: December 10, 2011, 03:51:23 PM »

<<< After 3 failed attempts, I think it has finally sunk in to PA !!>>>

More like 40 years of failed attempts.

I was thinking of the 3 recent ones under the TEA-21 pilot program for tolling 3 Interstates for reconstruction ...

It has sunk in as the website for the tolling of 80 now redirects to the PTC's main page.
Logged

Sammer

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 18
  • Location: Canonsburg, PA
  • Last Login: May 25, 2013, 01:47:59 PM
Re: Central Susquehanna Valley Transportation Project
« Reply #24 on: September 20, 2012, 11:58:14 AM »

How does MAP-21 effect the 12.5 miles of CSVT and the nearly 60 incomplete miles of Corridor M between Holidaysburg and Lewistown? Supposedly PA can now get 100% (although its no longer dedicated) federal ADHS funding. Presumably for CSVT that means 100% of what it would cost to rebuild 12.5 miles of Corridor O-1 to ADHS standards rather than the 12.5 miles of P-1 to Interstate Highway standards although toll credits may now be able to be used to obtain additional federal funding.
Logged

 


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.