Central Susquehanna Valley Transportation Project

[froggie]

Pardon the rant here, but this makes little sense. Wouldn't it be easier to upgrade the existing 322 corridor? Just turn it into a Jersey freeway, or at least construct RIROs for local businesses and roads, with interchanges at more important roads. There's even space on the side for another carriageway.

If the intention is a freeway, the existing corridor won't work...too many farms and homes along the existing roadway, especially in the Tusseyville vicinity.

curious if there's long term plans to upgrade the 33 miles of 11/15 from Selinsgrove to Duncannon.

This has been mentioned several times in other threads on this forum.  Nobody has found anything for long-term plans along 11/15, nor is there really a need for any...the existing corridor functions well.

[RevZimmerman]

A couple news articles provide updates on the CSVT Project. Big takeaway is that the project will cost more and take longer to complete ($200 million more / 3 extra years) due to the fly ash basins that had been in the southern section of the planned route. But the northern section should still open in 2022.

https://www.pennlive.com/news/2019/03/central-susquehanna-valley-thruway-to-take-three-years-longer-to-finish-and-cost-200-million-more.html

https://www.pennlive.com/news/2019/03/central-susquehanna-valley-thruway-project-fully-funded-despite-a-200-million-cost-increase.html

Some pictures from February 2019 are in the gallery accompanying the articles.

[Beltway]

A couple news articles provide updates on the CSVT Project. Big takeaway is that the project will cost more and take longer to complete ($200 million more / 3 extra years) due to the fly ash basins that had been in the southern section of the planned route. But the northern section should still open in 2022.

Why $200 million more?   Plan sheets I have seen don't show the alignment being significantly longer or with a significantly different conceptual design.

[froggie]

Some of the realignment contains pyrite rock...doesn't explain all of the $200 million increase but certainly explains some of it.  One of the articles also mentions this:

The decision to go with a more substantial pavement structure added to the cost, Beck said.

[Beltway]

Some of the realignment contains pyrite rock...doesn't explain all of the $200 million increase but certainly explains some of it.  One of the articles also mentions this:

The decision to go with a more substantial pavement structure added to the cost, Beck said.

But now they don't have to deal with crossing the fly ash basins, now just normal types of excavation (regular, borrow, undercut).  That should save money.  I wonder what the "more substantial pavement structure" is, maybe another 2 inches of concrete, another 2 inches of subbase?

[jemacedo9]

Some of the realignment contains pyrite rock...doesn't explain all of the $200 million increase but certainly explains some of it.  One of the articles also mentions this:

The decision to go with a more substantial pavement structure added to the cost, Beck said.

But now they don't have to deal with crossing the fly ash basins, now just normal types of excavation (regular, borrow, undercut).  That should save money.  I wonder what the "more substantial pavement structure" is, maybe another 2 inches of concrete, another 2 inches of subbase?

Are they removing more pyrite rock than originally thought, with the realignment?  I believe it was pyrite rock that caused major issues in building I-99 over Skytop Mtn just west of State College.  So maybe there is more of increase in that vs any cost savings in avoiding fly ash basins?

[Beltway]

Are they removing more pyrite rock than originally thought, with the realignment?  I believe it was pyrite rock that caused major issues in building I-99 over Skytop Mtn just west of State College.  So maybe there is more of increase in that vs any cost savings in avoiding fly ash basins?

It is hard to say whether there is any more lane mileage of new construction, or any more new bridge construction --
http://www.csvt.com/maps/pdfs/58758_Board13-EastAlt-04_May2018.pdf

[Alps]

Some of the realignment contains pyrite rock...doesn't explain all of the $200 million increase but certainly explains some of it.  One of the articles also mentions this:

The decision to go with a more substantial pavement structure added to the cost, Beck said.

But now they don't have to deal with crossing the fly ash basins, now just normal types of excavation (regular, borrow, undercut).  That should save money.  I wonder what the "more substantial pavement structure" is, maybe another 2 inches of concrete, another 2 inches of subbase?

I don't think the original cost estimate accounted for the problems with the fly ash basins.

[Beltway]

But now they don't have to deal with crossing the fly ash basins, now just normal types of excavation (regular, borrow, undercut).  That should save money.  I wonder what the "more substantial pavement structure" is, maybe another 2 inches of concrete, another 2 inches of subbase?

I don't think the original cost estimate accounted for the problems with the fly ash basins.

But wouldn't those costs no longer be present now?

[Alps]

But now they don't have to deal with crossing the fly ash basins, now just normal types of excavation (regular, borrow, undercut).  That should save money.  I wonder what the "more substantial pavement structure" is, maybe another 2 inches of concrete, another 2 inches of subbase?

I don't think the original cost estimate accounted for the problems with the fly ash basins.

But wouldn't those costs no longer be present now?

Original costs (not including fly ash) + $200 million = new costs. That's why they're not "saving money" as per your quote above.

[Beltway]

But now they don't have to deal with crossing the fly ash basins, now just normal types of excavation (regular, borrow, undercut).  That should save money.  I wonder what the "more substantial pavement structure" is, maybe another 2 inches of concrete, another 2 inches of subbase?

I don't think the original cost estimate accounted for the problems with the fly ash basins.

But wouldn't those costs no longer be present now?

Original costs (not including fly ash) + $200 million = new costs. That's why they're not "saving money" as per your quote above.

But if the fly ash costs won't be incurred, where does the new $200 million come from?

[Alps]

But now they don't have to deal with crossing the fly ash basins, now just normal types of excavation (regular, borrow, undercut).  That should save money.  I wonder what the "more substantial pavement structure" is, maybe another 2 inches of concrete, another 2 inches of subbase?

I don't think the original cost estimate accounted for the problems with the fly ash basins.

But wouldn't those costs no longer be present now?

Original costs (not including fly ash) + $200 million = new costs. That's why they're not "saving money" as per your quote above.

But if the fly ash costs won't be incurred, where does the new $200 million come from?

Other factors are stated upstream in this thread.

[Beltway]

But if the fly ash costs won't be incurred, where does the new $200 million come from?

Other factors are stated upstream in this thread.

The thicker pavement?  How much thicker would it be over the standard freeway pavement design?

[webny99]

I would assume it costs more for the new highway to weave its way around the basins, adding mileage, instead of going straight through them. The junction with PA 61 has also become more complicated. It looks like a mangled version of its would-have-been self.

[Beltway]

I would assume it costs more for the new highway to weave its way around the basins, adding mileage, instead of going straight through them. The junction with PA 61 has also become more complicated. It looks like a mangled version of its would-have-been self.

On the face of it, it actually looks like slightly less overall lane mileage and bridge construction as compared to the old alignment --
http://www.csvt.com/maps/pdfs/58758_Board13-EastAlt-04_May2018.pdf

[davewiecking]

Looks to me like a few more residential properties are impacted under the new alignment (SE of "11th Ave"  on the map). Now to figure out the other 99%...

[Alps]

Project update: Beams are halfway across from the southwest side of the Susquehanna bridge.

[webny99]

Project update: Beams are halfway across from the southwest side of the Susquehanna bridge.

Yep, saw that a few weeks ago when returning from Tennessee. That bridge is going to be a pretty prominent and impressive feature in the landscape of the region; you can see it right from current US 15.

[74/171FAN]

Project update: Beams are halfway across from the southwest side of the Susquehanna bridge.

Yep, saw that a few weeks ago when returning from Tennessee. That bridge is going to be a pretty prominent and impressive feature in the landscape of the region; you can see it right from current US 15.

From what I saw on US 15 a couple weekends ago, all they need to do at the interchange there at this point seems to be paving. It looked to me that all the grading of the ramps were complete.

[webny99]

Project update: Beams are halfway across from the southwest side of the Susquehanna bridge.

Yep, saw that a few weeks ago when returning from Tennessee. That bridge is going to be a pretty prominent and impressive feature in the landscape of the region; you can see it right from current US 15.

From what I saw on US 15 a couple weekends ago, all they need to do at the interchange there at this point seems to be paving. It looked to me that all the grading of the ramps were complete.

Yes, very much so. I was actually impressed with the progress.

[Beltway]

The entire CSVT will save, in my estimation, about 8 to 10 minutes on a trip from Selinsgrove to Montandon.

Phase I will bypass the Lewisburg area and that part of US-15, with a direction connection with PA-147 and I-180, a very welcome improvement, IMHO.

I drove on both sides of the project in late March ... bridge is coming along nicely!

[webny99]

The entire CSVT will save, in my estimation, about 8 to 10 minutes on a trip from Selinsgrove to Montandon.

Phase I will bypass the Lewisburg area and that part of US-15, with a direction connection with PA-147 and I-180, a very welcome improvement, IMHO.

Very much welcome, of course. When complete I will be able to get from the Rochester area to the Harrisburg area without going through a single stoplight.

The larger question is, will this cause more traffic to use I-180 and less to use US 15 between I-80 and Williamsport?
US 15 will still be by far the shorter and more scenic of the two routes.

[webny99]

The current difference in time from Washington to Toronto is exactly three minutes:

478 miles and 8h 42 min using I-270, I-70, I-99, and US 219.
500 miles and 8h 45 min using I-270, US 15, I-86, and I-390. (It doesn't default to I-180, but that would add about 2-3 minutes).

Thus, given the state of US 219 in Northern PA, it is very reasonable to assume US 15 will be the route of choice once CSVT is complete.

[Beltway]

The entire CSVT will save, in my estimation, about 8 to 10 minutes on a trip from Selinsgrove to Montandon.

Phase I will bypass the Lewisburg area and that part of US-15, with a direction connection with PA-147 and I-180, a very welcome improvement, IMHO.

Very much welcome, of course. When complete I will be able to get from the Rochester area to the Harrisburg area without going through a single stoplight.
The larger question is, will this cause more traffic to use I-180 and less to use US 15 between I-80 and Williamsport?
US 15 will still be by far the shorter and more scenic of the two routes.

I use this route 2 or 3 times a year between Washington and Buffalo.  The times are about equal, and I-180 is a much higher standard highway so I very rarely take the direct US-15 route between I-80 and Williamsport.

Phase I will eliminate the 3 miles of I-80 and be that much shorter.

The current difference in time from Washington to Toronto is exactly three minutes:
478 miles and 8h 42 min using I-270, I-70, I-99, and US 219.
500 miles and 8h 45 min using I-270, US 15, I-86, and I-390. (It doesn't default to I-180, but that would add about 2-3 minutes).
Thus, given the state of US 219 in Northern PA, it is very reasonable to assume US 15 will be the route of choice once CSVT is complete.

On Google Maps for my trip those times can flip either way depending on when you run it, but they are close.

[webny99]

Phase I will eliminate the 3 miles of I-80 and be that much shorter.

Well, right now, if you want to use I-180 you have to choose between hopping the river on I-80 or slogging through Northumberland.
Once CSVT is complete, "neither" will become an option, and a very much valued one at that.