For now, Interstate 99 is only an intrastate Interstate running in central Pennsylvania. However, I read that it will be extended via the US 15 corridor to Corning (I-86) in New York. The US 15 is currently rebuild to Interstate Highway standards in New York. Wouldn't it make sense to extend it all the way to Rochester, NY? Via the current I-390 and I-86 via Bath.
It will definitely head to Painted Post and Interstate 86, but that is several years off because the route in NYS is still not fully freewayized. As far as extending it northward, I hope it does not because I like Interstate 390 as it is.
I-99 = US 220 + 4 lanes
Yeah, definitely build it into 390, that's the most useless Interstate spur I know of.
Quote from: voyager on January 19, 2009, 06:22:27 PM
Yeah, definitely build it into 390, that's the most useless Interstate spur I know of.
What makes it so useless?
It doesn't serve any major cities in PA.
Quote from: voyager on January 19, 2009, 06:22:27 PM
Yeah, definitely build it into 390, that's the most useless Interstate spur I know of.
Cough I-180 in IL, PA, and WY cough.
Got me there.
Quote from: voyager on January 19, 2009, 06:22:27 PM
Yeah, definitely build it into 390, that's the most useless Interstate spur I know of.
does this mean 99 will be mercifully renumbered?
Quote from: agentsteel53 on January 19, 2009, 07:24:04 PM
Quote from: voyager on January 19, 2009, 06:22:27 PM
Yeah, definitely build it into 390, that's the most useless Interstate spur I know of.
does this mean 99 will be mercifully renumbered?
I got the neutered I-390 shield from Ebay in case they deep-six I-390 for I-99. :banghead: I-390 resonates with me because it is the way to grandmom's.
Speaking of stupid I-390 things, there is/was (probably dead) this mini-golf place in Dansville. They had one course which had a loopdy-loop thing on it and they called the hole "I-390".
LOL there is a weird story. I like loop-de-loops (and mini-golf), too bad I won't be seeing that one.
PA is currently working on the construction of new freeway and the upgrading of existing sections of U.S. 15, to hold I-99. New York, in 2006 finished re-constructing the I-86/U.S. 15(I-99) exit in Corning(Can you say pressure from PA?) with flyovers, etc. I believe they are starting to finish the U.S. 15 expressway from where it currently ends to the PA border.
It would make sense to take it to Rochester, but they could still keep I-390 if they wanted to.
Lets just mass produce I-390 signs and post them over 99
Quote from: Snappyjack on January 19, 2009, 11:40:39 PM
PA is currently working on the construction of new freeway and the upgrading of existing sections of U.S. 15, to hold I-99. New York, in 2006 finished re-constructing the I-86/U.S. 15(I-99) exit in Corning(Can you say pressure from PA?) with flyovers, etc. I believe they are starting to finish the U.S. 15 expressway from where it currently ends to the PA border.
It would make sense to take it to Rochester, but they could still keep I-390 if they wanted to.
The U.S. 15/I-86 stack is an nice improvement over the previous partial-cloverleaf interchange. That replaced a much cooler "circlechange", which I remembered from early childhood. http://terraserver-usa.com/image.aspx?t=2&s=12&x=408&y=5836&z=18&w=1%22
Nooo another roundabout junction taken away :(
I love those, the reason why I like driving in boston
If you like roundabouts, check out Exit 12 on the Adirondack Northway portion of I-87, north of Albany. 5 roundabouts in a row.
Pretty ridiculous in my opinion.
Also, recently, NY 85 south of Albany was reconstructed and re-routed for a portion, and a roundabout was constructed at each intersection. I think there are about 4.
New York, especially in the eastern part of the state, loves roundabouts. To me, they are just band-aids to a longer term problem. Way overused as well.
It is finally done between Tyrone and Stage College!
So why does U.S. 220 still remain multiplexed with the Interstate, instead of going back to its old alignment. I recall in the mid-1980's when portions of the southern section of freeway were still under construction, and U.S. 220 alternated between freeway and local road alignments.
PennDOT wants to encourage through traffic to use the I-99 freeway rather than two-lane old US 220 so much that they removed the temporary Alt US 220 through Milesburg, never bothered to sign Bus US 220 in Tyrone, and got rid of US 220 and US 322 on the two-lane road between State College and Bald Eagle without creating a new designation in its place.
For those wondering about the new north end, it doesn't quite reach to I-80 yet. It stops at Musser Lane:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.m-plex.com%2Froads%2Fraw%2FImg2008_11_29_i99%2FDSCN7076.JPG&hash=9b3fb93c233a83f319ee68279a13f5f38202338b)
Along the southbound lanes, PennDOT put up a few extra I-99 shields on the non-I-99 part between there and I-80 to pretend the freeways do connect. The last half mile or so is US 220/PA 26 with a speed limit at 45mph. After two intersections ahead, the rural 55mph I-99 freeway begins.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.m-plex.com%2Froads%2Fraw%2FImg2008_11_29_i99%2FDSCN7083.JPG&hash=8d9485a63af518b008266f8c3831af09362a9c94)
hahaha it has an I-99 shield yet behind it is a sign for an at-grade intersection :-D. i find that funny
i.c.
That's not the first time that has happened.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.southeastroads.com%2Fsouth_carolina200%2Fi-585_us-176_sc-009_eb_app_pearl_st.jpg&hash=9fa56492e9cb7b4f79f1a0f2f94718fdd7c905be)
Incidentally this assembly is still in place as of New Year's Eve eve.
I-180 in Cheyenne, WY is also just an at-grade boulevard.
Some Texas Interstates also have access roads for remote ranches.
Quote from: Chris on January 24, 2009, 04:52:35 AM
I-180 in Cheyenne, WY is also just an at-grade boulevard.
Some Texas Interstates also have access roads for remote ranches.
Interstate 180 (https://www.aaroads.com/west/i-180_wy.html) in Cheyenne is an at-grade Interstate. Four at-grades total, just the bridge over the Union Pacific Railroad Yard counts as "freeway-like"
It is also the only Interstate that you can walk to clinch :)
Quote from: aaroads on January 19, 2009, 11:46:31 PM
Quote from: Snappyjack on January 19, 2009, 11:40:39 PM
PA is currently working on the construction of new freeway and the upgrading of existing sections of U.S. 15, to hold I-99. New York, in 2006 finished re-constructing the I-86/U.S. 15(I-99) exit in Corning(Can you say pressure from PA?) with flyovers, etc. I believe they are starting to finish the U.S. 15 expressway from where it currently ends to the PA border.
It would make sense to take it to Rochester, but they could still keep I-390 if they wanted to.
The U.S. 15/I-86 stack is an nice improvement over the previous partial-cloverleaf interchange. That replaced a much cooler "circlechange", which I remembered from early childhood. http://terraserver-usa.com/image.aspx?t=2&s=12&x=408&y=5836&z=18&w=1%22 (http://terraserver-usa.com/image.aspx?t=2&s=12&x=408&y=5836&z=18&w=1%22)
They did a nice job on the new stack, and it's much more fluid in traffic movement now. With the construction of the stack interchange, NYSDOT did install reference markers (the little green signs) for I-99 (or 99I as NYSDOT inventory goes) at the stack in Painted Post.
Quote from: dougtone on January 24, 2009, 09:12:44 PM
They did a nice job on the new stack, and it's much more fluid in traffic movement now. With the construction of the stack interchange, NYSDOT did install reference markers (the little green signs) for I-99 (or 99I as NYSDOT inventory goes) at the stack in Painted Post.
I'm going down that way in a few weeks, so I'll try to grab some pictures!
Quote from: treichard on January 21, 2009, 12:31:42 AM
PennDOT wants to encourage through traffic to use the I-99 freeway rather than two-lane old US 220 so much that they removed the temporary Alt US 220 through Milesburg, never bothered to sign Bus US 220 in Tyrone, and got rid of US 220 and US 322 on the two-lane road between State College and Bald Eagle without creating a new designation in its place.
Interesting, I drove along I-80 at Christmastime (Dec. 22nd and 27th to be exact) and, at that time, t :confused:he ALT 220 routing was still on the BGS for exit 158 and was on the reassurance signs between exits 158 and 161. The had, however, uncovered the I-99 sign at exit 161.
Having been born and raised in PA, I'm surprised PENNDOT could move that fast! :confused:
BREEZEWOOD!!!!
Four at-grade (at least part of) Interstates - two in PA? :banghead:
Quote from: Master son on January 28, 2009, 05:06:18 PM
BREEZEWOOD!!!!
Four at-grade (at least part of) Interstates - two in PA? :banghead:
Pennsylvania used to have a tourist motto of "America Starts Here"
Of course, if you're driving an Pennsylvania interstate it's "America Stops Here!" (and sometimes pays a toll, too!) X-(
Quote from: Master son on January 28, 2009, 05:06:18 PM
BREEZEWOOD!!!!
Four at-grade (at least part of) Interstates - two in PA? :banghead:
Don't forget the portion of I-78 that passes through traffic signals between the NJ Turnpike and the Holland Tunnel!
Quote from: akotchi on January 28, 2009, 10:17:12 PM
Quote from: Master son on January 28, 2009, 05:06:18 PM
BREEZEWOOD!!!!
Four at-grade (at least part of) Interstates - two in PA? :banghead:
Don't forget the portion of I-78 that passes through traffic signals between the NJ Turnpike and the Holland Tunnel!
At least for I-78 the argument can be made that this is due to the whole area being densely populated, whereas Breezewood is pretty much in the middle of f'n nowhere. At least there you don't necessarily have NIMBYs b!tching about interstate construction. Not that it makes it any better, but still...
. . . Just a lot of hoteliers, restauranteurs and truck stop operators that would see business plummet if the connection were ever made. After all, isn't that all Breezewood is?
A glorified truck stop IMO. Really its just a cluster of sprawl feeding off of an Interstate without the actual Interstate there.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.northeastroads.com%2Fpennsylvania001%2Fi-070_eb_exit_147_01.jpg&hash=177d79209d989e210c0f1379a656aae43c22c4b5)
So many memories there :)
I was in Breezewood in March of '07...I was shocked. I had (and still haven't) NEVER seen so many businesses packed in in one place. Look at that shit! *points at photo above*
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on January 29, 2009, 10:45:15 PM
I was in Breezewood in March of '07...I was shocked. I had (and still haven't) NEVER seen so many businesses packed in in one place. Look at that shit! *points at photo above*
Isn't it wonderful! All chain businesses too...
Quote from: aaroads on January 29, 2009, 10:54:06 PM
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on January 29, 2009, 10:45:15 PM
I was in Breezewood in March of '07...I was shocked. I had (and still haven't) NEVER seen so many businesses packed in in one place. Look at that shit! *points at photo above*
Isn't it wonderful! All chain businesses too...
Yes, it makes me want to jump in my car and drive up there. I don't see one, but I'm sure there's a Burger "Spleene" around.
I've been through Breezewood (http://www.pahighways.com/interstates/bwoodservices.html) so many times I don't even notice them anymore. To think, it all began with the Gateway Truck Stop which was built when the Turnpike was completed to offer services for those traveling south on then PA 126.
Ahhh Breezewood. I got food poisioning there... twice!
I also can pretty safely say the sign of the cop saying "YOU! SLOW DOWN!" as you exit I-76 is gone. It was a bummer because I was looking forward to seeing it.
Does anyone know if Congress has passed the legislation necessary to officially extend I-99 from Bald Eagle to around I-80?
Quote from: deanej on February 01, 2009, 07:23:21 PM
Does anyone know if Congress has passed the legislation necessary to officially extend I-99 from Bald Eagle to around I-80?
I haven't found anything on it, unless it has just recently passed.
Quote from: PAHighways on February 02, 2009, 12:54:36 AM
Quote from: deanej on February 01, 2009, 07:23:21 PM
Does anyone know if Congress has passed the legislation necessary to officially extend I-99 from Bald Eagle to around I-80?
I haven't found anything on it, unless it has just recently passed.
Since when did a little thing such as the law stop politicians. :-D
Seriously, does anyone know whether the original law needs to be amended to cover the new section of I-99 or whether that original legislation covered more ground that what was initially in place?
What's the timeline to begin construction on the I-80/I-99 Interchange?
Quote from: Hellfighter06 on February 05, 2009, 05:27:06 PM
What's the timeline to begin construction on the I-80/I-99 Interchange?
I don't know.
I can say this. From driving the older parts of I-99 and the parts of US 220 & US 322 near state college, there is not a lot of traffic on this road. If the highway had remained just US 220, then the interchange could remain as it currently is. IMHO
Quote from: Hellfighter06 on February 05, 2009, 05:27:06 PM
What's the timeline to begin construction on the I-80/I-99 Interchange?
It was supposed to have begun a few years back, but acid rock reared its ugly head there as well.
Yeah acid rock is still delaying that. The bill extending I-99 was passed not too long ago, someone posted the date in a new thread a couple hours ago.
Actually, PENNDot has fixed this problem with the at grade interchange with Musser Road. They added a "to" sign right above the "south 99" marker.
Why is I-99 still posted at 55 mph between I-80 and US-322 WB? That is clearly rural and somewhat suburban and can clearly be safely signed at 65 mph. Also, does anyone know of any plans to rebuild 322 into some sort of 4-lane interstate standard highway or 4-lane parkway of sorts?
Quote from: jackson1300 on April 06, 2009, 10:48:58 AM
Why is I-99 still posted at 55 mph between I-80 and US-322 WB? That is clearly rural and somewhat suburban and can clearly be safely signed at 65 mph. Also, does anyone know of any plans to rebuild 322 into some sort of 4-lane interstate standard highway or 4-lane parkway of sorts?
No one goes 55 anyway.
I mention the plan to upgrade US 322 (http://www.pahighways.com/us/US322.html) between State College and Milroy on my website.
QuoteNo one goes 55 anyway.
I mention the plan to upgrade US 322 between State College and Milroy on my website.
Just watch out southbound around Exit 80...the cops sit there all the time!
And there's your reason why it's posted 55. X-(
Quote from: dave19 on April 29, 2009, 11:47:32 AM
And there's your reason why it's posted 55. X-(
As with any other location where speeds are set so low. *cough* Illinois *cough* Wisconsin *cough* Oregon
Shortly before the part of I-99 north of State College opened, the Centre Daily Times posted an article about how the speed limit would be 55 mph and well enforced.
So you are right, and the enforcement officials were never hiding this fact.
The Berkshire spur of the Thruway has a work zone posted on the bridge over the Hudson. When I was last there, there were no signs of any work zone actually existing. There was, however, a state trooper with a radar gun.
The Centre Daily Times posted a new article about the problems and delay with the I-80 & I-99 interchange:
http://www.centredaily.com/news/local/story/1256830.html (http://www.centredaily.com/news/local/story/1256830.html)
Does anyone know what the high speed interchange will be? High speed would suggest it's not a trumpet or anything else where freeway to freeway movements are loops.
I saw this on PAHighways.com:
http://www.pahighways.com/interstates/I80-I99interchange.pdf (http://www.pahighways.com/interstates/I80-I99interchange.pdf)
This looks like a basic three-way freeway interchange with no left exits.
Quote from: mightyace on May 01, 2009, 02:44:11 PM
I saw this on PAHighways.com:
http://www.pahighways.com/interstates/I80-I99interchange.pdf (http://www.pahighways.com/interstates/I80-I99interchange.pdf)
Hey, that's my line!
During the State College Meet, we took a side trip up to see the future location. There is earth moving taking place which, according to the map, would be the start of relocating Musser Lane.
How will local traffic access the freeways with the new interchange? It looks like a lengthy detour.
An additional interchange would be constructed on 80 to the east of the 99 Y for local traffic.
Scuttlebutt on the CCMPO website suggests a July 2009 letting for SR 0080 Section A18, with SR 0080 Section B18 to follow later.
I just hope the signing is pattern-accurate.
How does PennDOT select section names (like C20 or A18)?
Also, the Centre Daily Times mentioned that already an I-99 interchange along the State College bypass needs an upgrade to handle the increased traffic and new development:
http://www.centredaily.com/news/local/story/1262404.html (http://www.centredaily.com/news/local/story/1262404.html)
And they wonder why us roadgeeks can't stand this road :-D? Anyway sprawl now effecting interstates within a year and I thought VA 288 was quick for extensive sprawl at 4 years.
Quote from: treichardHow does PennDOT select section names (like C20 or A18)?
It varies. Basically the section designation refers to a project being carried out on the named SR (or LR for pre-1985 projects when the legislative route numbering system was still in effect). The SR number is not necessarily the same as the signed route ("traffic route" in PennDOT parlance)--for instance, many I-99 projects had SR 6220 designations, and the expressway relocation of US 15 in Tioga County is being built as various sections of SR 6015.
As a generalization, turnkey construction contracts (frequently but not always on new location) tend to have section designations consisting of a letter followed by an integer (e.g. A09, B18, C10). Smaller contracts to do specific kinds of work tend to have section designations which refer in some way to the kind of work being done--e.g. "XNS" for exit numbering or "SGN" for signal upgrades. PennDOT has also had a history of using the last letter "S" in a section designation to refer to signing contracts (e.g. SR 0080 Section 7S, which was a pure signing contract), but this is not a reliable way to search for signing contracts because final letter S is also used by some resurfacing contracts.
In the old days of LR numbering, PennDOT section designations were generally simple integers, while the smaller projects (e.g. signing) had alphabetic suffixes. LRs were also normally short enough that a given SR consists of the combined lengths of a number of former LRs. It is my theory, for which I have no proof, that the alphabetic prefixes in current SR section designations refer to former LRs which are now part of the SR in question. This convention would have made it possible to carry over section designations for projects which were already in the Twelve Year Plan under LR numbers without having to change the numerical part of the LR section designation or risk duplicating section designations for a given SR. This theory is consistent with the fact that A?? section designations are very common, while D?? (or higher) designations are much rarer (all SRs have the mileage of at least one LR, but few SRs have the mileage of four or more LRs).
Section designations have a certain highly limited geographical specificity. If a corridor-level project to expand or otherwise improve a road is broken up into multiple contracts for construction, each with its own section designation, these will often be consecutive--for instance, SR 0219 Sections C08, C09, C10, C11.
Nowadays, it is actually more helpful to have the four- or five-digit ECMS number to locate the project plans. These have relatively little geographical specificity, although multiple contracts associated with a single large project tend to have consecutive ECMS numbers--for instance 14675, 14676, and 14677 for the Pa. 309 Fort Washington Expressway upgrade (but this rule was not followed in the case of 64275, which was also a Pa. 309 job). As a general rule, the ECMS number for a project is one of several MPMS numbers, each of which is associated with a share of the work done in that project. It is relatively easy to get ECMS numbers by using the Bid Package "Advanced Search" function in ECMS if the project has already been advertised, but if it is still in the preconstruction stages (as is the case for the I-80/Pa. 26 wye interchange), I don't know of an alternative to MPMSMap. My experience has been that the MPMS numbers in MPMSMap sometimes have a different final digit from the apparent corresponding ECMS project (e.g. MPMSMap says 75903 for the ongoing I-376 redesignation work/Squirrel Hill tunnel refurbishment between Pittsburgh and Monroeville, ECMS says 75905).
MPMSMap is a highly fiddly GIS application, but I think it is possible to get tabular data out of it--I haven't really explored its features thoroughly.
Alphabet soup decoder: ECMS = Engineering and Construction Management System; MPMS = Multimodal Project Management System.
For the most part, the 6xxx series adheres to the parent route that is being relocated and retired soon after completion. The exception being the SR 6279 and 6579 designations which are used for the HOV lanes of I-279 and I-579.
The 6220 designation was used in place of 6099 since the I-99 designation is written into law and required legislation to modify the route, but US 220 was ready to move with only AASHTO approval needed. The section between the Mount Nittany Expressway and Bellefonte Bypass was called SR 6026 even though PA 26 was not being moved.
I don't think this analysis is fully correct. Section 1105(c)(9) of ISTEA 1991 does say that the HPC now known as I-99 must follow "United States Route 220 and the Appalachian Thruway Corridor from Business 220 in Bedford, Pennsylvania, to the vicinity of Corning, New York," but it does not actually require that it follow a particular traversable routing of US 220. In order for the law to contain such a requirement, deposit plans showing an approved alignment of US 220 would have to be incorporated by reference. (We do not do this in the US because we do not do private bills at the federal level, but it has historically been used in the UK for railways and estuarial crossings like the Mersey Tunnel.) The actual requirement that the Section 1105(c)(9) corridor be called I-99 is in Section 332 of the NHSDA 1995 and it likewise does not particularize a traversable routing. What this means is that while the designation of the corridor as a whole is I-99, the application of the I-99 designation to a particular traversable routing is an administrative decision which has to be made by FHWA.
Moreover, designations like US 220 and I-99 are entities under the control of FHWA and AASHTO which are formally PennDOT traffic routes if they are signed at all, while designations like SR 0099 and SR 6220 are PennDOT entities. There is no requirement that the PennDOT and FHWA/AASHTO numbers match. I suspect the real reason parts of I-99 have been built as SR 6220 with various section designations is that the projects to upgrade US 220 were created long before the I-99 designation became law at the federal level. (In all likelihood they would have been created shortly after ISTEA 1991, if they were not already in the books in anticipation of federal funding for corridor expansion.) There is nothing that would have prevented PennDOT from building these as SR 0099, aside from the inconvenience of changing project numbers which were already in the Twelve Year Plan. PennDOT has done SR 0099 projects but these are generally rehabiliation projects on sections which have been signed as I-99 for more than a decade.
Great posts, Mr. Winkler. I figured there was a method to the madness. Have you worked for PennDOT?
One more question on the SR numbering,
Once a new SR 6xxx highway is completed and the I/US/PA designation is moved to it, the SR 0xxx number is moved, too, and the old route needs a SR number. Sometimes the thousands digit is simply changed to 1-4 to match the quadrant numbering (e.g., SRs 3222 and SR 3422 for the Reading business routes 222 and 422), but other times the old route is given a sequential SR number (e.g., SRs 3040 and 3042 replaced old US 220 and old US 322 in Centre County, or SR 3006 for Business 22 in Lewistown). How does PennDOT decide which numbering method to use?
The plan to upgrade US 220 was on the books long before Interstate 99 was even a thought, so any plans would use 220 after the LR/SR change in 1985. The original plans to upgrade US 220 called for following the original alignment, much as it has from Bedford to Marthas Furnace, then continue north to Milesburg instead of swinging over to State College.
Now that it is all SR 0099, any work involving the route would use that rather than 0220 or 0026 to identify the route.
Just spotted this article on centerdaily.com about using Stimulus funds for linking I-80 & I-99 together.
http://www.centredaily.com/news/i99/story/1367259.html (http://www.centredaily.com/news/i99/story/1367259.html)
I hope that PennDOT can get some stimulus funding so that this (http://www.centredaily.com/news/local/story/1348520.html) has less chance of happening.
that seems to be a Pennsylvania policy in general ... very low speed interchanges between freeways. See I-80 and I-81, the two biggest truck routes in the northeast, complete with 15mph cloverleaves.
The proposed I-80/I-99 interchange is a high-speed, directional-Y (http://www.pahighways.com/interstates/I80-I99interchange.pdf).
Got a map of the proposed "local" interchange to the east of that one? I've assumed it'll be a simple diamond, but I've never found a map of it to confirm my suspicion.
How will PA 26 be rerouted with this and the new local interchange?
Probably this (south to north):
From PA 64, PA 26 should tie into I-99/US 220 and bypass Bellefonte, as it does now.
At the (not-yet-)completed high-speed I-80 & I-99 interchange, it should follow I-80/US 220 east to the new local interchange, then exit north on an upgraded back road to meet the existing route.
Jacksonville Road (old PA 26) traffic between Bellefonte and Howard will be isolated from the new Y interchange to achieve a separation between local and regional traffic (in theory at least). The connections between the freeways and old route will be via PA 550 to I-99 Exit 83 to the south or via the back road to the new local I-80 interchange to the northeast.
Quote from: treichard on June 27, 2009, 11:51:28 PM
Got a map of the proposed "local" interchange to the east of that one? I've assumed it'll be a simple diamond, but I've never found a map of it to confirm my suspicion.
Yes, it is the third figure in newsletter where I got the schematic of the Y. It would be a diamond to a connector in this (http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=Bellefonte,+PA&sll=37.509726,-95.712891&sspn=34.133414,79.013672&ie=UTF8&ll=40.962708,-77.677138&spn=0.007988,0.01929&z=16) general area.
Quote from: treichard on June 28, 2009, 01:09:22 AM
Probably this (south to north):
From PA 64, PA 26 should tie into I-99/US 220 and bypass Bellefonte, as it does now.
At the (not-yet-)completed high-speed I-80 & I-99 interchange, it should follow I-80/US 220 east to the new local interchange, then exit north on an upgraded back road to meet the existing route.
Jacksonville Road (old PA 26) traffic between Bellefonte and Howard will be isolated from the new Y interchange to achieve a separation between local and regional traffic (in theory at least). The connections between the freeways and old route will be via PA 550 to I-99 Exit 83 to the south or via the back road to the new local I-80 interchange to the northeast.
Since you're saying probably, I'll point out another possibility - putting 26 back on Jacksonville Rd. and renaming the connector as some unnumbered SR between 99 and 26.
Does anyone know the status of Future I-99 in New York?
Quote from: AlpsROADS on June 28, 2009, 07:44:59 PM
Since you're saying probably, I'll point out another possibility - putting 26 back on Jacksonville Rd. and renaming the connector as some unnumbered SR between 99 and 26.
To do so means sending PA 26 back into Bellefonte to hook up with Jacksonville Road there and head northeasterly under I-80. That defeats the initial intent of the Bellefonte bypass (originally a PA 26 super-2 expressway bypass that took PA 26 out of the town) and the purpose of the planned local I-80 interchange once Jacksonville road access to I-80 Exit 161 is removed.
Quote from: Hellfighter on June 28, 2009, 08:41:12 PM
Does anyone know the status of Future I-99 in New York?
There is a 5 mile gap remaining after the southernmost mile of US 15 was finished last fall.
Quote from: https://www.nysdot.gov/portal/page/portal/news/press-releases/2009/2009-05-0191. Route 15 — Watson Creek to Presho (PIN 6008.51) This project will construct a new four-lane highway from Watson Creek Road north, approximately five miles, to the Route 15 Presho interchange. The new highway will be built on the hillside west of the existing two lane highway. Traffic will be maintained on existing route 15. Construction of the first phase is expected to begin in mid-August 2009 and end August 2012.
By 2012, I-99 will be complete from I-180 to I-86 (unless the I-180 interchange is not worthy of a design exception?). It remains to be seen if the I-99 designation approval and signing would come then or wait until the I-80 to I-180 gaps are ever designed, built, and completed.
It seems to me I-99 was born for the Penn State Nittany Lion football fans. I really think the feds messed up on this designation completely. I think I-99 would be better suited to take the US 219 corridor as a route to Buffalo instead of US 219. If the feds really wanted to, they could build a southern extension on the US 522 corridor (via I-70 Breezewood stub) to end at I-81 in Winchester, VA.
The change in path was due in part to Penn State University.
As for the US 219 corridor, John Murtha wanted the Interstate 67 (http://www.pahighways.com/interstates/I67.html) designation.
Quote from: PAHighways on September 24, 2009, 09:28:31 PM
The change in path was due in part to Penn State University.
As for the US 219 corridor, John Murtha wanted the Interstate 67 (http://www.pahighways.com/interstates/I67.html) designation.
Ah, so that's where rickmastfan67's "I want I-67 in PA!!" slogan comes from. :hmmm:
Quote from: mightyace on September 24, 2009, 09:33:57 PM
Quote from: PAHighways on September 24, 2009, 09:28:31 PM
The change in path was due in part to Penn State University.
As for the US 219 corridor, John Murtha wanted the Interstate 67 (http://www.pahighways.com/interstates/I67.html) designation.
Ah, so that's where rickmastfan67's "I want I-67 in PA!!" slogan comes from. :hmmm:
:sombrero:
The freeway that was "born for PSU fans" is US 322 between State College and Harrisburg. Lots of the PennDOT engineers graduated from Penn State and are football fans of their alma mater.
But alas, the Red Rabbit and Seven Mountains-Boalsburg sections of US 322 fumbled the ball to I-99.
QuoteThe freeway that was "born for PSU fans" is US 322 between State College and Harrisburg. Lots of the PennDOT engineers graduated from Penn State and are football fans of their alma mater.
But alas, the Red Rabbit and Seven Mountains-Boalsburg sections of US 322 fumbled the ball to I-99.
Could you say that was a "forced fumble" credited to Bud Shuster?
Quote from: Mr_Northside on September 25, 2009, 12:06:48 PM
QuoteThe freeway that was "born for PSU fans" is US 322 between State College and Harrisburg. Lots of the PennDOT engineers graduated from Penn State and are football fans of their alma mater.
But alas, the Red Rabbit and Seven Mountains-Boalsburg sections of US 322 fumbled the ball to I-99.
Could you say that was a "forced fumble" credited to Bud Shuster?
Maybe, but shouldn't Bud be flagged for "Illegal Procedure" :-D :) :sombrero:
QuoteMaybe, but shouldn't Bud be flagged for "Illegal Procedure"
Nah, just unsportsmanlike conduct ;-)
How long has Bud been out of office, about 12 years now? And how much longer until we stop whining about him? :colorful: (I don't like him any better than any of you, BTW.) :pan:
It seems that way but it's only been eight.
While we're on it, how about that "end-around" Bud pulled on Murtha years ago, getting that "Continental One" designation tranferred from 219 south of I-80 to Corridor O (322 from Woodland to Port Matilda), then south on I-99? :-D
Although I appreciate Bud's efforts in getting that ARC Corridor completed, which was sorely needed for safety concerns, I've always had a problem with the chicanery involved with putting his son in office in his place (I never voted for Bill in all the years I lived in that district becuase of that).
Well, one of the unwritten rules of the hobby is..."you're not a real roadgeek unless you have a webpage complaining about I-99."
There were a few others. (Please note: this was 8-10 years ago.)
-A page on the abandoned turnpike in Breezewood
I forget the rest...Jeff do you remember what they were?
I think a Centralia page was one of them. If you're west-coast, an I-238 photo and a diatribe.
Steve you're right - I forgot about Centralia!
We need to revise that list!
Quote from: CanesFan27 on September 28, 2009, 08:52:37 AM
Well, one of the unwritten rules of the hobby is..."you're not a real roadgeek unless you have a webpage complaining about I-99."
There were a few others. (Please note: this was 8-10 years ago.)
-A page on the abandoned turnpike in Breezewood
I forget the rest...Jeff do you remember what they were?
I remember there was around 10 or so, and I think the Goat Path Expressway was one.
Many viewers think I change my proposals like the weather , but how about extending I-99 southward onto the US 29 corridor where the road is divided at least and a freeway in some places from Warrenton to Greensboro, NC. AA Roads a couple of years back considered this the southern I-83 extension, but I think prolonging I-99 on it would be better. Then after Greensboro, I-99 would be built onto the US 421/NC 87 corridor south to Wilmington and visiting Fayetteville. I-99 would start easternly of I-95 which would fit the grid. I know, it's a pipe dream. But hey , if the feds want to extend I-74 to Myrtle Beach anything can happen.
As was brought up in Highland, I propose we take a leaf out of Britain's book and renumber I-99 as US 220 (I) :colorful:
Dunno how you'd fit that on a shield, though... :hmmm:
Leif: it's not the Feds who want to extend I-74...it's the states.
Quote from: Duke87 on October 08, 2009, 12:29:22 AM
As was brought up in Highland, I propose we take a leaf out of Britain's book and renumber I-99 as US 220 (I) :colorful:
Dunno how you'd fit that on a shield, though... :hmmm:
Just about as much as you can fit in the shields.
Contractor screw-up - so I doubt US 220I is plausible.
So you're suggesting Virginia & North Carolina would not want I-99?
I-99 never bothered me as much as I-180 (traffic lights), I-278 (doesn't meet its parent) or I-238 (no I-38 for it to be a child of). Or, for that matter, I-97 which really ought to be an x95. The route when finished (I-68 in Maryland to I-90 in New York) will be long enough for a 2di designation and 99 is closer to being in sequence than any other odd 2di number the route could have been given.
Quote from: hbelkins on October 08, 2009, 11:07:29 PM
I-99 never bothered me as much as I-180 (traffic lights), I-278 (doesn't meet its parent) or I-238 (no I-38 for it to be a child of). Or, for that matter, I-97 which really ought to be an x95. The route when finished (I-68 in Maryland to I-90 in New York) will be long enough for a 2di designation and 99 is closer to being in sequence than any other odd 2di number the route could have been given.
67 is closer ... as is 73, which at the time of 99's introduction did not yet exist in NC, I don't believe.
Leif,
You are applying one of the unwritten rules of roadgeeking - "Hey! It looks cool on a map, so lets make these Interstate changes."
The I-83 southern extension was just a guy who usedto flood forums with that idea. Just like another guy did with the "I-77 Southern Extension".
QuoteSo you're suggesting Virginia & North Carolina would not want I-99?
Virginia already studied it (http://www.virginiadot.org/projects/resources/I-99_Final_Report_-_VDOT_website.pdf)...came to the conclusion that it's too costly and there's opposition to it on the Eastern Shore.
Actually, I did think it looked cool on the map. In 2007, I drove US 29 from the VA 6 jct. to Greensboro, NC and I admit the traffic was not that heavy on it, but it was a great ride. The traffic was heaviest at Lynchburg and near Greensboro.
Quote from: agentsteel53 on October 08, 2009, 11:22:00 PM
67 is closer ... as is 73, which at the time of 99's introduction did not yet exist in NC, I don't believe.
NC ought to give up on I-73. That route will never exist north of Virginia.
I think NC is too committed . I mean it's kinda like have a finacee seeing three other men , but the groom wants to meet her at the altar anyways. It's also like every father's worst nightmare: his daughter brings her nose ring, partying, untucked shirt, lazy boyfriend to meet the grandparents. That is really what I-73 is? It's the one who was not quite invited to the party and the most likely to have terrible prank pulled on it.
Ah no...considering the US Congress legislated I-73. And that the only people that don't like the 73 or 99 designation pretty much reside in this forum.
Being very honest , I like the proposal of I-73. I just think it's in the wrong place. The US 23 corridor through the entire state of Ohio really should be I-73 and yes, I have been on it. The thing that I'm not so sure is about the US 52 corridor in West Virginia ; does it have the traffic on that stretch to qualify I-73/I-74 being built on it.
And I definitely don't like I-74 being it's dancing partner either. To me, it makes more sense for I-74 to follow US 50 from Ohio to Virginia and take over I-66 . Therefore I-66 in Kentucky would make more sense. To me, the roads that have the most controversy are I-97, I-99, I-73, and the extended I-74.
I think Michigan & Ohio would have liked to have I-73 (except the people on US 223) but both states are not too sure where the funding is going to come from and that's why they rejected it. It's too bad I-73 could not follow US 23 down the east side of Kentucky and go to Atlanta; then follow US 19 down to the Suncoast Pkwy and end in Tampa instead of Myrtle Beach. And then let I-74 be extended to Myrtle Beach by its lonesome. I think the US Congress messed up completely on I-73.
who doesn't like 73?
it's 74 that boggles the mind!
I-73 will never exist in West Virginia. Neither will I-74. The sections of US 52 that are being rebuilt are being built as a surface four-lane with at-grades and a few grade-separated interchanges. And that's all it ever needs to be. The surface four-lane US 23 in Kentucky and Virginia, which sort of parallels US 52, works fine as is.
I have another proposal for I-99 (did I mention this?). May be it could take over I-95 northeast of Boston and I-93 could become I-95. Then, all the I-x95 routes along the I-99 corridor, could become I-x99's. A little crazy, but just an idea. And for the freeway in which I-99 abandonned, could just be US 220 and US 15. Doesn't have to be an interstate. Though, the portion from the PA Turnpike to State College could become an I-x76.
Well, if I-73 will never exist in WV, why not multiplex with 64/77 through the state. And if someday in the future WV wants to build up the US-52 corridor, it'd just be rerouted.
Sykotyk
Quote from: Sykotyk on October 12, 2009, 04:04:25 PM
Well, if I-73 will never exist in WV, why not multiplex with 64/77 through the state. And if someday in the future WV wants to build up the US-52 corridor, it'd just be rerouted.
Sykotyk
Where would I-73 go after it got to Charleston?
US 35, US 33 and US 52 are surface routes with at-grades, as is a lot of US 23 north of Columbus.
Quote from: Sykotyk on October 12, 2009, 04:04:25 PM
Well, if I-73 will never exist in WV, why not multiplex with 64/77 through the state. And if someday in the future WV wants to build up the US-52 corridor, it'd just be rerouted.
Sykotyk
If I-73 got built from Saulte Ste. Marie to Huntington, yes it would be a way to connect the two other segments. Plus VDOT would have to hook up Roanoke to Princeton alongUS 460 which won't happen either. Hey we are lucky if Virginia at all will buildI-73 along US 220 between the NC line and I-581.
Snakes alive, this has to be an all-time record bump. :-o
There's a bunch (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=12778.50) of more (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=26264.25) recent (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=7514.0) threads (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=25889.0) about I-99, not to mention the user being quoted hasn't logged in for over two years.