Breezewood

[Mr_Northside]

For the longest time, I couldn't understand why the PTC signed on to Act 44.

While I'm sure they had some input in pre-vote meetings, since it's a law (and not a good one), it really wouldn't matter if they signed on to it or not.

One thing that might -- MIGHT -- make a difference here is distance from the mainline. In most places, the highway businesses are located very near the exit. Add a direct connection for I-70, and suddenly the Breezewood services are a couple of miles off both I-70 and I-76.

I don't know that it would be more than a mile each direction.... it's about a mile from the general junction of the access road and 30 (maybe less for "free" 70 heading north) for either movement.

[jeffandnicole]

That leaves the various political powers from state legislators to the Bedford County Commissioners as having the most influence.

The federal government could put a stop to it easily.

What sort of actual legal tools do they have?   Do they have any legal power that would withstand a lawsuit if they tried to withhold any portion of PennDOT's federal funding?
As an aside why try to penalize PennDOT when it is the PTC that is refusing to participate in an interchange project?  Since PTC is not federally funded they could not be penalized in that manner.

What interchange project?  The fantasy one that doesn't exist?

That's the point, the PTC is refusing to plan and build this interchange.

Why should they? The Turnpike is fine in this area. It's a straight run with no lights. It's the PennDOT road that has the problem.

[thenetwork]

Here's a question I have:  When Breezewood was Breeze-wooded (a.k.a when Free I-70 to MD was completed) in the late 60's/Early 70's (?), there were businesses and owners who had or were setting up shop to cash in on the I-70 gap.

How many of those specific businesses and/or owners are still in their exact spots 50 years later?  Not many. 

So the vast majority of businesses along that US-30 strip today should not have the same rights as those when the gap was first created since I believe there has been enough talk over the last couple of decades to eliminate the gap -- or at least to eliminate the Free-to-Toll-I-70-movements from the gap -- that they should know that the PTC & PennDOT may alter the Breezewood connection in the near future because of the increase in traffic volumes. 

Same goes for those residents that live within a 10-mile radius of Breezewood.  How many of the owners & their families still live on their same property or in that same radius 50 years later?  They should know the day is coming as well.

That's like those who decided to build or move to the area of Pasadena where the missing I-710 link is.  If you move into that questionable area that you know could be bulldozed, then you have no right to play the NIMBY card...And the politicians should not be helping them to block progress either -- jobs be damned!

Bottom line is:  The benefits to these people if only a direct east-to-east/west-to-west connection is ultimately made is Less Pollution, Less Noise and a Safer Neighborhood (less accidents, backups,...).  But if heaven forbid a nudie bar or a similar undesirable business darkens their block, then  they change their tune.  In other words, you can't have it both ways.

[Beltway]

What interchange project?  The fantasy one that doesn't exist?

That's the point, the PTC is refusing to plan and build this interchange.

Why should they? The Turnpike is fine in this area. It's a straight run with no lights. It's the PennDOT road that has the problem.

PennDOT can't fix the problem without the partnership with PTC. 

Both roads are Interstate highways.  Interstate highways are part of a network and they need interchanges that directly connect them.

[jeffandnicole]

What interchange project?  The fantasy one that doesn't exist?

That's the point, the PTC is refusing to plan and build this interchange.

Why should they? The Turnpike is fine in this area. It's a straight run with no lights. It's the PennDOT road that has the problem.

PennDOT can't fix the problem without the partnership with PTC. 

Both roads are Interstate highways.  Interstate highways are part of a network and they need interchanges that directly connect them.

Should we go back to listing all the interstates in PA that aren't connected yet get completely ignored?

[Rothman]

I-81.

Done.

[Beltway]

What interchange project?  The fantasy one that doesn't exist?

That's the point, the PTC is refusing to plan and build this interchange.

Why should they? The Turnpike is fine in this area. It's a straight run with no lights. It's the PennDOT road that has the problem.

PennDOT can't fix the problem without the partnership with PTC. 
Both roads are Interstate highways.  Interstate highways are part of a network and they need interchanges that directly connect them.

Should we go back to listing all the interstates in PA that aren't connected yet get completely ignored?

They are not ignored, I and others have commented on them many times.  The FAct that some others aren't connected does not justify I-70 Breezewood not being connected.

[Alps]

I-81.

Done.

376@76 (west) technically a breezewood. Both ends of 99 are breezewoods. 80@476 is a unique case. 81@476 (southern - planned to be fixed). 78@476 (albeit all freeway to connect).

[jeffandnicole]

What interchange project?  The fantasy one that doesn't exist?

That's the point, the PTC is refusing to plan and build this interchange.

Why should they? The Turnpike is fine in this area. It's a straight run with no lights. It's the PennDOT road that has the problem.

PennDOT can't fix the problem without the partnership with PTC. 
Both roads are Interstate highways.  Interstate highways are part of a network and they need interchanges that directly connect them.

Should we go back to listing all the interstates in PA that aren't connected yet get completely ignored?

They are not ignored, I and others have commented on them many times.  The FAct that some others aren't connected does not justify I-70 Breezewood not being connected.

They've been commented on...occasionally.  And often while we're talking about Breezewood.  The others don't have a 22 page thread - their combined mentions would barely fill up a page or two.

[hotdogPi]

What interchange project?  The fantasy one that doesn't exist?

That's the point, the PTC is refusing to plan and build this interchange.

Why should they? The Turnpike is fine in this area. It's a straight run with no lights. It's the PennDOT road that has the problem.

PennDOT can't fix the problem without the partnership with PTC. 
Both roads are Interstate highways.  Interstate highways are part of a network and they need interchanges that directly connect them.

Should we go back to listing all the interstates in PA that aren't connected yet get completely ignored?

They are not ignored, I and others have commented on them many times.  The FAct that some others aren't connected does not justify I-70 Breezewood not being connected.

They've been commented on...occasionally.  And often while we're talking about Breezewood.  The others don't have a 22 page thread - their combined mentions would barely fill up a page or two.

With the one exception of I-95/276, which has its own long thread.

[jeffandnicole]

What interchange project?  The fantasy one that doesn't exist?

That's the point, the PTC is refusing to plan and build this interchange.

Why should they? The Turnpike is fine in this area. It's a straight run with no lights. It's the PennDOT road that has the problem.

PennDOT can't fix the problem without the partnership with PTC. 
Both roads are Interstate highways.  Interstate highways are part of a network and they need interchanges that directly connect them.

Should we go back to listing all the interstates in PA that aren't connected yet get completely ignored?

They are not ignored, I and others have commented on them many times.  The FAct that some others aren't connected does not justify I-70 Breezewood not being connected.

They've been commented on...occasionally.  And often while we're talking about Breezewood.  The others don't have a 22 page thread - their combined mentions would barely fill up a page or two.

With the one exception of I-95/276, which has its own long thread.

Very true.

And 25% of that interchange has taken 35 years to be built...under a government mandate to be built.

[Beltway]

What interchange project?  The fantasy one that doesn't exist?

That's the point, the PTC is refusing to plan and build this interchange.

Why should they? The Turnpike is fine in this area. It's a straight run with no lights. It's the PennDOT road that has the problem.

PennDOT can't fix the problem without the partnership with PTC. 
Both roads are Interstate highways.  Interstate highways are part of a network and they need interchanges that directly connect them.

Should we go back to listing all the interstates in PA that aren't connected yet get completely ignored?

They are not ignored, I and others have commented on them many times.  The FAct that some others aren't connected does not justify I-70 Breezewood not being connected.

They've been commented on...occasionally.  And often while we're talking about Breezewood.  The others don't have a 22 page thread - their combined mentions would barely fill up a page or two.

Breezewood is the worst example, but discussing it is a proxy for the others.

One of the main reasons why the Breezewood discussion has so many posts, is because people like yourself keep it going by posting so many objecting and contrarian posts.

[Rothman]

I-81.

Done.

376@76 (west) technically a breezewood. Both ends of 99 are breezewoods. 80@476 is a unique case. 81@476 (southern - planned to be fixed). 78@476 (albeit all freeway to connect).

Meh.  The only connection out of all of the missing ones that I find anywhere close to as annoying as Breezewood is I-81/I-76 in Carlisle. 

Although I-78 to I-476 N sends you around all sorts of loops, at least you're moving.

I-80 to I-476?  One light that you drive straight through?  Meh.

I suppose I think of I-99 as just incomplete rather than the result of political nonsense.

And I-376 to I-76?  Pffffffffffft.

Just saying the I-81 connections to the Penna Turnpike are the only other ones worth bothering with.

[jeffandnicole]

What interchange project?  The fantasy one that doesn't exist?

That's the point, the PTC is refusing to plan and build this interchange.

Why should they? The Turnpike is fine in this area. It's a straight run with no lights. It's the PennDOT road that has the problem.

PennDOT can't fix the problem without the partnership with PTC. 
Both roads are Interstate highways.  Interstate highways are part of a network and they need interchanges that directly connect them.

Should we go back to listing all the interstates in PA that aren't connected yet get completely ignored?

They are not ignored, I and others have commented on them many times.  The FAct that some others aren't connected does not justify I-70 Breezewood not being connected.

They've been commented on...occasionally.  And often while we're talking about Breezewood.  The others don't have a 22 page thread - their combined mentions would barely fill up a page or two.

Breezewood is the worst example, but discussing it is a proxy for the others.

One of the main reasons why the Breezewood discussion has so many posts, is because people like yourself keep it going by posting so many objecting and contrarian posts.

So, no debate?  Certain people have the one and only answer?  Should someone have the final answer and then shut the thread down, God forbid we keep talking about it?

They're not so much objecting and contrarian, but rather pointing out the flaws of reasoning others make, especially when they come upon this phenomenon that has existed for 55 years or so. 

Should it be a direct connection? Absolutely.  There's no doubt about that, and one that technically I haven't argued against.  My argument is that the feds aren't actually doing anything about it, yet people here act as if the feds should start cutting off funding for PA until it's fixed.  For as much knowledge that gets passed around these boards, I've found a very strong and lengthy history of people not caring about how stuff actually works.  The feds actually have to demand and approve these projects that they actually permitted in the first place.  The feds aren't demanding it be fixed, so why should PA go thru the expense of fixing it when the people most directly affected don't want it fixed? 

Meh.  The only connection out of all of the missing ones that I find anywhere close to as annoying as Breezewood is I-81/I-76 in Carlisle. 

The actual statement I made was listing all the interstates in PA that aren't connected yet get completely ignored.  It had nothing to do with their degree of annoyance.  For the most part, the degree of annoyance depends on how often one actually uses the interchange.  If you don't use 476 to 80 all that often, not a big deal.  If you use it every day, when heavy truck traffic requires a 2 or 3 cycle wait to go thru that one light, it's quite a bit more annoying.

[AMLNet49]

That leaves the various political powers from state legislators to the Bedford County Commissioners as having the most influence.

The federal government could put a stop to it easily.

What sort of actual legal tools do they have?   Do they have any legal power that would withstand a lawsuit if they tried to withhold any portion of PennDOT's federal funding?
As an aside why try to penalize PennDOT when it is the PTC that is refusing to participate in an interchange project?  Since PTC is not federally funded they could not be penalized in that manner.

What interchange project?  The fantasy one that doesn't exist?

That's the point, the PTC is refusing to plan and build this interchange.

For this to be the case they would have to be thinking about it. Do we even know if Breezewood crosses their minds as a problem? The 95 interchange will be completed because the feds want it to be, but Breezewood is rather insignificant in comparison. I'd be willing to believe that they don't even have alternatives because they never plan on doing anything about it.

[Beltway]

They've been commented on...occasionally.  And often while we're talking about Breezewood.  The others don't have a 22 page thread - their combined mentions would barely fill up a page or two.

Breezewood is the worst example, but discussing it is a proxy for the others.
One of the main reasons why the Breezewood discussion has so many posts, is because people like yourself keep it going by posting so many objecting and contrarian posts.

So, no debate?  Certain people have the one and only answer?  Should someone have the final answer and then shut the thread down, God forbid we keep talking about it?
They're not so much objecting and contrarian, but rather pointing out the flaws of reasoning others make, especially when they come upon this phenomenon that has existed for 55 years or so. 
Should it be a direct connection? Absolutely.  There's no doubt about that, and one that technically I haven't argued against.  My argument is that the feds aren't actually doing anything about it, yet people here act as if the feds should start cutting off funding for PA until it's fixed.  For as much knowledge that gets passed around these boards, I've found a very strong and lengthy history of people not caring about how stuff actually works.  The feds actually have to demand and approve these projects that they actually permitted in the first place.  The feds aren't demanding it be fixed, so why should PA go thru the expense of fixing it when the people most directly affected don't want it fixed? 

You seem to stir various pots endlessly, and sometimes like above it is not even clear what you are trying to accomplish.

I have not suggested cutting off federal funds over this, I have questioned the legality of it in fact; and I am very much process-oriented in how to get things done.  I have questioned whether the FHWA has any actual legal authority to force a state to build a project on a turnpike that does not receive federal funds.

I don't see how FHWA can force PTC to build this project so your argument is a strawman.

[jeffandnicole]

They've been commented on...occasionally.  And often while we're talking about Breezewood.  The others don't have a 22 page thread - their combined mentions would barely fill up a page or two.

Breezewood is the worst example, but discussing it is a proxy for the others.
One of the main reasons why the Breezewood discussion has so many posts, is because people like yourself keep it going by posting so many objecting and contrarian posts.

So, no debate?  Certain people have the one and only answer?  Should someone have the final answer and then shut the thread down, God forbid we keep talking about it?
They're not so much objecting and contrarian, but rather pointing out the flaws of reasoning others make, especially when they come upon this phenomenon that has existed for 55 years or so. 
Should it be a direct connection? Absolutely.  There's no doubt about that, and one that technically I haven't argued against.  My argument is that the feds aren't actually doing anything about it, yet people here act as if the feds should start cutting off funding for PA until it's fixed.  For as much knowledge that gets passed around these boards, I've found a very strong and lengthy history of people not caring about how stuff actually works.  The feds actually have to demand and approve these projects that they actually permitted in the first place.  The feds aren't demanding it be fixed, so why should PA go thru the expense of fixing it when the people most directly affected don't want it fixed? 

You seem to stir various pots endlessly, and sometimes like above it is not even clear what you are trying to accomplish.

I have not suggested cutting off federal funds over this, I have questioned the legality of it in fact; and I am very much process-oriented in how to get things done.  I have questioned whether the FHWA has any actual legal authority to force a state to build a project on a turnpike that does not receive federal funds.

I don't see how FHWA can force PTC to build this project so your argument is a strawman.

I never said you specifically.  You're taking this a bit personally if you think I did.  But it has been mentioned several times by others that PA Funding should be cut off until a interchange is built. 

Stirring the pot?  Isn't that normally done by people that want change?  How is explaining the status quo stirring the pot?

[02 Park Ave]

I can see the genisis of this thread evolving into something like the numerical/sequential exit numbering thread.

[empirestate]

I can see the genisis of this thread evolving into something like the numerical/sequential exit numbering thread.

I was just thinking the same thing.

[webny99]

I can see the genisis of this thread evolving into something like the numerical/sequential exit numbering thread.

I was just thinking the same thing.

You and I will just watch this time 

[Avalanchez71]

What is the exit number?

[Brandon]

I can see the genisis of this thread evolving into something like the numerical/sequential exit numbering thread.

There are just some topics that devolve into a roadgeek version of a holy war.

[02 Park Ave]

With the current focus on improving "Infrastructure", a transformation to the Breezewood situation would be for a private entity to build EZ Pass only ramps directly connecting I-70 with the Turnpike.  They could maintain their own tolling equipment or perhaps enter into an agreement with the Turnpike to add their toll, as a surcharge, onto the Turnpike's there.

This could be a way for this project to get the high priority it deserves rather than languishing as it is now and has been for decades.

[Beltway]

With the current focus on improving "Infrastructure", a transformation to the Breezewood situation would be for a private entity to build EZ Pass only ramps directly connecting I-70 with the Turnpike.  They could maintain their own tolling equipment or perhaps enter into an agreement with the Turnpike to add their toll, as a surcharge, onto the Turnpike's there.
This could be a way for this project to get the high priority it deserves rather than languishing as it is now and has been for decades.

The state would need to have enabling legislation to allow the formulation of a public-private partnership for such a project.  Environmental impact studies would need to be undertaken.  The state would need to acquire the needed right-of-way for the ramps.

[Beltway]

You seem to stir various pots endlessly, and sometimes like above it is not even clear what you are trying to accomplish.
I have not suggested cutting off federal funds over this, I have questioned the legality of it in fact; and I am very much process-oriented in how to get things done.  I have questioned whether the FHWA has any actual legal authority to force a state to build a project on a turnpike that does not receive federal funds.
I don't see how FHWA can force PTC to build this project so your argument is a strawman.

I never said you specifically.  You're taking this a bit personally if you think I did.  But it has been mentioned several times by others that PA Funding should be cut off until a interchange is built. 

And I have responded to them a number of times, asking anyone who wants to answer what if any mechanism does FHWA have available to withhold funds if a state won't build a particular project.

Stirring the pot?  Isn't that normally done by people that want change?  How is explaining the status quo stirring the pot?

In what ways have you been "explaining the status quo"?  Ladling chum onto the waters doesn't do that.