I-95/Penna Turnpike Interchange

[roadman65]

I-295 used to end for years at US 130 in Bordentown.   Most traffic used the side road and cut over the NJ Turnpike and entered it to go points north.  The section north of Hamilton mainly  was used by locals.

Though there was a TO I-295 N Bound shield at CR 524 if you really needed to get back to the route after the Bordentown gap.  Then later it was given to US 206 N Bound from US 130 when I-195 got connected to I-295.

[yakra]

the interstate highway system designated by the number 95 that links Portland, Me., with Miami, Fla.

I don't know whether my snarky response should be...
- Portland? Hell, it goes all the way to FALMOUTH!
- Don't they mean, Portland to Jacksonville?

[KEVIN_224]

No Houlton, ME to New Jersey Turnpike Exit 6 and then from US Route 1 in Lawrenceville, NJ to Miami?

[1995hoo]

I-295 used to end for years at US 130 in Bordentown.   Most traffic used the side road and cut over the NJ Turnpike and entered it to go points north.  The section north of Hamilton mainly  was used by locals.

Though there was a TO I-295 N Bound shield at CR 524 if you really needed to get back to the route after the Bordentown gap.  Then later it was given to US 206 N Bound from US 130 when I-195 got connected to I-295.

When I was a kid, my father would take the Turnpike south to I-195 west to US-130, then south to Bordentown. We'd stop at the Town and Country Diner for lunch or dinner, then take 130 down to I-295. I don't think he knew that Exit 7 on the Turnpike was just south of there. He'd probably have gotten back on the Turnpike had he known that.

[roadman65]

What is interesting in Bordentown that all the overheads at both ends of the US 130 & 206 splits both have remnants from when there was a missing link of I-295.  NB has the NB US 206 guide with at "TO I-295" shield on it to navigate those dumped onto US 130 when the freeway ended just south of Bordentown back to the freeway once the partial interchange between I-295 and I-195 was completed in 1989 or circa. 

Then SB it would have it where US 130 leaves, but now its a good guide being the interchange with the freeway is so close, and the fact that it compliments the "TO NJ Turnpike" shield on the US 206 SB to Hammonton panel next to it.

I doubt that once the I-95 and PA Turnpike interchange is completed NJDOT will ever include a I-95 shield with the Turnpike going SB on both US 130 & US 206.

[theroadwayone]

I could crawl army-style from my home in San Diego to Cape Cod, and they'd still be working on the interchange when I'd be done.

[SignBridge]

You got that right!

[webny99]

I haven't been following this thread, but are there any updates on the progress of this interchange?
It's rather slow going, I presume? 

[SignBridge]

To make a very long story short, the interchange should have been built forty years ago. The Penn. Turnpike Comm. dragged their feet forever before finally starting construction. And the actual construction process is taking far longer than it should. I think they're building at a rate of about one girder per month. LOL

If you read back in the pages of this thread, it has been a very colorful discussion. 

[Beltway]

To make a very long story short, the interchange should have been built forty years ago. The Penn. Turnpike Comm. dragged their feet forever before finally starting construction. And the actual construction process is taking far longer than it should. I think they're building at a rate of about one girder per month. LOL

There was plenty of open land around the crossing when I-95 opened in the mid-1970s.  I know because I saw it then.  It would have been a lot simpler to build then.

[jeffandnicole]

To make a very long story short, the interchange should have been built forty years ago. The Penn. Turnpike Comm. dragged their feet forever before finally starting construction. And the actual construction process is taking far longer than it should. I think they're building at a rate of about one girder per month. LOL

There was plenty of open land around the crossing when I-95 opened in the mid-1970s.  I know because I saw it then.  It would have been a lot simpler to build then.

There's plenty of things that could've should've would've been done in the 1970's.  But even then, the number of projects they wanted to do exceeded the money available.

In a way, today, they're doing the 95/Tpk interchange right.  If they did the traditional PA Tpk interchange in the 1970's.  it'll be 25 mph ramp curves thru an undersized toll plaza.  Granted, all things being equal, the Somerset Freeway in NJ would've been built too. 

[Beltway]

To make a very long story short, the interchange should have been built forty years ago. The Penn. Turnpike Comm. dragged their feet forever before finally starting construction. And the actual construction process is taking far longer than it should. I think they're building at a rate of about one girder per month. LOL

There was plenty of open land around the crossing when I-95 opened in the mid-1970s.  I know because I saw it then.  It would have been a lot simpler to build then.

There's plenty of things that could've should've would've been done in the 1970's.  But even then, the number of projects they wanted to do exceeded the money available.
In a way, today, they're doing the 95/Tpk interchange right.  If they did the traditional PA Tpk interchange in the 1970's.  it'll be 25 mph ramp curves thru an undersized toll plaza.  Granted, all things being equal, the Somerset Freeway in NJ would've been built too. 

It always was a standard practice on new Interstate highways to build interchanges with other major highways.

The current design for the I-476 interchange with the Turnpike was devised in the 1970s.  Community opposition to the Mid-County Expy. delayed its construction.  It has high-speed semi-directional ramps.  An 1970s interchange with I-95 could likewise have had a high-speed and high capacity design, and they had enough land so that they would not be constrained into building long towering bridges to make the connection.

[jeffandnicole]

To make a very long story short, the interchange should have been built forty years ago. The Penn. Turnpike Comm. dragged their feet forever before finally starting construction. And the actual construction process is taking far longer than it should. I think they're building at a rate of about one girder per month. LOL

There was plenty of open land around the crossing when I-95 opened in the mid-1970s.  I know because I saw it then.  It would have been a lot simpler to build then.

There's plenty of things that could've should've would've been done in the 1970's.  But even then, the number of projects they wanted to do exceeded the money available.
In a way, today, they're doing the 95/Tpk interchange right.  If they did the traditional PA Tpk interchange in the 1970's.  it'll be 25 mph ramp curves thru an undersized toll plaza.  Granted, all things being equal, the Somerset Freeway in NJ would've been built too. 

It always was a standard practice on new Interstate highways to build interchanges with other major highways.

The current design for the I-476 interchange with the Turnpike was devised in the 1970s.

Impossible, in its current form.  There was no EZ Pass in the 1970's.  The general ramp layout could've been about the same and movements between 276 and 476 could've been the same because you're not exiting the toll system, but the actual toll plaza interchange would've been traditional toll lanes.

An 1970s interchange with I-95 could likewise have had a high-speed and high capacity design, and they had enough land so that they would not be constrained into building long towering bridges to make the connection.

What's funny with your comparison is that the 276/476 interchange involves long towering bridges.

If you look up historic aerials, you'll see that much of the land was already built on where 95 and the Turnpike meet.  A quick comparison on historic aerials between 1970 and 2000 shows only the northeast quadrant of the interchange has changed significantly during that timespan.

Other options included that stub from 95 to 413.  Again, look at historic aerials - the most likely routing already had homes and businesses on it already.  And unless they completely killed tolls east of present day 95 there would've been no high speed design, because no EZ Pass.

[PHLBOS]

Looks like NJ 101.5 is already commenting on the proposed east-west/north-south oddities of the extended I-295.

One for the I told you so... department.
Drive north to go south ... or is that west? Why they're renumbering 95/295

[Beltway]

It always was a standard practice on new Interstate highways to build interchanges with other major highways.
The current design for the I-476 interchange with the Turnpike was devised in the 1970s.

Impossible, in its current form.  There was no EZ Pass in the 1970's.  The general ramp layout could've been about the same and movements between 276 and 476 could've been the same because you're not exiting the toll system, but the actual toll plaza interchange would've been traditional toll lanes.

That is what it was, as there was no electronic tolling in 1992, only toll booths where vehicles had to stop.  The toll plaza was in the same place.  The only later modification is the provision of open road tolling, IIRC about 10 years ago.

The high-speed semi-directional 2-lane connections were in the original 1970s design, between the Mid-County and the easterly east-west Turnpike, and between the Mid-County and the Northeast Extension.  The toll plaza was in the same place. 

An 1970s interchange with I-95 could likewise have had a high-speed and high capacity design, and they had enough land so that they would not be constrained into building long towering bridges to make the connection.

What's funny with your comparison is that the 276/476 interchange involves long towering bridges.

Not really, the two longest bridges are about 400 feet long, and with standard Interstate vertical clearances, probably 16 feet.

If you look up historic aerials, you'll see that much of the land was already built on where 95 and the Turnpike meet.  A quick comparison on historic aerials between 1970 and 2000 shows only the northeast quadrant of the interchange has changed significantly during that timespan.
Other options included that stub from 95 to 413.  Again, look at historic aerials - the most likely routing already had homes and businesses on it already.  And unless they completely killed tolls east of present day 95 there would've been no high speed design, because no EZ Pass.

Need to get an account and pay money for access to historic aerials, and I am not going to do that.

Most of the nearby buildings at I-95, particularly commercial buildings, were not yet built in the 1970s.

Between southerly I-95 and easterly Turnpike, they could have built 2-lane ramps with at least a 45 mph design speed, and each could have had its own toll plaza.  Back then vehicles would have had to stop at the toll plaza, I didn't mean to say that 'high speed' means otherwise as there was no ETC then.

[PHLBOS]

Need to get an account and pay money for access to historic aerials, and I am not going to do that.

For simply viewing, not necessarily.
Historic Aerials Viewer

[jeffandnicole]

Go to https://www.historicaerials.com/

Just below the video of how to make a purchase, you'll see a button that says "Let's see some aerials".

You're on the screen to view aerials.  No login or payment required.

And if you do that, you'll see the very commercial buildings you clam aren't there were there.

An 1970s interchange with I-95 could likewise have had a high-speed and high capacity design, and they had enough land so that they would not be constrained into building long towering bridges to make the connection.

What's funny with your comparison is that the 276/476 interchange involves long towering bridges.

Not really, the two longest bridges are about 400 feet long, and with standard Interstate vertical clearances, probably 16 feet.

Because of their height, they feel longer than they really are.  But you're right...most of it is simply built up land.

[Beltway]

Go to https://www.historicaerials.com/
Just below the video of how to make a purchase, you'll see a button that says "Let's see some aerials".
You're on the screen to view aerials.  No login or payment required.
And if you do that, you'll see the very commercial buildings you clam aren't there were there.

OK... there are a bunch of commercial buildings right north of the Turnpike that I see on Google Maps aerial, that are not on the 1970 image.  The Bristol Plaza buildings in the SE quadrant have been relocated to much closer to the Turnpike, and there was a lot more space of unbuilt land back then for the ramps I suggested.  Bristol Plaza itself looks like it is under construction, and that wouldn't have happened if the right-of-way had been acquired for the interchange.

Interesting that I-95 was already under construction there in 1970, I had thought it was a few years later.  An expansive design might have required acquiring up to 50 homes for the right-of-way, and back then when Interstate construction was in full swing that would have been a small number.  I-95 thru Center City required thousands of homes and hundreds of businesses.

[roadman65]

It always was a standard practice on new Interstate highways to build interchanges with other major highways.
The current design for the I-476 interchange with the Turnpike was devised in the 1970s.

Impossible, in its current form.  There was no EZ Pass in the 1970's.  The general ramp layout could've been about the same and movements between 276 and 476 could've been the same because you're not exiting the toll system, but the actual toll plaza interchange would've been traditional toll lanes.

That is what it was, as there was no electronic tolling in 1992, only toll booths where vehicles had to stop.  The toll plaza was in the same place.  The only later modification is the provision of open road tolling, IIRC about 10 years ago.

The high-speed semi-directional 2-lane connections were in the original 1970s design, between the Mid-County and the easterly east-west Turnpike, and between the Mid-County and the Northeast Extension.  The toll plaza was in the same place. 

An 1970s interchange with I-95 could likewise have had a high-speed and high capacity design, and they had enough land so that they would not be constrained into building long towering bridges to make the connection.

What's funny with your comparison is that the 276/476 interchange involves long towering bridges.

Not really, the two longest bridges are about 400 feet long, and with standard Interstate vertical clearances, probably 16 feet.

If you look up historic aerials, you'll see that much of the land was already built on where 95 and the Turnpike meet.  A quick comparison on historic aerials between 1970 and 2000 shows only the northeast quadrant of the interchange has changed significantly during that timespan.
Other options included that stub from 95 to 413.  Again, look at historic aerials - the most likely routing already had homes and businesses on it already.  And unless they completely killed tolls east of present day 95 there would've been no high speed design, because no EZ Pass.

Need to get an account and pay money for access to historic aerials, and I am not going to do that.

Most of the nearby buildings at I-95, particularly commercial buildings, were not yet built in the 1970s.

Between southerly I-95 and easterly Turnpike, they could have built 2-lane ramps with at least a 45 mph design speed, and each could have had its own toll plaza.  Back then vehicles would have had to stop at the toll plaza, I didn't mean to say that 'high speed' means otherwise as there was no ETC then.

If the PTC did that with Breezewood too.  You are talking about the same agency that neglected to build the direct connection to I-70 back then too.  Remember, if they did that then as well, Breezewood would have never gotten the travelers on I-70 to go through their downtown to build up their economy, and no reason to protest the movement to complete now.

Yes, PTC is very slow not only to react recently, but also to light a fire under the construction progress as indeed its taking a lot longer than it should.  At the rate they are going we might see the rest of the I-4 Ultimate in Central Florida completed long before this simple interchange is finished.

[Alex]

Looks like NJ 101.5 is already commenting on the proposed east-west/north-south oddities of the extended I-295.

One for the I told you so... department.
Drive north to go south ... or is that west? Why they're renumbering 95/295

Reading that article:

Schapiro said under the new configuration, if you want to go south to Philadelphia from the new stretch of I-295, "you're going to be going north past Route 1 towards the Delaware River, and when you get to the Delaware River in Pennsylvania, 295 will be designated as 295 West."

I do not see why I-295 cannot be signed as west/west leading west from U.S. 1 in New Jersey to the state line. Changing cardinal directions is not unheard of in the Interstate system. For example I-196 in Michigan is signed as north/south from South Haven to the split with U.S. 31 at Holland, and east/west from there to Grand Rapids. Also I-635 around Dallas uses east/west cardinal directions on the north side, and north/south on the east side.

Schapiro said typically roadways that loop in a circle don't actually have a north-south designation; they may simply be called the inner or outer loop. But in the case of 295, it's not a complete circle.

"Because this is not a true beltway, they're not able to do that type of designation."

We all know that is not true, as there are a number of scenarios where beltways shift cardinal directions on each side of their respective city. Furthermore, I-295 around Jacksonville is signed as South from both directions of I-95 on the north side, with East Beltway/West Beltway to delineate the difference.

I still think designating old I-95 southwest into Bucks County as a new I-x95 (I-695?) would be the best option. And if they cited that one Interstate cannot end at another with a U.S. Highway in between, I'd reference I-280 and I-680 coming together at U.S. 101 in San Jose, CA.

[roadman65]

I do not see why not NJDOT did not make US 1 up to freeway standards from New Brunswick to Trenton years ago before the current sprawl in West Windsor and South Brunswick.  Before 1985, the road had hardly any development along its corridor, where upgrading to a freeway could have been done easily without eminent domain proceedings to acquire land along its ROW.  If they did, now they could have applied I-95 to it and just figured away to connect it the Turnpike either via the now defunct NJ 92 or an elongated Exit 9 ramp directly to US 1. Though the latter one has to deal with the conservation area along Lawrence Brook as there is some former Lene Lenape ruins there including a cave that the tribe held sacred there which may not be an option, but NJ 92 being built even as a Turnpike Spur could have taken I-95 to it. 

That could have solved the problem too, and if it was done then we would have been ready for all that sprawl which now needs NJDOT to worry about adding extra lanes from Aaron Road to Nassau Park Boulevard as they now have to study real carefully.

[jeffandnicole]

Looks like NJ 101.5 is already commenting on the proposed east-west/north-south oddities of the extended I-295.

One for the I told you so... department.
Drive north to go south … or is that west? Why they’re renumbering 95/295

And also in the I told you so department...of the 5 people that commented, 2 are spam, 2 were talking about a completely different matter regarding signing 287 & 440, and 1 is a fellow road enthusiast.

The normal people just don't care.

[mrsman]

This project would actually be a boon to the PTC, so it's strange that they are taking so much time to complete this.  In my view, NYC-Philly traffic would now, for the most part, be taking a portion of the PA Tunpike to complete their trip.  Currently, there are many ways to make this trip, each with their positives and negatives, but would generally avoid the turnpike.  I imagine most would make the trip by taking I-195 to one of the Trenton area bridges or perhaps continuing south on the NJTP and using one of the bridges that lead directly to Philly (like Betsy Ross, Ben, or Walt).  With this interchange, there would be one clear way of getting to Philly that would be far faster than the others, and the PTC would benefit.

[PHLBOS]

The normal people just don't care.

I'd wait until the signs are actually erected before making that call just yet.

[bzakharin]

I wonder how you can gradually replace the signs. Will they just work from the current 295 terminus? Will they temporarily put up the "End 295 Begin 95" at each interchange as they complete its signing and move it when they complete the next one?