PA Turnpike News

[PHLBOS]

I am glad to hear of this possible change.  I would also have used I-695, or I-895 (which also had an original project in both states, closer by), but at least something other than I-195 is the cleanest way to incorporate another designation into the system in this area.  Would eliminate the need for cardinal direction changes as well along the affected sections of present I-95 and I-295.

IMHO, the NJ section of the future I-395 should still be signed East-West given its beginning & end points in the Garden State.  Such wouldn't alter Exits and mile markers 1 through 8 at all.

The PA section can (IMHO, should) still stay North-South once its changed from I-95 to I-395 as well.

[odditude]

I am glad to hear of this possible change.  I would also have used I-695, or I-895 (which also had an original project in both states, closer by), but at least something other than I-195 is the cleanest way to incorporate another designation into the system in this area.  Would eliminate the need for cardinal direction changes as well along the affected sections of present I-95 and I-295.

IMHO, the NJ section of the future I-395 should still be signed East-West given its beginning & end points in the Garden State.  Such wouldn't alter Exits and mile markers 1 through 8 at all.

The PA section can (IMHO, should) still stay North-South once its changed from I-95 to I-395 as well.

agreed.

[vdeane]

Honestly, we don't need any more occurrences of two interstates ending at each other at a random location.  Bad enough that I-195/I-495 and I-280/I-680 do it.

[jeffandnicole]

Based on the graphic in the article that CP posted yesterday and in a FB posting containing another web-link (I saw it earlier but can't find it); the redesignation of I-95/295 north of the PA Turnpike and I-195 is slated to become I-395 rather than an extension of I-195. 

Such a designation would eliminate the need to change more mile markers & interchange numbers along I-195 as well as having a through-route running via a cloverleaf ramp (current I-295 South onto I-195 East).

Personally, I would've went with I-695 since the roadway in question is actually a beltway around Trenton and the fact that the original I-695 projects in both PA and NJ never came to fruition.

What?! How many times is that designation going to change? I could've sworn I-195 was already pretty much the final answer.

Until the signs are posted, it's not final.  And even then things can change! :-)

I recall seeing something as well that referred to I-395.  If this is what they decide on, Ithink it's a good decision all around.  It eliminates all the issues of changing everything along present-day 195 in NJ; not only the highway signs, but all the businesses and people that rely on the current signage.

As for the odd vs. even numbering, it doesn't bother me either way.  And it makes for a nice 195/295/395 meetup. 

[02 Park Ave]

Shouldn't miles 0 to 60 of the I-295 be redesignated to an odd number first digit as it will no longer rejoin its parent, i.e. the I-95.

[NE2]

Honestly, we don't need any more occurrences of two interstates ending at each other at a random location.  Bad enough that I-195/I-495 and I-280/I-680 do it.

Both of those are major interchanges, not random locations. Making I-195 and I-495 one continuous route would be stupid. I-280/680 would make more sense, but it's fine as it is.

Shouldn't miles 0 to 60 of the I-295 be redesignated to an odd number first digit as it will no longer rejoin its parent, i.e. the I-95.

No. Ignoring the fact that the rules have been crushed in recent years, there was never any consensus on what parity to give a route that begins at the parent but ends at another Interstate. See I-276.

[jeffandnicole]

Shouldn't miles 0 to 60 of the I-295 be redesignated to an odd number first digit as it will no longer rejoin its parent, i.e. the I-95.

No. Ignoring the fact that the rules have been crushed in recent years, there was never any consensus on what parity to give a route that begins at the parent but ends at another Interstate. See I-276.

See I-476 if you want an interstate that doesn't begin nor end at its parent.

Regarding 295...if one of the reasons for not changing 195 is because of the work involved to redo the exit numbers, they're not going to change 295, which would require changing the route number upteen millions of times.

You *could* extend 295 along 195 for 6 additional miles and then it would meet up with its parent (NJ Turnpike I-95), but it'll be a relatively pointless concurrence.

[signalman]

See I-476 if you want an interstate that doesn't begin nor end at its parent.

I immediately thought of I-476 after reading NE2's post too.  Granted, I didn't chime in.  I suppose one cound say for interstate anomalies/fuck ups, see PennDOT.

[cl94]

Shouldn't miles 0 to 60 of the I-295 be redesignated to an odd number first digit as it will no longer rejoin its parent, i.e. the I-95.

No. Ignoring the fact that the rules have been crushed in recent years, there was never any consensus on what parity to give a route that begins at the parent but ends at another Interstate. See I-276.

Agree completely. The thing is that an even 3di has differing meanings depending on the state. In NY, NJ and OH, an even digit is assigned if it connects to an Interstate at both ends. While I-390 has both ends at an Interstate currently, that was not the case until 15 years ago. I-590 was, at one point, going to be extended to NY 104. I-280, I-684 and I-290 were never intended to connect to their parents on both ends. Heck, I-287 doesn't have either end at its parent, although the New York portion did at one point.

Some states aren't even consistent within their own borders. Take Massachusetts. There's the I-395 designation from Connecticut and then you have I-290, I-291, and I-495. 291 doesn't even have a direct interchange with I-90. PA is the same way with I-376 - both the old and new iterations have both ends at an Interstate, yet every other 3di with both ends at an interstate is even.

[PHLBOS]

The thing is that an even 3di has differing meanings depending on the state. In NY, NJ and OH, an even digit is assigned if it connects to an Interstate at both ends. While I-390 has both ends at an Interstate currently, that was not the case until 15 years ago. I-590 was, at one point, going to be extended to NY 104. I-280, I-684 and I-290 were never intended to connect to their parents on both ends. Heck, I-287 doesn't have either end at its parent, although the New York portion did at one point.

FWIW, on their road maps & atlases, Rand McNally lists 3dis on their road maps (in a separate legend from the general legend) in the following manner:

First Digit Even: route through or around a city.

First Digit Odd: spur route into a city.

Nothing is mentioned (on the map legend) about whether or not these 3dis began and/or ended with either their parent 2di or another Interstate route all together.

Some states aren't even consistent within their own borders. Take Massachusetts. There's the I-395 designation from Connecticut and then you have I-290, I-291, and I-495. 291 doesn't even have a direct interchange with I-90. PA is the same way with I-376 - both the old and new iterations have both ends at an Interstate, yet every other 3di with both ends at an interstate is even.

Do keep in mind that the I-395 designation came along years if not a decade later than most of the 3dis in the Bay State (the highway was originally CT/MA 52).

The reason why 395 was chosen rather than an extension of I-290 (or even I-190, one early-80s vintage Atlas road map erroneously listed MA 52 as such) was likely due to CT not having I-90 anywhere inside the state.  The closest I-90 gets to the CT border is just over 7 miles at the Sturbridge (Exit 9/I-84) interchange.  In contrast, I-95 goes through both CT and MA and I-195 was already taken in MA (& RI).

[Alps]

Shouldn't miles 0 to 60 of the I-295 be redesignated to an odd number first digit as it will no longer rejoin its parent, i.e. the I-95.

No. Ignoring the fact that the rules have been crushed in recent years, there was never any consensus on what parity to give a route that begins at the parent but ends at another Interstate. See I-276.

I-276 was designated well before it ended at another Interstate.

[NE2]

Shouldn't miles 0 to 60 of the I-295 be redesignated to an odd number first digit as it will no longer rejoin its parent, i.e. the I-95.

No. Ignoring the fact that the rules have been crushed in recent years, there was never any consensus on what parity to give a route that begins at the parent but ends at another Interstate. See I-276.

I-276 was designated well before it ended at another Interstate.

I-276 ended at what was then future I-95.
http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/infrastructure/tollroad.cfm

Pennsylvania Turnpike, 359 miles: from the Ohio State line to Bristol (the entire route except a short section at the eastern end).

[vdeane]

Honestly, we don't need any more occurrences of two interstates ending at each other at a random location.  Bad enough that I-195/I-495 and I-280/I-680 do it.

Both of those are major interchanges, not random locations. Making I-195 and I-495 one continuous route would be stupid. I-280/680 would make more sense, but it's fine as it is.

Personally, I'd extend I-195 and decommission MA 25, which would have I-495 end at I-195.

The reason why 395 was chosen rather than an extension of I-290 (or even I-190, one early-80s vintage Atlas road map erroneously listed MA 52 as such) was likely due to CT not having I-90 anywhere inside the state.  The closest I-90 gets to the CT border is just over 7 miles at the Sturbridge (Exit 9/I-84) interchange.  In contrast, I-95 goes through both CT and MA and I-195 was already taken in MA (& RI).

I-290 and I-395 -> I-695
I-190 -> I-395

[PHLBOS]

Personally, I'd extend I-195 and decommission MA 25, which would have I-495 end at I-195.

I-495 already ends at I-195.  Your suggestion (which I agree with you 100%) only involves changing MA 25 not I-495.

The reason why 395 was chosen rather than an extension of I-290 (or even I-190, one early-80s vintage Atlas road map erroneously listed MA 52 as such) was likely due to CT not having I-90 anywhere inside the state.  The closest I-90 gets to the CT border is just over 7 miles at the Sturbridge (Exit 9/I-84) interchange.  In contrast, I-95 goes through both CT and MA and I-195 was already taken in MA (& RI).

I-290 and I-395 -> I-695
I-190 -> I-395

Nice idea.  However, when CT/MA 52 became I-395; I-290 was already built and the decision to designate as an Interstate came about due to CT (not MA) trading in I-84 (to RI) mileage.  As a result, ConnDOT was only focused on CT/MA 52 not I-190 nor 290 further north.

I-395 Historic Overview.

[Alps]

Shouldn't miles 0 to 60 of the I-295 be redesignated to an odd number first digit as it will no longer rejoin its parent, i.e. the I-95.

No. Ignoring the fact that the rules have been crushed in recent years, there was never any consensus on what parity to give a route that begins at the parent but ends at another Interstate. See I-276.

I-276 was designated well before it ended at another Interstate.

I-276 ended at what was then future I-95.
http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/infrastructure/tollroad.cfm

Pennsylvania Turnpike, 359 miles: from the Ohio State line to Bristol (the entire route except a short section at the eastern end).

You're telling me that the Somerset Freeway proposal was already dead before I-276 was numbered (at least as the original I-280)? I don't buy it for a second.

[NE2]

No, I-280/276 ended at the crossing of then-proposed I-95 in Bucks County. This was probably at US 13 (exit 358) rather than where I-95 was eventually built (2 miles west). I don't know if or when I-276 was officially extended to the state line.

[DrSmith]

Just to be crazy and continue making long x76 routes, switch 276 onto the old 95 north of the PA turnpike up and around Trenton.  We could always use more super long x76 routes that go way beyond everything else.

[SignBridge]

This Interstate route numbering and re-numbering is all very confusing.

Back to the Interchange completion issue. I said before and I will repeat, I think the PTC is purposely stretching this project out as many years as they can to delay what they believe will be a loss of toll revenue resulting from the I-95 connection. They never wanted this interchange in the first place for that reason or it would have been built by them back in the 1970's.

[cl94]

Just to be crazy and continue making long x76 routes, switch 276 onto the old 95 north of the PA turnpike up and around Trenton.  We could always use more super long x76 routes that go way beyond everything else.

Please, knowing PA, they'd find a way to get I-99 or an x99 on current I-95

[Alps]

No, I-280/276 ended at the crossing of then-proposed I-95 in Bucks County. This was probably at US 13 (exit 358) rather than where I-95 was eventually built (2 miles west). I don't know if or when I-276 was officially extended to the state line.

Exactly. It did not end at another Interstate. Thank you.

[NE2]

No, I-280/276 ended at the crossing of then-proposed I-95 in Bucks County. This was probably at US 13 (exit 358) rather than where I-95 was eventually built (2 miles west). I don't know if or when I-276 was officially extended to the state line.

Exactly. It did not end at another Interstate. Thank you.

It ended at another Interstate in the way that most even 3DIs did back then, when the system was still being built.

[Alps]

No, I-280/276 ended at the crossing of then-proposed I-95 in Bucks County. This was probably at US 13 (exit 358) rather than where I-95 was eventually built (2 miles west). I don't know if or when I-276 was officially extended to the state line.

Exactly. It did not end at another Interstate. Thank you.

It ended at another Interstate in the way that most even 3DIs did back then, when the system was still being built.

Okay. What happened between the period that Somerset was cancelled but before 95 was extended to the PA Extension? Wasn't there a time when it was extended down to Exit 8 or so, but not all the way?

[NE2]

What happened between the period that Somerset was cancelled but before 95 was extended to the PA Extension? Wasn't there a time when it was extended down to Exit 8 or so, but not all the way?

Signage was not all changed at once (and still hasn't been), but I-95 was officially moved from the Somerset to the PA Extension in 1982.
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/97/hjres631/text

SEC. 149. (A) Notwithstanding the first sentence of section 103(e)(4) of title 23, United States Code ["Upon the joint request of a State Governor and the local governments concerned, the Secretary may withdraw his approval of any route or portion thereof on the Interstate System which is within an urbanized area or which passes through and connects urbanized areas within a State and which was selected and approved in accordance with this title, if he determines that such route or portion thereof is not essential to completion of a unified and connected Interstate System and if he receives assurances that the State does not intend to construct a toll road in the traffic corridor which would be served by the route or portion thereof."], the Secretary of Transportation shall approve the withdrawal from the Interstate System the route of Interstate Route 95 and Interstate Route 695 from the intersection with Interstate Route 295 in Hopewell Township, Mercer County, New Jersey, to the proposed intersection with Interstate Route 287 in Franklin Township, Somerset County, New Jersey.
(B) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the Secretary of Transportation is authorized and directed, pursuant to section 103 of such title, to designate as part of the Interstate Highway System the New Jersey Turnpike from exit 10 to the interchange with the Pennsylvania Turnpike and the Pennsylvania Turnpike from such interchange to and including the proposed interchange with Interstate Route 95 in Bucks County, Pennsylvania.
(C) The Secretary of Transportation is further authorized and directed to designate Interstate Route 95 and assure through proper sign designations the orderly connection of Interstate Route 95 pursuant to this section.

[hubcity]

That reminds me of the old mile designations on I-287 - as you went south (west at the time) on NJ 440, mileage dropped to 0 at the Turnpike, then reset to (I think) 36, and continued down to (again, I think) 33 before dropping to 0 for the "actual" start of I-287, where I-95, whose mileage was represented by the 36-33 numbering, was to turn south. Exits were renumbered when they finally moved the start of I-287 to abut the start of NJ 440.

[Alps]

That reminds me of the old mile designations on I-287 - as you went south (west at the time) on NJ 440, mileage dropped to 0 at the Turnpike, then reset to (I think) 36, and continued down to (again, I think) 33 before dropping to 0 for the "actual" start of I-287, where I-95, whose mileage was represented by the 36-33 numbering, was to turn south. Exits were renumbered when they finally moved the start of I-287 to abut the start of NJ 440.