I understand once the PATP and NJTP I-95 gap is fixed, I-95 will be resigned as I-195 north of the exit in PA to the current I-295 exit in NJ.
To me, this makes no sense.
I do not understand why I-95 from I-195 to the PATP just doesn't become part of 295 so it forms a near loop of the Philly region?
look at the map and you'll see what you suggest makes no sense either. i should get a whole new designation like I-695...oh and while we're at it...I-195 needs to be widened from I-295 to exit 7.
Its likely the PA section of what will become I-195 will be signed north/south, while the NJ portion will remain east/west.
Quote from: NJRoadfan on October 10, 2013, 05:47:26 PM
Its likely the PA section of what will become I-195 will be signed north/south, while the NJ portion will remain east/west.
Do you have a source for this or are you just speculating at to what seems logical?
Extend I-276 to replace I-195.
Quote from: NJRoadfan on October 10, 2013, 05:47:26 PM
Its likely the PA section of what will become I-195 will be signed north/south, while the NJ portion will remain east/west.
Why not just re-label the PA section of I-95 as I-295 so that I-295 goes from I-95 in Delaware through Trenton to the PATP/I-95 interchange like a regular circumferential highway which that stretch effectively will become.
Quote from: NE2 on October 10, 2013, 09:29:40 PM
Extend I-276 to replace I-195.
I had not thought of that concept, but I like it.
Quote from: bluecountry on October 11, 2013, 12:07:47 PM
Quote from: NJRoadfan on October 10, 2013, 05:47:26 PM
Its likely the PA section of what will become I-195 will be signed north/south, while the NJ portion will remain east/west.
Why not just re-label the PA section of I-95 as I-295 so that I-295 goes from I-95 in Delaware through Trenton to the PATP/I-95 interchange like a regular circumferential highway which that stretch effectively will become.
That was the original plan but the Feds changed it for some reason. Not sure if that reason was because there already exists a state route 295 in PA.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pennsylvania_Route_295 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pennsylvania_Route_295)
Given that PA 295 is only 6 miles long; PennDOT could've easily renumbered that road.
Quote from: Alex on October 11, 2013, 12:41:57 PM
Quote from: NE2 on October 10, 2013, 09:29:40 PM
Extend I-276 to replace I-195.
I had not thought of that concept, but I like it.
Hm.
- 95/276 concurrency between the new PA Turnpike Exit for 95 and NJ Turnpike exit 7A
- 295 stays as-is to US 1
- 95 to US1 becomes 995
- 195 between 29 and NJ Turnpike exit 7A stays as-is.
I dunno, I think I like extending 195 better.
No, I-276 and I-95 bump at the new interchange, with I-276 taking the long route north of Trenton. It's no sillier than extending I-195.
Quote from: PHLBOS on October 11, 2013, 12:52:19 PM
Quote from: bluecountry on October 11, 2013, 12:07:47 PM
Quote from: NJRoadfan on October 10, 2013, 05:47:26 PM
Its likely the PA section of what will become I-195 will be signed north/south, while the NJ portion will remain east/west.
Why not just re-label the PA section of I-95 as I-295 so that I-295 goes from I-95 in Delaware through Trenton to the PATP/I-95 interchange like a regular circumferential highway which that stretch effectively will become.
That was the original plan but the Feds changed it for some reason. Not sure if that reason was because there already exists a state route 295 in PA.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pennsylvania_Route_295 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pennsylvania_Route_295)
Given that PA 295 is only 6 miles long; PennDOT could've easily renumbered that road.
New York has both I-295 and NY 295 in different parts of the state, so it's been done elsewhere without needing to renumber. Massachusetts also has I-295 and MA 295.
Pennsylvania has I-380 and PA 380. Busted.
Quote from: NE2 on October 11, 2013, 07:04:05 PM
No, I-276 and I-95 bump at the new interchange, with I-276 taking the long route north of Trenton. It's no sillier than extending I-195.
I thought the new "interchange" was going to just be 95N and S through movements.
I think the I-295 idea was rejected because it would flip directions at the PA/NJ border.
Quote from: Steve on October 11, 2013, 07:52:03 PM
Quote from: NE2 on October 11, 2013, 07:04:05 PM
No, I-276 and I-95 bump at the new interchange, with I-276 taking the long route north of Trenton. It's no sillier than extending I-195.
I thought the new "interchange" was going to just be 95N and S through movements.
At first... eventually it will be a full one, hopefully before the sun expands into a red giant.
Quote from: NE2 on October 11, 2013, 07:47:10 PM
Pennsylvania has I-380 and PA 380. Busted.
And I/PA 283, which aren't just close to each other, but they form the main route from Harrisburg to Lancaster!
I think that 295 should end at 195, and 276 should cover the rest of 95/295, as was suggested already. But then, 195 should be extended over to current 95 via an upgraded NJ 29. :cool:
My problem is the interchange 60 in NJ with I-295/I-195 and NJ 29. There should be new flyover ramps built if I-195 continues where I-295 was. However, I emailed the DOT and they said no plans were made to do so. It seems funny if you have to exit and slow to 25 mph on a ramp, not to mention with one lane: https://maps.google.com/?ll=40.183759,-74.722588&spn=0.004377,0.010557&t=m&z=17&layer=c&cbll=40.183666,-74.722585&panoid=l5ZDTEhjF9juP8ixbg4V3w&cbp=12,189.34,,0,11.98
I hope they at least modify the interchange.
I understand that PA is finally closing the gap on I-95 by building a new interchange with I-276 and reroute I-95 along the eastern part of I-276 (taking over it)... but my question is.. why didn't they try to extend I-95 by using the exit 40 interchange (the tri-level interchange that leads and deadends at PA 413). They could have just saved money by extending past PA 413 and connect with I-276 near the US 13 interchange. Is there any reason why PADOT decided to build a new interchange instead of using exit 40 one?
Quote from: Strider on October 12, 2013, 01:15:48 PM
I understand that PA is finally closing the gap on I-95 by building a new interchange with I-276 and reroute I-95 along the eastern part of I-276 (taking over it)... but my question is.. why didn't they try to extend I-95 by using the exit 40 interchange (the tri-level interchange that leads and deadends at PA 413). They could have just saved money by extending past PA 413 and connect with I-276 near the US 13 interchange. Is there any reason why PADOT decided to build a new interchange instead of using exit 40 one?
Remember you are talking about the same state that will not build a direct ramp between I-70 and the Pennsylvania Turnpike in Breezewood where I-70 crosses itself south of town. Two little ramps are all that is needed there with no bridges.
Then you have the missing link for the US 30 freeway between Lancaster and Coatesville that is badly needed as well, but they will not budge even if it means jeopardizing public safety in the meantime and allowing accidents to happen in the meantime resulting in injuries.
Quote from: Strider on October 12, 2013, 01:15:48 PM
I understand that PA is finally closing the gap on I-95 by building a new interchange with I-276 and reroute I-95 along the eastern part of I-276 (taking over it)... but my question is.. why didn't they try to extend I-95 by using the exit 40 interchange (the tri-level interchange that leads and deadends at PA 413). They could have just saved money by extending past PA 413 and connect with I-276 near the US 13 interchange. Is there any reason why PADOT decided to build a new interchange instead of using exit 40 one?
Much has been discussed already on this forum regarding your question, in at least three different threads. For a good starting point see my post (reply 623) in this thread: https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=419.msg243971#msg243971 You'll be able to jump to the top of that thread as well as link easily to the other two.
Quote from: NE2 on October 11, 2013, 07:47:10 PM
Pennsylvania has I-380 and PA 380. Busted.
Hence, one reason why I placed the words
Not sure in my previous post, reposted below (
bold emphasis added):
Quote from: PHLBOS on October 11, 2013, 12:52:19 PMThat was the original plan but the Feds changed it for some reason. Not sure if that reason was because there already exists a state route 295 in PA.
Quote from: PHLBOS on October 15, 2013, 08:44:48 AM
Quote from: NE2 on October 11, 2013, 07:47:10 PM
Pennsylvania has I-380 and PA 380. Busted.
Hence, one reason why I placed the words Not sure in my previous post, reposted below (bold emphasis added):
Quote from: PHLBOS on October 11, 2013, 12:52:19 PMThat was the original plan but the Feds changed it for some reason. Not sure if that reason was because there already exists a state route 295 in PA.
Yes, and because you were not sure, he posted a counterexample...