Has any actual construction been started on the new I-95 interchange with the Pennsylvania Turnpike? When I zoom in using Google Earth, I don't see that any work has started.
Google (Earth) StreetView images aren't always current.
An actual road trip or this website (http://www.paturnpikei95.com/construction/ConstructionHome.htm) might better answer your question.
Most if not all of the too-narrow overpasses have been reconstructed, and the new mainline toll plaza on the Turnpike is being built. They're starting to build the pylons for the flyover ramps - you can see the work from I-95 NB as you pass over the Turnpike.
This is a project that will be years in the making. If you look at the original time line estimates it was all supposed to have been done by 2016 with a new bridge over the Delaware River being the final project.
I think the gap should have been filled years ago. It should not have taken 30 years to fill it.
Thank the NJTA and the people of Central Jersey for posing the obstacle for stopping the Somerset Freeway.
It's not really a filling in the gap, rather a new set of ramps and rerouting the number.
However, these are up:
(https://c1.staticflickr.com/9/8567/16399735757_b768a21e3a_z.jpg)[/url]
I always found it funny in a sad way that I-95 was not finished despite the incomplete section being in the BosWash Corridor. After all, I-95 is only the #1 freeway for the East Coast! Had I-70 been left with a gap in Utah, that would have been more understandable.
Rick
It really is pathetic how long it is taking to build the new exit. Compare this multi-year project to in which the I-22/I-65 interchange is being built and that even with a one year delay.
Another real gap in Pennsylvania is the I-70 interchange at Breezewood. Additionally, there are not direct connections between I-81, and I-99 with the PA Turnpike. I don't understand the Turnpike's resistance to direct connections. However, the I-70 situation is explained in the Breezewood listing on Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breezewood,_Pennsylvania
Quote from: rbt48 on May 28, 2015, 10:06:26 PM
Has any actual construction been started on the new I-95 interchange with the Pennsylvania Turnpike? When I zoom in using Google Earth, I don't see that any work has started.
Drove by there last fall (after the mini-meet in New Jersey to check out the widened Turnpike between Exits 6 and 8A), and pitifully little had been done by the PTC (several bridges had been rebuilt to accommodate the wider Turnpike East-West Mainline and a wider place for a new mainline toll barrier west of I-95) had been done.
Drove by there again a few weeks ago, and construction of the piers that will carry I-95 southbound traffic from the westbound side of the Turnpike to the southbound side of the Delaware Expressway had started.
Wow they are doing it. Unbelievable! I though Xanadu in East Rutherford, NJ would finish long before PTC and PennDOT would even move a bulldozer on this project.
Quote from: roadman65 on May 30, 2015, 02:54:25 PM
Wow they are doing it. Unbelievable! I though Xanadu in East Rutherford, NJ would finish long before PTC and PennDOT would even move a bulldozer on this project.
It would be a good place to send the bulldozers when they're done.
Hasn't been named Xanadu for years, btw. "American Dream" is the current
lie name.
Quote from: rbt48 on May 29, 2015, 10:41:11 PM
Additionally, there are not direct connections between I-81, and I-99 with the PA Turnpike. I don't understand the Turnpike's resistance to direct connections.
The Turnpike predates both I-81 and the US 220 freeway/I-99, which is why the turnpike has an interchange with US 11 rather than I-81 and old US 220, rather than the freeway. Constructing additional interchanges didn't (When 81 and I-99 were added in) make financial sense when the current arrangements, imperfect as they are, were in the same general location, and performed the same function.
On Topic: Is all the construction presently going on happening along 276, or have crews started prepping I-95, too?, like grading for where the ramps will connect?
nothing on I-95 yet outside of the already-completed Ford Rd overpass replacement.
The "resistance to direct connections" dates back to old federal funding rules that didn't allow federal funds to be spent on projects directly connecting free Interstates to toll roads.
Quote from: CentralPAguy on May 30, 2015, 03:51:35 PM
Quote from: rbt48 on May 29, 2015, 10:41:11 PM
Additionally, there are not direct connections between I-81, and I-99 with the PA Turnpike. I don't understand the Turnpike's resistance to direct connections.
The Turnpike predates both I-81 and the US 220 freeway/I-99, which is why the turnpike has an interchange with US 11 rather than I-81 and old US 220, rather than the freeway. Constructing additional interchanges didn't (When 81 and I-99 were added in) make financial sense when the current arrangements, imperfect as they are, were in the same general location, and performed the same function.
On Topic: Is all the construction presently going on happening along 276, or have crews started prepping I-95, too?, like grading for where the ramps will connect?
what about I-83? That connects to the Turnpike directly and it does not use local streets or other roads to act as a go between. I-83 was indeed built after the PA Turnpike as far as I know.
Yes, I-83 was built after the Turnpike, but since it was built as the US 111 Harrisburg-Baltimore Expressway, it still pre-dated the Interstate system.
Eisenhower signed the bill that created the funding mechanism for the Interstate system in 1956. By that point, what is now I-83 had already been completed and opened from Exit 28 to today's PA 581.
Quote from: Mergingtraffic on May 29, 2015, 06:28:47 PM
It's not really a filling in the gap, rather a new set of ramps and rerouting the number.
It is sort of. It will provide an all freeway connection between Philly and NYC, but not between Trenton and Piscataway (unless you take I-195 to the Turnpike to I-287 or NJ-18, which is a huge detour) or even Trenton to NYC (a smaller detour relatively speaking).
Quote from: lordsutch on May 30, 2015, 07:56:12 PM
The "resistance to direct connections" dates back to old federal funding rules that didn't allow federal funds to be spent on projects directly connecting free Interstates to toll roads.
And yet, the PTC is still behind on it. The Ohio Turnpike was connected directly to most of the interstates it crosses, even if belatedly. It still lacks a direct connection to I-475. The Indiana Toll Road was also connected to the interstates it crosses, when those interstates were built. So, there really is no excuse for the PTC not to have made most of those connections by now.
Quote from: nexus73 on May 29, 2015, 06:44:57 PM
I always found it funny in a sad way that I-95 was not finished despite the incomplete section being in the BosWash Corridor. After all, I-95 is only the #1 freeway for the East Coast! Had I-70 been left with a gap in Utah, that would have been more understandable.
Rick
Well, they could've routed it over the Delaware River on I-295 and up all of the NJ Turnpike, but I can see why it didn't happen because the largest city between Washington and New York needed I-95, and it was for the best that it was routed that way.
Quote from: Brandon on June 02, 2015, 12:47:46 PM
Quote from: lordsutch on May 30, 2015, 07:56:12 PM
The "resistance to direct connections" dates back to old federal funding rules that didn't allow federal funds to be spent on projects directly connecting free Interstates to toll roads.
And yet, the PTC is still behind on it. The Ohio Turnpike was connected directly to most of the interstates it crosses, even if belatedly. It still lacks a direct connection to I-475. The Indiana Toll Road was also connected to the interstates it crosses, when those interstates were built. So, there really is no excuse for the PTC not to have made most of those connections by now.
Does a double trumpet count as a direct connection?
Quote from: vtk on June 02, 2015, 02:25:30 PM
Quote from: Brandon on June 02, 2015, 12:47:46 PM
Quote from: lordsutch on May 30, 2015, 07:56:12 PM
The "resistance to direct connections" dates back to old federal funding rules that didn't allow federal funds to be spent on projects directly connecting free Interstates to toll roads.
And yet, the PTC is still behind on it. The Ohio Turnpike was connected directly to most of the interstates it crosses, even if belatedly. It still lacks a direct connection to I-475. The Indiana Toll Road was also connected to the interstates it crosses, when those interstates were built. So, there really is no excuse for the PTC not to have made most of those connections by now.
Does a double trumpet count as a direct connection?
I would say so, as long as it connects directly to both the turnpike and the freeway.
Can anyone provide an update on construction of the interchange? Has any real paving (or grading) of ramps from I-95 onto the PA Turnpike actually started as yet (Feb 2016)?
Yes in fact that entire area of 95 is ripped up into various cattle chutes as the shoulders are now gone. There are piers and towers that have been erected to support the flyover ramps but no decking yet.
Quote from: rbt48 on February 23, 2016, 09:59:17 AM
Can anyone provide an update on construction of the interchange? Has any real paving (or grading) of ramps from I-95 onto the PA Turnpike actually started as yet (Feb 2016)?
Images taken by me on 1 January 2016, just before the end of cash toll collection at the far east end of the Pennsylvania Turnpike, as well as along the current alignment of I-95 (Delaware Expressway) on Facebook (no need to have a Facebook account to see these): End of cash toll collection - east end of the Penna. Turnpike (https://www.facebook.com/cpzilliacus/media_set?set=a.10206898887662837.1073741870.1596953667&type=3)
Passed through there yesterday and it is a bit amazing to see visible progress actually (finally) occurring. Several vertical supports for the future I-95 SB ramp are in place.
One rather crazy thing I noted is that leading up to the bridge, the work zone speed limit drops to 35, and then to 15(!), neither of which was particularly heeded by anyone on the road. The reason for the drastic drop is that the former DRB toll barrier, while no longer in use, is still physically in place, so traffic still needs to slow down to pass through the old toll lanes (only two of them are clear for this purpose, one for each through lane).
Thread dedicated about the PA Turnpike I-95 interchange. ;) https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=11707.0
Quote from: Henry on June 02, 2015, 12:53:37 PM
Quote from: nexus73 on May 29, 2015, 06:44:57 PM
I always found it funny in a sad way that I-95 was not finished despite the incomplete section being in the BosWash Corridor. After all, I-95 is only the #1 freeway for the East Coast! Had I-70 been left with a gap in Utah, that would have been more understandable.
Rick
Well, they could've routed it over the Delaware River on I-295 and up all of the NJ Turnpike, but I can see why it didn't happen because the largest city between Washington and New York needed I-95, and it was for the best that it was routed that way.
I've always thought that this was the logical way to route I-95 anyway.
Quote from: Brandon on June 02, 2015, 12:47:46 PM
Quote from: lordsutch on May 30, 2015, 07:56:12 PM
The "resistance to direct connections" dates back to old federal funding rules that didn't allow federal funds to be spent on projects directly connecting free Interstates to toll roads.
And yet, the PTC is still behind on it. The Ohio Turnpike was connected directly to most of the interstates it crosses, even if belatedly. It still lacks a direct connection to I-475. The Indiana Toll Road was also connected to the interstates it crosses, when those interstates were built. So, there really is no excuse for the PTC not to have made most of those connections by now.
Ditto the Mass. Pike. That highway was originally connected to Rte. 5 in Springfield, but when I-91 came through, they linked up ramps to the turnpike to make a direct connection. Ditto when 495 came through in Marlboro, Mass.
Quote from: The Nature Boy on February 23, 2016, 11:30:26 PM
Quote from: Henry on June 02, 2015, 12:53:37 PM
Quote from: nexus73 on May 29, 2015, 06:44:57 PM
I always found it funny in a sad way that I-95 was not finished despite the incomplete section being in the BosWash Corridor. After all, I-95 is only the #1 freeway for the East Coast! Had I-70 been left with a gap in Utah, that would have been more understandable.
Rick
Well, they could've routed it over the Delaware River on I-295 and up all of the NJ Turnpike, but I can see why it didn't happen because the largest city between Washington and New York needed I-95, and it was for the best that it was routed that way.
I've always thought that this was the logical way to route I-95 anyway.
That should have been the routing, where is it written that an interstate must go through downtown? Amazing that I-95 is technically not complete in 2016.
Quote from: longhornwhere is it written that an interstate must go through downtown?
Under "Interstate Route Numbering" (http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/planning/national_highway_system/interstate_highway_system/routefinder/index.cfm#s02) (about 2/3 down):
QuoteThe major route numbers (i.e. 1/2-digit routes) are routed through urban areas on the path of the major traffic stream. Generally, this major traffic stream will be the shortest and most direct line of travel. Connecting routes and full or partial circumferential beltways around and within urban areas carry a three-digit number.
While it doesn't specifically state that the Interstate must go through downtown, far more often than not the "path of the major traffic stream" goes through the city.
Quote from: froggie on April 25, 2016, 03:59:03 PM
Quote from: longhornwhere is it written that an interstate must go through downtown?
Under "Interstate Route Numbering" (http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/planning/national_highway_system/interstate_highway_system/routefinder/index.cfm#s02) (about 2/3 down):
QuoteThe major route numbers (i.e. 1/2-digit routes) are routed through urban areas on the path of the major traffic stream. Generally, this major traffic stream will be the shortest and most direct line of travel. Connecting routes and full or partial circumferential beltways around and within urban areas carry a three-digit number.
While it doesn't specifically state that the Interstate must go through downtown, far more often than not the "path of the major traffic stream" goes through the city.
Thanks for info.
I guess there are exceptions to this rule, like I -20 going to the south of the Metroplex, and I-85 going around downtown Charlotte.
For traffic, the Rochester, DFW (I-20), Columbia (I-77 & I-20), Pittsburgh (I-79 and to an extent you can argue I-76 and I-70), Cleveland (I-80), Erie (smaller city, but I-90 does goes well south of town), Buffalo (I-90 stays in the suburban areas and away from the downtown core), etc.
I-70 through St. Louis, Indianapolis, and Columbus shoulc've been routed just above (I-270/370 in STL), and below (I-465 & I-270 in IND & CLB). But not just looping downand still having a 'straight through' but the east/west route of I-70 from IND and CLB should've probably have ran entirely below US40 and had a loop route up into downtown on each case. The extra miles of taking a bypass many times influences people's decisions not to take them. In addition to the travelers that suffer from 'route hypnosis). If they're going to be on I-70 west of a city and I-70 east of a city, then they can't comprehend how or why they would leave the road to get back on the same road (such as I-270 through STL).