I-80/I-99 West Interchange

[Roadsguy]

I also have my own photos starting here (https://www.facebook.com/photo/?fbid=10218015626702741&set=a.10218015778106526) for anyone interested.

Ugh, 3/4 error on the BGSes on I-80...

[DJStephens]

I also have my own photos starting here (https://www.facebook.com/photo/?fbid=10218015626702741&set=a.10218015778106526) for anyone interested.

Ugh, 3/4 error on the BGSes on I-80...

A mish-mash of fonts and sizes.  Gosh that clearview is awful.   

[Ketchup99]

Update on this: Exit 163 is up and running, no construction going on atm.

That's great news! I'd love to somehow spread the word so traffic knows to stay on PA 26 to get on I-80 EB at the new Exit 163 entrance when the left turn from I-99 to I-80 EB backs up. With this new interchange open, there's zero reason to wait in line for that notorious left turn if there's any chance at all of a wait there. The new entrance to I-80 EB should get plenty of use after Penn State games for the next few seasons until the I-80/I-99 redesign is complete.

Oh, I'd rather not spread the word. It backed up a few days ago and I sat in traffic for about three minutes before going "hold up, I forgot, there's another interchange now!" and I was on the highway five minutes later. Don't want everyone else figuring out about this too.

This project also gives us a great opportunity to restore PA 26 onto its old routing: College Avenue to the Benner Pike and then through Bellefonte onto Jacksonville Road. Then, PA 150 can be truncated to Milesburg - and then extended all the way down US 220 Alternate, ending at US 322 just west of Port Matilda. Hopefully PennDOT takes advantage!

[webny99]

Update on this: Exit 163 is up and running, no construction going on atm.

That's great news! I'd love to somehow spread the word so traffic knows to stay on PA 26 to get on I-80 EB at the new Exit 163 entrance when the left turn from I-99 to I-80 EB backs up. With this new interchange open, there's zero reason to wait in line for that notorious left turn if there's any chance at all of a wait there. The new entrance to I-80 EB should get plenty of use after Penn State games for the next few seasons until the I-80/I-99 redesign is complete.

Oh, I'd rather not spread the word. It backed up a few days ago and I sat in traffic for about three minutes before going "hold up, I forgot, there's another interchange now!" and I was on the highway five minutes later. Don't want everyone else figuring out about this too.

My thought was that the backup could be removed entirely if enough people took the new interchange. The way the new interchange is laid out with a right turn from PA 26 and left turn onto the ramp with no cross traffic, it would take a crazy amount of volume for it to get congested and I don't see that happening.

The bigger issue might be that more traffic using PA 26 would create fewer gaps in traffic and longer backups for traffic exiting I-80 WB, making that gnarly left turn to I-99 SB even worse. Of course, traffic in that direction could use the new interchange too: they would still have to turn left onto PA 26 so that could back up, but at least it wouldn't affect the I-80 mainline.

[Bitmapped]

My thought was that the backup could be removed entirely if enough people took the new interchange. The way the new interchange is laid out with a right turn from PA 26 and left turn onto the ramp with no cross traffic, it would take a crazy amount of volume for it to get congested and I don't see that happening.

The bigger issue might be that more traffic using PA 26 would create fewer gaps in traffic and longer backups for traffic exiting I-80 WB, making that gnarly left turn to I-99 SB even worse. Of course, traffic in that direction could use the new interchange too: they would still have to turn left onto PA 26 so that could back up, but at least it wouldn't affect the I-80 mainline.

The ramp from I-80 WB to PA 26/I-99 SB is now signalized, so gaps in traffic aren't really an issue anymore.

[webny99]

The ramp from I-80 WB to PA 26/I-99 SB is now signalized, so gaps in traffic aren't really an issue anymore.

Interesting, I see that now in the most recent Street View. I guess I'm out of date as I haven't been through there in a few years. Is that a somewhat recent change?

[rickmastfan67]

The ramp from I-80 WB to PA 26/I-99 SB is now signalized, so gaps in traffic aren't really an issue anymore.

Interesting, I see that now in the most recent Street View. I guess I'm out of date as I haven't been through there in a few years. Is that a somewhat recent change?

Lights were installed by Aug '18 per StreetView, just not active yet at that time.
https://goo.gl/maps/V96cup6GPogZeMPQ6

[LeftyJR]

I also have my own photos starting here (https://www.facebook.com/photo/?fbid=10218015626702741&set=a.10218015778106526) for anyone interested.

I was so disappointed to see these.  I don't like Clearview, but when done right, it can look good.

Ugh, 3/4 error on the BGSes on I-80...

A mish-mash of fonts and sizes.  Gosh that clearview is awful.   

[74/171FAN]

(For I-80 and I-99)  PennDOT - District 2 News: PennDOT Bids High Speed Interchange Phase of Centre County I-80 Project

[The Ghostbuster]

The high-speed interchange between Interstates 80 and 99 will finally bring a direct connection of 99 to the rest of the Interstate System. If the 2030 completion date for the high-speed interchange is accurate, it will have taken 35 years to make the connection. 99's connection to the Interstate System could have come much sooner if they had connected existing Exit 1 on Interstate 99 with Exit 146 of the Interstates 70/76 Pennsylvania Turnpike. Instead, they have left in place a "Breezewood" connection between the two highways via Business 220.

[webny99]

Once this project is complete, there are essentially just three more hurdles to clear before I-99 can be designated to the NY line:

1.) Reconstruct I-80 Exit 178
2.) Twin existing US 220 between I-80 and PA 477
3.) The big one - reconstruct or build a new alignment for 6.3 miles of existing US 220 between Jersey Shore and Linden

I think 1 and 2 should be prioritized and would be fine with I-99 being fully signed and designated once those are complete, except for the short substandard segment which would remain signed with "Future I-99" signage until funding allows for a full completion.

However, within that 6-mile segment, reconstruction of the US 220/PA 287 junction and tight railroad underpass could potentially be advanced and completed as a separate project.

[74/171FAN]

However, within that 6-mile segment, reconstruction of the US 220/PA 287 junction and tight railroad underpass could potentially be advanced and completed as a separate project.

That 6-mile segment was recently just reconstructed with a bunch of RCUTs so I doubt PennDOT will be prioritizing construction here anytime soon.

[webny99]

However, within that 6-mile segment, reconstruction of the US 220/PA 287 junction and tight railroad underpass could potentially be advanced and completed as a separate project.

That 6-mile segment was recently just reconstructed with a bunch of RCUTs so I doubt PennDOT will be prioritizing construction here anytime soon.

Yes, but my understanding is that did not affect the US 220/PA 287 intersection or the squeezed rail underpass. That really needs to be rebuilt as a proper interchange regardless of what happens with the rest of the 6 mile stretch.

[74/171FAN]

However, within that 6-mile segment, reconstruction of the US 220/PA 287 junction and tight railroad underpass could potentially be advanced and completed as a separate project.

That 6-mile segment was recently just reconstructed with a bunch of RCUTs so I doubt PennDOT will be prioritizing construction here anytime soon.

Yes, but my understanding is that did not affect the US 220/PA 287 intersection or the squeezed rail underpass. That really needs to be rebuilt as a proper interchange regardless of what happens with the rest of the 6 mile stretch.

The railroad underpass was not changed; however, the US 220/PA 287 intersection was part of the reconstruction.

[vdeane]

There was a project on the books ~20 years ago to build a freeway alignment to fill in that gap, and it was ready to go, only to get axed by an incoming governor.  Since then, the whole I-99 effort seems to have been put on the backburner by PennDOT and I'm no longer convinced that we'll see it completed within our lifetimes.  For this reason I would support a "complete it or lose it" provision to adding/extending interstate numbers.  Too many projects get started only to end up fragmented once the political will inevitably dies.

I imagine they would also need to reconfigure the I-180 interchange.  This isn't exactly mainline material.  There's also a RIRO on US 15 that needs to be dealt with, but that's on the schedule to be done.

[webny99]

my understanding is that did not affect the US 220/PA 287 intersection or the squeezed rail underpass. That really needs to be rebuilt as a proper interchange regardless of what happens with the rest of the 6 mile stretch.

The railroad underpass was not changed; however, the US 220/PA 287 intersection was part of the reconstruction.

What exactly was done there? If being part of the project just means the project limits extended through the intersection but nothing functionally changed with how it operates, then it still needs a major overhaul with proper exit/entrance ramps that would allow the signal to be removed.

I imagine they would also need to reconfigure the I-180 interchange.  This isn't exactly mainline material.

I figured that would come up, and I agree it should be addressed eventually, but it shouldn't need to hold up the I-99 designation IMO. There are plenty of mainline "ramps" more egregious than that, and it's not busy enough to cause congestion issues.

[Henry]

There was a project on the books ~20 years ago to build a freeway alignment to fill in that gap, and it was ready to go, only to get axed by an incoming governor.  Since then, the whole I-99 effort seems to have been put on the backburner by PennDOT and I'm no longer convinced that we'll see it completed within our lifetimes.  For this reason I would support a "complete it or lose it" provision to adding/extending interstate numbers.  Too many projects get started only to end up fragmented once the political will inevitably dies.

I imagine they would also need to reconfigure the I-180 interchange.  This isn't exactly mainline material.  There's also a RIRO on US 15 that needs to be dealt with, but that's on the schedule to be done.

Not to mention that the eastern interchange with I-80 is still a diamond. Another sign of a wasted effort if the I-99 project goes nowhere. NY already did its part on the US 15 upgrade, so the ball is now in PA's court.

[vdeane]

Not to mention that the eastern interchange with I-80 is still a diamond. Another sign of a wasted effort if the I-99 project goes nowhere. NY already did its part on the US 15 upgrade, so the ball is now in PA's court.

webny99 already mentioned that.  Although what's weird here is that the at-grade north of there was converted to an interchange... but I'm not sure if there's room for the other carriageway, so they might need to rip this all out if they ever bother with finishing I-99 here.

[webny99]

Not to mention that the eastern interchange with I-80 is still a diamond. Another sign of a wasted effort if the I-99 project goes nowhere. NY already did its part on the US 15 upgrade, so the ball is now in PA's court.

webny99 already mentioned that.  Although what's weird here is that the at-grade north of there was converted to an interchange... but I'm not sure if there's room for the other carriageway, so they might need to rip this all out if they ever bother with finishing I-99 here.

I am just assuming that there is enough ROW on the east side of US 220 here to tie into the existing stub at PA 477. It's subtle, but you can sort of tell that the northbound ramps at the Mackeyville interchange were built to be able to exit/enter from a second carriageway in the future. Other than that and a second bridge that would be needed over Fishing Creek, it looks very feasible. I would think the I-80 interchange would be more expensive by far.

[74/171FAN]

my understanding is that did not affect the US 220/PA 287 intersection or the squeezed rail underpass. That really needs to be rebuilt as a proper interchange regardless of what happens with the rest of the 6 mile stretch.

The railroad underpass was not changed; however, the US 220/PA 287 intersection was part of the reconstruction.

What exactly was done there? If being part of the project just means the project limits extended through the intersection but nothing functionally changed with how it operates, then it still needs a major overhaul with proper exit/entrance ramps that would allow the signal to be removed.

It basically functions the same except that the left-turn from US 220 NB to PA 287 NB is protected now.

[DJStephens]

There was a project on the books ~20 years ago to build a freeway alignment to fill in that gap, and it was ready to go, only to get axed by an incoming governor.  Since then, the whole I-99 effort seems to have been put on the backburner by PennDOT and I'm no longer convinced that we'll see it completed within our lifetimes.  For this reason I would support a "complete it or lose it" provision to adding/extending interstate numbers.  Too many projects get started only to end up fragmented once the political will inevitably dies.
I imagine they would also need to reconfigure the I-180 interchange.  This isn't exactly mainline material.  There's also a RIRO on US 15 that needs to be dealt with, but that's on the schedule to be done.

Bob Casey, perhaps?   A slap to an area that is presumed to be allegiant to the opposing party?   Was there ever a proposal to "cut the corner" to say, and go West of, and go around Cedar Springs and roughly follow state route 64 or Nittany Valley Dr to I-80?  Seems more efficient and direct for traffic demand.  Am guessing though, this area is slowly bleeding population, and daily trips and or AADT's are declining.   Longer term trends on the numbers would be interesting.   

[Bitmapped]

There was a project on the books ~20 years ago to build a freeway alignment to fill in that gap, and it was ready to go, only to get axed by an incoming governor.  Since then, the whole I-99 effort seems to have been put on the backburner by PennDOT and I'm no longer convinced that we'll see it completed within our lifetimes.  For this reason I would support a "complete it or lose it" provision to adding/extending interstate numbers.  Too many projects get started only to end up fragmented once the political will inevitably dies.
I imagine they would also need to reconfigure the I-180 interchange.  This isn't exactly mainline material.  There's also a RIRO on US 15 that needs to be dealt with, but that's on the schedule to be done.

Bob Casey, perhaps?   A slap to an area that is presumed to be allegiant to the opposing party?   Was there ever a proposal to "cut the corner" to say, and go West of, and go around Cedar Springs and roughly follow state route 64 or Nittany Valley Dr to I-80?  Seems more efficient and direct for traffic demand.  Am guessing though, this area is slowly bleeding population, and daily trips and or AADT's are declining.   Longer term trends on the numbers would be interesting.   

There was a state appropriation in 1986 for $6.5 million for widening. I don't know what happened to it. It looks like Clinton County was also to receive $20 million for reconstructing PA 120 to eliminate slide hazards and I don't know that those projects happened either.

Clinton County has been relatively friendly to Democrats from the 1980s to the present, with Dems winning the county or coming close to doing so. I don't think the area was punished, at least not by Casey/Rendell/Wolf.

The locals likely would not be too happy about losing more farmland to a new, more direct routing parallel to PA 64. The savings would be less than 3 miles. I don't see PennDOT going to the trouble of building a brand new alignment when they can just dualize what they already have.

[DJStephens]

There was a project on the books ~20 years ago to build a freeway alignment to fill in that gap, and it was ready to go, only to get axed by an incoming governor. 

Bob Casey, perhaps?   A slap to an area that is presumed to be allegiant to the opposing party?   Was there ever a proposal to "cut the corner" to say, and go West of, and go around Cedar Springs and roughly follow state route 64 or Nittany Valley Dr to I-80?  Seems more efficient and direct for traffic demand. 

The locals likely would not be too happy about losing more farmland to a new, more direct routing parallel to PA 64. The savings would be less than 3 miles. I don't see PennDOT going to the trouble of building a brand new alignment when they can just dualize what they already have.

Okay then it was Ed Rendell, aka media celebrity who cancelled it.  That makes more sense as he was a Philly / SEPA centered politician.   Not saying it's possible to build a "new terrain" cut off now, but was it ever considered then, say mid 1970's before the 1977 fiscal crisis?  Meaning they planned, and got stuff off the ground then, like the infamous "Goat Path" PA 23 expressway, which seemingly led into nowhere.  Am guessing also population numbers for Williamsport were higher then, meaning 45-50 years ago as well.     

[Mr_Northside]

I'd speculate that even beyond the notion of a politician cancelling it, when we stopped having Bud Shuster "bringing home the bacon" to get sections of I-99 done, it probably lost its only powerful ally, and overall lost momentum.
The project for this thread is just as much about this needing to be a high-speed interchange on its own merits (especially compared to what is there now), if not moreso, than another piece of completing I-99.

[74/171FAN]

(For I-80, I-99. US 220, and PA 26)  PennDOT - District 2 News: PennDOT Announces Start Date for High-Speed Interchange Project