PA's I-476 (Blue Route) reviewing possible use of shoulders during rush hours

[jeffandnicole]

http://www.philly.com/philly/news/20130802_Blue_Route_shoulders_might_provide_rushhour_lanes.html

Rather than widen the road, which would cost a lot of money, they are looking into using the shoulders of the roadway during rush hour, which would cost not as much.  PennDOT says it'll still take 4 - 5 years to put the plan in place. 

[PHLBOS]

http://www.philly.com/philly/news/20130802_Blue_Route_shoulders_might_provide_rushhour_lanes.html

Rather than widen the road, which would cost a lot of money, they are looking into using the shoulders of the roadway during rush hour, which would cost not as much.  PennDOT says it'll still take 4 - 5 years to put the plan in place. 

This has been talked about off and on for a while... about a year after the highway first opened.

While it sounds like a quick-fix on the surface, the downside of such action comes when there's a vehicle breakdown.  Anyone old enough to remember what the Southeast Expressway (I-93) in the Boston area was like prior to the 1984-85 overall will tell you that such a move is a bad idea.  Tid Bit: the overall widened the shoulder in many areas as a means to reduce/eliminate breakdown-related lane closures.

MassDOT's finally adding 2 lanes along 6-lane stretches of I-95/93 (MA 128) to eliminate rush-hour break-down lane usage.

It's worth noting that the majority of the 4-lane section of I-476 could easily be widened into a full 6-laner by simply paving and beefing up the inner shoulders and median.  Yes, some overpasses from Baltimore Pike (Exit 3) southward would require inner add-ons; but the road was secretly designed to allow for an inside widening from the get-go.

With regards to Swarthmore (where most Blue Route opponents resided) whining about adding lanes, there's a couple things to consider:

1.  Doing the above widening would not increase the right-of-way width one iota.

2.  How many of them use to road as a means to head towards the Main Line, King of Prussia and/or the Poconos?

One word for Swarthmore residents opposed to the Blue Route and a possible widening - hypocrites.

[Chris19001]

You hit my thoughts, exactly.  A poor-man's widening would REALLY not be too hard from PA3 to past US1.  In a few spots, the median would have to be fooled with, but most all the overpasses and underpasses are already wide enough to shoe-horn in another travel lane.  I just don't understand why that concept is so lost on PENNDOT..

[jeffandnicole]

If they had to widen a local road, encroach on people's properties, etc, I could understand some of the anti-widening issues.  Obviously here, most of the improvements could be made within the median.  The DVRPC should really be pushing the issue to widen the roadway, since they are the REGIONAL planning commission, but instead they shy away from it and hide behind their pro-mass transit/pro-bicycle agendas.  Back when the highway was built, we were told better mass transit would be the key to reducing congestion.  20/25 years later, there's been almost no improvements in mass transit, and the congestion is even worse.  Give it another 20/25 years, and we'll continue to have the same problems, and they will STILL insist better mass transit will help the situation.

[SteveG1988]

NJ29/129 near trenton has the right shoulder setup that way for NB Traffic, it is to serve as a lane to take you directly onto 129 itself from 29

[roadman]

Breakdowns and their impact on traffic are still a problem on the Southeast Expressway.  In conjunction with the 1995 "zipper lane" installation, the shoulders were completely removed between Mass. Ave and the Braintree split and changed to full time travel lanes.

[jeffandnicole]

NJ29/129 near trenton has the right shoulder setup that way for NB Traffic, it is to serve as a lane to take you directly onto 129 itself from 29

Yep - never understood why they just didn't build 4 lanes NB in that area, as they did for the SB side. 

[SteveG1988]

NJ29/129 near trenton has the right shoulder setup that way for NB Traffic, it is to serve as a lane to take you directly onto 129 itself from 29

Yep - never understood why they just didn't build 4 lanes NB in that area, as they did for the SB side. 

Because the road did not exist as it is now until about 11 years ago, as such all traffic flowed into NJ 129, meaning the current config would have worked both ways. also the wetlands there might have something to do with it along with the noise barrier

[jeffandnicole]

NJ29/129 near trenton has the right shoulder setup that way for NB Traffic, it is to serve as a lane to take you directly onto 129 itself from 29

Yep - never understood why they just didn't build 4 lanes NB in that area, as they did for the SB side. 

Because the road did not exist as it is now until about 11 years ago, as such all traffic flowed into NJ 129, meaning the current config would have worked both ways. also the wetlands there might have something to do with it along with the noise barrier

NJ 29 North, Before the tunnel was constructed:

The left and center lanes went towards what is now Rt. 29, but back then was Lamberton Rd. (A gap in Rt. 29 existed where the tunnel is now located...I think the signs indicated 'To NJ 29' along Lamberton) The center lane ended, merging into the left lane. Traffic went down a hill towards the river, turned right at a traffic light, then crept along Lamberton Rd.

The right lane expanded into 2 lanes, then curved right starting NJ 129.

A lane also became the exit lane for Duck Island...I think the center lane split before the 29/129 split.

The sound barrier only exists where the road has already widened at the 29/129 split.

It would be kinda strange that the roadway would only be permitted to be 7 lanes wide...by that point, an 8th lane wouldn't/shouldn't make much of a difference.

Then again, if one looks at the original plans drawn up in the 60's, the actual construction in the 90's was nearly the same design, despite the highways that were planned and cancelled during those years. It's significant, because in the 60's, a little known highway that none ever talks about called I-95 was on the books. When that highway was cancelled, the routing was sent thru 295 & 195, via a sharp cloverleaf ramp. It also changed the planned traffic flow of 29 & 129. Actual traffic flow is probably much heavier than envisioned in that area as a result.

[briantroutman]

Directing traffic onto shoulders strikes me as the kind of stopgap measure you employ in an emergency–not something that you'd spend 4-5 years and thousands or millions of dollars putting into place. I-476 probably should have been 6 lanes or more from the start, and any time spent on such a shoulder use scheme would merely postpone an inevitability that's already almost 30 years overdue.

Beyond the questionable logic of committing such considerable time and resources to an incomplete and makeshift solution, I'm also concerned about the precedent you set when you direct motorists to drive on a portion of the roadway that they've been specifically instructed not to use, except in an emergency. I understand that PennDOT would place signs indicating the times when motorists could use the shoulder. But I don't think that would stop people from bending the rules at other times and in other places as it suits them.

And on the topic of public transportation–if the DRVPC is going to retreat into that bunker, they're going to have to back up their rhetoric with action (which won't happen). The 476 corridor isn't served by public transit. Like most cities (at least most older cities), Philadelphia's transit system is mostly radial–whereas 476 is semi-circumferential. People on 476 aren't commuting to and from Center City; they're driving from Lansdale to Media or from Warminster to Wayne. They don't live in rowhomes in inner suburbs and work in century-old office buildings downtown; they have cubicles in '90s-era corporate parks and live in drywall McMansions. These people live in one suburb, work in another, and shop in a third. The only time they see Center City is a night out. Public transportation doesn't serve these people, and at the current rate, it never will.

[jeffandnicole]

Directing traffic onto shoulders strikes me as the kind of stopgap measure you employ in an emergency—not something that you'd spend 4-5 years and thousands or millions of dollars putting into place. I-476 probably should have been 6 lanes or more from the start, and any time spent on such a shoulder use scheme would merely postpone an inevitability that's already almost 30 years overdue.

Beyond the questionable logic of committing such considerable time and resources to an incomplete and makeshift solution, I'm also concerned about the precedent you set when you direct motorists to drive on a portion of the roadway that they've been specifically instructed not to use, except in an emergency. I understand that PennDOT would place signs indicating the times when motorists could use the shoulder. But I don't think that would stop people from bending the rules at other times and in other places as it suits them.

And on the topic of public transportation—if the DRVPC is going to retreat into that bunker, they're going to have to back up their rhetoric with action (which won't happen). The 476 corridor isn't served by public transit. Like most cities (at least most older cities), Philadelphia's transit system is mostly radial—whereas 476 is semi-circumferential. People on 476 aren't commuting to and from Center City; they're driving from Lansdale to Media or from Warminster to Wayne. They don't live in rowhomes in inner suburbs and work in century-old office buildings downtown; they have cubicles in '90s-era corporate parks and live in drywall McMansions. These people live in one suburb, work in another, and shop in a third. The only time they see Center City is a night out. Public transportation doesn't serve these people, and at the current rate, it never will.

In many cases, those people along 476 are commuting from/to Delaware and New Jersey as well, which presents even more of a mass-transit issue.  The train line that goes thru Media is the same one that has stops in the Newark, DE area as well, and that's about as close as those two states will get to a mass-transit system serving both areas for a while.

[PHLBOS]

The train line that goes thru Media is the same one that has stops in the Newark, DE area as well, and that's about as close as those two states will get to a mass-transit system serving both areas for a while.

Not so.

The SEPTA train through Media is actually the Media/Elwyn line (originally the Media/West Chester line, once known as the R3).  The train through Newark, DE is the Marcus Hook/Wilmington/Newark line, once known as the R2.  The two lines come together at the University City station in Philadelphia. 

That said, if one in Media want to get to Newark, DE by SEPTA Regional Rail; they would have to head eastbound to University City then change trains to the Newark line (and not every outbound train serves that station) and head southwest.  While one could theoretically do such, there too much time and backtracking involved.

From Media, one's better off taking a bus to Chester, Marcus Hook or Wilmington and transfer to the DART bus system to continue along to Newark.

Long story short, mass transit in its current hub-and-spoke setup won't solve the I-476 traffic congestion issues.

Breakdowns and their impact on traffic are still a problem on the Southeast Expressway.  In conjunction with the 1995 "zipper lane" installation, the shoulders were completely removed between Mass. Ave and the Braintree split and changed to full time travel lanes.

Thanks for the correction/update.  I found that out after my previous post and this past Saturday when heading to the Cadillac-LaSalle car show in Quincy from Logan Airport.

[jeffandnicole]

]Not so.
The SEPTA train through Media is actually the Media/Elwyn line (originally the Media/West Chester line, once known as the R3).  The train through Newark, DE is the Marcus Hook/Wilmington/Newark line, once known as the R2.  The two lines come together at the University City station in Philadelphia. 

That said, if one in Media want to get to Newark, DE by SEPTA Regional Rail; they would have to head eastbound to University City then change trains to the Newark line (and not every outbound train serves that station) and head southwest.  While one could theoretically do such, there too much time and backtracking involved.

Writing what I wrote, I was debating if that was the same line.  Obviously, I've never taken it.  I guess the Newark line isn't really useful to get to places along 476 then.

[Henry]

I could see this as a short-term solution to the congestion on I-476, but I do agree that it will have to be widened eventually.