I-95/Penna Turnpike Interchange

[Alps]

I have family over in the Main Line I can crash with, so if the meet is on for Aug. 25, I'm in.

I don't believe that the interchange ramps will be open that early.

Last I read, PTC says the ramps will open to complete I-95 on August 25, 2018.

Know something we don't, Chris? Or are you just being a Nervous Nelly in reference to the PTC?

At this point, I think Nellyism is fair.

[PHLBOS]

Know something we don't, Chris? Or are you just being a Nervous Nelly in reference to the PTC?

Oops, I did not see the earlier-mentioned Aug. 25 opening date reference.  As far as being a Nervous Nelly is concerned; I believe that Doubting Thomas would be more fitting.  We shall see.

[Henry]

Know something we don't, Chris? Or are you just being a Nervous Nelly in reference to the PTC?

Oops, I did not see the earlier-mentioned Aug. 25 opening date reference.  As far as being a Nervous Nelly is concerned; I believe that Doubting Thomas would be more fitting.  We shall see.

I'll believe it when I see it.

[cpzilliacus]

Know something we don't, Chris? Or are you just being a Nervous Nelly in reference to the PTC?

Oops, I did not see the earlier-mentioned Aug. 25 opening date reference.  As far as being a Nervous Nelly is concerned; I believe that Doubting Thomas would be more fitting.  We shall see.

PTC has not done anything associated with this project with speed.  It's been one (mostly slow) contract after the other.   I think it reasonable to assume that there were no incentives in the contract to encourage the construction contractor(s) to get it done quickly.

[Beltway]

PTC has not done anything associated with this project with speed.  It's been one (mostly slow) contract after the other.   I think it reasonable to assume that there were no incentives in the contract to encourage the construction contractor(s) to get it done quickly.

I wonder if people will quickly forget how long it took after they see the new I-95 connection completed once and for all? 

Like when I-95 and the Fort McHenry Tunnel was finally completed after about 20 years of insufferable congestion at the original Harbor Tunnel Thruway.  All that pain quickly became a memory of the past.

[Roadwarriors79]

So are there anymore sign changes planned (besides the obvious ones)? Didn't know PennDOT was going to change all their NB signage on I-95 from "Trenton"  to "New York"  until recently. What other surprises are in store?

[briantroutman]

Thanks for the replies from those interested in attending a meet. Given the historical significance of this project, I never really doubted that we'd be lacking interest, and I'm already looking at some preliminary planning options.

Looking back through recent posts on this thread, it appears C.P.Z. added the specific August 25th date to the discussion. C.P., I'm not sure where you read or heard that, but on the project's home page, the PTC has been listing a target completion date of "Fall 2018"  since at least early October of last year. (From what I can find prior to that, the website indicated only "2018"  with regard to completion of the through ramps, D10 and D20). Google searches and searches of PTC's press releases also turned up nothing about August 25th specifically. So if you have a reliable source for that date, please share it with us.

Given the uncertainty surrounding the specific date, I think I'll wait until about 30 days prior the anticipated opening before getting into specifics. I've already made contact with a public information officer at the PTC's project office to see what additional access might be available to us and get clearer information regarding the opening date. Once I've collected some additional information, I'll start a thread for this meet on the Meets board.

[Don'tKnowYet]

One my boss's, boss's bosses was told to clear his calendar the weekend of September 21 for a high-level ceremony of some type.  That's all I overheard.  That cant possibly be for a fake ribbon-cutting weeks in advance.  That sounded to me like the real thing.

[Alps]

One my boss's, boss's bosses was told to clear his calendar the weekend of September 21 for a high-level ceremony of some type.  That's all I overheard.  That cant possibly be for a fake ribbon-cutting weeks in advance.  That sounded to me like the real thing.

Sometimes ramps are opened before ribbon cutting, sometimes after, sometimes at. *shrug*

[roadman]

One my boss's, boss's bosses was told to clear his calendar the weekend of September 21 for a high-level ceremony of some type.  That's all I overheard.  That cant possibly be for a fake ribbon-cutting weeks in advance.  That sounded to me like the real thing.

Sometimes ramps are opened before ribbon cutting, sometimes after, sometimes at. *shrug*

And sometimes the ribbon cutting is held when the project is only "substantially complete".

[jeffandnicole]

One my boss's, boss's bosses was told to clear his calendar the weekend of September 21 for a high-level ceremony of some type.  That's all I overheard.  That cant possibly be for a fake ribbon-cutting weeks in advance.  That sounded to me like the real thing.

Sometimes ramps are opened before ribbon cutting, sometimes after, sometimes at. *shrug*

And sometimes the ribbon cutting is held when the project is only "substantially complete".

That will be guaranteed at this one.   Otherwise the ribbon cutting will be in 2019, well after anyone cares!

[RoadWarrior56]

Even though I am aware of the history why there is no existing direct connection at this interchange, and the issues at Breezewood, etc.  As a resident in either the Midwest or South his entire life, it is still totally ridiculous to me and nearly unfathomable as to why the h$*l there are so many crossings between various toll roads, freeways, interstates, etc. that don't have interchanges or direct connections in this part of the country.  This would be virtually unheard in any other part of the country that I have traveled in or lived in.  And to compound the absurdity, it has only taken 30 years to get to the point of actually buiding two flyover ramps to provide a direct interstate connection between two of the largest cities in the county (NYC and Philidelphia).  Better late than never I suppose.

[qguy]

Even though I am aware of the history why there is no existing direct connection at this interchange, and the issues at Breezewood, etc.  As a resident in either the Midwest or South his entire life, it is still totally ridiculous to me and nearly unfathomable as to why the h$*l there are so many crossings between various toll roads, freeways, interstates, etc. that don't have interchanges or direct connections in this part of the country.  This would be virtually unheard in any other part of the country that I have traveled in or lived in.  And to compound the absurdity, it has only taken 30 years to get to the point of actually buiding two flyover ramps to provide a direct interstate connection between two of the largest cities in the county (NYC and Philidelphia).  Better late than never I suppose.

As a near-thirty-year resident of eastern Pennsylvania, I share your amazement and consternation, believe me!

[cpzilliacus]

Even though I am aware of the history why there is no existing direct connection at this interchange, and the issues at Breezewood, etc.  As a resident in either the Midwest or South his entire life, it is still totally ridiculous to me and nearly unfathomable as to why the h$*l there are so many crossings between various toll roads, freeways, interstates, etc. that don't have interchanges or direct connections in this part of the country.  This would be virtually unheard in any other part of the country that I have traveled in or lived in.  And to compound the absurdity, it has only taken 30 years to get to the point of actually buiding two flyover ramps to provide a direct interstate connection between two of the largest cities in the county (NYC and Philidelphia).  Better late than never I suppose.

This is mostly a Pennsylvania problem. 

Yes, there are Breezewood-type non-connections in other states, including New Jersey (no connection between the NJ-700 part of the Turnpike and  I-76/NJ-42/ACE); Florida (no connection between I-95 and Florida's Turnpike at Fort Pierce where the Turnpike turns northwest toward Orlando) except via a Breezewood-style section of FL-70); Ohio (no connection between I-475 and the Ohio Turnpike (I-80/I-90) near the southwest corner of Toledo, but the non-connections at I-75 and at I-280 were remediated years ago).

[webny99]

What's clear is that Pennsylvania loved constructing non-connections, aka "Breezewoods".

What isn't clear is why they did this, or what the supposed advantages were. (Or maybe it was intentional to discourage local traffic from the turnpike?)

[NE2]

What's clear is that Pennsylvania loved constructing non-connections, aka "Breezewoods", when building the Turnpike.

Only clear to someone who doesn't have any understanding of the history involved...

[vdeane]

What's clear is that Pennsylvania loved constructing non-connections, aka "Breezewoods", when building the Turnpike.

What isn't clear is why they did this, or what the supposed advantages were. (Or maybe it was intentional to discourage local traffic from the turnpike?)

Connect to what?  The Turnpike was already long finished when the interstates were built; in fact, many of them were first thought of as Turnpike extensions!

[webny99]

What's clear is that Pennsylvania loved constructing non-connections, aka "Breezewoods", when building the Turnpike.

Only clear to someone who doesn't have any understanding of the history involved...

OK, cut out "when building the Turnpike". I have no idea if "loved" adequately reflects the feelings of the responsible agencies, but the Breezewoods undeniably exist; they didn't just appear, and it should have been obvious they would be problematic. In so many words, I was asking for the history, so have at it.

Connect to what?  The Turnpike was already long finished when the interstates were built; in fact, many of them were first thought of as Turnpike extensions!

Right, so they had to add new interchanges anyways; why didn't they make them full freeway connections?

The fact that the turnpike already existed doesn't really excuse constructing non-connections. It seems to me that morphing an existing interchange (as I assume happened to Breezewood itself) shouldn't even have been considered as an option for the junction of two freeways.

[cpzilliacus]

Looking back through recent posts on this thread, it appears C.P.Z. added the specific August 25th date to the discussion. C.P., I'm not sure where you read or heard that, but on the project's home page, the PTC has been listing a target completion date of "Fall 2018"  since at least early October of last year. (From what I can find prior to that, the website indicated only "2018"  with regard to completion of the through ramps, D10 and D20). Google searches and searches of PTC's press releases also turned up nothing about August 25th specifically. So if you have a reliable source for that date, please share it with us.

I did. I believe it was either a  PTC News release (I could not find one that matched now) or maybe of the Philadelphia-area news outlets, such as KWY, WHYY or maybe Philly.com. 

[jeffandnicole]

What's clear is that Pennsylvania loved constructing non-connections, aka "Breezewoods", when building the Turnpike.

Only clear to someone who doesn't have any understanding of the history involved...

OK, cut out "when building the Turnpike". I have no idea if "loved" adequately reflects the feelings of the responsible agencies, but the Breezewoods undeniably exist; they didn't just appear, and it should have been obvious they would be problematic. In so many words, I was asking for the history, so have at it.

Connect to what?  The Turnpike was already long finished when the interstates were built; in fact, many of them were first thought of as Turnpike extensions!

Right, so they had to add new interchanges anyways; why didn't they make them full freeway connections?

The fact that the turnpike already existed doesn't really excuse constructing non-connections. It seems to me that morphing an existing interchange (as I assume happened to Breezewood itself) shouldn't even have been considered as an option for the junction of two freeways.

The quick version of history:  PA Turnpike came first.  Interstates came second, but at first interstates were not permitted to have direct interchanges with toll roads.  So, your last paragraph was basically against policy.  If PA wanted their federal funding, they had to follow policy.

Then, interchanges with toll roads were permitted, but PA in general has never really been too excited about such designs. Maybe it has to do with the local areas, where numerous businesses have opened due to such indirect connections.

[cpzilliacus]

Connect to what?  The Turnpike was already long finished when the interstates were built; in fact, many of them were first thought of as Turnpike extensions!

There was an arcane provision in the original 1956 National Interstate and Defense Highways Act  which allowed connections between "new" and "free" Interstate highways and older toll roads such as the Pennsylvania Turnpike.  But if federal dollars (sometimes called "90/10" funds, since 90% came from BPR and later FHWA, and only 10% had to be provided  by the states) were used at such  interchanges, then effectively toll road was required to de-toll itself. 

That provision is no longer in  effect, and many states (including Ohio, New York and Massachusetts and probably others) long since remediated most or all of their breezewoods (there were once quite a few along the Ohio Turnpike, and once of the more-recent breezewood eliminations was on the I-87 part of the New York State Thruway at Newburgh, where drivers had to use arterial roads (I think NY-300) to get between I-87 and I-84).

[SignBridge]

When was the rule changed? The New York Thruway had interchanges with toll-free Interstates as far back as 1960. Notably the interchanges with I-287, the Cross-Westchester Expwy, and the Thruway mainline and the New England Section, I-95.

OR, was it that the NY Thruway Authority paid for the interchanges themselves, since the C.W. Expwy connected two separate sections of the Thruway? If so, then the Penn. Turnpike Comm. elected not to pay for and build interchanges with I-95, etc.

[vdeane]

Right, so they had to add new interchanges anyways; why didn't they make them full freeway connections?

The fact that the turnpike already existed doesn't really excuse constructing non-connections. It seems to me that morphing an existing interchange (as I assume happened to Breezewood itself) shouldn't even have been considered as an option for the junction of two freeways.

They didn't add new interchanges.  Take I-81 and I-76.  The interchange between US 11 and I-76 was always there.  When I-81 came in, PennDOT built an interchange with US 11.  No new interchange was added to the Turnpike.

The interstates were originally supposed to be tolled Turnpike routes.  The only reason they're free is because the federal government paid for their construction.  PA would have had to pay for direct interchanges, so they just didn't build them.  The other states in the area weren't so cheap.

[Beltway]

What's clear is that Pennsylvania loved constructing non-connections, aka "Breezewoods", when building the Turnpike.

That makes it sound like action was involved.  When in fact it was -lack of action-.

[Beltway]

There was an arcane provision in the original 1956 National Interstate and Defense Highways Act  which allowed connections between "new" and "free" Interstate highways and older toll roads such as the Pennsylvania Turnpike.  But if federal dollars (sometimes called "90/10" funds, since 90% came from BPR and later FHWA, and only 10% had to be provided  by the states) were used at such  interchanges, then effectively toll road was required to de-toll itself. 

The Richmond-Petersburg Turnpike didn't follow any such process.  The five Interstate connections were connected with the turnpike as they were built between 1962 and 1968.