I-95/Penna Turnpike Interchange

[SignBridge]

I would assume that NJTA paid for the entire Exit-10 Interchange, since they've never had a problem paying for worthwhile projects on their road. The rule as I understand it is that Federal dollars cannot be used for an interchange connecting an Interstate to a toll road. That was supposedly why the infamous Penn. Tpk./I-95 interchange was never built (until now).

But I have to agree that if I-95 had gone along what is now I-287, it sure would have been an awkward route thru that Exit-10 interchange to stay on I-95.

[jwolfer]

I would assume that NJTA paid for the entire Exit-10 Interchange, since they've never had a problem paying for worthwhile projects on their road. The rule as I understand it is that Federal dollars cannot be used for an interchange connecting an Interstate to a toll road. That was supposedly why the infamous Penn. Tpk./I-95 interchange was never built (until now).

But I have to agree that if I-95 had gone along what is now I-287, it sure would have been an awkward route thru that Exit-10 interchange to stay on I-95.

If Somerset Freeway had been completed i am sure exit 10 would have been upgraded at some point. But remember that there was the propsed 695 which would have diverted a lot of thru traffic via 695 and 287.

I think the NJTP would still be the prefered GPS routing. it avoids center city Philadelphia and Wilmington. Just like GPS avoids 295 beccuse it is more miles and carries local commuter traffic more that the NJTP

LGMS428

[SignBridge]

I completely agree, jwolfer.

[vdeane]

The federal funding prohibition is not the reason for the switch to the free-flow design over the originally planned double trumpet.  That is the fact that interstate standards don't allow interstates to exit off themselves.  Most/all the present-day examples of such either predate the interstate system or were built to older standards; in either case, they are now grandfathered; hence, why exit 10 of the Turnpike would likely have been grandfathered in.  But because there was no existing infrastructure there when I-95 was re-routed, standards demanded a free-flow interchange.  The federal funding rule may, however, have played a part in why the double trumpet was only in design at the time and not built when I-95 was.

[NE2]

The federal funding prohibition is not the reason for the switch to the free-flow design over the originally planned double trumpet.  That is the fact that interstate standards don't allow interstates to exit off themselves.

I-95 north will be a right-side exit from its current route, and I-95 south will exit right from current I-276...
http://www.patpconstruction.com/paturnpikei95/section-d30-d40.aspx

[J N Winkler]

The federal funding prohibition is not the reason for the switch to the free-flow design over the originally planned double trumpet.  That is the fact that interstate standards don't allow interstates to exit off themselves.

I-95 north will be a right-side exit from its current route, and I-95 south will exit right from current I-276...

http://www.patpconstruction.com/paturnpikei95/section-d30-d40.aspx

For signing purposes there is a distinction between exits and splits and I doubt the TOTSO prohibition applies to splits, even if they are assigned exit numbers and those are signed.

[NJRoadfan]

I-95 south will exit from the right at NJTP Exit 6, so I doubt the PA Turnpike interchange layout really matters.

[jemacedo9]

I-76 eastbound exits itself at Exit 326...this is all due to the exit numbering staying with the toll road, not the numbering.

[Alps]

The federal funding prohibition is not the reason for the switch to the free-flow design over the originally planned double trumpet.  That is the fact that interstate standards don't allow interstates to exit off themselves.  Most/all the present-day examples of such either predate the interstate system or were built to older standards; in either case, they are now grandfathered; hence, why exit 10 of the Turnpike would likely have been grandfathered in.  But because there was no existing infrastructure there when I-95 was re-routed, standards demanded a free-flow interchange.  The federal funding rule may, however, have played a part in why the double trumpet was only in design at the time and not built when I-95 was.

[citation needed]

[Roadsguy]

I-76 eastbound exits itself at Exit 326...this is all due to the exit numbering staying with the toll road, not the numbering.

Actually, the Schuylkill Expressway and the I-276 segment of the Turnpike both continue the exit numbering from 326.

[bzakharin]

I-76 eastbound exits itself at Exit 326...this is all due to the exit numbering staying with the toll road, not the numbering.

Actually, the Schuylkill Expressway and the I-276 segment of the Turnpike both continue the exit numbering from 326.

I think that is actually reasonable. Since 276 never leaves the Turnpike there is no reason it should have its own identity, and it has only one set of exit numbers. I'd much prefer I-87 to have a single set of exit numbers and not the 3 it has now. Now with I-95 thrown onto the PA Turnpike one could argue that exits 358 and 359 need renumbering, but then again one can argue they don't.

[vdeane]

The interchange being built and NJ Turnpike exit 6 function as splits, regardless of signage.  Valley Forge is grandfathered in.  The issue is with the geometry of what FHWA considered the mainline (I-95, not the Pennsylvania Turnpike), not the signage.  A double trumpet would have forced traffic on I-95 onto one lane through tight, low-speed ramps.  This design can be navigated at highway speeds.

The federal funding prohibition is not the reason for the switch to the free-flow design over the originally planned double trumpet.  That is the fact that interstate standards don't allow interstates to exit off themselves.  Most/all the present-day examples of such either predate the interstate system or were built to older standards; in either case, they are now grandfathered; hence, why exit 10 of the Turnpike would likely have been grandfathered in.  But because there was no existing infrastructure there when I-95 was re-routed, standards demanded a free-flow interchange.  The federal funding rule may, however, have played a part in why the double trumpet was only in design at the time and not built when I-95 was.

[citation needed]

So what's the reason for this?  And the reason the PTC didn't just build a double trumpet and call it done?

[jeffandnicole]

The interchange being built and NJ Turnpike exit 6 function as splits, regardless of signage.  Valley Forge is grandfathered in.  The issue is with the geometry of what FHWA considered the mainline (I-95, not the Pennsylvania Turnpike), not the signage.  A double trumpet would have forced traffic on I-95 onto one lane through tight, low-speed ramps.  This design can be navigated at highway speeds.

The federal funding prohibition is not the reason for the switch to the free-flow design over the originally planned double trumpet.  That is the fact that interstate standards don't allow interstates to exit off themselves.  Most/all the present-day examples of such either predate the interstate system or were built to older standards; in either case, they are now grandfathered; hence, why exit 10 of the Turnpike would likely have been grandfathered in.  But because there was no existing infrastructure there when I-95 was re-routed, standards demanded a free-flow interchange.  The federal funding rule may, however, have played a part in why the double trumpet was only in design at the time and not built when I-95 was.

[citation needed]

So what's the reason for this?  And the reason the PTC didn't just build a double trumpet and call it done?

Regarding the PA Turnpike/95 Interchange: I wouldn't be surprised if the FHA did have some say in that they wanted a true high-speed connection.  Absent of that, the PA Turnpike could've made the decision themselves.  It's also noteworthy that it was decided long ago (and we're talking last century, in the 90's sometime) that the PA Turnpike would charge motorists a toll entering PA only.  However, it is a much more recent change to make that all-electronic; as recently as 2005 they still talked about a conventional toll plaza with Express lanes and cash lanes.  It's such a short, but potentially busy, section of highway that the Turnpike probably realized that it wouldn't make sense to operate a ticket system for that stretch of highway, and decided it was more economically feasible to go with one-way tolling.

Regarding the I-69 project in Kentucky...that appears to be part of the I-69 master plan for the highway, in which they made or proposed to make numerous improvements to several interchanges and straightaway sections.  http://transportation.ky.gov/highway-design/conference%20presentation/i-69%20update.pdf .  I didn't dive deep enough to see if the feds mandated that specific project though.

[MrDisco99]

I meant exit 10.

It just seems funny that they would've been fine with routing I-95 through that interchange, but then cancelling the Somerset meant sending the PTC back to design when they already had a plan to build.  Maybe they figured they would fix exit 10 after the Somerset was built.

[jeffandnicole]

I meant exit 10.

It just seems funny that they would've been fine with routing I-95 through that interchange, but then cancelling the Somerset meant sending the PTC back to design when they already had a plan to build.  Maybe they figured they would fix exit 10 after the Somerset was built.

The NJ Turnpike was constructed in 1951.  The entire Interstate Highway system wasn't really envisioned until the mid-1950's at the earliest...and in most cases traffic was envisioned to be light throughout much of the system. If I-95 was built as planned, I'm sure they would've made some adjustments to the NJ Turnpike Interchange 10.

If the PTC had a design for 95 & the PA Turnpike, it would make sense that it would need to be redesigned anyway as originally 95 would have continued north of the Turnpike rather than become the Turnpike.

[NJRoadfan]

The current Exit 10 was built when I-287 was built..... much newer then the 1950s.

[storm2k]

The current Exit 10 was built when I-287 was built..... much newer then the 1950s.

I believe 1963, though the current design of the interchange might be from when the dual-dual roadways were built in the late 60s-very early 70s.

[PHLBOS]

Based on the Historic Aerials & USGS maps; Interchange 10/I-287 was constructed sometime between 1964-1969.

[NJRoadfan]

The current interchange does have a semi-high speed connection to I-287 north that I-95 south traffic would have used. NJDOT even kept the legends "suggesting" I-95 continues along there when they finally replaced what were likely the original signs: https://goo.gl/maps/kSU2ckRg65r

(The "TO" over I-287 isn't needed here, it might have implied that the ramp was originally for I-95 south and thats the way to I-287)

[epzik8]

I got a picture of the construction site from I-95 southbound on Monday.

[Chris19001]

I got a picture of the construction site from I-95 southbound on Monday.

You mean "future" I-95 southbound?  That looks like the PATP westbound to me..?

[odditude]

I got a picture of the construction site from I-95 southbound on Monday.

You mean "future" I-95 southbound?  That looks like the PATP westbound to me..?

No, this is current I-95.  The piers visible are for the incoming future I-95 south, and the retaining wall on the right will be supporting the C/D lanes. Visible in the distance is the Ford Rd overpass.

edit: fixed "the the"

[cpzilliacus]

I got a picture of the construction site from I-95 southbound on Monday.

You mean "future" I-95 southbound?  That looks like the PATP westbound to me..?

Agree with  odditude.

It may not yet be signed (and presumably won't be until PTC finishes their snail-like crawl toward partial completion of the Bristol Township interchange project), but I understand that the N.J. Turnpike "Pennsylvania" Connector as well as the Pennsylvania  Turnpike E-W Mainline (from the Delaware River as far west as the Delaware Expressway) are now I-95, even though there (properly) will be no signs of same until sometime in 2018.

[epzik8]

I got a picture of the construction site from I-95 southbound on Monday.

You mean "future" I-95 southbound?  That looks like the PATP westbound to me..?

I was definitely on I-95 south when I took this photo. I was coming back from Staten Island and I had taken I-287 to U.S. 1 to I-95 at Trenton, New Jersey. However, I did previously post a set of photos of this construction site heading eastbound on the Turnpike.

[Chris19001]

Sorry, my bad then.  I thought the overpass in the background was present I-95.  Knowing for sure this is 95 south, they are much further along than I thought.  I take the turnpike through there from time to time, but very rarely 95 as I have easier ways to connect north and south of the area... Thanks for the photo.