I-95/Penna Turnpike Interchange

[MASTERNC]

Just saw a traffic cam on the local news in Philly that was trained on a VMS on I-95 warning of an overnight closure on the 22nd around the interchange. Looks like it's happening.

[Henry]

Here are some pics from the Golden Spike Meet that Brian Troutman organized. All are from 13 Sep 2018 except the button.


The group photo. One of the Turnpike officials climbed up onto the top of a water tanker truck he had strategically positioned for the shot. We're on the I-95 southbound flyover, looking roughly toward the northeast.


The vanity shot of my son (Roadsguy) and me. I forget who brought the shields from their private collection (profuse apologies). It was a great touch! (Someone please claim credit or provide a shoutout.)


An overview image, the view from the I-95 southbound flyover, looking roughly toward the northest. Visible are (from left to right) the I-95 southbound flyover, the I-295 westbound carriageway, the I-295 eastbound carriageway, and the I-95 northbound flyover.


The I-95 northbound carriageway just before the beginning of the flyover, looking toward the north. For more information on the project, heed the billboard. Visible to the left of the carriageway are (from left to right) the I-95 southbound flyover, the I-295 westbound carriageway, and the I-295 eastbound carriageway. Note the enhanced mile marker at the far right.


Oooh, shiny and new! The I-95 northbound flyover, looking toward the east. The northbound flyover was almost entirely striped, while the southbound flyover wasn't striped at all yet. The roomy outer shoulder provides for safe sight distance on the curve.


The art shot. Three inches above the deck of the I-95 northbound flyover.


The I-95 northbound flyover, looking toward the east. Visible off the starboard bow are (from right to left) the westbound lanes of the PA Turnpike (I-276 here for a few more feet) and the eastbound lanes of the PA Turnpike (I-276). The local roadway visible passing under the Turnpike is PA 413, New Rogers Rd.


A little further along on the I-95 northbound flyover, looking toward the east. Visible in the distance (just right of center) is the steel arch of the Delaware River Bridge.


The I-95 northbound carriageway as it touches down from the flyover, looking toward the east. Visible in the distance is the merge from PA Turnpike (I-276) eastbound (at right) and the PA Turnpike (I-276) westbound split (at left). Also visible in the distance is the Bristol Oxford Valley Road overpass.


At the start of the I-95 southbound flyover, looking toward the west.


The I-95 southbound flyover, looking toward the east. As noted above, the northbound flyover was striped while the southbound was not.


The I-95 southbound flyover touching down, looking toward the south. Visible (from left to right) are the I-295 eastbound carriageway, the I-295 westbound carriageway, the I-95 southbound flyover, and the extended ramp entrance from the PA 413 interchange. Visible ahead is the Ford Road overpass. Note the "END I-295 BEGIN I-95" signage.


Prior to going out the project site, the group was briefed by two of the contractors.


Brian provided this button for each participant in the meet.

Outstanding meet, Brian!

Nice pics!

[thenetwork]

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).

I-280 always had a direct connection to the Turnpike as that at-grade expressway was built a few years before it got the I-280 designation.  I-77, between Cleveland and Akron, got a direct Turnpike connection in the late 90's.  Remaining "Breezewoods" along the Ohio Turnpike include I-271 (not needed) and I-475/US-23. 

"Half-Breezewoods" due to single-direction interchanges include the I-80/90 split (SR-57 is the Half-Breezewood route), the Western terminus of I-480 (Old SR-10) and I-680 (SR-7).

[Roadsguy]

I threw this together to count down to the opening: http://isi95completeyet.tk/

Only a week now? Alright!

Nice photos, qguy!

I clarified the timing with one of the contractors and will adjust the countdown accordingly. It will actually open at 6am on Saturday the 22nd at the earliest if all goes well with the sign changes. The goal is to have it open by 6am on Monday the 24th. I'll set the countdown for 6am the 23rd and edit it again near the end if weather looks good.

[ipeters61]

The photos look amazing.  Makes me wish I could have gone, but my family was visiting from northeastern PA.

[PHLBOS]

Bold emphasis added below:

And just to expand upon some comments made earlier regarding mileposts, exit numbers, and the ownership of the roadway: The PTC is constructing the new flyovers from the Delaware Expressway to the Pennsylvania Turnpike, but ownership and maintenance responsibilities for the flyovers will be transferred to PennDOT upon completion. The mainline of the Turnpike from the flyovers eastward to the NJ line will remain PTC property (and will technically still be a part of the Pennsylvania Turnpike System), but signage both on the mainline and on intersecting roads will carry only I-95 shields–no "Penna Turnpike"  keystones. So unlike I-70 and I-76, a motorist driving through on I-95 may be completely unaware that he or she has ever been on the Pennsylvania Turnpike for part of the journey. And Mike Phillips emphasized that the westbound-only toll at the Delaware River Bridge was a "bridge toll" , not a road toll. So in a manner of speaking, I-95 in Pennsylvania remains toll-free.

I know you're just posting what was told at the meet (kudos again BTW); however that being the case, then the toll for that gantry should not be increasing next year IMHO.  Unlike this year's Act 44-related toll increase; next year's (2019) upcoming increase includes that westbound AET gantry.  It will increase both E-ZPass/Toll-By-Plate rates ($5/$6.75 to $5.30/$7.20) making it the most expensive Delaware River crossing to date.

Source

The cashless toll at the westbound Delaware River Bridge will increase from $5.00 to $5.30 for E-ZPass customers and from $6.75 to $7.20 for those who use PA Turnpike TOLL-BY-PLATE.

Just saw a traffic cam on the local news in Philly that was trained on a VMS on I-95 warning of an overnight closure on the 22nd around the interchange. Looks like it’s happening.

Those messages were present during the meet.

[theroadwayone]

How long will the toll hikes go on for?

[vdeane]

How long will the toll hikes go on for?

Annually for the foreseeable future.

[famartin]

I'll be driving thru Saturday morning, so hopefully I'll have more photos to share, this time showing it actually open (about damn time)

[SignBridge]

Anybody know if the NJT Authority is uncovering the "95 South - Philadelphia" legend on their signs at Exit-6 in coordination with the Interchange opening?

[02 Park Ave]

Anybody know if the NJT Authority is uncovering the "95 South - Philadelphia" legend on their signs at Exit-6 in coordination with the Interchange opening?

We were told at the meet that the opening would be coordinated with NJ and the signs would be changed accordingly.

[theroadwayone]

Anybody know if the NJT Authority is uncovering the "95 South - Philadelphia" legend on their signs at Exit-6 in coordination with the Interchange opening?

We were told at the meet that the opening would be coordinated with NJ and the signs would be changed accordingly.

Are they going to do it simultaneously or what?

[jeffandnicole]

Bold emphasis added below:

And just to expand upon some comments made earlier regarding mileposts, exit numbers, and the ownership of the roadway: The PTC is constructing the new flyovers from the Delaware Expressway to the Pennsylvania Turnpike, but ownership and maintenance responsibilities for the flyovers will be transferred to PennDOT upon completion. The mainline of the Turnpike from the flyovers eastward to the NJ line will remain PTC property (and will technically still be a part of the Pennsylvania Turnpike System), but signage both on the mainline and on intersecting roads will carry only I-95 shields–no "Penna Turnpike"  keystones. So unlike I-70 and I-76, a motorist driving through on I-95 may be completely unaware that he or she has ever been on the Pennsylvania Turnpike for part of the journey. And Mike Phillips emphasized that the westbound-only toll at the Delaware River Bridge was a "bridge toll" , not a road toll. So in a manner of speaking, I-95 in Pennsylvania remains toll-free.

I know you're just posting what was told at the meet (kudos again BTW); however that being the case, then the toll for that gantry should not be increasing next year IMHO.  Unlike this year's Act 44-related toll increase; next year's (2019) upcoming increase includes that westbound AET gantry.  It will increase both E-ZPass/Toll-By-Plate rates ($5/$6.75 to $5.30/$7.20) making it the most expensive Delaware River crossing to date.

Also, if that toll is just a bridge toll, and there's no toll per-se on the I-95 portion of the PA Turnpike, who would be responsible for maintaining it and spending money on it? (Obvious answer - the PTC).  I don't see the PA Turnpike allocating all the money from the bridge toll solely for their half of the bridge after not having a dedicated toll for the past 60 years for the bridge.  Honestly, it's more likely just a bookkeeping issue more than anything.

Anybody know if the NJT Authority is uncovering the "95 South - Philadelphia" legend on their signs at Exit-6 in coordination with the Interchange opening?

We were told at the meet that the opening would be coordinated with NJ and the signs would be changed accordingly.

Are they going to do it simultaneously or what?

I would suspect it would be done over the weekend.  While the Interchange 6 signs are probably the most important, there are other signs they need to uncover the I-95 shield, or put up an I-95 shield. 

It may also be the case that it's more important for the PA Turnpike to open up their section first prior to the NJ Turnpike I-95 signs being uncovered, in case an issue arises!

[PHLBOS]

I don't see the PA Turnpike allocating all the money from the bridge toll solely for their half of the bridge after not having a dedicated toll for the past 60 years for the bridge.  Honestly, it's more likely just a bookkeeping issue more than anything.

Unfortunately, I only arrived towards the tail-end of the meet so I was not able to ask/rebut Mike Phillips on that matter. 

However (playing devil's advocate for a few seconds), for the last 60 years, neither the PTC (nor the NJTA for that matter, since the original bridge was a joint-venture between both agencies IIRC) had plans to build a parallel span set in motion until recently.  Granted, the recent closure due a to finding a crack in one of the bridge members might've been a wake-up call to the PTC.

Either way, the PA-bound toll (especially for those without E-ZPass and/or coming from US 130) is too high with respect to the other surrounding crossings.

Given PTC's history; this is one case (& I don't believe I'm saying this) where a separate agency (either DRJTBC or DRPA) taking ownership/responsibility for the existing and future parallel span wouldn't be a bad thing.  At least then, the risk/threat of having the tolls increased annually would be nulled.

[storm2k]

I don't see the PA Turnpike allocating all the money from the bridge toll solely for their half of the bridge after not having a dedicated toll for the past 60 years for the bridge.  Honestly, it's more likely just a bookkeeping issue more than anything.

Unfortunately, I only arrived towards the tail-end of the meet so I was not able to ask/rebut Mike Phillips on that matter. 

However (playing devil's advocate for a few seconds), for the last 60 years, neither the PTC (nor the NJTA for that matter, since the original bridge was a joint-venture between both agencies IIRC) had plans to build a parallel span set in motion until recently.  Granted, the recent closure due a to finding a crack in one of the bridge members might've been a wake-up call to the PTC.

Either way, the PA-bound toll (especially for those without E-ZPass and/or coming from US 130) is too high with respect to the other surrounding crossings.

Given PTC's history; this is one case (& I don't believe I'm saying this) where a separate agency (either DRJTBC or DRPA) taking ownership/responsibility for the existing and future parallel span wouldn't be a bad thing.  At least then, the risk/threat of having the tolls increased annually would be nulled.

Well the bridge still is jointly owned. It's structure P0.0 for the NJTA. When the crack was found in it, they mobilized on their end, as well as the PTC.

[Beltway]

Well the bridge still is jointly owned. It's structure P0.0 for the NJTA. When the crack was found in it, they mobilized on their end, as well as the PTC.

I have seen data that the AADT is about 47,000.  Given that by its location there might not be much in the way of rush hour peaks, does it have any real traffic problems that would make providing more capacity an urgent issue?

[storm2k]

Well the bridge still is jointly owned. It's structure P0.0 for the NJTA. When the crack was found in it, they mobilized on their end, as well as the PTC.

I have seen data that the AADT is about 47,000.  Given that by its location there might not be much in the way of rush hour peaks, does it have any real traffic problems that would make providing more capacity an urgent issue?

When it was just 276 and the connector between the NJT and the PATP, not really. Now that a major mainline interstate is being routed onto it, it may increase, but I still don't think as much as people think. A lot of people who are thru-travelling from Baltimore, DC, and points south on 95 are probably already taking the NJ Turnpike from the Del Mem Br already, and drivers in the Philadelphia area are coming back via the Walt Whitman, Ben Franklin, or other bridges from the city itself. Time will tell. The bridge does need to be replaced in the long term, though. The crack should be enough to prove that.

[Beltway]

I thought the plan was to build a parallel bridge, and then rehab the original bridge.

[jeffandnicole]

I thought the plan was to build a parallel bridge, and then rehab the original bridge.

Correct - the plan was for it to be rehabbed for future traffic.  I don't think it's ever been publicized if the incident that occurred will shorten the lifespan of the bridge.  Neither Authority seems to have publicly indicated that there's any current concern as to the bridge's driveability; such an issue could have been addressed by not signing I-95 on it which is assumed to increase traffic on the bridge.

[PHLBOS]

I have seen data that the AADT is about 47,000.  Given that by its location there might not be much in the way of rush hour peaks, does it have any real traffic problems that would make providing more capacity an urgent issue?

When it was just 276 and the connector between the NJT and the PATP, not really. Now that a major mainline interstate is being routed onto it, it may increase, but I still don't think as much as people think. A lot of people who are thru-travelling from Baltimore, DC, and points south on 95 are probably already taking the NJ Turnpike from the Del Mem Br already, and drivers in the Philadelphia area are coming back via the Walt Whitman, Ben Franklin, or other bridges from the city itself. Time will tell.

One has to wonder (not to beat a dead horse here) that had these new ramps been completed prior to the completion of I-195 & I-295 east of Trenton (both would happen during the early 90s); would the increased capacity due to the new ramps opening and said-I-95 designation on the Turnpike Connector been more than what will eventually take place after this weekend?

[jeffandnicole]

I have seen data that the AADT is about 47,000.  Given that by its location there might not be much in the way of rush hour peaks, does it have any real traffic problems that would make providing more capacity an urgent issue?

When it was just 276 and the connector between the NJT and the PATP, not really. Now that a major mainline interstate is being routed onto it, it may increase, but I still don't think as much as people think. A lot of people who are thru-travelling from Baltimore, DC, and points south on 95 are probably already taking the NJ Turnpike from the Del Mem Br already, and drivers in the Philadelphia area are coming back via the Walt Whitman, Ben Franklin, or other bridges from the city itself. Time will tell.

One has to wonder (not to beat a dead horse here) that had these new ramps been completed prior to the completion of I-195 & I-295 east of Trenton (both would happen during the early 90s); would the increased capacity due to the new ramps opening and said-I-95 designation on the Turnpike Connector been more than what will eventually take place after this weekend?

At this point you're talking 25 years ago...So much could have happened between then and now that you can't really analyze it.  Everything from Wilmington to Trenton along I-95, I-295 and the NJ Turnpike, along with nearly every other major road in the region, has been studied and constructed based on what was existing at the time.

[briantroutman]

One more note regarding the I-95 Delaware River Bridge toll being a "bridge toll" : It's only charged westbound (to Pennsylvania), which is consistent with the DRPA bridges.

I think there's a natural limit to toll increases, though, because the Turnpike bridge is, to an extent, in competition with the other Delaware River crossings as well as the New Jersey Turnpike. Continuous toll increases may be a way to wring more money out of the essentially captive audience that is headed from the NJ Turnpike to Harrisburg and points west, but it at the same time potentially kills off the new revenue streams from commuter and long-distance I-95 traffic that the PTC is currently not profiting from. And I tend to think that the latter group has greater potential to bring more revenue to PTC coffers. The officials on hand for the meet basically said as much.

With regard to the Delaware River Bridge, the PTC and NJTA are considering multiple options. The long-standing plan has been to construct a parallel bridge, then rehabilitate the existing one. This option is still on the table.

They're also considering options that would result in demolition of the existing bridge–after being replaced with either a single new bridge carrying both directions or two new parallel bridges. The chief engineer from Jacobs (the lead contractor on the I-95 project) said during the meet that opinions among engineers at both toll agencies and all contractors is split roughly in half. About 50% are emphatic that the existing Delaware River Bridge is perfectly sound and that replacing it outright would be a waste of resources. The other 50% are equally emphatic that the bridge must be replaced. The Jacobs engineer (who seemed to be in the "save"  camp) stated that no other bridge in the country has been inspected more carefully or more thoroughly.

Regardless, the PTC will be carefully monitoring traffic trends after the opening of the I-95 flyovers to analyze trends that will influence the plan of action for the bridge.

[jeffandnicole]

One more note regarding the I-95 Delaware River Bridge toll being a "bridge toll" : It's only charged westbound (to Pennsylvania), which is consistent with the DRPA bridges.

I think there's a natural limit to toll increases, though, because the Turnpike bridge is, to an extent, in competition with the other Delaware River crossings as well as the New Jersey Turnpike. Continuous toll increases may be a way to wring more money out of the essentially captive audience that is headed from the NJ Turnpike to Harrisburg and points west, but it at the same time potentially kills off the new revenue streams from commuter and long-distance I-95 traffic that the PTC is currently not profiting from. And I tend to think that the latter group has greater potential to bring more revenue to PTC coffers. The officials on hand for the meet basically said as much.

With regard to the Delaware River Bridge, the PTC and NJTA are considering multiple options. The long-standing plan has been to construct a parallel bridge, then rehabilitate the existing one. This option is still on the table.

They're also considering options that would result in demolition of the existing bridge–after being replaced with either a single new bridge carrying both directions or two new parallel bridges. The chief engineer from Jacobs (the lead contractor on the I-95 project) said during the meet that opinions among engineers at both toll agencies and all contractors is split roughly in half. About 50% are emphatic that the existing Delaware River Bridge is perfectly sound and that replacing it outright would be a waste of resources. The other 50% are equally emphatic that the bridge must be replaced. The Jacobs engineer (who seemed to be in the "save"  camp) stated that no other bridge in the country has been inspected more carefully or more thoroughly.

Regardless, the PTC will be carefully monitoring traffic trends after the opening of the I-95 flyovers to analyze trends that will influence the plan of action for the bridge.

At this stage in the game, that's appropriate.

When it comes to construction projects, usually there's a obscene number of alternatives that are preliminary designed and considered.  Often, many of those plans are rejected in-house before they ever make it to the public.  The NJ Turnpike considered numerous ideas for their 6-9 widening, including what would be frequently considered the easiest and cheapest option - just having all the lanes on one roadway, rather than dividing them 3-3 as they ultimately did.  Sure, it seemed like the natural progression considering what they've done up north, but it was by far not the only option considered.

In the project I know and love, the 295/76/42 interchange, 26 options were considered and even made public.  Those 26 were whittled down to 5.  And ultimately the final design has still undergone some changes after it was picked.

So what does it mean for the NJ/PA Turnpike bridge?  Anything is possible.  Someone could even toss in the idea of a tunnel.  It'll be soundly rejected within 30 seconds because of the hazmat issue, but it's nonetheless an alternative idea that was considered and documented.  Expect other groups to chime in, wanting pedestrian/bicycle/rail access.  And especially in NJ but true in PA as well, the towns affected have to give their blessing to the projects also, and sometimes those towns will use their power to demand a few extra favors from the transportation authorities.

[jeffandnicole]

The Bucks County Courier-Times has a story today stating that both I-95 and the PA Turnpike will be closed near the interchange Friday Night so they can complete the final work needed to make I-95 continuous.

http://www.buckscountycouriertimes.com/news/20180917/pa-turnpike-i-95-to-close-friday-night

The last paragraph mentions what we've been talking about today - the PA/NJ Turnpike Bridge.  It's extremely general in nature and no timeline is given.

[Beltway]

They're also considering options that would result in demolition of the existing bridge–after being replaced with either a single new bridge carrying both directions or two new parallel bridges. The chief engineer from Jacobs (the lead contractor on the I-95 project) said during the meet that opinions among engineers at both toll agencies and all contractors is split roughly in half. About 50% are emphatic that the existing Delaware River Bridge is perfectly sound and that replacing it outright would be a waste of resources. The other 50% are equally emphatic that the bridge must be replaced. The Jacobs engineer (who seemed to be in the "save"  camp) stated that no other bridge in the country has been inspected more carefully or more thoroughly.

Regarding the load carrying capacity and the structural integrity and the approximate lifespan at that load carrying capacity, sound engineering sources should be pretty close in their analysis results.  If they are not then that is a concern.

On the other hand if the question is how much it would cost to rehab the original bridge and how long the rehab would last, then it becomes a valid question as to whether the cost versus benefits are worth rehabbing and not replacing.