AARoads Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

Author Topic: I-83 York County  (Read 1697 times)

Mr_Northside

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1082
  • "Oh god... They'll know! They'll know!"

  • Age: 39
  • Location: Woods Run (Northside), Pittsburgh, PA
  • Last Login: October 18, 2018, 03:40:03 PM
    • Currently playing washboard in Ye Olde Royal Shithouse Players
Re: I-83 York County
« Reply #25 on: March 21, 2018, 02:46:38 PM »

The Penn-Lincoln Parkway (or is that name obsolete?) is being addressed by the Southern Beltway and the last leg of the MFE, at least there is a completed location study and NEPA process for those highways, and they will provide major alternative routing and traffic relief to the Penn-Lincoln Parkway.   

I'm going to have to disagree on that....The Mon-Fayette & Southern Beltway will have a negligible effect on Parkway East/West traffic.  Some traffic will probably pony up the tolls and make such a big half-loop to get to the airport, but the rest of the traffic (especially beyond Edgewood/Swissvale) isn't going to use it.
Logged
I don't have opinions anymore. All I know is that no one is better than anyone else, and everyone is the best at everything

Roadsguy

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1125
  • Age: 19
  • Location: Here
  • Last Login: Today at 09:32:40 AM
Re: I-83 York County
« Reply #26 on: March 21, 2018, 05:08:28 PM »

The Squirrel Hill Tunnel only carries about 56,000 AADT

According to the Allegheny County traffic volume map, it actually gets more than 80,000, arguably enough to warrant eight lanes for future growth. It badly needs expansion or a bypass.

Strider

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 639
  • Location: Greensboro, NC
  • Last Login: October 18, 2018, 02:38:07 PM
Re: I-83 York County
« Reply #27 on: March 21, 2018, 05:36:16 PM »

Just a few random questions because I am being a curious cat.

Why don't they close the I-83 Southbound at Exit 19B ramp? The same goes for the entrance ramp from N. Hills Rd. It would just make sense to just route all the exit ramps to 19A (E. Market Street). Is there a reason why the ramps are not being changed?

Also, up north in Harrisburg, first... at the I-83/PA 581 interchange, why do they not close the Lowther St ramp? especially you can also access Lowther St at the next exit (40B).

around the I-76 interchange, why are there three exits SO close to I-76? weaving could be an issue down there.
Logged

Beltway

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3268
  • Roads to the Future

  • Location: Richmond, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 10:52:52 AM
Re: I-83 York County
« Reply #28 on: March 21, 2018, 06:00:33 PM »

The Penn-Lincoln Parkway (or is that name obsolete?) is being addressed by the Southern Beltway and the last leg of the MFE, at least there is a completed location study and NEPA process for those highways, and they will provide major alternative routing and traffic relief to the Penn-Lincoln Parkway.   
I'm going to have to disagree on that....The Mon-Fayette & Southern Beltway will have a negligible effect on Parkway East/West traffic.  Some traffic will probably pony up the tolls and make such a big half-loop to get to the airport, but the rest of the traffic (especially beyond Edgewood/Swissvale) isn't going to use it.

I was comparing it to the Surekill Expressway, which has no such alternative planned.  The SB/MFE should provide -some- relief to the Parkway, and/or the forestalling of future traffic growth.
Logged
Scott M. Savage
-- Borders, Language and Culture
http://www.roadstothefuture.com
http://www.capital-beltway.com

Beltway

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3268
  • Roads to the Future

  • Location: Richmond, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 10:52:52 AM
Re: I-83 York County
« Reply #29 on: March 21, 2018, 06:08:40 PM »

The Squirrel Hill Tunnel only carries about 56,000 AADT
According to the Allegheny County traffic volume map, it actually gets more than 80,000, arguably enough to warrant eight lanes for future growth. It badly needs expansion or a bypass.

Interesting ... the PA statewide traffic volume map of 2014 has 52,000, that is the one I have saved.  They now have a 2016 map on the PennDOT site and it gives 84,000.  I don't see how it would be possible that both of those figures could be correct.  Which is correct?
Logged
Scott M. Savage
-- Borders, Language and Culture
http://www.roadstothefuture.com
http://www.capital-beltway.com

Alps

  • Everybody Obeys the Octagon
  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 11915
  • Views expressed are my own, not my employer's.

  • Age: 35
  • Location: New Jersey
  • Last Login: October 18, 2018, 04:57:08 PM
    • Alps' Roads
Re: I-83 York County
« Reply #30 on: March 21, 2018, 06:11:23 PM »

Just a few random questions because I am being a curious cat.

Why don't they close the I-83 Southbound at Exit 19B ramp? The same goes for the entrance ramp from N. Hills Rd. It would just make sense to just route all the exit ramps to 19A (E. Market Street). Is there a reason why the ramps are not being changed?

Also, up north in Harrisburg, first... at the I-83/PA 581 interchange, why do they not close the Lowther St ramp? especially you can also access Lowther St at the next exit (40B).

around the I-76 interchange, why are there three exits SO close to I-76? weaving could be an issue down there.
General note: Any time you add, close, or change configuration of ramps along an Interstate, you need to apply to FHWA with an Access Justification Report. That, in itself, is a reason to avoid making changes. (Each change is its own report, so making changes at Mt. Rose Ave. doesn't make it any easier to make changes, say, at Market St.) Specific notes:
1. 19B looks like a useful connection to divide traffic between west (downtown) and east.
2. I assume you're referring to the SB exit that immediately follows the 581 EB entrance, since the other two ramps don't conflict with traffic. I'll note that you would lose EB access to Lowther if you close that ramp, although there is no return access to head WB so maybe it's not so important. What I really want to say though is to just close all of the local access entirely (SB off/on, NB off), as the full Exit 40B just to the south can serve everyone just fine. Carlisle and Lowther meet just west of I-83.
3. Those are historic exits. You could make a case that a lot of reconfiguration should have happened when the US 111 interchange was first constructed, but of course no one cared about interchange spacing or freeway standards in the 1940s-early 50s. Once 111 was grandfathered in as I-83, no one bothered making any changes. Now you can look at it and say they're all too close, but what do you do about it? Businesses at those exits will demand millions upon millions for basically shuttering all of them by closing the exit and convenient Turnpike access. If I could turn back time, I'd close the Limekiln exit and build the entire I-76 trumpet on the north side of the Turnpike, thus giving more space to keep the ramps at PA 114. Not really viable anymore. The best I can think of is a massive widening with two through lanes each way on I-83 and a two-lane CD road each way for all the ramps, but not closing any of them.

Strider

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 639
  • Location: Greensboro, NC
  • Last Login: October 18, 2018, 02:38:07 PM
Re: I-83 York County
« Reply #31 on: March 22, 2018, 02:51:00 PM »

Just a few random questions because I am being a curious cat.

Why don't they close the I-83 Southbound at Exit 19B ramp? The same goes for the entrance ramp from N. Hills Rd. It would just make sense to just route all the exit ramps to 19A (E. Market Street). Is there a reason why the ramps are not being changed?

Also, up north in Harrisburg, first... at the I-83/PA 581 interchange, why do they not close the Lowther St ramp? especially you can also access Lowther St at the next exit (40B).

around the I-76 interchange, why are there three exits SO close to I-76? weaving could be an issue down there.
General note: Any time you add, close, or change configuration of ramps along an Interstate, you need to apply to FHWA with an Access Justification Report. That, in itself, is a reason to avoid making changes. (Each change is its own report, so making changes at Mt. Rose Ave. doesn't make it any easier to make changes, say, at Market St.) Specific notes:
1. 19B looks like a useful connection to divide traffic between west (downtown) and east.
2. I assume you're referring to the SB exit that immediately follows the 581 EB entrance, since the other two ramps don't conflict with traffic. I'll note that you would lose EB access to Lowther if you close that ramp, although there is no return access to head WB so maybe it's not so important. What I really want to say though is to just close all of the local access entirely (SB off/on, NB off), as the full Exit 40B just to the south can serve everyone just fine. Carlisle and Lowther meet just west of I-83.
3. Those are historic exits. You could make a case that a lot of reconfiguration should have happened when the US 111 interchange was first constructed, but of course no one cared about interchange spacing or freeway standards in the 1940s-early 50s. Once 111 was grandfathered in as I-83, no one bothered making any changes. Now you can look at it and say they're all too close, but what do you do about it? Businesses at those exits will demand millions upon millions for basically shuttering all of them by closing the exit and convenient Turnpike access. If I could turn back time, I'd close the Limekiln exit and build the entire I-76 trumpet on the north side of the Turnpike, thus giving more space to keep the ramps at PA 114. Not really viable anymore. The best I can think of is a massive widening with two through lanes each way on I-83 and a two-lane CD road each way for all the ramps, but not closing any of them.


Thank you for your response. I agree with you that CD road should have been constructed around the I-76 interchange. It would have made the interchange area more cleaner.
Logged

DJStephens

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 437
  • Age: 43
  • Location: Dona Ana NM/Tucson AZ
  • Last Login: October 18, 2018, 08:45:43 PM
Re: I-83 York County
« Reply #32 on: March 23, 2018, 09:05:07 PM »

The problem with PA is...in looking at the 2016 AADT map, there are a couple dozen 4-lane freeways that have more AADT than I-83 York County. In an utopian world (read - unlimited funding), it would be nice...and especially as this stretch is substandard, maybe that might rank it higher than, say, US 222 just north of Lancaster that gets 60K but is more of standard design.

Yes, but most of US-222 between Lancaster and Reading is in the 40ish range, and it is not a mainline Interstate highway.

Remember viewing the Kutztown bypass, for the first time in the early - mid eighties, when it was only 10-12 years old, and thinking - "wow" what a cool overbuilt road, for an out of the way place.  Unfortunate that those standards could not have been applied to the more heavily traveled interstate corridors - such as I-78, I-81, and I-83, back when nearly everything was cheaper and easier to do.   Of course major sections of those corridors were "grandfathered" in from pre-existing highways, before the 1956 legislation.   
« Last Edit: March 23, 2018, 09:10:16 PM by DJStephens »
Logged

 


Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.