AARoads Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length

Author Topic: Interstate 99 north of Williamsport  (Read 2188 times)

Roadgeek Adam

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1075
  • Warren CR 14 - Warrensburg, NY

  • Age: 28
  • Location: East Amherst, New York
  • Last Login: November 18, 2019, 11:23:42 PM
    • My Flickr Photostream
Re: Interstate 99 north of Williamsport
« Reply #25 on: November 06, 2019, 11:45:23 PM »

But we can spend a lot less money cleaning up a bit rather than bypassing it completely because of a linear designation that no longer has value.
Logged
Adam Seth Moss
M.A. History, Western Illinois University '17
B.A. History, Montclair State University '15
A.A. History & Education - Middlesex County College '13

Alps

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

  • Posts: 12794
  • Elimitante the truck trarffic,

  • Age: 36
  • Location: New Jersey
  • Last Login: Today at 12:36:04 AM
    • Alps' Roads
Re: Interstate 99 north of Williamsport
« Reply #26 on: November 07, 2019, 12:32:53 AM »

But we can spend a lot less money cleaning up a bit rather than bypassing it completely because of a linear designation that no longer has value.
But we can actually clean it up properly.

sprjus4

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2722
  • Location: Hampton Roads, VA
  • Last Login: November 18, 2019, 10:17:36 PM
Re: Interstate 99 north of Williamsport
« Reply #27 on: November 07, 2019, 12:56:12 AM »

a linear designation that no longer has value.
As Beltway noted above, it was proposed in the 1950s, long before the I-99 designation came to fruition.

It's a needed project IMO. Fixing the existing road with spot improvements would be a waste of money compared to spending slightly more and getting a 4-lane limited-access freeway out of it instead of a high-quality 2-lane road that still lacks access control, multiple lanes, etc.

If traffic counts were low (<5,000 - 10,000 AADT), I could see fixing up the road to a high-quality 2-lane, but it appears the traffic volumes warrant 4-lanes, and it's best to do that on a new location alignment as a freeway.
Logged

sparker

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 6103
  • Location: Bay Area, CA
  • Last Login: Today at 12:16:53 AM
Re: Interstate 99 north of Williamsport
« Reply #28 on: November 07, 2019, 05:37:17 AM »

By pure volume, there are rarely delays there - not never, I've seen them - but rarely. But the existing road has no shoulders, not always turn lanes, lots of cross traffic. It's been under proposal to be bypassed for decades upon decades, well before I-99 was conceived. I support it.
The Appalachian Thruway was first proposed in the late 1950s.

Basically a freeway paralleling US-220 and US-15, Cumberland-Bedford-Altoona-Lock Haven-Williamsport-Corning.

http://digitalcollections.library.cmu.edu/awweb/awarchive?type=file&item=556593
 

One of the original iterations of the Appalachian Thruway continued NE well beyond Corning to Ithaca, Cortland, and Utica before finally curving back NW roughly along NY 12 to the Watertown area.   It was essentially a "connect-the-dots" route intended to serve those cities initially left out of the Interstate system -- or at least the N-S aspect of the network.   The "Continental One" routing, mostly an upgrade of US 219, was a similar proposal but situated slightly to the west of the proposed "Thruway" -- but initiated using a similar basic rationale.   These proposals have been either active or dormant for decades -- resulting from the presence of the "gap" between the I-79 and I-81 alignments and the often politically-motivated quest for a remedy.
Logged

Beltway

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 5721
  • Roads to the Future

  • Location: Richmond, VA
  • Last Login: November 18, 2019, 11:57:06 PM
Re: Interstate 99 north of Williamsport
« Reply #29 on: November 07, 2019, 07:04:22 AM »

If traffic counts were low (<5,000 - 10,000 AADT), I could see fixing up the road to a high-quality 2-lane, but it appears the traffic volumes warrant 4-lanes, and it's best to do that on a new location alignment as a freeway.
The western 3 miles that is two lanes definitely needs 4 lanes, and the right-of-way is already limited access.  May as well make that a freeway and with at least a trumpet interchange with I-80.

The 8-mile section east of Jersey Shore is 4 lanes and high speed and works fairly well.  But at some time in the future when funds can be found, it would be worthwhile to build a freeway bypass.
Logged
http://www.roadstothefuture.com
http://www.capital-beltway.com
On the Plains of Hesitation, bleach the bones of countless millions who, at the Dawn of Victory, sat down to rest, and resting died.

Roadsguy

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1528
  • Age: 20
  • Location: Here
  • Last Login: November 18, 2019, 09:50:46 PM
Re: Interstate 99 north of Williamsport
« Reply #30 on: November 07, 2019, 09:26:45 AM »

It's not like they'd need to start design from scratch on the Jersey Shore–Williamsport section, either. PennDOT's been basically sitting on a near-final design for 15 years since it was last shelved.
Logged
[thing you don't like] is better than [thing you like]

Beltway

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 5721
  • Roads to the Future

  • Location: Richmond, VA
  • Last Login: November 18, 2019, 11:57:06 PM
Re: Interstate 99 north of Williamsport
« Reply #31 on: November 07, 2019, 10:43:50 AM »

It's not like they'd need to start design from scratch on the Jersey Shore–Williamsport section, either. PennDOT's been basically sitting on a near-final design for 15 years since it was last shelved.
And it would be stored in a CADD (Computer Aided Design and Drafting) system where it would be straightforward to make any needed modifications to it. 

Not like the old days when it would have been on manually drafted sheets.
Logged
http://www.roadstothefuture.com
http://www.capital-beltway.com
On the Plains of Hesitation, bleach the bones of countless millions who, at the Dawn of Victory, sat down to rest, and resting died.

Beltway

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 5721
  • Roads to the Future

  • Location: Richmond, VA
  • Last Login: November 18, 2019, 11:57:06 PM
Re: Interstate 99 north of Williamsport
« Reply #32 on: November 07, 2019, 10:49:58 AM »

The Appalachian Thruway was first proposed in the late 1950s.
Basically a freeway paralleling US-220 and US-15, Cumberland-Bedford-Altoona-Lock Haven-Williamsport-Corning.
http://digitalcollections.library.cmu.edu/awweb/awarchive?
One of the original iterations of the Appalachian Thruway continued NE well beyond Corning to Ithaca, Cortland, and Utica before finally curving back NW roughly along NY 12 to the Watertown area.   
It discusses the southern sections discussed above. 

Even in 1985 there were proposals to use a lower-level design --

Maryland's Department of Transportation gave the final three miles of the Thruway at the southern end design status last year and is in the process of exploring environmental impact and cost estimates for the various corridors.

The 19.5-mile section of Route 220 from the Maryland border to the finished sections near the Pennsylvania Turnpike are not programmed by the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation.  The Thruway is working to have this section upgraded rather than rebuilt, saving millions of dollars.
Logged
http://www.roadstothefuture.com
http://www.capital-beltway.com
On the Plains of Hesitation, bleach the bones of countless millions who, at the Dawn of Victory, sat down to rest, and resting died.

sturmde

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 27
  • Location: Bangor, Maine, USA
  • Last Login: November 15, 2019, 04:21:53 PM
Re: Interstate 99 north of Williamsport
« Reply #33 on: November 08, 2019, 02:33:11 PM »

But we can spend a lot less money cleaning up a bit rather than bypassing it completely because of a linear designation that no longer has value.

Who Defines Value?  The citizens of Pennsylvania and New York (not New Jersey) do, and their state DOTs chose to create the non-chargeable corridor through the "middle" of 79-81, connecting Rochester to Williamsport to State College to Altoona to the I-70 corridor to Washington DC.  You don't determine value.  You can't "clean up" a dangerous two-way split with narrow rights-of-way (Larrys Creek), poor sightlines, floodplain crossings, and low clearance rail crossings (not an 11'8" but low enough) with a "cleanup".  You need a new structural solution, barely more than 6 miles in length, and a interchange rehab at PA 26/I-99/I-80 in the west and US 220/I-99/I-80 in the east.  Traffic is significant westerly from Williamsport, and that segment southwest through to State College, Altoona, and the Penna Tpk provides access to one of the nation's largest public land grant institutions, Penn State University.  It needs to be built.

Whether the FHA agrees or not.  (And why the housing administration matters, is a great question!!)  And whether the FHWA agrees or not -- they don't decide where states build highways.  And AASHTO's USRN committee long ago approved extensions of numbering highways as I-99 beyond the original Shuster-driven legislated I-99.
« Last Edit: November 10, 2019, 11:35:57 PM by Alps »
Logged

LeftyJR

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 134
  • Last Login: November 11, 2019, 07:34:45 PM
Re: Interstate 99 north of Williamsport
« Reply #34 on: November 08, 2019, 08:00:04 PM »

By pure volume, there are rarely delays there - not never, I've seen them - but rarely. But the existing road has no shoulders, not always turn lanes, lots of cross traffic. It's been under proposal to be bypassed for decades upon decades, well before I-99 was conceived. I support it.


The Appalachian Thruway was first proposed in the late 1950s.

Basically a freeway paralleling US-220 and US-15, Cumberland-Bedford-Altoona-Lock Haven-Williamsport-Corning.

http://digitalcollections.library.cmu.edu/awweb/awarchive?type=file&item=556593
 

This would take so much traffic off I-81, which is desperately needed!
« Last Edit: November 08, 2019, 08:03:32 PM by LeftyJR »
Logged

goobnav

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 257
  • Cannonball Run should start in Wilmington!

  • Age: 45
  • Location: Durham, NC
  • Last Login: November 18, 2019, 11:33:59 AM
Re: Interstate 99 north of Williamsport
« Reply #35 on: November 15, 2019, 11:57:40 AM »

By pure volume, there are rarely delays there - not never, I've seen them - but rarely. But the existing road has no shoulders, not always turn lanes, lots of cross traffic. It's been under proposal to be bypassed for decades upon decades, well before I-99 was conceived. I support it.


The Appalachian Thruway was first proposed in the late 1950s.

Basically a freeway paralleling US-220 and US-15, Cumberland-Bedford-Altoona-Lock Haven-Williamsport-Corning.

http://digitalcollections.library.cmu.edu/awweb/awarchive?type=file&item=556593
 

This would take so much traffic off I-81, which is desperately needed!

Don't see that happening, 81 connects to 84 and 80 and vice versa, for bypassing the DC Metro area for those going to New England and the Tristate Metro area, especially truckers, 99 would take them out of the way.  81 needs to be rebuild, to spec, the original spec was never done north of Harrisburg and until that is done, 81 will be a terrible road.
Logged
Life is a highway and I drive it all night long!

The Ghostbuster

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2359
  • Age: 35
  • Location: Madison, WI
  • Last Login: November 18, 2019, 05:55:44 PM
Re: Interstate 99 north of Williamsport
« Reply #36 on: November 15, 2019, 01:39:53 PM »

If converting US 220 into a four-lane Interstate Standard freeway from Interstate 80 to Interstate 180 can't be done, maybe 99 would have to follow Interstate 80 to 180, and replace 180 in its entirety. I do realize that such a convoluted and backtracking proposal wouldn't make much sense, but I doubt a new freeway connecting Interstate 80 with US 15 in Williamsport would be built along any other alignment.
Logged

Beltway

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 5721
  • Roads to the Future

  • Location: Richmond, VA
  • Last Login: November 18, 2019, 11:57:06 PM
Re: Interstate 99 north of Williamsport
« Reply #37 on: November 15, 2019, 04:54:57 PM »

If converting US 220 into a four-lane Interstate Standard freeway from Interstate 80 to Interstate 180 can't be done, maybe 99 would have to follow Interstate 80 to 180, and replace 180 in its entirety. I do realize that such a convoluted and backtracking proposal wouldn't make much sense, but I doubt a new freeway connecting Interstate 80 with US 15 in Williamsport would be built along any other alignment.
I would give it time.

Even if it takes 20 years, let be eventually built.
Logged
http://www.roadstothefuture.com
http://www.capital-beltway.com
On the Plains of Hesitation, bleach the bones of countless millions who, at the Dawn of Victory, sat down to rest, and resting died.

sprjus4

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2722
  • Location: Hampton Roads, VA
  • Last Login: November 18, 2019, 10:17:36 PM
Re: Interstate 99 north of Williamsport
« Reply #38 on: November 15, 2019, 07:02:24 PM »

If converting US 220 into a four-lane Interstate Standard freeway from Interstate 80 to Interstate 180 can't be done, maybe 99 would have to follow Interstate 80 to 180, and replace 180 in its entirety. I do realize that such a convoluted and backtracking proposal wouldn't make much sense, but I doubt a new freeway connecting Interstate 80 with US 15 in Williamsport would be built along any other alignment.
I would give it time.

Even if it takes 20 years, let be eventually built.
If it’s anything like I-73 in Virginia, I’d estimate another at least 30 years before anything breaks ground.

The existing corridor is mostly 4-lane divided highway with the southern end as the exception (that simply needs twinning), and as you’ve noted before that an interstate isn’t needed when a high-speed 4-lane arterial with town bypasses already exists. Now, while I disagree with this way of thinking, it’s just worth mentioning as this corridor already exists as a 4-lane divided highway, and based on your other posts, this would seem to be a very low priority project.
« Last Edit: November 15, 2019, 07:08:18 PM by sprjus4 »
Logged

Beltway

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 5721
  • Roads to the Future

  • Location: Richmond, VA
  • Last Login: November 18, 2019, 11:57:06 PM
Re: Interstate 99 north of Williamsport
« Reply #39 on: November 15, 2019, 07:54:51 PM »

If converting US 220 into a four-lane Interstate Standard freeway from Interstate 80 to Interstate 180 can't be done, maybe 99 would have to follow Interstate 80 to 180, and replace 180 in its entirety. I do realize that such a convoluted and backtracking proposal wouldn't make much sense, but I doubt a new freeway connecting Interstate 80 with US 15 in Williamsport would be built along any other alignment.
I would give it time.
Even if it takes 20 years, let be eventually built.
If it’s anything like I-73 in Virginia, I’d estimate another at least 30 years before anything breaks ground.
22 miles is already built, if the alignment is revised to US-220 west of Martinsville.

220   Martinsville Bypass US-220 segment, Henry County, freeway ………………..... 11.61
220   Roy Webber Highway (Southwest Expressway), City of Roanoke, freeway …. 3.54
220   I-581 / US-220   City of Roanoke, freeway  ......................................……… 6.75
Logged
http://www.roadstothefuture.com
http://www.capital-beltway.com
On the Plains of Hesitation, bleach the bones of countless millions who, at the Dawn of Victory, sat down to rest, and resting died.

sprjus4

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2722
  • Location: Hampton Roads, VA
  • Last Login: November 18, 2019, 10:17:36 PM
Re: Interstate 99 north of Williamsport
« Reply #40 on: November 15, 2019, 08:10:51 PM »

If converting US 220 into a four-lane Interstate Standard freeway from Interstate 80 to Interstate 180 can't be done, maybe 99 would have to follow Interstate 80 to 180, and replace 180 in its entirety. I do realize that such a convoluted and backtracking proposal wouldn't make much sense, but I doubt a new freeway connecting Interstate 80 with US 15 in Williamsport would be built along any other alignment.
I would give it time.
Even if it takes 20 years, let be eventually built.
If it’s anything like I-73 in Virginia, I’d estimate another at least 30 years before anything breaks ground.
22 miles is already built, if the alignment is revised to US-220 west of Martinsville.

220   Martinsville Bypass US-220 segment, Henry County, freeway ………………..... 11.61
220   Roy Webber Highway (Southwest Expressway), City of Roanoke, freeway …. 3.54
220   I-581 / US-220   City of Roanoke, freeway  ......................................……… 6.75
Pre-existing freeways, not apart of I-73. No new construction since the 1980s.

Looking to the south, they’ve constructed at least 60 miles of I-73 since the 90s, and incorporated older US-220 freeways seamlessly in the system - I wouldn’t count those as I-73 construction.

Same goes with any future interstate highway.
Logged

Beltway

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 5721
  • Roads to the Future

  • Location: Richmond, VA
  • Last Login: November 18, 2019, 11:57:06 PM
Re: Interstate 99 north of Williamsport
« Reply #41 on: November 15, 2019, 09:08:03 PM »

If it’s anything like I-73 in Virginia, I’d estimate another at least 30 years before anything breaks ground.
22 miles is already built, if the alignment is revised to US-220 west of Martinsville.
220   Martinsville Bypass US-220 segment, Henry County, freeway ………………..... 11.61
220   Roy Webber Highway (Southwest Expressway), City of Roanoke, freeway …. 3.54
220   I-581 / US-220   City of Roanoke, freeway  ......................................……… 6.75
Pre-existing freeways, not apart of I-73.

But WILL be part of I-73 under that scenario.   22 miles.
Logged
http://www.roadstothefuture.com
http://www.capital-beltway.com
On the Plains of Hesitation, bleach the bones of countless millions who, at the Dawn of Victory, sat down to rest, and resting died.

sprjus4

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2722
  • Location: Hampton Roads, VA
  • Last Login: November 18, 2019, 10:17:36 PM
Re: Interstate 99 north of Williamsport
« Reply #42 on: November 15, 2019, 10:08:44 PM »

If it’s anything like I-73 in Virginia, I’d estimate another at least 30 years before anything breaks ground.
22 miles is already built, if the alignment is revised to US-220 west of Martinsville.
220   Martinsville Bypass US-220 segment, Henry County, freeway ………………..... 11.61
220   Roy Webber Highway (Southwest Expressway), City of Roanoke, freeway …. 3.54
220   I-581 / US-220   City of Roanoke, freeway  ......................................……… 6.75
Pre-existing freeways, not apart of I-73.

But WILL be part of I-73 under that scenario.   22 miles.
The Martinsville Bypass was constructed in the 70s, I-581 in the 60s, and the extension in the 80s as arterial bypasses of the US-220 corridor.

The concept for a long-distance freeway along US-220, I-73 wasn’t proposed in Virginia until the early 90s, along with a feasibility study completed on the corridor, recommending ~70 miles to be built on new location.

How much of those 70 miles have been built to date? And how much of the existing freeways (non-interstate) have been improved to interstate standards to date?
Logged

Alps

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

  • Posts: 12794
  • Elimitante the truck trarffic,

  • Age: 36
  • Location: New Jersey
  • Last Login: Today at 12:36:04 AM
    • Alps' Roads
Re: Interstate 99 north of Williamsport
« Reply #43 on: November 17, 2019, 01:29:24 AM »

If it’s anything like I-73 in Virginia, I’d estimate another at least 30 years before anything breaks ground.
22 miles is already built, if the alignment is revised to US-220 west of Martinsville.
220   Martinsville Bypass US-220 segment, Henry County, freeway ………………..... 11.61
220   Roy Webber Highway (Southwest Expressway), City of Roanoke, freeway …. 3.54
220   I-581 / US-220   City of Roanoke, freeway  ......................................……… 6.75
Pre-existing freeways, not apart of I-73.

But WILL be part of I-73 under that scenario.   22 miles.
But nothing has broken ground since I-73 was designated.

sparker

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 6103
  • Location: Bay Area, CA
  • Last Login: Today at 12:16:53 AM
Re: Interstate 99 north of Williamsport
« Reply #44 on: November 17, 2019, 02:51:11 AM »

^^^^^^^^^^
Since the only common grounds between I-73 in VA and I-99 between I-80 and Williamsport in PA are that (a) they aren't built yet despite a general corridor definition, and (b) there's considerable existing divided highway along much of the route.  But that's common for many defined future Interstate corridors around the country (the various NC examples, for instance).  A rehashing of the I-73 situation in this particular thread seems a bit gratuitous -- not to mention a bit of a stretch to find other than general commonalities.  What happens with one is unlikely to inform action regarding the other; the detour down to VA isn't really warranted.

So -- getting back to I-99 -- IMO the best course of action is to do a "spot fix" at the single side-road instance, converting it into a standard on-off interchange (maybe 20-25mph ramps) with the NB side of US 15.  At that point, an I-99 designation replete with signage could be applied to the facility north of the US 15/220 interchange.  The presence of that completed section, along with the already-signed portion in NY, might provoke a measure of support for prioritization of the US 220-based segment -- support emanating from disparate groups such as local interest groups, possibly abetted by truckers and their regional customers.   Always a chance such support could rekindle interest in a project in dormancy for way too long.
Logged

Beltway

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 5721
  • Roads to the Future

  • Location: Richmond, VA
  • Last Login: November 18, 2019, 11:57:06 PM
Re: Interstate 99 north of Williamsport
« Reply #45 on: November 17, 2019, 08:58:23 AM »

But WILL be part of I-73 under that scenario.   22 miles.
But nothing has broken ground since I-73 was designated.

Well yes but I was responding to the notion that nothing was built, when in fact 22 miles has.
Logged
http://www.roadstothefuture.com
http://www.capital-beltway.com
On the Plains of Hesitation, bleach the bones of countless millions who, at the Dawn of Victory, sat down to rest, and resting died.

Alps

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

  • Posts: 12794
  • Elimitante the truck trarffic,

  • Age: 36
  • Location: New Jersey
  • Last Login: Today at 12:36:04 AM
    • Alps' Roads
Re: Interstate 99 north of Williamsport
« Reply #46 on: November 18, 2019, 12:12:28 AM »

But WILL be part of I-73 under that scenario.   22 miles.
But nothing has broken ground since I-73 was designated.

Well yes but I was responding to the notion that nothing was built, when in fact 22 miles has.
Nothing has been built as a part of I-73.

Beltway

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 5721
  • Roads to the Future

  • Location: Richmond, VA
  • Last Login: November 18, 2019, 11:57:06 PM
Re: Interstate 99 north of Williamsport
« Reply #47 on: November 18, 2019, 12:19:28 AM »

But WILL be part of I-73 under that scenario.   22 miles.
But nothing has broken ground since I-73 was designated.
Well yes but I was responding to the notion that nothing was built, when in fact 22 miles has.
Nothing has been built as a part of I-73.
I agree wholeheartedly!

But 22 miles is available for use as part of I-73.
Logged
http://www.roadstothefuture.com
http://www.capital-beltway.com
On the Plains of Hesitation, bleach the bones of countless millions who, at the Dawn of Victory, sat down to rest, and resting died.

Alps

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

  • Posts: 12794
  • Elimitante the truck trarffic,

  • Age: 36
  • Location: New Jersey
  • Last Login: Today at 12:36:04 AM
    • Alps' Roads
Re: Interstate 99 north of Williamsport
« Reply #48 on: November 18, 2019, 07:23:56 PM »

But WILL be part of I-73 under that scenario.   22 miles.
But nothing has broken ground since I-73 was designated.
Well yes but I was responding to the notion that nothing was built, when in fact 22 miles has.
Nothing has been built as a part of I-73.
I agree wholeheartedly!

But 22 miles is available for use as part of I-73.
I agree wholeheartedly! Here's the context:
Quote
If it’s anything like I-73 in Virginia, I’d estimate another at least 30 years before anything breaks ground.
Since I-73 was legislated, nothing has broken ground. So the point here is that I-99 would take another 30 years for the final section. Which, by the way, I think may be overly pessimistic, but one never knows with Act 44.

 


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.