I-195, does it *REALLY* need to be extended???

[route_82]

I have discussed this with many people, including those who are somewhat involved in the project.  No one can really give a good reason for extending I-195 over I-295 and old I-95 post turnpike interchange except for that it will be one less number.

I think what PA and NJ are proposing is flawed, and will lead to unnecessary confusion, and wasted money on new signage.

I have created two new maps based on the one provided from the PA TPK/I-95 interchange website.  Instead of forcing I-195 onto existing I-295 (exits 60-67) and I-95 in PA/NJ, the solution should be to just leave everything as is and just change the number of I-95 itself.  Keep I-295 going to US Route 1 and at the changeover so many are already used to, instead of I-95 it will then be something like I-695 or I-895.  Both numbers are as yet unused in PA and NJ.

There would be no need to renumber the exits on I-195 existing, or I-295 between exits 60-67.  The awkward movement of mainline I-195 navigating Exit 60 through ramps would also be avoided.

The exit numbers on I-95 in NJ between Route 1 and Route 29 could actually be kept in place.  They would change over in PA and start new or keep I-95's exit numbers much like I-395 does in Connecticut.  The only necessary change would be to slap a new interstate shield over all of the present I-95 shields.  Low cost and easier to follow solution.

It would also eliminate the strange situation of I-195 going east-west, then north-south, then east-west, then south-north to go around Trenton.

Does anyone else concur?

  --- I-695 proposal

  --- I-895 Proposal

[cpzilliacus]

Unable to see these without having an account on Flickr.

[1995hoo]

I couldn't view them either. Site demanded a login.

[route_82]

How do I attach the images I have to my actual post?  I can't figure out how.

Doing this with the links doesn't work.
[ img ] [ /img ]

[hubcity]

Has a stretch of Interstate ever been downgraded to a US route? If there's precedent, I'd do the following...

South of future 95/PA Tpk intersection, 95 remains 95.
North of it, up to US1 intersection, current 95 becomes 395 (a spur.)
North of the US1 intersection, 95 becomes US1, right through to the US1 intersection north of Trenton.
295 stays 295, 195 stays 195, and US1 Trenton becomes...eh, that's where it all falls down.

[Alex]

How do I attach the images I have to my actual post?  I can't figure out how.

Doing this with the links doesn't work.
[ img ] [ /img ]

You will need to hotlink them or click the share option in Flickr. The "Grab the HTML/BBCode" option on Flickr works well for others on the forum, so try that out.

And for what its worth, I agree with either renumbering the eventual former stretch of Interstate 95 between the Pennsylvania Turnpike and I-295 to either I-695 or I-895. The extension of I-195 is inane, much like the I-44 northward extension in St. Louis.

[route_82]

Has a stretch of Interstate ever been downgraded to a US route? If there's precedent, I'd do the following...

South of future 95/PA Tpk intersection, 95 remains 95.
North of it, up to US1 intersection, current 95 becomes 395 (a spur.)
North of the US1 intersection, 95 becomes US1, right through to the US1 intersection north of Trenton.
295 stays 295, 195 stays 195, and US1 Trenton becomes...eh, that's where it all falls down.

It's an interesting proposal, but They would have to reconfigure the cloverleaf with I-95 and US 1 in PA.  It could not handle the volume of drivers "following" US Route 1.

I just think since there is no 695 or 895, it just makes sense to use em

[route_82]

How do I attach the images I have to my actual post?  I can't figure out how.

Doing this with the links doesn't work.
[ img ] [ /img ]

You will need to hotlink them or click the share option in Flickr. The "Grab the HTML/BBCode" option on Flickr works well for others on the forum, so try that out.

And for what its worth, I agree with either renumbering the eventual former stretch of Interstate 95 between the Pennsylvania Turnpike and I-295 to either I-695 or I-895. The extension of I-195 is inane, much like the I-44 northward extension in St. Louis.

It says I can't share them... the box for that is greyed out, and I can't click on it.
What is hotlinking?

[route_82]

FIXED!!!!

[PHLBOS]

Has a stretch of Interstate ever been downgraded to a US route? If there's precedent, I'd do the following...

When the originally-proposed I-95 leg from Revere (US 1 & MA 60 aka Cutler Circle) to Peabody (MA 128) was dropped in 1975; the Tobin Bridge and related Northeast Expressway (originally designated as I-95) became US 1 and the old US 1 between MA 60 and the Central Artery became just MA 60 (between Cutler & Bell Circles) and an extension of MA 1A (from Bell Circle to the Central Artery (now the O'Neill Tunnel)).

Back to NJ/PA; I agree that the I-195 extension be dropped in favor of I-695.  The only change I would make is redesignating I-295 from I-195 and US 1 as part of I-695 as well.  Yes, it would still mean a change of exit numbers and mile markers on that stretch (it would do that anyway w/the I-195 proposal); but it would place the Interstate number change at another Interstate highway vs. a US highway.

My listed I-695 suggestion would be to have the PA leg as a north-south route and the NJ leg as an east-west route.

[route_82]

Has a stretch of Interstate ever been downgraded to a US route? If there's precedent, I'd do the following...

When the originally-proposed I-95 leg from Revere (US 1 & MA 60 aka Cutler Circle) to Peabody (MA 128) was dropped in 1975; the Tobin Bridge and related Northeast Expressway (originally designated as I-95) became US 1 and the old US 1 between MA 60 and the Central Artery became just MA 60 (between Cutler & Bell Circles) and an extension of MA 1A (from Bell Circle to the Central Artery (now the O'Neill Tunnel)).

Back to NJ/PA; I agree that the I-195 extension be dropped in favor of I-695.  The only change I would make is redesignating I-295 from I-195 and US 1 as part of I-695 as well.  Yes, it would still mean a change of exit numbers and mile markers on that stretch (it would do that anyway w/the I-195 proposal); but it would place the Interstate number change at another Interstate highway vs. a US highway.

My listed I-695 suggestion would be to have the PA leg as a north-south route and the NJ leg as an east-west route.

Interesting idea, it would certainly make for a proper fitting with the rules.  But we know how strictly they enforce those.

Besides, I-695 would be ending at an interstate (per se).  Keeping as much of the status-quo as possible I think would make for the easiest and least confusing conversion to the traveling public.

Plus we'd finally get our 695/895 after all these years

[vdeane]

I don't like it when interstates end at each other like that.  It just looks sloppy.

But the directional stuff isn't strange with I-195 on the beltway.  Is every other interstate that's on a beltway considered strange now too?  Just call the entire thing east-west even if some segments run north-south.  There are many non-beltway roads that do that for long segments that go in another direction; heck, NY 11B is signed north-south* even though the entire road is east-west.

*Actually, there are signs for both, but all the ones of US 11 say north-south.

[kj3400]

Why don't they just renumber the whole thing I-295? Then there's no extra numbers in the mix, I-295 ends on I-95 at both ends, and I-295 won't just spontaneously turn into I-(6/8)95.

[route_82]

I don't like it when interstates end at each other like that.  It just looks sloppy.

But the directional stuff isn't strange with I-195 on the beltway.  Is every other interstate that's on a beltway considered strange now too?  Just call the entire thing east-west even if some segments run north-south.  There are many non-beltway roads that do that for long segments that go in another direction; heck, NY 11B is signed north-south* even though the entire road is east-west.

*Actually, there are signs for both, but all the ones of US 11 say north-south.

The problem with this is that beltways that are signed N-S and E-W are just that... Beltways! This arrangement would be I-195 coming off as a spur for 30+ miles, then suddenly forming an incomplete C-shaped loop around Trenton.

There are tons of interstates that end at each other all over the country in far more complicated ways than this.

The highway actually changes direction, so it makes sense at least.  At lot more than when I-395 in CT changes to I-290.

[route_82]

Why don't they just renumber the whole thing I-295? Then there's no extra numbers in the mix, I-295 ends on I-95 at both ends, and I-295 won't just spontaneously turn into I-(6/8)95.

That was the original intention.  There are a couple images on the project website that still say I-295.  For whatever reason they decided against that...  Perhaps because two I-295's would be running simultaneously N-S on either side of the river. Might be a bit confusing.  But I'd still rather that then it becoming I-195.  That would at least preserve the majority of the exit numbers.

[PHLBOS]

The highway actually changes direction, so it makes sense at least.  At lot more than when I-395 in CT changes to I-290.

I-395 doesn't turn into I-290 until it reaches I-90 (Mass Pike) in Auburn, MA.  Additionally, I-395 was originally MA/CT 52 prior to 1983(?) and didn't extend/connect to I-90/290 until the late 70s.  The decision for choosing I-395 vs. extending I-290 southward along the Route 52 corridor was likely based on the fact that while MA and CT have I-95; I-90 does not go into CT.  Granted, one could've fudged it like I-287 in NJ (I-87 does not go into CT NJ).

Why don't they just renumber the whole thing I-295? Then there's no extra numbers in the mix, I-295 ends on I-95 at both ends, and I-295 won't just spontaneously turn into I-(6/8)95.

That was the original intention.  There are a couple images on the project website that still say I-295.  For whatever reason they decided against that...  Perhaps because two I-295's would be running simultaneously N-S on either side of the river. Might be a bit confusing.  But I'd still rather that then it becoming I-195.  That would at least preserve the majority of the exit numbers.

Prior to the mid 1990s, I-295's exit numbers north of I-195 ran up to what would have been the I-95 North split interchange (roughly 3 miles east of US 1) with the highest exit number being 71 (current Exit 5).

[Alps]

O HAY Y NOT BILD SOMERSET FWY *trollface*

[cpzilliacus]

O HAY Y NOT BILD SOMERSET FWY *trollface*

DAT BE A FAHN IDUH!

[route_82]

O HAY Y NOT BILD SOMERSET FWY *trollface*

DAT BE A FAHN IDUH!

Just try and get that thing around Princeton now... forget about it!

[kj3400]

O HAY Y NOT BILD SOMERSET FWY *trollface*

DAT BE A FAHN IDUH!

Just try and get that thing around Princeton now... forget about it!

Tunnel it.

[dgolub]

Why don't they just renumber the whole thing I-295? Then there's no extra numbers in the mix, I-295 ends on I-95 at both ends, and I-295 won't just spontaneously turn into I-(6/8)95.

This would probably be a bit confusing since drivers travelling across the Delaware River would encounter I-295 twice, once on each side of the river.  Also, you'd need to have it change direction from north to south at the current I-95/I-295/US 1 interchange, which would be confusing.  People get lost in New Jersey enough as it is.

[dgolub]

I have created two new maps based on the one provided from the PA TPK/I-95 interchange website.  Instead of forcing I-195 onto existing I-295 (exits 60-67) and I-95 in PA/NJ, the solution should be to just leave everything as is and just change the number of I-95 itself.  Keep I-295 going to US Route 1 and at the changeover so many are already used to, instead of I-95 it will then be something like I-695 or I-895.  Both numbers are as yet unused in PA and NJ.

How about assigning I-695 or I-895 to old I-95/I-295/I-195 from Philadelphia to exit 7A of the New Jersey Turnpike?  Then, it could change designation at the turnpike to become I-195.  That way, it will follow the interstate numbering convention where I-695 or I-895 with an even first digit is a loop off of I-95 and I-195 with an odd first digit is a spur off of I-95.

[jp the roadgeek]

.  Granted, one could've fudged it like I-287 in NJ (I-87 does not go into CT).

I know you mean NJ, but not to get off topic, I-87 did enter CT at one time when I-684 was signed as such. 

[agentsteel53]

I-87 did enter CT at one time when I-684 was signed as such.

when was this?  what was the complete routing of 87 at that time?  was it multiplexed with I-84 to get from the Thruway to the 684 alignment?

[Don'tKnowYet]

I-895 is currently still legislated in NJ so that number is taken. 695 is available.

The decision you are all discussing was only a Conditional Approval.  The official application has yet to be submitted and approved by AASHTO which leads me to guess that the DOT higher ups haven't seen this plan and it will never come to fruition.