U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Pennsylvania > Philadelphia
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Jump to a detailed profile or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Business Search - 14 Million verified businesses
Search for:  near: 
 
 
Old 05-25-2010, 11:36 PM
 
Location: South Philly
1,943 posts, read 4,117,637 times
Reputation: 580
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phyxius View Post
I'm talking about the Somerset Freeway not the Turnpike. All the sprawl and development they didn't want end up happening anyway. Now you have all of those homes on a dangerous two lane highway and guess what there's still traffic along US 206. US 1 and US 130 are over-capacity and so is the Turnpike especially at Exit 8 and they think moving the bottleneck a half and hour to the south is going to help? I-95 was to be to the west of both US 1 and US 130. Did you see the link?

You have people going out of their ways to reach to their destinations.


One of the countries busiest highways is incomplete and PA is never going to get started on that interchange.

you're missing the point.

Interstate highways are meant to move people and goods between states. Not from Ewing to South Brunswick. We already have a 10-lane interstate, 10 to 12 lanes of US highway, a state highway, 4 tracks of the busiest passenger rail line in the country and another line on the books for restoration - all in that same corridor.

We didn't need another 6 lanes of interstate in the 60's and we certainly don't need it now.

More highways don't make less traffic. that was empirically proven in the 1930's.
Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-26-2010, 12:26 AM
 
1,202 posts, read 654,344 times
Reputation: 752
Quote:
Originally Posted by solibs View Post
you're missing the point.

Interstate highways are meant to move people and goods between states. Not from Ewing to South Brunswick. We already have a 10-lane interstate, 10 to 12 lanes of US highway, a state highway, 4 tracks of the busiest passenger rail line in the country and another line on the books for restoration - all in that same corridor.

We didn't need another 6 lanes of interstate in the 60's and we certainly don't need it now.

More highways don't make less traffic. that was empirically proven in the 1930's.
There isn't a direct interstate connecting Philadelphia and New York. I-95 ends and heads back in the opposite direction as 295. How is that moving people and goods between states?

There's no way for a truck driver to carry goods from Philadelphia to points North without aggravation.

Right now the current highways in place aren't doing a good job moving people between places more specially in this thread between Philadelphia and New York.

I gave proof as to why the Somerset Freeway should have been built. Right now the Turnpike is filled with people going in all directions forced to use that highway just to go to New England while the Somerset could take drivers off the Turnpike because it would end at I-287 while I-95 heads east and become on the Turnpike.

It would of benefit people trying to head in two different location instead of being forced to use the Turnpike and a highway with businesses and traffic lights.

I still don't think you read that link.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-27-2010, 12:21 AM
 
Location: South Philly
1,943 posts, read 4,117,637 times
Reputation: 580
I read your link. I'm more familiar with both projects than you think.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Phyxius View Post
There isn't a direct interstate connecting Philadelphia and New York.
There isn't one because the connection between 95 and the Turnpike was never built. It's now funded in the TIP, 95 will be re-signed to reflect this new routing.

Building an interstate to bypass another interstate induces demand. It makes people clock more VMT by forcing them on a circumferential route and it encourages more development along the exit ramps that inevitably pop up at every other overpass. Witness 287 for most of its maddening length.

VMT has been in decline for what? 6 straight years? Like Newt Gingrich said 20 years ago, we don't have enough resources to take care of what we already have. we need to put interstate construction behind us and focus on fixing what's broken.

. . . case closed.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-27-2010, 02:40 PM
 
1,202 posts, read 654,344 times
Reputation: 752
Quote:
Originally Posted by solibs View Post
I read your link. I'm more familiar with both projects than you think.



There isn't one because the connection between 95 and the Turnpike was never built. It's now funded in the TIP, 95 will be re-signed to reflect this new routing.

Building an interstate to bypass another interstate induces demand. It makes people clock more VMT by forcing them on a circumferential route and it encourages more development along the exit ramps that inevitably pop up at every other overpass. Witness 287 for most of its maddening length.

VMT has been in decline for what? 6 straight years? Like Newt Gingrich said 20 years ago, we don't have enough resources to take care of what we already have. we need to put interstate construction behind us and focus on fixing what's broken.

. . . case closed.
I-95 was never intended to connect to the PA Turnpike or to NJ from Bristol(although it should of but didn't). It was to go straight along its current route to NJ then continue north to 287 then head east towards the NJ Turnpike where it will join to New York. Currently, it's incomplete. There's a gap between Philadelphia and New York.

The original I-95 wasn't a circumferential route. http://www.ihoz.com/I95a.jpg


You lost me with the circumferential route being that the NJ Turnpike wasn't originally planned to be I-95 beyond Exit 10.

287 doesn't only serve as a bypass but it also direct traffic to Western NJ and Upstate NY and to other destinations in New England.

I'm not sure what you're referring to with fixing what's broken.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-28-2010, 10:53 AM
 
Location: South Philly
1,943 posts, read 4,117,637 times
Reputation: 580
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phyxius View Post
I-95 was never intended to connect to the PA Turnpike or to NJ from Bristol(although it should of but didn't). It was to go straight along its current route to NJ then continue north to 287 then head east towards the NJ Turnpike where it will join to New York. Currently, it's incomplete. There's a gap between Philadelphia and New York.
Seriously man . . . This isn't the first time I've seen that map of 95. I get it. Everyone knows there's a disconnect. You're not bringing any new information to the table. In order to solve the problem a connection needs to be built. The process of building that connection has already begun.
That highway was just lines on a map. It didn't get built (and for good reason). It's not going to get built. Get over it.

If you have something substantive or revelatory to say then go for it but i'm not going to argue semantics with you.

Quote:
I'm not sure what you're referring to with fixing what's broken.
It means making sure that you can keep your current system in a state of good repair before you go adding more to it. You can start with this - - Deficient Bridges by State and Highway System - Programs - Integrated - Bridge - FHWA
"SD" means structurally deficient and "FO" means functionally obsolete.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-28-2010, 11:22 AM
 
1,202 posts, read 654,344 times
Reputation: 752
Quote:
Originally Posted by solibs View Post
Seriously man . . . This isn't the first time I've seen that map of 95. I get it. Everyone knows there's a disconnect. You're not bringing any new information to the table. In order to solve the problem a connection needs to be built. The process of building that connection has already begun.
That highway was just lines on a map. It didn't get built (and for good reason). It's not going to get built. Get over it.

If you have something substantive or revelatory to say then go for it but i'm not going to argue semantics with you.



It means making sure that you can keep your current system in a state of good repair before you go adding more to it. You can start with this - - Deficient Bridges by State and Highway System - Programs - Integrated - Bridge - FHWA
"SD" means structurally deficient and "FO" means functionally obsolete.
You kept ignoring the gap as if you had no idea what I talking about so I kept bringing it up. I understand that the original route of I-95 is not going to be built. My argument is that it should of been built.
Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


 
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Options
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2011 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

Over $79,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Pennsylvania > Philadelphia

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2014, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 - Top