Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 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.
Don't get me wrong, I'd love to see the parkway east and west expanded with better interchanges. I just know how expensive it is, and how difficult it is to design them and to get the funding for the projects. Go yell at Corbett . And yes, the Squirrel Hill interchange on 376 is by engineering standards, atrocious. I want to smack whoever designed that when there was actually land and funding to build the highway. SPUI's are designed for urban and suburban areas, but with all our hills and valleys, are difficult to build in western PA. That's why there aren't any haha.
Currently, the transportation infrastructure in Western PA received a "D". That is pathetic, and Penndot has started to begin designing upgrades for the existing roadways. Unfortuntely, without the proper funding, it will never get done.
Do you think it'd be more feasible to expand the highway in segments? Like do the Parkway West first, and deal with the Parkway East in the more distant future? It should be relatively easy to expand the highway between Pittsburgh International Airport and I-79, I would figure. And expanding between I-79 and U.S. 19/PA 51 might be a little more expensive, but it still appears to be doable since there aren't any buildings tight against the highway. Expanding the Fort Pitt Tunnel portals would be expensive, but until/unless that happens, then just drop a lane as an "exit only" lane at U.S. 19/PA 51, and add a lane westbound.
I realize that there are always going to be design compromises when I-376 passes by downtown Pittsburgh just as there would be for a highway in the downtown of any large city, but what really screws up the Parkway East is that once you get out of downtown, the Squirrel Hill Tunnel is located near the the midpoint, so even if the Parkway East was expanded, it'd have to involve adding a lane westbound and dropping a lane eastbound at the Squirrel Hill/Homestead interchange, and adding a lane eastbound and dropping a lane westbound at the Edgewood/Swissvale interchange, until/unless the Squirrel Hill Tunnel portals could be expanded.
Another idea I have that might sound crazy is reconfiguring the U.S. 19/PA 51 interchange to be a modified "directional T." I also have on file somewhere a half-finished idea for the reconfiguration of the Squirrel Hill/Homestead interchange. Basically, I have a satellite image of it, and I'm redrawing the ramps and street alignments with MS paint.
I can remember my parents rhapsodizing over the Parkway when it was built, and watched the dynamiting of hills for I-79 in Collier Twp, from my aunt's back porch. From what I can remember, comments were always made about how the roads were obsolete from the day they opened for traffic.
IMO, as an average citizen who just drives on the roads ... anything we build will never be good enough. More will always be needed.
Comparing WPa to any other locale is not relevant because of our topography and terrain which increases costs and complicates everything to a much greater degree.
And there's no money.
A majority of our country doesn't see the worth in investing in infrastructure. People in other states are outraged that their tax dollars might fix something in Pittsburgh. Do we throw the money available at the locks and damns, the century-old sewage systems, or the roads that are good enough at the moment? Almost forgot, what about all those crumbling bridges?
I weep for future generations.
Do you think it'd be more feasible to expand the highway in segments? Like do the Parkway West first, and deal with the Parkway East in the more distant future? It should be relatively easy to expand the highway between Pittsburgh International Airport and I-79, I would figure. And expanding between I-79 and U.S. 19/PA 51 might be a little more expensive, but it still appears to be doable since there aren't any buildings tight against the highway. Expanding the Fort Pitt Tunnel portals would be expensive, but until/unless that happens, then just drop a lane as an "exit only" lane at U.S. 19/PA 51, and add a lane westbound.
I realize that there are always going to be design compromises when I-376 passes by downtown Pittsburgh just as there would be for a highway in the downtown of any large city, but what really screws up the Parkway East is that once you get out of downtown, the Squirrel Hill Tunnel is located near the the midpoint, so even if the Parkway East was expanded, it'd have to involve adding a lane westbound and dropping a lane eastbound at the Squirrel Hill/Homestead interchange, and adding a lane eastbound and dropping a lane westbound at the Edgewood/Swissvale interchange, until/unless the Squirrel Hill Tunnel portals could be expanded.
Another idea I have that might sound crazy is reconfiguring the U.S. 19/PA 51 interchange to be a modified "directional T." I also have on file somewhere a half-finished idea for the reconfiguration of the Squirrel Hill/Homestead interchange. Basically, I have a satellite image of it, and I'm redrawing the ramps and street alignments with MS paint.
Doing it in segments would be the best alternative, by far. Unless I had alot of time on my hands, the section in downtown Pittsburgh is nearly impossible to upgrade in my head haha. The Ft. Pitt Bridge is fine with 4 lanes... however nobody uses all 4 due to the tunnel.
My best alternative would be to bore a new tunnel (if possible, I haven't looked into seeing if it is possible), and use it as a one way tunnel, depending on the time of day (ex afternoon rush, having 2 tunnels going out and 1 going in). Then, completely redo the interchange with 19 and 51. After that section, it would be relatively easy until you got to 79, which that interchange already revamped. And you are right about the section from the airport to 79. That would be the easiest section to complete.
The parkway east would be much much harder than the west in my opinion haha. I'd like to see your paint drawing
Doing it in segments would be the best alternative, by far. Unless I had alot of time on my hands, the section in downtown Pittsburgh is nearly impossible to upgrade in my head haha. The Ft. Pitt Bridge is fine with 4 lanes... however nobody uses all 4 due to the tunnel.
My best alternative would be to bore a new tunnel (if possible, I haven't looked into seeing if it is possible), and use it as a one way tunnel, depending on the time of day (ex afternoon rush, having 2 tunnels going out and 1 going in).
I think the direction-adjustable tunnel would be impossible because the Fort Pitt Bridge is a double-decker bridge. Regarding the bridge interplay with the Fort Pitt Tunnel, maybe what could be done is the ramps to and from Carson Street could be reduced to one lane each, and the existing tunnel portals could be expanded to hold three lanes each, so then three of the four lanes on the bridge could be used as traffic to and from the tunnels, and there'd be a bit less "weaving" occurring on the bridge. Since boring a tunnel is expensive, and since the Fort Pitt Bridge lacks shoulders itself, I'd say just leave room for two 4' shoulders in the expanded tunnel portals so that nobody feels claustrophobic when entering. (That's more of a Squirrel Hill Tunnel problem, but I believe the width of the tunnels makes people slow down, not the height.)
Quote:
Originally Posted by speagles84
Then, completely redo the interchange with 19 and 51.
I think some sort of hybrid between a "full Y" interchange with through lanes would work:
Imagine that the Fort Pitt Tunnel is at the top of the picture above. The set of lanes coming in from the bottom is the Parkway West, and they continue to the top to enter the Fort Pitt Tunnel, unlike in this picture. The highway heading left to right across the picture is U.S. 19/PA 51. The design would also be modified so that the ramps to and from the Parkway West do not enter or exit from the left. (Left-lane exits and entrances are acceptable on U.S. 19/PA 51 since that highway is not an Interstate.) I hope that description makes sense.
Quote:
Originally Posted by speagles84
The parkway east would be much much harder than the west in my opinion haha. I'd like to see your paint drawing
but generally speaking adding capacity does encourage sprawl.
Yes it does, but we aren't talking about Cranberry here. The critical areas are I-376 (parkways east and west).
they were obsolete decades ago and once again - it's absurd that the core areas have the same number of lanes as rural PA.
It's dangerous when you factor in the people get on as people exit interchanges - making the parkway west not even really 2 lanes in either direction - because the right line is a constant on ramp.
You need at least 3 lanes so that you actually 2 lanes of driving without ramps for better and safer flow.
I don't think anyone is arguing I-376 is up to modern highway standards. But again, there are many other modes of surface transportation in the area that not only aren't up to modern standards, they actually don't even exist. So if you had a few billion to spend on transportation infrastructure, and a remotely balanced goal in mind, you wouldn't start by spending it on upgrading I-376.
I think the direction-adjustable tunnel would be impossible because the Fort Pitt Bridge is a double-decker bridge. Regarding the bridge interplay with the Fort Pitt Tunnel, maybe what could be done is the ramps to and from Carson Street could be reduced to one lane each, and the existing tunnel portals could be expanded to hold three lanes each, so then three of the four lanes on the bridge could be used as traffic to and from the tunnels, and there'd be a bit less "weaving" occurring on the bridge. Since boring a tunnel is expensive, and since the Fort Pitt Bridge lacks shoulders itself, I'd say just leave room for two 4' shoulders in the expanded tunnel portals so that nobody feels claustrophobic when entering. (That's more of a Squirrel Hill Tunnel problem, but I believe the width of the tunnels makes people slow down, not the height.)
I think some sort of hybrid between a "full Y" interchange with through lanes would work:
Imagine that the Fort Pitt Tunnel is at the top of the picture above. The set of lanes coming in from the bottom is the Parkway West, and they continue to the top to enter the Fort Pitt Tunnel, unlike in this picture. The highway heading left to right across the picture is U.S. 19/PA 51. The design would also be modified so that the ramps to and from the Parkway West do not enter or exit from the left. (Left-lane exits and entrances are acceptable on U.S. 19/PA 51 since that highway is not an Interstate.) I hope that description makes sense.
I'm working on the drawing right now.
I like your idea for the 51/19 interchange. The whole Ft Pitt Tunnel is just such a hard project to deal with, I'm not sure what to do haha. If I have time this week I'll take some time on paint and see what happens
So if you had a few billion to spend on transportation infrastructure, and a remotely balanced goal in mind, you wouldn't start by spending it on upgrading I-376.
I'm talking about the condition and standard of the interstates, not western PA roads in general, so what gets spent where and the balance is another issue.
The fact is that no America city has such outdated core interstate roads. Much smaller cities have better interstates.
Additionally, secondary roads involve different funding dynamics than Interstates.
I talking about not just local roads but also transit, commuter rail, and intercity rail--those are the categories in which we are ridiculously underinvested relative to highways even given the outdated nature of I-376. So if you were going to level up those modes even just to the standard set by I-376 in its current state, you would have a lot of projects to do.
It is true that stuff sometimes comes out of different pots, but the sort of political effort that it would take to get funding of this magnitude (again, it would takes billions to really redo I-376) is really not subject to such an analysis. Rather it is a matter of favoring certain priorities over many years, at many levels and in many elections.
Again, I'm talking specifically about a Federal interstate, not local priorities.
Needing to expand transit options is naturally something that needs to happen and why in the mid 80s when the T opened, there wasn't an expansion at a certain stage, I have no idea and now 25 years later, it gets a tunnel to the stadiums and that's it.
Improving I-376 could involve a master plan with segments of upgrading. For example, I-79 to Greentree etc.
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 register to participate in our discussions with 2 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.
. And yes, the Squirrel Hill interchange on 376 is by engineering standards, atrocious. I want to smack whoever designed that when there was actually land and funding to build the highway. SPUI's are designed for urban and suburban areas, but with all our hills and valleys, are difficult to build in western PA. That's why there aren't any haha.
