Florida Turnpike and I-95
Lyon_Wonder
bring up this question.
In my 2000 Rand McNally Atlas it shows the Florida Turnpike and I-95,
where they're close to each other into the Miami area, as running
parallel. My 1965 vintage Rand McNally also shows the Florida
Turnpike, and the proposed parallel alignment of I-95.
Why did Florida build I-95 on a ROW parallel to the Florida Turnpike
instead of utilizing the existing limited-access turnpike as the
alignment of I-95.
They could have used the turnpike as a southern alignment of I-95 into
the Miami area when the freeway alignment came close to intersecting
the turnpike west of Fort Pierce.
SPUI
"Lyon_Wonder" <lyon_...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:bi58jtkfbpau6s7r2...@4ax.com...
But nowadays both are needed, I-95 for more local traffic and FLTP for
bypass traffic.
--
Dan Moraseski - Going into 14th grade at MIT
http://spui.cjb.net - FL NJ MA route logs and exit lists
Editor of http://roadlinks.cjb.net (highway cat of Open Directory Project)
http://ridot.cjb.net - why RIDOT sucks
AlbertC79
>instead of utilizing the existing limited-access turnpike as the
>alignment of I-95.
>
>They could have used the turnpike as a southern alignment of I-95 into
>the Miami area when the freeway alignment came close to intersecting
>the turnpike west of Fort Pierce.
>
>
I honestly have no idea on why they did it, but I have driven on both highways
through that segment, and it just seems like a waste of space. They should've
had the Turnpike and I-95 merge as one highway for that stretch in my opinion
Gene Janczynskyi
FLTP helps relives traffic on I-95 by providing a faster (but at a price and
interchanges are further apart) N-S route of Broward, Palm Beach, Martin and St.
Lucie counties.
Plus the area between Jupiter and Palm City, where the FLTP and I-95 share the same
ROW it provides a free alternative for those cheapskates out there. You know who you
are. :-)
--
Gene Janczynskyi
in Cape Coral, FL
Presnwap
densely populated corridor, and a freeway is needed for local traffic. If
they didn't build a separate alignment for I-95, the local traffic wouldn't
have much use for the Florida's Turnpike, thus little freeway status. Also,
you need to remember that with the millions of people down there in a very
hurricane prone area, it would be even more of a nightmare evacuating
everyone.
"SPUI" <sp...@mit.NOSPDAMMedu> wrote in message
news:EaVY6.31464$WB1.9...@typhoon.tampabay.rr.com...
Jeff Kitsko
> instead of utilizing the existing limited-access turnpike as the
> alignment of I-95.
Funny you mention this, because the early 1960s RMcN indicated I-95 as being
on the then Sunshine State Parkway all the way up to where I-95 and the
Turnpike split directions. In the mid-1960s, the new parallel alignment
began to be shown.
--
Jeff Kitsko
Pennsylvania Highways: http://www.pahighways.com/
Pittsburgh Highways: http://www.pahighways.com/pghhwys/
Philadelphia Highways: http://www.pahighways.com/phlhwys/
AlbertC79
>the same
>ROW it provides a free alternative for those cheapskates out there. You know
>who you
>are. :-)
You can save about $4.00 in toll fees (it's $10.00 if you take it all the way
up) if you take I-95 north from Miami to Ft. Pierce, then exit off FL-70 and
catch the Turnpike the rest of the way up to Orlando. Its at this point where
I-95 continues north to Daytona Beach and Jacksonville, and the Turnpike turns
West then Northwest to Orlando
Steve Anderson
>
> "Lyon_Wonder" <lyon_...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:bi58jtkfbpau6s7r2...@4ax.com...
> > Why did Florida build I-95 on a ROW parallel to the Florida Turnpike
> > instead of utilizing the existing limited-access turnpike as the
> > alignment of I-95.
>
> Funny you mention this, because the early 1960s RMcN indicated I-95 as being
> on the then Sunshine State Parkway all the way up to where I-95 and the
> Turnpike split directions. In the mid-1960s, the new parallel alignment
> began to be shown.
>
-- Steve Anderson
http://www.nycroads.com
http://www.phillyroads.com
http://www.bostonroads.com
Pat O'Connell
>
> Jeff Kitsko wrote:
> >
> > "Lyon_Wonder" <lyon_...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> > news:bi58jtkfbpau6s7r2...@4ax.com...
> > > Why did Florida build I-95 on a ROW parallel to the Florida Turnpike
> > > instead of utilizing the existing limited-access turnpike as the
> > > alignment of I-95.
> >
> > Funny you mention this, because the early 1960s RMcN indicated I-95 as being
> > on the then Sunshine State Parkway all the way up to where I-95 and the
> > Turnpike split directions. In the mid-1960s, the new parallel alignment
> > began to be shown.
> >
> When did the "Sunshine State Parkway" become "Florida's Turnpike?"
1966, according to:
http://www.contrib.andrew.cmu.edu/~mn2n/tollfl.html
--
Pat O'Connell
MCT
and the West Palm Beach area. North and south of that stretch I-95 is
on its own alignment, which parallels the Turnpike on the south leg.
I-95 is shown as proposed and/or under construction north and south of
both splits for some distance; on the south leg, 95 was incomplete north
of Fort Lauderdale.
From Jeff's post, it sounds like I-95 was originally supposed to use the
Turnpike all the way down, south of Fort Pierce. If I'm understanding
this correctly, it seems that I-95 originally got its own alignment only
south of West Palm Beach, but was still supposed to use the Turnpike
between there and Fort Pierce. Only later (sometime in the 1970s?) was
it completely separated from the Turnpike.
SPUI
"MCT" <maggie...@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:2371-3B...@storefull-158.iap.bryant.webtv.net...
I'm pretty sure I-95 was planned to be separate all the way from the
beginning. FL 9 was left out of the new 1946 FL state routes, because it
would eventually become I-95. FL 9 in Miami was built before the
Interstates, and I-95 (FL 9) in Jacksonville was likely planned too at the
time. I-95 may have been signed temporarily on FLTP (maybe with TO or TEMP
banners), but was likely never intended to be permanent.
Mikey
news:20010623110758...@ng-fg1.aol.com:
> You can save about $4.00 in toll fees (it's $10.00 if you take it all
> the way up) if you take I-95 north from Miami to Ft. Pierce, then exit
> off FL-70 and catch the Turnpike the rest of the way up to Orlando.
The stretch of I-95 between Ft. Pierce and Jupiter was 20 years late, for
some strange reason. More than likely, it was to prevent people from takng
just that free ride.
While the I-95 gap existed, a few gas stations and restaurants in Port St.
Lucie County got the "Breezewood advantage" by forcing I-95 traffic down a
mile-long boulevard to meet the turnpike. Now with I-95 completed, the
businesses at the exit still have an advantage from people taking I-95 to
get to the turnpike -- but this time it's from those travelling to/from
Orlando and points north.
---------------------------
Mikey
aveenyH...@aol.com
(remove the HOV lanes to reply)
George Boles
> instead of utilizing the existing limited-access turnpike as the
> alignment of I-95.
You would need to look close up at the way South Florida is settled.
First of all, from east to west, the urbanized area that is South
Florida is only approximately 20 miles at its widest point, bound by
the Atlantic Ocean to the east, and Everglades National Park and three
Water Conservation Areas to the west, yet from Florida City to West
Palm Beach is about 100 miles. There are about 5-6 million living in
this area. To merge I-95 and the Turnpike would not benefit the
already congested roadways, especially those that are aligned
north-south.
Plus, if you look carefully you will see that I-95 runs parallel to
US 1, and the Turnpike follows a path similar to US 441. Most limited
access highways(at least in Florida) seem to follow paths similar to
the older US highways.