Turnpike Slip Ramp
Letters (email) Received Regarding the Turnpike Slip Ramp
How to express your views on this page.
September 8, 2000 John Evans -- Charlestown Resident
Traffic in the southern part of the township near Charlestown Road is already unbearable. It takes us 20 minutes to travel the first 3/4 mile of our daily commute. The proposed slip ramp will only make things worse. We are unequivocably opposed to the ramp and believe it is a great disservice to local residents.
March 8, 2000 Kelly Richardson, an East Whiteland Resident
I have just read over the many postings on this page and wish to express my views. I am a resident of neighboring East Whiteland Township and I can assure you that none of the immediate Chester County townships wanted the traffic issues which currently exist. That being said, I believe it to be completely unrealistic that a township or the residents of that township feel exempt from the development and/or the effect that development reflects on the area.
You simply cannot shut of your roads to traffic. The existing roadways (Route 30, 202, 401 and 29) in the area are utilized to their current capacity and are unable to withstand any more traffic; therefore, it needs to be filtered elsewhere. Additionally, several comments have been made regarding the 202 construction and concern has been voiced regarding if PENN DOT has researched the effect the improvements on 202 will have on traffic congestion. The 202 project will not be completely finished until a projected 2005 timeframe. In the next five years, the situation will just get worse and to answer your questions/concerns, yes, the slip ramp would most definitely be helpful, while working in conjunction with the new 202.
I am completely in favor of the slip ramp. I believe it will reduce congestion and traffic issues in neighboring townships and will inevitably make traveling within our local communities much less stressful and enjoyable. Yes, it is quite possible that the slip ramp may bring some more traffic to those roads within Charlestown Township, but with progress comes sacrifice. I also agree with what someone else stated regarding the development...why not focus on all the new housing developments being built which bring more people, more cars, etc. and try to stop that? Perhaps Charlestown Township should consider a moratorium like East Whiteland just passed - no new development for 1 1/2 years and during this time, the Township will reevaluate its zoning ordinances to be better prepared for future issues.
Kelly, 30 years old, employed in King of Prussia
March 3, 2000 Peter Bunten, a Charlestown Resident
I personally believe this is another knee jerk reaction to someone's view on alleviating the problems caused by the unchecked sprawl. They, the decision makers, should spend a day watching the traffic. When the coporate center and 202 corridor traverse to and from work they are coming primarily from the north in the morning and also 202 to 401 to 30 and up 29. Before spending the states tax dollars and possibly creating worse traffic problems we should make the developers and the businesses that enjoy the profits and the area chip in for some of the suffering and congestion. Chester county will enjoy a 28+% tax hike and the developers who have contributed to this will suffer no pain. This is an area which should be enjoyed by all, but there needs to be a responsibility check. When I built here I was put through alot of stringent requirements that have not been placed on the large developers.
Let's make sure the state or turnpike commission is not allowed to react for us, but stand back, observe and make a responsible decision. What is said to be good for today may severly hurt us in the future.
May 12, 1999 Jacquelynn Beckers, a resident of Charlestown Hunt
I have lived in the new Charlestown Hunt development for the last 2 years. Up until this year, I worked in Great Valley Corporate Center. If I tried to get to the office during the 8:00 am hour, it could take a full 20 minutes to travel the 3.5 mile commute I had door-to-door. So of course I delayed leaving the house until after 9:00, sometimes 9:30, and I would encounter NO TRAFFIC PROBLEMS whatsoever on my journey down Phoenixville Pike. Except when it was raining. Of course, going in late meant I went home late...all the better because 29 North is a parking lot between 4:30 and 6:00.
Just this morning I went to a seminar at Penn State Great Valley, and only encountered a slight delay at the light to make my left turn onto 29 S from Phoenixville Pike...the intersection is much better since the addition of the left turn signal. Now, if one turn signal can make that big of a difference...imagine if ALL of those congested intersections were improved to handle not only the current traffic, but the future traffic that will come regardless whether or not the slip ramp is built.
In reading the posts from others, it seems the biggest opposition to the slip ramp is that it will make the traffic worse. It is my understanding that the slip ramp is not a full interchange...you can only get on to go eastbound and exit if you are travelling westbound. I don't see how this will make traffic any worse than it is now. I don't need the slip ramp access, but I am all for giving it to the center city commuters so I don't have to drive the same roads as they do on my current commute through King of Prussia. PLEASE get them off 202 and 23! All the plans I saw for the slip ramp also called for improved signals and traffic management solutions for Whitehorse Road and Yellow Springs to connect with Rt. 29. WE NEED THOSE IMPROVEMENTS ANYWAY. I am all for the slip ramp just to get those enhancements!
I think that we should be more focused on what additional improvements could be made by PennDOT to control the traffic patterns ... PennDOT gets their slip ramp, and we get to be able to get home in a reasonable amount of time regardless of the hour of the day. Simply adding a slip ramp will not accelerate the traffic in our area...but the growing Corporate Center just around the corner will. Let's figure out ways to get those people where they need to go without taking our quiet country backroads. Somebody mentioned working with the corporate center to see if they can offer up any land for connecting 202 with the turnpike...has anybody pursued that idea?
04/28/99 Andrew Hall, an 11 year old resident of Howells Road
My name is Andrew Hall. I am 11 years old and I live on Howell Road in Charlestown Township.
I am writing to let you know that I am opposed to the plans of the Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission to build slip-ramps on Route 29 and on Yellow Springs Road. I am very concerned about this matter. I even went to a recent township meeting at Charlestown Elementary School, but since this topic was placed so late on the agenda, I had to leave the meeting.
On the small semi-rural road where I live there are currently five builders constructing housing developments. There will be an increase of traffic once the people who bought those houses move in. There is too much traffic on my road already. A slip-ramp would dramatically increase the traffic. It is not even safe for me to ride my bike or walk down the street to my friends house.
My community was safe several years ago. Now, there are tons of builders, plans for slip-ramps, and cars speeding down my street. Please make sure the plans for the slip-ramps are rejected.
03/20/99 from Kevin Kuhn
To all the respondents that feel a turnpike interchange will help ease the traffic to the Great Valley Corporate Center consider this. Presently you arrive by way of Route 202, Route 29, Phoenixville Pike, Charlestown Road, Route 401, Yellow Springs Road and numerous other back roads. How does this compare to waiting in line on Route 29 to get on the Turnpike along with everyone else who wants to go the Quick Route. Why would you think a one lane slip ramp will eliminate the traffic that numerous other roads can't? Not to mention the additional traffic and development it will encourage. I'm not opposed to development, however, at what point are we solving an existing problem vs. facilitating more of the same - TRAFFIC.
03/19/99 from Liz Anderson
In response to Sue Hammil's comment that Charlestown already has traffic problems, I would have to agree. However, I firmly believe that building a turnpike ramp at Route 29 will increase the traffic in Charlestown Township.
Turnpike access will ruin Northern Chester County. The development pressure will be too great to resist. If you want to say no to suburban sprawl, say NO to the slip ramp.
03/14/99 from Jacob Merriwether
In response to Ben (03/13/99):
"It seemed to me that the folks in Charlestown had the most to gain. It would reduce the commute time significantly if they work in center city."
Most folks who live in Charlestown and work in center city could be living much closer to center city if they wanted to. However, they value the tradeoff of living in rural Charlestown as being worth the additional commute time. The slip ramp would be a catalyst for the further urbanization of Charlestown, as turnpike exchanges always do, and would lead to the replacement of our rural community with even more town houses, commercial enterprises, and traffic, traffic, traffic.
"Not (to) mention the potential property gain!"
Few residents of Charlestown purchased their homes in order to make money from the eventual urbanization of our township and corresponding appreciation of the value of their homes. Besides, many residents hope Charlestown stays as rural as it is with no worsening of traffic so they can continue to enjoy living here for a long time.
03/13/99 from Ben
I am a little confused on this issue. It seemed to me that the folks in Charlestown had the most to gain. It would reduce the commute time significantly if they work in center city. Not mention the potential property gain!
03/07/99 from Jim Schinski
As usual PA DOT and Turnpike Commission continue to take a myopic view in planning future upgrades, there exists no better evidence than this plan and the coincidental upgrade to the 422/202 and 76 interchanges. Although I am completely against this slip ramp, I don't believe it can be stopped completely, what I would prefer to see in contrast is an interchange at Rt 202 connecting from 202 to the Turnpike on the ramps only, not on local roads.
Traffic would be able to exit Rt 202 and enter the Turnpike interchange directly, as was done at the Blue Route to Turnpike interchange in Plymouth Meeting. There exists no real benefit to local residents for an interchange here, with the real benefit to the Great Valley Corporate Center, and from that perspective it would be my suggestion that the corporate center donate the required land to house the interchange.
The point is...do it correctly from the start!! The slip ramp is $1 solution to a $5 problem, it won't last and will aggrevate traffic problems in the area, and provide a benefit to the corporate center and its employees.
Thanks for listening, and for your website(nice job).
03/05/99 from Rich Drago, Royersford resident
I vote an emphatic NO! to the Slip Ramp. I commute daily from Royersford to Malvern. The AM & PM rush hour traffic on Rt. 29 and the surrounding roads is already a mess. These roads were simply not designed to handle the current volume of traffic - much less the increased traffic that would result from the addition of a slip ramp. There is no way these roads, given their geographical constraints, could be reasonably improved to handle the proposed traffic increase. The local folks who live and work in this area should not have to sufffer further because the PA DOT wishes to relieve some traffic congestion at the Valley Forge interchange!
03/03/99 from Sue Hamill, soon to be Charlestown resident
Seems to me that it is too late to worry about too much traffic in the area. You've already got it. Now we need to do something about it. Yes to the slip ramp.
02/28/99 from Tony D'Andrea
I vote a sound NO to the idea of a "slip ramp" at Route 29. The surrounding roads were never designed to handle the large volume of traffic that is now present on them. The "slip ramp" will induce more drivers from the Chesterbrook businesses to travel back and forth across Yellow Springs Road, Phoenixville Pike, Charlestown Road, over Church Road, and yes, even on Swedesford road. We have numerous school buses on our roads. How many children and how many of us trying to pull out of our driveways will be endangered by the increased flow of drivers flying down our country roads? What will they do? Expand all of our roads to four lanes?
02/27/99 from Walt Clarke
I really think everyone needs to think before over react, The slip ramp will be a great asset for commuters in this area. If you try going to KofP or Rt 100 to get to the turnpike daily, you too would understand why we NEED th ramp. I really think we have more important concerns than to worry about the ramp. Think of the good things it may bring (Increase propeety value?) So SUPPORT THE RAMP
02/26/99 from Bill Merritt, Spring City resident
I commute from Spring City to Paoli daily via rt 29. There is no way that road can handle any more traffic. The slip ramps need to go into Great Valley Corporate Center directly from the Turnpike, with no local road access at all.The Turnpike Commission needs to come up with other ideas to reduce traffic at Valley Forge.
02/26/99 from Dan Pettigrew
I, for one, will be urging the governor and the turnpike commission to approve the slip ramp. I believe that,in the end traffic,will improve in the area as the flow is spread out over more of the local roads. The fact that Charlestown Township wants to remain in the 18th Century is unrealistic. Get a life.
02/24/99 from Marcia Wanish, Pottstown resident
I work in the Great Valley Corporate Center. I cannot fathom more traffic on the roads surrounding route 29! I am fortunate that I have flex time and adjust my hours but my commute from Pottstown could become horrendous if this ramp is allowed.
02/24/99 from Claudia Hauser
I think that the government and local community can collectively come up with a more creative idea(s) which would solve the traffic conjestion problems. IF MY VOTE COUNTS, I VOTE "NO" -- DO NOT BUILD THE PROPOSED TURNPIKE SLIP RAMP AT ROUTE 29. Here is a copy of my letter sent to Senator Gerlach & Congressman Weldon. Let's hope they listen to the people who pay their salaries and benefits!!
Dear Senator Gerlach: Dear Congressman Weldon:
I vote "NO" on the proposed Turnpike Slip Ramp for Charlestown Twp. Building a slip ramp at Route 29 just doesn't make sense. Why make the current conjestion worse? If I were in charge, I would first improve the existing roads and intersections. I would also suggest better timing of the traffic light which controls the intersection to improve the traffic flow.
Also, the companies in the Great Valley Corporate Center (and surrounding areas) could consider offering their employees staggered work hours (i.e. come in earlier, stay later). Staggered work hours could also help alleviate the "five o'clock rush".
PLEASE VOTE "NO".
Here's another thought: could we introduce mass transit into this area?
FACT: People are driving the same traffic patterns during the same time each day.
* POSSIBLE SOLUTION: Provide a "jitney" bus system with vehicles running every 10 or 15 minutes. This works very well in the New Jersey shore areas. And, it is not expensive. Maybe this could work for our community.
* POSSIBLE SOLUTION: Bring back our local rail system. We need to think of ways to get more cars off the roadways during these peak travel times, howeve car pooling doesn't seem to work. If given enough thought, I believe we can find more creative solutions than building slip ramps.
We need to think of ways to get more cars off the roadways during these peak travel times, howeve car pooling doesn't seem to work. If given enough thought, I believe we can find more creative solutions than building slip ramps.
02/24/99 from Brian Alderman, West Pikeland Twp Resident
The traffic around Rt 29 is bad enough we do not need to add more conjestion to the road. I travel charlestown Road to get to Rt29, I work in The Great Valley Corporate Center. Some days it takes me upwards of 20 minutes to get to the intersection of Pheonixville pike, Rt29, and Charlestown Road traveling on Charlestown Rd. I know it is just as bad trying to turn left to stay on RT 29. Unless they plan to open Rt29 into a 6 lane road with plenty of turning lanes, adding a Slip ramp is a very bad Idea.
02/18/99 from Andrea Griffiths
We wrote our letters to the governor et al. after we received the last request from Charlestown Green. The reason we specifically moved to this area was for the peace & quiet. We moved into the old Post Office on Rt 29 near the Union Hill/29 intersection (right by the narrow bridge). I have 2 small children and do not want an increase in traffic in the area. Not only that, but what about people like Dee Solitario who will lose not only her house, but her kennel business because of this? Sure she'll get a "fair market value" for her house but what about her livelyhood - she works out of her house. I sent out my letter to the governor, supervisors etc & did receive a very nice letter from Andy Dinniman, thanking him for voicing my concern. I believe this shows we can beat this thing if we all stick together. Think of what they did in Thornbury with Toll Brothers.
Good luck & lets keep up the fight!
02/15/99 From Paul Stevens
Click here to read Paul Stevens' letter to Governor Ridge.
02/14/99 From Phyllis Nathans
Housing is growing here which brings more drivers and therefore more cars. Congestion on the roads is building (take a view during rush hour). There is no official police force in Charlestown to enforce laws effectively. Motorists are driving more thoughtlessly and aggressively these days. Accidents are on the rise, I am sure.
Build it and they will come. Therefore we don't need this. (unless of course we get our own police force and traffic management crew).
I believe that people against this slip ramp idea may have to take a more powerful step beyond the meetings and plan to physically go out and protest on Route #29 if this ridiculous idea continues. This community must send a very strong message to the turnpike commission that we will not take on the traffic burdens of this state. Let all the other improvement possibilities come first before you destroy a community and bring havoc. Let them widen the 202 roads, and any thought of improving the Paoli Train station would be a minor miracle. While the turnpike authority is concerned about moving traffic, let them just simply widen the turnpike while they are at it. But don't re-route endless cars through our little township!
02/11/99 From Eric Woodworth
I haven't researched this so I may be saying something that others have already raised as an issue.
It sounds like the lead concern from citizens is that the ramps themselves will bring additional cars onto the already crowded roads. I believe that this is true. But I also believe that the existence or even the promise of the ramps will also encourage additional corporate development of the surrounding area. This will lead to increasing numbers of people not just from the ramps onto the already crowded roads, but onto all the the already crowded feeder roads that run through the rural areas we are trying to protect.
The slipramps will only feed a vicious reinforcing cycle of corporate development that is choking the quality of life around us. It also makes a very very few people very very rich.
Yes, we need jobs. Yes, we need business development. Yes, we need to feed the economic engine. But does that have to be at the expense of the quality of life? I don't think so!
There has to be a better way that serves the underlying interests of ALL the stakeholders.
02/10/99 copy of email from Kevin Kuhn (Charlestown Green) to
Gerlach & Thompson & Congressman Weldon
Dear Senators Gerlach & Thompson & Congressman Weldon:
I strongly urge you to be more vocally opposed to any Turnpike Slip Ramps in Chester County. This approach to solving traffic problems will only ruin what shrinking acreage of open space is left in our county. The fact that the Turnpike Commission has the ability to conduct themselves as they are is, in itself, difficult to comprehend.
Chester County officials have worked very hard to begin to construct land use guidelines that will assist us in controlling suburban sprawl. The addition of one or more slip ramps will surely override any progress in that direction. The voters in our county have voted their feelings through the approval of bond issues for open space. This was done specifically to overcome the problems additional traffic has brought.
Do I want to be the last person to move to Chester County, NO. Do I want the traffic problems in the county solved YES. Unfortunately, through the use of Slip Ramps what we are really doing is changing a Long Haul Road to accommodate and unfortunately facilitate additional traffic.
Please Say No to ANY Slip Ramps in Chester County as our other county officials have done.
Kevin R. Kuhn President - Charlestown Green, Inc.
02/09/99 from David Hewlings
Here's a link to the press release about Governor Ridge's "Growing Greener"
initiative: http://www.state.pa.us/PA_Exec/DCED/newevent/cd21.htm . It seems to me
that efforts to discourage sprawl should also discourage turnpike exchanges
by decree rather than through cooperation and planning. We might be able to
use Governor Ridge's initiative to press the turnpike commission for more
Express Your Views firstname.lastname@example.org
Any visitors to the Charlestown Township web site who would like to make a public comment on the proposed Slip Ramp can send email to email@example.com or to the site by clicking here. Email received on this subject (pro and con) with your name will be posted on this page. While your name will be identified as the author of your letter, your email address will not be posted with the letter unless you specifically request it. Letters containing personal attacks or foul language will not be posted.