Officials hope changes at Routes 66, 366 make intersection safer |
Valley News Dispatch

Officials hope changes at Routes 66, 366 make intersection safer

Mary Ann Thomas
Mary Ann Thomas | Tribune-Review
A makeshift memorial for Anthony Reefer, 23, marks the spot where he died in a crash in 2016 at intersection of Routes 66 and 366 in Washington Township.

The flowers of a makeshift memorial at a Washington Township intersection where a Brackenridge woman died in a July 27 crash haven’t faded yet.

The fatal crash happened when Haley Montgomery’s northbound car tried to turn left from Route 66 onto Route 366 but was struck by an oncoming SUV.

Other drivers have made the same fatal mistake over the years, officials said.

After fielding complaints about the intersection, state Rep. Joe Petrarca, D-Washington Township, said he contacted PennDOT this year to request a traffic study and help to make the intersection safer.

Earlier this month, PennDOT eliminated one lane in each direction of Route 66 at the intersection with Route 366, reducing it to one lane in each direction. The agency also reduced the speed limit from 55 mph to 45 mph in the area.

“I hope this is an adequate fix and makes a dangerous situation better,” Petrarca said.

Washington Township Supervisors Chairman Rich Gardner said he believes it’s up to PennDOT to make the intersection safer since it involves two state roads.

“Time will tell whether the elimination of lanes will alleviate the problem,” Gardner said.

Washington Township police Chief Scott Slagle blamed some crashes that happened years ago on motorists on Route 366 “blowing through the stop sign” because the intersection was not well lighted.

A flashing light was installed along with rumble strips to address the problem.

“Where we seem to be having trouble is with cars that are northbound on 66 making a left turn onto 366,” said Slagle, who has been chief for 23 years.

“The serious accidents have been cross-traffic,” Slagle said. “It’s a tough intersection to navigate.”

Bryan Walker, district traffic engineer for PennDOT’s District 12, said all approaches and turning movements at the intersection were examined in a recent safety study. And he, like Slagle, found that the biggest danger was for motorists trying to making left-hand turns from Route 66 onto Route 366.

Walker said some motorists “were not able to effectively judge speeds of traffic coming at them, and that is not necessarily addressed by a traffic signal.”

Currently, no studies are planned to weigh the merits of installing a traffic signal at the intersection.

Mary Ann Thomas is a Tribune-Review staff writer. You can contact Mary at 724-226-4691, [email protected] or via Twitter .

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.