District of Columbia

[cpzilliacus]

And the current bridge is still against interstate highway standards.

I can assure you that USDOT/FHWA granted design waivers to allow the construction of a draw span there, which replaced the old span, which also had a draw span.   

By building the bridge higher (but not so high to eliminate the need for a draw bridge), the number of bridge openings was significantly reduced.  Unlike most draw spans over bodies of water considered navigable by the federal government, federal regulation allows the Wilson Bridge to be opened only at certain times.  You can read the specific regulation here (PDF).

[jmacswimmer]

Would trucks have been banned through the city (specifically on the section under the Mall/Capitol Hill), particularly post-9/11?

They would have been rerouted to the outer loop as a "Truck 95" detour or something like that, so pretty much how it is today.

My guess is it would have been handled similar to I-465 Indy/I-270 Columbus/I-285 Atlanta, where inbound signage approaching the first beltway interchange advises thru trucks/hazmats to use the beltway route.

[Mapmikey]

Would trucks have been banned through the city (specifically on the section under the Mall/Capitol Hill), particularly post-9/11?

They would have been rerouted to the outer loop as a "Truck 95" detour or something like that, so pretty much how it is today.

My guess is it would have been handled similar to I-465 Indy/I-270 Columbus/I-285 Atlanta, where inbound signage approaching the first beltway interchange advises thru trucks/hazmats to use the beltway route.

Hazmats are prohibited from the tunnel currently, plus the height is 13'-0", so truck traffic on the Wilson Bridge wouldn't be much different had 95 been completed through the city.

[cpzilliacus]

Would trucks have been banned through the city (specifically on the section under the Mall/Capitol Hill), particularly post-9/11?

They would have been rerouted to the outer loop as a "Truck 95" detour or something like that, so pretty much how it is today.

My guess is it would have been handled similar to I-465 Indy/I-270 Columbus/I-285 Atlanta, where inbound signage approaching the first beltway interchange advises thru trucks/hazmats to use the beltway route.

Hazmats are prohibited from the tunnel currently, plus the height is 13'-0", so truck traffic on the Wilson Bridge wouldn't be much different had 95 been completed through the city.

But no HAZMAT restrictions for the route I-395, I-695 and DC-295 across D.C. (but there are height restrictions on DC-295 due to low pedestrian bridges at 13' 9" (just under 4.2 meters).

[Mapmikey]

Would trucks have been banned through the city (specifically on the section under the Mall/Capitol Hill), particularly post-9/11?

They would have been rerouted to the outer loop as a "Truck 95" detour or something like that, so pretty much how it is today.

My guess is it would have been handled similar to I-465 Indy/I-270 Columbus/I-285 Atlanta, where inbound signage approaching the first beltway interchange advises thru trucks/hazmats to use the beltway route.

Hazmats are prohibited from the tunnel currently, plus the height is 13'-0", so truck traffic on the Wilson Bridge wouldn't be much different had 95 been completed through the city.

But no HAZMAT restrictions for the route I-395, I-695 and DC-295 across D.C. (but there are height restrictions on DC-295 due to low pedestrian bridges at 13' 9" (just under 4.2 meters).

Sure, but trucks can't use 295 north of US 50, so being forced to go to Beltway there makes it just 3 miles shorter (and undoubtedly slower most of the time) than using the Beltway from Springfield to US 50.

[mrsman]

Would trucks have been banned through the city (specifically on the section under the Mall/Capitol Hill), particularly post-9/11?

They would have been rerouted to the outer loop as a "Truck 95" detour or something like that, so pretty much how it is today.

My guess is it would have been handled similar to I-465 Indy/I-270 Columbus/I-285 Atlanta, where inbound signage approaching the first beltway interchange advises thru trucks/hazmats to use the beltway route.

Hazmats are prohibited from the tunnel currently, plus the height is 13'-0", so truck traffic on the Wilson Bridge wouldn't be much different had 95 been completed through the city.

But no HAZMAT restrictions for the route I-395, I-695 and DC-295 across D.C. (but there are height restrictions on DC-295 due to low pedestrian bridges at 13' 9" (just under 4.2 meters).

Sure, but trucks can't use 295 north of US 50, so being forced to go to Beltway there makes it just 3 miles shorter (and undoubtedly slower most of the time) than using the Beltway from Springfield to US 50.

Part of this discussion pre-supposes a I-95 through DC.   So I guess it depends on what specific alignment the North-Central Freeway will take.  Regardless, there doesn't appear to be a route for HAZMATs through the city.  No way to double back from 295/50 to I-95 on any sort of freeway routing that doesn't also lose significant distance.

I would think an Atlanta style truck restriction would be put in place at Beltway interchanges if I-95 through DC were built.  But since a trucker who looks at today's map can see that there is no way to go through the city without the use of some surface streets would generally automatically opt for the Beltway.  The Atlanta truck restriction only prohibits thru trucks, local trucks can still drive on 75/85, so long as they have a delivery withing the Perimeter.

[AlexandriaVA]

This may have come up earlier in this thread.

I was driving up the B/W Parkway yesterday, and at the site of the collapsed pedestrian bridge, there's almost no evidence of the bridge itself, except for the abutments/foundations on either side of I-295 in NE DC.

[tolbs17]

This may have come up earlier in this thread.

I was driving up the B/W Parkway yesterday, and at the site of the collapsed pedestrian bridge, there's almost no evidence of the bridge itself, except for the abutments/foundations on either side of I-295 in NE DC.

That highway sucks, and it's too narrow. Maybe that's meant to be an expressway design and not a freeway?

[AlexandriaVA]

?? I have no idea what you're talking about.

Even living in Virginia, it's a very convenient way to get up to that northeast (hence my use going to Baltimore the other day).

[jakeroot]

?? I have no idea what you're talking about.

tolbs's posts are best categorized into the "shoot first aim second" style of commenting, so you're probably not alone.

[tolbs17]

?? I have no idea what you're talking about.

Even living in Virginia, it's a very convenient way to get up to that northeast (hence my use going to Baltimore the other day).

I'm saying it has too few lanes, tight interchanges, and with curb/gutters which a freeway should NOT have.

[Dirt Roads]

I was driving up the B/W Parkway yesterday, and at the site of the collapsed pedestrian bridge, there's almost no evidence of the bridge itself, except for the abutments/foundations on either side of I-295 in NE DC.

That highway sucks, and it's too narrow. Maybe that's meant to be an expressway design and not a freeway?

Not sure why everyone is wanting to argue with tolbs17.  Just to point out what the locals there already know, the southern end of the Baltimore-Washington Parkway is part of the National Capitol Park administrative wing of the National Park Service.  That entity has grown so much that it has been split into six different administrative wings.  That means that the BW Parkway is now part of a different wing that the George Washington Parkway and the Clara Barton Parkway.  Anyhow, these function more like Skyline Drive without the trails and campgrounds.  They just happen to be in an urban area where everyone is looking for a shortcut around traffic.  In comparison, the Rock Creek and Potomac Parkway is only two lanes.

When I lived there, sometimes I used all of these parkways to just have an quiet serene drive out of the Capitol area (and yes, and I spelled it that way on purpose).

[vdeane]

I was driving up the B/W Parkway yesterday, and at the site of the collapsed pedestrian bridge, there's almost no evidence of the bridge itself, except for the abutments/foundations on either side of I-295 in NE DC.

That highway sucks, and it's too narrow. Maybe that's meant to be an expressway design and not a freeway?

Not sure why everyone is wanting to argue with tolbs17.  Just to point out what the locals there already know, the southern end of the Baltimore-Washington Parkway is part of the National Capitol Park administrative wing of the National Park Service.  That entity has grown so much that it has been split into six different administrative wings.  That means that the BW Parkway is now part of a different wing that the George Washington Parkway and the Clara Barton Parkway.  Anyhow, these function more like Skyline Drive without the trails and campgrounds.  They just happen to be in an urban area where everyone is looking for a shortcut around traffic.  In comparison, the Rock Creek and Potomac Parkway is only two lanes.

When I lived there, sometimes I used all of these parkways to just have an quiet serene drive out of the Capitol area (and yes, and I spelled it that way on purpose).

tolbs tends to post non-sequitors that are only tangentially related to whatever he replied to (often the relation isn't obvious even after thinking about it), and people have gotten tired of him posting a bunch of signs in NC that to us, at best, have only very, very, VERY minor errors over in the Traffic Control forum.

[Alps]

?? I have no idea what you're talking about.

Even living in Virginia, it's a very convenient way to get up to that northeast (hence my use going to Baltimore the other day).

I'm saying it has too few lanes, tight interchanges, and with curb/gutters which a freeway should NOT have.

Agreed 100%. I frequently find myself on I-95 between the beltways because any little anything ties up the B-W.

[tolbs17]

?? I have no idea what you're talking about.

Even living in Virginia, it's a very convenient way to get up to that northeast (hence my use going to Baltimore the other day).

I'm saying it has too few lanes, tight interchanges, and with curb/gutters which a freeway should NOT have.

Agreed 100%. I frequently find myself on I-95 between the beltways because any little anything ties up the B-W.

Then they have this document which says they will widen it to 6 lanes from I-195 to I-695.

Also, what the hell are these wooden bridges they have under this overpass? They have been like that for a few years now.

[froggie]

^ That wooden subdeck is a non-issue compared to the rather noticeable pier spalling and I-beam corrosion on the same bridge.

[tolbs17]

^ That wooden subdeck is a non-issue compared to the rather noticeable pier spalling and I-beam corrosion on the same bridge.

And for some reason, I cannot find any link that would reconstruct the existing interchange to something nicer.

[Alps]

?? I have no idea what you're talking about.

Even living in Virginia, it's a very convenient way to get up to that northeast (hence my use going to Baltimore the other day).

I'm saying it has too few lanes, tight interchanges, and with curb/gutters which a freeway should NOT have.

Agreed 100%. I frequently find myself on I-95 between the beltways because any little anything ties up the B-W.

Then they have this document which says they will widen it to 6 lanes from I-195 to I-695.

Also, what the hell are these wooden bridges they have under this overpass? They have been like that for a few years now.

Those are up there to catch debris, probably rust falling off the steel beams

[cpzilliacus]

Those are up there to catch debris, probably rust falling off the steel beams

At least in theory, the presence of those means that the bridge is on the list for a deck replacement or in some cases, a rehabilitation.

[1995hoo]

It appears to me there's some confusion in this thread because there is a reference to the BW Parkway (which doesn't enter DC), the collapsed pedestrian bridge (which was in DC and which the Mayor said will be rebuilt at a higher clearance), and I-295 (which didn't pass under the pedestrian bridge in question). Then tolbs17, who is not known for attention to detail, jumped in and further confused things.

[jmacswimmer]

Agreed 100%. I frequently find myself on I-95 between the beltways because any little anything ties up the B-W.

Agreed 200%.  Even when 295 is incident-free and moving, the amount of times you get stuck behind 2 vehicles going the same speed side-by-side....having 4 lanes each way on 95 makes this occurrence much less frequent (although I've occasionally seen it happen there as well).

Then they have this document which says they will widen it to 6 lanes from I-195 to I-695.

Uhhh, that project's been completed for almost 10 years now.

Those are up there to catch debris, probably rust falling off the steel beams

At least in theory, the presence of those means that the bridge is on the list for a deck replacement or in some cases, a rehabilitation.

A lot of the underpasses & overpasses along the Beltway in that area are in similar condition - as one example, the bridge decks passing over the WMATA/CSX tracks are getting pretty beat-up.

It appears to me there's some confusion in this thread because there is a reference to the BW Parkway (which doesn't enter DC), the collapsed pedestrian bridge (which was in DC and which the Mayor said will be rebuilt at a higher clearance), and I-295 (which didn't pass under the pedestrian bridge in question). Then tolbs17, who is not known for attention to detail, jumped in and further confused things.

Glad I'm not the only one struggling to follow how discussion of the now-removed pedestrian overpass on DC 295 led to complaints of the B-W Parkway not being freeway-standard (which, being a parkway designed & constructed by NPS before modern freeway standards were developed, makes perfect sense to me anyway). 

[vdeane]

Then tolbs17, who is not known for attention to detail, jumped in and further confused things.

Which is ironic, given that his signage complaints in the Traffic Control board tend to be things that are so nit-picky that even the most anal of us here think they're no big deal.

[tolbs17]

Then tolbs17, who is not known for attention to detail, jumped in and further confused things.

Which is ironic, given that his signage complaints in the Traffic Control board tend to be things that are so nit-picky that even the most anal of us here think they're no big deal.

like changing the topic?

[mrsman]

As the subject of DC-295 is still part of the discussion here, I recently read an article on ggwash about some of the history of the corridor.

As a warning, a lot of ggwash stuff is very pro-transit, pro-bike, and anti-car.

The first article in the series definitely reads a bit like an anti-freeway screed:

How DC Route 295 isolates neighborhoods in Northeast DC from the rest of the city


The second article, though, is defintely worth reading and has a lot of interesting history and map links:

Here's how neighborhoods west of Kenilworth Avenue in Northeast DC became isolated from the city

[cpzilliacus]

As the subject of DC-295 is still part of the discussion here, I recently read an article on ggwash about some of the history of the corridor.

As a warning, a lot of ggwash stuff is very pro-transit, pro-bike, and anti-car.

The first article in the series definitely reads a bit like an anti-freeway screed:

How DC Route 295 isolates neighborhoods in Northeast DC from the rest of the city

As to be expected, much emphasis on air quality impact of the traffic - but no mention of the air quality impact of greatly improved vehicle emission controls and reformulated fuels.  Nor any mention of the air quality impact of the decommissioning of the Benning Road coal-fired generating station, which was torn down several years ago.

The second article, though, is defintely worth reading and has a lot of interesting history and map links:

Here's how neighborhoods west of Kenilworth Avenue in Northeast DC became isolated from the city

This one is indeed better.

One thing that the author seems to not be aware of - streetcar service in the Benning Road corridor (I think those were Routes 10 and 12) were decommissioned and replaced with bus service for one simple reason - the streetcars could not serve the demand and buses could. 

One big reason why was the "plow pit" on H Street, N.E, where inbound streetcars stopped to have the trolley pole lowered and the "plow" attached to rear truck of the car (power was DC, with the power rail in the conduit having a positive and negative pole (one side of the plow was for positive and one side was negative)). 

There was a dedicated employee at each plow pit at all times when trolley service was running  This job required going under the car to the pit to attach (inbound) or remove (outbound) the plow and then lowering the pole (inbound) or raising it (outbound). This was a miserable job, exposed to the elements and sometimes dangerous involving exposure to live traffic and enough electric power to be lethal.

Outbound cars had the plow removed and the pole raised. 

The conduit system existed because Congress had forbidden overhead wires in the monumental core of D.C., including trolley wires.

The National Capital Trolley Museum on Bonifant Road in Silver Spring (overlooking MD-200) has at least one example of a plow in their collection open to the public - these things were heavy beasts.