I've wondered why in MD, they are expanding I-495, I-270, and the BW Parkway, but leaving the most important road (I-95) untouched.
95 between 495 and 695 NEEDS to be expanded.
It suffers from the 'funneling' effect that the NJTP does in Central NJ and I-95 by Fredericksburg; whereby a major thoroughway cutting through a somewhat less dense area actually gets more congested because all of the regional roadways dump into it, leaving just one main road.
This is why on I-95 it is so crowded from Laurel through Columbia as you have the ICC, MD-32, MD-100, I-895, and I-195 emptying on.
Yet when you get closer to Baltimore, the urban core, you actualyl lose traffic.
So why is this road NOT being widened especially when there is amply ROW?
A) The part of 95 concurrent with 495 is included in the Governor's proposal.
B) The Beltway, 270, and the BW Pkwy have far worse problems than 95.
C) The roads you cited are not emptying all their traffic onto 95...they're also going onto the BW Pkwy and 29.
To answer your last question, it's because 95 really does not have a significant issue unless there's a crash. In my experience, this holds true even during evening rush hour. And much of 95's problems during the morning rush hour are the result of spillover from the Beltway's Outer Loop.
Quote from: froggie on March 22, 2018, 03:47:51 PM
A) The part of 95 concurrent with 495 is included in the Governor's proposal.
B) The Beltway, 270, and the BW Pkwy have far worse problems than 95.
C) The roads you cited are not emptying all their traffic onto 95...they're also going onto the BW Pkwy and 29.
To answer your last question, it's because 95 really does not have a significant issue unless there's a crash. In my experience, this holds true even during evening rush hour. And much of 95's problems during the morning rush hour are the result of spillover from the Beltway's Outer Loop.
Disagree.
95 is HORRIBLE until MD-100 during rush hour.
I-95 was flowing fine during rush hour last Thursday and Friday when I was in D.C. and staying near BWI.
I do agree with Adam's comment in that the BWI should receive more attention versus adding yet another lane to I-95. Continuing three lanes for the entire distance should be considered.
But the question arises: how many lanes is enough? There are two freeways (I-95, B-W), one expressway and freeway (US 29), and another parallel arterial (US 1). A better ROI would be along Marc's Camden and Penn lines to increase the frequency of service and the construction of fully enclosed and modern stations - and add transit-oriented developments around them. (Some of these stations are just strange - like Jessup, which has a ridership of... 1.)
Quote from: froggie on March 22, 2018, 03:47:51 PM
To answer your last question, it's because 95 really does not have a significant issue unless there's a crash. In my experience, this holds true even during evening rush hour. And much of 95's problems during the morning rush hour are the result of spillover from the Beltway's Outer Loop.
^Agreed. While I'd be all for Maryland expanding I-95 between the beltways(likely via HOT lanes), I just don't think that overall it would be worth the massive cost(or profitable). IMO Maryland should continue to get rid of lights on US-29, widen both US-29 and the BW Pkwy to at least six free lanes, and rebuild the BW Pkwy/Beltway interchange.
Quote95 is HORRIBLE until MD-100 during rush hour.
What's your specific definition of "horrible"?
Quote from: froggie on March 22, 2018, 03:47:51 PM
To answer your last question, it's because 95 really does not have a significant issue unless there's a crash. In my experience, this holds true even during evening rush hour. And much of 95's problems during the morning rush hour are the result of spillover from the Beltway's Outer Loop.
I-95 from MD-198 in the south to MD-100 in the north has gotten significantly worse in the past several years. Some of this may be due to increased traffic to BWI from Prince George's County and Montgomery County. Background traffic seems to have increased too.
At least North of Baltimore, I'd like to see them do something approaching Belair, which would most likely be an expansion of the 4 lane section north. That area seems to get bad quite often during normal rush hours and on the weekends.
Quote from: seicer on March 22, 2018, 08:06:46 PM
I-95 was flowing fine during rush hour last Thursday and Friday when I was in D.C. and staying near BWI.
Did last week's Wednesday snowstorm have any affect on traffic? I know here in New Jersey traffic on Thursday was some of the fastest, lightest rush hour traffic I've seen in a long while.
Quote from: seicer on March 22, 2018, 08:06:46 PM
But the question arises: how many lanes is enough? There are two freeways (I-95, B-W), one expressway and freeway (US 29), and another parallel arterial (US 1). A better ROI would be along Marc's Camden and Penn lines to increase the frequency of service and the construction of fully enclosed and modern stations - and add transit-oriented developments around them. (Some of these stations are just strange - like Jessup, which has a ridership of... 1.)
Improving the frequency of service might be possible on the Amtrak Northeast Corridor (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northeast_Corridor) (Penn Line) tracks (owned and controlled by Amtrak), but probably not on the CSX Capital Subdivision (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_Subdivision) (Camden Line, owned and controlled by CSX) which carries a high volume of CSX freight trains.
Quote from: cpzilliacus on March 27, 2018, 11:06:46 AM
Quote from: froggie on March 22, 2018, 03:47:51 PM
To answer your last question, it's because 95 really does not have a significant issue unless there's a crash. In my experience, this holds true even during evening rush hour. And much of 95's problems during the morning rush hour are the result of spillover from the Beltway's Outer Loop.
I-95 from MD-198 in the south to MD-100 in the north has gotten significantly worse in the past several years. Some of this may be due to increased traffic to BWI from Prince George's County and Montgomery County. Background traffic seems to have increased too.
Agreed. I-95 was very heavy when I was on it the Saturday before TRB. A few slow spots between the beltways, too. While the beltways and BW Parkway are more pressing, I-95 should get some attention, though counts may decrease if they widen the BW Parkway to siphon off some more local traffic.
From what I've observed, the major problems with I-95 between MD 198 and MD 100 are caused by poor merging behaviors at MD 198, MD 32, and MD 175 going north, and MD 100 and MD 32 going south. My observation is that the acceleration lanes are either too short or drivers are too inattentive and unwilling to merge at speeds high enough to avoid congestion.
One obvious improvement is to widen the I-95 southbound overpass at MD 103 so that the ramps from both directions of MD 100 have more room to merge together and then merge into traffic.
Here's my take on this. 95 between the beltways has some issues, but the BW Parkway is far worse in my opinion.
What I don't get is why Waze has you go on the BW Parkway (and 895) instead of 95 when driving through the DC area. To make matters worse it even has you drive through downtown DC as well via 695 and 395.
Quote from: jcn on April 15, 2018, 09:53:48 PM
Here's my take on this. 95 between the beltways has some issues, but the BW Parkway is far worse in my opinion.
There have been proposals in the past to reconstruct the B-W Parkway to as much as an 8-lane highway built to Interstate standards. The National Park Service of course has opposed that.
Quote from: jcn on April 15, 2018, 09:53:48 PM
Here's my take on this. 95 between the beltways has some issues, but the BW Parkway is far worse in my opinion.
What I don't get is why Waze has you go on the BW Parkway (and 895) instead of 95 when driving through the DC area. To make matters worse it even has you drive through downtown DC as well via 695 and 395.
going from where to where? the only time Waze has directed me to go through downtown was when the Beltway was a total dumpster fire.
The only question I have is why they aren't adding ETLs going southbound between Bel Air and White Marsh. I get the backups NB when the road loses a lane, but you would think they'd at least make it symmetrical.
Quote from: jcn on April 15, 2018, 09:53:48 PM
Here's my take on this. 95 between the beltways has some issues, but the BW Parkway is far worse in my opinion.
What I don't get is why Waze has you go on the BW Parkway (and 895) instead of 95 when driving through the DC area. To make matters worse it even has you drive through downtown DC as well via 695 and 395.
I don't use Waze, so this is just a guess, but might it be basing the recommendation in part on distance? I've seen navigation software do some odd things in that respect–the built-in sat-nav in my 2004 TL will tell me to exit from I-270's express lanes to its local lanes and then change back a short distance later, for example, and the only reason that makes any sense is because the road curves there and the distance via the local lanes would be shorter. I've had online mapping sites, including Google from time to time, tell me to go north via the Beltway to I-295/DC-295 and up the BW Parkway. I usually ignore that sort of routing advice, but the fact that it's not unique to one source makes me suspect apps like Waze have trouble overcoming the difference in distances even if the traffic makes a practical impact.
Quote from: 1995hoo on April 27, 2018, 08:44:25 AM
Quote from: jcn on April 15, 2018, 09:53:48 PM
Here's my take on this. 95 between the beltways has some issues, but the BW Parkway is far worse in my opinion.
What I don't get is why Waze has you go on the BW Parkway (and 895) instead of 95 when driving through the DC area. To make matters worse it even has you drive through downtown DC as well via 695 and 395.
I don't use Waze, so this is just a guess, but might it be basing the recommendation in part on distance? I've seen navigation software do some odd things in that respect–the built-in sat-nav in my 2004 TL will tell me to exit from I-270's express lanes to its local lanes and then change back a short distance later, for example, and the only reason that makes any sense is because the road curves there and the distance via the local lanes would be shorter. I've had online mapping sites, including Google from time to time, tell me to go north via the Beltway to I-295/DC-295 and up the BW Parkway. I usually ignore that sort of routing advice, but the fact that it's not unique to one source makes me suspect apps like Waze have trouble overcoming the difference in distances even if the traffic makes a practical impact.
My 2016 Lacrosse has OnStar and it told me to take the local lanes on I-270 on a thru trip.
Quote from: 1995hoo on April 27, 2018, 08:44:25 AM
Quote from: jcn on April 15, 2018, 09:53:48 PM
Here's my take on this. 95 between the beltways has some issues, but the BW Parkway is far worse in my opinion.
What I don't get is why Waze has you go on the BW Parkway (and 895) instead of 95 when driving through the DC area. To make matters worse it even has you drive through downtown DC as well via 695 and 395.
I don't use Waze, so this is just a guess, but might it be basing the recommendation in part on distance? I've seen navigation software do some odd things in that respect–the built-in sat-nav in my 2004 TL will tell me to exit from I-270's express lanes to its local lanes and then change back a short distance later, for example, and the only reason that makes any sense is because the road curves there and the distance via the local lanes would be shorter. I've had online mapping sites, including Google from time to time, tell me to go north via the Beltway to I-295/DC-295 and up the BW Parkway. I usually ignore that sort of routing advice, but the fact that it's not unique to one source makes me suspect apps like Waze have trouble overcoming the difference in distances even if the traffic makes a practical impact.
If both ways are free of congestion, the shortest distance will theoretically be faster. Of course, sometimes the longer way is actually better because the road is of better quality (and no speed cameras) so traffic can in fact travel at a higher speed.
Waze is good about routing you around congestion. But if there is no congestion present, they likely route you on the shortest routing, even though for all practical purposes you can get there faster on the Beltway (becasue of speeding and the ability to use more lanes to go around a slow moving vehicle).
Quote from: mrsman on April 27, 2018, 06:39:17 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on April 27, 2018, 08:44:25 AM
Quote from: jcn on April 15, 2018, 09:53:48 PM
Here's my take on this. 95 between the beltways has some issues, but the BW Parkway is far worse in my opinion.
What I don't get is why Waze has you go on the BW Parkway (and 895) instead of 95 when driving through the DC area. To make matters worse it even has you drive through downtown DC as well via 695 and 395.
I don't use Waze, so this is just a guess, but might it be basing the recommendation in part on distance? I've seen navigation software do some odd things in that respect–the built-in sat-nav in my 2004 TL will tell me to exit from I-270's express lanes to its local lanes and then change back a short distance later, for example, and the only reason that makes any sense is because the road curves there and the distance via the local lanes would be shorter. I've had online mapping sites, including Google from time to time, tell me to go north via the Beltway to I-295/DC-295 and up the BW Parkway. I usually ignore that sort of routing advice, but the fact that it's not unique to one source makes me suspect apps like Waze have trouble overcoming the difference in distances even if the traffic makes a practical impact.
If both ways are free of congestion, the shortest distance will theoretically be faster. Of course, sometimes the longer way is actually better because the road is of better quality (and no speed cameras) so traffic can in fact travel at a higher speed.
Waze is good about routing you around congestion. But if there is no congestion present, they likely route you on the shortest routing, even though for all practical purposes you can get there faster on the Beltway (becasue of speeding and the ability to use more lanes to go around a slow moving vehicle).
Sorry for the late response on this, but here's the craziest thing about all of this. Even when the downtown DC highways (395, 695, and the Kenilworth portion of 295) are backed up, Waze still has you go that way which makes no sense given how it's supposed to help you avoid traffic.
Quote from: jcn on September 29, 2018, 08:34:34 PM
Quote from: mrsman on April 27, 2018, 06:39:17 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on April 27, 2018, 08:44:25 AM
Quote from: jcn on April 15, 2018, 09:53:48 PM
Here's my take on this. 95 between the beltways has some issues, but the BW Parkway is far worse in my opinion.
What I don't get is why Waze has you go on the BW Parkway (and 895) instead of 95 when driving through the DC area. To make matters worse it even has you drive through downtown DC as well via 695 and 395.
I don't use Waze, so this is just a guess, but might it be basing the recommendation in part on distance? I've seen navigation software do some odd things in that respect–the built-in sat-nav in my 2004 TL will tell me to exit from I-270's express lanes to its local lanes and then change back a short distance later, for example, and the only reason that makes any sense is because the road curves there and the distance via the local lanes would be shorter. I've had online mapping sites, including Google from time to time, tell me to go north via the Beltway to I-295/DC-295 and up the BW Parkway. I usually ignore that sort of routing advice, but the fact that it's not unique to one source makes me suspect apps like Waze have trouble overcoming the difference in distances even if the traffic makes a practical impact.
If both ways are free of congestion, the shortest distance will theoretically be faster. Of course, sometimes the longer way is actually better because the road is of better quality (and no speed cameras) so traffic can in fact travel at a higher speed.
Waze is good about routing you around congestion. But if there is no congestion present, they likely route you on the shortest routing, even though for all practical purposes you can get there faster on the Beltway (becasue of speeding and the ability to use more lanes to go around a slow moving vehicle).
Sorry for the late response on this, but here's the craziest thing about all of this. Even when the downtown DC highways (395, 695, and the Kenilworth portion of 295) are backed up, Waze still has you go that way which makes no sense given how it's supposed to help you avoid traffic.
I went down to DC from Philly in August and Waze took me away from I-95 between Baltimore and DC both ways. Instead, it took me down I-97 to US 50 West. I wasn't aware of any major incidents on I-95 either day.
Quote from: MASTERNC on September 29, 2018, 08:40:07 PM
Quote from: jcn on September 29, 2018, 08:34:34 PM
Sorry for the late response on this, but here's the craziest thing about all of this. Even when the downtown DC highways (395, 695, and the Kenilworth portion of 295) are backed up, Waze still has you go that way which makes no sense given how it's supposed to help you avoid traffic.
I went down to DC from Philly in August and Waze took me away from I-95 between Baltimore and DC both ways. Instead, it took me down I-97 to US 50 West. I wasn't aware of any major incidents on I-95 either day.
I've noticed that with OnStar, with a variety of routings in different places. The algorithm probably finds that it is 1 or 2 minutes less on those routes (295, Kenilworth, BW Parkway) so they route you that way rather than stay on the Beltway. Maybe that is true in free-flowing traffic, but the probability of things not deteriorating quickly are a lot higher on the Beltway than on the D.C. routing. Same with taking 395/695/Kenilworth/BW Parkway rather than the eastern half of the Beltway.
It is interesting taking the route thru the city once in awhile, but unless there is a major traffic problem reported on the Beltway I find that a much superior route in terms of drivability.
Quote from: jcn on September 29, 2018, 08:34:34 PM
Sorry for the late response on this, but here's the craziest thing about all of this. Even when the downtown DC highways (395, 695, and the Kenilworth portion of 295) are backed up, Waze still has you go that way which makes no sense given how it's supposed to help you avoid traffic.
No. It's supposed to get you from one place to another via the quickest route possible. If one route takes you into congestion and adds 10 minutes to the normal drive, or another route that involves 25 mph roads going 50 miles out of the way cause there's no congestion but takes you 3 hours longer, what would you prefer?
Quote from: mrsman on April 27, 2018, 06:39:17 PM
....
If both ways are free of congestion, the shortest distance will theoretically be faster. ....
....
Of course, that's assuming all things are equal. In this case, the BW Parkway has two lanes to a side for most (not all) of its length between the beltways and it has a 55-mph speed limit, whereas I-95 has four lanes to a side and a 65-mph speed limit. I usually find I-95 to be a considerably faster route, not so much because of the higher speed limit but because having more lanes makes it easier to get past slower drivers.
Regarding the all-295 route through DC, there are multiple speed cameras on that route.
Quote from: jcn on April 15, 2018, 09:53:48 PM
Here's my take on this. 95 between the beltways has some issues, but the BW Parkway is far worse in my opinion.
What I don't get is why Waze has you go on the BW Parkway (and 895) instead of 95 when driving through the DC area. To make matters worse it even has you drive through downtown DC as well via 695 and 395.
My guess is that 95 through Baltimore was a dumpster fire that day. Most locals don't bother with 895 on the south side because there are no exits from 95 all the way to the toll booth for the Harbor Tunnel. It's usually a much more pleasant ride than 95.
In 2009, I got laid off from a job in Tyson's Corner, and started a new job in Columbia. For the first 7-8 months, I was finishing up my lease in Falls Church to avoid paying breaklease fees. 29, 95, and the BW Parkway between the beltways all suck, with the BW Parkway being the worst of the three -- but 495 and 270 have even worse traffic problems. If I didn't leave my apartment by 6:45a I could forget about being at work before 10. I can't imagine how much worse the traffic has gotten in the ensuing 10 years.
I thought that Gov. Hogan floated a proposal for Lexus Lanes along the BW Parkway. In fact, I remember there being an uproar about it in the news because the State of Maryland would first have to buy the BW Parkway from the National Park Service, which people thought was wasteful and that the NPS would likely not sell due to the environmental effects of the planned construction. Am I remembering this wrong?
Though I still have yet to venture to the north east, reading this article about the chronic congestion this stretch of freeway suffers leads me to believe this is a major lost opportunity that they aren't significantly expanding this section as they plan to reconstruct it.
https://amp.delawareonline.com/amp/1382703002
^ I can think of several reasons why they aren't:
- First, it's not a full reconstruction. It's a combination of viaduct & deck repair plus replacing joints and the outer barriers.
- Reconstruction/rehab does not require a full environmental impact statement. A widening would.
- There are a large number of wetlands and wet lowlands south of downtown and near the Christiana River...right up to the edge of the fill that comprises the ground portions of I-95. Widening 95 would require filling in a large chunk of these lowlands, so you'd run into hydrology and environmental impacts.
- Between the NEC tracks, the ballfield, and other development, ROW is pretty tight in the vicinity of the viaduct.
- To handle logical termini for additional lanes plus retain shoulders, the SB I-495 bridge over NB I-95 would also have to be replaced.
They need to if the freeway is experience congestion so bad they're claiming major preparations need to be made in order for a rehabilitation project that is 2 years away. They are claiming city wide gridlock on certain freeways because of this. This is why US is becoming a joke when it comes to infrastructure. Quit kicking the can down the road.
This is also said to be several hundred million dollar project so they should just make a billion dollar one and do it right. They can find the money somehow if it means that much to voters not to sit in traffic. Otherwise more rail lines should be included as well.
My own experience with that area is it's not as bad as you're making it out to be. Primarily rush hour trying to get in and out of downtown Wilmington. Through traffic has for years been encouraged to take 495 around the city...and (bridge shifting notwithstanding) 495 usually is not a problem.
Ah, well I've never been so I'll take your word for it. The article made it sound like it was really bad. It also said it was a reconstruction, that is not the case?
Reconstruction of the bridge deck, to a degree. But not a full reconstruction of the bridge.
Maybe promoting the use of that new Bike Trail/Bridge, They want everyone to ditch cars and ride bikes into Wilmington. That will for Sure drop the amount of cars on I-95 during rush hour.
Except that's not what they are advocating. Totally different use cases.
Quote from: froggie on October 05, 2018, 05:24:13 PM
^ I can think of several reasons why they aren't:
- First, it's not a full reconstruction. It's a combination of viaduct & deck repair plus replacing joints and the outer barriers.
- Reconstruction/rehab does not require a full environmental impact statement. A widening would.
- There are a large number of wetlands and wet lowlands south of downtown and near the Christiana River...right up to the edge of the fill that comprises the ground portions of I-95. Widening 95 would require filling in a large chunk of these lowlands, so you'd run into hydrology and environmental impacts.
- Between the NEC tracks, the ballfield, and other development, ROW is pretty tight in the vicinity of the viaduct.
- To handle logical termini for additional lanes plus retain shoulders, the SB I-495 bridge over NB I-95 would also have to be replaced.
I understand the amount of impact, but how do cities like Philly and NY build Highway tunnels with roads above that would make you not think there is a tunnel with a highway running under it because of the amount of houses, trees, grass etc thats around. if you cannot build outward you build up! Did america forget about all the great architecture it has built? Tunnels, buildings, Bridge-Tunnels! Are we saying forget building great things that will change the area for better so Ny and old cities will retain the reason for tourists to go spend money and see infrastructure that the U.S Government will never make again?
Quote from: seicer on October 09, 2018, 03:18:57 PM
Except that's not what they are advocating. Totally different use cases.
https://www.delawareonline.com/story/news/2018/09/05/wilmington-new-castle-bike-trail-convince-commuters-opt-bike/1193736002/
Quote from: Tonytone on October 09, 2018, 03:23:20 PM
Quote from: froggie on October 05, 2018, 05:24:13 PM
^ I can think of several reasons why they aren't:
- First, it's not a full reconstruction. It's a combination of viaduct & deck repair plus replacing joints and the outer barriers.
- Reconstruction/rehab does not require a full environmental impact statement. A widening would.
- There are a large number of wetlands and wet lowlands south of downtown and near the Christiana River...right up to the edge of the fill that comprises the ground portions of I-95. Widening 95 would require filling in a large chunk of these lowlands, so you'd run into hydrology and environmental impacts.
- Between the NEC tracks, the ballfield, and other development, ROW is pretty tight in the vicinity of the viaduct.
- To handle logical termini for additional lanes plus retain shoulders, the SB I-495 bridge over NB I-95 would also have to be replaced.
I understand the amount of impact, but how do cities like Philly and NY build Highway tunnels with roads above that would make you not think there is a tunnel with a highway running under it because of the amount of houses, trees, grass etc thats around. if you cannot build outward you build up! Did america forget about all the great architecture it has built? Tunnels, buildings, Bridge-Tunnels! Are we saying forget building great things that will change the area for better so Ny and old cities will retain the reason for tourists to go spend money and see infrastructure that the U.S Government will never make again?
+100. Great post!
Quote from: Tonytone on October 09, 2018, 03:23:20 PM
Quote from: froggie on October 05, 2018, 05:24:13 PM
^ I can think of several reasons why they aren't:
- First, it's not a full reconstruction. It's a combination of viaduct & deck repair plus replacing joints and the outer barriers.
- Reconstruction/rehab does not require a full environmental impact statement. A widening would.
- There are a large number of wetlands and wet lowlands south of downtown and near the Christiana River...right up to the edge of the fill that comprises the ground portions of I-95. Widening 95 would require filling in a large chunk of these lowlands, so you'd run into hydrology and environmental impacts.
- Between the NEC tracks, the ballfield, and other development, ROW is pretty tight in the vicinity of the viaduct.
- To handle logical termini for additional lanes plus retain shoulders, the SB I-495 bridge over NB I-95 would also have to be replaced.
I understand the amount of impact, but how do cities like Philly and NY build Highway tunnels with roads above that would make you not think there is a tunnel with a highway running under it because of the amount of houses, trees, grass etc thats around. if you cannot build outward you build up! Did america forget about all the great architecture it has built? Tunnels, buildings, Bridge-Tunnels! Are we saying forget building great things that will change the area for better so Ny and old cities will retain the reason for tourists to go spend money and see infrastructure that the U.S Government will never make again?
Philly built highway tunnels? Where?
Please don't include the extended decks near Penns Landing as an example. It's literally a park above it. That's all. And that took years to evolve.
Something like that north of Baltimore have nothing to do with why 95 hasn't been expanded above it. It's nowhere close to a city-like area where they are begging for space. The issues froggie outlined won't be resolved with a cut-and-cover tunnel.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on October 09, 2018, 03:45:04 PM
Quote from: Tonytone on October 09, 2018, 03:23:20 PM
Quote from: froggie on October 05, 2018, 05:24:13 PM
^ I can think of several reasons why they aren't:
- First, it's not a full reconstruction. It's a combination of viaduct & deck repair plus replacing joints and the outer barriers.
- Reconstruction/rehab does not require a full environmental impact statement. A widening would.
- There are a large number of wetlands and wet lowlands south of downtown and near the Christiana River...right up to the edge of the fill that comprises the ground portions of I-95. Widening 95 would require filling in a large chunk of these lowlands, so you'd run into hydrology and environmental impacts.
- Between the NEC tracks, the ballfield, and other development, ROW is pretty tight in the vicinity of the viaduct.
- To handle logical termini for additional lanes plus retain shoulders, the SB I-495 bridge over NB I-95 would also have to be replaced.
I understand the amount of impact, but how do cities like Philly and NY build Highway tunnels with roads above that would make you not think there is a tunnel with a highway running under it because of the amount of houses, trees, grass etc thats around. if you cannot build outward you build up! Did america forget about all the great architecture it has built? Tunnels, buildings, Bridge-Tunnels! Are we saying forget building great things that will change the area for better so Ny and old cities will retain the reason for tourists to go spend money and see infrastructure that the U.S Government will never make again?
Philly built highway tunnels? Where?
Please don't include the extended decks near Penns Landing as an example. It's literally a park above it. That's all. And that took years to evolve.
Something like that north of Baltimore have nothing to do with why 95 hasn't been expanded above it. It's nowhere close to a city-like area where they are begging for space. The issues froggie outlined won't be resolved with a cut-and-cover tunnel.
https://www.google.com/maps/dir/39.9569331,-75.1545068/US-30,+Philadelphia,+PA+19103/@39.9589939,-75.166371,2272m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m8!4m7!1m0!1m5!1m1!1s0x89c6c6351533008d:0x766f341377ec4e62!2m2!1d-75.176456!2d39.9595752 (https://www.google.com/maps/dir/39.9569331,-75.1545068/US-30,+Philadelphia,+PA+19103/@39.9589939,-75.166371,2272m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m8!4m7!1m0!1m5!1m1!1s0x89c6c6351533008d:0x766f341377ec4e62!2m2!1d-75.176456!2d39.9595752)
Last time I checked 676 cuts right through the city and the roads above it doesn't even look like a highway is running right underneath. and I've been there in person and anyone who has, understands why I would say this.
^ That's not a tunnel. Not even close. And it was also a very expensive undertaking even by 1990 financial standards.
Quote from: froggie on October 09, 2018, 11:16:27 PM
^ That's not a tunnel. Not even close. And it was also a very expensive undertaking even by 1990 financial standards.
Its damn near close to one, close the top up and bang a tunnel. I think we know that the state dots just dont do big projects involving architecture anymore.
The state DOT's don't have that type of funding anymore. Back in the timeframe you're yearning for, we spent a much higher percentage of our GDP on transportation than we do now.
Quote from: Tonytone on October 09, 2018, 11:58:42 PM
Quote from: froggie on October 09, 2018, 11:16:27 PM
^ That's not a tunnel. Not even close. And it was also a very expensive undertaking even by 1990 financial standards.
Its damn near close to one, close the top up and bang a tunnel. I think we know that the state dots just dont do big projects involving architecture anymore.
no, it's not. it takes up every bit as much space as it would if it were elevated; it's just less visible.
even if you were to cover it and build ventilation, you wouldn't be able to put any significant structures over it unless they were fully supported on both ends - and nobody would be building something that size in Center City without a sublevel or two.
Quote from: Tonytone on October 09, 2018, 03:49:22 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on October 09, 2018, 03:45:04 PM
Quote from: Tonytone on October 09, 2018, 03:23:20 PM
Quote from: froggie on October 05, 2018, 05:24:13 PM
^ I can think of several reasons why they aren't:
- First, it's not a full reconstruction. It's a combination of viaduct & deck repair plus replacing joints and the outer barriers.
- Reconstruction/rehab does not require a full environmental impact statement. A widening would.
- There are a large number of wetlands and wet lowlands south of downtown and near the Christiana River...right up to the edge of the fill that comprises the ground portions of I-95. Widening 95 would require filling in a large chunk of these lowlands, so you'd run into hydrology and environmental impacts.
- Between the NEC tracks, the ballfield, and other development, ROW is pretty tight in the vicinity of the viaduct.
- To handle logical termini for additional lanes plus retain shoulders, the SB I-495 bridge over NB I-95 would also have to be replaced.
I understand the amount of impact, but how do cities like Philly and NY build Highway tunnels with roads above that would make you not think there is a tunnel with a highway running under it because of the amount of houses, trees, grass etc thats around. if you cannot build outward you build up! Did america forget about all the great architecture it has built? Tunnels, buildings, Bridge-Tunnels! Are we saying forget building great things that will change the area for better so Ny and old cities will retain the reason for tourists to go spend money and see infrastructure that the U.S Government will never make again?
Philly built highway tunnels? Where?
Please don't include the extended decks near Penns Landing as an example. It's literally a park above it. That's all. And that took years to evolve.
Something like that north of Baltimore have nothing to do with why 95 hasn't been expanded above it. It's nowhere close to a city-like area where they are begging for space. The issues froggie outlined won't be resolved with a cut-and-cover tunnel.
https://www.google.com/maps/dir/39.9569331,-75.1545068/US-30,+Philadelphia,+PA+19103/@39.9589939,-75.166371,2272m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m8!4m7!1m0!1m5!1m1!1s0x89c6c6351533008d:0x766f341377ec4e62!2m2!1d-75.176456!2d39.9595752 (https://www.google.com/maps/dir/39.9569331,-75.1545068/US-30,+Philadelphia,+PA+19103/@39.9589939,-75.166371,2272m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m8!4m7!1m0!1m5!1m1!1s0x89c6c6351533008d:0x766f341377ec4e62!2m2!1d-75.176456!2d39.9595752)
Last time I checked 676 cuts right through the city and the roads above it doesn't even look like a highway is running right underneath. and I've been there in person and anyone who has, understands why I would say this.
The closest you get to a tunnel-like structure is this 650 foot section of overpass https://goo.gl/maps/AB3HgjtAGz82 , the majority of which handles the Ben Franklin Parkway crossing at an angle. While I will grant you in this area you can be on top and not realize there's a highway underneath, that's hardly the definition of tunneling a highway under a city. The Vine Street Expressway goes in a straight line thru Philly from about 10th to 22nd Streets, and this is the only area that is somewhat covered (you can probably argue Pennypacker Park is as well, although that only takes up about 1/3rd of the block between 18th and 19th). On every other street, if you're walking over the highway on the sidewalk, you clearly can look thru the fence and see a highway.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on October 10, 2018, 08:01:34 AM
Quote from: Tonytone on October 09, 2018, 03:49:22 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on October 09, 2018, 03:45:04 PM
Quote from: Tonytone on October 09, 2018, 03:23:20 PM
Quote from: froggie on October 05, 2018, 05:24:13 PM
^ I can think of several reasons why they aren't:
- First, it's not a full reconstruction. It's a combination of viaduct & deck repair plus replacing joints and the outer barriers.
- Reconstruction/rehab does not require a full environmental impact statement. A widening would.
- There are a large number of wetlands and wet lowlands south of downtown and near the Christiana River...right up to the edge of the fill that comprises the ground portions of I-95. Widening 95 would require filling in a large chunk of these lowlands, so you'd run into hydrology and environmental impacts.
- Between the NEC tracks, the ballfield, and other development, ROW is pretty tight in the vicinity of the viaduct.
- To handle logical termini for additional lanes plus retain shoulders, the SB I-495 bridge over NB I-95 would also have to be replaced.
I understand the amount of impact, but how do cities like Philly and NY build Highway tunnels with roads above that would make you not think there is a tunnel with a highway running under it because of the amount of houses, trees, grass etc thats around. if you cannot build outward you build up! Did america forget about all the great architecture it has built? Tunnels, buildings, Bridge-Tunnels! Are we saying forget building great things that will change the area for better so Ny and old cities will retain the reason for tourists to go spend money and see infrastructure that the U.S Government will never make again?
Philly built highway tunnels? Where?
Please don't include the extended decks near Penns Landing as an example. It's literally a park above it. That's all. And that took years to evolve.
Something like that north of Baltimore have nothing to do with why 95 hasn't been expanded above it. It's nowhere close to a city-like area where they are begging for space. The issues froggie outlined won't be resolved with a cut-and-cover tunnel.
https://www.google.com/maps/dir/39.9569331,-75.1545068/US-30,+Philadelphia,+PA+19103/@39.9589939,-75.166371,2272m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m8!4m7!1m0!1m5!1m1!1s0x89c6c6351533008d:0x766f341377ec4e62!2m2!1d-75.176456!2d39.9595752 (https://www.google.com/maps/dir/39.9569331,-75.1545068/US-30,+Philadelphia,+PA+19103/@39.9589939,-75.166371,2272m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m8!4m7!1m0!1m5!1m1!1s0x89c6c6351533008d:0x766f341377ec4e62!2m2!1d-75.176456!2d39.9595752)
Last time I checked 676 cuts right through the city and the roads above it doesn't even look like a highway is running right underneath. and I've been there in person and anyone who has, understands why I would say this.
The closest you get to a tunnel-like structure is this 650 foot section of overpass https://goo.gl/maps/AB3HgjtAGz82 , the majority of which handles the Ben Franklin Parkway crossing at an angle. While I will grant you in this area you can be on top and not realize there's a highway underneath, that's hardly the definition of tunneling a highway under a city. The Vine Street Expressway goes in a straight line thru Philly from about 10th to 22nd Streets, and this is the only area that is somewhat covered (you can probably argue Pennypacker Park is as well, although that only takes up about 1/3rd of the block between 18th and 19th). On every other street, if you're walking over the highway on the sidewalk, you clearly can look thru the fence and see a highway.
Ok that is true, But this is planning at it's best, you wont find something like this anywhere else. Maybe after all the construction ceases on minor roads, they will think about the major roads that really need it, I wonder if roads would be better maintained if they were on wall street and stocks could be bought, A private business just like Prisons and now we have excellent roads that are better then New Jersey's :-D
Quote from: Tonytone on October 10, 2018, 12:28:33 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on October 10, 2018, 08:01:34 AM
Quote from: Tonytone on October 09, 2018, 03:49:22 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on October 09, 2018, 03:45:04 PM
Quote from: Tonytone on October 09, 2018, 03:23:20 PM
Quote from: froggie on October 05, 2018, 05:24:13 PM
^ I can think of several reasons why they aren't:
- First, it's not a full reconstruction. It's a combination of viaduct & deck repair plus replacing joints and the outer barriers.
- Reconstruction/rehab does not require a full environmental impact statement. A widening would.
- There are a large number of wetlands and wet lowlands south of downtown and near the Christiana River...right up to the edge of the fill that comprises the ground portions of I-95. Widening 95 would require filling in a large chunk of these lowlands, so you'd run into hydrology and environmental impacts.
- Between the NEC tracks, the ballfield, and other development, ROW is pretty tight in the vicinity of the viaduct.
- To handle logical termini for additional lanes plus retain shoulders, the SB I-495 bridge over NB I-95 would also have to be replaced.
I understand the amount of impact, but how do cities like Philly and NY build Highway tunnels with roads above that would make you not think there is a tunnel with a highway running under it because of the amount of houses, trees, grass etc thats around. if you cannot build outward you build up! Did america forget about all the great architecture it has built? Tunnels, buildings, Bridge-Tunnels! Are we saying forget building great things that will change the area for better so Ny and old cities will retain the reason for tourists to go spend money and see infrastructure that the U.S Government will never make again?
Philly built highway tunnels? Where?
Please don't include the extended decks near Penns Landing as an example. It's literally a park above it. That's all. And that took years to evolve.
Something like that north of Baltimore have nothing to do with why 95 hasn't been expanded above it. It's nowhere close to a city-like area where they are begging for space. The issues froggie outlined won't be resolved with a cut-and-cover tunnel.
https://www.google.com/maps/dir/39.9569331,-75.1545068/US-30,+Philadelphia,+PA+19103/@39.9589939,-75.166371,2272m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m8!4m7!1m0!1m5!1m1!1s0x89c6c6351533008d:0x766f341377ec4e62!2m2!1d-75.176456!2d39.9595752 (https://www.google.com/maps/dir/39.9569331,-75.1545068/US-30,+Philadelphia,+PA+19103/@39.9589939,-75.166371,2272m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m8!4m7!1m0!1m5!1m1!1s0x89c6c6351533008d:0x766f341377ec4e62!2m2!1d-75.176456!2d39.9595752)
Last time I checked 676 cuts right through the city and the roads above it doesn't even look like a highway is running right underneath. and I've been there in person and anyone who has, understands why I would say this.
The closest you get to a tunnel-like structure is this 650 foot section of overpass https://goo.gl/maps/AB3HgjtAGz82 , the majority of which handles the Ben Franklin Parkway crossing at an angle. While I will grant you in this area you can be on top and not realize there's a highway underneath, that's hardly the definition of tunneling a highway under a city. The Vine Street Expressway goes in a straight line thru Philly from about 10th to 22nd Streets, and this is the only area that is somewhat covered (you can probably argue Pennypacker Park is as well, although that only takes up about 1/3rd of the block between 18th and 19th). On every other street, if you're walking over the highway on the sidewalk, you clearly can look thru the fence and see a highway.
Ok that is true, But this is planning at it's best, you wont find something like this anywhere else. Maybe after all the construction ceases on minor roads, they will think about the major roads that really need it, I wonder if roads would be better maintained if they were on wall street and stocks could be bought, A private business just like Prisons and now we have excellent roads that are better then New Jersey's :-D
As long as a company can figure out a way to make money, they're more than welcome to have the road!
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on October 05, 2018, 11:33:47 AM
Though I still have yet to venture to the north east, reading this article about the chronic congestion this stretch of freeway suffers leads me to believe this is a major lost opportunity that they aren't significantly expanding this section as they plan to reconstruct it.
https://amp.delawareonline.com/amp/1382703002
Okay, I asked a similar question in a recent I-95/Wilmington, DE thread & I'll ask it here: what does that project
in Delaware have to do this I-95/Maryland thread topic?
Last time I checked, Gov. Hogan is only governor of Maryland and not Delaware.
Observation after reading the subsequent replies: this thread has veered way off-topic.
Quote from: PHLBOS on October 11, 2018, 12:06:06 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on October 05, 2018, 11:33:47 AM
Though I still have yet to venture to the north east, reading this article about the chronic congestion this stretch of freeway suffers leads me to believe this is a major lost opportunity that they aren't significantly expanding this section as they plan to reconstruct it.
https://amp.delawareonline.com/amp/1382703002
Okay, I asked a similar question in a recent I-95/Wilmington, DE thread & I'll ask it here: what does that project in Delaware have to do this I-95/Maryland thread topic?
Last time I checked, Gov. Hogan is only governor of Maryland and not Delaware.
Observation after reading the subsequent replies: this thread has veered way off-topic.
Thread drift. It is like rust or erosion. :-|
Quote from: Beltway on October 11, 2018, 03:35:23 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on October 11, 2018, 12:06:06 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on October 05, 2018, 11:33:47 AM
Though I still have yet to venture to the north east, reading this article about the chronic congestion this stretch of freeway suffers leads me to believe this is a major lost opportunity that they aren't significantly expanding this section as they plan to reconstruct it.
https://amp.delawareonline.com/amp/1382703002
Okay, I asked a similar question in a recent I-95/Wilmington, DE thread & I'll ask it here: what does that project in Delaware have to do this I-95/Maryland thread topic?
Last time I checked, Gov. Hogan is only governor of Maryland and not Delaware.
Observation after reading the subsequent replies: this thread has veered way off-topic.
Thread drift. It is like rust or erosion. :-|
And sometimes too pervasive to cure. Hopefully after this people can get back to discussing I-95 in Maryland.
I really don't understand why traffic is so bad from the I-495 beltway until MD-100, exit 43.
Traffic on the beltway is understandable because it is in a very densely populated area with many exits, merges, curves, and short shoulders.
However, I-95 between I-495 and MD 100 has a HUGE right of way, a large median, it is very straight, and has only a few spaced out interchanges.
Thus traffic is not bad there due to the road design, and it is mostly trees.
I gotta think traffic is so bad there because of the funneling effect of I-495/ICC/Rt 32/Rt 100/I-195 emptying out.
That, or does NSA/Ft Meade REALLy add that much traffic?
All I know is, try driving NB on I-95 at rush hour, even at 3 PM, and it is very rough.
Ceases to amaze me that I-95 flows BETTER north of the Baltimore Beltway some 5 miles from the center of Baltimore than it does in the middle of Howard County. It defies logic.
Quote from: bluecountry on November 03, 2018, 03:58:31 PM
I really don't understand why traffic is so bad from the I-495 beltway until MD-100, exit 43.
Someone dig up the volume? Probably over 120,000 AADT. Plus heavy B-W area commuting in peak hours. That would be the explanation.
Quote from: Beltway on November 03, 2018, 04:24:01 PM
Quote from: bluecountry on November 03, 2018, 03:58:31 PM
I really don't understand why traffic is so bad from the I-495 beltway until MD-100, exit 43.
Someone dig up the volume? Probably over 120,000 AADT. Plus heavy B-W area commuting in peak hours. That would be the explanation.
It hovers around 200k between 495 and 895, not changing too much at 100. The Capital Beltway has similar volumes between MD 4 and I-95.
Quote from: Roadsguy on November 03, 2018, 05:03:14 PM
Quote from: Beltway on November 03, 2018, 04:24:01 PM
Quote from: bluecountry on November 03, 2018, 03:58:31 PM
I really don't understand why traffic is so bad from the I-495 beltway until MD-100, exit 43.
Someone dig up the volume? Probably over 120,000 AADT. Plus heavy B-W area commuting in peak hours. That would be the explanation.
It hovers around 200k between 495 and 895, not changing too much at 100. The Capital Beltway has similar volumes between MD 4 and I-95.
That explains the congestion!! :spin:
From 2017 figures - https://www.roads.maryland.gov/Traffic_Volume_Maps/Traffic_Volume_Maps.pdf#page=1&zoom=100
I-95 just inside I-695 - 186k
I-95 btw MD 43 and MD 152 - 166k
I-95 btw MD 152 and MD 24 - 155k
I-95 btw MD 24 and MD 543 - 125k
I-95 btw MD 543 and MD 22 - 105k
I-95 btw MD 22 and MD 155 - 89k
compare with:
I-95 btw MD 100 and I-895 - 206k
I-95 btw MD 175 and MD 100 - 209k
I-95 btw MD 32 and MD 175 - 216k
I-95 btw MD 216 and MD 32 - 204k
I-95 btw MD 198 and MD 216 - 200k
I-95 btw MD 200 and MD 198 - 206k
I-95 btw MD 212 and MD 200 - 219k
I-95 btw I-495 and MD 212 - 199k
I-495 w of I-95 is 253k and e of I-95 is 211k, with 495 traffic neither entering/leaving 95 there at 144k.
I didn't realize that I-95 between I-495 and I-695 carried that much traffic, around 200,000+ AADT, which is in the same range as that of the Capital Beltway.
I-95 has multiple relief routes, the 4-lane freeway B-W Parkway, the 4-lane arterial US-1, and US-29 with 4 and 6 lane sections some of which are freeway and others which are arterial.
So even with 8 lanes I-95 will see lots of congested times.
^ Although I don't have a lot of recent experience with "95 between the Beltways" (in part because I only get down once a year these days), my earlier-this-decade experience is that 95 will still generally move unless there's a crash or inclement weather.
Quote from: Beltway on November 04, 2018, 03:33:20 PM
I didn't realize that I-95 between I-495 and I-695 carried that much traffic, around 200,000+ AADT, which is in the same range as that of the Capital Beltway.
I-95 has multiple relief routes, the 4-lane freeway B-W Parkway, the 4-lane arterial US-1, and US-29 with 4 and 6 lane sections some of which are freeway and others which are arterial.
So even with 8 lanes I-95 will see lots of congested times.
That's exactly right. There are many decent options and traffic can use whichever route works better. BW Pkwy is closer to more job sites (BWI, Fort Meade) and is generally narrower so it tends to back up more. I-95 gets a lot of interregional traffic. US 29 seems to be a great shortcut for local traffic that is aware of it, but there are signals south of MD 198.
From my experience, I-95 is just not as crowded as 270, BW Pkwy, or the Beltway and does move well for most of the day and usually maintains respectable speed even at the height of rush hour.
Quote from: mrsman on November 04, 2018, 06:16:05 PM
From my experience, I-95 is just not as crowded as 270, BW Pkwy, or the Beltway and does move well for most of the day and usually maintains respectable speed even at the height of rush hour.
The Baltimore-Washington Parkway is usually the "first to fail" in terms of severe traffic congestion - because it is either four or six lanes total all the way from the Tuxedo area of Prince George's County to South Russell Street in Baltimore City.
For I-95 drivers on long trips, especially persons using GPS that does not include congestion feedback, they are nearly all routed onto the Parkway, which causes it to carry more traffic than it might otherwise. And then there's the matter of employment centers at Fort Meade in Anne Arundel County (biggest in the state); BWI also in Anne Arundel; downtown Baltimore City; and at the USDA Henry Wallace Beltsville Agriculture Research Center (and other federal agencies within that footprint, including the U.S. Secret Service facility on Powder Mill Road, the Food and Drug Administration and especially the NASA Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt), all in Prince George's County.
Quote from: froggie on November 04, 2018, 05:31:52 PM
^ Although I don't have a lot of recent experience with "95 between the Beltways" (in part because I only get down once a year these days), my earlier-this-decade experience is that 95 will still generally move unless there's a crash or inclement weather.
Of course, you need for there not to be a crash on not just I-95, but also US 29 and the B-W Pkwy. If all 3 are crash free then 95 is crowded but moving...
Its really too crowded and the volume warrants an expansion of I-95, especially given how much of that stretch has so much of a large median.
Can't understand why this isn't a priority.
A perusal of Google Maps indicates that typical rush hour traffic on the beltway is definitively worse than on I-95 between the beltways, in spite of the similar volumes. Particularly earlier in the week (on Thursdays and Fridays congestion on I-95 gets closer in severity to that on the beltway).
The obvious reason is that the beltway, especially west of the I-95 interchange, has generally inferior geometry - sharper and more numerous curves, shorter accel/decel lanes, short weaves that are not given C/D roads, tight loop ramps, narrower left shoulder, etc.
^ Geometry's part of it, but the Beltway does consistently have more traffic than I-95, typically about 10-20K vpd more on the leg between 270 and 95, and 40-50K more between the 270 Spur and the Legion Bridge. 270 between the Beltway and Rockville also has a bit more than 95, with the segment just north of the Beltway split being the busiest road segment in all of Maryland.
Quote from: Duke87 on November 22, 2018, 09:04:41 AM
A perusal of Google Maps indicates that typical rush hour traffic on the beltway is definitively worse than on I-95 between the beltways, in spite of the similar volumes. Particularly earlier in the week (on Thursdays and Fridays congestion on I-95 gets closer in severity to that on the beltway).
The obvious reason is that the beltway, especially west of the I-95 interchange, has generally inferior geometry - sharper and more numerous curves, shorter accel/decel lanes, short weaves that are not given C/D roads, tight loop ramps, narrower left shoulder, etc.
I-95 between the DC and Baltimore beltway is always crowded, even when 'free flowing.'
It just really needs to be like the NJTP is in Central Jersey with 6 lanes in each direction.
Quote from: bluecountry on April 28, 2019, 06:51:16 PM
Quote from: Duke87 on November 22, 2018, 09:04:41 AM
A perusal of Google Maps indicates that typical rush hour traffic on the beltway is definitively worse than on I-95 between the beltways, in spite of the similar volumes. Particularly earlier in the week (on Thursdays and Fridays congestion on I-95 gets closer in severity to that on the beltway).
The obvious reason is that the beltway, especially west of the I-95 interchange, has generally inferior geometry - sharper and more numerous curves, shorter accel/decel lanes, short weaves that are not given C/D roads, tight loop ramps, narrower left shoulder, etc.
I-95 between the DC and Baltimore beltway is always crowded, even when 'free flowing.'
It just really needs to be like the NJTP is in Central Jersey with 6 lanes in each direction.
It is often crowded but usually moves OK unless there's an incident or its at true peak on that segment of it. I think the bad BW Parkway pavement recently may have nudged the traffic numbers a bit higher than usual, though.