Virginia

[Jmiles32]

Would the I-664 and VA-164 widening projects be a continuation of the current 2 GP/1 HOT lane configuration in each direction that is currently being built on the southside section of I-64?

Unfortunately, for at least I-664 as of now, yes.

VDOT is currently conducting a study to create an Environmental Impact Statement for the Bowers Hill Interchange and the I-664 corridor between Bowers Hill and the MMMBT. A public meeting was held in March 2021 that presented various alternatives that involved constructing 1 or 2 HO/T lanes in each direction along with alternatives that would construct 1 or 2 general purpose lanes in each direction. There was a public comment period, and the response from an overwhelming majority of people was that their was preference for general purpose widening with an emphasis on no tolls. Anyways, being this is VDOT, and the fact the HRTPO has locked in an "Express Lane Network" that is to be built out around the entire Hampton Roads Beltway (I-64 / I-664) and up I-64 to Jefferson Ave in Newport News, they threw that right out the window and eliminated all general purpose alternatives from further study. Their reasoning? It "didn't meet the purpose and need" which indicates that one of the goals is to "provide alternative travel choices". Essentially, this study was ultimately going to be a HO/T lane addition project, but they couldn't brand it as such. I predicted from the beginning they would go this route, and sure enough they did.

See this presentation for specifics - https://www.hrtpo.org/uploads/docs/042321%20BHIWG%2005_Presentation%20Improvement%20Study.pdf

The idea does not seem popular in this region, nor does it make sense outside maybe I-64 in Norfolk where it's currently being built - I will also add I could see viability and a potential way to help fund for a complete reconstruction of I-264 similar to how I-495 was done in Northern Virginia or currently I-66 (3 general purpose + 2 HO/T each way, every interchange completely reconstructed). I-64 south of I-264 Norfolk into Virginia Beach and Chesapeake all the way to I-464 has 3 general purpose lanes and 1 HOV lane in each direction and has since the 90s and almost never has any congestion issues - and of course these HOV lanes will be converted to HO/T (the segment in Chesapeake and Virginia Beach is already under construction) but at least there will still be 3 general purpose lanes retained. The same applies for I-64 on the Peninsula north of I-664. The stretches of I-64 and I-664 that are still 4 lanes in Chesapeake see moderate congestion during peak hours, but the volumes are low enough (lower than the previous mentioned segments due to a large percentage of traffic exiting at VA-168 / US-17 South) that if you simply added one or two general purpose lanes, traffic would be fine, and if the previous mentioned segments are any indication, it would work for decades to come. But instead, we'll see a transition from that nice wide open highway crammed down to still 2 congested general purpose lanes and the occasional car in the Express Lane. And of course, to make it better, they had an original policy that the HO/T lanes would only be tolled during peak hours, similar to the existing reversible segment, but they have instead changed on that and mandated they be tolled 24/7. Soon enough, they'll change the policy on the existing ones too to be "consistent". It's ridiculous honestly, and I question how well it will help traffic problems more than general purpose widening would do - but who knows. It's what we're stuck with and clearly "public input" is worthless - they blatantly admitted from that I-664 study and the above linked presentation.

Here's something that I just thought of; since it appears that VDOT isn't planning to add anymore GP lanes to southside regardless, why not just make all of the HOT lane projects there a PP3 deal? Then not only would these projects happen sooner, but VDOT would also save a ton of money that could otherwise be used to expediate other important projects such as the further widening of I-64 on the Peninsula and proper interchange improvements at Bowers Hill, Oak Grove, and I-264.

Longer term, I think that it makes sense to widen all of I-81 from north of I-66 to the West Virginia state line.

Agreed considering West Virginia is eventually going to get to that point, and honestly, long term, VDOT should be planning for a full widening of all 325 miles from Tennessee to West Virginia. Nobody is saying it's going to get done immediately, but the fact they aren't even at least proposals or concepts on a map for the majority of rural areas is sad. I agree with the principle of addressing the major chokepoints first, but then they plan to just stop. Keep it going, 6 lanes throughout should be the next step. The whole corridor in all honesty is a bottleneck. The peak weekend volumes along with just the sheer amount of trucks all year round clearly warrants a continuous 3rd lane.

As someone who travels on a majority of I-81 in Virginia much more frequently now, I would argue that not all of the 325 miles needs widening. In fact, I actually think that the Interstate I-81 Improvement Program did a pretty good job project need wise with perhaps only two exceptions; not including southbound widening from Exit 137 to Exit 128 and pretty much screwing over the Winchester area. The widening from Exit 313 to 317 (almost wasn't even a project in the first place) does not go far enough and indeed should extend 13 miles south and 6 miles north. Extending the widening south to Exit 307 now would go a long way in getting that done. Ultimately, twenty plus years down the line, I would not be surprised if development between Winchester, Martinsburg, and Hagerstown pretty much fills in and you have seemingly have one 50 mile metropolitan area stretching from I-66 to the Pennsylvania state line in which 6 lanes the whole way would surely be needed.

I also think that some of the money could be used to help construct either the first section of the VA-37 eastern extension or the Exit 307 relocation project.

What are these projects?

https://www.fcva.us/departments/planning-development/transportation/road-plans-transportation-comp-plans
https://www.fcva.us/home/showpublisheddocument/11561/636214603255330000
https://www.fcva.us/home/showpublisheddocument/11557/637459610817330000
https://www.winchesterstar.com/winchester_star/frederick-panel-discusses-county-road-improvement-priorities/article_c6367f72-33f0-515a-bd0c-7092904b4ede.html

Two other major interstate projects, both unfunded, involve further improvements to I-81 exit 310 and relocating the I-81 exit 307 interchange near Stephens City. Town officials have stressed the need to relocate exit 307 to reduce traffic congestion in Stephens City. Relocating the exit would cost an estimated $241 million.

The top primary road projects are related to the four-phase extension of the Va. 37 bypass, which will loop around Winchester once completed. The project has been on the county's wish list for years, but its more than $770 million cost has kept it from getting off the ground.

I believe that both projects, the Exit 307 relocation and the first phase of the VA-37 bypass (to US-522) were submitted to smart scale at some point but did not score well. Since then, I think that the first phase of the VA-37 bypass has now been even further shortened to only extend to Warrior Drive. Also IMO that $770 million estimate to complete the whole thing seems low.

[cpzilliacus]

As someone who travels on a majority of I-81 in Virginia much more frequently now, I would argue that not all of the 325 miles needs widening. In fact, I actually think that the Interstate I-81 Improvement Program did a pretty good job project need wise with perhaps only two exceptions; not including southbound widening from Exit 137 to Exit 128 and pretty much screwing over the Winchester area. The widening from Exit 313 to 317 (almost wasn't even a project in the first place) does not go far enough and indeed should extend 13 miles south and 6 miles north. Extending the widening south to Exit 307 now would go a long way in getting that done. Ultimately, twenty plus years down the line, I would not be surprised if development between Winchester, Martinsburg, and Hagerstown pretty much fills in and you have seemingly have one 50 mile metropolitan area stretching from I-66 to the Pennsylvania state line in which 6 lanes the whole way would surely be needed.

I agree with the above.  In a perfect world, I-81 would be at least six lanes all the way from Bristol, Virginia in the south to the junction of I-81 and I-80 north of Hazleton in Luzerne County, Pennsylvania.  The I-81 interchanges at I-77 (both of them), I-64 (also both of them), I-66, I-70, I-78 and I-81 would become more truck friendly, and the breezewood at I-76 (Penn Pike) in Carlisle would be remediated.

[Rothman]

As someone who travels on a majority of I-81 in Virginia much more frequently now, I would argue that not all of the 325 miles needs widening. In fact, I actually think that the Interstate I-81 Improvement Program did a pretty good job project need wise with perhaps only two exceptions; not including southbound widening from Exit 137 to Exit 128 and pretty much screwing over the Winchester area. The widening from Exit 313 to 317 (almost wasn't even a project in the first place) does not go far enough and indeed should extend 13 miles south and 6 miles north. Extending the widening south to Exit 307 now would go a long way in getting that done. Ultimately, twenty plus years down the line, I would not be surprised if development between Winchester, Martinsburg, and Hagerstown pretty much fills in and you have seemingly have one 50 mile metropolitan area stretching from I-66 to the Pennsylvania state line in which 6 lanes the whole way would surely be needed.

I agree with the above.  In a perfect world, I-81 would be at least six lanes all the way from Bristol, Virginia in the south to the junction of I-81 and I-80 north of Hazleton in Luzerne County, Pennsylvania.  The I-81 interchanges at I-77 (both of them), I-64 (also both of them), I-66, I-70, I-78 and I-81 would become more truck friendly, and the breezewood at I-76 (Penn Pike) in Carlisle would be remediated.

I don't know.  The stretch south of I-77 seems fine as is. 

[74/171FAN]

As someone who travels on a majority of I-81 in Virginia much more frequently now, I would argue that not all of the 325 miles needs widening. In fact, I actually think that the Interstate I-81 Improvement Program did a pretty good job project need wise with perhaps only two exceptions; not including southbound widening from Exit 137 to Exit 128 and pretty much screwing over the Winchester area. The widening from Exit 313 to 317 (almost wasn't even a project in the first place) does not go far enough and indeed should extend 13 miles south and 6 miles north. Extending the widening south to Exit 307 now would go a long way in getting that done. Ultimately, twenty plus years down the line, I would not be surprised if development between Winchester, Martinsburg, and Hagerstown pretty much fills in and you have seemingly have one 50 mile metropolitan area stretching from I-66 to the Pennsylvania state line in which 6 lanes the whole way would surely be needed.

I agree with the above.  In a perfect world, I-81 would be at least six lanes all the way from Bristol, Virginia in the south to the junction of I-81 and I-80 north of Hazleton in Luzerne County, Pennsylvania.  The I-81 interchanges at I-77 (both of them), I-64 (also both of them), I-66, I-70, I-78 and I-81 would become more truck friendly, and the breezewood at I-76 (Penn Pike) in Carlisle would be remediated.

I don't know.  The stretch south of I-77 seems fine as is. 

The stretch of I-81 between I-78 and I-80 gets less traffic than the rest of the corridor.  However, I-81 really needs 6+ lanes from I-80 all the way to at least the northern end of I-476.  Anyway back to Virginia...

How long has there been a push to realign VA 277?  (My fictional VA renumbering plans actually have VA 277 becoming part of an extended US 48.)

[Alps]

As someone who travels on a majority of I-81 in Virginia much more frequently now, I would argue that not all of the 325 miles needs widening. In fact, I actually think that the Interstate I-81 Improvement Program did a pretty good job project need wise with perhaps only two exceptions; not including southbound widening from Exit 137 to Exit 128 and pretty much screwing over the Winchester area. The widening from Exit 313 to 317 (almost wasn't even a project in the first place) does not go far enough and indeed should extend 13 miles south and 6 miles north. Extending the widening south to Exit 307 now would go a long way in getting that done. Ultimately, twenty plus years down the line, I would not be surprised if development between Winchester, Martinsburg, and Hagerstown pretty much fills in and you have seemingly have one 50 mile metropolitan area stretching from I-66 to the Pennsylvania state line in which 6 lanes the whole way would surely be needed.

I agree with the above.  In a perfect world, I-81 would be at least six lanes all the way from Bristol, Virginia in the south to the junction of I-81 and I-80 north of Hazleton in Luzerne County, Pennsylvania.  The I-81 interchanges at I-77 (both of them), I-64 (also both of them), I-66, I-70, I-78 and I-81 would become more truck friendly, and the breezewood at I-76 (Penn Pike) in Carlisle would be remediated.

I don't know.  The stretch south of I-77 seems fine as is. 

The stretch of I-81 between I-78 and I-80 gets less traffic than the rest of the corridor.  However, I-81 really needs 6+ lanes from I-80 all the way to at least the northern end of I-476.  Anyway back to Virginia...

How long has there been a push to realign VA 277?  (My fictional VA renumbering plans actually have VA 277 becoming part of an extended US 48.)

I was gonna say, 78 contributes the majority of traffic at the 81 junction, so the 6-laning can end there.

[Bitmapped]

Two other major interstate projects, both unfunded, involve further improvements to I-81 exit 310 and relocating the I-81 exit 307 interchange near Stephens City. Town officials have stressed the need to relocate exit 307 to reduce traffic congestion in Stephens City. Relocating the exit would cost an estimated $241 million.

$241 million to relocate a minor interchange? Huh?

[74/171FAN]

Two other major interstate projects, both unfunded, involve further improvements to I-81 exit 310 and relocating the I-81 exit 307 interchange near Stephens City. Town officials have stressed the need to relocate exit 307 to reduce traffic congestion in Stephens City. Relocating the exit would cost an estimated $241 million.

$241 million to relocate a minor interchange? Huh?

I would not consider that a minor interchange.  VA 277 is a good alternative to access US 340 and VA 7 without going through WInchester.  2019 VDOT Traffic Data shows a minimum AADT of 8500.

Also VA 277 is being widened to four lanes from I-81 to SR 641 right now.

[VTGoose]

I don't know.  The stretch south of I-77 seems fine as is.

For the most part it is. Compared to other sections it is relatively flat, has a lower traffic volume, and fewer major wrecks that sections further north. In the widening scheme, most of that section could be at the bottom of the list, with perhaps the area around Abingdon getting additional lanes first. There is a combination of through and local traffic there that would benefit from an additional lane in each direction.

Bruce in Blacksburg

[hbelkins]

There are a few hills around Marion that could stand to have a passing lane added -- basically any stretch that has the signage that any vehicle traveling at less than the posted speed limit must use the right lane.

[1995hoo]

https://twitter.com/VaDOT/status/1393250683709759489

Larger image:

[cpzilliacus]

I don't know.  The stretch south of I-77 seems fine as is. 

I am speaking of the interchanges, not the mainline of I-81.  The I-77 N interchange in Wytheville (I-81 Exit 72) is has pretty sharp ramps and the bridge that carries I-81 over I-77 there is not in great shape either.

The I-77 S interchange (I-81 Exit 81) is better for reasons not clear to me (age perhaps?).

[WillWeaverRVA]

https://www.facebook.com/ChesterfieldVA/posts/10158520629394862

After almost four wacky years, the project to widen Chesterfield County SR 720's (Lucks Lane) remaining 2-lane segment to 4-lanes divided has been completed and opened to traffic.

The widening was planned to be completed in August 2019, but the original contractor, Fielder's Choice Enterprises, understaffed and eventually abandoned the project. The company has since been suspended from bidding on VDOT projects, and no longer exists (it was acquired by Caton Construction Group). Fielder's Choice did strange things such as install a traffic signal at Lucks Lane and Walton Bluff Parkway before actually widening the road. They abandoned the project in mid-2020 and another contractor was brought in to complete it.

SR 720 is now a 4-lane facility throughout and is now a pretty good toll-free alternative to VA 76 for reaching VA 288 from Courthouse Road (SR 653).

[74/171FAN]

https://www.facebook.com/ChesterfieldVA/posts/10158520629394862

After almost four wacky years, the project to widen Chesterfield County SR 720's (Lucks Lane) remaining 2-lane segment to 4-lanes divided has been completed and opened to traffic.

The widening was planned to be completed in August 2019, but the original contractor, Fielder's Choice Enterprises, understaffed and eventually abandoned the project. The company has since been suspended from bidding on VDOT projects, and no longer exists (it was acquired by Caton Construction Group). Fielder's Choice did strange things such as install a traffic signal at Lucks Lane and Walton Bluff Parkway before actually widening the road. They abandoned the project in mid-2020 and another contractor was brought in to complete it.

SR 720 is now a 4-lane facility throughout and is now a pretty good toll-free alternative to VA 76 for reaching VA 288 from Courthouse Road (SR 653).

I need to drive that (along with SR 711) the next time I am in the area.

[plain]

It's about time too. I figured it had something to do with the contractors as VDOT projects in the Richmond District usually doesn't take that long. I'll go take a look at the finished product later this afternoon.

[sprjus4]

Now, I've seen cars do this, but never expected it from a truck.

https://twitter.com/NorfolkVA/status/1395432925575974916

Here are the plans:

[plain]

Wow!!! What in the entire actual non-fictional fuck was he thinking?? If that was a Jersey wall there instead of grass he wouldn't have ever made it.

[Alps]

Now, I've seen cars do this, but never expected it from a truck.

[tweet]1395432925575974916[/tweet]

Here are the plans:

Why is every single vehicle going that way...

[1995hoo]

Why is every single vehicle going that way...

Monkey see, monkey do.

[sprjus4]

Why is every single vehicle going that way...

If you're asking why they're on the off-ramp as opposed to the on-ramp, it's because they close the on-ramp during heavy congestion to deter drivers from getting off at Exit 273 4th View St, cutting down Tidewater Dr through the Ocean View community, then getting on right before the ramp.

But drivers frequently, as seen in the image, just simply illegally use the off-ramp to jump on anyways and avoid the gate. Very dangerous.

[jakeroot]

But drivers frequently, as seen in the image, just simply illegally use the off-ramp to jump on anyways and avoid the gate. Very dangerous.

Then the easiest change would have been to remove the ramp gate. Queue jumping is annoying, but driving the wrong way onto a freeway is far worse.

Here's an easy fix: install a ramp meter with a fixed (long!) interval that operates during peak hours. Queue jumpers will quickly realize that they lose time, and they won't do it anymore. Then, every ramp is open as before but without any queue jumping. Everyone wins, especially residents, who now don't have to back-track to 4th View to go north.

[1995hoo]

Why do you assume they'll obey the ramp meter?

[jakeroot]

Why do you assume they'll obey the ramp meter?

Why assume drivers would ignore it? Ramp meters are very common across the US, and I'm not aware of compliance issues to the level of "we may as well take the meter out".

It's occasional red light runner versus wrong-way drivers versus total ramp closure. My vote still goes for the first option.

[sprjus4]

Presentation from the May 20th HRTPO meeting regarding the upcoming Hampton Roads Gateways Study.

Introduction
Improvements have been proposed for many of the corridors that provide access to and from Hampton Roads.
- Widening I-64 between Richmond and Williamsburg
- Replacing all or portions of US Route 58 and US Route 460 with limited-access facilities
- Replacing portions of US Route 17 and US Route 64 with limited-access facilities (I-87)
- Because of the importance of these gateways to the vitality of Hampton Roads, HRTPO will be preparing a study to compare proposed improvements to these gateways based on the impact on the region.

Major Regional Gateways
- VA Route 168
- US Route 17 (Proposed I-87)
- US Route 58
- US Route 460
- I-64 West
- US Route 17 North
- US Route 13 North

Existing Travel Characteristics
I-64 from I-295 to I-664 (Coliseum)
- via I-64

Distance

% Limited Access

Travel Time

Average Speed

64 miles

100%

55 mins

70.0 MPH

Hampton Roads to Raleigh Routes
- via US-58 / I-95

Distance

% Limited Access

Travel Time

Average Speed

178 miles

75%

2 hr 41 mins

66.2 MPH

- via US-17 / US-64 (Proposed I-87)

Distance

% Limited Access

Travel Time

Average Speed

194 miles

66%

2 hr 57 mins

65.6 MPH

Proposed Study Elements
Identify corridors serving outside areas
- Compare:
     - The current usage of highways by area served:
          - Total vehicle volumes
          - Truck volumes
          - Trucks serving the port
     - Areas by port-related origins/destinations
     - Current travel times for highways
     - Future travel times for highways based on future scenarios

Proposed Study Elements
- Identify planned improvements by corridor
- Consider other measures such as safety and economic development opportunities.
- Prioritize investments based on overall impact for our region
- Consider overall impact for our region
     - Job creation
     - Economic impacts
     - Port as an economic driver
     - Quality of life
- Coordination with HRPDC

Presentation: https://www.hrtpo.org/uploads/docs/052021%20TPO%2007_Presentation%20FY%202022%20UPWP%20-%20Hampton%20Roads%20Regional%20Gateways.pdf

[18 wheel warrior]

Why assume drivers would ignore it? Ramp meters are very common across the US, and I'm not aware of compliance issues to the level of "we may as well take the meter out".

It's occasional red light runner versus wrong-way drivers versus total ramp closure. My vote still goes for the first option.

Meters would be of no use when tunnel bound traffic is backed up beyond 4th View St, often as far as Granby St (6 miles), sometimes even longer!

Residents in Willoughby don't want the traffic on W. Ocean View jamming up their final approach to home. The gate closes when tunnel traffic is backed up. The self privilege class who think they are above waiting in traffic with everyone else is the problem. Trucks aren't even permitted on WB W. Ocean View. The Penn-Ohio driver was likely unfamiliar with the area and was stuck in the wrong lane forcing the driver there. I'd never seen a truck driver do that before. Interesting the city used that photo to make its point.

I've often suggested that VDOT install "wrong way" spikes in the pavement to prevent these alpha henrys from driving up the offramp. This ramp needs to stay open for overheight vehicles to exit and loop around to re-enter the interstate on the other side.  The problem would be solved after word gets out that tires will explode if one tries to bypass the stopped traffic. Probably much cheaper than their "solution".

[kernals12]

https://twitter.com/VaDOT/status/1393250683709759489

Larger image:

Muh induced demand