Virginia

[wriddle082]

https://publicinput.com/Portal/N2538

Map of the improvements: https://rkk.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=e042a03eb7b64af7bd6499bccce87fab

The preferred alternative for the Bowers Hill Interchange Study is Alternative C, which adds one managed lane and a part-time drivable shoulder in each direction on I-664, which is consistent with the other managed lanes projects happening around the region.

I feel like improvements should focus more on US 58 than I-664.  The US 58 portion of the Suffolk Bypass needs at least three lanes in each direction, and the improvements that recently started just west of the bypass need to be continued further west to at least the Suffolk/Southampton line.  The truck traffic along this stretch going to/from the Port of Virginia to/from I-95 and I-85 is starting to become unbearable through Suffolk.  Also, they need to reconstruct the ancient I-95/US 58 cloverleaf in Emporia, but that's probably asking for too much.

[plain]

I-664 definitely could use an additional lane (each direction), I drive it enough to know it's in trouble. But there's still going to be that rush hour bottleneck at the MMMBT...

[kernals12]

https://publicinput.com/Portal/N2538

Map of the improvements: https://rkk.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=e042a03eb7b64af7bd6499bccce87fab

The preferred alternative for the Bowers Hill Interchange Study is Alternative C, which adds one managed lane and a part-time drivable shoulder in each direction on I-664, which is consistent with the other managed lanes projects happening around the region.

And it acknowledges the reality of the bottleneck at the MMMBT.

[sprjus4]

I-664 definitely could use an additional lane (each direction), I drive it enough to know it's in trouble. But there's still going to be that rush hour bottleneck at the MMMBT...

Unfortunately, that lane is going to merely an express / HOT lane. It is in line with what VDOT is doing in the Hampton Roads region for any new widening projects.

I-664 would function perfectly with 6 or 8 general purpose lanes, and before any induced demand argument arises, take a look at many 8 lane urban segments in the region that flow 65-70+ mph during rush hour without any problems and carry 100,000+ AADT.

[kernals12]

I-664 definitely could use an additional lane (each direction), I drive it enough to know it's in trouble. But there's still going to be that rush hour bottleneck at the MMMBT...

Unfortunately, that lane is going to merely an express / HOT lane. It is in line with what VDOT is doing in the Hampton Roads region for any new widening projects.

I-664 would function perfectly with 6 or 8 general purpose lanes, and before any induced demand argument arises, take a look at many 8 lane urban segments in the region that flow 65-70+ mph during rush hour without any problems and carry 100,000+ AADT.

Is the HRBT just chopped liver to you?

[sprjus4]

^ The HRBT is the exact same thing.

[sprjus4]

I feel like improvements should focus more on US 58 than I-664.  The US 58 portion of the Suffolk Bypass needs at least three lanes in each direction,

It's questionable that the entire bypass needs 6 lanes, though I can certainly understand east of either the US-460 or VA-10/32 interchanges.

The AADT between US-460 and VA-32 is 45,000, increasing to 55,000 east of there, then dropping back to around 47,000 east of VA-642. This is likely due to the fact the US-58 bypass is the only crossing of the Nansemond River in miles either direction. A good "small" project could be to add an auxiliary lane between VA-32 and VA-642 which would include widening / replacing the bridges over the river. That would cover roughly 1 mile. The next segment would be east of VA-642 to the eastern end of the bypass, around 2 miles, tying into the existing 6 lane arterial segment.

The need west of VA-32 or US-460 is certainly less, that stretch only carrying around 40,000 AADT which is plenty adequate on a 4 lane freeway. Any backups are caused due to the arterial segment to the west queuing, not the freeway itself.

Thankfully, the busiest portion of US-58, the stretch between Suffolk and Bowers Hill, was built out to 6 lanes in the 1970s and is more than adequate lane wise. Access control is another problem - though not nearly as big especially congestion wise, though it's slowly getting fixed. A flyover / interchange at the SPSA Regional Landfill is planned to begin in 2026 which would eliminate a dangerous left turn for trucks from the west to the facility, that currently have to cross 3 high-speed lanes of traffic.

The city of Chesapeake is pursuing a project in the near term that would add a series of RCUTs and close some median crossings closer to the airport just west of Bowers Hill.
https://smartportal.virginiahb2.org/#/public/applications/2022/smartScale/view/F30-0000007226-R01

Included in that link is a study that recommends constructing a full diamond interchange in the airport vicinity in the long term.

and the improvements that recently started just west of the bypass need to be continued further west to at least the Suffolk/Southampton line.  The truck traffic along this stretch going to/from the Port of Virginia to/from I-95 and I-85 is starting to become unbearable through Suffolk.

It's also questionable if the ongoing 6 lane arterial widening needs to extend beyond its current terminus. While that area is an issue, a true long term solution is needed - an interstate grade facility on new location bypassing that entire segment between Suffolk and Holland.

VDOT completed a study for the US-58 corridor between the western end of the Suffolk bypass and west of I-95 a few years ago. While recommendations were largely limited to spot upgrades such as innovative intersections, closing some crossings, etc. two pages of the final study report were dedicated to analyzing the potential of upgrading / relocating the entire corridor to interstate standards. VDOT estimated around $2.3 - $3.5 billion for such a project.

Additionally, the HRTPO has completed a "gateway analysis" over the past few months which analyzed three major potential projects - upgrading US-58 to interstate standards east of I-95 ("I-58"), upgrading US-17 to interstate standards to NC (I-87), and widening I-64 to Richmond. That report estimated $3 billion for an "I-58" project.

https://www.hrtpo.org/uploads/docs/040622%20TTAC%2010_Presentation%20Hampton%20Roads%20Gateways%20Analysis.pdf

As a start, I would like to see a project pursued for a freeway connection between the western end of the Suffolk Bypass and the Holland or Franklin bypasses. The segment between Emporia and Courtland should be the last priority.

Also, they need to reconstruct the ancient I-95/US 58 cloverleaf in Emporia, but that's probably asking for too much.

That area would be an interesting one to address, especially if US-58 is ever to be upgraded to a full freeway out to I-95. I imagine some sort of hybrid of using the existing bypass then splitting off to the north slightly near US-301 to a new freeway-to-freeway interchange with I-95, then tying back to the existing US-58 west of Emporia.

The US-58 corridor study referenced above recommended reconstructing that junction into a diverging diamond interchange.

[wriddle082]

I feel like improvements should focus more on US 58 than I-664.  The US 58 portion of the Suffolk Bypass needs at least three lanes in each direction,

It's questionable that the entire bypass needs 6 lanes, though I can certainly understand east of either the US-460 or VA-10/32 interchanges.

The AADT between US-460 and VA-32 is 45,000, increasing to 55,000 east of there, then dropping back to around 47,000 east of VA-642. This is likely due to the fact the US-58 bypass is the only crossing of the Nansemond River in miles either direction. A good "small" project could be to add an auxiliary lane between VA-32 and VA-642 which would include widening / replacing the bridges over the river. That would cover roughly 1 mile. The next segment would be east of VA-642 to the eastern end of the bypass, around 2 miles, tying into the existing 6 lane arterial segment.

The need west of VA-32 or US-460 is certainly less, that stretch only carrying around 40,000 AADT which is plenty adequate on a 4 lane freeway. Any backups are caused due to the arterial segment to the west queuing, not the freeway itself.

Thankfully, the busiest portion of US-58, the stretch between Suffolk and Bowers Hill, was built out to 6 lanes in the 1970s and is more than adequate lane wise. Access control is another problem - though not nearly as big especially congestion wise, though it's slowly getting fixed. A flyover / interchange at the SPSA Regional Landfill is planned to begin in 2026 which would eliminate a dangerous left turn for trucks from the west to the facility, that currently have to cross 3 high-speed lanes of traffic.

The city of Chesapeake is pursuing a project in the near term that would add a series of RCUTs and close some median crossings closer to the airport just west of Bowers Hill.
https://smartportal.virginiahb2.org/#/public/applications/2022/smartScale/view/F30-0000007226-R01

Included in that link is a study that recommends constructing a full diamond interchange in the airport vicinity in the long term.

Maybe it was just the roadwork on the west side of Suffolk, but the last time I was through there (and I'll be through there again in about an hour or so), Waze detoured me off of the Suffolk Bypass at Pitchkettle Rd and sent me on a couple of other streets back to 58 at Kenyon Rd.  The traffic light right after US 13 splits off had trucks backed up for at least a mile, and it was a similar situation in Emporia at the one traffic light before the I-95 cloverleaf (but I was able to sneak around most of them).

The stretch near the airport and landfill don't bother me nearly as much because they're three lanes in each direction, but I do see a need for a diamond at the airport, and maybe they can reconfigure the interchange with US 58 Business to allow for a new access point to the landfill.

and the improvements that recently started just west of the bypass need to be continued further west to at least the Suffolk/Southampton line.  The truck traffic along this stretch going to/from the Port of Virginia to/from I-95 and I-85 is starting to become unbearable through Suffolk.

It's also questionable if the ongoing 6 lane arterial widening needs to extend beyond its current terminus. While that area is an issue, a true long term solution is needed - an interstate grade facility on new location bypassing that entire segment between Suffolk and Holland.

VDOT completed a study for the US-58 corridor between the western end of the Suffolk bypass and west of I-95 a few years ago. While recommendations were largely limited to spot upgrades such as innovative intersections, closing some crossings, etc. two pages of the final study report were dedicated to analyzing the potential of upgrading / relocating the entire corridor to interstate standards. VDOT estimated around $2.3 - $3.5 billion for such a project.

Additionally, the HRTPO has completed a "gateway analysis" over the past few months which analyzed three major potential projects - upgrading US-58 to interstate standards east of I-95 ("I-58"), upgrading US-17 to interstate standards to NC (I-87), and widening I-64 to Richmond. That report estimated $3 billion for an "I-58" project.

https://www.hrtpo.org/uploads/docs/040622%20TTAC%2010_Presentation%20Hampton%20Roads%20Gateways%20Analysis.pdf

As a start, I would like to see a project pursued for a freeway connection between the western end of the Suffolk Bypass and the Holland or Franklin bypasses. The segment between Emporia and Courtland should be the last priority.

Agreed.  Not nearly as heavy from Emporia to Courtland.

Also, they need to reconstruct the ancient I-95/US 58 cloverleaf in Emporia, but that's probably asking for too much.

That area would be an interesting one to address, especially if US-58 is ever to be upgraded to a full freeway out to I-95. I imagine some sort of hybrid of using the existing bypass then splitting off to the north slightly near US-301 to a new freeway-to-freeway interchange with I-95, then tying back to the existing US-58 west of Emporia.

The US-58 corridor study referenced above recommended reconstructing that junction into a diverging diamond interchange.

Yeah I can see a DDI working here

[Great Lakes Roads]

https://www.potomaclocal.com/2022/05/03/i-95-e-zpass-lanes-extension-to-fredericksburg-delayed-1-year/

The I-95 express lanes extension to Fredericksburg has been delayed by a year due to "supply chain issues".

[Declan127]

Don't know if this has been addressed, but there seems to be a sign replacement on 95 NB just past I-85 (might be wrong) that as of mid-April just had the BGS on the side of the road uncovered facing 95.

[kernals12]

https://www.potomaclocal.com/2022/05/03/i-95-e-zpass-lanes-extension-to-fredericksburg-delayed-1-year/

The I-95 express lanes extension to Fredericksburg has been delayed by a year due to "supply chain issues".

ugh. I'm sick of hearing about supply chain issues. Can we start calling them "supply ropes"?

[bluecountry]

So I'm confused on the ultimate 95 HOT lane configuration.

1.  Where is the 95 HOT lanes supposed to end in Stafford?
-When it ends, will 95 be just 3 lanes in each direction or will the HOT lane end directly connect to the 95 local/thru section at Route 17?

2.  The 95 local/thru going south, right now, seems to be a poor end design.
-It goes from being 3+3, to after Route 3 3+2 then a quick merge to just 3 lanes before the 126 exit.
-This is NOT the final design, is it, because my god the bottleneck.

IMO
#1.  95 should stay local/thru to exit 126, which should have an additional separate exit for 17 south
#2.  If not, then 95 needs to be 4 lanes to 126

[sprjus4]

^ The I-95 reversible HO/T lanes will terminate in Fredericksburg. Going southbound, one lane will merge into the "through"  general purpose lanes, and the other will flyover to connect with the "local"  lanes. Going northbound, it will be the same entering from the local/thru into the HO/T lanes.

As far as the southbound merge, I agree. I don't believe there are any immediate plans to address this, but they do eventually want to add a 4th lane southbound to US-17. That is not a fictional concept.

[bluecountry]

^ The I-95 reversible HO/T lanes will terminate in Fredericksburg. Going southbound, one lane will merge into the "through"  general purpose lanes, and the other will flyover to connect with the "local"  lanes. Going northbound, it will be the same entering from the local/thru into the HO/T lanes.

As far as the southbound merge, I agree. I don't believe there are any immediate plans to address this, but they do eventually want to add a 4th lane southbound to US-17. That is not a fictional concept.

Thanks.
My god, what a HORRIBLE merge that will be after Route 3.
It is bad enough a lane is lost at Route 3.

Frankly why not just extend the Thru/Local to 126, and as I said, 126 NEEDS a separate exit for 17S, it can't siphon off with Rt 1 any longer.

[Jmiles32]

^ The I-95 reversible HO/T lanes will terminate in Fredericksburg. Going southbound, one lane will merge into the "through"  general purpose lanes, and the other will flyover to connect with the "local"  lanes. Going northbound, it will be the same entering from the local/thru into the HO/T lanes.

As far as the southbound merge, I agree. I don't believe there are any immediate plans to address this, but they do eventually want to add a 4th lane southbound to US-17. That is not a fictional concept.

Thanks.
My god, what a HORRIBLE merge that will be after Route 3.
It is bad enough a lane is lost at Route 3.

Frankly why not just extend the Thru/Local to 126, and as I said, 126 NEEDS a separate exit for 17S, it can't siphon off with Rt 1 any longer.

Agreed that the merge south of VA-3 is not ideal and will eventually need to be addressed in the form of a 4th southbound lane within the next 10 years. In regards to a separate exit for US-17, I would also add Celebrate Virginia Parkway, Harrison Road, and Courthouse Road (VA-208) to that list of possibilities as well. VA-3 west of I-95 is becoming increasingly unbearable and there needs to be other alternatives. If new exits were added (and there have been studies on this), then extending the Thru/Local lanes to just south of Exit 126 would be the way to go. Fredericksburg imo could use more I-95 exits that take pressure off of US-1 and VA-3. 

[Mapmikey]

Here is the 2013 study covering a lot of the recent posts on I-95 issues through the Fredericksburg area.

Some figures to look at:

AADT (2019 - pre-pandemic and also pre-local lanes)

I-95 SB after 136: 68k
I-95 SB after 133: 75k
I-95 SB after 130: 64k
I-95 SB after 126: 53k

To estimate how the current local/express lanes change this:

off-ramps to any direction at Exits 130-133:
I-95 SB to US 17 NB - 6600
I-95 SB to US 17 SB - 6000
I-95 SB to VA 3 EB - 6900
I-95 SB to VA 3 WB - 19000

So, in theory, the 68k at the SB split to local/express gives:
I-95 local entry - 38500
I-95 express entry - 29500

on-ramps to I-95 SB:
US 17 NB to I-95 SB - 3400
US 17 SB to I-95 SB - 21000
VA 3 EB to I-95 SB - 8100
VA 3 WB to I-95 SB - 3000

This gives the following:
I-95 SB express end - 29500
I-95 SB local end - 35500
Combined is 65k (difference from the 64k above likely from people entering at US 17 and exiting at VA 3).

So this suggests the express lanes should be merging into the local?

The local configuration has the drop from 3 to 2 before the VA 3 EB onramp, so 27400 are a part of that merge to then accept 8100 from the other VA 3 ramp (which merges shortly after).  Then there is 4000 ft to lose those 2 thru lanes, most of which is after the local lanes end.  This is almost certainly too short during some of the day.

Extending the local lanes past Exit 126 would give:

I-95 SB to US 1-17: 20000
US 1 to I-95 SB: 5400

So there would be only 9500 in the express lanes with 40900 local lanes at a new south endpoint.  This is a little short of the 53000 shown as the AADT on the 2019.  Doing this would seem to make sense to have the express lanes drop lanes instead of the local.

[bluecountry]

I think what makes most sense is to after exit 130 have it be 5 lanes in each direction until 126 with a separate exit for 17 (call it 125).

[Jmiles32]

https://richmond.com/sports/professional/commanders-buy-land-draw-up-plans-for-3-billion-mini-city-stadium-complex-in-woodbridge/article_4358a499-6f98-5147-92e4-55a627100993.html

The Washington Commanders have purchased 200 acres of land in Woodbridge that could be the home of their new stadium project, a $3 billion "mini-city" that would contain a number of entertainment, residential and workspace components.

Renderings obtained by The Richmond Times-Dispatch show a futuristic stadium that can change colors, a translucent roof that would allow natural light while climate-controlled, and a new team headquarters.

The land, near Potomac Mills off I-95, was purchased for $100 million, but sources with knowledge of the team's plans were quick to point out on Monday that the location has not been picked yet, and other potential sites remain in play - in Virginia, Maryland and D.C.

A bill that will provide state support for a potential stadium is expected to pass in the coming weeks along with the state budget, formalizing Virginia's contribution to the project at an estimated $350 million.

The project is modeled in part after The Battery in Atlanta, the home of the Atlanta Braves. It's anchored by the team, but that also has a number of other components to draw year-round traffic.

One major question mark on a project in Prince William County will be traffic, given that the segment of I-95 that runs through Occoquan is routinely one of the most backed-up sections of roadway on the East Coast.

Surovell noted that there has long been interest in extending Metro service to Potomac Mills, but so far the regional authorities have been lukewarm, at best, to the idea.

Sources with knowledge of the stadium design said there would be ample parking built into the Commanders' project, with additional entrance and exit lanes built into I-95 and the I-95 Express Lanes. It is considered extremely unlikely that a Metro expansion would happen before the stadium's opening date.

Traffic wise there is no way in hell that this location would be better than the current traffic situation at FedEx Field. At least the Loudoun and Potomac Shores locations would have good access to transit (Silver Line Metro and VRE). Ultimately, because I no longer think that the team will ever move back to D.C, I would have to go with the Loudoun location as my preferred option. I just don't see how putting a stadium along the I-95 corridor (south of the ever congested Occoquan bottleneck) could feasibly not be a traffic nightmare.

[Mapmikey]

Thankfully I will be retired when they could start playing in a new stadium.

It's hard to imagine a more horrible location for a stadium and mini-city that would accompany it.

[kernals12]

They could make the Commanders pay for some of the highway improvements needed.

[1995hoo]

Don't forget VRE doesn't run on Sunday. It's a peak-direction weekday-only service. Of course that could change someday, but don't hold your breath, and it wouldn't much help anyone not located near the Fredericksburg Line (the one that serves Woodbridge) because of how the system is configured.

[plain]

There was a public meeting last night about Chesterfield's Upper Magnolia Green development - which includes the Powhite Parkway extension to US 360 in Skinquarter - and there was substantial community opposition. I'm skeptical the extension will ever get built...which is about how I normally feel anyway.

The Chesterfield County Planning Commission voted 3-2 to approve the Upper Magnolia Green plan, which now heads to the Board of Supervisors for a full vote. There continues to be heavy community opposition to the plan and it probably will not pass - if it doesn't, the Powhite Parkway extension is dead.

I don't think the Extension would truly be dead because of that, but it would be incredibly foolish to not build it in any case. The road has been needed for a while now, and the longer VDOT/county officials sit on the issue the worst it will be for that part of the county. There's more development in the pipeline just for US 360 alone, which is going to make it and the interchange with VA 288 even worse than it is now. The commuters need a bypass of that area in the worst way.

UPDATE: Despite heavy opposition, the Chesterfield County Board Of Supervisors have approved the rezoning needed for the Upper Magnolia Green development.

With this there is now a good chance we will see the extension of the Powhite Parkway sooner than later.

https://richmondbizsense.com/2022/05/27/chesterfield-supervisors-approve-zoning-for-upper-magnolia-green-tech-park/

[WillWeaverRVA]

There was a public meeting last night about Chesterfield's Upper Magnolia Green development - which includes the Powhite Parkway extension to US 360 in Skinquarter - and there was substantial community opposition. I'm skeptical the extension will ever get built...which is about how I normally feel anyway.

The Chesterfield County Planning Commission voted 3-2 to approve the Upper Magnolia Green plan, which now heads to the Board of Supervisors for a full vote. There continues to be heavy community opposition to the plan and it probably will not pass - if it doesn't, the Powhite Parkway extension is dead.

I don't think the Extension would truly be dead because of that, but it would be incredibly foolish to not build it in any case. The road has been needed for a while now, and the longer VDOT/county officials sit on the issue the worst it will be for that part of the county. There's more development in the pipeline just for US 360 alone, which is going to make it and the interchange with VA 288 even worse than it is now. The commuters need a bypass of that area in the worst way.

UPDATE: Despite heavy opposition, the Chesterfield County Board Of Supervisors have approved the rezoning needed for the Upper Magnolia Green development.

With this there is now a good chance we will see the extension of the Powhite Parkway sooner than later.

https://richmondbizsense.com/2022/05/27/chesterfield-supervisors-approve-zoning-for-upper-magnolia-green-tech-park/

I was just coming here to post this. Hopefully if the extension gets built, and the Bailey Bridge Road connector extending south from Commonwealth Centre Parkway also gets built, that region will see some traffic relief.

[Takumi]

Great news. Hull Street is a mess all the way from Chippenham to at least Hampton Park, except for the little lull around Pocoshock/Amberleigh. This should help a lot.

[Mapmikey]

US 11 southbound overlay with I-81 near Buchanan has been changed to leave I-81 at Exit 169 instead of Exit 168, whose off-ramp has been removed. US 11 south follows the frontage road from Exit 169.

US 11 northbound is unchanged and still enters at the Exit 168 location.

VDOT has studied building a roadway as the NB frontage road to eliminate the on-ramp at Exit 168 but I don't know if that is coming.