Virginia

[Thing 342]

One would think the city would've sent it up to London then onto the MLK and through the Midtown Tunnel to meet back up with mainline 337, at least it would've made sense that way... then again mainline 337's routing isn't signed very well either especially between the Jordan Bridge and Downtown Norfolk smdh who knows

I think that there is sufficient enough evidence to show that most of the Hampton Roads (especially those on the Southside) cities do not give two shits about the state routes that pass through them. I doubt that anyone has actually ever used VA-337-ALT as a through route anyways, so it's probably better off being decommissioned.

[Mapmikey]

One would think the city would've sent it up to London then onto the MLK and through the Midtown Tunnel to meet back up with mainline 337, at least it would've made sense that way... then again mainline 337's routing isn't signed very well either especially between the Jordan Bridge and Downtown Norfolk smdh who knows

I think that there is sufficient enough evidence to show that most of the Hampton Roads (especially those on the Southside) cities do not give two shits about the state routes that pass through them. I doubt that anyone has actually ever used VA-337-ALT as a through route anyways, so it's probably better off being decommissioned.

This was a frequently used truck route.

I went ahead and sent the City of Portsmouth an e-mail asking what the routing actually is...we'll see what kind of response I get...

[74/171FAN]

The second weekend of the I-95 SB Bridge Work in Prince William County continues to be delayed due to rain in the forecast again this weekend.(from Fairfax News)  It is now planned to be next weekend (May 19th-May 22nd).

[cpzilliacus]

The second weekend of the I-95 SB Bridge Work in Prince William County continues to be delayed due to rain in the forecast again this weekend.(from Fairfax News)  It is now planned to be next weekend (May 19th-May 22nd).

I like the map and instructions with one notable exception.

East side: I-495 to Route 5 (Branch Avenue) southbound to Route 301 southbound to Route 206/218 westbound to I-95 southbound

No, no, no, a thousand times no!

East side: I-495 to Route 5 (Branch Avenue) southbound to Route 301 southbound to Route 207 westbound to I-95 southbound

[Mapmikey]

East side: I-495 to Route 5 (Branch Avenue) southbound to Route 301 southbound to Route 206/218 westbound to I-95 southbound

VA 218 is narrow and extremely hilly and twisting for about 10 miles west of VA 206 and is not a good road to drive at night, in addition to it not being an efficient detour (even if only going to Fredericksburg...faster to go VA 206 to VA 3)...

[74/171FAN]

There was a public hearing Tuesday Night for the new planned interchange on US 15/17/29 at the south end of the Warrenton Bypass.  (from Fauquier Times)

There will be roundabouts at the intersections of the ramps at US 15/17/29 BUS and Lord Fairfax Dr.

[cpzilliacus]

There was a public hearing Tuesday Night for the new planned interchange on US 15/17/29 at the south end of the Warrenton Bypass.  (from Fauquier Times)

There will be roundabouts at the intersections of the ramps at US 15/17/29 BUS and Lord Fairfax Dr.

Getting rid of the miserable signal there will provide significant benefit to drivers on U.S. 15/U.S. 17/U.S. 29. 

Especially southbound, it seems that drivers are sometimes not expecting a signal there, perhaps they are fooled by the interchanges at the northeast corner of Warrenton and the one at Meetze Road?

[WillWeaverRVA]

There was a public hearing Tuesday Night for the new planned interchange on US 15/17/29 at the south end of the Warrenton Bypass.  (from Fauquier Times)

There will be roundabouts at the intersections of the ramps at US 15/17/29 BUS and Lord Fairfax Dr.

Getting rid of the miserable signal there will provide significant benefit to drivers on U.S. 15/U.S. 17/U.S. 29. 

Especially southbound, it seems that drivers are sometimes not expecting a signal there, perhaps they are fooled by the interchanges at the northeast corner of Warrenton and the one at Meetze Road?

There's plenty of advanced warning of the signal, but the signal has got to go.

[CVski]

Rumor was Chris Pearmund was part of a planned development down near there.  A housing tract built like a golf course community, but with vineyards and a wine cellar/tasting clubhouse.

[Jmiles32]

Especially southbound, it seems that drivers are sometimes not expecting a signal there, perhaps they are fooled by the interchanges at the northeast corner of Warrenton and the one at Meetze Road?

I think US-29 from south of I-66 to NC is definitely one of those roads that VA really didn't know what it wanted to do with. What I mean is that for a while it looked like the idea of extending I-83 down US-29 throughout Virginia in the 1990s wasn't that far fetched, as US-29 already had 11 freeway like bypasses around various towns with little to no development in between. However I assume the state gave up on that idea as the cost do this was too high with not enough traffic at the time to make up for it. I think the proposed Charlottesville Western Bypass which VDOT fully suspended/cancelled in 2014 killed the last hope of turning US-29 into I-83. As a result today the majority of US-29 isn't all too bad and is in fact mostly pleasant. However as more drivers begin to also realize this and increasingly use US-29 as an alternative to I-95 and I-81, combined with more Northern Virginia sprawl I think VDOT should study doing 2 things
1. Continue to take out not just the dangerous traffic lights on US-29 they are now currently converting to interchanges, but take out all the traffic lights on 28 miles of US-29 from the south end of the Culpeper bypass to the north end of the Warrenton bypass. I'm not saying go full limited access interstate here, just take get rid of all the unnecessary traffic lights and build interchanges where appropriate.
2. Because of the much heavier development in between Warrenton and Gaineville that would make replacing traffic lights with interchanges much more destructive and expensive, widen this stretch of US-29 to six lanes. I do not support the proposed Buckland Bypass as I think it goes too far out of the way and hardly anyone would use it, let alone it also being extremely destructive to houses, battlefileds ext.
Now I know someone is going to criticize how much more sprawl and traffic this idea would create and to that I agree and say if the developers really want it, let them pay for it.

[LM117]

As a result today the majority of US-29 isn't all too bad and is in fact mostly pleasant.

Except for the stretch near Lynchburg. US-29 is a parking lot between VA-24 and US-460. Between the truck traffic, the traffic lights and the constant speed limit changes, it's a pain in the ass approaching Lynchburg from the south. The existing freeway bypass there really needs to be extended from US-460 to US-29 south of the city.

I used to go to Lynchburg a lot for shopping when I lived in Farmville a few years ago since getting there from US-460 was easy, but since I ended up in the Danville area, it's a bitch getting there on US-29. I stopped going to Lynchburg altogether and started going to Greensboro instead, since it's about the same distance from me and US-29 is a MUCH quicker and better drive between Danville and Greensboro. Plus Greensboro is a lot easier to navigate than Lynchburg. Despite Greensboro being a much larger city, traffic flows a lot better there.

[cpzilliacus]

There's plenty of advanced warning of the signal, but the signal has got to go.

I do not get down that way too often, but I have seen  drivers (including drivers of commercial vehicles) slam on the brakes going southbound when that movement has a red signal.

[cpzilliacus]

I think US-29 from south of I-66 to NC is definitely one of those roads that VA really didn't know what it wanted to do with. What I mean is that for a while it looked like the idea of extending I-83 down US-29 throughout Virginia in the 1990s wasn't that far fetched, as US-29 already had 11 freeway like bypasses around various towns with little to no development in between. However I assume the state gave up on that idea as the cost do this was too high with not enough traffic at the time to make up for it. I think the proposed Charlottesville Western Bypass which VDOT fully suspended/cancelled in 2014 killed the last hope of turning US-29 into I-83. As a result today the majority of US-29 isn't all too bad and is in fact mostly pleasant. However as more drivers begin to also realize this and increasingly use US-29 as an alternative to I-95 and I-81, combined with more Northern Virginia sprawl I think VDOT should study doing 2 things
1. Continue to take out not just the dangerous traffic lights on US-29 they are now currently converting to interchanges, but take out all the traffic lights on 28 miles of US-29 from the south end of the Culpeper bypass to the north end of the Warrenton bypass. I'm not saying go full limited access interstate here, just take get rid of all the unnecessary traffic lights and build interchanges where appropriate.
2. Because of the much heavier development in between Warrenton and Gaineville that would make replacing traffic lights with interchanges much more destructive and expensive, widen this stretch of US-29 to six lanes. I do not support the proposed Buckland Bypass as I think it goes too far out of the way and hardly anyone would use it, let alone it also being extremely destructive to houses, battlefileds ext.
Now I know someone is going to criticize how much more sprawl and traffic this idea would create and to that I agree and say if the developers really want it, let them pay for it.

1. The I-83 proposal was never a formal one by VDOT, and it drove the Piedmont Environmental Council (PEC) bananas (to the point that VDOT finally sent them a letter saying that I-83 was not then, and never had been, an official plan).  The PEC spent a lot of time and money opposing the Western Bypass of Charlottesville.

2.  As money becomes available, I think you will see more signalized intersections replaced by interchanges.  Rio Road at U.S. 29 turned out pretty well.

3.  Developers do not use transportation infrastructure, but their customers do.

[froggie]

3.  Developers do not use transportation infrastructure, but their customers do.

Oh, they most certainly do use transportation infrastructure, both for the physical construction of their developments, but also in planning where they can make the most bang for the buck.

[1995hoo]

Don't forget the use of "proffers" is pretty common in Virginia as part of the zoning/development process. I assume it's not unique to Virginia, of course, but this IS a Virginia thread....

[Mapmikey]

VDOT has released their 2016 traffic data.  I breezed through it a minute and did not notice anything newsworthy regarding routings...

http://www.virginiadot.org/info/resources/Traffic_2016/AADT_PrimaryInterstate_2016.pdf

[cpzilliacus]

3.  Developers do not use transportation infrastructure, but their customers do.

Oh, they most certainly do use transportation infrastructure, both for the physical construction of their developments, but also in planning where they can make the most bang for the buck. get approval from the local development approval process.

FTFY.

The use of the system to build structures such as new homes is exactly what the system was designed and built for. 

As for in planning where they develop, in most of the United States, developers cannot use such methods to determine where to build, with the notable exception of Houston, Texas. You know that very well. 

In Maryland and Northern Virginia, that explains new home construction in exurban places like Adams and York Counties in Pennsylvania; the Eastern Panhandle of West Virginia; the western I-66 corridor (Warren County around Front Royal); and even Washington County, Maryland.  Otherwise known as "leapfrog" development.

[cpzilliacus]

Don't forget the use of "proffers" is pretty common in Virginia as part of the zoning/development process. I assume it's not unique to Virginia, of course, but this IS a Virginia thread....

Yes, that is standard operating procedure in at least some Virginia jurisdictions.  And it does have one advantage - it frequently leads to roads getting built (parts of the Fairfax County Parkway were built with dollars from developer proffers), intersections improved and other improvements.

I personally much prefer it over the adequate public facilities ordinances (APFO) used in much of Maryland, which can be pretty easily "gamed" and allows development in places that are not well-served by transit and suffer from severe traffic congestion.

[Beltway]

2.  As money becomes available, I think you will see more signalized intersections replaced by interchanges.  Rio Road at U.S. 29 turned out pretty well.

This is a bad project.  $80 million for an urban interchange that eliminated three signals but in the overall scheme makes very little difference for thru traffic, the money was basically wasted by VDOT.

A critical weakness remains where the US-29 bypass connects to Emmet Street / Seminole Trail, and that will be very expensive and complex to resolve; two different alternatives were developed around 2004 to provide a high capacity connection for US-29 thru traffic and Hydraulic Road grade separation and were estimated at $170 million, it would be over $300 million today.

The Western Bypass was under contract for $180 million when the governor flushed the project down the commode, a very irresponsible decision, IMHO. 

Building urban arterial interchanges largely fell out of favor by 20 years ago, too expensive, too disruptive, too complex to build, too little traffic benefits.  And these ones would not be needed if the Western Bypass was built.  And the northern terminal of the Western Bypass would have been extensible with future projects to extend the US-29 bypass to the airport or even to Ruckersville.

Bad and wasteful decisions have been and are being made here by the state and the county.

--
Scott M. Kozel   
http://www.roadstothefuture.com

[froggie]

And these ones would not be needed if the Western Bypass was built. 

Not true.  The local studies pointed out that major upgrades, if not outright grade separation, were needed at Rio and Hydraulic even if the Western Bypass was built.

And the northern terminal of the Western Bypass would have been extensible with future projects to extend the US-29 bypass to the airport or even to Ruckersville.

Not with the way development has been pushing into Greene County.  One of the Western Bypass's biggest flaws is that the preserved right-of-way didn't go far enough north.  For several years now, there's been a lot of pricey development (or the existing development along US 29 proper) in the way.

[Beltway]

And these ones would not be needed if the Western Bypass was built. 

Not true.  The local studies pointed out that major upgrades, if not outright grade separation, were needed at Rio and Hydraulic even if the Western Bypass was built.

US-29 already had 8 lanes at Rio Road, higher capacity turn lanes would have addressed the needs.

US-29 has 6 lanes at Hydraulic Road, and 8 widening and higher capacity turn lanes would address the needs.

Urban arterial interchanges are a mostly outmoded concept for any new construction, and I can't believe that they would be deemed worth building if the bypass extension was built.

And the northern terminal of the Western Bypass would have been extensible with future projects to extend the US-29 bypass to the airport or even to Ruckersville

Not with the way development has been pushing into Greene County.  One of the Western Bypass's biggest flaws is that the preserved right-of-way didn't go far enough north.  For several years now, there's been a lot of pricey development (or the existing development along US 29 proper) in the way.

Aerial photos show ample room to extend the bypass north of the airport.  Even without a future extension, bypassing 6 miles of US-29 and then transitioning into a widened US-29 would have provided a major improvement.

[plain]

@Beltway: The proposed Charlottesville bypass was flawed from the beginning. The bypass was not planned to have any interchanges other than the endpoints.. the only thing it would've done was provide a way for through traffic to avoid the development just north of the city and nothing else... it would not have helped with the traffic situation at all as the far majority of the people who uses the existing stretch are commuters, thus the reason why it was 8-laned in the first place and even that have become inadequate. The whole reason for the Rio Rd grade separation was to basically keep traffic flowing on US 29 at that junction. Another grade separation or two at other junctions is the only thing I see fixing this stretch

[Beltway]

@Beltway: The proposed Charlottesville bypass was flawed from the beginning. The bypass was not planned to have any interchanges other than the endpoints.. the only thing it would've done was provide a way for through traffic to avoid the development just north of the city and nothing else... it would not have helped with the traffic situation at all as the far majority of the people who uses the existing stretch are commuters, thus the reason why it was 8-laned in the first place and even that have become inadequate. The whole reason for the Rio Rd grade separation was to basically keep traffic flowing on US 29 at that junction. Another grade separation or two at other junctions is the only thing I see fixing this stretch

It was originally planned to have two more interchanges, but those were deleted to satisfy "anti-sprawl" advocates.  VA-654 Barracks Road and at VA-743 Hydraulic Road.

The urban arterial interchanges are flawed as I pointed out. 

I mentioned the critical weakness that remains where the US-29 bypass connects to Emmet Street / Seminole Trail along with the Hydraulic Road intersection.  I don't believe that project will ever be built; the construction costs and R/W costs and impacts are far too high and I predict that it will never be built.

During the development of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act legislation (ISTEA of 1991, the federal 7-year transportation bill), Virginia, along with North Carolina, worked successfully to have US-29 designated as a "Highway of National Significance." This designation means that the U.S. Congress considers the US-29 corridor to be an important corridor that is not adequately served by the Interstate Highway System, and therefore, it requires further highway development to serve the travel and economic development needs of the region. State transportation officials view US-29 as a interregional highway that serves important regional transportation interests along the whole corridor from I-40/I-85 at Greensboro, N.C., to I-66 at Gainesville, Virginia.

The Charlottesville US-29 situation is grossly inadequate and state and local officials are failing to provide sound transportation decisions.

[LM117]

During the development of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act legislation (ISTEA of 1991, the federal 7-year transportation bill), Virginia, along with North Carolina, worked successfully to have US-29 designated as a "Highway of National Significance." This designation means that the U.S. Congress considers the US-29 corridor to be an important corridor that is not adequately served by the Interstate Highway System, and therefore, it requires further highway development to serve the travel and economic development needs of the region. State transportation officials view US-29 as a interregional highway that serves important regional transportation interests along the whole corridor from I-40/I-85 at Greensboro, N.C., to I-66 at Gainesville, Virginia.

I'll probably get scorching nuclear heat for saying this, but I've always felt that if there's any highway in Virginia that would benefit from a freeway upgrade, it's US-29. Even though there's no chance in hell of an I-83 extension (which I'm a big fan of), US-29 could still be an interstate standard freeway between Danville and I-66 without having I-shields. Considering that I-81 is clogged with truck traffic with no plans by VDOT to widen it and the fact that I-95 is a nightmare between Richmond and DC, it would make sense to me that the main N/S corridor through central VA be a high speed alternative to I-81 and I-95.

[Mapmikey]

US 29 is definitely an important corridor but cost will make doing the full length prohibitive...

Except for Amherst to near Lovingston, way too many access control issues to upgrade existing US 29 without mostly new alignments from Danville northward.

From Lovingston to I-64 in addition to accesses, the terrain is pretty unfavorable for highway construction.

Charlottesville to Culpeper and Remington to I-66 are OK from a terrain standpoint but too many accesses and development to do a direct upgrade for the most part.

Extending the Madison Heights Bypass south to VA 24 is needed and is on VDOT's wish list to actually do.  Perhaps other areas could get by with superstreet upgrades in lieu of full freeway.  Couple that with a few strategic interchanges (south end of Warrenton Bypass will be quite helpful when done; also where US 15 splits off near Gainesville)...