I-495 Inner Loop to get 5th lane north of HOT Lanes

[Mapmikey]

Construction starts soon...open in late 2014.

It will function like the I-66 shoulder lanes with signals, etc...

http://www.wtop.com/149/3370033/Gov-5th-lane-to-ease-congestion-on-495

Mapmikey

[cpzilliacus]

Dr. Gridlock in the Washington Post: Virginia to allow travel on Beltway shoulder

The left shoulder on the Capital Beltway's inner loop will be converted into a rush-hour travel lane south of the American Legion Bridge, Gov. Robert F. McDonnell announced Tuesday.

The effect will be to have five travel lanes for 1.5 miles from Old Dominion Drive north to the George Washington Parkway interchange. It should remind drivers of the configuration on Interstate 66 west of the Beltway, where drivers are allowed to use the shoulders for travel during peak periods.

[froggie]

Band-aid, at best...pointless, at worst.  As Dr. Gridlock notes, about the only real beneficiaries of it are those who exit at GW Pkwy.

A 5th lane won't really do any good here unless and until it can be extended across the Legion Bridge, so my main reaction here is "why bother?"

[1995hoo]

I imagine the lane-control signals will be widely ignored when the new lane is closed, much as they are on I-66.

[Henry]

So the Outer Loop won't get a fifth lane? That would make an odd configuration, even for a major bypass around the nation's capital!

[Mapmikey]

On this part of the Beltway the Outer Loop does not have a bottleneck...the bridge and hill climb into the sunshine is often a point of slow down but the 5th lane would need to be in Maryland and across the bridge to address.

Shortly after the HOT lanes begin and traffic picks up most days just past VA 193 on the Outer Loop.

Mapmikey

[Roadsguy]

I always thought it should be five or even six (like at the south end from there to 95) lanes in each direction from the end up to 270. Is this what I'm thinking it is, or am I confused?

[froggie]

You're confused.  It's 4 lanes each way plus a couple auxiliary lanes across the Legion Bridge and from Cabin John to the 270 Spur.

[Mapmikey]

Construction on the shoulder lane on the Inner Loop from the north end of the Express Lanes to the GW Pkwy was supposed to begin today, per portable VMS in the area...

According to VDOT (http://www.virginiadot.org/projects/northernvirginia/i-495_shoulder.asp) this will be open by the end of 2014...

Mapmikey

[MillTheRoadgeek]

For me, whenever I think of shoulder lanes...
I think of cars scraping along retaining walls and such. Weird, eh?

[mrsman]

As far as the inner loop goes, any bit can help.  You have 6 lanes merging down to 4 lanes + an exit lane towards the GWP.  If one could ignore the fact that the express lanes are special, for the moment, it would make more sense to have only the left lane end to force a merge instead of the left two lanes.

So the left lane should be forced to merge into the second lane when the express lanes end.  The second lane becomes the new left lane on the bridge.  This lane would be open to all traffic after the express lanes end, but not-HOT lane traffic must merge into that lane.
The left three lanes of the main beltway should become the second, third, and fourth lanes of the Beltway.  The fourth lane of the main lanes should be a forced exit onto the GWP.

So the express lanes will merge two to one.  The main lanes will merge four to three.  While it makes the commute worse for the general lanes, I think it would improve the Beltway as a whole.  Each roadway shares some of the burden of merging.

[A similar merge takes place on the southbound NJTP at Exit 8.  Car lanes merge three to two with left lane ending.  Truck lanes are already two at this point.  Then the far right car lane and the far left truck lane merge into the new center lane of the southbound NJTP.  But we don't force the truck lanes to merge both lanes into the three lane car lanes.  And we shouldn't force the two HOT lanes to both merge into the four lane Beltway.]

Another idea: There is a significant C-D roadway along the outer loop from the Bridge to Georgetown Pike.  Unlike the Inner Loop, where you have 4 beltway lanes and one lane that would force you off to the Clara Barton Pkwy, the Outer Loop lanes allow 5 lanes to continue on the Beltway.  The 4 left lanes on the main beltway and the right lane along the C-D roadway.  This C-D roadway does not force you off at the GWP, instead you can ride it and merge back onto the Beltway right at Georgetown Pike overcrossing.  Could there possibly be room to expand the Inner Loop along this section, by shifting more thru traffic of the Outer Loop onto the C-D roadway?

[froggie]

Another idea: There is a significant C-D roadway along the outer loop from the Bridge to Georgetown Pike.  Unlike the Inner Loop, where you have 4 beltway lanes and one lane that would force you off to the Clara Barton Pkwy, the Outer Loop lanes allow 5 lanes to continue on the Beltway.  The 4 left lanes on the main beltway and the right lane along the C-D roadway.  This C-D roadway does not force you off at the GWP, instead you can ride it and merge back onto the Beltway right at Georgetown Pike overcrossing.  Could there possibly be room to expand the Inner Loop along this section, by shifting more thru traffic of the Outer Loop onto the C-D roadway?

The root of the problem isn't the configuration in Virginia.  The root problem is the American Legion Bridge.  Even if you try what you suggest, you'd still be hamstrung by the current limit of 5 lanes on the bridge.  A complicating factor with this is the large volume of traffic that enters the Inner Loop from the GWP.

[jeffandnicole]

So the express lanes will merge two to one.  The main lanes will merge four to three.  While it makes the commute worse for the general lanes, I think it would improve the Beltway as a whole.  Each roadway shares some of the burden of merging.

While at first glance it sounds reasonable, it isn't.  The express lanes merging from 2 lanes to 1 lane means they lose 50% of their capacity...and pay a premium for doing so. The free lanes merge from 4 to 3, a loss of only 25% of lane capacity.

A similar merge takes place on the southbound NJTP at Exit 8 (actually, 8A). Car lanes merge three to two with left lane ending.  Truck lanes are already two at this point.  Then the far right car lane and the far left truck lane merge into the new center lane of the southbound NJTP.  But we don't force the truck lanes to merge both lanes into the three lane car lanes. 

And this situation results in major 5-10 mile traffic jams on busy weekends, and mile or 2 mile jams on many regular rush hour days. And yes, the truck lanes will congest before the car lanes.  This is part of the reason why the NJ Turnpike Authority spent $2.5 Billion to widen the road for another 25 miles. If you're going to use an example, you may want to use one where congestion and billions of dollars spent to fix a major congestion issue isn't the result.

[MillTheRoadgeek]

A little question: Will VDOT use the red shoulder paving, like on I-66? I haven't been down there since January, so I need to know if this is the new standard by them.

[mrsman]

So the express lanes will merge two to one.  The main lanes will merge four to three.  While it makes the commute worse for the general lanes, I think it would improve the Beltway as a whole.  Each roadway shares some of the burden of merging.

While at first glance it sounds reasonable, it isn't.  The express lanes merging from 2 lanes to 1 lane means they lose 50% of their capacity...and pay a premium for doing so. The free lanes merge from 4 to 3, a loss of only 25% of lane capacity.

Yes, but in the current configuration, the 2 lanes merge to 1 and then the 1 merges into the main lanes, as opposed to its own lane.  Main lanes have the right of way.  So the express lanes lose 100% of their capacity and the main lanes lose 0% of their capacity.  My suggestion is certainly more fair than the current configuration.

A similar merge takes place on the southbound NJTP at Exit 8 (actually, 8A). Car lanes merge three to two with left lane ending.  Truck lanes are already two at this point.  Then the far right car lane and the far left truck lane merge into the new center lane of the southbound NJTP.  But we don't force the truck lanes to merge both lanes into the three lane car lanes. 

And this situation results in major 5-10 mile traffic jams on busy weekends, and mile or 2 mile jams on many regular rush hour days. And yes, the truck lanes will congest before the car lanes.  This is part of the reason why the NJ Turnpike Authority spent $2.5 Billion to widen the road for another 25 miles. If you're going to use an example, you may want to use one where congestion and billions of dollars spent to fix a major congestion issue isn't the result.

I think that for both the NJTP and the Beltway it's obviously better if there were no drop downs until such point as the traffic dissipated. 

Maybe years ago Exit 8 represented the furthest extent of NYC bound commuting traffic and that it was thought that nobody would need more than 3 lanes in each direction south of that point.  Now they realize that a lot of the NJTP's  traffic is weekend and long-distance traffic.  People use the road to make daytrips up and down the East Coast.  Now they realize that the point where traffic really decreases significantly is Exit 6 where traffic splits up between NJTP traffic heading long distance towards Delaware and Baltimore vs. traffic heading to Harrisburg and Philadelphia and that a lot of traffic may have already found their way to I-295 or I-195 before reaching Exit 6.

A five lane to 3 lane neck down is bad.  Certainly.  Yet if you are constrained by money and political will from widening the whole road to 5 lanes, what is the best method to employ the 5 lane to 3 lane neckdown?  I think it would be to close both the left and the right lanes forcing each of those lanes to merge into the 3 central lanes.  That seems far better than closing 2 lanes on the left or 2 lanes on the right in a fairly abrupt fashion.

For the Beltway, ideally, they should extend the Express lanes into MD to at least the 495/270 Spur split in Bethesda.  But that is not in the plans right now.  So the question for right now is to decide how to best plan for a 6 lane to 4 lane neckdown?  And now keep in mind that the 6 lanes is two separate roadways: 2 lanes HOT and 4 lanes general.  Politically, it was decided that the 4 general lanes would have the least impact, the 2 HOT lanes would merge into one and then 1/2 mile later merge into the general lanes.  But I don't believe that is the best decision for traffic. 

It would be better to allow the 2 HOT lanes to merge together and become the left lane of the Beltway that would carry forward without merging all the way to 270.  The 3 left general lanes should become the next 3 lanes at the Bridge.  The right lane should either: 1) be forced off to the GWP, 2)merge into the next lane to the left just after the GWP exit, or 3) become the rightmost lane at the Bridge with GWP traffic merging into that right lane.

Ultimately, if they redesign this area of the Beltway, they need to determine if there is more traffic from the Beltway HOT lanes or from the GWP that is heading to the Bridge.  The lanes that have the most traffic should have its own lane on the bridge and the other set of traffic should merge into the Beltway.

[1995hoo]

A little question: Will VDOT use the red shoulder paving, like on I-66? I haven't been down there since January, so I need to know if this is the new standard by them.

I haven't seen anything one way or the other on that issue. I drove through the work zone on July 20 but it was in the very early stages of shifting lanes around.

[mtantillo]

A little question: Will VDOT use the red shoulder paving, like on I-66? I haven't been down there since January, so I need to know if this is the new standard by them.

Not if FHWA has any say in it. The new proposed national standard is for red to be reserved for transit lanes (bus lanes).

[mtantillo]

Also, the preferred way to end lanes is to have all lanes continue through the converge point, and then start dropping lanes as far beyond the convergence of the two roads as possible. Forget about normal operations for a second and lets think about when there is an emergency and one entire roadway is shut down. Say the mainline of the Beltway is blocked and everyone is diverted to the Express Lanes. Do you want to have them merge from 2 into 1 before spilling out into 4 lanes? Or have 2 lanes spill out into 4. Likewise, if the Express Lanes are closed, by narrowing the mainline to 3 in advance of the merge point, you are creating an artificial chokepoint. 

This is a fatal flaw on the NJ Turnpike. When they do construction in the car lanes and have to shut the truck lanes, all traffic squeezes from 3 to 2 and then opens back up to 3 lanes. The new configuration, south of Exit 6, I believe, is to have all 6 lanes for a short portion before ending those lanes one at a time after the converge point. This way, if if one roadway is closed, there is no point where the remaining roadway connecting to the single carriageway to the south would ever be narrower than 3 lanes.

[1995hoo]

A little question: Will VDOT use the red shoulder paving, like on I-66? I haven't been down there since January, so I need to know if this is the new standard by them.

Not if FHWA has any say in it. The new proposed national standard is for red to be reserved for transit lanes (bus lanes).

The I-66 shoulder lane is more of a rusty orange color than red, though. I've never been to San Francisco, but the "People Behaving Badly" videos from KRON-4's Stanley Roberts showing the transit lanes out there show a much redder color–more like fire engine red or Ferrari red than the I-66 color.

[mtantillo]

A little question: Will VDOT use the red shoulder paving, like on I-66? I haven't been down there since January, so I need to know if this is the new standard by them.

Not if FHWA has any say in it. The new proposed national standard is for red to be reserved for transit lanes (bus lanes).

The I-66 shoulder lane is more of a rusty orange color than red, though. I've never been to San Francisco, but the "People Behaving Badly" videos from KRON-4's Stanley Roberts showing the transit lanes out there show a much redder color—more like fire engine red or Ferrari red than the I-66 color.

My guess is that FHWA would say that the orangish color is "close enough" to red. my only other experience with red is on Hylan Blvd in Staten Island. When faded and dirtied up a bit, that red looks pretty similar to the color of I-66.

[Mapmikey]

The shoulder lane opened yesterday.  Traffic on the inner loop was reported as better than average, which means the backup to the American Legion bridge didn't start as far south (often VA 7 these days).

My guess is that people in the mainline 495 will also try to use the shoulder lane and this will cut into whatever (minimal) positive effect this project will have on traffic there.  Until Maryland does something, this part of the beltway will always be a mess.

Mike

[cpzilliacus]

[Emphasis added below]

The shoulder lane opened yesterday.  Traffic on the inner loop was reported as better than average, which means the backup to the American Legion bridge didn't start as far south (often VA 7 these days).

My guess is that people in the mainline 495 will also try to use the shoulder lane and this will cut into whatever (minimal) positive effect this project will have on traffic there.  Until Maryland does something, this part of the beltway will always be a mess.

It is not widely known, but Montgomery County's Master Plan of Highways already calls for an unspecified number of HOV lanes from the Virginia end of the American Legion Bridge at least as far as I-270Y (I-270 Spur).