News:

Thank you for your patience during the Forum downtime while we upgraded the software. Welcome back and see this thread for some new features and other changes to the forum.

Main Menu

Northern Virginia HOT Lanes

Started by mtantillo, August 14, 2012, 11:02:35 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Beltway

Quote from: sprjus4 on June 20, 2019, 09:07:39 AM
Maybe 6 lanes... if you've ever been on US-301 / the Nice bridge corridor on a heavy travel weekend, it's pretty packed with the 4-lanes... it felt almost like I-64 in free-flowing conditions, but still packed.

Four freeway lanes flow -much- smoother than four arterial lanes.  Per lane capacity of about 2,000 VPH compared to about 800.  Plus all those traffic signals.
http://www.roadstothefuture.com
http://www.capital-beltway.com

Baloney is a reserved word on the Internet
    (Robert Coté, 2002)


sprjus4

Quote from: Beltway on June 20, 2019, 10:51:32 AM
Quote from: sprjus4 on June 20, 2019, 09:07:39 AM
Maybe 6 lanes... if you've ever been on US-301 / the Nice bridge corridor on a heavy travel weekend, it's pretty packed with the 4-lanes... it felt almost like I-64 in free-flowing conditions, but still packed.

Four freeway lanes flow -much- smoother than four arterial lanes.  Per lane capacity of about 2,000 VPH compared to about 800.  Plus all those traffic signals.
I'm referring to the 23 mile stretch between Port Royal and Ruther Glen - no signals at all, and no obstacles for traffic flow. It flows like a freeway, just without the frontage roads and interchanges.

And don't give me "the private driveways and cross roads could be the issue"  because I rarely see traffic pull out of there, and it certainly isn't the reason traffic is packed.

Look if they wanted to build it to just 4-lanes, they can but I see issues in the long-run.

Beltway

Quote from: sprjus4 on June 20, 2019, 11:07:10 AM
Quote from: Beltway on June 20, 2019, 10:51:32 AM
Four freeway lanes flow -much- smoother than four arterial lanes.  Per lane capacity of about 2,000 VPH compared to about 800.  Plus all those traffic signals.
I'm referring to the 23 mile stretch between Port Royal and Ruther Glen - no signals at all, and no obstacles for traffic flow. It flows like a freeway, just without the frontage roads and interchanges.
And don't give me "the private driveways and cross roads could be the issue"  because I rarely see traffic pull out of there, and it certainly isn't the reason traffic is packed.

I see at least 25 at-grade intersections, plus adjacent business strips in two places.  Could handle more than 800 VPH but I doubt it.
http://www.roadstothefuture.com
http://www.capital-beltway.com

Baloney is a reserved word on the Internet
    (Robert Coté, 2002)

sprjus4

Quote from: Beltway on June 20, 2019, 11:16:57 AM
Quote from: sprjus4 on June 20, 2019, 11:07:10 AM
Quote from: Beltway on June 20, 2019, 10:51:32 AM
Four freeway lanes flow -much- smoother than four arterial lanes.  Per lane capacity of about 2,000 VPH compared to about 800.  Plus all those traffic signals.
I'm referring to the 23 mile stretch between Port Royal and Ruther Glen - no signals at all, and no obstacles for traffic flow. It flows like a freeway, just without the frontage roads and interchanges.
And don't give me "the private driveways and cross roads could be the issue"  because I rarely see traffic pull out of there, and it certainly isn't the reason traffic is packed.

I see at least 25 at-grade intersections, plus adjacent business strips in two places.  Could handle more than 800 VPH but I doubt it.
So you're claiming that's the reason traffic gets packed, but still flows at 60-70 mph? It's likely it'd still be that way if it was freeway.

By the way, just curious, would a freeway be a mere upgrade of US-301 of VA-207 to interstate standards, or new location facility within Virginia? Obviously in Maryland, most would be new location, but how could it work in Virginia?

Beltway

Quote from: sprjus4 on June 20, 2019, 12:33:48 PM
Quote from: Beltway on June 20, 2019, 11:16:57 AM
Quote from: sprjus4 on June 20, 2019, 11:07:10 AM
Quote from: Beltway on June 20, 2019, 10:51:32 AM
Four freeway lanes flow -much- smoother than four arterial lanes.  Per lane capacity of about 2,000 VPH compared to about 800.  Plus all those traffic signals.
I'm referring to the 23 mile stretch between Port Royal and Ruther Glen - no signals at all, and no obstacles for traffic flow. It flows like a freeway, just without the frontage roads and interchanges.  And don't give me "the private driveways and cross roads could be the issue"  because I rarely see traffic pull out of there, and it certainly isn't the reason traffic is packed.
I see at least 25 at-grade intersections, plus adjacent business strips in two places.  Could handle more than 800 VPH but I doubt it.
So you're claiming that's the reason traffic gets packed, but still flows at 60-70 mph? It's likely it'd still be that way if it was freeway.

The only claim I made is about the capacity of the two designs (above).  That many intersections would impact the flow and throughput.

Quote from: sprjus4 on June 20, 2019, 12:33:48 PM
By the way, just curious, would a freeway be a mere upgrade of US-301 of VA-207 to interstate standards, or new location facility within Virginia? Obviously in Maryland, most would be new location, but how could it work in Virginia?

I would have to do a more detailed evaluation, but probably a lot of it in Virginia would be more suited to a new location, it would depend on costs, environmental impacts, and right-of-way impacts.
http://www.roadstothefuture.com
http://www.capital-beltway.com

Baloney is a reserved word on the Internet
    (Robert Coté, 2002)

Beltway

Quote from: sprjus4 on June 19, 2019, 11:14:31 PM
I've supported an [Washington] eastern bypass in the past, but one of my main concerns is once at the US-50 freeway, what is the most efficient routing for the heavy amount of traffic using the new bypass to get back to I-95? I-97 could work, but you'd need to expand that to likely 8-lanes, and it would still dump into Baltimore.

It would tie into I-97 and the I-895 Harbor Tunnel Thruway, and traffic could bypass Baltimore on the eastern part of the I-695 Beltway.  The Key Bridge only carries about 30,000 AADT today.
http://www.roadstothefuture.com
http://www.capital-beltway.com

Baloney is a reserved word on the Internet
    (Robert Coté, 2002)

sprjus4

#1456
Quote from: Beltway on June 19, 2019, 11:52:31 AM
No, the typical toll (as in no major incidents outstanding) on Friday afternoon peak is more like $15 to $18 for the entire 28 miles.
Currently, Transurban reports the toll for the I-95 Express Lanes between Springfield and Garrisonville Rd is $27.20 and there's no major incidents currently occurring. A little while ago, it was $25. I'll report if it gets higher.

Like I said, $20 - $30.

A quick check at 511virginia.org reports the same number adding up the prices on the overhead sign.

Updates:


Update @ 2:30pm - Toll at $30.00 - Typical conditions / no major incidents
Update @ 2:50pm - Toll at $31.10 - Typical conditions / no major incidents
Update @ 3:00pm - Toll at $31.95 - Typical conditions / no major incidents
Update @ 3:10pm - Toll at $31.55 - Typical conditions / no major incidents
Update @ 3:35pm - Toll at $32.60 - Typical conditions / no major incidents
Update @ 4:40pm - Toll at $33.35 - Typical conditions / no major incidents (A quick check now shows I-495 at $18.10, making an entire I-95/I-495 trip $51.45)

Mapmikey

Monday through Thursday at 515 pm the toll to use 95 from the beltway to Garrisonville is typically $20-25 if there are no incidents. It is also typically 30-45 minutes faster.

At 5 am northbound this toll is about $10. Mainline 95 NB at this time is busy but moving a fair bit better than the return trip SB but there are backups in Dale City and sometimes Springfield. The horrible Garrisonville backups have still not returned following the short HOT lane extension south.

sprjus4

Quote from: Mapmikey on June 21, 2019, 02:10:25 PM
typically $20-25 if there are no incidents.
That's my point - $20 - $30, not $15 - $18.

Quote from: Mapmikey on June 21, 2019, 02:10:25 PM
The horrible Garrisonville backups have still not returned following the short HOT lane extension south.
It certainly hasn't gotten better - it just moved the backup 2 miles south.

The traffic chokes around that area every day - including right now.

Once the Fredericksburg extension is completed, hopefully as HO/T traffic will split to the new thru / local lanes, there will be enough of a balance where the lanes can evenly drop off, and smoothly release traffic out of them far better then the current endpoint, and certainly better than the old Garrisonville exit you mentioned. And not to mention, if the traffic splits between local / thru at that location, it will split into 3 lanes of either local or 3 lanes of thru and have far more capacity to handle them.

Mapmikey

I was referring to northbound in the morning with the backups gone still.

Southbound is a mixed bag. Some days the merge is smooth with no backups in HOT lanes or the mainline. This is partly dependent on whether the stafford exit is backing up or not.

Most of the time the mainline is slower through the HOT lane merge but it is rare for the HOT lanes to backup much at all. Overall the current merge location works better than the previous location and is way better than the Dumfries merge point was.

sprjus4

Quote from: Mapmikey on June 21, 2019, 02:36:47 PM
Most of the time the mainline is slower through the HOT lane merge but it is rare for the HOT lanes to backup much at all
That's the thing - it horribly congests everybody in the mainline. I'm hoping once the Fredericksburg Extension is completed and the Rappahannock River Crossing project is completed, it will be a much smoother merge point for traffic, and help the mainline lanes flow a lot quicker. If it indeed works - then I'll actually admit the HO/T lanes have helped traffic flow in the GP lanes. Once that's done, add a 4th GP lane, and I think I-95 will be much better overall.

Jmiles32

Quote from: sprjus4 on June 21, 2019, 02:38:46 PM
Quote from: Mapmikey on June 21, 2019, 02:36:47 PM
Most of the time the mainline is slower through the HOT lane merge but it is rare for the HOT lanes to backup much at all
That's the thing - it horribly congests everybody in the mainline. I'm hoping once the Fredericksburg Extension is completed and the Rappahannock River Crossing project is completed, it will be a much smoother merge point for traffic, and help the mainline lanes flow a lot quicker. If it indeed works - then I'll actually admit the HO/T lanes have helped traffic flow in the GP lanes. Once that's done, add a 4th GP lane, and I think I-95 will be much better overall.

While the merge should indeed be much better, there are still some who would like to see the HOT lanes further extended to Massaponax as originally planned. Will this be necessary? Perhaps so if VA can't come up with the money to at the very least add an additional GP lane in each direction from the local thru/lane merge(Exit 130) to Exit 126. 6 lanes immediately choking down to 3 is never a good idea anywhere, let alone on a road like I-95.
Aspiring Transportation Planner at Virginia Tech. Go Hokies!

sprjus4

Quote from: Jmiles32 on June 21, 2019, 05:26:09 PM
While the merge should indeed be much better, there are still some who would like to see the HOT lanes further extended to Massaponax as originally planned. Will this be necessary?
Past VA-3, traffic is usually fine heading southbound... now northbound is a different story, that backup starts just a little south of US-1. The 70 mph zone also starts south of US-1.

Jmiles32

Quote from: sprjus4 on June 21, 2019, 05:37:02 PM
Quote from: Jmiles32 on June 21, 2019, 05:26:09 PM
While the merge should indeed be much better, there are still some who would like to see the HOT lanes further extended to Massaponax as originally planned. Will this be necessary?
Past VA-3, traffic is usually fine heading southbound... now northbound is a different story, that backup starts just a little south of US-1. The 70 mph zone also starts south of US-1.

Agreed but if widening I-95 to 8 lanes down to Richmond is the goal, then that would be the place to start. Regarding the weekend northbound traffic (which in my experiences can start from as far back as even the Thornburg Exit(118)), I could definitely see backups resulting from the northbound local/thru lane merge. How bad would this be? Hard to tell but certainly better than the current situation in IMO.

Slightly off topic, but I again believe that the Fredricksburg area would also tremendously benefit from more exits. It sounds like an Exit 131 (a connection to the Carl D. Silver Pkwy) is seriously being considered, but an Exit 128 (Harrison Road) and an Exit 124 (Potential future road) would also be extremely beneficial in distributing the amount of local traffic getting on and off I-95.
Aspiring Transportation Planner at Virginia Tech. Go Hokies!

AlexandriaVA

Extend the HOT lanes down to Danville while we're at it. Lord help us if people consider something other than living in the middle of nowhere.

These arguments over prices and merge points have become so banal. It's a major metropolitan area, and the moment you decide to live at or beyond it's fringes, it shouldn't be surprising that it's going to cost in terms of time and/or money to overcome that distance.

famartin

Quote from: AlexandriaVA on June 21, 2019, 06:58:00 PM
Extend the HOT lanes down to Danville while we're at it. Lord help us if people consider something other than living in the middle of nowhere.

These arguments over prices and merge points have become so banal. It's a major metropolitan area, and the moment you decide to live at or beyond it's fringes, it shouldn't be surprising that it's going to cost in terms of time and/or money to overcome that distance.

No its not surprising.  Also not surprising people want to, considering the insane cost of living inside the beltway (and even in many areas just outside of it).

What is surprising is that local jurisdictions refuse to take ownership of the neverending congestion problem.  They could hold traffic in check, if they just restrained development.  But that's not going to happen as long as development equals money, so...

1995hoo

It's not so simple in Virginia for "local jurisdictions"  to "restrain development."  The reasons why are a bit complex to explain in this sort of forum, but essentially their powers are quite constrained.
"You know, you never have a guaranteed spot until you have a spot guaranteed."
—Olaf Kolzig, as quoted in the Washington Times on March 28, 2003,
commenting on the Capitals clinching a playoff spot.

"That sounded stupid, didn't it?"
—Kolzig, to the same reporter a few seconds later.

sprjus4

Quote from: 1995hoo on June 21, 2019, 10:33:04 PM
It's not so simple in Virginia for "local jurisdictions"  to "restrain development."  The reasons why are a bit complex to explain in this sort of forum, but essentially their powers are quite constrained.
Don't approve rezonings, don't approve permits, etc. for each development.

Some of the development down here in Chesapeake has been prevented by City Council, and all of the rapid development going up all over the place is approved each and every one by City Council. If the jurisdiction doesn't want it, don't approve it.

AlexandriaVA

No photos, but work crews are clearly making progress on the new concrete barriers. The southernmost portion of the 395 HOT lanes extension (between the Turkeycock crossover and roughly Seminary) looks effectively to be done - the third lane is painted in place of the old shoulder.

Also noticed on a run today, from my position on the Mt Vernon Trail right below the 14th street bridge, that there are new HOT lane information (i.e. price) signs. If they ever extend the HOT lanes into DC, there's already plenty of infrastructure in place right up to the city line...

Beltway

Quote from: AlexandriaVA on July 16, 2019, 10:50:34 PM
No photos, but work crews are clearly making progress on the new concrete barriers. The southernmost portion of the 395 HOT lanes extension (between the Turkeycock crossover and roughly Seminary) looks effectively to be done - the third lane is painted in place of the old shoulder.

I rode it a few weeks ago, on the HOV lanes from D.C., and it is indeed looking near completion.

Quote from: AlexandriaVA on July 16, 2019, 10:50:34 PM
Also noticed on a run today, from my position on the Mt Vernon Trail right below the 14th street bridge, that there are new HOT lane information (i.e. price) signs. If they ever extend the HOT lanes into DC, there's already plenty of infrastructure in place right up to the city line...

No need, as the reversible roadway divides into two 2-lane roadways each way at Eads Street near the Pentagon and carries that across the center 14th Street Bridge, and those split into lanes to/from 14th Street and lanes to/from the Southwest Freeway (I-395 GP).
http://www.roadstothefuture.com
http://www.capital-beltway.com

Baloney is a reserved word on the Internet
    (Robert Coté, 2002)

1995hoo

Based on what I can see from the buses while commuting, it appears there's still a decent amount of paving and barrier work to be done between Shirlington and the Pentagon and in the area immediately north of Turkeycock, but they've definitely made excellent progress and it looks like they ought to be ready to begin HO/T operations either sometime in October or at worst by Thanksgiving. 
"You know, you never have a guaranteed spot until you have a spot guaranteed."
—Olaf Kolzig, as quoted in the Washington Times on March 28, 2003,
commenting on the Capitals clinching a playoff spot.

"That sounded stupid, didn't it?"
—Kolzig, to the same reporter a few seconds later.

tolbs17

I don't even understand why it gets so congested there so much. I know it's near 200,000 VPD. I think they are squished. Make bypasses. I don't think they can widen the main highway unless you build more bridges and shift the highway. I try to avoid that area and take 301 if I have to. It's fun driving through there but the only thing is not fun is the traffic.  :-/

sprjus4

Quote from: mrhappy1261 on July 25, 2019, 02:29:35 AM
I don't even understand why it gets so congested there so much. I know it's near 200,000 VPD. I think they are squished. Make bypasses. I don't think they can widen the main highway unless you build more bridges and shift the highway. I try to avoid that area and take 301 if I have to. It's fun driving through there but the only thing is not fun is the traffic.  :-/
It's certainly possible to widen the GP lanes to 4 each way. Plenty of room. You'd have to widen some overpasses, and replace a couple of bridges here and there, but it certainly is possible.

It gets congested because 200,000 AADT on a 6-lane freeway is overloading it. The HO/T lanes provide -some- relief, especially for those who can afford it, but the general purpose lanes are still clogged.

A bypass proposal has been touted for years and even studied, but both states (Maryland and Virginia) can't agree on where it will go, and there's no funding to build a 80+ mile freeway, plus upgrading other interstates / freeways it will tie into to accommodate the additional traffic.

HO/T lanes seem to currently be the only answer for congestion relief, at least in Northern Virginia on I-95. I'll think different once VDOT does a detailed evaluation of widening to 8-lanes GP in their I-95 Corridor Study. I'd be shocked if they do, but it would be a good step.

AlexandriaVA

Widening isn't going to happen, certainly not along 395. For one, there are legal non-competition restrictions on improvements along the corridor as part of the HOT lane deal, plus even if there weren't, there simply isn't any space and there's no political interest in it (or desire for that matter).

sprjus4

Quote from: AlexandriaVA on July 25, 2019, 11:39:26 AM
Widening isn't going to happen, certainly not along 395. For one, there are legal non-competition restrictions on improvements along the corridor as part of the HOT lane deal, plus even if there weren't, there simply isn't any space and there's no political interest in it (or desire for that matter).
I-395 is not I-95. There's plenty of room on I-95.

And of course there's no desire. That would involve the state actually spending money and not giving the work to private investors and letting them toll every and all new capacity.

I've lost faith in VDOT for any large I-95 improvement. Until they show they're willing to actually do the work or at least study it, they're a joke. They're expanding I-95 in North Carolina, a freeway with 50,000 - 60,000 AADT to 8-lanes. We can't even do that to a freeway with 200,000 AADT, and don't tell me the magical HO/T lanes solve that problem 100%. They don't.



Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.