Virginia

[sprjus4]

What was the proposed speed limit on VA-3? 

The statute allows 60 mph. The article he posted implies that's what was proposed for some portion.

It does?  Last I looked only certain nonlimited-access highways had been authorized for 60 mph, and then only certain sections of them.  US-17, US-29, US-58, Alt. US-58, US-360, US-460.

In the past, it was those highways. On March 19, 2018, legislation was approved to allow 60 MPH along US-23, US-301, State Route 3, and State Route 207. It also removed "between the Town of Port Royal and Saluda" code, allowing every part of US-17 in Virginia to eligible to 60 MPH.

I was informed by the City of Chesapeake last year a study was being conducted to raise the speed limit on US-17 between George Washington Hwy and the NC border to 60 MPH as a result of this legislation as well. The City code would have to amended however, which currently restricts the maximum speed limit to 55 MPH in the city, except on interstate highways (I-64 & I-464 are 60 MPH through Chesapeake).

Eventually I could see the code being revised to eliminate the selection-based increases, and permit 60 MPH on every divided highway in Virginia, after a speed study is conducted of course. Almost every divided highway in the 1960s and early 70s had 60 MPH in Virginia, and I could easily see it again.

[1995hoo]

....

They ought to do what they did around 1960, all 4-lane nonlimited-access highways authorized up to for 60 mph.  Granted that took a lot more work to study them given all the varying design characteristics, than the Interstate system.  From what Mapmikey posted recently, it took from 1960 to 1966 to study and post all the 60 mph speed limits around the state.

I agree with you in general, although I can think of places where 65 would be more appropriate (though I'll concede I'll take 60 over 55!). I've long thought this system of codifying exceptions specific to certain highways or parts thereof is inefficient and stupid, and I think VDOT would be more qualified to assess appropriate speed limits than the General Assembly members.

[sprjus4]

....

They ought to do what they did around 1960, all 4-lane nonlimited-access highways authorized up to for 60 mph.  Granted that took a lot more work to study them given all the varying design characteristics, than the Interstate system.  From what Mapmikey posted recently, it took from 1960 to 1966 to study and post all the 60 mph speed limits around the state.

I agree with you in general, although I can think of places where 65 would be more appropriate (though I'll concede I'll take 60 over 55!). I've long thought this system of codifying exceptions specific to certain highways or parts thereof is inefficient and stupid, and I think VDOT would be more qualified to assess appropriate speed limits than the General Assembly members.

Most of the arterial highway system in Virginia can handle 65 MPH. Let's just be honest.

[Beltway]

I agree with you in general, although I can think of places where 65 would be more appropriate (though I'll concede I'll take 60 over 55!). I've long thought this system of codifying exceptions specific to certain highways or parts thereof is inefficient and stupid, and I think VDOT would be more qualified to assess appropriate speed limits than the General Assembly members.

Most of the arterial highway system in Virginia can handle 65 MPH. Let's just be honest.

Maybe.  The limited-access mileage of the arterial highway system is 27% of the system, and nearly all of that could be 65 mph, and 70 in some places.  The US-29 Madison Heights Bypass is 70 mph.

[sprjus4]

I agree with you in general, although I can think of places where 65 would be more appropriate (though I'll concede I'll take 60 over 55!). I've long thought this system of codifying exceptions specific to certain highways or parts thereof is inefficient and stupid, and I think VDOT would be more qualified to assess appropriate speed limits than the General Assembly members.

Most of the arterial highway system in Virginia can handle 65 MPH. Let's just be honest.

Maybe.  The limited-access mileage of the arterial highway system is 27% of the system, and nearly all of that could be 65 mph, and 70 in some places.  The US-29 Madison Heights Bypass is 70 mph.

The freeways mainly can handle 65 MPH, I agree, a lot them 70 MPH. As for non-limited-access, the older roadways that are windy with no shoulders, narrow lanes, etc. should remain 60 MPH IMHO. A good majority of the highways though have 12 foot lanes, and at least a few feet of shoulder that could be studied to determine if it could handle 65 MPH. The stretches with at least 6 foot paved shoulders, 12 foot lanes, etc. can definitely handle it IMHO. Some examples that come to mind are most of US-17, US-58, some of US-460, and others. Not to mention, most people exceed the 60 MPH limit on most of these highways. For instance, the average along the stretch of US-17 being raised north of Gloucester has an average speed of 65 MPH. A lot of times, in my experience anyways, traffic averages 70 MPH mainly. A posted speed of 65 MPH would be appropriate for those stretches.

[sprjus4]

Updates regarding the I-64 South Island Trestle Bridge replacement apart of the HRBT expansion, along with an updated cost estimate.

http://www.ctb.virginia.gov/resources/2019/mar/pres/1_hrbt_update.pdf
http://www.ctb.virginia.gov/resources/2019/mar/pres/2_trestles.pdf

The project for simply widening the I-64 corridor and constructing a new tunnel is estimated at $3,753,469,673. The I-64 South Island Trestle Bridge replacement was added to the estimate, costing $108,527,554 for the slightly over 1 mile span, bring the project cost up to $3,861,997,227.

The new bridge will be one eight-lane bridge with full shoulders on either side, and will be higher than the existing one to accommodate sea level rising. The bridge will be built with a 100 year life span.

For funding, HRTAC is providing $3,208,469,673, $345,000,000 will come from toll-backed bond proceeds (assumingly from the HO/T collections), SmartScale is providing $200,000,000, and VDOT is providing $108,527,554 for the South Island Trestle Bridge Replacement project under the State of Good Repair program.

[Takumi]

A fatal bus crash on I-95 northbound at the exit 45 offramp this week has brought concerns about the signage there. Apparently people, like the bus driver, occasionally think it’s for I-295, which is about a mile ahead, and take the ramp too fast and crash.
https://www.richmond.com/news/local/crime/exit-ramp-where-bus-crashed-along-i--already-was/article_2386c224-54f6-573e-808b-fe411366c6d8.html

https://www.progress-index.com/news/20190319/bus-driver-charged-with-manslaughter

[Beltway]

"to accommodate sea level rising"

Harrummph.  So why aren't they raising the manmade islands?

[1995hoo]

What was the proposed speed limit on VA-3? 

The statute allows 60 mph. The article he posted implies that's what was proposed for some portion.

It does?  Last I looked only certain nonlimited-access highways had been authorized for 60 mph, and then only certain sections of them.  US-17, US-29, US-58, Alt. US-58, US-360, US-460.

In the past, it was those highways. On March 19, 2018, legislation was approved to allow 60 MPH along US-23, US-301, State Route 3, and State Route 207. It also removed "between the Town of Port Royal and Saluda" code, allowing every part of US-17 in Virginia to eligible to 60 MPH.

....

The boldfaced text is not, strictly speaking, accurate. The 60-mph provision is limited by the clause at the end of the sentence:

The maximum speed limit shall be 60 miles per hour where indicated by lawfully placed signs, erected subsequent to a traffic engineering study and analysis of available and appropriate accident and law-enforcement data, on U.S. Route 17, U.S. Route 23, U.S. Route 29, U.S. Route 58, U.S. Alternate Route 58, U.S. Route 301, U.S. Route 360, U.S. Route 460, U.S. Route 501 between the Town of South Boston and the North Carolina state line, State Route 3, and State Route 207 where such routes are nonlimited access, multilane, divided highways.

Thus, for example, US-17 from I-66 at Delaplane up to US-50 at Paris is not eligible for a 60-mph speed limit because it's a two-lane road, meaning it's neither multilane nor divided. (That's setting aside that they wouldn't raise it even if it were eligible, given that it's currently posted at 45.) The boldfaced clause is a bit poorly placed. It ought to come after the word "data" and it ought to say "on the following routes where they are nonlimited access, multilane, divided highways: [followed by the list of routes]."

With that said, I'd be mildly interested in knowing how VDOT approaches concurrencies where one of the concurrent routes is eligible for the 60-mph limit and one is not. Again citing US-17, at Paris it turns west and runs concurrently with US-50 to Winchester as a nonlimited access, multilane, divided highway. Which one takes precedence? Is the segment eligible for 60 mph because Route 17 is eligible, or does the fact that Route 50 is not eligible mean that segment must be disqualified? (Setting aside that the odds are VDOT may not consider that segment either way for political reasons having to do with the portion of Route 50 between Paris and Gilbert's Corner.)


Edited to add: Upon reflection, I think I know the answer to the "concurrencies" question from driving on Route 29. It has a concurrency with US-15 from near Culpeper to south of Haymarket. Route 15 is not eligible for a 60-mph speed limit, but Route 29 is, and a 60-mph speed limit is posted from Opal south to beyond the end of the concurrency. So I guess if one route is eligible, they might consider the segment for the 60-mph limit.

[Mapmikey]

Edited to add: Upon reflection, I think I know the answer to the "concurrencies" question from driving on Route 29. It has a concurrency with US-15 from near Culpeper to south of Haymarket. Route 15 is not eligible for a 60-mph speed limit, but Route 29 is, and a 60-mph speed limit is posted from Opal south to beyond the end of the concurrency. So I guess if one route is eligible, they might consider the segment for the 60-mph limit.

Same as with US 11-460 west of Roanoke...

[Mapmikey]

"to accommodate sea level rising"

Harrummph.  So why aren't they raising the manmade islands?

They have to take into account the waves and sea level rise for all parts of the project, including the islands.  So they may indeed raise the islands some...

http://www.p3virginia.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/Part-2-HRBT-Addendum-1.pdf

[Beltway]

Thus, for example, US-17 from I-66 at Delaplane up to US-50 at Paris is not eligible for a 60-mph speed limit because it's a two-lane road, meaning it's neither multilane nor divided. (That's setting aside that they wouldn't raise it even if it were eligible, given that it's currently posted at 45.) The boldfaced clause is a bit poorly placed. It ought to come after the word "data" and it ought to say "on the following routes where they are nonlimited access, multilane, divided highways: [followed by the list of routes]."

Right, that is why 4-lane undivided highways like most of US-460 between Petersburg and Suffolk, is not eligible for a 60 mph speed limit, even though it is part of the US-460 corridor authorized for 60 mph in the statute.

With that said, I'd be mildly interested in knowing how VDOT approaches concurrencies where one of the concurrent routes is eligible for the 60-mph limit and one is not.

The statute should govern that.  In a basic legal sense if any one is eligible then the highway segment should be eligible.

[1995hoo]

With that said, I'd be mildly interested in knowing how VDOT approaches concurrencies where one of the concurrent routes is eligible for the 60-mph limit and one is not.

The statute should govern that.  In a basic legal sense if any one is eligible then the highway segment should be eligible.

Yeah, notice I edited my prior comment after remembering I'd driven on a 60-mph segment that answered the question.

[sprjus4]

Right, that is why 4-lane undivided highways like most of US-460 between Petersburg and Suffolk, is not eligible for a 60 mph speed limit, even though it is part of the US-460 corridor authorized for 60 mph in the statute.

If it was legal, the rural sections of U.S. 460 could definitely handle 60 MPH. From my experience, as with a lot of roads I as you know by now, the average traffic flow is about 63 to 67 MPH on a good day. Not a lot of speeding through the towns though, mainly because of local police enforcement hiding in driveways, etc. A lot of straight, two lane roads built to proper rural standards (12 foot lanes, 4 foot paved shoulders) could also handle it IMHO. I wouldn't recommend higher than 60 MPH though, unless it had a full 10 foot paved shoulder, and there's really none of those in Virginia.

https://www.google.com/maps/@36.694561,-78.1925966,3a,75y,58.77h,81.85t/data=!3m5!1e1!3m3!1s7WU4HMAo6_rG09yfbL5tEw!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo2.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3D7WU4HMAo6_rG09yfbL5tEw%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D139.31473%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100

Stretches like this though, 4 lanes, undivided, with 10 foot paved shoulders could be 65 MPH IMHO, if per se the rest of the divided highway segments were increased. It could be 60 MPH at least.

[Beltway]

Right, that is why 4-lane undivided highways like most of US-460 between Petersburg and Suffolk, is not eligible for a 60 mph speed limit, even though it is part of the US-460 corridor authorized for 60 mph in the statute.

If it was legal, the rural sections of U.S. 460 could definitely handle 60 MPH. From my experience, as with a lot of roads I as you know by now, the average traffic flow is about 63 to 67 MPH on a good day. Not a lot of speeding through the towns though, mainly because of local police enforcement hiding in driveways, etc. A lot of straight, two lane roads built to proper rural standards (12 foot lanes, 4 foot paved shoulders) could also handle it IMHO. I wouldn't recommend higher than 60 MPH though, unless it had a full 10 foot paved shoulder, and there's really none of those in Virginia.

The Suffolk Bypass has 10 foot paved shoulders, and there are others that I am not going to spend the time locating at this moment.  That part of US-460 is more like 58-60 on average when including the trucks, from my many observations over the years.  It has 10.5 foot lanes and in most places the shoulders are not wide enough to stop on, and I would not recommend a speed limit increase.

That section of US-58 west of South Hill was rebuilt as part of the US-58 Corridor Program.  It has 5 12-foot lanes and 10-foot paved shoulders.  Also rebuilt the vertical alignment and leveled it considerably, but it is still more rolling than the more rural sections.  Lots of houses along the way.
 

[sprjus4]

The Suffolk Bypass has 10 foot paved shoulders, and there are others that I am not going to spend the time locating at this moment.

The Suffolk Bypass is not an undivided roadway. It's a freeway with a grassy median built to interstate standards. That alone should be 65 MPH IMHO.

It has 10.5 foot lanes and in most places the shoulders are not wide enough to stop on, and I would not recommend a speed limit increase.

[/quote]
A lot of divided highways in Virginia have smaller lanes and narrow shoulders with no room to stop, and are posted 60 MPH. The only difference about those and US-460 is that US-460 is undivided.

https://www.google.com/maps/@36.629582,-79.6527606,3a,55y,278.24h,85.81t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1svtY9JeYSZyHwTj7UjaoDMg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

This stretch of US-58 between Danville and Martinsville has 8 foot lanes, no shoulder, very hilly, and has lots of blind intersections. It's posted at 60 MPH. Trucks do about 55 or 60 MPH on average. I've seen a truck here drive off the road going around a corner at about 58 MPH, trying to maintain his lane. Luckily, it was minimal and there was a small portion of the grass on the side. He kept on going though after taking the corner and re-adjusting back into the lane.

[Beltway]

The Suffolk Bypass has 10 foot paved shoulders, and there are others that I am not going to spend the time locating at this moment.

The Suffolk Bypass is not an undivided roadway. It's a freeway with a grassy median built to interstate standards. That alone should be 65 MPH IMHO.

But part of the 4-lane highway system that supplements the Interstate highway system.

It appears that VDOT delegated the 4-lane speed limit studies to the district office traffic engineering sections, with no central control from Central Office.  That is why a district like Hampton Roads posts 60 on these freeway bypasses and you see 65 and even 70 in some other districts.  That is a mistake if you ask me, even if assuming that each district section uses what they think are the highest engineering standards.

A lot of divided highways in Virginia have smaller lanes and narrow shoulders with no room to stop, and are posted 60 MPH. The only difference about those and US-460 is that US-460 is undivided.

That is a -massive- difference from a safety standpoint.

This stretch of US-58 between Danville and Martinsville has 8 foot lanes, no shoulder, very hilly, and has lots of blind intersections. It's posted at 60 MPH. 

20-foot roadway and 1-foot wedges (narrow shoulders) so actually 22 feet of usable roadway.

Again see my comment about inconsistent interpretation of standards from district to district.

[sprjus4]

But part of the 4-lane highway system that supplements the Interstate highway system.

We were discussing the undivided roadways. I agree the bypass should be 65 MPH. I wouldn't say 70 MPH, as that area is heavily developed, and traffic is very heavy, and some of the curves are questionable, but it could be 65 MPH.

It appears that VDOT delegated the 4-lane speed limit studies to the district office traffic engineering sections, with no central control from Central Office.  That is why a district like Hampton Roads posts 60 on these freeway bypasses and you see 65 and even 70 in some other districts.  That is a mistake if you ask me, even if assuming that each district section uses what they think are the highest engineering standards.

The system in Virginia is very strange. In some cases, the state maintains and determines the speed limits, in others it's the locality. For instance, the City of Suffolk maintains and determines the speed limit on the US 58 bypass. In Chesapeake, the same applies with VA-168. Major freeway corridors, though ran by the localities.

A lot of divided highways in Virginia have smaller lanes and narrow shoulders with no room to stop, and are posted 60 MPH. The only difference about those and US-460 is that US-460 is undivided.

That is a -massive- difference from a safety standpoint.

If the lanes were wider and at least 4 foot of shoulder was provided, it could handle higher.

20-foot roadway and 1-foot wedges (narrow shoulders) so actually 22 feet of usable roadway.

It's still a dangerous speed limit none the less. I was comfortable cruising about 65 MPH (in 55 MPH zones) to 70 MPH (in 60 MPH zones) in other areas from Suffolk to Danville along US-58, though through here, I didn't feel comfortable really above 57 MPH or so. It's too risky.

The state should be able to mandate a maximum speed limit of 55 MPH on this stretch, though I guess they have not decided to.

[Beltway]

The system in Virginia is very strange. In some cases, the state maintains and determines the speed limits, in others it's the locality. For instance, the City of Suffolk maintains and determines the speed limit on the US 58 bypass. In Chesapeake, the same applies with VA-168. Major freeway corridors, though ran by the localities.

Since when, I never heard that before, and which parts?  The state controls the speed limit on US-58, and also on the state-built parts of VA-168 (Oak Grove Connector and Great Bridge Bypass).

That is a -massive- difference from a safety standpoint.

If the lanes were wider and at least 4 foot of shoulder was provided, it could handle higher.

My minimum design for 60 mph on a 4-lane highway cross-section would be four 12-foot lanes, a 12-foot continuous left turn lane, and 10-foot stabilized (aggregate) shoulders.

20-foot roadway and 1-foot wedges (narrow shoulders) so actually 22 feet of usable roadway.

It's still a dangerous speed limit none the less. I was comfortable cruising about 65 MPH (in 55 MPH zones) to 70 MPH (in 60 MPH zones) in other areas from Suffolk to Danville along US-58, though through here, I didn't feel comfortable really above 57 MPH or so. It's too risky.

Some people are impleasable.  Most speed limits too low, but some too high and 'dangerous'.  I've not felt danger or risk on that segment.

[Beltway]

"to accommodate sea level rising"
So why aren't they raising the manmade islands?

They have to take into account the waves and sea level rise for all parts of the project, including the islands.  So they may indeed raise the islands some...
http://www.p3virginia.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/Part-2-HRBT-Addendum-1.pdf

That's odd, I thought that nowadays it was "global climate change".  That could mean falling sea levels if there is global cooling.

So why aren't they building the tunnels deeper so as to maintain design water depth above the floor of the bay?

[sprjus4]

Since when, I never heard that before, and which parts?  The state controls the speed limit on US-58, and also on the state-built parts of VA-168 (Oak Grove Connector and Great Bridge Bypass)

I recall seeing this tweet months back about the Suffolk Bypass - https://twitter.com/VaDOTHR/status/1072302510994587648

I can find documentation if you'd like, but Chesapeake does have full authority over the maintenance, operations, projects, and speed limits on the Great Bridge Bypass. For example, the city is currently finishing a slope stabilization project installing new drainage, stabilizing the slopes, etc. at the Great Bridge Bypass / Mt. Pleasant Rd interchange (Exit 11). They also have plans to reconstruct the interchange in the near future. If it was VDOT maintained, this would be done by VDOT, not the city. The City of Chesapeake has also done routine maintenance on the Great Bridge Bypass as well. I've never seen VDOT vehicles south of I-64.

The Oak Grove Connector was built by the City of Chesapeake, not VDOT. The only project VDOT constructed was the Great Bridge Bypass in 1980.

My minimum design for 60 mph on a 4-lane highway cross-section would be four 12-foot lanes, a 12-foot continuous left turn lane, and 10-foot stabilized (aggregate) shoulders.

Take this roadway in Florida for example. It safely can handle 60 MPH, and has two 12-foot lanes, and 5-foot paved shoulders.

https://www.google.com/maps/@30.4357148,-85.4355243,3a,37.5y,274.68h,83.18t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sV53Vvg1V_KFBUCq6Xki5Qg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

This roadway in Texas is even narrower. 12-foot lanes, and 3 foot paved shoulders. And that's 70 MPH.

https://www.google.com/maps/@27.6759814,-97.4545086,3a,36.5y,188.52h,85.63t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sngFixfHbtmnIWzymzoLu1A!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

That example in particular is a decent-traffic roadway. The TX-286 freeway north of there was previously a 70 MPH rural roadway with significant traffic volumes, and therefore was expanded to a 70 MPH four-lane freeway.

Some people are impleasable.  Most speed limits too low, but some too high and 'dangerous'.  I've not felt danger or risk on that segment.

Maybe "dangerous" or "too high" were the wrong words... I certainly wouldn't drive much above 60 MPH. But I suppose a high limit allows drivers to drive a comfortable speed within the legal limit. This section definitally wouldn't be a candidate of mine for 4-lane roads in Virginia for 65 MPH. Other parts of US-58 definitely, but not this stretch.

[Beltway]

I recall seeing this tweet months back about the Suffolk Bypass -

Maintaining the roadway doesn't mean that a locality can set a speed limit on a principal arterial highway that is on the Strategic Highway Network (STRAHNET).  The US-58 Suffolk Bypass was built by VDH&T in the early 1970s so it wasn't originally built by the locality.  Not saying that it is impossible just rather unlikely.  It also fits the model of bypass speed limits west of there in that district.

[Mapmikey]

"to accommodate sea level rising"
So why aren't they raising the manmade islands?

They have to take into account the waves and sea level rise for all parts of the project, including the islands.  So they may indeed raise the islands some...
http://www.p3virginia.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/Part-2-HRBT-Addendum-1.pdf

That's odd, I thought that nowadays it was "global climate change".  That could mean falling sea levels if there is global cooling.

So why aren't they building the tunnels deeper so as to maintain design water depth above the floor of the bay?

My guess is because the top of the tunnel is at or below the bottom of the shipping channel, per design document of the original tunnel.  This puts the tunnel minimum about 70 ft below the mean water line (in the 1950s) which is dredged to a 50 ft channel and authorized for 55 ft for future expansion of the channel.  So is it more likely over the course of the next 100 years that the ocean rises a little bit more or drops 10 ft...?

[Alps]

"to accommodate sea level rising"
So why aren't they raising the manmade islands?

They have to take into account the waves and sea level rise for all parts of the project, including the islands.  So they may indeed raise the islands some...
http://www.p3virginia.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/Part-2-HRBT-Addendum-1.pdf

That's odd, I thought that nowadays it was "global climate change".  That could mean falling sea levels if there is global cooling.

So why aren't they building the tunnels deeper so as to maintain design water depth above the floor of the bay?

Are you a science denier? Global warming is the correct term. On average, the globe is getting warmer. Cooling is not happening.

[Beltway]

"to accommodate sea level rising"
So why aren't they raising the manmade islands?

They have to take into account the waves and sea level rise for all parts of the project, including the islands.  So they may indeed raise the islands some...
http://www.p3virginia.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/Part-2-HRBT-Addendum-1.pdf

That's odd, I thought that nowadays it was "global climate change".  That could mean falling sea levels if there is global cooling.
So why aren't they building the tunnels deeper so as to maintain design water depth above the floor of the bay?

Are you a science denier? Global warming is the correct term. On average, the globe is getting warmer. Cooling is not happening.

Definition of the scientific method --
- Observable
- Testable
- Repeatable

"Global climate change" is based on computer models, there is nothing scientific about it.  It can't be tested with repeatable experiments.

This from the link above --
"The design sea level rise has been set at 2.0 feet for this Project."

May as well kiss most of Norfolk, Portsmouth, Hampton, Newport News and Virginia Beach goodbye.

I get Engineering News-Record and they have various articles about predictions about GCC that will generate more business for the contracting and heavy construction industry.