Virginia

[plain]

Memories of the past ...

Yeah I remember this like it was yesterday. It was even worse at night, especially NB. There were times where they briefly closed the road altogether in order to move equipment or sections of the bridge into place. It was just long enough to create a backup all the way back to Bells Rd and sometimes further. VDOT warned of an hour delay on DMS's and they weren't kidding.
I found a pic online a couple years back of the first (1976) BGS for VA 195, I'm gonna try and dig it up.

This was a fascinating project to watch.  There were a variety of vantage points where one could stand within about 150 feet of the bridge and watch the sawing, removal and replacement operations for the prefabricated sections of bridge deck, and there were a number of nights where I went there for several hours to watch the construction.  Driving through there was also a good way to pass the construction zones and to get a glimpse of the construction operations, and I did that many times also, at least after the heavy traffic periods so that I was not adding to the backup.

http://www.roadstothefuture.com/I95_JRB_Restoration.html

Since bridge volume was about 4,800 vehicles per hour at 7:00 PM when the closure started, motorists were advised to consider alternate routes, since 2 lanes could not handle that much traffic.  I-95 traffic backed up for a couple miles at times during the early evenings.  Volumes dropped steadily and at 10:00 PM it was down to about 3,000 vehicles per hour, and traffic usually flowed freely from then until all lanes reopened at 6:00 AM, albeit traffic moved slowly at about 40 mph.  The AADT (annual average daily traffic) on the bridge at the time of the project was over 110,000 with 9% large trucks.  Construction did not occur on weekends, holidays, or during bad weather.

During construction nights, it was necessary to stop all traffic for up to 10 minutes at a time, about twice a night, so that the large caterpillar-like vehicle with rubber treads, could carry the new bridge span sections across the highway to the bridge work site.  State troopers would stop the traffic during these times.

The official signed alternate routes included segments of I-295, VA-288, VA-76, I-195, and US-1/US-301.

I've always said VDOT has some interesting techniques, in this case basically doing a variation of what they did with the Coleman Bridge.



Here's the pic I mentioned (actually there's 2).

The first pic is the original BGS (on the right in the photo). The exit number is inside the BGS, typical of the RPT at the time.

The 2nd pic is also the original, but the exit number had been covered or removed on the BGS and added on a separate tab instead. I believe this pic was taken in the early 1980's.




SM-S820L

[NJRoadfan]

The old sign is very NJ Turnpike-esque. Wonder if the RPT copied their sign designs.

[plain]

The old sign is very NJ Turnpike-esque. Wonder if the RPT copied their sign designs.

That could be the case as the NJTP was innovative in several ways... but then again how many BGS's on turnpikes actually had a separate exit tab before the 1970's?

[cpzilliacus]

The old sign is very NJ Turnpike-esque. Wonder if the RPT copied their sign designs.

Closer to the end of tolling on  the RPT in 1992, the signs were much more like what VDOT has installed on its other urban freeways around the Commonwealth.

[OracleUsr]

I remember those type signs at the VA 10 interchange in Chester (formerly Exits 6W-E), when I was coming back from Baltimore in 1990.

[WillWeaverRVA]

The old sign is very NJ Turnpike-esque. Wonder if the RPT copied their sign designs.

Closer to the end of tolling on  the RPT in 1992, the signs were much more like what VDOT has installed on its other urban freeways around the Commonwealth.

Indeed, a lot of those signs are still up, with mileage-based exit numbers patched over the original RPT exit numbers (Exit 75 on I-95 northbound briefly became Exit 11 a few years ago when a storm blew off the "75" patch).

[sprjus4]

http://www.hrbtexpansion.org/easset_upload_file19007_113901_e.pdf

Presentation regarding the I-64 HRBT expansion, also includes a new conceptual drawing for the proposed 8-lane bridge and two 2-lane tunnels, which has a rather strange alignment. In some areas, it even overlays the existing bridges. It will be interesting to see how they manage traffic throughout this whole thing. There will need to be a minimum of 4-lanes open at most times, with the exception of overnight lane closures.

Thoughts?

[sprjus4]

A month late, but apparently the speed limit has been raised on VA-207 from 55 mph to 60 mph for about 5 miles in two sections between I-95 and Bowling Green.

https://www.virginiadot.org/newsroom/fredericksburg/2019/vdot-to-install-new-speed-limit-signs-at-two-locations-on-route-207-in-caroline-county-on-wednesday-june-196-18-2019.asp

[D-Dey65]

https://twitter.com/vadot/status/1150766678827053056?s=21

It seems like this survey is less about improving I-95 and more about convincing drivers to switch to mass transit. That might be fine if your destination was the DC Metro Area, Hampton Roads, or some other metropolitan area seeking such a network, but it has nothing to do with those driving from the deep south to the northeast.

And I was ready for the chance to advocate reviving I-95 through DC. 

[famartin]

https://twitter.com/vadot/status/1150766678827053056?s=21

It seems like this survey is less about improving I-95 and more about convincing drivers to switch to mass transit. That might be fine if your destination was the DC Metro Area, Hampton Roads, or some other metropolitan area seeking such a network, but it has nothing to do with those driving from the deep south to the northeast.

And I was ready for the chance to advocate reviving I-95 through DC. 

In fairness, most of the congestion is likely due to daily commuters, so moving them off I-95 would help long range travelers.

As far as I-95 thru DC, that could be completed now with some new signs and transfer of the BW Parkway to MSHA.

[sprjus4]

In fairness, most of the congestion is likely due to daily commuters, so moving them off I-95 would help long range travelers.

That, along with a widening of the general purpose lanes to 4 free lanes each way would provide for a significant improvement overall.

It would be interesting if VDOT and MSHA would collaborate to conduct an Environmental Impact Statement on constructing a ~60-80 mile 6-lane lane toll road around the eastern side in the VA-207 / US-301 corridor between Ruther Glen and US-50, building a second 4-lane Harry Nice Bridge parallel to the current proposed one (to allow 6-lanes of traffic across the bridge and expansion room for 8-lanes in the future), along with replacing the Chesapeake Bay Bridges with two 4-lane bridges w/ full shoulders, widening US-50 / US-301 to 8-lanes and upgrading the remaining substandard-freeway pieces near Annapolis to interstate standards, and upgrading US-301 to interstate standards.

A very expensive overall of the VA-207 / US-301 / US-50 corridors but would provide significant relief for through traffic, the US-50 corridor, and local traffic in the DC area in conjunction to an 8-lane GP I-95 in Northern Virginia. It would be funded through a mix of toll revenue, federal, and state funding split between Maryland and Virginia for their respective portions.

[froggie]

As far as I-95 thru DC, that could be completed now with some new signs and transfer of the BW Parkway to MSHA.

No it couldn't.  First, BW Pkwy lacks paved shoulders.  Second, Kenilworth Ave doesn't even meet Interstate standards of the late '50s (when the Anacostia Freeway was built), let alone modern standards.

[famartin]

As far as I-95 thru DC, that could be completed now with some new signs and transfer of the BW Parkway to MSHA.

No it couldn't.  First, BW Pkwy lacks paved shoulders.  Second, Kenilworth Ave doesn't even meet Interstate standards of the late '50s (when the Anacostia Freeway was built), let alone modern standards.

Like that has ever stopped a road from being signed as an interstate...

[MNHighwayMan]

Like that has ever stopped a road from being signed as an interstate...

I would argue that most of the time, it actually does.

[famartin]

Like that has ever stopped a road from being signed as an interstate...

I would argue that most of the time, it actually does.

There are plenty of substandard roads, or roads that were substandard when first signed.

[plain]

I took the survey.

While there's plenty of issues left to deal with in Northern Virginia, VDOT really needs to start focusing on Richmond. The stretch north of the James River is especially outdated (still 6 lanes like it was in 1958), the overlap with I-64 sees major congestion in both directions during mornings and afternoons, plus much of this stretch still lacks lighting.. which is ridiculous considering this is one of the most dangerous stretches of freeway in the entire state.

[famartin]

I took the survey.

While there's plenty of issues left to deal with in Northern Virginia, VDOT really needs to start focusing on Richmond. The stretch north of the James River is especially outdated (still 6 lanes like it was in 1958), the overlap with I-64 sees major congestion in both directions during mornings and afternoons, plus much of this stretch still lacks lighting.. which is ridiculous considering this is one of the most dangerous stretches of freeway in the entire state.

It's been a couple years since I drove thru there but that was my impression as well. That said, they may be keeping it as-is to encourage use of I-295.

[plain]

I took the survey.

While there's plenty of issues left to deal with in Northern Virginia, VDOT really needs to start focusing on Richmond. The stretch north of the James River is especially outdated (still 6 lanes like it was in 1958), the overlap with I-64 sees major congestion in both directions during mornings and afternoons, plus much of this stretch still lacks lighting.. which is ridiculous considering this is one of the most dangerous stretches of freeway in the entire state.

It's been a couple years since I drove thru there but that was my impression as well. That said, they may be keeping it as-is to encourage use of I-295.

I-295 is very useful for long distance traffic, not so much for local commuters.

[Beltway]

While there's plenty of issues left to deal with in Northern Virginia, VDOT really needs to start focusing on Richmond. The stretch north of the James River is especially outdated (still 6 lanes like it was in 1958),

It has been freeway bypassed at least 5 ways --
I-195/VA-195 -- 1977
I-195/VA-76/VA-150 -- 1982
I-295 E-W  -- 1981
I-295 N-S  -- 1992
I-295/VA-895 -- 2002
I-295/I-64/VA-288 -- 2005

the overlap with I-64 sees major congestion in both directions during mornings and afternoons, plus much of this stretch still lacks lighting.. which is ridiculous considering this is one of the most dangerous stretches of freeway in the entire state.

I see the points, but I don't recall seeing accident stats of that nature.  I-95 in the city has had safety improvement projects where a raised median island was converted to flush median with concrete barrier, addition of auxiliary lanes between interchanges, lengthening of acceleration and deceleration lanes on all interchanges.

It would be nice to see it 8-laned, but that would be pretty involved especially at the historic Sixth Mt. Zion Baptist Church.

[sprjus4]

It has been freeway bypassed at least 5 ways --
I-195/VA-195 -- 1977
I-195/VA-76/VA-150 -- 1982
I-295 E-W  -- 1981
I-295 N-S  -- 1992
I-295/VA-895 -- 2002
I-295/I-64/VA-288 -- 2005

It's still an important local route. The bypasses have certainly helped, without them I-95 would need at least 10 lanes through Downtown, but the mainline through Richmond still has a large amount of traffic.

I could say I-64 was bypassed by I-664, I-264, VA-164, etc. so improvements on I-64 aren't a priority - Hampton Roads

I-40 was bypassed by I-540 and eventually NC-540, so improvements on I-40 aren't a priority - Raleigh

I-85 and I-77 was bypassed by I-485, so improvements on I-85 and I-77 aren't a priority - Charlotte

I-85, I-20, and I-75 was bypassed by I-285, so improvements on I-85, I-20, and I-75 aren't a priority - Atlanta

[Beltway]

It has been freeway bypassed at least 5 ways --
I-195/VA-195 -- 1977
I-195/VA-76/VA-150 -- 1982
I-295 E-W  -- 1981
I-295 N-S  -- 1992
I-295/VA-895 -- 2002
I-295/I-64/VA-288 -- 2005

It's still an important local route. The bypasses have certainly helped, without them I-95 would need at least 10 lanes through Downtown, but the mainline through Richmond still has a large amount of traffic.

I could say I-64 was bypassed by I-664, I-264, VA-164, etc. so improvements on I-64 aren't a priority - Hampton Roads

I-40 was bypassed by I-540 and eventually NC-540, so improvements on I-40 aren't a priority - Raleigh

I-85 and I-77 was bypassed by I-485, so improvements on I-85 and I-77 aren't a priority - Charlotte

I-85, I-20, and I-75 was bypassed by I-285, so improvements on I-85, I-20, and I-75 aren't a priority - Atlanta

Are you trying to start another argument?  Remember what the moderators said a week ago?

I never said that improvements weren't a priority. 

There are studies underway now looking at major expansions for both I-64 interchanges, I-95/I-64 Downtown, and I-95/I-64/I-195 Bryan Park which would include the mainline between Boulevard and I-64.

https://www.virginiadot.org/projects/richmond/i-95-64_overlap_study.asp

[sprjus4]

Are you trying to start another argument?

No, I was just commenting on what you said. Plus, arguments aren't a bad thing necessarily. It only becomes an issue when it spreads for many pages. That's mostly an issue when both parties have strong opinions on one issue and there's a continuous effort to get the other one to see the other persons view and it never goes anywhere. I don't necessarily disagree with you here. I just interpreted your comment about Richmond having freeway bypasses as saying it's already been bypassed, so no need to improve anything.

There are studies underway now looking at major expansions for both I-64 interchanges, I-95/I-64 Downtown, and I-95/I-64/I-195 Bryan Park which would include the mainline between Boulevard and I-64.

https://www.virginiadot.org/projects/richmond/i-95-64_overlap_study.asp

It will be interesting to see the proposals for those. It could be small modifications or major reconstruction which would be complex due to the density of development adjacent to the highways.

[sprjus4]

I see the points, but I don't recall seeing accident stats of that nature.

https://www.virginiadot.org/projects/resources/richmond/I-95-64_Overlap_Study/Overlap_Final_Report_032713_No_Appendix.pdf

Page 3

VDOT identified the I-95/I-64 Overlap area in downtown Richmond to be one of the highest crash, heavily congested corridors in the region.

[froggie]

Like that has ever stopped a road from being signed as an interstate...

I would argue that most of the time, it actually does.

There are plenty of substandard roads, or roads that were substandard when first signed.

In the early days, sure.  FHWA has been a bit more stringent in the past 30 years.  Ever notice the preponderance of Future Interstate routes, even on roads that are freeway grade?  FHWA requires that they be substantially up to current standards, or have a design exemption with a technical or geographic reason as to why not...and cost isn't a valid reason.  And paved shoulders outside of bridges and tunnels is a hard requirement.  As noted, neither Kenilworth Ave nor the BW Pkwy come even close.

[sprjus4]

and cost isn't a valid reason.

Hasn't stopped NCDOT.