Birmingham Northern Beltline (I-422, I-959)

[sprjus4]

ALDOT originally projected the entire project to cost $5.3 billion and be completed by 2054.

Heh.

[Tomahawkin]

I would assume that 30 million will go to ROW acquisition and clearing of the land until the state gets more funding...

[silverback1065]

this sounds like the dumbest project ever. 

[The Ghostbuster]

I wonder how much traffic would theoretically use future Interstate 422 (and 222) compared to existing Interstate 459? If it is built in full (a big if at this point), I hope it does not turn out to be an underutilized boondoggle.

[sprjus4]

I hope it does not turn out to be an underutilized boondoggle.

VA-895 in Richmond.

[silverback1065]

I wonder how much traffic would theoretically use future Interstate 422 (and 222) compared to existing Interstate 459? If it is built in full (a big if at this point), I hope it does not turn out to be an underutilized boondoggle.

i feel like that's a virtual guarantee.  What was the reason for this project anyway?  is traffic really that bad?

[planxtymcgillicuddy]

this sounds like the dumbest project ever.

North Carolina, Pennsylvania and Texas just said, "Hold my beer!"

[goobnav]

I hope it does not turn out to be an underutilized boondoggle.

VA-895 in Richmond.

Shhhhh!!!  Don't tell Beltway.

[sprjus4]

I hope it does not turn out to be an underutilized boondoggle.

VA-895 in Richmond.

Shhhhh!!!  Don't tell Beltway.

It's not a matter of that, the road went bankrupt and traffic & toll revenue was far below projections.

Pocahontas Parkway (Route 895) - The Toll Road That Failed

The 2-mile segment between I-95 and VA-5 segment that was expected to carry significant numbers connecting developments on the east side of the James River only carries 17,000 AADT, and the 5-mile segment continuing to I-295 carries only 6,000 AADT.

Then they built a 2-mile 4-lane airport connector road with two grade separations connecting the airport with VA-895 about 5-7 years ago, and that road carries virtually no traffic.

[goobnav]

I hope it does not turn out to be an underutilized boondoggle.

VA-895 in Richmond.

Shhhhh!!!  Don't tell Beltway.

It's not a matter of that, the road went bankrupt and traffic & toll revenue was far below projections.

Pocahontas Parkway (Route 895) - The Toll Road That Failed

The 2-mile segment between I-95 and VA-5 segment that was expected to carry significant numbers connecting developments on the east side of the James River only carries 17,000 AADT, and the 5-mile segment continuing to I-295 carries only 6,000 AADT.

Then they built a 2-mile 4-lane airport connector road with two grade separations connecting the airport with VA-895 about 5-7 years ago, and that road carries virtually no traffic.

Saw that happening when they built it, with the free alternative of I-64 just up the road.  Was redundant.

[formulanone]

I wonder how much traffic would theoretically use future Interstate 422 (and 222) compared to existing Interstate 459? If it is built in full (a big if at this point), I hope it does not turn out to be an underutilized boondoggle.

I think it would ease travelers from Atlanta to Huntsville or Nashville between I-20 and I-65, but I'm not sure how much time it would really save.

I don't think the NW quadrant heading back to I-22 then to I-65 is going to have that much traffic for a very long time. I don't see that many vehicles turning onto I-22.

[The Ghostbuster]

If the proposed roadway had not been given an Interstate designation from the get-go, would it have been possible, in the interim, to build the road as a two lane roadway with expansion to four lanes if/when such is warranted? I ask this because if the proposed BNB is built, and turns out to be an underutilized roadway, two lanes would probably be sufficient capacity.

[Beltway]

VA-895 in Richmond.

Shhhhh!!!  Don't tell Beltway.

It's not a matter of that, the road went bankrupt and traffic & toll revenue was far below projections.
Pocahontas Parkway (Route 895) - The Toll Road That Failed
The 2-mile segment between I-95 and VA-5 segment that was expected to carry significant numbers connecting developments on the east side of the James River only carries 17,000 AADT, and the 5-mile segment continuing to I-295 carries only 6,000 AADT.

That article is at least 10 years old.

Meanwhile the highway won't be moved somewhere else, the bonds are being fully serviced, and it has been carrying decent volumes since it was opened in 2002.  It is a quite useful highway to connect between South Richmond, Chesterfield County, southern Henrico County, without having to detour thru downtown Richmond on I-95 and I-64, or my case it would mean using the RMTA expressways that have a lower but still substantial toll.

Interstate functions (it should be I-895) --
I-295 provides an outer Richmond bypass for east-west I-64 traffic, and I-295 provides an outer Richmond-Petersburg bypass for north-south I-95 traffic, and I-295 also provides an outer Richmond bypass for traffic between I-95 north of the city and I-64 east of the city.  Until Route 895 opened in September 2002, a major missing link in the Richmond regional Interstate beltway was the connection between I-95 north of Richmond and I-85 south of Petersburg; the through traffic needed to follow I-95 and I-85, passing through downtown Richmond, if it wanted to stay on Interstate highways.  Now that Route 895 is open, the I-95/I-85 through traffic has a freeway bypass around Richmond, using Route 895 and I-295 (given that a section of I-95 will be used between I-85 and Route 895).  There is another Interstate function of Route 895 that was not served before Route 895 existed, the Richmond freeway bypass for traffic traveling between the I-85 corridor and the section of I-64 from east of Richmond to Williamsburg.

Then they built a 2-mile 4-lane airport connector road with two grade separations connecting the airport with VA-895 about 5-7 years ago, and that road carries virtually no traffic.

Also useful with the aforementioned places west of the river wanting to connect to the airport and east end area around the airport.  The AADT is about 5,000.  Part of its intent is to support industrial development.

[Georgia]

I wonder how much traffic would theoretically use future Interstate 422 (and 222) compared to existing Interstate 459? If it is built in full (a big if at this point), I hope it does not turn out to be an underutilized boondoggle.

I think it would ease travelers from Atlanta to Huntsville or Nashville between I-20 and I-65, but I'm not sure how much time it would really save.

I don't think the NW quadrant heading back to I-22 then to I-65 is going to have that much traffic for a very long time. I don't see that many vehicles turning onto I-22.

someone going from Atlanta to Nashville isnt going to go through Birmingham anyways unless they live in far west metro Atlanta.  that traffic would be almost nil in my mind.

[sprjus4]

That article is at least 10 years old.

Except it was published after 2015.

The roadway on the grand scheme of things was largely a failure. It provides all those things you mention, except almost nobody actually uses it. With only 6,000 AADT, a 2-lane road would've sufficed. Thru traffic from I-85 uses I-95 thru the city, and traffic to I-64 can use the short VA-10 to cut over to I-295. I'd say that latter movement might be the biggest regional use of the road, for those that opt to pay $4.50 to save 2 minutes, asides from local traffic.

I'm surprised the airport connector even gets 5,000 AADT. Still very low, considering the roadway is 4-lanes with two grade separations. Again, easily could've been a two-lane road with at-grade crossings, even at the tracks.

Expectation vs. reality really shows with this project, both the freeway itself, and the airport connector.

[Beltway]

The roadway on the grand scheme of things was largely a failure. It provides all those things you mention, except almost nobody actually uses it. With only 6,000 AADT, a 2-lane road would've sufficed.

You yourself said 17,000.  That is on the main part between I-95 and Laburnum Avenue including the river crossing.  That is a substantial amount that provides a more direct route for them as well as not having to overload the other routes on either side (I-95, I-64.  I-95, VA-10, I-295).

Two Richmond middle circumferentials --
VA-150 and Route 895 to I-295
VA-150 and Route 895 and 4-lane arterial Laburnum Avenue.

Thru traffic from I-85 uses I-95 thru the city, and traffic to I-64 can use the short VA-10 to cut over to I-295. I'd say that latter movement might be the biggest regional use of the road, for those that opt to pay $4.50 to save 2 minutes, asides from local traffic.

I use it as an extension of Chippenham Parkway to the airport area, to I-64 East to Hampton, and to western New Kent County.

Especially helpful in peak hours when backups and/or slowdowns can happen on the route thru the city (I-64, I-95, VA-195, VA-76) and they also have $1.40 in tolls.

Clearly worth the $4.50 for the times that I use it.  Smooth sailing all the way.

It carries enough traffic to support itself and it provides favorable service to the various users.

I make regular use of it.

[X99]

That article is at least 10 years old.

Except it was published after 2015.

The roadway on the grand scheme of things was largely a failure. It provides all those things you mention, except almost nobody actually uses it. With only 6,000 AADT, a 2-lane road would've sufficed. Thru traffic from I-85 uses I-95 thru the city, and traffic to I-64 can use the short VA-10 to cut over to I-295. I'd say that latter movement might be the biggest regional use of the road, for those that opt to pay $4.50 to save 2 minutes, asides from local traffic.

I'm surprised the airport connector even gets 5,000 AADT. Still very low, considering the roadway is 4-lanes with two grade separations. Again, easily could've been a two-lane road with at-grade crossings, even at the tracks.

Expectation vs. reality really shows with this project, both the freeway itself, and the airport connector.

It's a simple solution to increase traffic on 895- just increase the speed limit to 75 or 80.

[sprjus4]

That article is at least 10 years old.

Except it was published after 2015.

The roadway on the grand scheme of things was largely a failure. It provides all those things you mention, except almost nobody actually uses it. With only 6,000 AADT, a 2-lane road would've sufficed. Thru traffic from I-85 uses I-95 thru the city, and traffic to I-64 can use the short VA-10 to cut over to I-295. I'd say that latter movement might be the biggest regional use of the road, for those that opt to pay $4.50 to save 2 minutes, asides from local traffic.

I'm surprised the airport connector even gets 5,000 AADT. Still very low, considering the roadway is 4-lanes with two grade separations. Again, easily could've been a two-lane road with at-grade crossings, even at the tracks.

Expectation vs. reality really shows with this project, both the freeway itself, and the airport connector.

It's a simple solution to increase traffic on 895- just increase the speed limit to 75 or 80.

Expectation vs. reality. Probably wouldn't do much. One proposal for the US-460 toll road between Suffolk and Petersburg that never got built would've included a 75 mph speed limit to attract more traffic. I'm not sure how much more traffic it would attract, but it could some since it's long-distance. Reality is most people would drive 75-80 mph regardless.  VA-895 isn't even 10 miles long. They tried the 85 mph speed limit on TX-130 southeast of Austin to attract more traffic, and it barely has. A fun road to drive though, and avoids I-35 at the same time.

The speed limit is already 65 mph, and it's easy to drive 70 mph - 75 mph.

I could see increasing it to 70 mph.

[formulanone]

I wonder how much traffic would theoretically use future Interstate 422 (and 222) compared to existing Interstate 459? If it is built in full (a big if at this point), I hope it does not turn out to be an underutilized boondoggle.

I think it would ease travelers from Atlanta to Huntsville or Nashville between I-20 and I-65, but I'm not sure how much time it would really save.

I don't think the NW quadrant heading back to I-22 then to I-65 is going to have that much traffic for a very long time. I don't see that many vehicles turning onto I-22.

someone going from Atlanta to Nashville isnt going to go through Birmingham anyways unless they live in far west metro Atlanta.  that traffic would be almost nil in my mind.

Selfishly, it would help me. But not many others.

I suppose Atlanta—Nashville would be better handled by I-24 and I-75, though Chattanooga is a knot. 

[nexus73]

I wonder how much traffic would theoretically use future Interstate 422 (and 222) compared to existing Interstate 459? If it is built in full (a big if at this point), I hope it does not turn out to be an underutilized boondoggle.

Seeing the 222 number reminded me of a riddle posed by the Riddler from the Batman TV show from the Sixties.

"When it time like a train?  When it's two to two!".

Rick

[Beltway]

I could see increasing it to 70 mph.

Route 895 could indeed be 70 mph.

My strategy all along has been to do that, and designate it as Interstate 895, as it should be and originally was planned to be. 

Those two things would at least attract -some- additional traffic.

[sprjus4]

Those two things would at least attract -some- additional traffic.

I wouldn't keep my fingers crossed.

[Tourian]

I wonder how much traffic would theoretically use future Interstate 422 (and 222) compared to existing Interstate 459? If it is built in full (a big if at this point), I hope it does not turn out to be an underutilized boondoggle.

459 goes through/nearby Birmingham's largest grouping and most affluent suburbs, of which many can credit their growth due to 459 being there. You can see how the metro spread south because of it. So no, comparing its use to 422 at any point in the forseeable future is not a fair contest.

[Tomahawkin]

I agree. I think 459 gets widened before anything happens to 422. IH 65 south of Birmingham is even a more pressing need IMO

[clong]

I wonder how much traffic would theoretically use future Interstate 422 (and 222) compared to existing Interstate 459? If it is built in full (a big if at this point), I hope it does not turn out to be an underutilized boondoggle.

459 goes through/nearby Birmingham's largest grouping and most affluent suburbs, of which many can credit their growth due to 459 being there. You can see how the metro spread south because of it. So no, comparing its use to 422 at any point in the forseeable future is not a fair contest.

I believe those in support of building 422 would hope similar growth would happen in the northern suburbs and development would take off in the western portion of the county.

422 from I-65 to I-59 would be helpful as commerical traffic from all points could then avoid the city center.