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

Virginia

Started by Alex, February 04, 2009, 12:22:16 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

jakeroot

Quote from: Mapmikey on March 02, 2019, 04:43:13 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on March 02, 2019, 04:31:23 PM
Anyone know who manages the traffic lights and pavement markings in Arlington County? They both seem slightly different than what I've seen outside of the county...

* most lights in Arlington County lack backplates
* most of the crosswalks are the "zebra" style instead of the parallel lines that VDOT uses

https://transportation.arlingtonva.us/traffic-signal-specification-updates/
http://arlingtonva.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/21/2013/11/DES-Pavement-Marking-Standards.pdf

Very helpful! Thank you.


Mapmikey

Quote from: Roadsguy on March 02, 2019, 11:21:49 PM
Speaking of x64s, has VDOT ever intended to redesignate VA 164 as I-164? I don't believe any of it is tolled.

VDOT applied for VA 164 to be an interstate in 1968 along with these other 4 requests (see pdf pg 41 at http://www.ctb.virginia.gov/meetings/minutes_pdf/CTB-08-1968-01.pdf):
Today's I-195
Today's I-664 (described as an extension of I-64)
Today's VA 288
A parallel crossing east of the Berkley bridge connecting I-464 and I-264.  This description is 0.6 miles which is too long to be just the newer I-264 EB span that was eventually built...?

Mapmikey

Quote from: sprjus4 on March 02, 2019, 10:32:09 PM

I got some other questions about that document.

It also numbers the proposed Southeastern Parkway & Greenbelt as VA-961... Guess a major freeway that would carry up to 30,000 AADT and serve as a 4-lane 60 MPH bypass to 2-lane local routes is a secondary route? Also the MLK Freeway extension is cited as VA-958. This document has some odd numbering concepts.

Possible these are just placeholder numbers in the way VDOT used to call lots of things VA 599 before they were actually built.

pdf pg. 12 at this document (https://www.hrtpo.org/uploads/docs/HR-2040-LRTP-Projects.pdf) shows the Southeastern Parkway/Greenbelt as a primary system endeavor.

froggie

Quote from: MapmikeyA parallel crossing east of the Berkley bridge connecting I-464 and I-264.  This description is 0.6 miles which is too long to be just the newer I-264 EB span that was eventually built...?

Actually, 0.6mi is about the right distance from the 264/464 junction to where 264 had previously been authorized on the Norfolk side.

Roadsguy

Quote from: sprjus4 on March 02, 2019, 10:32:09 PM
Quote from: Mapmikey on March 02, 2019, 10:11:29 PM
The number 364 has been previously floated in a VDOT document for whatever 3rd crossing comes to pass.

See pdf pg 193 at https://web.archive.org/web/20111217233755/http://vtrans.org/resources/VSTP_Entire_Report.pdf

Oddly they also float the number 245 for the Craney Island Connector, which is odd because there is already a VA 245.  Typo of 246 (may as well not exist) or 248 (not currently used)...?
I got some other questions about that document.

It also numbers the proposed Southeastern Parkway & Greenbelt as VA-961... Guess a major freeway that would carry up to 30,000 AADT and serve as a 4-lane 60 MPH bypass to 2-lane local routes is a secondary route? Also the MLK Freeway extension is cited as VA-958. This document has some odd numbering concepts.

Weren't the Fairfax County and Franconia-Springfield Parkways four-digit secondary routes for years?
Mileage-based exit numbering implies the existence of mileage-cringe exit numbering.

Mapmikey

Quote from: Roadsguy on March 03, 2019, 11:13:03 AM

Weren't the Fairfax County and Franconia-Springfield Parkways four-digit secondary routes for years?

Yes but there is no such thing as a secondary route in an independent city.  A non-primary route in an independent city would be called an urban route (which has an unposted numerical designation that can be any number) or a residential street.

sprjus4

Quote from: Mapmikey on March 03, 2019, 11:25:27 AM
Yes but there is no such thing as a secondary route in an independent city.  A non-primary route in an independent city would be called an urban route (which has an unposted numerical designation that can be any number) or a residential street.
Some secondary routes still exist in the Western Branch area of Chespaeake, an independent city, and plenty more existed throughout the entire city in the early 2000s, though have been removed since.

froggie

^ Some of that was spillover from when VDOT still maintained most of Suffolk's roads into the 2000s.  Chesapeake's roads have not officially had secondary routes since 1963.

sprjus4

Quote from: froggie on March 03, 2019, 12:35:04 PM
^ Some of that was spillover from when VDOT still maintained most of Suffolk's roads into the 2000s.  Chesapeake's roads have not officially had secondary routes since 1963.
Some roads south of the Intracoastal Water had secondary route numbers until the early 2000s. I recall Centerville Tpke having VA-604, and Blackwater Rd had one IIRC.

Takumi

Quote from: sprjus4 on March 03, 2019, 12:40:50 PM
Quote from: froggie on March 03, 2019, 12:35:04 PM
^ Some of that was spillover from when VDOT still maintained most of Suffolk's roads into the 2000s.  Chesapeake's roads have not officially had secondary routes since 1963.
Some roads south of the Intracoastal Water had secondary route numbers until the early 2000s. I recall Centerville Tpke having VA-604, and Blackwater Rd had one IIRC.
Those weren't official, though. Same with the 615 shields in Virginia Beach.
Quote from: Rothman on July 15, 2021, 07:52:59 AM
Olive Garden must be stopped.  I must stop them.

Don't @ me. Seriously.

Beltway

Quote from: Mapmikey on March 03, 2019, 09:18:23 AM
VDOT applied for VA 164 to be an interstate in 1968 along with these other 4 requests (see pdf pg 41 at http://www.ctb.virginia.gov/meetings/minutes_pdf/CTB-08-1968-01.pdf):
Today's I-195
Today's I-664 (described as an extension of I-64)
Today's VA 288
A parallel crossing east of the Berkley bridge connecting I-464 and I-264.  This description is 0.6 miles which is too long to be just the newer I-264 EB span that was eventually built...?

The Berkley Bridge and the Downtown Tunnel were not part of the I-264 that was authorized in 1956, the 2.2 miles of highway was built as the Norfolk-Portsmouth Bridge-Tunnel in 1952.
http://www.roadstothefuture.com/Downtown-Tunnel%20postcard-1952.jpg

In 1976, FHWA approval was provided for Interstate 90% federal-aid to expand the Downtown Tunnel/Berkley Bridge complex, as part of I-264.
http://www.roadstothefuture.com
http://www.capital-beltway.com

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

Mapmikey

VA 357 decommissioning on the March 2019 CTB agenda...

http://www.ctb.virginia.gov/resources/2019/mar/agendas/ctb_action_meeting_march_2019.pdf

The Southside Training Facility was torn down and redeveloped by private interests.

1995hoo

"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

#3688
https://www.wavy.com/news/local-news/gloucester/gloucester-co-supervisors-approve-60-mph-increase-on-portion-of-route-17/1838149721

Gloucester Co. supervisors approve speed limit increase on portion of Route 17

"GLOUCESTER COUNTY, Va. (WAVY) -- The speed limit along a nearly 20-mile portion of Route 17 through Gloucester County will soon be increased.

The Virginia Department of Transportation recommended that the speed limit from 8710 George Washington Memorial Highway to the Middlesex County line should be increased to 60 mph from 55 mph.

The Gloucester County Board of Supervisors unanimously approved a resolution during their monthly meeting on Tuesday to accept VDOT's recommendation.

VDOT conducted a 60 MPH Speed Limit Engineering Study on Route 17 and a part of Route 3 and presented the results to the board last month.

The board decided not to approve the recommended speed limit increase for Route 3 at this time. The portion of Route 3 that would have been affected was from Crab Thicket Road to just before the Mathews County line. "





Nice to see some new increases. This is an area that can definitely handle it. Route 3 could also handle it, though I suppose since it serves more a local route, they don't feel as obligated to go along with it. Route 17 on the other hand handles thru-traffic.

Hopefully we see more of U.S. Route 17 throughout Virginia get raised now that it's been allowed under speed limit law since last year.

hbelkins

Local governments have approval or veto power over speed limit decisions on state-maintained routes?  :confused:


Government would be tolerable if not for politicians and bureaucrats.

Avalanchez71

Quote from: hbelkins on March 20, 2019, 10:52:34 AM
Local governments have approval or veto power over speed limit decisions on state-maintained routes?  :confused:
I was thinking the same thing.  Apparently county government in VA has more powers than in TN.

Takumi

Quote from: Mapmikey on March 12, 2019, 03:54:36 PM
VA 357 decommissioning on the March 2019 CTB agenda...

http://www.ctb.virginia.gov/resources/2019/mar/agendas/ctb_action_meeting_march_2019.pdf

The Southside Training Facility was torn down and redeveloped by private interests.
It's been demolished for a couple years now, but the signs have remained.
Quote from: Rothman on July 15, 2021, 07:52:59 AM
Olive Garden must be stopped.  I must stop them.

Don't @ me. Seriously.

ipeters61

I've planned a day trip to the Hampton Roads region in 2 weeks (planning on leaving early on a Friday morning and arriving home on Saturday evening/night).  Just had two questions:

1. I saw that the Chesapeake Bay Bridge-Tunnel (the main reason I'm going on this trip) has the fishing pier closed to construct the parallel tunnels, meaning there's no observation deck.  Is there any way to take photos of it?  I'm traveling solo so I can't take pictures while driving.  I can do video (and just let the camera take care of it), but that's about it.

2. What road sights are worth seeing in the Hampton Roads region?  I'm arriving on the Bay Bridge-Tunnel and staying in Chesapeake, if that helps.
Disclaimer: Opinions expressed on my posts on the AARoads Forum are my own and do not represent official positions of my employer.
Instagram | Clinched Map

Beltway

Quote from: sprjus4 on March 19, 2019, 09:07:43 PM
Nice to see some new increases. This is an area that can definitely handle it. Route 3 could also handle it, though I suppose since it serves more a local route, they don't feel as obligated to go along with it. Route 17 on the other hand handles thru-traffic.

What was the proposed speed limit on VA-3? 
http://www.roadstothefuture.com
http://www.capital-beltway.com

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

hbelkins

Quote from: ipeters61 on March 20, 2019, 01:18:25 PM
I'm traveling solo so I can't take pictures while driving.

Sure you can. Lots of us do it.


Government would be tolerable if not for politicians and bureaucrats.

Takumi

Quote from: ipeters61 on March 20, 2019, 01:18:25 PM
What road sights are worth seeing in the Hampton Roads region?  I'm arriving on the Bay Bridge-Tunnel and staying in Chesapeake, if that helps.
-the four other tunnels (Hampton Roads Bridge-Tunnel on 64, Monitor-Merrimack Bridge Tunnel on 664, and the tolled Midtown and Downtown tunnels on 264 and 58)
-the James River Bridge on US 17/258
-the east end of US 60 at Rudee Inlet in Virginia Beach (the oceanfront is also home to the east end of US 58)
-the construction on US 17 in Chesapeake
-the fairly new Jordan and Gilmerton Bridges on VA 337 and US 13/460 respectively
-the now-incomplete VA 125 in Suffolk, which had a bridge demolished and not replaced
-VA 189 and 272 in far southwestern Suffolk have some seriously old concrete surfaces
-VA 164 was extended on a new freeway segment not long ago. I think 164 in general is an interesting route.
-if you have time to head up to the Williamsburg area, there's the Colonial Parkway and the Jamestown Ferry
This is by no means a complete list.
Quote from: Rothman on July 15, 2021, 07:52:59 AM
Olive Garden must be stopped.  I must stop them.

Don't @ me. Seriously.

1995hoo

Quote from: Beltway on March 20, 2019, 03:00:49 PM
Quote from: sprjus4 on March 19, 2019, 09:07:43 PM
Nice to see some new increases. This is an area that can definitely handle it. Route 3 could also handle it, though I suppose since it serves more a local route, they don't feel as obligated to go along with it. Route 17 on the other hand handles thru-traffic.

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.
"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.

Beltway

Quote from: 1995hoo on March 20, 2019, 04:19:00 PM
Quote from: Beltway on March 20, 2019, 03:00:49 PM
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.
http://www.roadstothefuture.com
http://www.capital-beltway.com

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

1995hoo

#3698
Quote from: Beltway on March 20, 2019, 04:25:13 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on March 20, 2019, 04:19:00 PM
Quote from: Beltway on March 20, 2019, 03:00:49 PM
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.

I was surprised too, but I looked it up the other day and it's apparently been amended again. The previous time I'd looked at this, I don't recall either state route being listed, and I recall US-17 being restricted to the segment from Port Royal to Saluda (I think).

Quote§ 46.2-870. Maximum speed limits generally.
Except as otherwise provided in this article, the maximum speed limit shall be 55 miles per hour on interstate highways or other limited access highways with divided roadways, nonlimited access highways having four or more lanes, and all state primary highways.

The maximum speed limit on all other highways shall be 55 miles per hour if the vehicle is a passenger motor vehicle, bus, pickup or panel truck, or a motorcycle, but 45 miles per hour on such highways if the vehicle is a truck, tractor truck, or combination of vehicles designed to transport property, or is a motor vehicle being used to tow a vehicle designed for self-propulsion, or a house trailer.

Notwithstanding the foregoing provisions of this section, the maximum speed limit shall be 70 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 (i) interstate highways; (ii) multilane, divided, limited access highways; and (iii) high-occupancy vehicle lanes if such lanes are physically separated from regular travel lanes. 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.

Code 1950, § 46-212; 1950, p. 881; 1952, c. 666; 1954, c. 244; 1956, c. 364; 1958, c. 541, §§ 46.1-193, 46.1-401; 1960, c. 153; 1962, c. 307; 1964, cc. 118, 408; 1966, c. 85; 1968, c. 641; 1972, cc. 89, 546, 553, 608; 1974, c. 528; 1975, c. 533; 1977, c. 577; 1978, c. 605; 1980, c. 347; 1986, c. 639; 1988, cc. 662, 897; 1989, cc. 276, 526, 727; 1992, c. 598; 1994, c. 423; 1996, c. 1; 1998, cc. 546, 560; 1999, c. 142; 2001, c. 298; 2002, c. 872; 2003, c. 838; 2004, c. 696; 2005, cc. 266, 267, 268; 2006, c. 213; 2007, cc. 222, 544; 2010, cc. 26, 56; 2014, c. 91; 2018, cc. 160, 339, 340, 345.


Edited to add: I haven't been on Route 3 down that way very often, so I may well be mistaken about it being a proposed increase to 60. I pretty much assumed that's what it was based on how the article was written combined with looking at the statute. The only segment of Route 3 I use regularly is the part between I-95 and Route 20 at Wilderness. It's part of my normal route to and from Charlottesville.

Edited again: It's the following paragraph that made me believe it was a 60-mph proposal (emphasis supplied): "VDOT conducted a 60 MPH Speed Limit Engineering Study on Route 17 and a part of Route 3 and presented the results to the board last month."
"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.

Beltway

Quote from: 1995hoo on March 20, 2019, 04:30:02 PM
Quote from: Beltway on March 20, 2019, 04:25:13 PM
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.
I was surprised too, but I looked it up the other day and it's apparently been amended again. The previous time I'd looked at this, I don't recall either state route being listed, and I recall US-17 being restricted to the segment from Port Royal to Saluda (I think).
QuoteU.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.

So it would be included.  Probably aimed mainly at the completed VA-3 corridor between Culpeper and US-301.

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.
http://www.roadstothefuture.com
http://www.capital-beltway.com

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



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.