AARoads Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

New rules to ensure post quality. See this thread for details.

Author Topic: VA I-81 Corridor Improvement Plan  (Read 51088 times)

Jmiles32

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 565
  • Age: 22
  • Location: Blacksburg, VA
  • Last Login: March 29, 2022, 10:53:05 PM
Re: VA I-81 Corridor Improvement Plan
« Reply #375 on: October 10, 2021, 10:18:10 PM »

Thanks to some recent travels up and down I-81 to/from Northern Virginia I've noticed that there are two problematic locations that probably should have been addressed/funded in the I-81 corridor improvement plan but were not. Both are in the northbound direction and result in delays frequently but especially on weekends. The first is near Lexington approaching the I-64 interchange (Exit 191). Here the traffic backups can and often do extend all the way to the US-60 interchange (Exit 188) and sometimes even further south. IMO I find this rather odd because while the I-64 interchange does result in a left lane on ramp merge, the traffic coming from I-64 is very light and seemingly wouldn't be enough to result in a miles long backup on I-81. Nevertheless that merge is clearly the culprit here.

The second is northbound approaching I-66 (Exit 300) near Strasburg. Here traffic usually starts backing up right before the US-48/VA-55 interchange (Exit 296) but can easily start further south as well. Now this one to me makes no sense and if someone here has a good guess as to the culprit please feel free to share. I don't think it has anything to do with the I-66 on ramp merge because traffic usually clears up right before the I-66 off ramp. I don't think it has anything to do with eastbound US-48 traffic either because traffic on that road is not that significant enough yet. Interesting too IMO that I-81 southbound between Exit 296 and Exit 300 is planned to be widened to 3 GP lanes but not northbound as right now I think the northbound backups on this stretch are far more frequent and arguably worse. Any thoughts?
Logged
Aspiring Transportation Planner at Virginia Tech. Go Hokies!

Rothman

  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 9883
  • Last Login: Today at 09:15:47 AM
Re: VA I-81 Corridor Improvement Plan
« Reply #376 on: October 10, 2021, 11:58:32 PM »

Maybe congestion locations, but I don't know about full-blown backups there happening frequently.
Logged
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position(s) of NYSDOT.

Jmiles32

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 565
  • Age: 22
  • Location: Blacksburg, VA
  • Last Login: March 29, 2022, 10:53:05 PM
Re: VA I-81 Corridor Improvement Plan
« Reply #377 on: October 11, 2021, 12:22:26 AM »

I'd argue that based on experiences and google maps traffic view, back ups on northbound I-81 in both these of these locations is almost a given during the weekend afternoon/evening. Very similar situation to the notorious weekend northbound I-95 back up in Fredericksburg which IMO similarly did not make logical sense unlike southbound. Thankfully, even though it was usually only on weekends, that back up was bad enough to be addressed by funding the northbound rappahannock river crossing project. I suspect that fixing these northbound I-81 ones would not be nearly as expensive. Maybe just acceleration and deacceleration lane extensions as opposed to full on widening.
Logged
Aspiring Transportation Planner at Virginia Tech. Go Hokies!

froggie

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 12261
  • Location: Greensboro, VT
  • Last Login: May 16, 2022, 10:00:09 PM
    • Froggie's Place
Re: VA I-81 Corridor Improvement Plan
« Reply #378 on: October 11, 2021, 01:14:04 AM »

81 northbound past Strasburg and up to 66 is on an uphill.  While the grade isn't steep, based on my own experience I would not be surprised if that uphill grade is a contributing factor.
Logged

sprjus4

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 7506
  • Location: Hampton Roads, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 07:21:01 AM
Re: VA I-81 Corridor Improvement Plan
« Reply #379 on: October 11, 2021, 02:11:33 AM »

Im not sure what it was, but I-81 North was busy between Roanoke and Staunton last Sunday. The volume of cars and trucks was heavy, and traffic was mostly moving 45-60 mph the whole way, very rarely reaching the 70 mph speed limit. The only relief was on the 6 lane segment north of Lexington where it opened up and everyone was filling all 3 lanes at 80+ mph, then right back down to 45-50 mph condensing to 2 lanes.

It really speaks for the need of a 6 lane statewide corridor. These spot improvements are a good start, I suppose, but VDOT really needs to be long term planning for full widening throughout.

Another safety project needs to be realigning the many 60 mph curves that often slows traffic, particularly when trucks are present in both lanes. Straighten them out and realign the highway where necessary to be able to maintain a minimum 70 mph design speed.
« Last Edit: October 11, 2021, 02:14:29 AM by sprjus4 »
Logged

VTGoose

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 410
  • Age: 2017
  • Location: Blacksburg, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 09:02:51 AM
Re: VA I-81 Corridor Improvement Plan
« Reply #380 on: October 11, 2021, 10:42:54 AM »

Im not sure what it was, but I-81 North was busy between Roanoke and Staunton last Sunday. The volume of cars and trucks was heavy, and traffic was mostly moving 45-60 mph the whole way, very rarely reaching the 70 mph speed limit. The only relief was on the 6 lane segment north of Lexington where it opened up and everyone was filling all 3 lanes at 80+ mph, then right back down to 45-50 mph condensing to 2 lanes.

Sunday is typically a busier day on I-81 with trucks rolling from the south to the Northeast. Add in a home football game for Virginia Tech and you have Hokies heading home (although last weekend way a bye week).

Yesterday was a good example of the need for a third lane in each direction. My wife and I headed out Sunday just before noon for a "quick" trip to Roanoke. Just after getting on at exit 118, we were in a traffic slowdown. The message boards approaching 81 showed "Accident at MM 127 -- Right shoulder blocked" -- which didn't fit with the traffic backup. When we finally approached the accident, there were three vehicles sitting off the road on the LEFT but no other signs of a wreck. Traffic continued in clog mode on past the Ironto exit and further north. I jumped off at the first Salem exit (137) when I saw both lanes ahead jammed. On the way back to Blacksburg later in the afternoon, I bypassed Salem from I-581 to exit 137 to take the "back way" on U.S 11/460 to Christiansburg. At the connection to the Dixie Caverns exit, there was a long line of traffic waiting to turn left from 11 east. The heavy eastbound traffic continued all the way until we reached I-81 (and beyond) with traffic on the 81 overpass at a standstill. Another northbound wreck blocked both lanes; see https://facebook.com/MontgomeryCountyemergencyServices for photos of the tractor-trailer wreck that caused all the havoc.

On another note, the original plans for the improvements between I-581 and exit 141/VA 419 weren't quite accurate. The plans showed the southbound right lane becoming the exit ramp for exit 141 and the left entrance ramp from I-581 continuing as the left lane, which required through traffic to shift. In reality, the ramp from I-581 continues almost to exit 141 and there is no through lane shift since the existing exit ramp for VA 419 was lengthened. The whole of the 581 ramp isn't open yet, but there is a longer space to merge than before the work started. Since we bailed early, I don't know the status of the northbound lanes, but when done it will be a major improvement to separate traffic exiting to 581 from faster through traffic.

Bruce in Blacksburg
Logged
"Get in the fast lane, grandma!  The bingo game is ready to roll!"

odditude

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 659
  • Location: NOVA
  • Last Login: May 14, 2022, 11:38:36 PM
Re: VA I-81 Corridor Improvement Plan
« Reply #381 on: October 11, 2021, 04:22:20 PM »

Im not sure what it was, but I-81 North was busy between Roanoke and Staunton last Sunday. The volume of cars and trucks was heavy, and traffic was mostly moving 45-60 mph the whole way, very rarely reaching the 70 mph speed limit. The only relief was on the 6 lane segment north of Lexington where it opened up and everyone was filling all 3 lanes at 80+ mph, then right back down to 45-50 mph condensing to 2 lanes.

Sunday is typically a busier day on I-81 with trucks rolling from the south to the Northeast. Add in a home football game for Virginia Tech and you have Hokies heading home (although last weekend way a bye week).


i believe this past weekend was homecoming for JMU (in Harrisonburg), as well.
Logged

sprjus4

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 7506
  • Location: Hampton Roads, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 07:21:01 AM
Re: VA I-81 Corridor Improvement Plan
« Reply #382 on: December 06, 2021, 01:21:54 AM »

MM 141-143 widening is now complete. MM 137-141 is currently under construction.

Logged

Tom958

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1225
  • Age: 63
  • Location: Lawrenceville, GA
  • Last Login: Today at 10:23:27 AM
Re: VA I-81 Corridor Improvement Plan
« Reply #383 on: December 06, 2021, 05:10:42 AM »

They used conventional signage instead of an APL at the split. It's OK per the MUTCD to do that temporarily in order to delay replacing an otherwise-adequate overhead installation (or, I presume, where a bridge would obstruct the view of a correctly-sited APL), but this is a new installation with no obstructions. Here's the previous condition.
Logged

1995hoo

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 14176
  • Age: 48
  • Location: Fairfax County, Virginia
  • Last Login: Today at 10:48:42 AM
Re: VA I-81 Corridor Improvement Plan
« Reply #384 on: December 06, 2021, 07:44:27 AM »

I wonder how they decide whether theyll put the direction ("north," in that case) before or after the shield.
Logged
"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.

Dirt Roads

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1540
  • Location: Central North Carolina
  • Last Login: May 16, 2022, 09:54:30 PM
Re: VA I-81 Corridor Improvement Plan
« Reply #385 on: December 06, 2021, 09:06:43 AM »

I wonder how they decide whether theyll put the direction ("north," in that case) before or after the shield.

I might be wrong, but I was under the impression that VDOT uses the same rule for cardinal directions on overhead BGS as is used for left/right placement of exit tabs.
Logged

1995hoo

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 14176
  • Age: 48
  • Location: Fairfax County, Virginia
  • Last Login: Today at 10:48:42 AM
Re: VA I-81 Corridor Improvement Plan
« Reply #386 on: December 06, 2021, 09:24:43 AM »

I wonder how they decide whether theyll put the direction ("north," in that case) before or after the shield.

I might be wrong, but I was under the impression that VDOT uses the same rule for cardinal directions on overhead BGS as is used for left/right placement of exit tabs.

I don't think that's always the case; if it were, "North" on this sign on I-95 near Woodbridge would be on the left.
Logged
"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.

hbelkins

  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 17507
  • It is well, it is well, with my soul.

  • Age: 60
  • Location: Kentucky
  • Last Login: May 16, 2022, 01:49:41 PM
    • Millennium Highway
Re: VA I-81 Corridor Improvement Plan
« Reply #387 on: December 06, 2021, 09:31:25 AM »

They used conventional signage instead of an APL at the split.

Good.
Logged


I identify as vaccinated.

Dirt Roads

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1540
  • Location: Central North Carolina
  • Last Login: May 16, 2022, 09:54:30 PM
Re: VA I-81 Corridor Improvement Plan
« Reply #388 on: December 06, 2021, 10:57:01 AM »

They used conventional signage instead of an APL at the split.

Is the prohibition on APL signage for "Exit Only" lanes still in effect?  There was quite a bit of discussion of this topic back some 5 years ago, but I haven't paying attention.
Logged

wriddle082

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1023
  • Give 'em the BIDNESS!

  • Age: 47
  • Location: Anymetro, Carolinas
  • Last Login: Today at 05:55:21 AM
Re: VA I-81 Corridor Improvement Plan
« Reply #389 on: December 06, 2021, 11:01:39 AM »

They used conventional signage instead of an APL at the split.

Good.

Indeed, conventional signage should be used right at the split, and APLs on all advance signage leading up to the split, in order to differentiate the split.  Of the states that used to use (and sometimes still do use) diagrammatics, they never used them right at the split.  Using an APL right at the split is akin to this.
Logged

ran4sh

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 726
  • Age: 35
  • Location: North Georgia
  • Last Login: April 27, 2022, 03:38:14 PM
    • YouTube - mostly my Cities:Skylines live streams
Re: VA I-81 Corridor Improvement Plan
« Reply #390 on: December 06, 2021, 06:01:18 PM »

They used conventional signage instead of an APL at the split.

Is the prohibition on APL signage for "Exit Only" lanes still in effect?  There was quite a bit of discussion of this topic back some 5 years ago, but I haven't paying attention.

Yes. There are still a lot of prohibited uses of APLs which some states have ignored.
Logged
Atlanta Braves 2021 Champions! Georgia Bulldogs 2021-22 CFP Champions!

VTGoose

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 410
  • Age: 2017
  • Location: Blacksburg, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 09:02:51 AM
Re: VA I-81 Corridor Improvement Plan
« Reply #391 on: December 07, 2021, 08:57:39 AM »

MM 141-143 widening is now complete. MM 137-141 is currently under construction.

The good news is that the diagrams released when the project was started were wrong. They showed the southbound through lanes shifting left a lane with the far lane becoming the extended exit lane for the VA 419 exit. The reality is that the existing exit lane was extended and the on-ramp lane from I-581 was extended on the other side of the through lanes, with a second entrance lane added in the median. On the northbound side, the extended and expanded exit lanes should help clear up a bottleneck in the section of the interstate. There is now an earlier separation of through traffic and exiting traffic.

The whole project still doesn't make sense when there was a better solution on the southbound side, as has been discussed and proposed here multiple times -- build two new southbound lanes parallel to the northbound lanes, crossing the I581 ramps on an overpass. The existing southbound lanes would become a C/D lane and southbound traffic to and from I-581 would exit/enter on the right.

Bruce in Blacksburg
 
Logged
"Get in the fast lane, grandma!  The bingo game is ready to roll!"

Dirt Roads

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1540
  • Location: Central North Carolina
  • Last Login: May 16, 2022, 09:54:30 PM
Re: VA I-81 Corridor Improvement Plan
« Reply #392 on: December 07, 2021, 09:57:41 AM »

They used conventional signage instead of an APL at the split.

Is the prohibition on APL signage for "Exit Only" lanes still in effect?  There was quite a bit of discussion of this topic back some 5 years ago, but I haven't paying attention.

Yes. There are still a lot of prohibited uses of APLs which some states have ignored.

As someone who used to referee similar issues, I believe that there is also a debate whether this situation is a lane drop requiring an "Exit Only" tab, or a highway split requiring APL signage.  I can see both sides of this argument and am not sure that consistency matters (as long as the signage doesn't lead to confusion).  In many states, the only rule that really matters is "least expensive".
Logged

ran4sh

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 726
  • Age: 35
  • Location: North Georgia
  • Last Login: April 27, 2022, 03:38:14 PM
    • YouTube - mostly my Cities:Skylines live streams
Re: VA I-81 Corridor Improvement Plan
« Reply #393 on: December 07, 2021, 06:47:44 PM »

Highway split isn't a sufficient condition by itself to require APLs, there must also be an option lane. Splits without option lanes, according to the MUTCD, should still be using conventional down-arrow signage.

As for "least expensive", an APL would almost never be that.
Logged
Atlanta Braves 2021 Champions! Georgia Bulldogs 2021-22 CFP Champions!

Dirt Roads

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1540
  • Location: Central North Carolina
  • Last Login: May 16, 2022, 09:54:30 PM
Re: VA I-81 Corridor Improvement Plan
« Reply #394 on: December 08, 2021, 08:57:23 AM »

As for "least expensive", an APL would almost never be that.

My point, exactly.
Logged

 


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.