Northern Virginia HOT Lanes

[1995hoo]

The now-closed ramp appeared to be blocked by a jersey wall when the bus went through that area (on the other side, of course) this morning. The ramp from Eads Street to the southbound HOV was blocked by trucks and heavy equipment to keep people from trying to use the closed road but to allow it open for the afternoon commute.

[VTGoose]

I haven't driven into DC since hockey season ended.

Understand "The Ovechkin" is a popular drink in many places -- no ice and no cup.

(Not that I can brag on my Penguins    )

[1995hoo]

I haven't driven into DC since hockey season ended.

Understand "The Ovechkin" is a popular drink in many places -- no ice and no cup.

(Not that I can brag on my Penguins    )

Don't know about "no Cup."  Hey, between the Caps last June and UVA spring sports this year, I don't have much to complain about in terms of sports these days.

[1995hoo]

The now-closed ramp appeared to be blocked by a jersey wall when the bus went through that area (on the other side, of course) this morning. The ramp from Eads Street to the southbound HOV was blocked by trucks and heavy equipment to keep people from trying to use the closed road but to allow it open for the afternoon commute.

Forgot to post this last night: Not only is the old ramp blocked off, they've already milled most of the pavement to remove the ramp and, it appears, extend the on-ramp merge lane coming from Eads Street.

[AlexandriaVA]

Traveling southbound on 395 (general purpose lanes) last Saturday (15th), I noticed a test pattern on the electronic lane indiactor signs ("1", "2" and "3" respectively), close to Glebe Road.

[1995hoo]

I drove to Merrifield via the I-495 HO/T lanes for a medical appointment last week and I noticed a lot of the electronic signs displaying messages saying "HOV-3 CHEATERS ENFORCED AT ALL TIMES" (or very similar wording). Made me wonder if they're seeing a lot of people using their E-ZPass Flexes in HOV mode without the required number of people in the car. I have no doubt there are some (emphasis on "some"!!!!) people who use I-66 inside the Beltway to the Beltway HO/T lanes, or vice versa, who may genuinely forget from time to time, but I'm sure they're the minority of people.

Come to think of it, I think the same message was displayed over the I-95 lanes in the middle of the Springfield Interchange during the afternoon commute–not positive because that's when I'm on the WMATA shuttle and I'm usually reading my Kindle. The I-66 "mistake" is less likely to be an issue there.

[sprjus4]

I drove to Merrifield via the I-495 HO/T lanes for a medical appointment last week and I noticed a lot of the electronic signs displaying messages saying "HOV-3 CHEATERS ENFORCED AT ALL TIMES" (or very similar wording). Made me wonder if they're seeing a lot of people using their E-ZPass Flexes in HOV mode without the required number of people in the car. I have no doubt there are some (emphasis on "some"!!!!) people who use I-66 inside the Beltway to the Beltway HO/T lanes, or vice versa, who may genuinely forget from time to time, but I'm sure they're the minority of people.

Come to think of it, I think the same message was displayed over the I-95 lanes in the middle of the Springfield Interchange during the afternoon commute–not positive because that's when I'm on the WMATA shuttle and I'm usually reading my Kindle. The I-66 "mistake" is less likely to be an issue there.

It's been displayed a lot on the I-95 HO/T lanes lately, especially during rush hour. I've noticed it pop up over the past month. Also signage like "LANES ENFORCED 24/7" is also common.

I'll be sticking to those free GP lanes though. I've learned my way through there without paying $40.

[1995hoo]

I drove to Merrifield via the I-495 HO/T lanes for a medical appointment last week and I noticed a lot of the electronic signs displaying messages saying "HOV-3 CHEATERS ENFORCED AT ALL TIMES" (or very similar wording). Made me wonder if they're seeing a lot of people using their E-ZPass Flexes in HOV mode without the required number of people in the car. I have no doubt there are some (emphasis on "some"!!!!) people who use I-66 inside the Beltway to the Beltway HO/T lanes, or vice versa, who may genuinely forget from time to time, but I'm sure they're the minority of people.

Come to think of it, I think the same message was displayed over the I-95 lanes in the middle of the Springfield Interchange during the afternoon commute–not positive because that's when I'm on the WMATA shuttle and I'm usually reading my Kindle. The I-66 "mistake" is less likely to be an issue there.

It's been displayed a lot on the I-95 HO/T lanes lately, especially during rush hour. I've noticed it pop up over the past month. Also signage like "LANES ENFORCED 24/7" is also common.

I'll be sticking to those free GP lanes though. I've learned my way through there without paying $40.

Whatever works for a given individual. My main use for the I-95 lanes is to go from the Beltway to the Franconia—Springfield Parkway, the latter an exit that isn't accessible from the mainline. Depending on the time of day, it's a much easier route than using Van Dorn Street.

[sprjus4]

Whatever works for a given individual. My main use for the I-95 lanes is to go from the Beltway to the Franconia—Springfield Parkway, the latter an exit that isn't accessible from the mainline. Depending on the time of day, it's a much easier route than using Van Dorn Street.

I mean, that's reasonable, especially if the toll isn't absurdly high. I'd probably use it then, or just take Franconia Rd to Frontier Drive, but I imagine the latter has traffic issues of it's own, thus making the HO/T exit much quicker.

My one dislike about that exit is the fact that they took a freeway segment of the parkway, and put a HO/T ramp with a stoplight right in the middle. But traffic wise, probably works out fine.

My main use of I-95 in North Virginia is south of US-1 exit. I rarely go north of there as my travels take me on US-1 when I'm in the area. And if I head north into DC, I'll just take US-1 or the George Washington Pkwy, or if going to I-495, I'll go straight to I-495 on US-1. I've only navigated through the "Mixing Bowl" Springfield Interchange on I-95 a couple of times, it mostly it was going through DC bound to Baltimore or something, not destined anywhere in DC.

[Mapmikey]

I drove to Merrifield via the I-495 HO/T lanes for a medical appointment last week and I noticed a lot of the electronic signs displaying messages saying "HOV-3 CHEATERS ENFORCED AT ALL TIMES" (or very similar wording). Made me wonder if they're seeing a lot of people using their E-ZPass Flexes in HOV mode without the required number of people in the car. I have no doubt there are some (emphasis on "some"!!!!) people who use I-66 inside the Beltway to the Beltway HO/T lanes, or vice versa, who may genuinely forget from time to time, but I'm sure they're the minority of people.

Come to think of it, I think the same message was displayed over the I-95 lanes in the middle of the Springfield Interchange during the afternoon commute–not positive because that's when I'm on the WMATA shuttle and I'm usually reading my Kindle. The I-66 "mistake" is less likely to be an issue there.

I think they just post this all over the region every so often.  If they wanted to emphasize violations that occur frequently it would be the prohibition of semi trucks. I still see them pulled over multiple times a week including three in one day a couple months ago.

[sprjus4]

I think they just post this all over the region every so often.  If they wanted to emphasize violations that occur frequently it would be the prohibition of semi trucks. I still see them pulled over multiple times a week including three in one day a couple months ago.

I've always wondered, why do they prohibit trucks? If they are willing to pay the toll to bypass the congestion, what's the issue with that? If the HO/T lanes in question are more than one lane in each direction (they are on I-95 and I-495), a truck doing 65 mph in the right lane wouldn't be any issues. Traffic can easily pass on the left. Same with when a bus is using it - pass the slower moving bus on the left. No issues.

They let the buses in there no problem, but trucks are prohibited no questions asked. A bus does 65 mph in the right lane, why can't a truck do 65 mph in the right lane?

[froggie]

^ IIRC, pavement depth in the HO/T lanes isn't quite the same as what it is in the main lanes.  As trucks give a considerable pounding to pavement (morseso than even buses), you'd have a lot more pavement failures in the HO/T lanes if you allowed trucks.

[sprjus4]

^ IIRC, pavement depth in the HO/T lanes isn't quite the same as what it is in the main lanes.  As trucks give a considerable pounding to pavement (morseso than even buses), you'd have a lot more pavement failures in the HO/T lanes if you allowed trucks.

Considering how much they charge for the tolls, I don't think it'd kill them to strengthen the pavement and reconstruct it. If that's the only real issue - that can be fixed. Also, trucks would be paying to use it anyways, so more revenue for Transurban, and the reconstruction of the lanes would essentially be paid by the trucks who get to bypass the congestion.

[1995hoo]

From what I've read, they plan to allow trucks in the I-66 HO/T lanes outside the Beltway. That won't help matters because it's yet another inconsistency to confuse some people.

The I-395 and I-95 HOV lanes allowed (or allow, as to I-395) trucks except near the weigh station between Dumfries and Potomac Mills, but trucks were banned once the HO/T conversion occurred.

[Beltway]

IIRC, pavement depth in the HO/T lanes isn't quite the same as what it is in the main lanes.  As trucks give a considerable pounding to pavement (morseso than even buses), you'd have a lot more pavement failures in the HO/T lanes if you allowed trucks.

Buses have high axle loadings with full passenger load, nearly that of a fully loaded large truck.

I don't recall ever reading anything about lighter pavement depth.  The I-95 reversible roadway used to allow large trucks in the off-peak hours.  The issue is that where it was widened to 3 lanes the lanes were narrowed to 11 feet wide and one side does not have a full shoulder; there was not enough space for 12 foot lanes and full shoulders on both sides.  Therefore that is an inadequate design for large trucks.

The HOT lanes on I-495 are the original pavement of I-495 and the widening was on the outside.

The 8 GP lanes are plenty adequate for the trucks on I-495, and the northern part of I-95 HOT lanes have cross-section issues.

Left hand ramps are a fact of life on managed lanes, workable with cars, but much more of a problem with large trucks, in driver visibility and in slow acceleration.

[sprjus4]

From what I've read, they plan to allow trucks in the I-66 HO/T lanes outside the Beltway. That won't help matters because it's yet another inconsistency to confuse some people.

The I-395 and I-95 HOV lanes allowed (or allow, as to I-395) trucks except near the weigh station between Dumfries and Potomac Mills, but trucks were banned once the HO/T conversion occurred.

I don't see why Transurban has such a big issue with trucks to begin with. It's more money coming in their pockets, why would they complain?

[sprjus4]

The issue is that where it was widened to 3 lanes the lanes were narrowed to 11 feet wide

What a cheap way to put in an additional lane  The entire highway's cross section, including the GP lanes should've been expanded to accommodate three 12 foot lanes and 10 foot paved shoulders in the HO/T lanes. A project shouldn't be done on the cheap to put some HO/T lane signage up and charge expensive tolls in return. You either build it to full standards or don't do anything at all. You don't "build an interstate highway on the cheap", as you've said before relating to another highway topic.

I wouldn't have as much of an issue with it, but I'm sensing some hypocrisy here.

To be fair though, I-264 between Downtown Norfolk and the Oceanfront only has 11 foot lanes and has truck traffic. I had wondered for the longest time why that highway has always felt narrow when driving on it, and sure enough I measured it out in Google Maps, and it's noticeably smaller than a regular 12 foot interstate highway lane width, and comes out to 11 feet.

and the northern part of I-95 HOT lanes have cross-section issues.

A poor, substandard design used by Transurban to build their interstate highway HO/T lane project on the cheap 

[1995hoo]

From what I've read, they plan to allow trucks in the I-66 HO/T lanes outside the Beltway. That won't help matters because it's yet another inconsistency to confuse some people.

The I-395 and I-95 HOV lanes allowed (or allow, as to I-395) trucks except near the weigh station between Dumfries and Potomac Mills, but trucks were banned once the HO/T conversion occurred.

I don't see why Transurban has such a big issue with trucks to begin with. It's more money coming in their pockets, why would they complain?

How do you know it's Transurban and not VDOT? (I don't know which of them decided on the restriction.)

[sprjus4]

How do you know it's Transurban and not VDOT? (I don't know which of them decided on the restriction.)

Couldn't see how it's VDOT judging by they're allowing large trucks on the I-66 Outside the Beltway lanes. Then again maybe it is. Or maybe Transurban's poor, substandard design just to finish their HO/T lanes on the cheap.

[Beltway]

The issue is that where it was widened to 3 lanes the lanes were narrowed to 11 feet wide

What a cheap way to put in an additional lane  The entire highway's cross section, including the GP lanes should've been expanded to accommodate three 12 foot lanes and 10 foot paved shoulders in the HO/T lanes. A project shouldn't be done on the cheap to put some HO/T lane signage up and charge expensive tolls in return. You either build it to full standards or don't do anything at all. You don't "build an interstate highway on the cheap", as you've said before relating to another highway topic.

Did you get it all out?  Do you have a bucket next to your desk in case it's not all out?

There is nothing cheap about it.  Having 11-foot lanes on a freeway roadway that bans trucks (which are up to 8.5 feet wide and 55 feet long) is not a substandard design.  The highway has at least one full shoulder the entire length.

It is not Transurban's design, this is how VDOT planned it from long before that.

The HOT lanes are for moving people, not cargo, and trucks would consume part of the capacity of the highway.

[kevinb1994]

The issue is that where it was widened to 3 lanes the lanes were narrowed to 11 feet wide

What a cheap way to put in an additional lane  The entire highway's cross section, including the GP lanes should've been expanded to accommodate three 12 foot lanes and 10 foot paved shoulders in the HO/T lanes. A project shouldn't be done on the cheap to put some HO/T lane signage up and charge expensive tolls in return. You either build it to full standards or don't do anything at all. You don't "build an interstate highway on the cheap", as you've said before relating to another highway topic.

Did you get it all out?  Do you have a bucket next to your desk in case it's not all out?

There is nothing cheap about it.  Having 11-foot lanes on a freeway roadway that bans trucks (which are up to 8.5 feet wide and 55 feet long) is not a substandard design.  The highway has at least one full shoulder the entire length.

It is not Transurban's design, this is how VDOT planned it from long before that.

The HOT lanes are for moving people, not cargo, and trucks would consume part of the capacity of the highway.

Seriously guys. Be nice to each other.

[sprjus4]

Did you get it all out?  Do you have a bucket next to your desk in case it's not all out?

Aren't you the one who complained about "personal insults"?

There is nothing cheap about it.  Having 11-foot lanes on a freeway roadway that bans trucks (which are up to 8.5 feet wide and 55 feet long) is not a substandard design.  The highway has at least one full shoulder the entire length.

AASHTO's Guide for High Occupancy Vehicle Facilities manual indicates the standard lane width in an HOV (or HO/T) facility is to be 12 feet wide. The Express Lanes use of 11 foot lanes is a substandard design, and in violation to FHWA & AASHTO standards. A reduced footprint of 2 foot left and right shoulders may be used when physical constraints exist, per the standards, though nowhere does it permit the lane width to be reduced under 12 feet.

It's not "acceptable" just because trucks don't use it. It's substandard and not something expected on a facility as new as 2013. 

Certain buses can have the width near that of a large truck as well in instances. No issues with them. Not to mention, a lot of arterial highways in Virginia have 10-11 ft lane widths, and carry large percentages of trucks with no issues. A lot of them even have speed limits as high as 60 mph. I'd be willing to bet some older 65 mph limited-access bypasses also have smaller widths than 12 feet.

8.5 feet wide

So... less than 11 feet?

[Beltway]

There is nothing cheap about it.  Having 11-foot lanes on a freeway roadway that bans trucks (which are up to 8.5 feet wide and 55 feet long) is not a substandard design.  The highway has at least one full shoulder the entire length.

AASHTO's Guide for High Occupancy Vehicle Facilities manual indicates the standard lane width in an HOV (or HO/T) facility is to be 12 feet wide. The Express Lanes use of 11 foot lanes is a substandard design, and in violation to FHWA & AASHTO standards.

I would have to read the standard to see exactly what it says.  Managed lanes can handle trucks unless prohibited, and it may be that 12 feet is enforced in that case.  Buses are not as wide as trucks and they are a lot shorter.

You're just being your usual contentious self.

[sprjus4]

You're just being your usual contentious self.

Again, what happened to no personal attacks? 

A bit of a hypocrite to say that nonetheless... let's look at dozens of pages of I-87 related discussions where you've spewed the same talking points just to keep the fire going in some sort of dispute that is never ending every time anything about the highway comes up, or a peep of Virginia is mentioned with it. There's valid points such as the concept is useless, then you've gotten into conspiracies about how the studies are flawed, low-balled, substandard designs, etc. when actually they've followed all of AASHTO and FHWA standards, use detailed engineering cost estimates, was put together by engineers with a private firm, etc. but you've claimed the study was put together by business advocates with no factual evidence. Yet a substandard, clear violation of AASHTO and FHWA guidelines on a project you support in -Virginia- is A-OK.

But I digress. We don't need a purple-text coming on here locking the thread over some silly back and forth. Let's move this discussion on.

[kevinb1994]

You're just being your usual contentious self.

Again, what happened to no personal attacks? 

A bit of a hypocrite to say that nonetheless... let's look at dozens of pages of I-87 related discussions where you've spewed the same talking points just to keep the fire going in some sort of dispute that is never ending every time anything about the highway comes up, or a peep of Virginia is mentioned with it. There's valid points such as the concept is useless, then you've gotten into conspiracies about how the studies are flawed, low-balled, substandard designs, etc. when actually they've followed all of AASHTO and FHWA standards, use detailed engineering cost estimates, etc. but you've claimed the study was put together by business advocates with no factual evidence. Yet a substandard, clear violation of AASHTO and FHWA guidelines on a project you support is A-OK.

But I digress. We don't need a purple-text coming on here locking the thread over some silly back and forth. Let's move this discussion on.

C'mon guys. Keep it together now.