Virginia

[WillWeaverRVA]

As another positive testimonial about the effectiveness of VDOT's support request page, I decided to submit a bunch of requests regarding the improvement of signage for VA 161 and VA 356 in Henrico County. The result is that VA 356 is now fully posted (complete with an END sign eastbound at VA 161), and no longer seems to "disappear". The movements for VA 161 and VA 356 are also fully posted at that intersection (VA 161 turns onto Hilliard Road from Lakeside Avenue). There is also now a reassurance shield at the western end of VA 356.

Maybe I should use this feature to have VDOT finally properly sign some poorly signed routes...

[Mapmikey]

As another positive testimonial about the effectiveness of VDOT's support request page, I decided to submit a bunch of requests regarding the improvement of signage for VA 161 and VA 356 in Henrico County. The result is that VA 356 is now fully posted (complete with an END sign eastbound at VA 161), and no longer seems to "disappear". The movements for VA 161 and VA 356 are also fully posted at that intersection (VA 161 turns onto Hilliard Road from Lakeside Avenue). There is also now a reassurance shield at the western end of VA 356.

Maybe I should use this feature to have VDOT finally properly sign some poorly signed routes...

Excellent...

Speaking of this intersection, around the 0:31 mark of this frenetic video about vintage Richmond signage (mostly commercial signage) there is a very clear photo of VA 161 NB approaching VA 356 in white border signs.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VBLGvGQWoFs

The video itself is pretty neat but I had to play it at a slower speed to not lose my mind...

Mike

[1995hoo]

VDOT tweeted out a link to a "Then and Now" gallery. Note they arranged them vertically rather than side-by-side.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/vadot/sets/72157665456278465/with/25203056670/

[cpzilliacus]

Maybe I should use this feature to have VDOT finally properly sign some poorly signed routes...

Would that it would be possible to alert VDOT to sign horrors by municipal governments that either do not sign Virginia primary and U.S. routes within their corporate limits - or - do a terrible job of same (yes, Falls Church, I am looking at you).

[1995hoo]

Maybe I should use this feature to have VDOT finally properly sign some poorly signed routes...

Would that it would be possible to alert VDOT to sign horrors by municipal governments that either do not sign Virginia primary and U.S. routes within their corporate limits - or - do a terrible job of same (yes, Falls Church, I am looking at you).

OTOH, I'd hate to see the remaining cutouts in Falls Church vanish.

[cpzilliacus]

Maybe I should use this feature to have VDOT finally properly sign some poorly signed routes...

Would that it would be possible to alert VDOT to sign horrors by municipal governments that either do not sign Virginia primary and U.S. routes within their corporate limits - or - do a terrible job of same (yes, Falls Church, I am looking at you).

OTOH, I'd hate to see the remaining cutouts in Falls Church vanish.

I agree - but there are no more state route signs along 338 in Falls Church, and there was no signing at all
of Va. 7 (Broad Street) when driving north on U.S. 29 (Washington Street) approaching that intersection.

[WillWeaverRVA]

Maybe I should use this feature to have VDOT finally properly sign some poorly signed routes...

Would that it would be possible to alert VDOT to sign horrors by municipal governments that either do not sign Virginia primary and U.S. routes within their corporate limits - or - do a terrible job of same (yes, Falls Church, I am looking at you).

Sadly I tried to make a request for signs on streets in Richmond and the interface is able to determine that VDOT doesn't maintain the streets I made the request for.

[1995hoo]

Maybe I should use this feature to have VDOT finally properly sign some poorly signed routes...

Would that it would be possible to alert VDOT to sign horrors by municipal governments that either do not sign Virginia primary and U.S. routes within their corporate limits - or - do a terrible job of same (yes, Falls Church, I am looking at you).

Sadly I tried to make a request for signs on streets in Richmond and the interface is able to determine that VDOT doesn't maintain the streets I made the request for.

Same thing happened when I tried to get some lumpy asphalt fixed in Alexandria. Problem extends onto a section I know is VDOT-maintained in Fairfax County, but neither jurisdiction seems to care.

[froggie]

In other words, don't bother.  The likely answer from VDOT would also be that those streets/roads are under city jurisdiction, not VDOT jurisdiction, so you should take it up with the city.

[1995hoo]

In other words, don't bother.  The likely answer from VDOT would also be that those streets/roads are under city jurisdiction, not VDOT jurisdiction, so you should take it up with the city.

To be sure, cpzilliacus began his comment with "would that," indicating he wishes one could do this. I certainly understand that wish.

[froggie]

I saw that...but my response was moreso after reading everyone else's response to his question.

[cpzilliacus]

In other words, don't bother.  The likely answer from VDOT would also be that those streets/roads are under city jurisdiction, not VDOT jurisdiction, so you should take it up with the city.

To be sure, cpzilliacus began his comment with "would that," indicating he wishes one could do this. I certainly understand that wish.

Thank you and agreed.

I think it is important to note that even on streets and roads maintained by towns and cities across Virginia, the Commonwealth still plays a major role in funding those public roadways, even when maintained by a municipal department outside of VDOT through the Urban Program, though there is nothing on the VDOT Web site that provides guidance for maintaining signage on streets and roads that are part of the primary system.

[1995hoo]

I don't see any technical reason why VDOT couldn't simply refer reports to the appropriate jurisdiction. They just don't want to do it.

[jwolfer]

In other words, don't bother.  The likely answer from VDOT would also be that those streets/roads are under city jurisdiction, not VDOT jurisdiction, so you should take it up with the city.

To be sure, cpzilliacus began his comment with "would that," indicating he wishes one could do this. I certainly understand that wish.

Wonderful use of the subjunctive mood! Most English speakers don't use it.. They say " if I was you.." Instead of " if I were you.."

I don't understand why some states don't maintain state routes through cites. Just to keep same quality of road and signage. It makes sense for maintenance on a signed route to be all on the state.. Florida maintaines the roads inside city limits.. I guess other states like Delaware the state maintains everything

[Mapmikey]

Virginia's situation has always been complicated.  The independent city concept goes back a long ways to 1871.
Even incorporated towns in Virginia can make it complicated:  all primary routes through incorporated towns were removed from state highway maintenance in 1929 after a legal interpretation involving Ashland and its desire to put certain signs up along a primary route that the CTB didn't want.  In 1930 the General Assembly passed a law outlining what needed to happen for a town to have their primary routes put back in the state highway maintenance system.  Most towns complied and had their routes restored to the system in 1930-31.

Mike

[cpzilliacus]

Virginia's situation has always been complicated.  The independent city concept goes back a long ways to 1871.
Even incorporated towns in Virginia can make it complicated:  all primary routes through incorporated towns were removed from state highway maintenance in 1929 after a legal interpretation involving Ashland and its desire to put certain signs up along a primary route that the CTB didn't want.  In 1930 the General Assembly passed a law outlining what needed to happen for a town to have their primary routes put back in the state highway maintenance system.  Most towns complied and had their routes restored to the system in 1930-31.

Though even now, the cities maintain all or very nearly all arterial roads inside their limits.  Most (maybe all) Interstate and urban freeway/expressways in cities are maintained by VDOT.

Towns under a certain population threshold (3,500?) can have their roads and streets maintained by VDOT.

Above that, and the towns need to maintain their own streets.

[WillWeaverRVA]

I don't see any technical reason why VDOT couldn't simply refer reports to the appropriate jurisdiction. They just don't want to do it.

They do...if it's a VDOT jurisdiction. I don't think most of the independent cities are concerned.

[cpzilliacus]

WTOP Radio: Prince William Co. pulls plug, for now, on controversial parkway route

The Bi-County Parkway that would directly connect Interstate 95 to Interstate 66 and the area near Dulles Airport is no longer part of Prince William County's long-range plans after a Board of Supervisors vote this week.

Although the board had said it would not act Tuesday since Chairman Corey Stewart was out of town, the board voted 4-3 to remove the Bi-County Parkway route from the county's comprehensive plan.

The route on the west side of Manassas National Battlefield had been chosen by the state more than a decade ago, but opposition from some neighbors eventually led to it being put on hold.

While Board Vice-Chair Pete Candland agrees with Virginia Department of Transportation plans that eventually call for some type of north-south connection through the county, he says removing the exact route from the comprehensive plan will allow for more negotiations in the future, rather than "getting slapped across the face, saying "˜this is in your comprehensive plan.'"

[noelbotevera]

Quick question: who maintains US 29 and VA 234 inside Manassas' battlefield? There's still green distance signs (probably VDOT spec), but there's also NPS signs (some signs on US 29 point to the Stone Bridge using the Rawlinson font).

[Mapmikey]

Quick question: who maintains US 29 and VA 234 inside Manassas' battlefield? There's still green distance signs (probably VDOT spec), but there's also NPS signs (some signs on US 29 point to the Stone Bridge using the Rawlinson font).

VDOT maintains these routes...

[WillWeaverRVA]

Speaking of VDOT, the preliminary versions of the 2015 traffic data reports are available on the VDOT website (they seem to be dated late February 2016):

http://www.virginiadot.org/info/2015_traffic_data_by_jurisdiction.asp

I haven't looked through them all to see if there's anything noteworthy in them.

[Mapmikey]

The proposed SR 630 Stafford Interchange is now envisioned as a DDI instead of the more complicated mess originally proposed, though still a little pricey at $149M

http://www.virginiadot.org/projects/resources/Fredericksburg/DDI_Map,_Exit_140_Courthouse_Road.PDF

VDOT's website puts this project in the "Coming soon" pile...

Send. Lots. of. Money. 

I make that assertion because of the land that VDOT will have to purchase for this to happen.

This project is now set for contract award in fall 2016 (http://www.virginiadot.org/projects/fredericksburg/interstate_95-route_630_courthouse_road_interchange_relocation_and_route_630_widening.asp).  The interchange price remains $149M; widening/relocating SR 630 is $36M.

They also have this as part of this project:

I-95 Southbound Fourth Lane Construction Option

VDOT has proposed constructing a fourth lane on Interstate 95 southbound as part of this project. It will be included as a bid option when the I-95 Exit 140 interchange and Route 630 widening project is advertised.

Design and construction of a fourth I-95 travel lane will be contingent on available funding after bids are submitted and reviewed.

Construction of a fourth southbound I-95 lane is proposed to be built in Stafford between I-95 mile marker 143 and 2,250 feet south of the new, relocated I-95 interchange at Exit 140 (Route 630/Courthouse Road).

The fourth lane would begin at the end of the southbound exit from the 95 Express Lanes Southern Terminus Extension project. This project will construct an approximate 2.2 miles of reversible extension of the Express Lanes.

The fourth lane would be open to all traffic in the general purpose lanes of I-95 southbound.

The estimated cost of the 4th lane is $17M.

Mike

[74/171FAN]

Residents on the Middle Peninsula and Northern Neck seem to be concerned with the safety with the VA 3 Robert O. Norris Bridge over the Rappahannock River, though VDOT says it is structurally safe.

[cpzilliacus]

Residents on the Middle Peninsula and Northern Neck seem to be concerned with the safety with the VA 3 Robert O. Norris Bridge over the Rappahannock River, though VDOT says it is structurally safe.

I recall the deck of the Norris Bridge getting some sort of a pretty thorough rehabilitation job in the 1990's.  Might even have been a deck replacement.  It was a very bumpy ride, and "lowboy" tractor-trailers were prohibited from crossing. 

First time I crossed the Norris Bridge in the 1960's, it was still a toll bridge.  There was a toll plaza at the north end of the crossing.  The building and wide spot in Va. 3 are still there:  https://www.google.com/maps/@37.6378997,-76.4094374,3a,75y,72.98h,66.08t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s9lnd29bC4MtGV3ejPPB8VQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1

[amroad17]

It "looks" alright, just a bit narrow (10 ft. lanes instead of 12 ft. lanes).  The problem is more than likely due to temperature and weather variations.  There seems to be a lot more snow and colder temperatures in this area than there was in the 1980's and 1990's.  The bridge is probably "structurally safe" but "functionally obsolete."