Virginia

[Beltway]

It looks pretty stupid to drivers to see an award-winning bridge sitting there with no traffic.

To the average Joe, once the Kentucky portion opens, they'll be going on nice four-lane highway, cross a nice high-rise bridge, then dump onto a two-lane narrow road in Virginia. Once this corridor opens, Virginia will seem like the cheap one until they complete their portion back to US-460.

To the average Joe, a section usable in Virginia will have been unusable for 6 years before the Kentucky section opens, and users of VA-80 and KY-80 will have immediate benefits.

The plan is to have the US-460 Connector complete in 2023 and the US-121/US-460 segment complete in 2024.

Reminds me of when North Carolina widened & relocated US-17 as a limited-access highway up to the border at Chesapeake, then dumped into a two-lane non-limited-access narrow road. It took Virginia almost four decades to finally complete their portion. It took three+ decades for them to realize hey, we can't widen the road on the swamp, let's relocate it instead!

2005 - 1985 = 20 years, not 40.  I daresay that the NEPA and ACOE and EPA requirements for the section in Chesapeake was several times more complicated than in Camden County.

[Beltway]

Not trying to start anything, but just wondering - what was the issue with the comment I made?

Political and not relevant to roads.

Sorry. I just felt the need as I found it ironic that Governor Northam calls the name "Jefferson Davis Highway" inappropriate. Something just doesn't add up in my head about that...
But I digress.

I find it irritating that people who don't live in Virginia are interfering with discussions of matters here that are directly related to highways.

[jakeroot]

Instead we have a high and expensive bridge sitting there 4 years because the KY section was delayed.

Perhaps, but they waited and did it right. Now it makes Virginia look cheap.

No, it makes Kentucky look incompetent.  Highways should be built in segments of independent utility.  Virginia funded the segment so that Kentucky could open that last few miles in their state and not have it sit there going nowhere.

It made Kentucky look incompetent. Now, as sprjus4 alludes to above, Virginia will look incompetent for having spent millions on a bridge, and then sat around doing nothing while Kentucky worked on a proper freeway. Unless Route 460's Phase II is finished before Kentucky opens their section, Virginia will look stupid having about half a mile of freeway before a tight 90-degree turn back onto two-lane roads.

The segment in Virginia beyond the new bridge is currently under construction. Drive SR 609 between Breaks and US 460 and you'll see a massive construction project at the top of the mountain.

Will this section connect to Route 460's dead-end at Route 693? And open before the Kentucky section opens?

To the average Joe, a section usable in Virginia will have been unusable for 6 years before the Kentucky section opens, and users of VA-80 and KY-80 will have immediate benefits.
The plan is to have the US-460 Connector complete in 2023 and the US-121/US-460 segment complete in 2024.

Are these referring to Virginia projects? And if so, will they be complete before Kentucky's section of freeway? I'm sort of rehashing my response to HB above.

Even if the section in Virginia opened, there would have been no local roads to which Kentucky could connect that bridge. Route 80 appears to be the faster route anyway, until the entire freeway is finished.

[Beltway]

To the average Joe, a section usable in Virginia will have been unusable for 6 years before the Kentucky section opens, and users of VA-80 and KY-80 will have immediate benefits.
The plan is to have the US-460 Connector complete in 2023 and the US-121/US-460 segment complete in 2024.

Are these referring to Virginia projects? And if so, will they be complete before Kentucky's section of freeway? I'm sort of rehashing my response to HB above.

Yes to the first, and probably no to the second.

Even if the section in Virginia opened, there would have been no local roads to which Kentucky could connect that bridge. Route 80 appears to be the faster route anyway, until the entire freeway is finished.

Like I said, the KY section in conjunction with the new bridge provides a major improvement to the KY/VA 80 corridor, not something to handwave.

[sprjus4]

2005 - 1985 = 20 years, not 40.

I had originally thought it was the 70s not 80s, but after checking my route openings map, it does appear it was 1984 the relocated segments opened, so it would've been around that time.

Still, it was in planning since at least the early 70s. I recall an EIS from the early 70s regarding the widening & relocation of the roadway. It was originally studied as a freeway with interchanges & access roads, though obviously was never constructed that way, but rather as a limited-access at-grade highway. As development increases though down that way, and the presence of NC I-87, that ultimate build-out will finally be constructed in the next 10-20 years. But that's besides the point, I'm not going to turn this into a 10 page argument why or why not it should be done.

It made Kentucky look incompetent. Now, as sprjus4 alludes to above, Virginia will look incompetent for having spent millions on a bridge, and then sat around doing nothing while Kentucky worked on a proper freeway. Unless Route 460's Phase II is finished before Kentucky opens their section, Virginia will look stupid having about half a mile of freeway before a tight 90-degree turn back onto two-lane roads.

The segment in Virginia beyond the new bridge is currently under construction. Drive SR 609 between Breaks and US 460 and you'll see a massive construction project at the top of the mountain.

Will this section connect to Route 460's dead-end at Route 693? And open before the Kentucky section opens?

To the average Joe, a section usable in Virginia will have been unusable for 6 years before the Kentucky section opens, and users of VA-80 and KY-80 will have immediate benefits.
The plan is to have the US-460 Connector complete in 2023 and the US-121/US-460 segment complete in 2024.

Are these referring to Virginia projects? And if so, will they be complete before Kentucky's section of freeway? I'm sort of rehashing my response to HB above.

Even if the section in Virginia opened, there would have been no local roads to which Kentucky could connect that bridge. Route 80 appears to be the faster route anyway, until the entire freeway is finished.

*limited-access highway. It's not being constructed as a full freeway with interchanges & overpasses, but rather a limited-access highway with at-grade intersections at minor cross streets, and interchanges at major cross streets. That's how the corridors are designed. West Virginia has a lot of good examples of roads like this. They function just as well as freeways though, having freeway cross-sections (I.E. 10 foot shoulders, 12 foot lanes, divided medians, gentle curves, etc)

[Beltway]

2005 - 1985 = 20 years, not 40.

I had originally thought it was the 70s not 80s, but after checking my route openings map, it does appear it was 1984 the relocated segments opened, so it would've been around that time.
Still, it was in planning since at least the early 70s. I recall an EIS from the early 70s regarding the widening & relocation of the roadway.

It is not a good example of arbitrary delays to a highway project.  There were about as serious a level of environmental obstacles that project could have and still get built, and it took years to find a solution that satisfied the resource agencies.

Plus the actual construction was not very expensive, so funding was not the issue.  Excerpt from my website article --

The contract bid amount was well below the engineering estimate for the project, and that provided a benefit to VDOT and the taxpayers.  As of the December 2002 bid opening, the VDOT Six-Year Program entry for that project was $76.566 million programmed for Construction.  There were 8 bids distributed between $41,039,684.75 (Barnhill) and $46,929,719.80.  For 11.6 miles of mostly new-location four-lane highway at a cost of $41.96 million, that works out to an average per mile cost of $3.62 million.  The project has two bridges, twin bridges over wetlands, each 984 feet long.  Sometimes the state of the national economy is such that contractors are hungry for work and will bid much lower on a project than ordinarily.  That was a very good deal for that amount of highway construction, and the quality of work is very good.  The 2006 Six-Year Program entry for this project shows expenditures of $3.46 million for Preliminary Engineering, and $12.338 million for Right-of-Way acquisition.  Total costs for the project amount to $57.758 million.

[jakeroot]

To the average Joe, a section usable in Virginia will have been unusable for 6 years before the Kentucky section opens, and users of VA-80 and KY-80 will have immediate benefits.
The plan is to have the US-460 Connector complete in 2023 and the US-121/US-460 segment complete in 2024.

Are these referring to Virginia projects? And if so, will they be complete before Kentucky's section of freeway? I'm sort of rehashing my response to HB above.

Yes to the first, and probably no to the second.
...
Like I said, the KY section in conjunction with the new bridge provides a major improvement to the KY/VA 80 corridor, not something to handwave.

But isn't VA hand-waving the bridge by taking forever to build a proper *limited access highway (thanks sprjus4) up the bridge? It's going to look awful strange to drivers, cruising along Route 460 in Kentucky, when they cross into Virginia and immediately get pooped out onto some B-road. Unless Virginia finishes their section first (in which case, Kentucky will definitely appear incompetent).

To make it clear, I'm happy to see that the bridge was built. But I feel it was almost built sooner than it needed to be, since neither state had the funds to build a proper road to connect to it straight-away. You didn't really explain what Kentucky should have connected to the new bridge. I don't see any local roads on the KY side of Grassy Creek.

[jakeroot]

I see now, on historic imagery, that the Kentucky side has had some sort of pavement leading up to the bridge for at least four years now. I will concede at least one thing: Kentucky should have finished that section of highway by now.

[sprjus4]

Plus the actual construction was not very expensive, so funding was not the issue.

My thing is why did it take them 20+ years (like I mentioned, the NC section was in planning in the 70s) to come up with a new location alignment? And it seems there clearly wasn't much effort to even start the project till the very late 90s and into the 2000s.

It always makes me wonder - why was this built for so cheap and taxpayer funded in a short period of time, and the VA-168 relocation in the same general area & timeframe took decades, and ended up being tolled and costing way more? Why didn't they construct VA-168 as a 10 mile relocation as a limited-access, at-grade highway with the same design specs as US-17 was? It probably would've been way cheaper, and no tolls necessary.

[sprjus4]

I see now, on historic imagery, that the Kentucky side has had some sort of pavement leading up to the bridge for at least four years now. I will concede at least one thing: Kentucky should have finished that section of highway by now.

Say hello to I-69 around Union City, TN. Been sitting there for over a decade, graded, bridges completed, everything, and it's finally going to open in 3 years.

That's far worse, and frankly more sad, seeing as that was on flat grade thru fields, not through mountains.

[Beltway]

Plus the actual construction was not very expensive, so funding was not the issue.

My thing is why did it take them 20+ years (like I mentioned, the NC section was in planning in the 70s) to come up with a new location alignment? And it seems there clearly wasn't much effort to even start the project till the very late 90s and into the 2000s.

Oh good grief, I wrote a website article about this project.  There were various new alignments proposed during those 20 years, various mitigation strategies, the fact that it is so close to the Great Dismal Swamp National Wildlife Refuge, negotiations that led to changes in the proposed alignment, and one of the final breakthroughs that got approval from all the resource agencies was the donation of 758 acres of wetlands (640 acres is one square mile for reference) to become a permanent undeveloped refuge.

Frankly many people wondered whether it could ever get built.

The Chesapeake Expressway had a tiny fraction of those issues to deal with.

[sprjus4]

The Chesapeake Expressway had a tiny fraction of those issues to deal with.

It always makes me wonder - why was this built for so cheap and taxpayer funded in a short period of time, and the VA-168 relocation in the same general area & timeframe took decades, and ended up being tolled and costing way more? Why didn't they construct VA-168 as a 10 mile relocation as a limited-access, at-grade highway with the same design specs as US-17 was? It probably would've been way cheaper, and no tolls necessary.

[Beltway]

The Chesapeake Expressway had a tiny fraction of those issues to deal with.

It always makes me wonder - why was this built for so cheap and taxpayer funded in a short period of time,

I thought you said it took forever to get built.

and the VA-168 relocation in the same general area & timeframe took decades,

Both were completed within 3 years of each other.

and ended up being tolled and costing way more? Why didn't they construct VA-168 as a 10 mile relocation as a limited-access, at-grade highway with the same design specs as US-17 was? It probably would've been way cheaper, and no tolls necessary.

What did I say about unusually low bids and why? 

The traffic volumes on VA-168 particularly on weekends would overwhelm an at-grade highway in mid- and northern Chesapeake.

The City of Chesapeake took control of that project and built it the way that they wanted, including using tolls.

[sprjus4]

But isn't VA hand-waving the bridge by taking forever to build a proper *limited access highway (thanks sprjus4) up the bridge? It's going to look awful strange to drivers, cruising along Route 460 in Kentucky, when they cross into Virginia and immediately get pooped out onto some B-road. Unless Virginia finishes their section first (in which case, Kentucky will definitely appear incompetent).

That's the point I'm trying to get at. When you cross over the border, and see a "Welcome to Virginia, Virginia is for Lovers" sign, you get some love by being transitioned from a high-speed 4-lane expressway onto a narrow, slow-speed two-lane windy mountain road.

[Beltway]

That's the point I'm trying to get at. When you cross over the border, and see a "Welcome to Virginia, Virginia is for Lovers" sign, you get some love by being transitioned from a high-speed 4-lane expressway onto a narrow, slow-speed two-lane windy mountain road.

It will provide a major improvement in the VA/KY 80 route, a traffic usable and beneficial connection.

So Kentucky leaves the bridge unusable for 6 years, then they complete their new highway, and then Virginia completes theirs in 2023 for US-460 Connector and 2024 for US-460/US-121.

[amroad17]

I'm positive I've been on roads that had rumble strips where there was a double yellow line and no rumble strip where there was a passing zone, though I can't recall what road(s) had that.

The AA Hwy in Kentucky has the rumble strips along the center line as well as on the shoulder.  An attempt to keep drivers from straying in the other lane while falling asleep driving some of the portions of that road.    Yes, some places along the 111 mile route (Wilder to Grayson) are "boring". 

[amroad17]

I wasn't in any way "dissing" any opinions brought forth.  They are all interesting.  It's just, like Beltway, I had never given it much thought.  Living in the area for 22 years, it was something that was accepted.  Even in the 1970's, I realized there could never be an interchange at that location.  If I needed to get to that area from the Western Branch area of Chesapeake (back when tolls for the tunnels were 25 cents), I would either exit off Military Hwy or Newtown Rd. to reach Va. Beach Blvd.

I didn't take it as being criticism, just questions for thought.  Some places there are major thoroughfares that don't connect to a freeway due to the proximity to other interchanges.

US-29 Lee Highway over I-495 Capital Beltway and VA-617 Backlick Road under I-495 come to mind.  No connections to the general purpose lanes of I-495.

Some other examples in Hampton Roads include I-64 over Shell Road near the US-17 George Washington Hwy interchange, Providence Rd (no official route number, though the overpass marker on the bridge over I-64 indicates "Rt 409"?) over I-64 near the Indian River Rd interchange, and Hampton Roads Pkwy over I-664 in between the VA-164 Western Freeway & VA-135 College Dr interchanges. Probably other ones too.

Just remember when I-64 was completed from Bowers Hill to I-264 in Norfolk--1967-69.  Back then there was no need for an interchange at Providence Road.  It was a sleepy two lane road.  An interchange at Shell Road would be too close to the US 17 interchange in Deep Creek.  Hampton Roads Parkway was completed after I-664 opened.  In 1992-93, it was simply a road to nowhere (a forest maybe, but not what is there now--Good Lord, there's a golf course back there now?).   Back then the road ended where Harbor View Blvd is now.  Still, the overpass is very near the on/off ramps from/to VA 164 and US 17.  Wouldn't want to tear down that Japanese Steakhouse/Sushi restaurant, would we?

[1995hoo]

I'm positive I've been on roads that had rumble strips where there was a double yellow line and no rumble strip where there was a passing zone, though I can't recall what road(s) had that.

The AA Hwy in Kentucky has the rumble strips along the center line as well as on the shoulder.  An attempt to keep drivers from straying in the other lane while falling asleep driving some of the portions of that road.    Yes, some places along the 111 mile route (Wilder to Grayson) are "boring". 

Having rumble strips on the center striping isn't that unusual. I believe (not positive) US-15 in Maryland has them between Point of Rocks and US-340. I know someone whose father and brother were killed in a head-on crash on that road involving a wrong-way driver. I don't remember whether the segment has any passing zones, though. I just don't go that way all that often.

[jakeroot]

That's the point I'm trying to get at. When you cross over the border, and see a "Welcome to Virginia, Virginia is for Lovers" sign, you get some love by being transitioned from a high-speed 4-lane expressway onto a narrow, slow-speed two-lane windy mountain road.

It will provide a major improvement in the VA/KY 80 route, a traffic usable and beneficial connection.

So Kentucky leaves the bridge unusable for 6 years, then they complete their new highway, and then Virginia completes theirs in 2023 for US-460 Connector and 2024 for US-460/US-121.

Virginia provided a connection to Route 80 on their side quite early on, but the quality is shit compared to what Kentucky took forever to build. Virginia will be the butt of jokes straight away, until they open Phase II.

[Beltway]

That's the point I'm trying to get at. When you cross over the border, and see a "Welcome to Virginia, Virginia is for Lovers" sign, you get some love by being transitioned from a high-speed 4-lane expressway onto a narrow, slow-speed two-lane windy mountain road.

It will provide a major improvement in the VA/KY 80 route, a traffic usable and beneficial connection.
So Kentucky leaves the bridge unusable for 6 years, then they complete their new highway, and then Virginia completes theirs in 2023 for US-460 Connector and 2024 for US-460/US-121.

Virginia provided a connection to Route 80 on their side quite early on, but the quality is shit compared to what Kentucky took forever to build. Virginia will be the butt of jokes straight away, until they open Phase II.

It will provide a major improvement in the VA/KY 80 route, a traffic usable and beneficial connection.

That is not "shit", that is an improvement to a major 2-lane primary highway.

You need to clean that material off of your glasses.

[jakeroot]

It will provide a major improvement in the VA/KY 80 route, a traffic usable and beneficial connection.

That is not "shit", that is an improvement to a major 2-lane primary highway

I'm not trying to imply that it's not an improvement to the overall corridor, but, until Virginia finishes their highway, it will look very awkward to have a 90-degree turn, immediately after crossing into the state.

On paper, the corridor has been improved. But behind the driver's seat, it's a very awkward maneuver. in fact, it's so awkward, that it might even be dangerous.

Has it been considered how fast drivers will be approaching that 90-degree turn onto Route 693? Will they expect such an awkward maneuver, until the freeway is finished?

It reminds me a lot of that old Kansas Turnpike picture...

[Beltway]

It will provide a major improvement in the VA/KY 80 route, a traffic usable and beneficial connection.
That is not "shit", that is an improvement to a major 2-lane primary highway

I'm not trying to imply that it's not an improvement to the overall corridor, but, until Virginia finishes their highway, it will look very awkward to have a 90-degree turn, immediately after crossing into the state.

No more than hundreds of other temporary Interstate and freeway termini over the last 75 years.  That is the nature of highway corridor construction, due to costs and industry capacity, they are built in segments, and the temporary termini are usually a compromise of some sort.

On paper, the corridor has been improved. But behind the driver's seat, it's a very awkward maneuver. in fact, it's so awkward, that it might even be dangerous.
Has it been considered how fast drivers will be approaching that 90-degree turn onto Route 693? Will they expect such an awkward maneuver, until the freeway is finished?

I have looked at aerial views, and one of the highway jobs I had in the past was designing signing layouts for construction and post-construction projects.  Start warning signing 2 miles before the end, close the left lane using barricades about 1/2 mile from the end, then have a series of warning signs lowering the speeds to 35 or 25 or whatever is needed, then sign the curve at the intersection.

Conceptually similar to the hundreds mentioned before.

It reminds me a lot of that old Kansas Turnpike picture...

Not at all.  The last several miles looks like it has no traffic, and has not yet had any. 

[Mapmikey]

I'm not trying to imply that it's not an improvement to the overall corridor, but, until Virginia finishes their highway, it will look very awkward to have a 90-degree turn, immediately after crossing into the state.

On paper, the corridor has been improved. But behind the driver's seat, it's a very awkward maneuver. in fact, it's so awkward, that it might even be dangerous.

Has it been considered how fast drivers will be approaching that 90-degree turn onto Route 693? Will they expect such an awkward maneuver, until the freeway is finished?

It can't be any worse that the temporary east end of Corridor H expressway outside Wardensville WV...8% grade into a 20 mph S curve:
https://goo.gl/maps/VpBDsnPGfbM7atjw8

Or the temporary end of King Coal Hwy east of Williamson with a 5% grade down to a stop sign (also in a posted fog area)
https://goo.gl/maps/ZGZT2AtP3F7XdfmGA

Temporary in this sense may mean decades...

Also, coming into Virginia on the future US 460 after crossing the bridge you will be going uphill approaching SR 693, which I'm guessing will become part of VA 80 when it is opened on the Kentucky side...

[LM117]

A public meeting is coming up in my neck of the woods to discuss a proposed US-311 connector road.

https://www.virginiadot.org/newsroom/lynchburg/2019/route-311-public-hearing-scheduled5-21-2019.asp

[hbelkins]

Too much to try to quote and respond to, so I'll try to recap...

All of future US 460 is either completed (US 23 to KY 195, and just past KY 80 to the state line) or under construction (KY 195 to KY 80) except for the bridge over KY 80, which hasn't even gone to bid yet.

There was talk of paving one of the ramps from KY 80 to the new road, opening it to two-way traffic, and thus opening the new four-lane from KY 80 north of Elkhorn City to VA 80 at Breaks, but Kentucky engineers nixed that idea. The fear was that if traffic started using what will be an exit ramp to enter the four-lane, the potential for wrecks would be increased after everything is fully complete. So access on the Kentucky side is going to be delays for some time.

Kentucky most likely will not sign the new route as US 460 until some connection is made to US 460 in Virginia. The currently opened segment is signed KY 3174. Even if it's completed to KY 80 near Elkhorn City, it will probably be signed as a state route. US 460 traffic will continue to run on the existing route, which is concurrent with KY 80 from Shelbiana (US 23/119) to Belcher. From there, US 460 follows a more recent routing that was built when Fishtrap Lake inundated the old route to KY 1499 at Mouthcard, then along the river and on into Virginia. There will be no through US 460 traffic from Kentucky into Virginia using the four-lane that will come to an abrupt stop anywhere.