District of Columbia

[18 wheel warrior]

.... Now, if you are really only looking to limit confusion for drivers... I-395 in DC shouldn't even have its own numbering scheme. MD and VA combined the beltway into one scheme. Why shouldn't DC and VA do likewise, and just continue the VA numbering to 295 in DC?

Agree 100%.

[18 wheel warrior]

.... Heck, even 395's Virginia exits aren't completely mileage-based, although that might be irrelevant.

In Virginia all 3 digit interstate exits are all sequential.

I-295 and I-495 are mileage-based (though I-495's numbers continue from MD).

That's true. The only two exceptions.

[1995hoo]

.... Heck, even 395's Virginia exits aren't completely mileage-based, although that might be irrelevant.

In Virginia all 3 digit interstate exits are all sequential.

I-295 and I-495 are mileage-based (though I-495's numbers continue from MD).

...and I-366 doesn't have exit numbers (or at least it didn't the last time I was on it).

[froggie]

...speaking of confusion...

[VTGoose]

Speaking of D.C. traffic . . .

"D.C. acquires "˜Dave Thomas Circle' on New York Avenue through eminent domain"

"A confusing intersection along New York Avenue in Northeast Washington will be redesigned to make it safer, city officials said.

D.C. Mayor Muriel E. Bowser (D) and city transportation officials said they used eminent domain to acquire the title for the property where a Wendy's restaurant sits in the center of New York and Florida avenues and First Street NE. The intersection is often referred to as "Dave Thomas Circle,"  nicknamed after the founder of the Wendy's fast-food chain."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/trafficandcommuting/dave-thomas-circle/2021/02/02/e41ab174-6547-11eb-8c64-9595888caa15_story.html

[jakeroot]

Concept from floridaaveproject.com ...



I really don't see how adding in all those new left turns will help traffic flow. Unless the left turns, such as those from eastbound New York Ave to westbound Florida Ave, are not going to have any protected phasing.

[froggie]

Will definitely help eastbound Florida, because you won't have that funky "half-circle" with the existing mis-matched signal phasing to contend with.  Shouldn't be any different than today for New York Ave....they already have 2 signals.  Also notice that FL/1st/Eckington has no left turns, so that one should be a simple two-phase signal.

[mrsman]

The advantages of mileage-based numbers are why they are the nation-wide standard...

...Because they normally line up with the route mileage. Yours, at best, barely meet that goal. To someone driving, it's far enough off that I fail to see how it could be useful. And there's still zero consideration for potential confusion around numerous "A" and "B" suffixes plastered across every sign. Has there ever been a consideration for how drivers could be confused by having six separate exits with an "A" attached to them? Suffixed exits are fine when not avoidable, but they're not typically ideal. Here, they're entirely avoidable yet we insist on it for unknown reasons beyond "it's just what you do".

Alright, I'll leap back in...

Lets be truly honest here... the only way most exit numbers are actually useful, on a highway with a lot of them, is by giving you an idea of how far to the next exit. On a road with very few exits, like, say the NJ Turnpike, they are so few and far apart that the numbers are useful even though they are sequential. However, on your average interstate where exits are fairly frequent, the exit numbers don't stick in my mind for any reason other than to give me an idea of how far to the my intended exit.  If you listen to WTOP, I hear them mention the intersecting roads a lot more than the actual exit numbers. They do mention them sometimes, but the emphasis is definitely on the intersecting road, not the exit number.  Thus, for a road like I-395, they aren't even that important. I'm much more likely to advise someone to take the 12th Street exit than Exit 3 or whatever it is.

Since they aren't that important, might as well conform to standard.

A lot of the confusion isn't so much the exit numbering - it's the large number of sigs in this area and all of the exits and additional supplemental signs.  Yes, there are a large number of points of interest in Downtown Washington, but not all of them need their own highway sign.  A cleanup of the signs is in order, beyond just the exit numbering.

[mrsman]

Concept from floridaaveproject.com ...



I really don't see how adding in all those new left turns will help traffic flow. Unless the left turns, such as those from eastbound New York Ave to westbound Florida Ave, are not going to have any protected phasing.

I share your concern.  The oldest configuraion here allowed two way traffic on both streets, but prohibited left turns throughout.  Some view of that can be seen in Oct 2007 GSV, if you click in the right places.  IMO, this was better than what exists now as well as what is now proposed.

There is definitely merit in connecting 1st to Eckington.  But there really should not be a left allowed from NY to FL.  The lefts should be prohibited up and down the NY Ave corridor, especially where there is no room for a left turn lane.   The lefts from FL to NY do make more sense and are probably needed given the expectations of traffic on FL Ave.

If anything, perhaps left turns (with left turn lanes) could be allowed from NY to 1st, but not from NY to FL.  The NY/FL intersection is very busy and the amount of traffic there can be severely blocked with more red time to allow for a protected left phase.   But even the NY to 1st left isn't truly necessary as traffic can make a right on N street and then a left on 1st to reach Eckington.

[jakeroot]

Concept from floridaaveproject.com ...



I really don't see how adding in all those new left turns will help traffic flow. Unless the left turns, such as those from eastbound New York Ave to westbound Florida Ave, are not going to have any protected phasing.

I share your concern.  The oldest configuraion here allowed two way traffic on both streets, but prohibited left turns throughout.  Some view of that can be seen in Oct 2007 GSV, if you click in the right places.  IMO, this was better than what exists now as well as what is now proposed.

There is definitely merit in connecting 1st to Eckington.  But there really should not be a left allowed from NY to FL.  The lefts should be prohibited up and down the NY Ave corridor, especially where there is no room for a left turn lane.   The lefts from FL to NY do make more sense and are probably needed given the expectations of traffic on FL Ave.

If anything, perhaps left turns (with left turn lanes) could be allowed from NY to 1st, but not from NY to FL.  The NY/FL intersection is very busy and the amount of traffic there can be severely blocked with more red time to allow for a protected left phase.   But even the NY to 1st left isn't truly necessary as traffic can make a right on N street and then a left on 1st to reach Eckington.

I had no idea the current configuration was only about ten years old. Seems rather odd to scrap the changes so quickly.

Looking at the old setup (pre-2010), I would agree that it seems like the better setup. It's not perfect for through traffic along Eckington/First, but it wasn't an impossible maneuver, and the priority here is clearly traffic between Florida Ave and New York Ave.

[mrsman]

Concept from floridaaveproject.com ...



I really don't see how adding in all those new left turns will help traffic flow. Unless the left turns, such as those from eastbound New York Ave to westbound Florida Ave, are not going to have any protected phasing.

I share your concern.  The oldest configuraion here allowed two way traffic on both streets, but prohibited left turns throughout.  Some view of that can be seen in Oct 2007 GSV, if you click in the right places.  IMO, this was better than what exists now as well as what is now proposed.

There is definitely merit in connecting 1st to Eckington.  But there really should not be a left allowed from NY to FL.  The lefts should be prohibited up and down the NY Ave corridor, especially where there is no room for a left turn lane.   The lefts from FL to NY do make more sense and are probably needed given the expectations of traffic on FL Ave.

If anything, perhaps left turns (with left turn lanes) could be allowed from NY to 1st, but not from NY to FL.  The NY/FL intersection is very busy and the amount of traffic there can be severely blocked with more red time to allow for a protected left phase.   But even the NY to 1st left isn't truly necessary as traffic can make a right on N street and then a left on 1st to reach Eckington.

I had no idea the current configuration was only about ten years old. Seems rather odd to scrap the changes so quickly.

Looking at the old setup (pre-2010), I would agree that it seems like the better setup. It's not perfect for through traffic along Eckington/First, but it wasn't an impossible maneuver, and the priority here is clearly traffic between Florida Ave and New York Ave.

I agree that should be the primary concern. 

One of the easiest ways of reducing traffic at a congested intersection is to prohibit left turns.  It may make certain movements more difficult, but at least it means there are fewer phases at the intersection in question.  I think NY and FL should be one that prohibits all left turns in order to keep thing moving and allowing traffic to use the side streets like 1st and N to make missing connections.  I do note that the RR tracks do make it difficult to reach certain areas, since they cut off the grid, but I do also note that NY Ave is STILL the primary means of reachning Downtown DC from Annapolis and Baltimore by car, so it is an important gateway.

For whatever work they did on what is still currently signed as I-695 to connect the SE Fwy to the Anacostia Fwy, a key problem is that there is still a bottleneck that severely restricts traffic there.  North of East Captiol, 295 is 3-3, but south of East Capitol it is 2-2.  Thus, if heading from Downtown DC to Baltimore or Annapolis, you are likely to face far more traffic following the freeway route where 695 and 295 traffic both have to merge into only 2 northbound lanes, then you would if you took surface streets like Independence (to join 295 at the point it widens to 3 NB lanes) or to use NY Ave, which also puts you on the left side of both US 50 and the BW Parkway making it a far easier drive overall.

Another point:  Does anyone ever notice how difficult it is to go from the east to turn left onto SB 14th (NW/SW) in Downtown, especially during rush hours?  South of Thomas Circle, lefts are prohibited (at some point of time) on K, NY, G, F, Pennsylvania, COnstitution, and Independence.  You can't go west on L or H because it is one-way the wrong way.  So your only options are I (one way), E (one way), Madison (one way), or C SW.  In some cases, these lefts are to prevent backups on the major two-way cross streets like K, Constitution, and Independence.  But in other cases, I think it is to limit traffic on 14th, which gets super-backed up as it is a direct connection to the bridge to VA.  F and G are quite curious, as those only go a block further, so a left at 14th will not really back up much traffic behind it, but they are restricted because they don't want you to add traffic to 14th.

I bring this up to show that the District will restrict left turns to keep traffic on main arteries moving, and they should do so on the northeastern stretch of NY Ave.

[1995hoo]

https://twitter.com/DildineWTOP/status/1369145799117074432

[74/171FAN]

^Is there any indication that this has to do with upcoming changes to I-395, I-695, and the new I-195?

[1995hoo]

^Is there any indication that this has to do with upcoming changes to I-395, I-695, and the new I-195?

I don't believe so, especially as the signs shown in that tweet are on the westbound side (technically southbound I-395, of course, but it runs westbound in DC) and thus would not be affected by the route numbers. They've been replacing old signage for a couple of years now and I'm reasonably certain this particular replacement was scheduled prior to the announcement about route renumbering. If you look back through this thread, you'll see various other references to sign replacement in recent years. The most notable from forum members' point of view was the ones on I-66 near the Kennedy Center, but they've been replacing signs on I-395 as well. Maybe they just wanted to finish the eastbound side before turning around to the westbound side.

I don't know whether the ancient signs on the ramp from northbound I-395 to the 12th Street Tunnel have been replaced yet, but if they haven't, it's only a matter of time. While as a general matter I think it's sad to see old signs disappear, I have to concede the sign on the left is in horrid condition that merits replacement.

Incidentally, I note that in the second picture in Dave Dildine's tweet (the one at the top right), Maine Avenue is signed as Exit 4A, whereas in the larger photo to the left it is not.

[74/171FAN]

Thank you.  I hope the I-66 signs on the Theodore Roosevelt Memorial Bridge get replaced at some point.  They looked to be in bad condition when I saw them while clinching US 50 on Saturday.

I have not been on I-395 since the last time I went with my parents to a Nationals game in 2011 so I remember the exit numbers being added but nothing since. 

[The Ghostbuster]

Is there a date set for the 395-to-195, 695-to-395 change in designations? Personally, I disagree with the proposed renumbering of the Interstates. 695 has been designated along the Southeast Freeway from the get-go, and makes more sense to me than making it 395 (which denotes a spur route). Interstate 395 (95 until 1977) has also gone the way it has from the get-go. IMHO, if 695 were to become 395, 395 should end at the Southeast Freeway's original terminus at Pennsylvania Ave., and the 11th Street Bridges should be renumbered back to 295.

[Alps]

https://twitter.com/DildineWTOP/status/1369145799117074432

Man, he's really one of us.

[cpzilliacus]

Thank you.  I hope the I-66 signs on the Theodore Roosevelt Memorial Bridge get replaced at some point.  They looked to be in bad condition when I saw them while clinching US 50 on Saturday.

I have not been on I-395 since the last time I went with my parents to a Nationals game in 2011 so I remember the exit numbers being added but nothing since. 

I believe the big structure that has a DMS (dynamic message sign) at the D.C. end of the T. Roosevelt Bridge (I-66 westbound) has some maintenance involvement by VDOT (or at least it did when it was installed).  The static part is likely DDOT, but I think the DMS part might be VDOT maintenance still.

[epzik8]

https://twitter.com/DildineWTOP/status/1369145799117074432

Man, he's really one of us.

I remember seeing some button copies on I-95 between the beltways in 2001, such as for exit 29 Calverton/Beltsville.

[interstate73]

Is there a timeline for when the interstate route changes in Downtown DC will be put into place on the ground?

[The Ghostbuster]

Apparently not. I asked the same question 8 days ago and got no response, meaning there isn't one yet. I would be okay if the renumbering proposal was scrapped, since I consider it unnecessary.

[AlexandriaVA]

Work on 16th Street bus lanes begins: https://dcist.com/story/21/03/17/16th-street-bus-lanes-dc-construction/

Lanes will be present between Lafayette Square and Arkansas Ave NW. That covers Downtown, Logan Circle, Mt Pleasant and Columbia Heights. Not very far from the Yellow/Green Line at times (particularly Columbia Heights), but downtown the Yellow Line runs under 7th St, so this will provide added North-South capacity.

Interestingly, I think 16th St (or 14th St) was the initial selected corridor for the Yellow/Green Line through Midtown, but after the 1968 riots, planners moved it to 7th street in order to spur reinvestment in the Shaw and other close-by neighborhoods.

[1995hoo]

Is there a timeline for when the interstate route changes in Downtown DC will be put into place on the ground?

I haven't heard of any timeline. If you use Twitter, you could ask Dave Dildine (see above) or Adam Tuss (@adamtuss, the transportation reporter for the local NBC TV affiliate).

[froggie]

Interestingly, I think 16th St (or 14th St) was the initial selected corridor for the Yellow/Green Line through Midtown, but after the 1968 riots, planners moved it to 7th street in order to spur reinvestment in the Shaw and other close-by neighborhoods.

13th.  Original plan had it taking Mass/13th/Kansas/Farragut.

[Strider]

D.C. really have poor ground mounted signage for U.S. 1 and U.S. 50. I had to check up Google Maps to see where they go or if they multiplex together, but god... there is no mention of U.S. 1 or U.S. 50 ground mounted signage almost everywhere.

Only one US route that DC did very well with ground mounted signage is U.S. 29.

What gives?