AARoads Forum

Regional Boards => Mid-Atlantic => Topic started by: 74/171FAN on June 18, 2009, 08:56:47 AM

Title: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: 74/171FAN on June 18, 2009, 08:56:47 AM
Victims of the fatal crash last summer possibly sueing the MDTA saying that the bridge isn't up to contemporary standards  http://www.tollroadsnews.com/node/4215 (http://www.tollroadsnews.com/node/4215)  Sounds like another ridiculous lawsuit to me :-/
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: Alps on June 18, 2009, 10:09:29 PM
Imagine what a victory for the plaintiff would portend.  If every road had to be brought up to exact modern standards, we would be out trillions.  Not to mention, what are standards exactly?  The only standards out there are for Interstates, and this one ends shy of the bridge in Annapolis.  Clearly baseless.
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: Hellfighter on June 19, 2009, 12:06:34 AM
This guy = fail.
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: Sykotyk on June 19, 2009, 02:17:28 AM
I don't think standards are the issue, if the bolts were deteriorated (and the DOT knew) then there is an argument regardless of what year the bridge was built.

But, I'm less likely to believe there being particular bolts there is going to stop a vehicle upwards of 80,000 pounds going 40-50mph from smashing through and hurtling to his death.

Sykotyk
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: Alex on April 11, 2011, 12:25:09 PM
Film explores history of Chesapeake Bay Bridge (http://www.delawareonline.com/article/20110411/NEWS/110411033/-1/7daysarchives/Film-explores-history-Chesapeake-Bay-Bridge)
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: froggie on May 12, 2011, 11:58:40 AM
More recently, MdTA is having a Finance Committee meeting today to hear proposals about how to increase revenue by $88 million (http://weblogs.baltimoresun.com/news/traffic/2011/05/toll_increase_proposal_expecte.html) (the article says $70M, but it's been tweeted since then that they're now looking at $88M).  One of the proposals to come out of it will increase Bay Bridge tolls (http://weblogs.baltimoresun.com/news/traffic/2011/05/proposal_bay_bridge_toll_would.html) to $5 later this fall, and to $8 on New Year's 2013.  This basically represents a doubling and tripling, respectively, of today's toll which is $2.50.

A related proposal would effectively eliminate the Hatem Bridge decal system (http://weblogs.baltimoresun.com/news/traffic/2011/05/hatem_bridge_commuters_likely.html) for local residents/commuters.  Currently they can buy a decal for $10/yr for unlimited use.  The proposal eliminates that and requires them to get an EZPass (if they don't have one already) and pay $36/yr for unlimited Hatem Bridge use.

The revenue increase is intended to address the agency's bond status and also for increased maintenance.

The full proposal will have to go through a series of public hearings, but approval from the Maryland General Assembly is not required.
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: Michael in Philly on May 13, 2011, 10:36:48 PM
Froggie (et al.), I just went to DC today, and I picked up the Baltimore Sun when I stopped at a Wawa near Edgewood for a sandwich.  The top story in the Sun - and on WTOP early this afternoon - was the proposed toll increases.  I haven't read the Sun story yet; and the WTOP story mentioned, intriguingly, discounts for E-ZPass holders, but gave no details of that.
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: Jennice45 on August 25, 2011, 01:02:38 PM
Please help me.  I live in Richmond, VA.  I am going to a conference in Ocean City, MD.  The issue that I have is I don't want to EVER cross the bay bridge (us 50) or Chesapeake Bay bridge tunnel (60 miles)  again. 

When I go to Dover, I go up to like Newark, DE and then across.  it's out of the way, but worth it.   :colorful:
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: agentsteel53 on August 25, 2011, 01:14:37 PM
Please help me.  I live in Richmond, VA.  I am going to a conference in Ocean City, MD.  The issue that I have is I don't want to EVER cross the bay bridge (us 50) or Chesapeake Bay bridge tunnel (60 miles)  again. 

When I go to Dover, I go up to like Newark, DE and then across.  it's out of the way, but worth it.   :colorful:

if those two bridges are not an option, then via Newark appears to be the only way to get to Ocean City as well.  take your usual route to Dover, then keep heading down DE-1.
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: Mr_Northside on August 25, 2011, 01:55:19 PM
Unless you use a different mode of transportation....  If you can find a regional flight into Salisbury, and if there is a place to rent cars around there, you could do that. 
Maybe charter a boat?

But if car is the way it's gotta be, then it seems "via Newark" is as good as it's gonna get.
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: Jennice45 on August 25, 2011, 02:50:57 PM
Thanks for the quick tip.  I figured as much.  does anyone know if there are any scary bridges that going through newark?    Also, it is about long how of a trip from Richmond this way?
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: Alex on August 25, 2011, 04:26:07 PM
Thanks for the quick tip.  I figured as much.  does anyone know if there are any scary bridges that going through newark?

You will still have to cross the Millard J. Tydings Bridge across the Susquehanna River. The span is pretty high above the river, but a lot shorter than the Bay Bridge or the Bridge-Tunnel aforementioned.

(http://www.aaroads.com/mid-atlantic/maryland095/i-095_nb_exit_093_03.jpg)

Also, it is about long how of a trip from Richmond this way?

Richmond is about 200 miles from Newark, Ocean City is about 100 miles south of Newark.
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: Ian on August 25, 2011, 05:02:51 PM
If you're taking DE 1 south from Newark, you also have to cross the Chesapeake and Delaware Canal Bridge, although that's a more newer bridge (1990's completion date):
(https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-mJ_L_kXbd9s/S-Y_ONLa-NI/AAAAAAAAb6Y/wQpyfMLdcvI/s640/IMG_5720.JPG)
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: Alps on August 25, 2011, 09:21:58 PM
At least in my opinion, the US 40 Hatem Bridge is lower to the water and therefore less "scary" than the Tydings bridge (I-95) over the Susquehanna, but it's a truss, meaning it has large beams going up around you. I don't know if you'd find that a problem or not. Of all the bridges across the C&D Canal, the DE 1 bridge is probably the least scary.
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: 1995hoo on August 26, 2011, 09:19:39 AM
If you're scared of bridges and you take I-95 over the Tydings Bridge as mentioned above, you'll want to drive in the center lane of the three over the bridge because of crosswinds. Driving in the center lane allows you more space to either side if you feel like the winds are buffeting your car.

An alternative through that area that does not involve high bridges takes you northwest to US-1 and across the river on the Conowingo Dam. But that might bother you more than a bridge!
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: froggie on August 26, 2011, 09:44:46 AM
To Jennice:  is there anything in particular about the CBBT or the Bay Bridge that you don't like, or is it just long/high bridges in general?  I ask for two reasons:

-It's physically impossible to drive to Ocean City (or anywhere on the Delmarva for that matter) without going across a bridge that's at least a half mile long (US 301/DE 896) and 75ft up in the air (US 13/CBBT).

- As it is, going from Richmond to Ocean City via the Bay Bridge is 20 miles and 20 minutes longer than taking the CBBT.  And detouring up to Elkton/Newport is 80 miles and well over an hour longer than the Bay Bridge.
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: agentsteel53 on August 26, 2011, 11:21:08 AM
-It's physically impossible to drive to Ocean City (or anywhere on the Delmarva for that matter) without going across a bridge that's at least a half mile long (US 301/DE 896) and 75ft up in the air (US 13/CBBT).

how did that ever happen?  I'm sure there was a time when people could walk to the Delmarva without any bridges being in place - that is the definition of peninsula, as opposed to island.
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: NE2 on August 26, 2011, 11:30:36 AM
The C&D Canal turned it into an island in the 1820s.
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: Jennice45 on August 26, 2011, 03:03:45 PM
I am not afraid of every bridge.  I don't mind the verazono. Althought, I not a big fan of the Goethals bridge (if they still call it that).  The woodrow wilson or delaware memorial isn't bad.  I don't like the bay bridge because it is super high.  I thought I hit a plane the few times I have gone up there.  It is also pretty thin.

@ Froggie.  As far as I know, you are right.  You have to cross some kind of bridge to get to the ocean's.  Although, is that true getting off jersey tpke heading to Atlantic City.  I can't remember.
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: Ian on August 26, 2011, 04:45:15 PM
IIRC, the Chesapeake Bay Bridge has an escort service for those with a phobia of heights and bridges.
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: Michael in Philly on August 26, 2011, 10:32:07 PM
To Jennice:  is there anything in particular about the CBBT or the Bay Bridge that you don't like, or is it just long/high bridges in general?  I ask for two reasons:

-It's physically impossible to drive to Ocean City (or anywhere on the Delmarva for that matter) without going across a bridge that's at least a half mile long (US 301/DE 896) and 75ft up in the air (US 13/CBBT).

- As it is, going from Richmond to Ocean City via the Bay Bridge is 20 miles and 20 minutes longer than taking the CBBT.  And detouring up to Elkton/Newport is 80 miles and well over an hour longer than the Bay Bridge.


If you're going up to the top of the bay, you could always use US 1 over Conowingo Dam.  Which also has no toll.
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: Jennice45 on August 27, 2011, 07:25:37 PM
Where do you pick up US 1 Conowingo Dam?  @ Penndot, I think that I have been across the canal bridge before.  That pic looks familiar.  That wasn't bad at all.

@ Alex, the Millards bridge looks fine also.  How do I pick that up?

The Canal or Millard bridge looks like the way to go.
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: Michael in Philly on August 27, 2011, 08:09:03 PM
Where do you pick up US 1 Conowingo Dam?  @ Penndot, I think that I have been across the canal bridge before.  That pic looks familiar.  That wasn't bad at all.

@ Alex, the Millards bridge looks fine also.  How do I pick that up?

The Canal or Millard bridge looks like the way to go.

US 1 (in case you're new around here :-) ) is the older route along the east coast that passes through a lot of the same cities as 95 does.  Between Baltimore and Philadelphia, it's a bit inland of 95; it is NOT a freeway in the area I'm talking about, but if you have issues with bridges....  It crosses the Susquehanna going over a dam, a little south of the Maryland-Pennsylvania line.  In fact the water upstream of the dam is nearly at eye level if you're driving across it.  (Downstream, there's a drop.)  It's a bit narrow though.  You might look at it on Google Street View.

The quickest way to get to it might be to exit 95 at exit 77 in Maryland, then take Md. 24 north to US 1, then follow the sign that says "US 1 north - Philadelphia".  Once you're across the dam, you can take Md. 222 back down to 95, or there are other options.

Here's the dam:
http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ll=39.661214,-76.173706&spn=0.059864,0.109692&z=13&vpsrc=6

By the way, as I type, channel 3 in Philadelphia reports the Bay Bridge has been closed.
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: NE2 on August 27, 2011, 08:12:43 PM
Best way to US 1 is probably MD 24. But no point in going there if you use the Millard Tydings Bridge on I-95.
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: Jennice45 on August 27, 2011, 09:07:50 PM
Michael in Philly:
I did see the bay bridge is closed.  It should be permanently....loL.  this is for a conference next month.  I like 95 and want to take that to Ocean City.  Mapquest always takes me across the bay bridge and goin up US 50.
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: NE2 on August 27, 2011, 09:30:26 PM
Mapquest always takes me across the bay bridge and goin up US 50.
You can drag the route: http://mapq.st/qOIVLH
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: cpzilliacus on March 24, 2013, 10:19:35 AM
Delmarvanow.com: OPINION: Chesapeake Bay Bridge's future begins now - Time to figure out what needs to be done, when (http://www.delmarvanow.com/article/20130319/OPINION01/303190052/OPINION-Chesapeake-Bay-Bridge-s-future-begins-now)

Quote
A 2006 task force called the issue of adding more spans to the Chesapeake Bay Bridge “complex, controversial and compelling.” That sums it up pretty well, and that’s why having these discussions now, with an increasing sense of urgency, is wise.
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: cpzilliacus on April 18, 2013, 05:12:35 PM
WBOC-TV: Safety Improvements for the Bay Bridge (http://www.wboc.com/story/22013270/safety-improvements-for-the-bay-bridge)

Quote
Safety improvements are coming to the westbound span of the Chesapeake Bay Bridge.

Quote
Beginning April 19, the Maryland Transportation Authority will install rumble strips, new lane markings and signs on the westbound Bay Bridge. The upgrades are to improve safety during "two-way" traffic operations.

Quote
A painted buffer and rumble strips will be added between the westbound left and center lanes.
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: cpzilliacus on February 16, 2016, 11:37:13 PM
WBOC-TV: Maryland Lawmakers Start Planning for a Third Bay Bridge Span (http://www.wboc.com/story/31238121/maryland-lawmakers-start-planning-for-a-third-bay-bridge-span)

Quote
ANNAPOLIS, Md.- For years, Maryland lawmakers have been debating the idea of adding a third span to the Chesapeake Bay Bridge.  Supporters say the state needs to start saving money now for such a big project.  This comes after a report that outlined the cost of a new bridge.

Quote
A new bay bridge span is a five billion dollar proposal according to that report.  Lawmakers from the Eastern Shore, led by democratic Senator Jim Mathias, believe that cost will not just be worth it, but is absolutely necessary as traffic continues to increase across the bay.

Quote
It's a long term project, but this year, republican Senator Addie Eckardt believes there's a stronger push than ever for the span following that report outlining the costs and benefits.

Quote
"I think enough people have been caught in traffic, and we've had enough incidents on the bay bridge this year that it's beginning to sink in.  So we do have to make that investment for the future, and we need to begin now," said Eckardt.
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: froggie on February 17, 2016, 07:30:04 AM
Of course, Hogan decided to cut a big source of revenue that the state could have started saving for a 3rd span...
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: AlexandriaVA on February 17, 2016, 11:38:47 AM
Of course, Hogan decided to cut a big source of revenue that the state could have started saving for a 3rd span...

Gotta please the base voters!
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: SteveG1988 on February 17, 2016, 11:55:44 AM
I would see this as a good excuse to build the world's longest suspension span. Just to break world records. May be used to appease the voters. "we need a new bridge, and we also are going to make it a record breaker"

If they build it close to the existing spans, then they would need similar tower placements and pier placements to prevent erosion from the uneven current, and also to smooth flow under the main spans. I predict if they go that route, they will use a concrete cantiliver for the secondary span, and a solid deck suspension bridge with similar tower structure to the existing westbound bridge. Reduce the truss count as much as possible.
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: abefroman329 on February 17, 2016, 02:39:50 PM
IIRC, the Chesapeake Bay Bridge has an escort service for those with a phobia of heights and bridges.

That was eliminated 15 or 20 years ago.
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: Rothman on February 17, 2016, 03:00:47 PM
IIRC, the Chesapeake Bay Bridge has an escort service for those with a phobia of heights and bridges.

That was eliminated 15 or 20 years ago.

...in favor of private business (http://www.kentislandexpress.com/policies-procedures.htm) ($30 a pop).
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: The Ghostbuster on February 17, 2016, 03:15:29 PM
If a third bridge is built, will the other two be reconfigured so all three bridges are up to Interstate Standards (even if they never become part of the Interstate System)?
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: froggie on February 17, 2016, 03:44:36 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster
If a third bridge is built, will the other two be reconfigured so all three bridges are up to Interstate Standards (even if they never become part of the Interstate System)?

No.  It's physically impossible to reconfigure the existing spans to Interstate standard, ESPECIALLY the eastbound span.
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: cpzilliacus on February 17, 2016, 04:04:59 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster
If a third bridge is built, will the other two be reconfigured so all three bridges are up to Interstate Standards (even if they never become part of the Interstate System)?

No.  It's physically impossible to reconfigure the existing spans to Interstate standard, ESPECIALLY the eastbound span.

I disagree, in a sense.

The solution is relatively simple (but not cheap) - build a new span with a deck wide enough for three or four lanes with shoulder to be used mostly by eastbound traffic, then (normally) run both of the existing spans for westbound traffic, leaving one of the existing travel lanes open on each as a shoulder.

The early drawings of the proposed replacement Gov. Harry W. Nice Memorial Bridge (U.S. 301) has shoulders on both sides, in addition to a multi-use path. 

The parallel (now southbound) trestled roadway  of the CBBT (U.S. 13) has a shoulder (and even some emergency pull-off areas), on those long overwater structures.
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: cpzilliacus on February 17, 2016, 04:08:31 PM
Of course, Hogan decided to cut a big source of revenue that the state could have started saving for a 3rd span...

Agreed.  And not (re)tolling the entire tolled section of the JFK Highway would bring in a lot of added revenue that could be used to help to fund both both a new crossing of the Chesapeake and a replacement of the Harry Nice.
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: froggie on February 17, 2016, 04:15:08 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster
If a third bridge is built, will the other two be reconfigured so all three bridges are up to Interstate Standards (even if they never become part of the Interstate System)?

No.  It's physically impossible to reconfigure the existing spans to Interstate standard, ESPECIALLY the eastbound span.

I disagree, in a sense.

*snip rest*

Your suggestion still would not bring the spans to Interstate standard, which in these situations would require full shoulders on both sides.  Even for a full shoulder on one side and a partial on the other, the bridge deck width is not wide enough.
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: cpzilliacus on February 17, 2016, 04:23:06 PM
Your suggestion still would not bring the spans to Interstate standard, which in these situations would require full shoulders on both sides.  Even for a full shoulder on one side and a partial on the other, the bridge deck width is not wide enough.

Both sides, no.  But were there to be an Interstate highway crossing the Chesapeake Bay, I am pretty certain that FHWA would waive that requirement.  There are plenty of freeways across the U.S. that have little or no shoulder on the left, including long sections of the Capital Beltway and much of the East-West Mainline of the Pennsylvania Turnpike (and long sections of "free" freeways in Pennsylvania).
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: Alps on February 17, 2016, 06:37:08 PM
Your suggestion still would not bring the spans to Interstate standard, which in these situations would require full shoulders on both sides.  Even for a full shoulder on one side and a partial on the other, the bridge deck width is not wide enough.

Both sides, no.  But were there to be an Interstate highway crossing the Chesapeake Bay, I am pretty certain that FHWA would waive that requirement.  There are plenty of freeways across the U.S. that have little or no shoulder on the left, including long sections of the Capital Beltway and much of the East-West Mainline of the Pennsylvania Turnpike (and long sections of "free" freeways in Pennsylvania).
Read the AASHTO Green Book for Interstates. I believe they allow going down as narrow as 5' shoulder across long spans.
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: Pete from Boston on February 17, 2016, 09:13:02 PM

I would see this as a good excuse to build the world's longest suspension span. Just to break world records. May be used to appease the voters. "we need a new bridge, and we also are going to make it a record breaker"

If they build it close to the existing spans, then they would need similar tower placements and pier placements to prevent erosion from the uneven current, and also to smooth flow under the main spans. I predict if they go that route, they will use a concrete cantiliver for the secondary span, and a solid deck suspension bridge with similar tower structure to the existing westbound bridge. Reduce the truss count as much as possible.

When was the last time a long-span suspension bridge was even built in the United States?
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: froggie on February 17, 2016, 09:35:58 PM
The replacement east span at the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge, finally completed 2 years-and-change ago.  Before that would be the eastbound Tacoma Narrows Bridge, finished in 2007.
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: SteveG1988 on February 17, 2016, 11:57:47 PM

I would see this as a good excuse to build the world's longest suspension span. Just to break world records. May be used to appease the voters. "we need a new bridge, and we also are going to make it a record breaker"

If they build it close to the existing spans, then they would need similar tower placements and pier placements to prevent erosion from the uneven current, and also to smooth flow under the main spans. I predict if they go that route, they will use a concrete cantiliver for the secondary span, and a solid deck suspension bridge with similar tower structure to the existing westbound bridge. Reduce the truss count as much as possible.

When was the last time a long-span suspension bridge was even built in the United States?

The New Carquinez Bridge (2003) as well.

We can still do it.

Title: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: Pete from Boston on February 18, 2016, 12:39:39 AM
The replacement east span at the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge, finally completed 2 years-and-change ago.  Before that would be the eastbound Tacoma Narrows Bridge, finished in 2007.

I haven't paid enough attention to the new Bay Bridge to realize it was not cable-stayed, as seems to be much more common with single-tower bridges.

I guess my real point in asking is, is there a cheaper way of achieving the desired goal here than building a suspension bridge?  I've never crossed the current ones, so I'm not familiar with the specific demands of the site.
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: cpzilliacus on February 18, 2016, 01:02:33 AM
I would see this as a good excuse to build the world's longest suspension span. Just to break world records. May be used to appease the voters. "we need a new bridge, and we also are going to make it a record breaker"

I have a feeling that the trustee representing the bondholders, and maybe the bondholders themselves, would not like that approach.

If they build it close to the existing spans, then they would need similar tower placements and pier placements to prevent erosion from the uneven current, and also to smooth flow under the main spans. I predict if they go that route, they will use a concrete cantiliver for the secondary span, and a solid deck suspension bridge with similar tower structure to the existing westbound bridge. Reduce the truss count as much as possible.

Only place where it could possibly go if not next to the existing spans, would be well to the south, between Calvert County on the Western Shore and Dorchester County on the Eastern Shore. But there are plenty of properties that have to be avoided on both sides of the Bay, including the Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant and the Cove Point LNG terminal.

There would certainly need to be extensive and expensive upgrading of existing roads on both sides of the bay (probably an entirely new approach road on the eastern side) and the crossing itself might need to be a bridge-tunnel instead of a bridge.

The replacement Tappan Zee Bridge is perhaps not a good comparison, but the main spans will be cable-stayed, and otherwise not much in the way of trusses to be seen.
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: SteveG1988 on February 18, 2016, 09:34:48 AM
I would see this as a good excuse to build the world's longest suspension span. Just to break world records. May be used to appease the voters. "we need a new bridge, and we also are going to make it a record breaker"

I have a feeling that the trustee representing the bondholders, and maybe the bondholders themselves, would not like that approach.

If they build it close to the existing spans, then they would need similar tower placements and pier placements to prevent erosion from the uneven current, and also to smooth flow under the main spans. I predict if they go that route, they will use a concrete cantiliver for the secondary span, and a solid deck suspension bridge with similar tower structure to the existing westbound bridge. Reduce the truss count as much as possible.

Only place where it could possibly go if not next to the existing spans, would be well to the south, between Calvert County on the Western Shore and Dorchester County on the Eastern Shore. But there are plenty of properties that have to be avoided on both sides of the Bay, including the Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant and the Cove Point LNG terminal.

There would certainly need to be extensive and expensive upgrading of existing roads on both sides of the bay (probably an entirely new approach road on the eastern side) and the crossing itself might need to be a bridge-tunnel instead of a bridge.

The replacement Tappan Zee Bridge is perhaps not a good comparison, but the main spans will be cable-stayed, and otherwise not much in the way of trusses to be seen.


You...just made a good point. They could make the new one cable stay if they wanted, it would cost less, but would look weird next to the current suspension spans.

I could see this setup. Main span, Suspension or Cable Stay. Approach spans, girders, secondary span, tied arch, similar in construction to the I-65 mobile bay bridge, or the Jefferson Barracks bridge in St Louis. It would be built with 3 lanes and shoulders on both sides, wide enough to where they can direct all traffic to it and reconstruct the existing bridges without much hassle. It would be built south of the existing pair to allow it to be tied into the toll booths  and not have too sharp of a curve on the western end where the two bridges touch down. The original bridge will close first, to allow for tying in the new bridge quickly, think new oakland bay bridge for how that would work out. Traffic would use the newer of the existing bridges in two way for a few days. After a few weeks all traffic would be shifted to the newest bridge. The current spans close for a full refurbishment like the JFK bridge at Louisville. After refurbishment, the 1950s bridge is reopened to eastbound traffic, but no trucks. The modern bridge opens to eastbound trucks and cars, and the westbound bridge gets restriped with three permament lanes.
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: Pete from Boston on February 18, 2016, 09:53:09 AM
If aesthetic imperfection (not mimicking the adjacent bridges) can save a billion dollars, aesthetic imperfection might have to be considered.
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: jwolfer on February 18, 2016, 10:59:24 AM
I would see this as a good excuse to build the world's longest suspension span. Just to break world records. May be used to appease the voters. "we need a new bridge, and we also are going to make it a record breaker"

I have a feeling that the trustee representing the bondholders, and maybe the bondholders themselves, would not like that approach.

If they build it close to the existing spans, then they would need similar tower placements and pier placements to prevent erosion from the uneven current, and also to smooth flow under the main spans. I predict if they go that route, they will use a concrete cantiliver for the secondary span, and a solid deck suspension bridge with similar tower structure to the existing westbound bridge. Reduce the truss count as much as possible.

Only place where it could possibly go if not next to the existing spans, would be well to the south, between Calvert County on the Western Shore and Dorchester County on the Eastern Shore. But there are plenty of properties that have to be avoided on both sides of the Bay, including the Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant and the Cove Point LNG terminal.

There would certainly need to be extensive and expensive upgrading of existing roads on both sides of the bay (probably an entirely new approach road on the eastern side) and the crossing itself might need to be a bridge-tunnel instead of a bridge.

The replacement Tappan Zee Bridge is perhaps not a good comparison, but the main spans will be cable-stayed, and otherwise not much in the way of trusses to be seen.

My brother lives in Calvert County.  They would probably fight a new bridge there.  The county does not want a metro line extended to Calvert County, they keep lot sizes large, limit the size of big box stores etc to limit development.
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: AlexandriaVA on February 18, 2016, 11:41:53 AM
My brother lives in Calvert County.  They would probably fight a new bridge there.  The county does not want a metro line extended to Calvert County, they keep lot sizes large, limit the size of big box stores etc to limit development.

Nor does anyone else...
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: Jardine on February 18, 2016, 01:25:56 PM
Any looming theoretical limits to the length of a cable stayed span ?

Compression in the deck near the towers springs to mind, but just add more concrete, no ?

(like in the typical precast deck segments typical used, but instead of them being identical the length of the bridge, progressively thicken the walls of the segments near the towers.

As for wind loading, similar effects on much longer (true) suspension bridges have been dealt with.

As for vulnerability of the span to wind prior to completion, how the heck do they deal with that now?  Seems like a deal killer for several already built, so there must be something they due to moderate the risk.
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: froggie on February 18, 2016, 01:26:50 PM
My brother lives in Calvert County.  They would probably fight a new bridge there.  The county does not want a metro line extended to Calvert County, they keep lot sizes large, limit the size of big box stores etc to limit development.

Nor does anyone else...

Tell that to Fairfax (SE, Centreville) and Prince William (Potomac Mills, Manassas) Counties...
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: cpzilliacus on February 18, 2016, 04:43:46 PM
Any looming theoretical limits to the length of a cable stayed span ?

Compression in the deck near the towers springs to mind, but just add more concrete, no ?

(like in the typical precast deck segments typical used, but instead of them being identical the length of the bridge, progressively thicken the walls of the segments near the towers.

As for wind loading, similar effects on much longer (true) suspension bridges have been dealt with.

As for vulnerability of the span to wind prior to completion, how the heck do they deal with that now?  Seems like a deal killer for several already built, so there must be something they due to moderate the risk.

Longest suspension span currently is this: Akashi Kaikyō Bridge (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Akashi_Kaiky%C5%8D_Bridge)

Norway is considering a much longer main suspension span (not cable-stayed).

Highway E39 over the Sognefjord (pronounced "sonyfior"), with a main span of almost 4 kilometers (!) in length.  English-language video here of the extremely long bridge and other alternatives here (http://www.vegvesen.no/Vegprosjekter/ferjefriE39/English/Film).  English-language report here (http://www.vegvesen.no/_attachment/274047/binary/485789) (.pdf).
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: cpzilliacus on February 18, 2016, 04:48:20 PM
My brother lives in Calvert County.  They would probably fight a new bridge there.  The county does not want a metro line extended to Calvert County, they keep lot sizes large, limit the size of big box stores etc to limit development.

Don't worry about Metro.  The closest it could ever come to Calvert County is an extension of the Green Line to Waldorf, and even that is beyond the current planning horizon.

Regarding big box retail, even been down Md. 2/Md. 4 lately?  Plenty of big retail around Prince Frederick right now.
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: jwolfer on February 18, 2016, 07:47:10 PM
My brother lives in Calvert County.  They would probably fight a new bridge there.  The county does not want a metro line extended to Calvert County, they keep lot sizes large, limit the size of big box stores etc to limit development.

Don't worry about Metro.  The closest it could ever come to Calvert County is an extension of the Green Line to Waldorf, and even that is beyond the current planning horizon.

Regarding big box retail, even been down Md. 2/Md. 4 lately?  Plenty of big retail around Prince Frederick right now.
My brother lives near Dunkirk.. He and his wife call their local Walmart the small-mart because its size.. They said it's because of County zoning.. SIL is from rural Georgia the land of super mega Walmart
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: cpzilliacus on February 18, 2016, 08:32:49 PM
My brother lives near Dunkirk.. He and his wife call their local Walmart the small-mart because its size.. They said it's because of County zoning.. SIL is from rural Georgia the land of super mega Walmart

I spent a lot of my childhood and youth in the Deale area of a nearby part of Anne Arundel County, where my late grandparents lived, and know Calvert County very well.

The county is not known for being excessively intrusive in matters of commercial and business development, at least by Maryland standards (FWIW, a huge amount of the county's property tax revenue comes from two properties in the Lusby area - Excelon's Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calvert_Cliffs_Nuclear_Power_Plant) and Dominion's Cove Point LNG Terminal (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dominion_Cove_Point_LNG)).
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: mattpedersen on February 19, 2016, 10:01:43 AM
The other thing that needs to be considered with a Southern crossing is that 2-4 would need substantial upgrades. The current road geometry barely supports the current traffic flow. The Prince George's and Anne Arundel segments would probably need to be widened to 3-4 lanes, and then everything South would need to look more like MD 210.
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: AlexandriaVA on February 19, 2016, 10:14:53 AM
My brother lives in Calvert County.  They would probably fight a new bridge there.  The county does not want a metro line extended to Calvert County, they keep lot sizes large, limit the size of big box stores etc to limit development.

Nor does anyone else...

Tell that to Fairfax (SE, Centreville) and Prince William (Potomac Mills, Manassas) Counties...

Come on, you know very well that WMATA is done with system expansions until more capacity comes along.

If anything, expansion out to Dulles was most justifiable because of a lack of potential RoW for VRE out that way.

Seeing as Metrorail in the areas you mentioned would amount to commuter service, I've always said more VRE is needed. In a fantasy world they'd be running hourly DMUs from the ends of the current system to Union Sta.
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: froggie on February 19, 2016, 01:40:42 PM
Quote
Come on, you know very well that WMATA is done with system expansions until more capacity comes along.

Do you even realize the dichotomy in what you just said here?

Quote
Seeing as Metrorail in the areas you mentioned would amount to commuter service, I've always said more VRE is needed. In a fantasy world they'd be running hourly DMUs from the ends of the current system to Union Sta.

Not all of it.  VRE wouldn't do squat for southeast Fairfax, where there is STRONG local support for extending the Yellow Line to Fort Belvoir.  Furthermore, such a Yellow Line extension would A) enable redevelopment of several existing commercial nodes along Route 1, and B) enable more direct transit commuting (and reverse commuting) to Fort Belvoir, which actually GREW as a result of BRAC instead of being cut.  Neither of these outcomes would be the "commuter service" you claim they'd be.

Another fact:  a Yellow Line trip from a theoretical Fort Belvoir station would STILL be a shorter trip to Gallery Place than a trip on the Red Line from Shady Grove.
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: AlexandriaVA on February 19, 2016, 02:24:42 PM
I meant to say "core capacity" (namely Rosslyn Tunnel II) and I would like to think you know that's what I meant.

And, on that topic, no more strain on the Blue/Yellow trunk route until the issue with Rosslyn is addressed. Sorry, but there's an absolute need to restore the Blue Line before its ridership gives up for good.

Plus, will Fairfax ever allow the upzoning needed to justify the Metrorail routes you want? I'd like to see them get a TOD project right first before giving them more trackage.
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: cpzilliacus on February 19, 2016, 04:57:44 PM
The other thing that needs to be considered with a Southern crossing is that 2-4 would need substantial upgrades. The current road geometry barely supports the current traffic flow. The Prince George's and Anne Arundel segments would probably need to be widened to 3-4 lanes, and then everything South would need to look more like MD 210.

Agree.

Md. 4 south from Md. 258 (Bristol) in Anne Arundel County to its north junction with Md. 2 in Sunderland would have to have substantial upgrades, and Md. 2+Md. 4 from there south to a new access road to the bay crossing would need the same. 

SHA would also have to get moving on getting rid of the two remaining signalized intersections on Md. 4  in Prince George's County at Westphalia Road and at Dower House Road (these need to be eliminated anyway for reasons of safety - never understood why SHA (and before it was SHA, SRC) spent all that money to upgrade Md. 4 from south of Dower House Road to Md. 258, but left those three miserable signalized intersections south of I-95/I-495 - at least the one at Suitland Parkway is out for bids and will be gone fairly soon).

Additionally, Md. 2 from Edgewater in Anne Arundel County south to its junction with Md. 4 would likely need to be upgraded to four lane divided (which it probably needs now, give the number of serious crashes experienced, especially between Edgewater and the roundabout in Lothian).
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: cpzilliacus on February 19, 2016, 05:06:21 PM
I meant to say "core capacity" (namely Rosslyn Tunnel II) and I would like to think you know that's what I meant.

Core capacity on Metro (even just the Orange and Silver Lines) is not just the part that crosses under the Potomac River.  That's something the local news media gets wrong over and over and over again.  Core capacity is from Rosslyn all the way to the wye on the elevated tracks east of Stadium/Armory near the D.C. 295/Benning Road, N.E. interchange.

And, on that topic, no more strain on the Blue/Yellow trunk route until the issue with Rosslyn is addressed. Sorry, but there's an absolute need to restore the Blue Line before its ridership gives up for good.

Are you aware of the potential cost of a mid-town line?  Billions and billions and billions of dollars, and do not count on Maryland being willing to contribute one cent toward construction costs.

There is a more-important reason for not extending the rail system right now - there are many repair and replacement projects that need to happen along the existing system, and that must take priority until the maintenance backlog is reduced.

Plus, will Fairfax ever allow the upzoning needed to justify the Metrorail routes you want? I'd like to see them get a TOD project right first before giving them more trackage.

They certainly have upzoned around the Dunn Loring rail station on the south side of I-66, and at Vienna too.
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: SteveG1988 on February 19, 2016, 10:27:17 PM
Would it be safe to have the oldest span be dedicated to peak travel direction?
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: froggie on February 20, 2016, 12:28:36 PM
The only way that could be done is if the third span is built south of the existing spans.
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: SteveG1988 on February 20, 2016, 03:33:23 PM
The only way that could be done is if the third span is built south of the existing spans.


Which would allow for a much longer curve to land on the western end.
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: cpzilliacus on February 20, 2016, 04:28:35 PM
The only way that could be done is if the third span is built south of the existing spans.

Which would allow for a much longer curve to land on the western end.

Unlikely it would be north of the existing bridges, because of the presence of Sandy Point State Park there.  Section 4(f) of the U.S. Department of Transportation Act would make that difficult.

Regarding the curves, I suspect that a third span here would be reasonably parallel to the existing eastbound (1952) bridge.
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: D-Dey65 on February 20, 2016, 07:56:18 PM
The only way that could be done is if the third span is built south of the existing spans.
So, a new span in the middle replacing the two of them would be impossible? Because it didn't look that way when I was there.
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: froggie on February 20, 2016, 08:11:49 PM
Quote
So, a new span in the middle replacing the two of them would be impossible? Because it didn't look that way when I was there.

Correct, that would be impossible.  Not enough spacing in between the existing spans relative to their height, plus the spacing narrows as one approaches the western end of the span.
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: SteveG1988 on February 20, 2016, 09:01:51 PM
Quote
So, a new span in the middle replacing the two of them would be impossible? Because it didn't look that way when I was there.

Correct, that would be impossible.  Not enough spacing in between the existing spans relative to their height, plus the spacing narrows as one approaches the western end of the span.

Plus you would not want long bridges that close. Just incase something bad happens, only one span goes down.
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: cpzilliacus on May 28, 2017, 05:35:28 PM
WTOP Radio: Remembering When There Wasn’t a Chesapeake Bay Bridge (http://wtop.com/mdta-bayspan/2017/05/remembering-wasnt-chesapeake-bay-bridge/slide/1/)

Quote
By 1919, the demand and pressure for some sort of Bay crossing led to the inauguration of regular ferry service between Annapolis and Claiborne, a 23-mile trip requiring two hours. Aside from the colonial ferry, this was the first regularly scheduled Bay ferry service in the State’s history. Mounting pressure for a bridge culminated in 1938, with legislation authorizing the crossing, but World War II postponed the efforts. Under the leadership of Governor William Preston Lane Jr., during the regular and extraordinary sessions of the 1947 General Assembly, the State Roads Commission was directed to proceed with building a Bay Bridge.

Quote
All earlier proposals for a bridge had planned for a crossing in the Bay Shore-Tolchester area. However, by 1938, the growing network of highways on the East Coast, the need to avoid hazardous navigation and the need to provide access to the lower Eastern Shore made a bridge location in the Sandy Point-Matapeake area most desirable.

Quote
After four decades of planning and waiting, the first shovelful of earth was turned in January 1949, in the area now occupied by the western approach roadway — and the largest public project in the history of the State had begun. Underwater work began, and the first permanent piles were driven into the Bay’s bottom in March 1950. By the end of the year, the bridge was more than one-third complete. The underwater work had been finished, including construction of the massive concrete piers to support the main towers and the anchor piers to hold the suspension-span cables.
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: cpzilliacus on November 15, 2017, 08:26:25 AM
There will be an online meeting on Wednesday, November 15, 2017 at 7:00 PM to discuss the Chesapeake Bay Crossing Study: Tier 1 NEPA (Bay Crossing Study).

Details on this site: http://baycrossingstudy.com/ (http://baycrossingstudy.com/) 
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: cpzilliacus on March 16, 2018, 11:21:14 AM
Baltimore Sun: As Maryland scouts locations for new Chesapeake Bay Bridge, hope and opposition emerge (http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/eastern-shore/bs-md-bay-bridge-20180314-story.html)

Quote
Trey Hill uses satellites and precision farming technology to maximize his wheat, corn and soybean yields here in Kent County. If the planned third bridge across the Chesapeake Bay landed here, he says, it would destroy the natural barrier between Baltimore on his quiet, 300-acre farm.

Quote
Farther south on the Eastern Shore, Danny Thompson wants to preserve that type of quaint appeal. But as the director of economic development in Somerset County, he sees a new bridge as a potential boon, bringing more residents and tourism.

Quote
Suzanne Konigkramer, a Kent Islander who commutes across the current bridge daily to work in Annapolis, likes the idea of a third span to alleviate gridlock. Just please, she asks: find somewhere else to put it.
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: triplemultiplex on March 16, 2018, 11:54:58 AM
Is it too obvious to put a new bridge in between the two existing ones?  The main spans are quite far apart.
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: froggie on March 16, 2018, 01:17:39 PM
Spacing concerns with both construction and maintenance would likely preclude putting it in between.  There's a reason the existing westbound span was built as far from the original (current eastbound) span as it was.
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: cpzilliacus on March 16, 2018, 02:10:43 PM
Spacing concerns with both construction and maintenance would likely preclude putting it in between.  There's a reason the existing westbound span was built as far from the original (current eastbound) span as it was.

I agree.  If a new span were to be built parallel to the existing two, it would need to go south of the "old" (1952) 2-lane span that normally runs eastbound only.  North of the "new" (1972) 3-lane span probably means unacceptable impacts on Sandy Point State Park. 

And there's at least some room south of the old span for a bridge landing on the western side of the crossing, by using the former area where the ferry had a slip prior to the opening of the "old" bridge.
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: ixnay on March 16, 2018, 08:30:20 PM
Spacing concerns with both construction and maintenance would likely preclude putting it in between.  There's a reason the existing westbound span was built as far from the original (current eastbound) span as it was.

I agree.  If a new span were to be built parallel to the existing two, it would need to go south of the "old" (1952) 2-lane span that normally runs eastbound only.  North of the "new" (1972) 3-lane span probably means unacceptable impacts on Sandy Point State Park. 

And there's at least some room south of the old span for a bridge landing on the western side of the crossing, by using the former area where the ferry had a slip prior to the opening of the "old" bridge.

The spans are about 450' apart (except where they taper together at the west end to accommodate the toll plaza and minimize impact on Sandy Point).

OTOH the spans of the Delaware Memorial Bridge are about 250' (dangerously close IMO).  They are that close to accommodate the DuPont Chambers Works and the Atlantic City Electric power station on the NJ side.

Pictures I've seen of the old cantilevered Sunshine Skyway spans in FL have them being even closer together than 250', but I haven't found out how close.

ixnay
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: Alps on March 16, 2018, 10:05:12 PM
Spacing concerns with both construction and maintenance would likely preclude putting it in between.  There's a reason the existing westbound span was built as far from the original (current eastbound) span as it was.

I agree.  If a new span were to be built parallel to the existing two, it would need to go south of the "old" (1952) 2-lane span that normally runs eastbound only.  North of the "new" (1972) 3-lane span probably means unacceptable impacts on Sandy Point State Park. 

And there's at least some room south of the old span for a bridge landing on the western side of the crossing, by using the former area where the ferry had a slip prior to the opening of the "old" bridge.

The spans are about 450' apart (except where they taper together at the west end to accommodate the toll plaza and minimize impact on Sandy Point).

OTOH the spans of the Delaware Memorial Bridge are about 250' (dangerously close IMO).  They are that close to accommodate the DuPont Chambers Works and the Atlantic City Electric power station on the NJ side.

Pictures I've seen of the old cantilevered Sunshine Skyway spans in FL have them being even closer together than 250', but I haven't found out how close.

ixnay
What about 250' is dangerous, IYO? The new K-Bridge spans in NY will be about 16' apart.
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: Beltway on March 17, 2018, 12:20:39 AM
Is it too obvious to put a new bridge in between the two existing ones?  The main spans are quite far apart.

They have been talking about this and studying the for at least 20 years, and nothing has been done or decided.

The ideal third bridge would be a 3-lane bridge about 200 to 300 feet south of the existing eastbound bridge.  That configuration would provide a 3-lane bridge each way, and the original 2-lane bridge would be in the middle and would be reversible to assist in the peak traffic direction. 

Approach roads would be widened some time in the future, maybe simply by adding a 2-lane reversible roadway between MD-2 and the US-50/US-301 split.
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: Duke87 on March 17, 2018, 11:12:36 AM
Core capacity on Metro (even just the Orange and Silver Lines) is not just the part that crosses under the Potomac River.  That's something the local news media gets wrong over and over and over again.  Core capacity is from Rosslyn all the way to the wye on the elevated tracks east of Stadium/Armory near the D.C. 295/Benning Road, N.E. interchange.

Nitpick: what is on the elevated tracks east of Stadium/Armory is not a wye, as it does not allow direct movements from New Carrollton to Largo Town Center.
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: Revive 755 on March 17, 2018, 11:37:57 AM
What about 250' is dangerous, IYO? The new K-Bridge spans in NY will be about 16' apart.

From a quick measurement in Google Earth, it appears the Tacoma Narrow twins are only ~125 feet apart.
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: DeaconG on March 17, 2018, 01:58:43 PM
Whatever happened to the Taylor's Island crossing proposal? Perhaps it should be revived?
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: froggie on March 17, 2018, 02:08:15 PM
^ It's a location that's still part of the study and got mentioned in the article posted the other day.  But has plenty of problems of its own.
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: cpzilliacus on March 17, 2018, 04:15:56 PM
^ It's a location that's still part of the study and got mentioned in the article posted the other day.  But has plenty of problems of its own.

I think it should be studied as part of a NEPA alternatives analysis.  But the Bay there  is roughly the same width as at Sandy Point (maybe slightly wider), and with approaches, it is over 9 miles from MD-2/MD-4 in Calvert County to MD-16 on Taylors Island (on the western side of Slaughter Creek).

A southern crossing also implies a lot of expensive improvements to many miles of MD-4 and maybe the MD-2 corridors north of any Calvert County landing of such a crossing.

It's also a considerable distance from a potential Dorchester County landing to U.S. 50 near Cambridge, at about 16 or 17 miles or more, following the path of MD-16. 

There are also Section 4(f) resources (parklands) on both sides of the Chesapeake Bay to avoid, and also the Cove Point LNG Terminal and the Calvert Cliffs nuclear power plant that have to be avoided too.
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: Beltway on March 17, 2018, 04:16:32 PM
[Southern Bay Crossing]
^ It's a location that's still part of the study and got mentioned in the article posted the other day.  But has plenty of problems of its own.

Cost issues for a 6-mile-long bridge plus about 20 miles of new approach roadways between MD-2 and US-50.

Environmental issues especially many wetlands between the bridge and US-50 near Cambridge.

Traffic issues as its position doesn't compete with the existing Bay Bridge for residents of
the northern part of the D.C. area and the Baltimore area, traveling to the ocean resorts.
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: cpzilliacus on March 17, 2018, 04:20:20 PM
Cost issues for a 6-mile-long bridge plus about 20 miles of new approach roadways.

Environmental issues especially many wetlands between the bridge and US-50 near Cambridge.

Traffic issues as its position doesn't compete with the existing Bay Bridge for residents of the northern part of the D.C. area and the Baltimore area, traveling to the ocean resorts.

The southern (or, more-correctly, mid-Bay) crossing is good in terms of establishing network redundancy, a good and desirable thing here, given that there are currently exactly two highways that link Maryland's Eastern Shore counties to the rest of the state.

Is it worth  the expense?  I don't know.  That's for the study to determine.
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: Beltway on March 17, 2018, 04:29:35 PM
Cost issues for a 6-mile-long bridge plus about 20 miles of new approach roadways.
Environmental issues especially many wetlands between the bridge and US-50 near Cambridge.
Traffic issues as its position doesn't compete with the existing Bay Bridge for residents of the northern part of the D.C. area and the Baltimore area, traveling to the ocean resorts.
The southern (or, more-correctly, mid-Bay) crossing is good in terms of establishing network redundancy, a good and desirable thing here, given that there are currently exactly two highways that link Maryland's Eastern Shore counties to the rest of the state.
Is it worth  the expense?  I don't know.  That's for the study to determine.

Southern bay crossing for Maryland.  The existing crossing is central and there is a not-built northern bay crossing that has been proposed and studied in the past.

It would provide good connectivity between southern Maryland and the lower Maryland Eastern Shore, as the current routing is rather circuitous.

I doubt that they can afford to build more than one new bay bridge, and by far the most effective place would be a third span of the current central crossing that is strategically placed to serve both the Baltimore and Washington areas, and connect the US-301 and US-50 arterial highway corridors on both sides of the Bay.

The northern crossing has similar limitations in the catchment area that it could serve.

I don't see the southern or northern crossings providing much traffic relief to the current bridges.
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: jwolfer on March 17, 2018, 05:51:58 PM
^ It's a location that's still part of the study and got mentioned in the article posted the other day.  But has plenty of problems of its own.

I think it should be studied as part of a NEPA alternatives analysis.  But the Bay there  is roughly the same width as at Sandy Point (maybe slightly wider), and with approaches, it is over 9 miles from MD-2/MD-4 in Calvert County to MD-16 on Taylors Island (on the western side of Slaughter Creek).

A southern crossing also implies a lot of expensive improvements to many miles of MD-4 and maybe the MD-2 corridors north of any Calvert County landing of such a crossing.

It's also a considerable distance from a potential Dorchester County landing to U.S. 50 near Cambridge, at about 16 or 17 miles or more, following the path of MD-16. 

There are also Section 4(f) resources (parklands) on both sides of the Chesapeake Bay to avoid, and also the Cove Point LNG Terminal and the Calvert Cliffs nuclear power plant that have to be avoided too.
My brother lives in Calvert County.. they very much want to keep the county rural( expensive exurbs now).   The county commission does not want the metro extended to Calvert County so I am sure they do not want a new crossing of the Bay

Z981

Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: cpzilliacus on March 17, 2018, 06:15:18 PM
My brother lives in Calvert County.. they very much want to keep the county rural( expensive exurbs now).   The county commission does not want the metro extended to Calvert County so I am sure they do not want a new crossing of the Bay

I am quite familiar with  Calvert County.  There used to be anti-development bumper stickers that read "Keep Calvert Country!" that were pretty common.   

Have not seen one for a while.  Maybe because much of northern Calvert County (along MD-4) is now exurban sprawl of Washington and to a lesser extent Baltimore (because it's a long trip from anywhere in Calvert County to most employment in the Baltimore region). 

Remember also that Maryland allows its county governments significant authority to regulate land use. That's one of the reasons why there are several interchanges along busy freeways in the state with no gas stations or convenience stores or other retail nearby.  In some counties, the elected members of the Board of Commissioners or County Councils choose not to use that authority, but in some counties, the regulation is quite  strict.

Southern Calvert County has become a "suburb" of residential development for employment to the south in St. Mary's County, where Lexington Park has grown significantly thanks to BRAC (base realignment and closure) rounds, with many jobs related to the Defense Department ending up at Naval Air Station Patuxent River, including the Naval Air Systems Command.  EDIT:  There has been enough population growth in southern Calvert County, and across the Patuxent River in St. Mary's County, that a metropolitan planning organization has been formed called (quite simply) the Calvert-St. Mary's Metropolitan Planning Organization (https://www.calvert-stmarysmpo.com/).
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: Beltway on March 17, 2018, 09:24:22 PM
Southern Calvert County has become a "suburb" of residential development for employment to the south in St. Mary's County, where Lexington Park has grown significantly thanks to BRAC (base realignment and closure) rounds, with many jobs related to the Defense Department ending up at Naval Air Station Patuxent River, including the Naval Air Systems Command.  EDIT:  There has been enough population growth in southern Calvert County, and across the Patuxent River in St. Mary's County, that a metropolitan planning organization has been formed called (quite simply) the Calvert-St. Mary's Metropolitan Planning Organization (https://www.calvert-stmarysmpo.com/).

Also are trying to find the funding to build a parallel MD-4 Thomas Johnson Bridge, due to severe traffic congestion.
....

Excerpts:

Study to upgrade MD 4 between MD 2 and MD 235 (4.0 miles), including the Governor Thomas Johnson Memorial Bridge (Bridge 04019) over the Patuxent River and the intersection at MD 235 (2.9 miles).

Currently, the Thomas Johnson Bridge is funded for final design, only. Funding for design, right of way, acquisition and construction for the other project phases will proceed as funds become available.

The Maryland State Highway Administration (SHA), secured Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Location Approval of SHA’s “Selected Alternative” on September 10, 2015

A new four-lane parallel bridge would be built with two northbound and two southbound lanes.

http://apps.roads.maryland.gov/webprojectlifecycle/ProjectInformation.aspx?projectno=SM351114
....

Question:  What happens to the existing bridge?
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: ixnay on March 18, 2018, 08:23:50 AM
What about 250' is dangerous, IYO? The new K-Bridge spans in NY will be about 16' apart.

What if one of the DMB towers topples towards the other?  Picture that scenario (smacks of Armageddon I know, but...).

ixnay
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: ixnay on March 18, 2018, 08:30:27 AM
What about 250' is dangerous, IYO? The new K-Bridge spans in NY will be about 16' apart.

From a quick measurement in Google Earth, it appears the Tacoma Narrow twins are only ~125 feet apart.

Well, I'm not an engineer nor do I play one (or anyone) on TV, but what's there at the Tacoma Narrows landings prevented the spans from being built farther apart?

ixnay
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: Alps on March 18, 2018, 12:07:42 PM
What about 250' is dangerous, IYO? The new K-Bridge spans in NY will be about 16' apart.

What if one of the DMB towers topples towards the other?  Picture that scenario (smacks of Armageddon I know, but...).

ixnay
That is not going to happen. That is not the failure mode of a bridge. If something happens to one of the piers, the weight of the bridge will collapse downward. It really cannot topple outward like you're picturing.
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: 1995hoo on March 18, 2018, 12:24:38 PM
What about 250' is dangerous, IYO? The new K-Bridge spans in NY will be about 16' apart.

What if one of the DMB towers topples towards the other?  Picture that scenario (smacks of Armageddon I know, but...).

ixnay

Given the pop-culture meaning of "DMB" in reference to a band from Charlottesville, I now have this unfortunate mental image of one of the two bridges singing to the other to "Crash into Me" .....  :ded:
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: davewiecking on August 14, 2018, 12:07:22 PM
https://wtop.com/dc-transit/2018/08/summer-traffic-backups-toward-bay-bridge-could-worsen/

Quote
WASHINGTON — Drivers headed to the Eastern Shore on U.S. Route 50 were caught in long backups last Friday, and many were further aggravated when they discovered only two lanes were open to eastbound traffic at the Bay Bridge. It turns out the traffic pattern was no mistake, and it could become the new norm.
...
Last Friday, beach-bound families, commercial drivers and residents alike were blindsided by a backup that extended from near Interstate 97 to the Bay Bridge, a distance of greater than 10 miles. Unlike most partly sunny, summer Friday afternoons, the reversible lane remained devoted to westbound traffic, limiting eastbound drivers to two lanes across the Chesapeake Bay.
...
Although westbound traffic was at a free flow for hours before two-way traffic was put into effect, a spokesperson for the Maryland Transportation Authority said the agency will be prioritizing westbound traffic, keeping the reversible lane open to westbound drivers longer, even on summer Fridays.

The MDTA said police and fire departments and other rescue personnel east of the Bay Bridge in Queen Anne’s County have said that when westbound traffic on Route 50 backs up, bailout traffic floods the limited routes across Kent Island, thus hampering rescue operations.

Trip last Friday took me an extra hour. Side roads paralleling US-50 on the "mainland" side of the bridge were pretty packed, thus hampering any potential rescue operations. The conspiracy theorist in the room believes this is part of the push to build a third Bay crossing.
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: Beltway on August 14, 2018, 12:28:59 PM
Trip last Friday took me an extra hour. Side roads paralleling US-50 on the "mainland" side of the bridge were pretty packed, thus hampering any potential rescue operations. The conspiracy theorist in the room believes this is part of the push to build a third Bay crossing.

The frontage roads and MD-18 have about 1/10 the capacity of a 6-lane freeway, and they have signals and at-grade intersections which further slow traffic and reduce capacity.
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: TheOneKEA on August 14, 2018, 03:25:13 PM
It may be into fictional highway territory, but I’m of the opinion that the 2-lane bridge needs to be replaced with a 6-lane bridge with full shoulders someday, and the 3-lane bridge repurposed for local and/or emergency traffic.I strongly doubt that a Northern or Southern crossing of any sort will ever be built.
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: cpzilliacus on August 14, 2018, 03:34:53 PM
It may be into fictional highway territory, but I’m of the opinion that the 2-lane bridge needs to be replaced with a 6-lane bridge with full shoulders someday, and the 3-lane bridge repurposed for local and/or emergency traffic.I strongly doubt that a Northern or Southern crossing of any sort will ever be built.

Problem is that both of the existing spans have plenty of useful life left, making it unlikely that MDTA would agree to remove even the original 1952 span (which will need to have its deck replaced in the coming years but is still in overall good condition).
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: jeffandnicole on August 14, 2018, 03:46:51 PM
It may be into fictional highway territory, but I’m of the opinion that the 2-lane bridge needs to be replaced with a 6-lane bridge with full shoulders someday, and the 3-lane bridge repurposed for local and/or emergency traffic.I strongly doubt that a Northern or Southern crossing of any sort will ever be built.

They could always build a new 3 lane span, use the two, 3 lane spans for 50/301 traffic, and bridge the roadway for the 2 lane span over/under one of the roadways approaching a 3 lane span for local traffic.
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: Mr_Northside on August 15, 2018, 03:22:42 PM
I'm not sure that I'm into (not that it really matters what I think) the notion of a span for "local traffic".  Even with the current bridges, I can't imagine that on a "local level", either side has much to do with each other.

I'm pretty sure I've opined on this before (possibly in a different thread), but it seems that as much as just having 5 lanes (total) capacity, the fact that neither span has really any shoulders to speak of is a major problem.  The bridge can be intimidating enough to some just due it it's nature, but when you're right against the barrier, I think it causes a lot more slow driving than if there was more space between the lanes and the sides of the bridge.

My thoughts are to just build a 3 lane span that actually has full left/right shoulders and used for the direction of travel that makes sense for whether it gets built north or south of the existing spans - Then convert the original 2-lane span to a 1 lane span with shoulders, and the existing 3 lane to 2 lanes with shoulders for the other direction of travel.

That said.... I'll be mostly surprised (but not totally shocked) if a new span gets built across the bay anywhere before I die.
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: Beltway on August 15, 2018, 03:54:44 PM
There is plenty of local traffic between the Annapolis area and Kent Island, and Baltimore and D.C. area commuters from Kent Island.

I don't know of any bridge in the world of that nature (function of length and height) that has a 10-foot right shoulder.  Deck space on a bridge like that is extremely expensive to build.
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: jeffandnicole on August 15, 2018, 11:00:14 PM
There is plenty of local traffic between the Annapolis area and Kent Island, and Baltimore and D.C. area commuters from Kent Island.

I don't know of any bridge in the world of that nature (function of length and height) that has a 10-foot right shoulder.  Deck space on a bridge like that is extremely expensive to build.

DE Rt. 1 over the C&D canal.

Betsy Ross Bridge over the Delaware has an 8 foot shoulder (shoulders provided as bridge now has 6 lanes, not 8)

NJ/PA Turnpike bridge also has 8-10 foot shoulders.

The new Scudder Falls Bridge is being designed with shoulders, I think.
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: Beltway on August 15, 2018, 11:15:47 PM
I don't know of any bridge in the world of that nature (function of length and height) that has a 10-foot right shoulder.  Deck space on a bridge like that is extremely expensive to build.
DE Rt. 1 over the C&D canal.
Betsy Ross Bridge over the Delaware has an 8 foot shoulder (shoulders provided as bridge now has 6 lanes, not 8)
NJ/PA Turnpike bridge also has 8-10 foot shoulders.

Those not nearly the total length, height, and length of the main span.  The eastern channel span of the CBB is in the length range of those above.
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: Alps on August 15, 2018, 11:28:47 PM
NJ/PA Turnpike bridge also has 8-10 foot shoulders.
Actually 12 feet. Same with Newark Bay Bridge. (shoulders provided as bridge now has 4 lanes, not 6)
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: D-Dey65 on August 29, 2018, 12:06:46 AM
Looks like Microsoft confused this bridge with the Chesapeake Bay Bridge-Tunnel:
https://www.msn.com/en-us/travel/tripideas/50-roads-you-need-to-cruise-down-before-you-die/ss-BBMwkda?ocid=spartandhp#image=1


The bridges come in at number 4.

Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: Steve D on August 29, 2018, 09:35:42 AM
There is plenty of local traffic between the Annapolis area and Kent Island, and Baltimore and D.C. area commuters from Kent Island.

I don't know of any bridge in the world of that nature (function of length and height) that has a 10-foot right shoulder.  Deck space on a bridge like that is extremely expensive to build.

DE Rt. 1 over the C&D canal.

Betsy Ross Bridge over the Delaware has an 8 foot shoulder (shoulders provided as bridge now has 6 lanes, not 8)

NJ/PA Turnpike bridge also has 8-10 foot shoulders.

The new Scudder Falls Bridge is being designed with shoulders, I think.

The new San Francisco Bay Bridge has both left and right shoulders. 

The new Woodrow Wilson Bridge connecting MD-DC-VA has full shoulders.

Don't the new Tappan Zee Bridge and Goethals Bridge also have real shoulders?

I think it is becoming the norm now to build shoulders on major bridges...
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: Beltway on August 29, 2018, 09:54:01 AM
DE Rt. 1 over the C&D canal.
Betsy Ross Bridge over the Delaware has an 8 foot shoulder (shoulders provided as bridge now has 6 lanes, not 8)
NJ/PA Turnpike bridge also has 8-10 foot shoulders.
The new Scudder Falls Bridge is being designed with shoulders, I think.
The new San Francisco Bay Bridge has both left and right shoulders. 
The new Woodrow Wilson Bridge connecting MD-DC-VA has full shoulders.
Don't the new Tappan Zee Bridge and Goethals Bridge also have real shoulders?
I think it is becoming the norm now to build shoulders on major bridges...

Norm?  I don't think so.  The SF and TZ are the only ones approaching the main span of CBB (1,600 feet horiz. and 190 feet vert.)

C&D and Goethals are in the 700-foot span range, WWB about 200.  Betsy Ross and PA/NY Turnpike were built with lanes that were later reverted to shoulders.  Scudder Falls is basically a viaduct.
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: Alps on August 29, 2018, 03:55:36 PM
DE Rt. 1 over the C&D canal.
Betsy Ross Bridge over the Delaware has an 8 foot shoulder (shoulders provided as bridge now has 6 lanes, not 8)
NJ/PA Turnpike bridge also has 8-10 foot shoulders.
The new Scudder Falls Bridge is being designed with shoulders, I think.
The new San Francisco Bay Bridge has both left and right shoulders. 
The new Woodrow Wilson Bridge connecting MD-DC-VA has full shoulders.
Don't the new Tappan Zee Bridge and Goethals Bridge also have real shoulders?
I think it is becoming the norm now to build shoulders on major bridges...

Norm?  I don't think so.  The SF and TZ are the only ones approaching the main span of CBB (1,600 feet horiz. and 190 feet vert.)

C&D and Goethals are in the 700-foot span range, WWB about 200.  Betsy Ross and PA/NY Turnpike were built with lanes that were later reverted to shoulders.  Scudder Falls is basically a viaduct.
. Forget the main span. Approaches are also structures. I can tell you from inside the industry that it's becoming more and more common due to the safety benefits, especially on Interstates.
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: Beltway on August 29, 2018, 04:10:43 PM
The SF and TZ are the only ones approaching the main span of CBB (1,600 feet horiz. and 190 feet vert.)
C&D and Goethals are in the 700-foot span range, WWB about 200.  Betsy Ross and PA/NY Turnpike were built with lanes that were later reverted to shoulders.  Scudder Falls is basically a viaduct.
. Forget the main span. Approaches are also structures. I can tell you from inside the industry that it's becoming more and more common due to the safety benefits, especially on Interstates.

A bridge with a long main span usually is very high and very long, as in what clearances and structure length is needed to cross a channel and estuary that handles large ocean going ships.  So the cost of providing extra structure width on bridge like that is substantially higher.
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: Alps on August 29, 2018, 06:14:26 PM
The SF and TZ are the only ones approaching the main span of CBB (1,600 feet horiz. and 190 feet vert.)
C&D and Goethals are in the 700-foot span range, WWB about 200.  Betsy Ross and PA/NY Turnpike were built with lanes that were later reverted to shoulders.  Scudder Falls is basically a viaduct.
. Forget the main span. Approaches are also structures. I can tell you from inside the industry that it's becoming more and more common due to the safety benefits, especially on Interstates.

A bridge with a long main span usually is very high and very long, as in what clearances and structure length is needed to cross a channel and estuary that handles large ocean going ships.  So the cost of providing extra structure width on bridge like that is substantially higher.
Same percentage of additional cost as anywhere else, just a higher cost to take that percentage from. I'm sure the Tappan Zee holds its own on a cost basis.
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: roadman65 on August 29, 2018, 06:42:22 PM
There is plenty of local traffic between the Annapolis area and Kent Island, and Baltimore and D.C. area commuters from Kent Island.

I don't know of any bridge in the world of that nature (function of length and height) that has a 10-foot right shoulder.  Deck space on a bridge like that is extremely expensive to build.

DE Rt. 1 over the C&D canal.

Betsy Ross Bridge over the Delaware has an 8 foot shoulder (shoulders provided as bridge now has 6 lanes, not 8)

NJ/PA Turnpike bridge also has 8-10 foot shoulders.

The new Scudder Falls Bridge is being designed with shoulders, I think.

The new San Francisco Bay Bridge has both left and right shoulders. 

The new Woodrow Wilson Bridge connecting MD-DC-VA has full shoulders.

Don't the new Tappan Zee Bridge and Goethals Bridge also have real shoulders?

I think it is becoming the norm now to build shoulders on major bridges...
The Newark Bay Bridge on the NJ Turnpike always had full shoulders.
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: Beltway on August 29, 2018, 08:09:29 PM
A bridge with a long main span usually is very high and very long, as in what clearances and structure length is needed to cross a channel and estuary that handles large ocean going ships.  So the cost of providing extra structure width on bridge like that is substantially higher.
Same percentage of additional cost as anywhere else, just a higher cost to take that percentage from. I'm sure the Tappan Zee holds its own on a cost basis.

The I-664 South Trestle and North Approach Bridge together would be about the 4.3 mile length of the Chesapeake Bay Bridge.  Low-level viaducts.  They do have full right shoulders, but I would daresay there is a radical difference in what the extra width cost.

Per how this shoulder discussion started with respect to the Chesapeake Bay Bridge.  Whether building a third bridge or building a new bridge with enough lanes to replace the existing bridges, including full shoulders is a tough call.  If they can afford to add 10 feet of shoulder they might just decide to add 2 more feet and use it as another lane.  Another person wrote, "be replaced with a 6-lane bridge with full shoulders".  If they could afford that then they might reason having 8 lanes with 2 foot shoulders on basically the same deck width.
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: Beltway on August 29, 2018, 08:18:48 PM
The Newark Bay Bridge on the NJ Turnpike always had full shoulders.

Wasn't that originally a 6-lane bridge and then later on two of the lanes were reverted to full shoulders?

In any event, Wikipedia says this about the NJTP Newark Bay Bridge --

During certain hours, especially morning rush hour, the eastbound shoulder of the Turnpike Extension (including the bridge) is opened for normal traffic (by green arrows above, instead of red Xs), for a total of 5 lanes (3 eastbound, 2 westbound).
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: Alps on August 29, 2018, 08:43:45 PM
The Newark Bay Bridge on the NJ Turnpike always had full shoulders.

Wasn't that originally a 6-lane bridge and then later on two of the lanes were reverted to full shoulders?

In any event, Wikipedia says this about the NJTP Newark Bay Bridge --

During certain hours, especially morning rush hour, the eastbound shoulder of the Turnpike Extension (including the bridge) is opened for normal traffic (by green arrows above, instead of red Xs), for a total of 5 lanes (3 eastbound, 2 westbound).
You are correct - it started at 6 lanes and went to 4. The rush hour thing is over because the Pulaski Skyway reopened, so it's back to 2/2 only.
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: roadman65 on August 29, 2018, 09:03:45 PM
When it had 6 lanes it had to be a long while back.  As far as I remember, when I lived there anyway, it was always 4 lanes from Exit 14 to 14C and the free part to the Holland Tunnel ( Jersey Avenue).  However, it was not until either right before I moved to FL in 1990 or after I moved here to FL and visited home, I noticed that there was full shoulders which struck me odd as most bridges of that type feature none usually.
I am guessing it was once 3/3 and then dropped to 2/2  at 14A at one time.  Though even the Passaic River Eastern Spur and Hackensack River Eastern Spur were originally 2/2 with the piers underneath the structure to show that.  When they did the work on it I remember it was long after the Western Spur opened as well.  So it is odd that the extension had one more travel lane each way than the mainline it stems from as originally even the 3/3/3/3 were at 2/2 when the Turnpike first opened.

However, stranger things on roads have happened. 
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: Beltway on August 29, 2018, 11:51:30 PM
Isn't the extra shoulder width on the new Tappan Zee Bridge already possibly spoken for with respect to adding railroad to the bridge?

One alternative would be to build a third span between the two and that would carry a 2-track railroad. 

Another alternative would add one track to the inside of each of the two new bridges, and the buffer space for the track would probably consume most or nearly all of the left and right shoulders after the 4 lanes were shifted to the right.
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: Steve D on August 30, 2018, 08:54:54 AM
When it had 6 lanes it had to be a long while back.  As far as I remember, when I lived there anyway, it was always 4 lanes from Exit 14 to 14C and the free part to the Holland Tunnel ( Jersey Avenue).  However, it was not until either right before I moved to FL in 1990 or after I moved here to FL and visited home, I noticed that there was full shoulders which struck me odd as most bridges of that type feature none usually.
I am guessing it was once 3/3 and then dropped to 2/2  at 14A at one time.  Though even the Passaic River Eastern Spur and Hackensack River Eastern Spur were originally 2/2 with the piers underneath the structure to show that.  When they did the work on it I remember it was long after the Western Spur opened as well.  So it is odd that the extension had one more travel lane each way than the mainline it stems from as originally even the 3/3/3/3 were at 2/2 when the Turnpike first opened.

However, stranger things on roads have happened.

The Newark Bay Bridge and Hudson County extension went from 3/3 to 2/2 with shoulders in 1960 per NJTP Annual Report.

The two major bridges on the eastern spur were originally 3/3 with no shoulders, and then widened in 1973/74 to include shoulders.  Please see my thread "Old NJ Turnpike Photos" for evidence...
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: vdeane on August 30, 2018, 01:22:29 PM
The bridge on I-295 (West Beltway) over the St. Johns River also has full (or nearly full - the left might be a couple feet short) shoulders.

Isn't the extra shoulder width on the new Tappan Zee Bridge already possibly spoken for with respect to adding railroad to the bridge?

One alternative would be to build a third span between the two and that would carry a 2-track railroad. 

Another alternative would add one track to the inside of each of the two new bridges, and the buffer space for the track would probably consume most or nearly all of the left and right shoulders after the 4 lanes were shifted to the right.
I would hope they wouldn't take the shoulder.  Those shoulders are needed - a major problem with the old bridge (and until they finish the new ones) is disabled vehicles/accidents blocking travel lanes and causing multi-hour delays because there's nowhere to pull over.  The project site doesn't specify where any future rail would go, just that the bridge has the "structural capacity" for it.

It also notes dedicated bus lanes, but whether those are shared with shoulders or not isn't specified, and both are implied in various parts of the FAQ.  If not, one could possibly add rail there.
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: Beltway on August 30, 2018, 04:01:47 PM
The bridge on I-295 (West Beltway) over the St. Johns River also has full (or nearly full - the left might be a couple feet short) shoulders.

Mostly low-level trestles with a navigational span with 150 feet of horizontal clearance and 65 feet of vertical clearance.  Intracoastal Waterway (ICW) clearances.
http://www.charts.noaa.gov/BookletChart/11492_BookletChart.pdf

Again not in the league of the kind of bridges we are talking about that handle the large ocean going ships.

I would hope they wouldn't take the shoulder.  Those shoulders are needed - a major problem with the old bridge (and until they finish the new ones) is disabled vehicles/accidents blocking travel lanes and causing multi-hour delays because there's nowhere to pull over.  The project site doesn't specify where any future rail would go, just that the bridge has the "structural capacity" for it.
It also notes dedicated bus lanes, but whether those are shared with shoulders or not isn't specified, and both are implied in various parts of the FAQ.  If not, one could possibly add rail there.

Building the third span utilizing the existing towers for the rail lines is obviously the ideal, but expensive.  When "push comes to shove" most agencies would be tempted to use what is already built.
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: froggie on August 30, 2018, 05:42:34 PM
Wasn't the idea for the new Tappan Zee to put the rail line underneath the vehicle deck?  I recall reading that being the case, but can't find it now.
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: roadman65 on August 30, 2018, 07:10:03 PM
When it had 6 lanes it had to be a long while back.  As far as I remember, when I lived there anyway, it was always 4 lanes from Exit 14 to 14C and the free part to the Holland Tunnel ( Jersey Avenue).  However, it was not until either right before I moved to FL in 1990 or after I moved here to FL and visited home, I noticed that there was full shoulders which struck me odd as most bridges of that type feature none usually.
I am guessing it was once 3/3 and then dropped to 2/2  at 14A at one time.  Though even the Passaic River Eastern Spur and Hackensack River Eastern Spur were originally 2/2 with the piers underneath the structure to show that.  When they did the work on it I remember it was long after the Western Spur opened as well.  So it is odd that the extension had one more travel lane each way than the mainline it stems from as originally even the 3/3/3/3 were at 2/2 when the Turnpike first opened.

However, stranger things on roads have happened.

The Newark Bay Bridge and Hudson County extension went from 3/3 to 2/2 with shoulders in 1960 per NJTP Annual Report.

The two major bridges on the eastern spur were originally 3/3 with no shoulders, and then widened in 1973/74 to include shoulders.  Please see my thread "Old NJ Turnpike Photos" for evidence...
They did what FDOT did on the I-4 bridge over CR 532 in Osceola County, FL.  It was 2/2 no shoulders, but two different overpasses due to the wide median there.  Then if you go underneath, you see the two straight piers next to the original capped piers of the original two lanes.  Now there is another inside pier that is T shaped to allow for the current third lane to the highway as I-4 was widened to 3/3 back in 2000 or so.  Of course now it will be widened again in the Beyond the Ultimate Project which will most likely replace all those bridges as a DDI is planned for there in addition to FDOT lately wasting money in many places and gong for full replacement just to add another lane or two to it.  However the DDI would not work under the current structure as I will admit that interchange does need one badly due to many left turns taking place at on and off peak hours.
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: vdeane on August 30, 2018, 09:05:07 PM
Wasn't the idea for the new Tappan Zee to put the rail line underneath the vehicle deck?  I recall reading that being the case, but can't find it now.

I recall reading that somewhere too, but no idea where, or when.  Given the way the bridge looks, I'm not sure where it would fit, unless it would be dangling from the supports somehow.  There certainly isn't anything for a second deck to rest on with what's there now or the renderings of the finished project (this looks like the one I have in my cubicle (https://www.larsa4d.com/img/home/tz1.jpg)).
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: Alps on August 31, 2018, 12:31:44 AM
Wasn't the idea for the new Tappan Zee to put the rail line underneath the vehicle deck?  I recall reading that being the case, but can't find it now.

My understanding is that the rail would go between the two bridges, with a connecting concrete beam going across between each set of piers to tie the two structures together. The extra width on each deck is for a bus lane - once that is added, they will have normal shoulders instead of giant left shoulders.
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: D-Dey65 on September 05, 2018, 11:45:25 AM
I keep thinking this thread should've had a poll asking whether or not anyone here is afraid to drive on the bridge. Last night I watched that old YouTube video from Inside Edition on how it's supposedly the scariest bridge in America.

You people know the stories of the few times I've driven on this bridge, right? How the first time I tried it, I was more afraid of being pulled over by the cops on my way to crossing the bridge rather than the bridge itself?



Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: cpzilliacus on September 05, 2018, 01:35:22 PM
I keep thinking this thread should've had a poll asking whether or not anyone here is afraid to drive on the bridge. Last night I watched that old YouTube video from Inside Edition on how it's supposedly the scariest bridge in America.

You people know the stories of the few times I've driven on this bridge, right? How the first time I tried it, I was more afraid of being pulled over by the cops on my way to crossing the bridge rather than the bridge itself?

IMO, the thing that makes some drivers think it is a "scary" bridge is that when they approach the toll plaza (eastbound only on the Western Shore at Sandy Point) the size of the both spans is very vividly on display, and some people that might not be bothered by crossing similar large bridges (George Washington Bridge, Verrazano Narrows, Delaware Memorial, Golden Gate and others) are unnerved by what they see.
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: jeffandnicole on September 05, 2018, 01:45:29 PM
I keep thinking this thread should've had a poll asking whether or not anyone here is afraid to drive on the bridge. Last night I watched that old YouTube video from Inside Edition on how it's supposedly the scariest bridge in America.

You people know the stories of the few times I've driven on this bridge, right? How the first time I tried it, I was more afraid of being pulled over by the cops on my way to crossing the bridge rather than the bridge itself?

IMO, the thing that makes some drivers think it is a "scary" bridge is that when they approach the toll plaza (eastbound only on the Western Shore at Sandy Point) the size of the both spans is very vividly on display, and some people that might not be bothered by crossing similar large bridges (George Washington Bridge, Verrazano Narrows, Delaware Memorial, Golden Gate and others) are unnerved by what they see.

Some people also don't like driving in the lane next to the edge of the bridge. On the 2 lane bridge, they have no option.  On the other bridges mentioned, there's 4+ lanes. 

I recall a story my mom said many years ago when she worked in a school.   The Principal was riding along in a school bus on a field trip and was afraid of heights.  He directed the bus driver to drive in the closed middle lane of the Commodore Barry Bridge (before it had the zipper barrier).  The bus subsequently was stopped by the police and the driver issued a ticket.
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: Beltway on September 05, 2018, 03:47:37 PM
I keep thinking this thread should've had a poll asking whether or not anyone here is afraid to drive on the bridge. Last night I watched that old YouTube video from Inside Edition on how it's supposedly the scariest bridge in America.

That notion came from sensationalist idiots in the news media.  I have driven the bridges hundreds of times, going back to when it was one 2-lane 2-way bridge, and I have never been "scared" by the trip, or even "anxious".
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: BrianP on September 05, 2018, 03:49:58 PM
I keep thinking this thread should've had a poll asking whether or not anyone here is afraid to drive on the bridge. Last night I watched that old YouTube video from Inside Edition on how it's supposedly the scariest bridge in America.

That notion came from sensationalist idiots in the news media.  I have driven the bridges hundreds of times, going back to when it was one 2-lane 2-way bridge, and I have never been "scared" by the trip, or even "anxious".
And your experience is the definitive one. No one else's can be different or even matters. 
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: Beltway on September 05, 2018, 03:54:39 PM
I keep thinking this thread should've had a poll asking whether or not anyone here is afraid to drive on the bridge. Last night I watched that old YouTube video from Inside Edition on how it's supposedly the scariest bridge in America.
That notion came from sensationalist idiots in the news media.  I have driven the bridges hundreds of times, going back to when it was one 2-lane 2-way bridge, and I have never been "scared" by the trip, or even "anxious".
And your experience is the definitive one. No one else's can be different or even matters. 

Strawman over Internet.  How about the dozens (or more) people in the Maryland and environs region that I have heard discuss the bridge over the last 50 years.
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: BrianP on September 05, 2018, 04:07:07 PM
I keep thinking this thread should've had a poll asking whether or not anyone here is afraid to drive on the bridge. Last night I watched that old YouTube video from Inside Edition on how it's supposedly the scariest bridge in America.
That notion came from sensationalist idiots in the news media.  I have driven the bridges hundreds of times, going back to when it was one 2-lane 2-way bridge, and I have never been "scared" by the trip, or even "anxious".
And your experience is the definitive one. No one else's can be different or even matters. 

Strawman over Internet.  How about the dozens (or more) people in the Maryland and environs region that I have heard discuss the bridge over the last 50 years.
Still doesn't cover everyone's else's experience.  It only takes one exception to disprove your evidence.
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: Beltway on September 05, 2018, 04:10:00 PM
Still doesn't cover everyone's else's experience.  It only takes one exception to disprove your evidence.

I never claimed to "cover everyone's else's experience", so "only one exception" doesn't really prove anything either.
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: seicer on September 05, 2018, 04:56:36 PM
Christ.

People do experience anxiety driving over that bridge. I have friends who have -refused- to drive over that bridge because it induces a panic attack. I know if I'm on the outside lanes of some bridges with low or exposed railings, I could have a panic attack if I look over.

This is why we have assistants that can help motorists at the Chesapeake Bay Bridge and at similar older crossings. No one really cares if someone drives over the bridge 5,000 times with no problems; it's a very real problem.
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: Beltway on September 05, 2018, 05:08:27 PM
Christ.
People do experience anxiety driving over that bridge. I have friends who have -refused- to drive over that bridge because it induces a panic attack. I know if I'm on the outside lanes of some bridges with low or exposed railings, I could have a panic attack if I look over.

How many?  I've probably talked to about 50 people in person about the bridge and I haven't yet talked to someone who refused to drive over it.  Some people are afraid to leave their house too but that doesn't mean that houses are 'scary'.  I actually have talked to a few people who are afraid to drive on any freeway or Interstate highway and refuse to.
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: seicer on September 05, 2018, 09:26:40 PM
20-30 per day (https://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/28/chesapeake-bay-bridge-drive-over_n_3346540.html).

Other bridges offer similar services (https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/08/16/bridge-driveover-service/13955737/).
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: Beltway on September 05, 2018, 09:47:59 PM
20-30 per day (https://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/28/chesapeake-bay-bridge-drive-over_n_3346540.html).
The Huffington comPost.

"as many as 20 to 30 bridge drive-overs a day during the peak summer vacation months"

A private company and that is out of about 70,000 AADT

"as it’s subjected to frequent—and often violent—storms"

I would like to see some data.  Not true for the Baltimore-Washington-Eastern Shore region in general.

Again hundreds of crossings and I have not yet had that happen to me.  Normally you would see a storm coming and if it is bad enough I would not cross the bridge until the storm passed.

So they include these also --

Millau Viaduct, France
Lake Pontchartrain Causeway, Louisiana
Seven Mile Bridge, Florida
Mackinac Bridge, Michigan
Royal Gorge Bridge, Colorado
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: Alps on September 05, 2018, 11:02:54 PM
So now you're denying data that was just presented to you. Drop it, Kozel.
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: Beltway on September 05, 2018, 11:10:52 PM
So now you're denying data that was just presented to you. Drop it, Kozel.

This is the only item that I questioned with regard to data --
"as it’s subjected to frequent—and often violent—storms"
I would like to see some data.  Not true for the Baltimore-Washington-Eastern Shore region in general.

[…]

I didn't see any actual data in the article about that -- please straighten me out if I missed it.
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: seicer on September 05, 2018, 11:13:10 PM
That article is easily verifiable. From sources you may prefer:
https://wamu.org/story/11/05/30/bay_bridge_fear_means_business_boom_for_shuttles/
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2331679/Chesapeake-Bay-bridge-The-Maryland-bridge-terrifying-locals-pay-25-company-shuttle-car.html
https://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/27/us/service-aids-fearful-drivers-across-the-chesapeake.html
https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/trafficandcommuting/for-some-a-drive-across-the-chesapeake-bay-bridge-is-a-harrowing-experience/2013/07/22/e6f1b8b4-f300-11e2-ae43-b31dc363c3bf_story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.5a5229703066
https://wtop.com/news/2013/07/local-service-drives-scared-drivers-across-bay-bridge/

Etc. It's a mom-and-pop operation. They aren't going to hand out data. Take their word for it. And the fact they can provide themselves a living off of $25 rides 3-30 times a day.

I did not know that the CBBT offered an in-house service, and did not know that the Chesapeake Bay Bridge had discontinued theirs. I remember about 10 years ago driving over it in a violent storm and it was white knucked driving. The cars behind and ahead of me were riding towards and in the center of the two-lane one-way crossing, presumably because we had fears of being thrown over the edge!

I am sad but kind of glad that awful two-lane (one-way) cantilever bridge down in Charleston SC was replaced. Very steep grades, tight turns mid-way, and something like 8 or 9 foot lanes. Also driven in less than prime conditions when I was 18. Good times!
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: Rothman on September 06, 2018, 07:53:19 AM


So now you're denying data that was just presented to you. Drop it, Kozel.

Alps wins the Internet today.
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: odditude on September 06, 2018, 09:44:58 AM
bridges generally don't bother me at all, but i was definitely more comfortable in the center lane going WB over the bridge. my girlfriend kept her eyes closed over length of the bridge.
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: D-Dey65 on September 06, 2018, 10:03:58 AM
Aw, man. I didn't want to start an argument over this. Scott, you and I aren't afraid to cross the bridge. That's good. Nobody you know is afraid of it either. That's good too. Most of the people I know either never heard of it, or confuse it with the Chesapeake Bay Bridge-Tunnel. They should go to your site. But that doesn't mean other people aren't afraid of it.

Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: Beltway on September 06, 2018, 12:07:48 PM
So now you're denying data that was just presented to you. Drop it, Kozel.
Alps wins the Internet today.

At the Woodrow Wilson Bridge opening ceremonies in 2006, one of the speakers mentioned the possibility of raffling off 10 or 20 momentos of the project.  I turned to the guy sitting next to me and said, "I propose that the winners be awarded a chunk of concrete!"  Got a good chuckle from him and several others nearby who heard it.

Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: roadman65 on September 06, 2018, 03:52:23 PM
bridges generally don't bother me at all, but i was definitely more comfortable in the center lane going WB over the bridge. my girlfriend kept her eyes closed over length of the bridge.
I had my cruise set the whole time as everybody stayed steady even with the left lane WB set for EB travel (as it was Labor Day Weekend and folks were heading to the beaches that day).  That bridge was not at all scary.

I think the Huey P. Long in NOLA was scarier when the bridge vibrated as I was stuck in traffic to not move but feel the movements of the opposing cars.  Now if a train came across I am sure that bridge really would have shook as that particular bridge is both a road and rail structure across the Mississippi.
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: Beltway on September 07, 2018, 10:23:02 PM
Regarding being on a bridge during a violent storm, I was thinking about my past experiences.  Obviously everybody has their own experiences, but here is mine to the best of my recollection.  1.1 million miles of driving in last 50 years.

I don't recall being on a bridge during a "violent storm".  That would seem to include high winds, hail, blizzard, etc.  There have been some times when I have crossed a bridge during snow or ice conditions, and a couple were a bit dicey, but not to the level any emergency.

I can think of just one time that I was on a bridge in seriously problematic traffic conditions due to a storm.  I was about age 20, crossing the Woodrow Wilson Bridge (I-495), and a heavy rain became severe enough to where many vehicles were stopping in the right lane, and that was back when there was no shoulder wide enough to hold a car.  Even with the windshield wipers on high I could barely see the road in front of me, and it was loud with the amount of rain hitting metal.  I and some other drivers did manage about 5 mph all the way across the bridge, as I wanted to reserve stopping for a full shoulder unless it was deemed impossible.  The rain did slack off about 10 minutes later.

Given the very small percentage of road mileage that is comprised of major bridges, that likely is the reason why it could be rare.
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: CentralPAguy on September 07, 2018, 11:26:43 PM
I just drove across the bridge for the first time today, was pretty impressed with the scale of it. While I don't recall seeing anyone pull over because I was not paying attention to that, I can certainly see how people with a fear of heights, or anxiety might be intimidated by it (particularly the narrower older span, and/or in adverse conditions.)
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: ipeters61 on September 08, 2018, 11:15:20 PM
I drove the bridge last weekend, for the second time in two years, when visiting a friend who lives in the DC suburbs (I rarely go west since most of my friends/family live north of me).  Personally, I didn't find it too bad, I just kept going in the middle lane (westbound)/right lane (eastbound, night time) at around 55 and felt okay.  Frankly, I just was so amazed that after three minutes or so I just said to myself, "Wait, I'm still on the bridge.  :-o"  I find it a very beautiful experience, I rarely go that way and I found it to be a nice drive.  If anything, driving the Capital Beltway was way more nervewracking than the bridge.

However, I know my father is not a fan of long bridges and can't imagine his reaction to the Bay Bridge.  From what I remember, westbound had a very unnerving looking "guardrail" on both sides, which is why I kept to the middle lane - I know my father really hates those (eastbound, if I recall correctly, had a concrete "guardrail" on both sides).  I also have a coworker who told me her husband hates driving over the bridge so she has to do the driving over it...and they've done the trip several times.

I would especially dread driving over that bridge in very windy conditions, though.  Just makes me think of that crash on the Bay Bridge-Tunnel in Virginia (https://www.delmarvanow.com/story/news/local/virginia/2018/08/02/after-fatal-bay-bridge-tunnel-crash-search-answers/863035002/) that happened recently...
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: Beltway on September 08, 2018, 11:31:28 PM
I would especially dread driving over that bridge in very windy conditions, though.

Well so would I but how often does that happen.  Hasn't happened to me yet in over 200 trips.  Depending on the definition of "very windy"; they close the bridge to traffic when high winds are forecast.

3000 posts
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: jeffandnicole on September 08, 2018, 11:52:15 PM
I just drove across the bridge for the first time today, was pretty impressed with the scale of it. While I don't recall seeing anyone pull over because I was not paying attention to that, I can certainly see how people with a fear of heights, or anxiety might be intimidated by it (particularly the narrower older span, and/or in adverse conditions.)

There are no shoulders on the CBB. Are you talking about the CBBT?
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: Alps on September 09, 2018, 09:06:43 PM
I would especially dread driving over that bridge in very windy conditions, though.

Well so would I but how often does that happen.  Hasn't happened to me yet in over 200 trips.  Depending on the definition of "very windy"; they close the bridge to traffic when high winds are forecast.

3000 posts
The scariest bridge I've ever driven on with wind is the Tydings Bridge. I stay in the middle lane because without shoulders, those nasty gusts easily push my small car 2 feet.
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: Beltway on September 09, 2018, 09:19:13 PM
The scariest bridge I've ever driven on with wind is the Tydings Bridge. I stay in the middle lane because without shoulders, those nasty gusts easily push my small car 2 feet.

So there are "nasty gusts" every time you cross over that bridge?  I crossed that at least 50 times in my 1968 VW Beetle (dating myself) and maybe I was just lucky but I don't recall having any problem with wind there.

Maybe next time I will be 'unlucky' and encounter an EF5 tornado when crossing.
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: Alps on September 09, 2018, 10:44:57 PM
The scariest bridge I've ever driven on with wind is the Tydings Bridge. I stay in the middle lane because without shoulders, those nasty gusts easily push my small car 2 feet.

So there are "nasty gusts" every time you cross over that bridge?  I crossed that at least 50 times in my 1968 VW Beetle (dating myself) and maybe I was just lucky but I don't recall having any problem with wind there.

Maybe next time I will be 'unlucky' and encounter an EF5 tornado when crossing.
Stop trying to intentionally be a dick in so many threads at once. You're spreading yourself too thin. I never said "every time". Let me know how you enjoy your EF5.
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: Beltway on September 09, 2018, 11:53:50 PM
The scariest bridge I've ever driven on with wind is the Tydings Bridge. I stay in the middle lane because without shoulders, those nasty gusts easily push my small car 2 feet.
So there are "nasty gusts" every time you cross over that bridge?  I crossed that at least 50 times in my 1968 VW Beetle (dating myself) and maybe I was just lucky but I don't recall having any problem with wind there.
Maybe next time I will be 'unlucky' and encounter an EF5 tornado when crossing.
Stop trying to intentionally be a dick in so many threads at once. You're spreading yourself too thin. I never said "every time".

Well, my take on it is that there are some posters who have a habit of being annoying and irritating and overly defensive of their worldview and who don't react well when challenged.  Maybe they don't realize they are doing that; maybe so, maybe not.  Most of the time I ignore it, but sometimes I don't.

Let me know how you enjoy your EF5.

I am enjoying my very well funded retirement! 
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: US71 on September 10, 2018, 08:22:37 PM
The scariest bridge I've ever driven on with wind is the Tydings Bridge. I stay in the middle lane because without shoulders, those nasty gusts easily push my small car 2 feet.
So there are "nasty gusts" every time you cross over that bridge?  I crossed that at least 50 times in my 1968 VW Beetle (dating myself) and maybe I was just lucky but I don't recall having any problem with wind there.
Maybe next time I will be 'unlucky' and encounter an EF5 tornado when crossing.
Stop trying to intentionally be a dick in so many threads at once. You're spreading yourself too thin. I never said "every time".

Well, my take on it is that there are some posters who have a habit of being annoying and irritating and overly defensive of their worldview and who don't react well when challenged.  Maybe they don't realize they are doing that; maybe so, maybe not.  Most of the time I ignore it, but sometimes I don't.

Let me know how you enjoy your EF5.

I am enjoying my very well funded retirement! 

Hope you have your water wings
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: Beltway on September 10, 2018, 08:54:16 PM
I am enjoying my very well funded retirement! 
Hope you have your water wings

Water wings?  The only thing that comes up on a search are these arm flotation devices for people who are learning how to swim.  I grew up in a beach front community in Florida and learned how to swim at 8 years old, and how sail a sailboat at 9.
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: froggie on September 10, 2018, 09:06:32 PM
I think he's referring to what you're about to get in 72-96 hours...
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: Beltway on September 10, 2018, 09:12:31 PM
I think he's referring to what you're about to get in 72-96 hours...

The latest track prediction has Richmond at the edge where winds would probably be 20 mph or less.  Obviously the track can change in 4 days.
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: ipeters61 on September 10, 2018, 09:16:33 PM
I think he's referring to what you're about to get in 72-96 hours...
My grandparents rented a house in Bowers Beach to stay in for my birthday (about 15 minutes away).  Just called them to tell them they should cancel since I'm sure Bowers Beach Road will be impassible by then (it's impassible now according to DelDOT).  Bummer.
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: Alps on September 10, 2018, 10:38:34 PM
I think he's referring to what you're about to get in 72-96 hours...
My grandparents rented a house in Bowers Beach to stay in for my birthday (about 15 minutes away).  Just called them to tell them they should cancel since I'm sure Bowers Beach Road will be impassible by then (it's impassible now according to DelDOT).  Bummer.
You guys got hammered down in greater Philadelphia.
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: froggie on September 11, 2018, 10:38:24 AM
I think he's referring to what you're about to get in 72-96 hours...

The latest track prediction has Richmond at the edge where winds would probably be 20 mph or less.  Obviously the track can change in 4 days.

It's not the wind that's going to be your problem.  The "water wings" comment from previously is very appropriate.
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: 1995hoo on September 11, 2018, 10:51:09 AM
The rain forecast makes it sound like parts of Virginia may experience flashbacks to Hurricane Camille.
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: cpzilliacus on September 11, 2018, 11:08:53 AM
The rain forecast makes it sound like parts of Virginia may experience flashbacks to Hurricane Camille.

Or Agnes.
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: Beltway on September 11, 2018, 02:30:51 PM
I think he's referring to what you're about to get in 72-96 hours...
The latest track prediction has Richmond at the edge where winds would probably be 20 mph or less.  Obviously the track can change in 4 days.
It's not the wind that's going to be your problem.  The "water wings" comment from previously is very appropriate.

Not yet known whether rainfall will be any serious problem, the track is now bending to the south.  Any James River flooding and severity depends on where the remnants wind up.

I do have a problem with when a "Global Moderator" makes sniping, "joking" remarks about possible severe weather impacting where I live. 

How would he like it if I made "joking" cracks about EF4 and EF5 tornadoes hitting urban areas in Missouri and Oklahoma?  I wouldn't wish that on anybody.
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: CentralPAguy on September 12, 2018, 05:37:28 PM
I just drove across the bridge for the first time today, was pretty impressed with the scale of it. While I don't recall seeing anyone pull over because I was not paying attention to that, I can certainly see how people with a fear of heights, or anxiety might be intimidated by it (particularly the narrower older span, and/or in adverse conditions.)

There are no shoulders on the CBB. Are you talking about the CBBT?

I mean the lead up to the bridge around the toll booths. Someone mentioned a driving service and that is what I was referring to. I have never traversed the CBBT.
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: Beltway on September 12, 2018, 09:20:48 PM
There are no shoulders on the CBB. Are you talking about the CBBT?
I mean the lead up to the bridge around the toll booths. Someone mentioned a driving service and that is what I was referring to. I have never traversed the CBBT.

The US-50/US-301 approach highway is a freeway with full shoulders, including the toll plaza area. 
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: CentralPAguy on September 13, 2018, 06:06:24 PM
There are no shoulders on the CBB. Are you talking about the CBBT?
I mean the lead up to the bridge around the toll booths. Someone mentioned a driving service and that is what I was referring to. I have never traversed the CBBT.

The US-50/US-301 approach highway is a freeway with full shoulders, including the toll plaza area.
again, this is what I'm referring to. I did not see anyone pulled over on the shoulder BEFORE the bridge
Title: Re: US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)
Post by: jeffandnicole on September 13, 2018, 10:28:28 PM
There are no shoulders on the CBB. Are you talking about the CBBT?
I mean the lead up to the bridge around the toll booths. Someone mentioned a driving service and that is what I was referring to. I have never traversed the CBBT.

The US-50/US-301 approach highway is a freeway with full shoulders, including the toll plaza area.
again, this is what I'm referring to. I did not see anyone pulled over on the shoulder BEFORE the bridge

It doesn't happen all that often