AARoads Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

New rules for political content in signatures and user profiles. See this thread for details.

Author Topic: ICC Intercounty Connector  (Read 233924 times)

Henry

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 4819
  • Age: 49
  • Location: Chicago, IL/Seattle, WA
  • Last Login: June 24, 2019, 11:38:30 PM
    • Henry Watson's Online Freeway
Re: ICC Intercounty Connector
« Reply #525 on: November 11, 2014, 12:27:07 PM »

Quote
The Montgomery County planners were (for inexplicable reasons) not willing to go to the mat with regulators from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, who claimed that having a separate bike/pedestrian trail next to the six lanes (plus shoulders) of Md. 200 would somehow damage the cold waters of the Paint Branch of the Anacostia River - a claim that was (and remains) ridiculous on its face.

If that's truly the case, then perhaps the CoE shouldn't have allowed a permit for ANY of the ICC.  To allow a permit for a 6-lane freeway but not for a bike/ped path on the same corridor is pretty ludicrous.

Quote
Theoretically, it could be extended to the B-W Parkway or even US 50 in the east, and VA 28 in the west, because it (along with the Franconia-Springfield Parkway, IIRC) follows the same path that the Washington Outer Beltway would've taken. But the current route is a good start for now.

Besides what SPUI mentioned, neither VA 28 nor the Franconia-Springfield Parkway were ever part of the Outer Beltway proposal.  The Outer Beltway would have crossed I-66 near Stringfellow Rd and I-95 just north of the US 1/Woodbridge interchange.
Guess I was wrong, but I had been under the impression that those were leftovers from the failed Outer Beltway project.
Logged
Go Cubs Go! Go Cubs Go! Hey Chicago, what do you say? The Cubs are gonna win today!

cpzilliacus

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 10222
  • Age: 60
  • Location: Maryland
  • Last Login: May 15, 2019, 09:41:46 PM
Re: ICC Intercounty Connector
« Reply #526 on: November 11, 2014, 12:30:30 PM »

In other words, no. (It wouldn't surprise me if you own Washington Post stock, and that's why you're giving me a runaround.)

I believe Jeff Bezos owns all of the stock in the Washington Post these days.  I don't own any stock in anything, beyond what is in my retirement fund.

If you are too cheap to look in the Post's archives (and it seems you are), then I regard that as a personal problem.
Logged
Opinions expressed here on AAROADS are strictly personal and mine alone, and do not reflect policies or positions of MWCOG, NCRTPB or their member federal, state, county and municipal governments or any other agency.

NE2

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 13807
  • fuck

  • Age: 11
  • Location: central Florida
  • Last Login: June 24, 2019, 09:15:22 PM
Re: ICC Intercounty Connector
« Reply #527 on: November 11, 2014, 12:31:35 PM »

Yes, I'm "too cheap" to fork over money in an internet argument.
Logged
Florida route log | pre-1945
I will do my best to not make America hate again.
Global warming denial is barely worse than white privilege denial.

1995hoo

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 10085
  • Age: 46
  • Location: Fairfax County, Virginia
  • Last Login: June 24, 2019, 10:52:15 PM
Re: ICC Intercounty Connector
« Reply #528 on: November 11, 2014, 01:15:02 PM »

Quote
The Montgomery County planners were (for inexplicable reasons) not willing to go to the mat with regulators from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, who claimed that having a separate bike/pedestrian trail next to the six lanes (plus shoulders) of Md. 200 would somehow damage the cold waters of the Paint Branch of the Anacostia River - a claim that was (and remains) ridiculous on its face.

If that's truly the case, then perhaps the CoE shouldn't have allowed a permit for ANY of the ICC.  To allow a permit for a 6-lane freeway but not for a bike/ped path on the same corridor is pretty ludicrous.

Quote
Theoretically, it could be extended to the B-W Parkway or even US 50 in the east, and VA 28 in the west, because it (along with the Franconia-Springfield Parkway, IIRC) follows the same path that the Washington Outer Beltway would've taken. But the current route is a good start for now.

Besides what SPUI mentioned, neither VA 28 nor the Franconia-Springfield Parkway were ever part of the Outer Beltway proposal.  The Outer Beltway would have crossed I-66 near Stringfellow Rd and I-95 just north of the US 1/Woodbridge interchange.
Guess I was wrong, but I had been under the impression that those were leftovers from the failed Outer Beltway project.

I believe the portion of the Fairfax County Parkway running roughly from the interchange at West Ox Road and Route 29 was constructed along the right-of-way that was at one point discussed for an Outer Beltway, but south of there it would have run further west than the route the parkway eventually took. The parkway superseded old two-lane Pohick Road between Route 123 and where Pohick now splits off to turn towards Lorton.

I believe the Franconia–Springfield Parkway is an evolution of what was planned as the "Northern Virginia Expressway." Its interchange with I-95 (see below) was to be a stack interchange located roughly a mile or so south of where the parkway now crosses the Interstate. (My mental image of this is roughly where the new ramp connecting Heller Road to the HOV flyover ramp is now under construction, though that's probably a little further south than what was planned). The Northern Virginia Expressway wasn't the same thing as the Outer Beltway, though. It would have passed further in than the Outer Beltway in the vicinity of Fairfax City—it would have passed Braddock Road around the current intersection with Guinea Road, cut a bit northwest, then roughly followed Pickett Road and crossed Route 50 just east of Fairfax Circle (roughly where the Circle Towers development has stood since the early 1970s). I find it hard to develop any sort of mental picture of these sorts of highways in that area. My parents have lived near the intersection of Guinea Road and Route 236 since the early 1980s and my brother and I both attended Woodson High, so it's kind of hard for me to visualize the sorts of changes the Northern Virginia Expressway would have worked on that area.




There was also a plan to turn Braddock Road into the "Monticello Freeway" out to the Guinea Road area. Supposedly Fairfax County is again pushing VDOT to upgrade Braddock to expressway-grade (RIRO or grade separation, no left turns) from Burke Station Road to Heming Avenue, with an option for either a busway, HOV lanes, or HO/T lanes.



Edited to add: Here is a summary map I found.

« Last Edit: November 11, 2014, 01:17:17 PM by 1995hoo »
Logged
"You know, you never have a guaranteed spot until you have a spot guaranteed."
—Olaf Kolzig, as quoted in the Washington Times on March 28, 2003,
commenting on the Capitals clinching a playoff spot.

"That sounded stupid, didn't it?"—Kolzig, to the same reporter a few seconds later.

TheOneKEA

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 243
  • Last Login: June 24, 2019, 06:24:38 PM
Re: ICC Intercounty Connector
« Reply #529 on: November 11, 2014, 02:52:56 PM »

Are there any online resources for how the Outer Beltway would have made its southern crossing of the Potomac and run through Charles and PG Counties?
Logged

NE2

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 13807
  • fuck

  • Age: 11
  • Location: central Florida
  • Last Login: June 24, 2019, 09:15:22 PM
Re: ICC Intercounty Connector
« Reply #530 on: November 11, 2014, 03:09:38 PM »

Are there any online resources for how the Outer Beltway would have made its southern crossing of the Potomac and run through Charles and PG Counties?
I saved these a while ago:


Logged
Florida route log | pre-1945
I will do my best to not make America hate again.
Global warming denial is barely worse than white privilege denial.

1995hoo

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 10085
  • Age: 46
  • Location: Fairfax County, Virginia
  • Last Login: June 24, 2019, 10:52:15 PM
Re: ICC Intercounty Connector
« Reply #531 on: November 11, 2014, 03:13:39 PM »

Are there any online resources for how the Outer Beltway would have made its southern crossing of the Potomac and run through Charles and PG Counties?

NE2 posted while I was typing.

I haven't found anything other than a rough map Scott Kozel sketched out (available at http://www.roadstothefuture.com/Outer_Beltway.html ). It seems to me there is more information online about planned roads in Virginia than in Maryland, but that may be a function of my being far more familiar with Virginia and thus having a better sense for what to look for.

I know the public library in Fairfax City has two copies of the Northern Virginia Major Thoroughfare Plan. I keep meaning to go out there one day when I don't have anything urgent to do and take a look at it. Perhaps I can scan some maps using my iPad; if so, I'll convert them to images so I can upload them here.
Logged
"You know, you never have a guaranteed spot until you have a spot guaranteed."
—Olaf Kolzig, as quoted in the Washington Times on March 28, 2003,
commenting on the Capitals clinching a playoff spot.

"That sounded stupid, didn't it?"—Kolzig, to the same reporter a few seconds later.

cpzilliacus

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 10222
  • Age: 60
  • Location: Maryland
  • Last Login: May 15, 2019, 09:41:46 PM
Re: ICC Intercounty Connector
« Reply #532 on: November 12, 2014, 02:47:25 AM »

I haven't found anything other than a rough map Scott Kozel sketched out (available at http://www.roadstothefuture.com/Outer_Beltway.html ). It seems to me there is more information online about planned roads in Virginia than in Maryland, but that may be a function of my being far more familiar with Virginia and thus having a better sense for what to look for.

Scott's map is consistent with what I recall for the crossing of the Potomac River south of the Wilson Bridge (the path was published on the Alexandria Drafting Company atlases for many years) - it would have crossed from the Mason Neck area of Fairfax County into Charles County north of Naval Support Facility Indian Head, then quickly into far southern Prince George's County, curving north to Upper Marlboro and ultimately becoming part of the proposed A-44 highway (as the ICC was designated on planning maps in Prince George's County).
Logged
Opinions expressed here on AAROADS are strictly personal and mine alone, and do not reflect policies or positions of MWCOG, NCRTPB or their member federal, state, county and municipal governments or any other agency.

1995hoo

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 10085
  • Age: 46
  • Location: Fairfax County, Virginia
  • Last Login: June 24, 2019, 10:52:15 PM
Re: ICC Intercounty Connector
« Reply #533 on: November 12, 2014, 03:36:43 PM »

I was out in Fairfax today, so I shuffled my schedule around to allow for a stop at the library to look at the books. Didn't have time to do much reading, and even if I'd had more time I would have skipped over large sections containing financial estimates and the like. But I scanned a bunch of maps to .PDF using my iPad. I'll try to upload some images once I convert them to another format.

cpzilliacus's description of where the Outer Beltway would have crossed the Potomac is spot-on, though. See Google Maps link below. On that map, notice where the word "Maryland" appears just beyond the end of Mount Venon Boulevard. The highway would have crossed roughly where that "M" appears.

http://goo.gl/maps/7pE1w

It would have crossed I-95 a short distance north of the present Exit 161.

Lots of interesting maps. One of them indicates that if it all had been built, I wouldn't be living where I do now because a freeway-grade Van Dorn Street would have been built less than a quarter-mile east of where our house now sits.
Logged
"You know, you never have a guaranteed spot until you have a spot guaranteed."
—Olaf Kolzig, as quoted in the Washington Times on March 28, 2003,
commenting on the Capitals clinching a playoff spot.

"That sounded stupid, didn't it?"—Kolzig, to the same reporter a few seconds later.

1995hoo

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 10085
  • Age: 46
  • Location: Fairfax County, Virginia
  • Last Login: June 24, 2019, 10:52:15 PM
Re: ICC Intercounty Connector
« Reply #534 on: November 12, 2014, 04:16:59 PM »

Following up on my previous post, here are some maps. The book didn't have anything for Maryland, of course. I do find it interesting where the Outer Beltway is shown crossing the Potomac in the north. Either of the proposed locations would connect nicely with an extension of what is now the Fairfax County Parkway. I've long thought connecting the Parkway across the river to Maryland, perhaps to the ICC, would be a more effective option than extending Route 28 north across the river (setting aside the issue of ramming such a road through residential areas and then through either parkland or Donald Trump's golf course). The Parkway, while not freeway-grade, offers more connections more useful to people driving from one part of the DC area to another than Route 28 does. Using the more easterly alignment shown on the map below would avoid the worst impact to parkland or Trump National, though it couldn't be angled too far east lest it impact Great Falls.

The description of the Outer Beltway reads as follows:

Quote
Like several of the other proposed facilities, a previous consideration had been given to another beltway for the metropolitan Washington area. The need for such a beltway in Virginia near the outer boundaries of Fairfax County was confirmed in this study. The Outer Beltway proposed in Virginia is a four-lane, controlled access facility throughout. Interchanges are provided at intersections with major roads except for Route 29-211. There are sufficient alternate means of access to the Outer Beltway in this vicinity to preclude the necessity of an interchange at Route 29-211. A Potomac River crossing on the east in the vicinity of Masons [sic] Neck is contemplated. The Potomac River crossing and its approach in Virginia on the north is to be the subject of further study by the Virginia Department of Highways which prepared the functional plans for the Outer Beltway.

Overview map of Fairfax County with my highlighting added (the dashed area is where the VDH was to perform further study). The Northern Virginia Expressway could not be built today on this alignment because it would run through Huntley Meadows Park, an environmentally-sensitive area. Back in the late 1960s that land still belonged to the US government.




Map showing the southern end of the Virginia portion of the Outer Beltway:




Finally, just because I was so surprised to see it, unrelated to the Outer Beltway was this map of a portion of the Potomac Freeway that would have done a number on the western end of Old Town Alexandria between where the King Street Metro and Joe Theismann's Restaurant are today:




The Potomac Freeway apparently would have connected to another Potomac crossing located just south of the Wilson Bridge and connecting to an extension of I-295 roughly where the Gaylord Hotel is in Maryland today. THAT would have resulted in massively different traffic patterns on a part of the Beltway so many of us grew up despising!

I made some other scans but don't have time to rotate and upload them all just now. One thing I found interesting was that the Outer Beltway was to have a full cloverleaf interchange with the Dulles Access Road. Remember this was long before the Dulles Toll Road was planned. Back then the Access Road did not allow for westbound exits or eastbound entrances (I suppose that's still true, as any such exits/entrances are on the Toll Road except for those two bus-only ramps).
« Last Edit: November 12, 2014, 04:30:45 PM by 1995hoo »
Logged
"You know, you never have a guaranteed spot until you have a spot guaranteed."
—Olaf Kolzig, as quoted in the Washington Times on March 28, 2003,
commenting on the Capitals clinching a playoff spot.

"That sounded stupid, didn't it?"—Kolzig, to the same reporter a few seconds later.

cpzilliacus

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 10222
  • Age: 60
  • Location: Maryland
  • Last Login: May 15, 2019, 09:41:46 PM
Re: ICC Intercounty Connector
« Reply #535 on: November 28, 2014, 12:54:35 AM »

Washington Post: Low traffic on ICC prompts calls for lower tolls to ease congestion on local roads

Quote
Welmoed Sisson’s drive between her northern Montgomery County home and her business clients across the Maryland suburbs often includes a trip on the Intercounty Connector, a toll highway with so little traffic that Sisson can’t recall ever tapping her brakes.

Quote
Almost 19 miles of pavement with no one in her way. Ever. Not even at rush hour.

Quote
“It’s not an empty wasteland,” said Sisson, 54, who owns a home inspection business with her husband. “But it’s certainly nowhere near the volume of the free roads in the area. . . . It’s nice, but then again, you’re paying for that quiet.”

Quote
Sisson said the 20 minutes or more she can save and the stress-free drive are worth the $50 in ICC tolls her company typically pays every month. But the amount of open asphalt that remains on the ICC nearly four years after it first opened is prompting some to urge Maryland Gov.-elect Larry Hogan (R) to cut toll rates, particularly for regular commuters.
Logged
Opinions expressed here on AAROADS are strictly personal and mine alone, and do not reflect policies or positions of MWCOG, NCRTPB or their member federal, state, county and municipal governments or any other agency.

cpzilliacus

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 10222
  • Age: 60
  • Location: Maryland
  • Last Login: May 15, 2019, 09:41:46 PM
Re: ICC Intercounty Connector
« Reply #536 on: December 05, 2014, 08:11:58 PM »

The Montgomery County Sentinel: ICC numbers either on target or not depending on who looks at the numbers


Quote
ROCKVILLE – The ICC’s numbers are on target – depending on who you ask. Officials from the Maryland Department of Transit [sic] (MDTA)  said traffic and revenue numbers during fiscal 2014 were on par with projected numbers but community activists said the current numbers are lower than the original projections from the MDTA because the numbers were changed multiple times during the last 10 years.

Quote
According to the final numbers for fiscal 2014, in combination with toll plazas on I-95, the ICC collected $174.5 million in tolls and 45,000 and 50,000 daily users rode the 18-mile highway connecting Route 1 in Prince George’s County and I-270 in Montgomery County.  Annual ongoing operating costs for the highway are nearly $80 million.

Quote
“We’re feeling pretty good about where we stand. We are on point with traffic and revenue projections and there is steady growth in traffic on the ICC. We think that users are beginning to recognize its time-saving value,” said John Sales, spokesman for the MDTA.

Quote
During the gubernatorial campaign, both Governor-elect Larry Hogan and Lt. Gov. Anthony Brown told voters they would consider lowering tolls on the highway, which vary depending on the time of travel. A trip from Route 29 in Burtonsville to I-370 in Gaithersburg during rush hour is $3.20. Hogan has declined to discuss any policy issues until he takes office in January 2015.
Logged
Opinions expressed here on AAROADS are strictly personal and mine alone, and do not reflect policies or positions of MWCOG, NCRTPB or their member federal, state, county and municipal governments or any other agency.

Duke87

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 5203
  • Age: 31
  • Location: Queens, NY
  • Last Login: June 23, 2019, 10:59:25 PM
Re: ICC Intercounty Connector
« Reply #537 on: December 06, 2014, 03:01:58 PM »

I do wonder what the traffic counts would be on the road if there were no toll. It seems that there being a toll at all discourages people from using it instead of the roads they've been used to taking for years. The tolls aren't really even that high, it's more a psychological barrier of "there's a toll, I have to pay more".

Lowering the tolls might encourage some more people to get on the road but I doubt it would have much of an impact since this presumes your average person is financially literate and shops rationally instead of emotionally, and we all know that's not true. Maybe if they advertize hard "REDUCED TOLLS!!" then people will go to it because putting something "on sale" makes it instantly more attractive regardless of absolute price.

Still, I think that even if MdTA does nothing, over the years traffic counts will gradually rise as the population turns over. I suspect you will find that people who moved into the area after the ICC opened may be more likely to use it than people who were living there beforehand. As more and more of the local population becomes part of the former category, traffic counts will go up.

Logged
If you always take the same road, you will never see anything new.

cpzilliacus

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 10222
  • Age: 60
  • Location: Maryland
  • Last Login: May 15, 2019, 09:41:46 PM
Re: ICC Intercounty Connector
« Reply #538 on: December 06, 2014, 06:44:10 PM »

I do wonder what the traffic counts would be on the road if there were no toll. It seems that there being a toll at all discourages people from using it instead of the roads they've been used to taking for years. The tolls aren't really even that high, it's more a psychological barrier of "there's a toll, I have to pay more".

It was free for the first week or two when the Contract A section opened (February 2011), and then again when the Contract B and C sections (November 2011).  Clearly the volumes were higher (especially) when the A, B and C section was "free"  in November 2011.

Lowering the tolls might encourage some more people to get on the road but I doubt it would have much of an impact since this presumes your average person is financially literate and shops rationally instead of emotionally, and we all know that's not true. Maybe if they advertize hard "REDUCED TOLLS!!" then people will go to it because putting something "on sale" makes it instantly more attractive regardless of absolute price.

Many people do not want to pay for something they can get which is "free," even though they wear the car more and probably burn more fuel on the congested or severely congested arterial alternatives.

Still, I think that even if MdTA does nothing, over the years traffic counts will gradually rise as the population turns over. I suspect you will find that people who moved into the area after the ICC opened may be more likely to use it than people who were living there beforehand. As more and more of the local population becomes part of the former category, traffic counts will go up.

I agree.  Had the road been built as originally planned from U.S. 50 in the east to either Va. 28 or Va. 286 in the west, then there would be tremendously more traffic on the road, without (as was planned in the 1960's and 1970's)  or with tolling (which would keep the road reasonably free-flow).
Logged
Opinions expressed here on AAROADS are strictly personal and mine alone, and do not reflect policies or positions of MWCOG, NCRTPB or their member federal, state, county and municipal governments or any other agency.

cpzilliacus

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 10222
  • Age: 60
  • Location: Maryland
  • Last Login: May 15, 2019, 09:41:46 PM
Re: ICC Intercounty Connector
« Reply #539 on: January 08, 2015, 11:57:12 PM »

GreaterGreaterWashington: The Intercounty Connector's traffic is light so far, but the road's future is still unclear

Quote
Planners routinely overestimate how much traffic will grow in the future in order to justify new highways. Usage of the Intercounty Connector is still growing but it looks like the ICC, too, will get less use than planners thought.

Quote
At first glance, traffic on the ICC seems sparse, and as many journalists report, drivers are taking far fewer trips on the road than predicted. But the trips are longer—about 9½ miles on average, compared to the 6½ miles forecasters expected. Also, the road's initial "ramping up" phase, which is when traffic grows rapidly as drivers learn about a new highway, has not yet ended.
Logged
Opinions expressed here on AAROADS are strictly personal and mine alone, and do not reflect policies or positions of MWCOG, NCRTPB or their member federal, state, county and municipal governments or any other agency.

lepidopteran

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 497
  • Location: Baltimore/DC area
  • Last Login: June 24, 2019, 05:24:20 PM
Re: ICC Intercounty Connector
« Reply #540 on: February 12, 2015, 04:22:17 PM »

A sign at the ICC/I-95 interchange has been modified.

On the EB ICC is a loop ramp leading to the I-95 NB C/D road.  Originally, on the BGS before that ramp, there was only a forlorn MD-198 shield present.  The sign has since added a "TO" before the shield, and control cities Laurel and Burtonsville are now listed.

Though when you think about it, having Burtonsville as a control city there seems a bit silly.  For if you were heading EB on the ICC to begin with, you could have gotten off at US-29 NB to get to Burtonsville and saved time, gas, and ~50¢ in tolls.  Sure, it's MUTCD protocol, but there's probably a thread somewhere that lists locations with dubious control cities.
Logged

mrsman

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2216
  • Age: 43
  • Location: Silver Spring, MD
  • Last Login: June 24, 2019, 11:13:44 PM
Re: ICC Intercounty Connector
« Reply #541 on: February 12, 2015, 09:08:16 PM »

IMO, the whole ICC should have control cities like a normal freeway instead of the signs to I-270 and to I-95. 

Westbound, Gaithersburg should be the control over I-370/MD 200 until the Frederick Rd exit and then the control can read Sam Eig Highway to Great Seneca Highway.

Eastbound, Laurel should be the control all the way to I-95 and this transition ramp.  East of I-95, the sign can read MD 200 to US 1.
Logged

Henry

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 4819
  • Age: 49
  • Location: Chicago, IL/Seattle, WA
  • Last Login: June 24, 2019, 11:38:30 PM
    • Henry Watson's Online Freeway
Re: ICC Intercounty Connector
« Reply #542 on: February 13, 2015, 01:44:21 PM »

IMO, the whole ICC should have control cities like a normal freeway instead of the signs to I-270 and to I-95. 

Westbound, Gaithersburg should be the control over I-370/MD 200 until the Frederick Rd exit and then the control can read Sam Eig Highway to Great Seneca Highway.

Eastbound, Laurel should be the control all the way to I-95 and this transition ramp.  East of I-95, the sign can read MD 200 to US 1.
Agreed on all counts.
Logged
Go Cubs Go! Go Cubs Go! Hey Chicago, what do you say? The Cubs are gonna win today!

cpzilliacus

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 10222
  • Age: 60
  • Location: Maryland
  • Last Login: May 15, 2019, 09:41:46 PM
Re: ICC Intercounty Connector
« Reply #543 on: February 13, 2015, 03:23:02 PM »

IMO, the whole ICC should have control cities like a normal freeway instead of the signs to I-270 and to I-95. 

Westbound, Gaithersburg should be the control over I-370/MD 200 until the Frederick Rd exit and then the control can read Sam Eig Highway to Great Seneca Highway.

Eastbound, Laurel should be the control all the way to I-95 and this transition ramp.  East of I-95, the sign can read MD 200 to US 1.

I would like westbound to read Gaithersburg and Rockville, at least as far as Md. 97 (Georgia Avenue).  West of Md. 97, just Gaithersburg (though there are no interchanges (now) between Md. 97 and the western terminus of the toll road at "secret" Md. 200A).

Eastbound, my preferences would be Laurel and Beltsville, and ideally Silver Spring as far east as U.S. 29 (Columbia Pike).
Logged
Opinions expressed here on AAROADS are strictly personal and mine alone, and do not reflect policies or positions of MWCOG, NCRTPB or their member federal, state, county and municipal governments or any other agency.

mrsman

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2216
  • Age: 43
  • Location: Silver Spring, MD
  • Last Login: June 24, 2019, 11:13:44 PM
Re: ICC Intercounty Connector
« Reply #544 on: February 13, 2015, 03:37:52 PM »

IMO, the whole ICC should have control cities like a normal freeway instead of the signs to I-270 and to I-95. 

Westbound, Gaithersburg should be the control over I-370/MD 200 until the Frederick Rd exit and then the control can read Sam Eig Highway to Great Seneca Highway.

Eastbound, Laurel should be the control all the way to I-95 and this transition ramp.  East of I-95, the sign can read MD 200 to US 1.

I would like westbound to read Gaithersburg and Rockville, at least as far as Md. 97 (Georgia Avenue).  West of Md. 97, just Gaithersburg (though there are no interchanges (now) between Md. 97 and the western terminus of the toll road at "secret" Md. 200A).

Eastbound, my preferences would be Laurel and Beltsville, and ideally Silver Spring as far east as U.S. 29 (Columbia Pike).

Rockville / Gaithersburg combined westbound would be OK, since the ICC does hang around the border (Shady Grove Road).  Plus, the end of the freeway leads directly to many of the Biotech jobs in Rockville near Darnestown Road.

Silver Spring??? The ICC isn't that close to the heart of Silver Spring (Georgia/Colesville) and even though the neighborhoods of Colesville and Burtonsville may have Silver Spring PO boxes, it isn't the real Silver Spring. 

Would Silver Spring be the control city from the Georgia Ave entrance as well?  It's clearly more direct to just head straight south at that point.

Logged

cpzilliacus

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 10222
  • Age: 60
  • Location: Maryland
  • Last Login: May 15, 2019, 09:41:46 PM
Re: ICC Intercounty Connector
« Reply #545 on: February 13, 2015, 04:19:20 PM »

IMO, the whole ICC should have control cities like a normal freeway instead of the signs to I-270 and to I-95. 

Westbound, Gaithersburg should be the control over I-370/MD 200 until the Frederick Rd exit and then the control can read Sam Eig Highway to Great Seneca Highway.

Eastbound, Laurel should be the control all the way to I-95 and this transition ramp.  East of I-95, the sign can read MD 200 to US 1.

I would like westbound to read Gaithersburg and Rockville, at least as far as Md. 97 (Georgia Avenue).  West of Md. 97, just Gaithersburg (though there are no interchanges (now) between Md. 97 and the western terminus of the toll road at "secret" Md. 200A).

Eastbound, my preferences would be Laurel and Beltsville, and ideally Silver Spring as far east as U.S. 29 (Columbia Pike).

Rockville / Gaithersburg combined westbound would be OK, since the ICC does hang around the border (Shady Grove Road).  Plus, the end of the freeway leads directly to many of the Biotech jobs in Rockville near Darnestown Road.

Silver Spring??? The ICC isn't that close to the heart of Silver Spring (Georgia/Colesville) and even though the neighborhoods of Colesville and Burtonsville may have Silver Spring PO boxes, it isn't the real Silver Spring.

Yes, Silver Spring.  The areas off of the interchanges at Md. 650 (Exit 13, New Hampshire Avenue); U.S. 29 (Exit 16, Columbia Pike); and Briggs Chaney Road (Exit 17) are all Silver Spring Zip Codes, mostly 20904, which is the "Colesville" Zip Code, which is Silver Spring every much as 20901 (Woodmoor) and 20903 (Hillandale) are Silver Spring. The numerous auto dealerships in the Montgomery Auto Sales Park usually describe their businesses as being in Silver Spring, which they are. Fairland could also be used at U.S. 29, but that is a master plan area designated by M-NCP&PC, and not widely known.

Would Silver Spring be the control city from the Georgia Ave entrance as well?  It's clearly more direct to just head straight south at that point.

I might use Aspen Hill or Wheaton, though much of those places can also be considered Silver Spring.
Logged
Opinions expressed here on AAROADS are strictly personal and mine alone, and do not reflect policies or positions of MWCOG, NCRTPB or their member federal, state, county and municipal governments or any other agency.

cpzilliacus

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 10222
  • Age: 60
  • Location: Maryland
  • Last Login: May 15, 2019, 09:41:46 PM
Re: ICC Intercounty Connector
« Reply #546 on: March 03, 2015, 04:50:34 PM »

WTOP Radio: Shooting reported on the ICC Tuesday afternoon

Washington Post: 2 traveling on Intercounty Connector report being shot at in their car

Baltimore Sun: Authorities investigate if one gunman is behind shootings

Quote
Authorities say a string of recent shooting incidents in public spaces — the latest involving shots fired at the National Security Agency in Fort Meade — may be connected to the same gunman, according to law enforcement sources briefed on the investigation.

Quote
The sources said investigators are looking into whether one gunman is tied to five incidents in Anne Arundel, Prince George's and Howard counties, including four in the past two days. At least two people were hurt in one of the incidents with non-life-threatening injuries.

Quote
"They're looking into whether these are linked together," said Lt. Kevin Ayd, a spokesman for the Maryland Transportation Authority Police, which investigated a shooting on the Intercounty Connector in Laurel on Tuesday.

Washington Post: Five shootings in public places in Maryland said to be linked; 35-year-old charged

Quote
The handgun was a ­.380-caliber semiautomatic. The vehicle was a 1999 Lincoln. The alleged shooter, suspected of firing indiscriminately at people and buildings as he roamed by car through a swath of suburban Maryland in the past week, was a 35-year-old former prison guard named Hong Young, now in police custody.

Quote
Still to be answered: Why?

Quote
“We have not gotten into the mind of the suspect,” Anne Arundel County police spokesman T.J. Smith said in announcing Young’s arrest Wednesday. Young is charged with shooting at a motorist Feb. 24 from the driver’s seat of his Lincoln Town Car and is suspected of opening fire Tuesday on two men in a tree-service truck, police said.

Quote
They said he also is suspected of firing shots into a Wal-Mart store and an AMC movie theater in the wee hours of Monday, when both businesses were closed, and shooting at a National Security Agency building Tuesday evening.
« Last Edit: March 04, 2015, 10:11:50 PM by cpzilliacus »
Logged
Opinions expressed here on AAROADS are strictly personal and mine alone, and do not reflect policies or positions of MWCOG, NCRTPB or their member federal, state, county and municipal governments or any other agency.

BrianP

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 403
  • Location: Maryland
  • Last Login: June 21, 2019, 05:26:18 PM
Re: ICC Intercounty Connector
« Reply #547 on: May 14, 2015, 11:29:40 AM »

Crash first fatality on ICC since November 2011 opening
Quote
A Montgomery County dump truck skidded across the eastbound lanes for unknown reasons before overturning on the median strip. The truck was hauling gravel which spilled across the westbound lanes of the highway following the crash.
Quote
Another vehicle, a 2004 Nissan Altima, was also involved in the incident. MDTA police spokesman 1st Sgt. Jonathan Green says the driver of the Nissan was transported to MedStar Montgomery Medical Center and suffered non-life-threatening injuries.
Logged

cpzilliacus

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 10222
  • Age: 60
  • Location: Maryland
  • Last Login: May 15, 2019, 09:41:46 PM
Re: ICC Intercounty Connector
« Reply #548 on: May 15, 2015, 02:59:48 PM »

Gazette.net opinion: For a busier ICC

Quote
Gov. Larry Hogan is continuing to follow through on his campaign platform by authorizing cuts to Maryland’s road and bridge tolls.

Quote
In Montgomery County, that means the Intercounty Connector will cost less, starting July 1. For example, a peak-time trip the full length of the road, from Interstate 370 in Gaithersburg to U.S. 1 in Laurel, will drop from $4.40 to $3.86 for a two-axle vehicle using E-ZPass.

Quote
Drivers also will see lower tolls at the Bay Bridge, the Fort McHenry Tunnel and elsewhere.

Quote
In addition, the state is eliminating the $1.50 monthly E-ZPass account fee.

Quote
Hogan pledged to stem a tide of tax increases if he were elected. Tolls aren’t the same, as they’re user fees, but they also eat into a household budget.

Quote
The first question when revenue is lowered is how the money will be replaced or what spending will be cut as a result.

Quote
On that question, the Maryland Transportation Authority is vague: “The $54 million annual toll reduction is made possible by efficiencies in MDTA’s capital and operating budgets that will allow the agency to meet its financial responsibilities and implement the governor’s toll rollback.”
Logged
Opinions expressed here on AAROADS are strictly personal and mine alone, and do not reflect policies or positions of MWCOG, NCRTPB or their member federal, state, county and municipal governments or any other agency.

cpzilliacus

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 10222
  • Age: 60
  • Location: Maryland
  • Last Login: May 15, 2019, 09:41:46 PM
Re: ICC Intercounty Connector
« Reply #549 on: October 18, 2015, 04:18:52 PM »

Washington Post: Traffic on Intercounty Connector is growing faster than on other Md. tollways

Quote
Traffic on the four-year-old Intercounty Connector toll road in the Maryland suburbs jumped by 18 percent in the last fiscal year, putting its growth rate at more than double that of the state’s other tollways, according to a financial report released Wednesday.

Quote
Motorists took 24.1 million trips on the ICC in the fiscal year that ended June 30, up 3.6 million trips from the previous fiscal year, according to the Maryland Transportation Authority’s year-end financial statement. The six-lane highway connects the Interstate 270 corridor in Montgomery County with the Interstate 95 corridor in Prince George’s County, outside the Capital Beltway.

Quote
The 18 percent growth in fiscal 2015 compares with 19 percent growth in the previous fiscal year. Traffic on all Maryland toll bridges, tunnels and roads grew by 8 percent in fiscal 2015. The ICC brought in $56 million in toll revenue, up nearly $8 million from the previous fiscal year.

Quote
Motorists still remark on the relatively open feel of the ICC, which was hotly debated for decades because of its $2.5 billion construction cost and its environmental and community effects as it sliced through woods and neighborhoods.
Logged
Opinions expressed here on AAROADS are strictly personal and mine alone, and do not reflect policies or positions of MWCOG, NCRTPB or their member federal, state, county and municipal governments or any other agency.

 


Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.