Maryland

[cpzilliacus]

MD 355 (URBANA PIKE) BRIDGE OVER THE MONOCACY RIVER IS CLOSED AFTER BEING STRUCK
http://www.marylandroads.com/pages/release.aspx?newsId=3041

Check out the photo.  That one got serious damage. 

Sure did.  I have heard the bridge may be closed for up to 60 days to repair the damaged structural steel.

[cpzilliacus]

Baltimore Sun: Gov. Larry Hogan proposes $461 million to ease congestion on Baltimore Beltway

Gov. Larry Hogan announced Tuesday that the state will spend $461 million to ease congestion on the northern rim of the Baltimore Beltway.

The plan would convert 19 miles of the interior shoulders in both directions on Interstate 695 into new travel lanes between I-70 and Parkville, a move state officials said would cut about 15 minutes off rush hour delays that can stretch an hour or more.

[MASTERNC]

Baltimore Sun: Gov. Larry Hogan proposes $461 million to ease congestion on Baltimore Beltway

Gov. Larry Hogan announced Tuesday that the state will spend $461 million to ease congestion on the northern rim of the Baltimore Beltway.

The plan would convert 19 miles of the interior shoulders in both directions on Interstate 695 into new travel lanes between I-70 and Parkville, a move state officials said would cut about 15 minutes off rush hour delays that can stretch an hour or more.

The I-70 interchange redo is probably the highlight here.  I also don't mind the ETLs going up to Bel Air, since I normally exit at White Marsh Blvd and can't use the ETLs right now for access.  What they really need to do, however, is finish the Beltway interchange to allow access to/from the ETLs now that they will carry more traffic.

Of course, this means more speed cameras in the coming years and more cash for the state from them.

[ixnay]

Traffic patterns will soon change on MD 213 through Centreville due to long term infrastructure work...

http://www.townofcentreville.org/liberty-street-commerce-street-construction-project/

ixnay

[Jmiles32]

Baltimore Sun: Gov. Larry Hogan proposes $461 million to ease congestion on Baltimore Beltway

Gov. Larry Hogan announced Tuesday that the state will spend $461 million to ease congestion on the northern rim of the Baltimore Beltway.

The plan would convert 19 miles of the interior shoulders in both directions on Interstate 695 into new travel lanes between I-70 and Parkville, a move state officials said would cut about 15 minutes off rush hour delays that can stretch an hour or more.

The I-70 interchange redo is probably the highlight here.  I also don't mind the ETLs going up to Bel Air, since I normally exit at White Marsh Blvd and can't use the ETLs right now for access.  What they really need to do, however, is finish the Beltway interchange to allow access to/from the ETLs now that they will carry more traffic.

Of course, this means more speed cameras in the coming years and more cash for the state from them.

Based on my experience driving through the Baltimore area, both the new travel lanes on the northern part of I-695 and the I-70/I-695 interchange rebuild will be extremely helpful. The I-95 express lanes extension? Not really warranted IMO and constructing a direct connection to I-695 probably would have been more helpful, but overall I don't mind the extension since the cost is only $210 million. However, that does bring me to some questions I have:
1. Is the ETL extension only for the northbound express lanes or for both directions? $210 million doesn't seem like enough to extend both directions of the ETLs for 7.75 miles.
2. Has a design been released yet for the I-695/I-70 interchange rebuild? It seems to be touted as a complete overall, but $100 million doesn't seem to be quite enough to effectively do that.
3. Will the inner shoulders on I-695 be replaced after they become travel lanes, or will I-695 just not have inside shoulders anymore?

[cpzilliacus]

Baltimore Sun: Gov. Larry Hogan proposes $461 million to ease congestion on Baltimore Beltway

Gov. Larry Hogan announced Tuesday that the state will spend $461 million to ease congestion on the northern rim of the Baltimore Beltway.

The plan would convert 19 miles of the interior shoulders in both directions on Interstate 695 into new travel lanes between I-70 and Parkville, a move state officials said would cut about 15 minutes off rush hour delays that can stretch an hour or more.

The I-70 interchange redo is probably the highlight here.  I also don't mind the ETLs going up to Bel Air, since I normally exit at White Marsh Blvd and can't use the ETLs right now for access.  What they really need to do, however, is finish the Beltway interchange to allow access to/from the ETLs now that they will carry more traffic.

Of course, this means more speed cameras in the coming years and more cash for the state from them.

Based on my experience driving through the Baltimore area, both the new travel lanes on the northern part of I-695 and the I-70/I-695 interchange rebuild will be extremely helpful. The I-95 express lanes extension? Not really warranted IMO and constructing a direct connection to I-695 probably would have been more helpful, but overall I don't mind the extension since the cost is only $210 million. However, that does bring me to some questions I have:
1. Is the ETL extension only for the northbound express lanes or for both directions? $210 million doesn't seem like enough to extend both directions of the ETLs for 7.75 miles.

No, I think the intent is for MDTA to build four managed lanes (2 each  way). Keep in mind that several (but not all) of the bridges have already been rebuilt to allow for the Express Toll Lanes.  The bridge that carries Raphael Road over I-95 should not need any added work, but the structure that carries Bradshaw Road will probably need replacement.

2. Has a design been released yet for the I-695/I-70 interchange rebuild? It seems to be touted as a complete overall, but $100 million doesn't seem to be quite enough to effectively do that.

I think they are working on preliminary  engineering now.  There is information in the draft 2018 MDOT CTP for Baltimore County that describes what they are planning there.  Here's a sample:

The bridges are nearing the end of their useful life and will need to be widened to
accommodate the ultimate configuration of the beltway.

3. Will the inner shoulders on I-695 be replaced after they become travel lanes, or will I-695 just not have inside shoulders anymore?

There are many sections of freeway in Maryland that do not have left shoulders, including parts of I-495 in Montgomery County and much of I-895 in Baltimore City.

[Jmiles32]

Baltimore Sun: Gov. Larry Hogan proposes $461 million to ease congestion on Baltimore Beltway

Gov. Larry Hogan announced Tuesday that the state will spend $461 million to ease congestion on the northern rim of the Baltimore Beltway.

The plan would convert 19 miles of the interior shoulders in both directions on Interstate 695 into new travel lanes between I-70 and Parkville, a move state officials said would cut about 15 minutes off rush hour delays that can stretch an hour or more.

The I-70 interchange redo is probably the highlight here.  I also don't mind the ETLs going up to Bel Air, since I normally exit at White Marsh Blvd and can't use the ETLs right now for access.  What they really need to do, however, is finish the Beltway interchange to allow access to/from the ETLs now that they will carry more traffic.

Of course, this means more speed cameras in the coming years and more cash for the state from them.

Based on my experience driving through the Baltimore area, both the new travel lanes on the northern part of I-695 and the I-70/I-695 interchange rebuild will be extremely helpful. The I-95 express lanes extension? Not really warranted IMO and constructing a direct connection to I-695 probably would have been more helpful, but overall I don't mind the extension since the cost is only $210 million. However, that does bring me to some questions I have:
1. Is the ETL extension only for the northbound express lanes or for both directions? $210 million doesn't seem like enough to extend both directions of the ETLs for 7.75 miles.

No, I think the intent is for MDTA to build four managed lanes (2 each  way). Keep in mind that several (but not all) of the bridges have already been rebuilt to allow for the Express Toll Lanes.  The bridge that carries Raphael Road over I-95 should not need any added work, but the structure that carries Bradshaw Road will probably need replacement.

Even considering the fact that a decent amount of the bridges from White Marsh to Bel-Air are wide enough for two extra lanes each way, I still don't see how $210 million is enough for almost eight miles. For comparison, the original construction of the ETLs cost about 1.1 billion for 5 miles(however the reconstruction of the I-895, I-695, and MD-43 interchange definitely contributed to this). Wouldn't be surprised if this project goes over budget.

[cpzilliacus]

Even considering the fact that a decent amount of the bridges from White Marsh to Bel-Air are wide enough for two extra lanes each way, I still don't see how $210 million is enough for almost eight miles. For comparison, the original construction of the ETLs cost about 1.1 billion for 5 miles(however the reconstruction of the I-895, I-695, and MD-43 interchange definitely contributed to this). Wouldn't be surprised if this project goes over budget.

I cannot predict the future and I will not do so here. 

De-braiding the interchange at I-95 and I-695 and converting it to a modern stack interchange so the ETLs could be built was not cheap nor easy.  There is no similar obstruction in the way of the ETLs from MD-43 to MD-24.

However, consider that the biggest (in terms of dollars) project that has ever been built for the MDTA is MD-200, and that project came in under budget when everything was finished.

[Jmiles32]

Even considering the fact that a decent amount of the bridges from White Marsh to Bel-Air are wide enough for two extra lanes each way, I still don't see how $210 million is enough for almost eight miles. For comparison, the original construction of the ETLs cost about 1.1 billion for 5 miles(however the reconstruction of the I-895, I-695, and MD-43 interchange definitely contributed to this). Wouldn't be surprised if this project goes over budget.

I cannot predict the future and I will not do so here. 

De-braiding the interchange at I-95 and I-695 and converting it to a modern stack interchange so the ETLs could be built was not cheap nor easy.  There is no similar obstruction in the way of the ETLs from MD-43 to MD-24.

However, consider that the biggest (in terms of dollars) project that has ever been built for the MDTA is MD-200, and that project came in under budget when everything was finished.

^Good point. Either way, it will be interesting to see how much more traffic the ETLs carry once the extension is completed and whether or not it warrants a direct I-695 connection or a possible phase 3 extension even further north.

[TheOneKEA]

I am firmly of the opinion that the ETL extension to MD 24 will drastically increase the traffic that those lanes carry; in my opinion, the existing lanes are too short to be useful as anything more than a bypass of the congestion at the Beltway. Extending the lanes up to MD 24 will significantly improve the traffic conditions going north at Exit 77, and it will allow the interchange to be comprehensively redesigned and made more regular. Extending the ETLs up to MD 543 would be even better, since the six lane segment of I-95 north of MD 24 also backs up regularly.

As for the I-70/I-695 interchange, anything will be better than what exists now. I will be slightly disappointed though if the interchange design doesn't have passive provision for any future extension of I-70 further into Baltimore.

[Beltway]

As for the I-70/I-695 interchange, anything will be better than what exists now. I will be slightly disappointed though if the interchange design doesn't have passive provision for any future extension of I-70 further into Baltimore.

Are they considering a conventional 3-way semi-directional interchange like is seen with I-695 and I-795?

By the way, I see that I-695's widening in that area provided four lanes each way thruout, but the outer lane each way drops at the offramp to I-795, and then resumes after the onramp from I-795.  Just now verified on Google Maps aerial view.

[cpzilliacus]

Disruptive project coming to the Baltimore Beltway between the MD-10 interchange and the  F.S. Key Bridge at the Curtis Creek Drawbridge - One Lane Open Each Direction 24/7 Jan. to Nov. 2018.

This section of freeway is signed as I-695 but is still officially MD-695.   

MDTA press release: MAJOR SYSTEM PRESERVATION PROJECTS COMING TO I-695 & I-895 IN BALTIMORE

Curtis Creek Drawbridge - One Lane Open Each Direction 24/7 Jan. to Nov. 2018

The $20 million project to rehabilitate the structural, mechanical and electrical components of the Curtis Creek Drawbridge begins this month, with traffic impacts to I-695 starting in January 2018. Two-way traffic will operate 24/7 on this section of I-695. The MDTA will close the Inner Loop I-695 first and operate two-way traffic on the Outer Loop. Once complete, the Outer Loop will close and two-way traffic will operate on the Inner Loop. During this stage, the entrance ramp from northbound MD 10 to the Outer Loop will be closed 24/7. All lanes will be open in November 2018. Detours will be in place and motorists should prepare to use alternative routes. Cianbro Corporation is performing the work.

See the I-895 thread for the other project (Canton Viaduct replacement) described in this press release.

[Beltway]

Disruptive project coming to the Baltimore Beltway between the MD-10 interchange and the  F.S. Key Bridge at the Curtis Creek Drawbridge - One Lane Open Each Direction 24/7 Jan. to Nov. 2018.
This section of freeway is signed as I-695 but is still officially MD-695.   
MDTA press release: MAJOR SYSTEM PRESERVATION PROJECTS COMING TO I-695 & I-895 IN BALTIMORE

Curtis Creek Drawbridge - One Lane Open Each Direction 24/7 Jan. to Nov. 2018

Both harbor crossings will 2-lane restrictions during construction.

[cpzilliacus]

So both harbor crossings will have a 2-lane restriction.

Though there's a third crossing that will have 6 or 8 lanes all the way across Baltimore City - the Fort McHenry Tunnel (I-95). The contractor is mobilized to widen the 6-lane section north of the toll plaza to 8 lanes right now - completion of the I-95 project is a prerequisite to the  contractor beginning work on the I-895 work.  The work at Curtis Creek on I-695 (really MD-695) probably is scheduled to complete before work starts on the I-895 project too.

[Beltway]

So both harbor crossings will have a 2-lane restriction.

Though there's a third crossing that will have 6 or 8 lanes all the way across Baltimore City - the Fort McHenry Tunnel (I-95). The contractor is mobilized to widen the 6-lane section north of the toll plaza to 8 lanes right now - completion of the I-95 project is a prerequisite to the  contractor beginning work on the I-895 work.  The work at Curtis Creek on I-695 (really MD-695) probably is scheduled to complete before work starts on the I-895 project too.

Yes indeed there are 3 crossings, I was just pointing out that two of them are being reduced from 4 to 2 lanes on a segment that will be under construction.  That has a major traffic impact on all three harbor crossings.

The I-95 6-lane section north of the toll plaza is on viaduct, it has the lane-drops for the unbuilt I-83 ramps, that would take at least 2 years to widen that to 8 lanes.

[mrsman]

As for the I-70/I-695 interchange, anything will be better than what exists now. I will be slightly disappointed though if the interchange design doesn't have passive provision for any future extension of I-70 further into Baltimore.

Are they considering a conventional 3-way semi-directional interchange like is seen with I-695 and I-795?

By the way, I see that I-695's widening in that area provided four lanes each way thruout, but the outer lane each way drops at the offramp to I-795, and then resumes after the onramp from I-795.  Just now verified on Google Maps aerial view.

I believe that the Beltway design around I-795 would be ideal for the entire Beltway, except the FSK Bridge.  Generally 4-4, but only 3 of the 4 lanes go through at interchanges with other freeways.  At the interchanges, there is briefly 5 lanes in each direction (at the merging in point, 2 lanes from the side freeway merge with 3 lanes of the Beltway to form 5 lanes and then the right lane immediately is foced to merge in to have 4 lanes again.)  This will make it easier for merging traffic to enter the Beltway.

[ixnay]

Between which points does the MdTA have jurisdiction over I-95 and I-(MD)695 (besides the actual FMcHT and FSKB themselves)?  I assume the MdTA has authority over the length of I-895.

ixnay

[TheOneKEA]

So both harbor crossings will have a 2-lane restriction.

Though there's a third crossing that will have 6 or 8 lanes all the way across Baltimore City - the Fort McHenry Tunnel (I-95). The contractor is mobilized to widen the 6-lane section north of the toll plaza to 8 lanes right now - completion of the I-95 project is a prerequisite to the  contractor beginning work on the I-895 work.  The work at Curtis Creek on I-695 (really MD-695) probably is scheduled to complete before work starts on the I-895 project too.

Yes indeed there are 3 crossings, I was just pointing out that two of them are being reduced from 4 to 2 lanes on a segment that will be under construction.  That has a major traffic impact on all three harbor crossings.

The I-95 6-lane section north of the toll plaza is on viaduct, it has the lane-drops for the unbuilt I-83 ramps, that would take at least 2 years to widen that to 8 lanes.

I just passed through this project, and not only are the construction of the inner lanes and shoulders on the viaduct quite advanced and mostly complete near the toll plaza, but the ramp stubs for the unbuilt I-83 interchange are still intact.

Between which points does the MdTA have jurisdiction over I-95 and I-(MD)695 (besides the actual FMcHT and FSKB themselves)?  I assume the MdTA has authority over the length of I-895.

ixnay

The southern end of the Outer Harbor Crossing begins at the mainline crossover just east of the MD 2 overpass, where the ramps to and from MD 10 link with the Beltway. The northern end of the Outer Harbor Crossing begins just north of an overpass over a set of railroad tracks and a former railroad yard, just to the south of the wide median area where the outer Back River crossing was planned to link with the Patapsco Freeway. Both ends of the crossing are posted with signage stating "BEGIN/END SHA MAINTENANCE"  and "BEGIN/END MDTA MAINTENANCE" .

[Beltway]

The I-95 6-lane section north of the toll plaza is on viaduct, it has the lane-drops for the unbuilt I-83 ramps, that would take at least 2 years to widen that to 8 lanes.

I just passed through this project, and not only are the construction of the inner lanes and shoulders on the viaduct quite advanced and mostly complete near the toll plaza, but the ramp stubs for the unbuilt I-83 interchange are still intact.

So how exactly is 4 lanes each way going to be provided on I-95 thru the unbuilt I-83 interchange?  I had figured that the stubs would be demolished and one lane and full shoulder each way would be added on the right, because that side is where the 4th lane currently drops.

[ixnay]

The southern end of the Outer Harbor Crossing begins at the mainline crossover just east of the MD 2 overpass, where the ramps to and from MD 10 link with the Beltway. The northern end of the Outer Harbor Crossing begins just north of an overpass over a set of railroad tracks and a former railroad yard, just to the south of the wide median area where the outer Back River crossing was planned to link with the Patapsco Freeway. Both ends of the crossing are posted with signage stating "BEGIN/END SHA MAINTENANCE"  and "BEGIN/END MDTA MAINTENANCE" .

Are those the parameters of hidden MD 695 too, or are MD 695's parameters different?

ixnay

[TheOneKEA]

The I-95 6-lane section north of the toll plaza is on viaduct, it has the lane-drops for the unbuilt I-83 ramps, that would take at least 2 years to widen that to 8 lanes.

I just passed through this project, and not only are the construction of the inner lanes and shoulders on the viaduct quite advanced and mostly complete near the toll plaza, but the ramp stubs for the unbuilt I-83 interchange are still intact.

So how exactly is 4 lanes each way going to be provided on I-95 thru the unbuilt I-83 interchange?  I had figured that the stubs would be demolished and one lane and full shoulder each way would be added on the right, because that side is where the 4th lane currently drops.

That was what I expected too. It appears that the MDTA is building a substructure out from the primary load-bearing substructure of the viaduct and building the inner lane and new inner shoulder on top of that. It looks like the new sub structures will be linked together in some way so that the load is spread across both original load-bearing sub structures. It shouldn't be difficult to walk or drive underneath and observe the underside of the new construction.

The southern end of the Outer Harbor Crossing begins at the mainline crossover just east of the MD 2 overpass, where the ramps to and from MD 10 link with the Beltway. The northern end of the Outer Harbor Crossing begins just north of an overpass over a set of railroad tracks and a former railroad yard, just to the south of the wide median area where the outer Back River crossing was planned to link with the Patapsco Freeway. Both ends of the crossing are posted with signage stating "BEGIN/END SHA MAINTENANCE"  and "BEGIN/END MDTA MAINTENANCE" .

Are those the parameters of hidden MD 695 too, or are MD 695's parameters different?

ixnay

MD 695 begins at the ramp gore of the I-695/I-97 interchange and ends at the midpoint of the northern I-95/I-695 interchange, between US 1 and MD 7. I've never seen a sign goof along this segment with a MD 695 shield shown.

[Beltway]

The I-95 6-lane section north of the toll plaza is on viaduct, it has the lane-drops for the unbuilt I-83 ramps, that would take at least 2 years to widen that to 8 lanes.

I just passed through this project, and not only are the construction of the inner lanes and shoulders on the viaduct quite advanced and mostly complete near the toll plaza, but the ramp stubs for the unbuilt I-83 interchange are still intact.

So how exactly is 4 lanes each way going to be provided on I-95 thru the unbuilt I-83 interchange?  I had figured that the stubs would be demolished and one lane and full shoulder each way would be added on the right, because that side is where the 4th lane currently drops.

That was what I expected too. It appears that the MDTA is building a substructure out from the primary load-bearing substructure of the viaduct and building the inner lane and new inner shoulder on top of that. It looks like the new sub structures will be linked together in some way so that the load is spread across both original load-bearing sub structures. It shouldn't be difficult to walk or drive underneath and observe the underside of the new construction.

I posed the question in two different threads, and the answer is here, in "I-895 (Baltimore Harbor Tunnel Thruway)" --

What exactly are they doing, just restriping the existing roadways?  In the unbuilt I-83 interchange area, there is almost 2,000 feet of I-95 twin bridges with 3 lanes and 2 full shoulders on each, I just checked on Google Maps aerial view, and they don't look wide enough to restripe for 4 lanes and have even one full shoulder (presumably on the right).
http://www.mdta.maryland.gov/News/MDTA_News_Releases/i-95-improvement-project-to-add-capacity-north-of-the-tunnel

As best as I can tell, the work is mostly on the left (median) side.  Does not appear to be any (permanent) re-striping going on. Interestingly, the Google car was by there recently (October 2017) and here is a good image of what Concrete General is doing.

Looks like they are decking in between the two bridges, which looks like on aerial view could give 4 more feet of bridge deck each way, which should allow for a full 10 foot shoulder on the right as well as four 12 foot lanes and maybe a 4-foot shoulder on the left.

[epzik8]

I would welcome the I-95 ETLs here in Harford County. My exit is 74, MD-152 and it would enhance my exiting experience.

[cpzilliacus]

MD 695 begins at the ramp gore of the I-695/I-97 interchange and ends at the midpoint of the northern I-95/I-695 interchange, between US 1 and MD 7. I've never seen a sign goof along this segment with a MD 695 shield shown.

In the early days of the FSK (especially when both approach roads were Super-2 highways after it opened in 1977), there were MD-695 shields to be seen along the MDTA-maintained part of the road (all of the Super-2 segments were MDTA maintenance).

[cl94]

The southern end of the Outer Harbor Crossing begins at the mainline crossover just east of the MD 2 overpass, where the ramps to and from MD 10 link with the Beltway. The northern end of the Outer Harbor Crossing begins just north of an overpass over a set of railroad tracks and a former railroad yard, just to the south of the wide median area where the outer Back River crossing was planned to link with the Patapsco Freeway. Both ends of the crossing are posted with signage stating "BEGIN/END SHA MAINTENANCE"  and "BEGIN/END MDTA MAINTENANCE" .

Those jurisdiction limits make sense. The SW jurisdiction change is just west of the Beltway's short foray into Baltimore City. Since SHA maintains nothing in Baltimore City, everything inside the City other than the bridge needs to be MDTA or city maintenance. SE change allows MDTA to maintain the Bear Creek viaduct.

MD 695 begins at the ramp gore of the I-695/I-97 interchange and ends at the midpoint of the northern I-95/I-695 interchange, between US 1 and MD 7. I've never seen a sign goof along this segment with a MD 695 shield shown.

In the early days of the FSK (especially when both approach roads were Super-2 highways after it opened in 1977), there were MD-695 shields to be seen along the MDTA-maintained part of the road (all of the Super-2 segments were MDTA maintenance).

They didn't pull a Maine/Utah and just sign the super-2 as I-695? Of course, this begs the question of why MD 695 even exists anymore. Is the Curtis Creek bridge the only thing preventing the designation at this point?