Nine "Wasteful" Highway Projects Across the U.S. Identified in New Report

[AlexandriaVA]

For me, at least, "sprawl" doesn't mean strictly building roads. After all, Manhattan has a lot of roads but I doubt anyone calls that "sprawl". Morever, cities have had roads since the days of Jericho, etc. Obviously any population growth needs to be facilitated by roads; such was true in the pre-automobile days and certainly these days as well.

However, the manner in which you build roads can determine if it's sprawl or not. Numerous independent cul-de-sac developments which all feed onto a single major thoroughfare (often seen in exurbs and Sunbelt cities) vs a relatively tight street grid/road network (more often seen in inner suburbs, cities, and the Northeast) plays a big role. As a result, you can accomodate more population growth in a more geographicially-constrained manner.

I guess it's a long-winded way of describing population density, but with a particular focus on how the road network facilities it (or fails to).

[Beltway]

you are predictable.

It was quite predictable that you would ignore the example provided.
The US-11 overpass over I-81 is being replaced and costs $16 million.

Did not ignore it.  It received one bid, for $12,560,729.22.
http://www.ctb.virginia.gov/resources/2019/june/ctb_action_meeting_june_2019.pdf
It is 370 feet long, and the new bridge will be 3 lanes wide, and there is other work involved than the bridge.
Rockingham County, Route 11 Bridge over I-81.
[....]

I tried to find a project brochure or any design plans that would show what is involved with this project, but could not.  Obviously there are a lot more construction items than just the bridge, from the descriptions found.
. . . .

The US-301 Nottoway River bridge itself is similar to a common 2-lane overpass bridge, although building piers in the river may have entailed deeper and more complex foundations. 

"The new bridge is 265 feet long and 32 feet wide.  The bridge approach road is rebuilt."

There were 6 bidders so it was competitive, and the winning bid $2,733,874.91 was slightly below the estimate. 

So for a recently built overpass bridge of this length and with 12 foot lanes and 4 foot shoulders, this is a good ballpark estimate of what they cost, given that no two projects or bridges are completely identical.

http://www.ctb.virginia.gov/resources/2016/june/pre/Action_Agenda.pdf
AWARD/EXECUTED
Order No.  J87
UPC No.   101232 
Location and Work Type 
FROM:  1.621 MILES NORTH OF ROUTE 642
TO:  0.255 MILES SOUTH OF ROUTE 734 LYNCHBURG
SUSSEX VA
HAMPTON ROADS DISTRICT
BRIDGE REPLACEMENT ROUTE 301 OVER NOTTOWAY RIVER
Vendor Name  ENGLISH CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INCORPORATED
No Of Bidders  6
Bid Amount  $2,733,874.91
Estimated Construction Cost  $2,928,135.14
Project No.
(NFO) 0301-091-729,M501,B609
BR-091-5(030)
Construction Funds

Recommended for AWARD    $2,733,874.91

[sprjus4]

But they don't say what the current clearances are.  Even 1979 is now 40 years old.  They are functionally obsolete.  To support modern trucking they all need to be at least that figure (IIRC on the WWB Project they used 18 or even 20 feet).

Found it. An "Interstate 64 Structure Inventory" indicating the condition of the bridges and the vertical clearances is located in the "Alternatives Development Technical Memorandum and Errata Record" on Page 150.

Per this report...
- The VA-143 overpass is rated "fair". The eastbound vertical clearance is 16'-6", and the westbound vertical clearance is 16'-5".
- The VA-716 overpass is rated "satisfactory". The eastbound vertical clearance is 17'-0", and the westbound vertical clearance is 17'-3".

They claim the bridges have "substandard vertical clearance" however the mainline design criteria for I-64 indicates the minimum vertical clearance shall be 16'-0" and the desired is 16'-6".

The only bridge clearance that does not meet the "desired" is the VA-143 overpass over I-64 West, and that's merely be one inch. It certainly is higher than the minimum.

I do not understand how those clearances are "substandard" as that one other part of the report indicated when in fact they are not.

[hbelkins]

For me, at least, "sprawl" doesn't mean strictly building roads.

To me, "sprawl" is a negative term used to describe building construction, either business or residential.

[Plutonic Panda]

I guess I should just expect pro-highway activists to dismiss valid concerns about wasteful automobile infrastructure, just like a normal person would exhale carbon dioxide after taking in oxygen.

I guess I should pro-mass transit advocates to live in a fantasy world and based their proposals in ideological pipe dreams while ignoring facts.

[Plutonic Panda]

Face it, most Americans want to drive.

Not just Americans, more and more of the worlds population is driving.

[Plutonic Panda]

Call me naive, idiotic, or other such demeaning insults...but is it really wrong to cancel road projects that would ruin the environment?

So what projects would quote on quote "ruin the environment?"

[sprjus4]

Call me naive, idiotic, or other such demeaning insults...but is it really wrong to cancel road projects that would ruin the environment?

So what projects would quote on quote "ruin the environment?"

Depends how you look at it. In a anti-highway activist mind, anything that touches a tree is a project that would "ruin the environment". Has a bridge over a river or wetland? You're getting at least 6 lawsuits before the highway begins construction.

[hobsini2]

I like tacos. That is all.

[Plutonic Panda]

I like tacos. That is all.

beans