Virginia

[plain]

Another phase of the Colonial Parkway rehabilitation project has begun. In addition to existing closures, the Parkway will be closed between VA-132Y and VA-641/Penniman Road until mid-2026. With the current set of closures, basically the only stretch of the parkway that will be usable is the portion between VA-199 and Jamestown Island until about mid-March.



Considering that many of the bridges are not being replaced, this project seems to be moving at a snail's pace. The portion between Penniman Road and Yorktown, which serves some amount of commuter traffic, has been effectively closed for over a year now. The tunnel underneath Colonial Williamsburg has been closed for at least two.

March came and went without much change or news, Google Maps now lists the portion between Yorktown and Cheatham Annex as being closed until May 30. Not that I'd put much stock in that value, since it also shows the portion between Cheatham Annex and Williamsburg which will be closed until mid-2026 as opening back up on April 30

I'm actually near Busch Gardens as we speak (been here for almost a week). I haven't seen much progress at all on the Parkway, at least from I-64 or VA 5 (Lafayette St).

From Lafayette I still saw the same equipment on the Parkway that I saw months ago.

[Thing 342]

I just noticed this update from the project page:

Parkway Rehabilitation Status - March 2025:

In Segment A (Ballard Street to Fusiliers Redoubt Ramp: Route 17 bridge deck is formed and ready to pour when steady temperatures allow. Demolition work on the Yorktown Creek Bridge is complete, and the bridge crews are currently performing concrete substructure repairs. It is expected that the new Yorktown Creek bridge girders will be erected in around spring of 2025. Masonry crews are also performing cleaning/repairs at the Old Williamsburg Bridge.

In Segment D&E (Felgates Creek to Penniman Road): Crews working on completing installation and aggregate exposure of new concrete pavement.

In Segment F (Penniman Road to Merrimac Trail): Crews are continuing with demolition of the existing pavement, the mixing/placement of cement stabilized subgrade, and the forming/pouring of new exposed aggregate concrete pavement. Masonry crews continue to perform cleaning/repairs at the Page Street, Parkway Drive, and Hubbard Lane bridges.

In Segment G (Merrimac Trail to Rt.199): Concrete pavement construction in the vicinity of Newport Avenue continues. Concrete and masonry repairs continue at the Lafayette/CSX bridge over the Colonial Parkway. Electrical crews also continue to install the new lighting system inside the Williamsburg Tunnel. Major storm drainage work continues from the Williamsburg Visitor Center traffic circle east towards Parkway Drive. The storm drain work includes the box culvert at the traffic circle, a 72" diameter culvert crossing between the traffic circle and Parkway Drive, and various small storm drainpipe/structures throughout Segment G. Finally, streambed improvements continue at locations at the far east end of Segment G.

Segment A has been closed for nearly two years, why are they _just now_ finishing demolition on the Yorktown Creek bridge?

[Thing 342]

The VA-3 / Norris Bridge replacement project has been pushed up to start in 2028:

Governor Glenn Youngkin Announces Construction to Replace the Norris Bridge Will Start in 2028

Groundbreaking for a new Rappahannock River bridge connecting the Northern Neck and Middle Peninsula will happen 8 years ahead of schedule

RICHMOND, VA – Governor Glenn Youngkin announced today that construction to replace the Robert O. Norris, Jr. Bridge over the Rappahannock River between the Northern Neck and Middle Peninsula will begin in 2028, eight years ahead of schedule. 

Using monies made available through the Commonwealth Transportation Special Structures Program Revenue Bond Act of 2025, construction to build a modern Norris Bridge, with substantially wider travel lanes, fully functional shoulders, and significantly higher guardrails, will start eight years ahead of the planned 2036 groundbreaking.

"It is time to build a modern bridge that will serve the communities of the Northern Neck and Middle Peninsula for the next 100 years," said Governor Glenn Youngkin. "Today we are accelerating construction of a new Norris Bridge to meet the daily travel needs of residents and businesses, and to welcome visitors to these scenic waterfront regions. Through this action, people will be driving over the new bridge almost a decade sooner than expected." 

The Norris Bridge carries Route 3 traffic over the Rappahannock River between Lancaster and Middlesex counties. The 1.9-mile bridge carries an average of 7,560 vehicles a day and opened to traffic in 1957. It has two travel lanes, with no real shoulders. The next closest available land crossing of the Rappahannock River is located on Route 360 at the Town of Tappahannock, about 40 miles to the west. If the Norris Bridge were to close for any reason, the full detour route is 85 miles. 

Due to the length of the Norris Bridge, it is one of 18 mega bridge and tunnel facilities in Virginia considered a Special Structure due to its size or complexity. The Commonwealth Transportation Board (CTB) maintains a Special Structure 50-Year Long-Term Plan, updated annually, to fund needed maintenance and eventual replacement of these structures. 

Through the passage of Senate Bill 1082, carried by Senator Ryan McDougle and championed by many including Senator Richard Stuart, Delegate Keith Hodges and Delegate Hillary Pugh Kent, the CTB may issue revenue bonds for up to $200 million a year, and up to $1 billion total, to support the Special Structures Program. These bonds will be payable from revenues provided to the Special Structure Fund.

"While today we are celebrating an eight-year acceleration of a new Norris Bridge, this legislation will expedite our progress on improvements to other large bridges and tunnels across Virginia, which collectively carry hundreds of thousands of people every day," said Senator Ryan McDougle. "This investment demonstrates our commitment to traveler safety, and to the free flow of commerce across Virginia. Even if you live miles from one of these tunnels or bridges, the benefits will be experienced by us all."

"Building safe, reliable infrastructure is foundational to the Commonwealth's ability to attract and retain business, encourage tourism, and care for its residents," said Virginia Secretary of Transportation W. Sheppard Miller III. "This administration is making an investment in the future success of our state by addressing the Norris Bridge and other necessary bridge and tunnel projects with urgency."   

Preliminary engineering and advanced right-of-way acquisition is already underway for the Norris Bridge replacement. The new bridge will have two travel lanes and shoulders that meet current road design standards, and it will have higher rails than the current bridge. A design public hearing will be scheduled to share proposed design plans and gather public comment before construction begins.

The Norris Bridge will remain open to traffic during construction of the new bridge. Once the replacement bridge has opened to traffic, the existing bridge will be demolished. 

"Until the day the new bridge opens, our mission at the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) will include ongoing maintenance and inspection of the existing Norris Bridge," said VDOT Commissioner of Highways Stephen C. Brich. "Our team of engineers, road designers, inspectors, and maintenance staff will sustain the bridge as we deliver a new bridge on time and on budget for the Commonwealth." 

The Norris Bridge replacement project is anticipated to be advertised to potential bidders as a design-build project. 

Learn more about the Norris Bridge replacement and stay updated through the project page on VDOT's website at https://www.vdot.virginia.gov/projects/fredericksburg-district/robert-o-norris-bridge-replacement-project/.

[Beltway]

The VA-3 / Norris Bridge replacement project has been pushed up to start in 2028:

Due to the length of the Norris Bridge, it is one of 18 mega bridge and tunnel facilities in Virginia considered a Special Structure due to its size or complexity. The Commonwealth Transportation Board (CTB) maintains a Special Structure 50-Year Long-Term Plan, updated annually, to fund needed maintenance and eventual replacement of these structures. 
Through the passage of Senate Bill 1082, carried by Senator Ryan McDougle and championed by many including Senator Richard Stuart, Delegate Keith Hodges and Delegate Hillary Pugh Kent, the CTB may issue revenue bonds for up to $200 million a year, and up to $1 billion total, to support the Special Structures Program. These bonds will be payable from revenues provided to the Special Structure Fund.

They are definitely going to need special funding sources.

Estimated Cost is $694 Million. See: Public Hearing Brochure

A lot for a 2.1 mile 2-lane bridge that carries about 7,500 AADT.

But the bridge is 68 years old and the nearest Rappahannock River bridge is 32 miles up the river.

[WillWeaverRVA]

The VA-3 / Norris Bridge replacement project has been pushed up to start in 2028:

Due to the length of the Norris Bridge, it is one of 18 mega bridge and tunnel facilities in Virginia considered a Special Structure due to its size or complexity. The Commonwealth Transportation Board (CTB) maintains a Special Structure 50-Year Long-Term Plan, updated annually, to fund needed maintenance and eventual replacement of these structures. 
Through the passage of Senate Bill 1082, carried by Senator Ryan McDougle and championed by many including Senator Richard Stuart, Delegate Keith Hodges and Delegate Hillary Pugh Kent, the CTB may issue revenue bonds for up to $200 million a year, and up to $1 billion total, to support the Special Structures Program. These bonds will be payable from revenues provided to the Special Structure Fund.

They are definitely going to need special funding sources.

Estimated Cost is $694 Million. See: Public Hearing Brochure

A lot for a 2.1 mile 2-lane bridge that carries about 7,500 AADT.

But the bridge is 68 years old and the nearest Rappahannock River bridge is 32 miles up the river.

Yeah, that project is definitely needed if it can be funded. It's a loooooong way around otherwise.

[Thing 342]

The use of revenue bonds is interesting - do they plan to pull revenues from tolled facilities in the state to fund this? Or is the new bridge going to be tolled?

[Beltway]

The use of revenue bonds is interesting - do they plan to pull revenues from tolled facilities in the state to fund this? Or is the new bridge going to be tolled?

Sounds to me like general obligation bonds. Tax monies provided to Special Structure Fund so that it can service the bond debt.

"These bonds will be payable from revenues provided to the Special Structure Fund."
https://www.vdot.virginia.gov/news-events/news/fredericksburg-district/governor-glenn-youngkin-announces-construction-to-replace-the-norris-bridge-will-start-in-2028.php

[epzik8]

This isn't about revenue bonds, but today was my first day driving on a Virginia surface street in a number of years (other than 207/301, if those count) and I was extremely upset to see they've implemented the hideous flashing yellow left arrow.

[Rothman]

This isn't about revenue bonds, but today was my first day driving on a Virginia surface street in a number of years (other than 207/301, if those count) and I was extremely upset to see they've implemented the hideous flashing yellow left arrow.

Not sure why you're upset.  I've yet to find the flashing yellow arrow nothing but most welcome.

[WillWeaverRVA]

This isn't about revenue bonds, but today was my first day driving on a Virginia surface street in a number of years (other than 207/301, if those count) and I was extremely upset to see they've implemented the hideous flashing yellow left arrow.

Virginia's had the flashing yellow arrow for a while now.

[1995hoo]

Virginia's had the flashing yellow arrow for a while now.

Some places longer than others, too—the City of Alexandria has had a few on Duke Street for several years, predating VDOT's more widespread adoption of them. I'm glad they've become more common, but what is frustrating is that you still encounter people who seem not to understand them and who either won't go at all or come to a complete stop even when nobody's coming.

I think highway departments could explain them more simply and clearly than they do. When a neighbor asked me if I knew what the point was, I said, "Think of it this way: The flashing yellow arrow tells you that traffic coming straight through in the other direction has a green light. If your light is flashing yellow and someone is coming the other way, expect him not to stop regardless of what the light for straight-through traffic in your direction shows."

[sprjus4]

Flashing yellow is also more advantageous over a standard green ball because it allows you turn left when clear when the opposing direction has a green arrow and green straight.

That would just be a standard red ball under the old system.

[Beltway]

The I-64 Gap Widening project will widen I-64 from four to six lanes from mile marker 204.9 in New
Kent County to mile marker 233.3 in York County. The proposed improvements include the 2" milling
and 5" paving of the two existing lanes and outside shoulders, the addition of one 12 foot-wide travel
lane and one 10 foot-wide paved inside shoulder in both directions. The widening will take place in the
median of I-64 within the existing right-of-way. Adding a third lane and 10 foot-wide shoulders in each
direction will improve congestion and safety and will enhance connectivity between Richmond and
Hampton Roads, growing the economy, supporting tourism, and providing an important link to the
Port of Virginia and the military. The I-64 Gap Widening project is broken into Segments A, B and C.

VDOT determined that the use of Design-Build contracting would expedite delivery for all three
segments. The Design-Builder will perform the final design, right of way acquisition, utility relocation,
and some construction activities concurrently.

These projects are coming in at well below original estimated costs, $587 million compared to $753 million.

My Excel spreadsheet --

[Thing 342]

Construction of new I-64 interchange to start later this year

Construction will start later this year on a new Interstate 64 interchange that officials hope will improve traffic flow in northern Newport News.

The I-64 Denbigh Boulevard Interchange Project will add a new diamond interchange between those at the intersections of Fort Eustis Boulevard and Jefferson Avenue. The addition is expected to reduce afternoon traffic congestion in the northbound lanes of Jefferson Avenue (from Brick Kiln to Denbigh), on Bland Boulevard (from Jefferson to Warwick), and in the northbound lanes of Warwick Boulevard (from Bland to Denbigh), according to a spokesperson for Newport News.

The project will be completed in two phases. The first is expected to be completed in mid-2029 and involves constructing the west on- and off-ramps, widening of I-64 and Denbigh Boulevard, and improvements at the Denbigh's intersections with Warwick Boulevard and Jefferson Avenue, according to the Virginia Department of Transportation.

The second phase is slated to begin in mid-2030 and be completed by mid-2034. This will include installation of the east on- and off-ramps on I-64 and widening of the Denbigh Boulevard bridge.

The first phase has a $93 million price tag, the second comes in at $188.1 million, according to VDOT. The project won't require any funding from Newport News' Capital Improvement Plan, a city spokesperson confirmed.

The requests for proposals for Phase 1 will go out in late spring or early summer, a VDOT spokesperson said.

"The primary reasons for initiating these projects include ongoing traffic congestion and safety concerns on I-64 and surrounding local roads," the spokesperson said. "Detailed analyses, including an Interchange Justification Report (IJR), were conducted and clearly indicated the need for improvements at Denbigh Boulevard to manage current and future traffic demands and enhance regional connectivity."

The project is expected to support the recently announced relocation of Costco from the northwest corner of the Jefferson Avenue and Oyster Point Road intersection to the southeast corner of the Jefferson Avenue and Bland Boulevard intersection.

The relocation will likely add between 150-200 more vehicles during peak hours to an area that's already congested, but the Denbigh Boulevard Interchange Project is considered the "ultimate answer" to this issue, according to an April 4 memo from Nathan Milaszewski, assistant district traffic engineer for VDOT's Hampton Roads District sent to Lisa Frankenberger, the chief traffic engineer for Newport News.

The new interchange will "reduce the background demand for both Jefferson Avenue generally and (Exit 255B to northbound Jefferson Avenue) in particular," the memo reads.

[Rothman]

The I-64 Gap Widening project will widen I-64 from four to six lanes from mile marker 204.9 in New
Kent County to mile marker 233.3 in York County. The proposed improvements include the 2" milling
and 5" paving of the two existing lanes and outside shoulders, the addition of one 12 foot-wide travel
lane and one 10 foot-wide paved inside shoulder in both directions. The widening will take place in the
median of I-64 within the existing right-of-way. Adding a third lane and 10 foot-wide shoulders in each
direction will improve congestion and safety and will enhance connectivity between Richmond and
Hampton Roads, growing the economy, supporting tourism, and providing an important link to the
Port of Virginia and the military. The I-64 Gap Widening project is broken into Segments A, B and C.

VDOT determined that the use of Design-Build contracting would expedite delivery for all three
segments. The Design-Builder will perform the final design, right of way acquisition, utility relocation,
and some construction activities concurrently.

These projects are coming in at well below original estimated costs, $587 million compared to $753 million.

My Excel spreadsheet --

The I-64 Gap Widening project will widen I-64 from four to six lanes from mile marker 204.9 in New
Kent County to mile marker 233.3 in York County. The proposed improvements include the 2" milling
and 5" paving of the two existing lanes and outside shoulders, the addition of one 12 foot-wide travel
lane and one 10 foot-wide paved inside shoulder in both directions. The widening will take place in the
median of I-64 within the existing right-of-way. Adding a third lane and 10 foot-wide shoulders in each
direction will improve congestion and safety and will enhance connectivity between Richmond and
Hampton Roads, growing the economy, supporting tourism, and providing an important link to the
Port of Virginia and the military. The I-64 Gap Widening project is broken into Segments A, B and C.

VDOT determined that the use of Design-Build contracting would expedite delivery for all three
segments. The Design-Builder will perform the final design, right of way acquisition, utility relocation,
and some construction activities concurrently.

These projects are coming in at well below original estimated costs, $587 million compared to $753 million.

My Excel spreadsheet --

What's your source for the original estimate and does it match what the estimate was at Final RFP?

[Beltway]

These [I-64 GAP] projects are coming in at well below original estimated costs, $587 million compared to $753 million.

What's your source for the original estimate and does it match what the estimate was at Final RFP?

TABLE 3.1: COST BY PHASE 
https://www.vdot.virginia.gov/media/vdotvirginiagov/about/budget-and-financing/I-64-Gap-Widening-Financial-Plan-August-2023-acc-1005.pdf

That was the year that the first contract was awarded.

There would have been very little if any changes in the design after then -- which was to add one lane and full shoulder each way in the median.

Contract awards can come in much lower depending on economic times, when contractors are more hungry for work.

[Rothman]

These [I-64 GAP] projects are coming in at well below original estimated costs, $587 million compared to $753 million.

What's your source for the original estimate and does it match what the estimate was at Final RFP?

TABLE 3.1: COST BY PHASE 
https://www.vdot.virginia.gov/media/vdotvirginiagov/about/budget-and-financing/I-64-Gap-Widening-Financial-Plan-August-2023-acc-1005.pdf

That was the year that the first contract was awarded.

There would have been very little if any changes in the design after then -- which was to add one lane and full shoulder each way in the median.

Contract awards can come in much lower depending on economic times, when contractors are more hungry for work.

That's the initial financial plan from 2023.  What would be more interesting is what the engineer's estimate was more recently -- like I said, at Final RFP, the design-build equivalent to PS&E.

And it looks like you made the mistake of comparing total costs to the contract awards which only include detailed design, construction and construction inspection for design-build contracts, anyway.  Not a huge difference percentage-wise, though.

Better yet, keeping track of its entry on the STIP, which has to be kept within 10% of the actual cost, might have been enlightening. But, I'd bet it's too late for that approach.  Although I'd bet one could find random old copies of it, I doubt one could find out what it said on a particular date.

The flip side is that on megaprojects, DOTs can be reluctant to change estimates, whether under or over originals, lest someone in the public notices and throws a fit.

Let's just say that whenever savings are claimed, it warrants more thorough information and comparison.

(personal opinion emphasized)

[WillWeaverRVA]

These [I-64 GAP] projects are coming in at well below original estimated costs, $587 million compared to $753 million.

What's your source for the original estimate and does it match what the estimate was at Final RFP?

TABLE 3.1: COST BY PHASE 
https://www.vdot.virginia.gov/media/vdotvirginiagov/about/budget-and-financing/I-64-Gap-Widening-Financial-Plan-August-2023-acc-1005.pdf

That was the year that the first contract was awarded.

There would have been very little if any changes in the design after then -- which was to add one lane and full shoulder each way in the median.

Contract awards can come in much lower depending on economic times, when contractors are more hungry for work.

However much it costs, I'm glad it's happening. It doesn't take a whole lot to paralyze that stretch of I-64. Does accounting for the contraflow provisions in place affect the cost or timeframe at all?

[1995hoo]

Flashing yellow is also more advantageous over a standard green ball because it allows you turn left when clear when the opposing direction has a green arrow and green straight.

That would just be a standard red ball under the old system.

That's an excellent point and I have indeed taken advantage of that on rare occasions ("rare" because it's unusual in Fairfax County, just because of traffic volumes, to encounter a situation where the other side has a full green plus an arrow and nobody's going straight).

The chief advantage I've observed is that at intersections with a flashing yellow arrow, sometimes the other side will get a red and the green arrow will come on even when the light hasn't gone through the cycle for the other street. That is, on several occasions I've been waiting at the flashing arrow to turn left into my neighborhood when both directions have full greens, then suddenly the other direction turns red and I get a green arrow. With the old doghouse signal, that never happened—I would not have gotten the green arrow unless and until the intersecting road had gotten some form of green light (even if just green arrows). So that's a big plus in my mind. It also makes me more likely to remain behind the stop bar when waiting to go left in order to try to trigger the green arrow (especially if nobody is behind me). I already tend to say behind the line at most suburban intersections that have an opposing left-turn lane because I find it easier to see around big SUVs and such coming the other way if I stay back, but to the extent staying back trips the sensor for the green arrow, it's all the more reason to do so.

[sprjus4]

Construction of new I-64 interchange to start later this year

Construction will start later this year on a new Interstate 64 interchange that officials hope will improve traffic flow in northern Newport News.

The I-64 Denbigh Boulevard Interchange Project will add a new diamond interchange between those at the intersections of Fort Eustis Boulevard and Jefferson Avenue. The addition is expected to reduce afternoon traffic congestion in the northbound lanes of Jefferson Avenue (from Brick Kiln to Denbigh), on Bland Boulevard (from Jefferson to Warwick), and in the northbound lanes of Warwick Boulevard (from Bland to Denbigh), according to a spokesperson for Newport News.

The project will be completed in two phases. The first is expected to be completed in mid-2029 and involves constructing the west on- and off-ramps, widening of I-64 and Denbigh Boulevard, and improvements at the Denbigh's intersections with Warwick Boulevard and Jefferson Avenue, according to the Virginia Department of Transportation.

The second phase is slated to begin in mid-2030 and be completed by mid-2034. This will include installation of the east on- and off-ramps on I-64 and widening of the Denbigh Boulevard bridge.

The first phase has a $93 million price tag, the second comes in at $188.1 million, according to VDOT. The project won't require any funding from Newport News' Capital Improvement Plan, a city spokesperson confirmed.

The requests for proposals for Phase 1 will go out in late spring or early summer, a VDOT spokesperson said.

"The primary reasons for initiating these projects include ongoing traffic congestion and safety concerns on I-64 and surrounding local roads," the spokesperson said. "Detailed analyses, including an Interchange Justification Report (IJR), were conducted and clearly indicated the need for improvements at Denbigh Boulevard to manage current and future traffic demands and enhance regional connectivity."

The project is expected to support the recently announced relocation of Costco from the northwest corner of the Jefferson Avenue and Oyster Point Road intersection to the southeast corner of the Jefferson Avenue and Bland Boulevard intersection.

The relocation will likely add between 150-200 more vehicles during peak hours to an area that's already congested, but the Denbigh Boulevard Interchange Project is considered the "ultimate answer" to this issue, according to an April 4 memo from Nathan Milaszewski, assistant district traffic engineer for VDOT's Hampton Roads District sent to Lisa Frankenberger, the chief traffic engineer for Newport News.

The new interchange will "reduce the background demand for both Jefferson Avenue generally and (Exit 255B to northbound Jefferson Avenue) in particular," the memo reads.

A very expensive project for ultimately being just a diamond interchange, but very much needed.

[Beltway]

That's the initial financial plan from 2023.  What would be more interesting is what the engineer's estimate was more recently -- like I said, at Final RFP, the design-build equivalent to PS&E.
And it looks like you made the mistake of comparing total costs to the contract awards which only include detailed design, construction and construction inspection for design-build contracts, anyway.  Not a huge difference percentage-wise, though.

These as mentioned are design-build contracts that include right-of-way acquisition, everything but:
VDOT Project Oversight Costs: VDOT post-award costs to manage the project and provide oversight of the project are estimated to be approx. 6% of the Design-Builder's cost. These costs include overall project management, contract administration, and construction oversight.

If you have been following contract awards for a good time, you know that they can vary widely from the engineering estimate.

Depending on current industry economical conditions, a (for example) $100 million project could get several bids in the 70s, or could get a couple bids around 100, or could get bids in the 110s, or maybe only one bid around 120 (which the DOT rejects).

It all depends on what contractors are willing to build it for.

These projects were stated as a $750 million project when this was initiated about 2020.

There would have been little if any significant changes, and very little new right-of-way is needed. Like I said, the project is add one lane and full shoulder each way in the median. No interchange upgrades.

[Beltway]

[I-64 GAP Project]
However much it costs, I'm glad it's happening. It doesn't take a whole lot to paralyze that stretch of I-64. Does accounting for the contraflow provisions in place affect the cost or timeframe at all?

No changes to the outside of the roadways.

Widening is in the median, and about 21 miles of the 28 mile segment has a very wide median (in the 150 to 500 feet wide range) with independent roadways.

[Beltway]

The I-64 Denbigh Boulevard Interchange Project will add a new diamond interchange between those at the intersections of Fort Eustis Boulevard and Jefferson Avenue. The addition is expected to reduce afternoon traffic congestion in the northbound lanes of Jefferson Avenue (from Brick Kiln to Denbigh), on Bland Boulevard (from Jefferson to Warwick), and in the northbound lanes of Warwick Boulevard (from Bland to Denbigh), according to a spokesperson for Newport News.

A very expensive project for ultimately being just a diamond interchange, but very much needed.

Everything is terribly expensive these days. I have wondered about that one too, but there is a tremendous amount of bridgework given the tight constraints of the railroad and the bridge connections to the new Denbigh Avenue bridge.

[sprjus4]

Everything is terribly expensive these days. I have wondered about that one too, but there is a tremendous amount of bridgework given the tight constraints of the railroad and the bridge connections to the new Denbigh Avenue bridge.

I have wondered why they didn't at least complete all that bridge work (including ramp stubs for the future eastbound ramps) when they replaced the bridge structure just a few years back. That entire project was only $23 million.

https://www.vdot.virginia.gov/projects/hampton-roads-district/denbigh-boulevard-bridge-replacement/

[Beltway]

Everything is terribly expensive these days. I have wondered about that one too, but there is a tremendous amount of bridgework given the tight constraints of the railroad and the bridge connections to the new Denbigh Avenue bridge.

I have wondered why they didn't at least complete all that bridge work (including ramp stubs for the future eastbound ramps) when they replaced the bridge structure just a few years back. That entire project was only $23 million.
https://www.vdot.virginia.gov/projects/hampton-roads-district/denbigh-boulevard-bridge-replacement/

That bridge is 910 feet long, and Phase 1 ramp terminals are just outside of the bridge itself, and Phase 2 completion is to be 2034.