Virginia

[Beltway]

The former project is a great idea, and it's a shame it was never built. However, with it being 10 years removed from being canceled, what is VDOT's next plan?

The cost would be much higher today... A Windsor bypass and extended to the Suffolk Bypass was considered a few years later, but even that was a $400 million project. The way that this project was canceled infuriates me to this day. Reviving it at today's be costs may prohibitive.

The completion of the widening projects on I-64 will demote it from being an official alternate to I-64 -- I will no longer use it between Richmond and South Hampton Roads. So that is good.

[Great Lakes Roads]

https://www.henricocitizen.com/funding-for-new-i-64-north-gayton-road-diverging-diamond-sets-in-motion-multi-year-project-to-alleviate-short-pump-congestion/



New DDI interchange coming to Short Pump on I-64. Construction is set to begin in the spring of 2028, with completion expected by the winter of 2031 on a design-build contract.

[WahooBill]

The Gayton Rd Interchange is so desperately needed for some Broad Street relief.  It's a shame that when I295 was originally completed that it didn't extend the 1/2 mile to end at Broad Street before all of the area was fully developed.

[WillWeaverRVA]

The Gayton Rd Interchange is so desperately needed for some Broad Street relief.  It's a shame that when I295 was originally completed that it didn't extend the 1/2 mile to end at Broad Street before all of the area was fully developed.

It was actually supposed to tie into what is now VA 288, which was originally planned to run along what is now John Rolfe Parkway, and form a seamless beltway. Residential development and community opposition in Chesterfield County threw a wrench into that plan.

[Beltway]

$94.2 million for a diamond interchange -- that is discouraging.

[sprjus4]

$94.2 million for a diamond interchange -- that is discouraging.

I believe the interchange with VA-106 at Exit 211 was around the same - something in the $90 million neighborhood. That project is currently under construction. To construct a new 2-lane overpass and reconfigure the ramps. Costs have skyrocketed in the last few years.

And for the Short Pump interchange, the $94.2 million is just local, state, and federal contributions. An additional $63.2 million from the CVTA brings the total up to $157.4 million.

[Beltway]

$94.2 million for a diamond interchange -- that is discouraging.

I believe the interchange with VA-106 at Exit 211 was around the same - something in the $90 million neighborhood. That project is currently under construction. To construct a new 2-lane overpass and reconfigure the ramps. Costs have skyrocketed in the last few years.
And for the Short Pump interchange, the $94.2 million is just local, state, and federal contributions. An additional $63.2 million from the CVTA brings the total up to $157.4 million.

It is hard to imagine spending that much money for a diamond interchange where the overpass already exists. It is 6 lanes divided so I can't see any major modifications.

$25-30 million has been a common figure in the last 5-10 years.

The overpass of VA-106 will be replaced but I don't think there are any other major changes. It is part of the I-64 GAP projects and that segment is similar to the others in cost (210.0, 203.0, 174.0 )

[Rothman]

Have to say, hesitantly, that $157m does seem quite high if the project is restricted in scope to the interchange work, even if it includes bridge replacment(s).

[Mapmikey]

This gives a better idea of the expanse of the project in both directions along I-64: https://www.vdot.virginia.gov/media/vdotvirginiagov/projects/richmond/short-pump-improvements-project/ShortPump_Boards_09262024_acc_PM.pdf

It will be a shame if they have to substantially redo the existing overpass, as it is only 14 years old.  But I think they may because the news article mentions a shared use path going on there, plus I haven't seen a DDI with the two directions close enough that they are on the same bridge, presumably because the crossovers need some distance to keep the curves at them at reasonable sharpness.

The article implied that the $157m does not include any of the other 6 projects that are also being pursued in that area.

[Rothman]

This gives a better idea of the expanse of the project in both directions along I-64: https://www.vdot.virginia.gov/media/vdotvirginiagov/projects/richmond/short-pump-improvements-project/ShortPump_Boards_09262024_acc_PM.pdf

It will be a shame if they have to substantially redo the existing overpass, as it is only 14 years old.  But I think they may because the news article mentions a shared use path going on there, plus I haven't seen a DDI with the two directions close enough that they are on the same bridge, presumably because the crossovers need some distance to keep the curves at them at reasonable sharpness.

The article implied that the $157m does not include any of the other 6 projects that are also being pursued in that area.

That's more like it.

[Beltway]

This gives a better idea of the expanse of the project in both directions along I-64: https://www.vdot.virginia.gov/media/vdotvirginiagov/projects/richmond/short-pump-improvements-project/ShortPump_Boards_09262024_acc_PM.pdf
It will be a shame if they have to substantially redo the existing overpass, as it is only 14 years old.  But I think they may because the news article mentions a shared use path going on there, plus I haven't seen a DDI with the two directions close enough that they are on the same bridge, presumably because the crossovers need some distance to keep the curves at them at reasonable sharpness.
The article implied that the $157m does not include any of the other 6 projects that are also being pursued in that area.

I'm not sure how that is implied.

"The purpose of the Short Pump Project is to address operational and safety challenges in the Short Pump transportation network."

So the project may be to encompass all 7 of those items on the map (on I-64, US-250, I-295, VA-288).

The $157 million would seem more logical in that case.

[Mapmikey]

This gives a better idea of the expanse of the project in both directions along I-64: https://www.vdot.virginia.gov/media/vdotvirginiagov/projects/richmond/short-pump-improvements-project/ShortPump_Boards_09262024_acc_PM.pdf
It will be a shame if they have to substantially redo the existing overpass, as it is only 14 years old.  But I think they may because the news article mentions a shared use path going on there, plus I haven't seen a DDI with the two directions close enough that they are on the same bridge, presumably because the crossovers need some distance to keep the curves at them at reasonable sharpness.
The article implied that the $157m does not include any of the other 6 projects that are also being pursued in that area.

I'm not sure how that is implied.

"The purpose of the Short Pump Project is to address operational and safety challenges in the Short Pump transportation network."

So the project may be to encompass all 7 of those items on the map (on I-64, US-250, I-295, VA-288).

The $157 million would seem more logical in that case.

From the article:

6 other related projects also planned in region
Henrico officials for years have been trying to alleviate traffic at bottleneck intersections in the Short Pump area.

The I-64 interchange at North Gayton Road project focuses on improving traffic operations and reducing recurring congestion and is part of a larger effort – the Short Pump Area Improvements suite of seven projects, which are at various stages of development and funding.

In coordination with the Richmond Regional Transportation Planning Organization, Henrico has applied for SMART SCALE Round 7 funding, for another distinct project in Short Pump in that grouping – the I‑64 at West Broad Street interchange, according to Henrico Department of Public Works Division Director of Transportation Development Sharon Smidler.

- bold emphasis mine

[Beltway]

This gives a better idea of the expanse of the project in both directions along I-64: https://www.vdot.virginia.gov/media/vdotvirginiagov/projects/richmond/short-pump-improvements-project/ShortPump_Boards_09262024_acc_PM.pdf
It will be a shame if they have to substantially redo the existing overpass, as it is only 14 years old.  But I think they may because the news article mentions a shared use path going on there, plus I haven't seen a DDI with the two directions close enough that they are on the same bridge, presumably because the crossovers need some distance to keep the curves at them at reasonable sharpness.
The article implied that the $157m does not include any of the other 6 projects that are also being pursued in that area.

I'm not sure how that is implied.
"The purpose of the Short Pump Project is to address operational and safety challenges in the Short Pump transportation network."
So the project may be to encompass all 7 of those items on the map (on I-64, US-250, I-295, VA-288).
The $157 million would seem more logical in that case.

From the article:

6 other related projects also planned in region
Henrico officials for years have been trying to alleviate traffic at bottleneck intersections in the Short Pump area.
The I-64 interchange at North Gayton Road project focuses on improving traffic operations and reducing recurring congestion and is part of a larger effort – the Short Pump Area Improvements suite of seven projects, which are at various stages of development and funding.
In coordination with the Richmond Regional Transportation Planning Organization, Henrico has applied for SMART SCALE Round 7 funding, for another distinct project in Short Pump in that grouping – the I‑64 at West Broad Street interchange, according to Henrico Department of Public Works Division Director of Transportation Development Sharon Smidler.

- bold emphasis mine

I still don't understand how they get that. The only VDOT project page is for the suite of 7 projects of which I-64/North Gayton Road interchange is just one part.
https://www.vdot.virginia.gov/projects/richmond-district/short-pump-area-in-henrico-transportation-improvements-project/

And they say -- Estimated cost of the project: N/A

[Mapmikey]

True, but the VDOT page hasn't been updated since May while the article is from September. Progress could have occurred since May.

[Beltway]

I hope it is buildable because a I-64/North Gayton Road interchange would be a big benefit for the Short Pump area.

[WillWeaverRVA]

I hope it is buildable because a I-64/North Gayton Road interchange would be a big benefit for the Short Pump area.

I've been waiting for this to get built for a while. It'll give Twin Hickory and Wyndham improved interstate access without having to use I-295 or drive through Short Pump.

[sprjus4]

VDOT, in an effort to improve traffic flow on the Peninsula, will be reducing I-64 from four to three lanes for 15 miles.

If I-64 in Chesapeake is any indication, expect new pockets of daily traffic congestion on the general purpose lanes permanently that did not previously exist.

[Beltway]

VDOT, in an effort to improve traffic flow on the Peninsula, will be reducing I-64 from four to three lanes for 15 miles.
If I-64 in Chesapeake is any indication, expect new pockets of daily traffic congestion on the general purpose lanes permanently that did not previously exist.

In order to convert that inner lane to HOV-2/HOT-2.

Single lane HOT is new in this region and has delineators to prevent crossing, with exit-entrance lanes every few miles.

I use it between Bowers Hill and Indian River Road regularly, and it works well overall, better than I thought. If someone dips below the speed limit you can always flash high beams to get him to speed up. My toll is usually in the $1.60 range. It definitely beats the GP lanes.

[sprjus4]

In order to convert that inner lane to HOV-2/HOT-2.

Single lane HOT is new in this region and has delineators to prevent crossing, with exit-entrance lanes every few miles.

So... VDOT, in an effort to improve traffic flow on the Peninsula, will be reducing I-64 from four to three lanes for 15 miles.

If I-64 in Chesapeake is any indication, expect new pockets of daily traffic congestion on the general purpose lanes permanently that did not previously exist.

If someone dips below the speed limit you can always flash high beams to get him to speed up.

Conveniently, if someone drops below the speed limit now, I can move over and pass them. I guess we're trying to find solutions to problems that currently don't exist.

[Beltway]

In order to convert that inner lane to HOV-2/HOT-2.
Single lane HOT is new in this region and has delineators to prevent crossing, with exit-entrance lanes every few miles.

So... VDOT, in an effort to improve traffic flow on the Peninsula, will be reducing I-64 from four to three lanes for 15 miles.

There will be 3 GP lanes on 1 HOT lane each way. The HREL project which has been widely discussed in the region.

If I-64 in Chesapeake is any indication, expect new pockets of daily traffic congestion on the general purpose lanes permanently that did not previously exist.

Not my experience -- traffic is considerably  relieved.

If someone dips below the speed limit you can always flash high beams to get him to speed up.

Conveniently, if someone drops below the speed limit now, I can move over and pass them. I guess we're trying to find solutions to problems that currently don't exist.

Some people do that in the HOT lane as well. On the 12 foot shoulder.

Or just follow behind. Nearly all have the good sense not to impede traffic.

[vdeane]

Michigan did something similar - they took a general purpose lane from I-94 and turned it into a separated "express" lane.  It just made congestion worse.  I fail to see why Virginia's experience would be different, tolls or no tolls.

"Flashing your brights to make someone go faster" isn't a great strategy for those single lane segments.  If that driver is like me, they will, at best, maintain the same speed.  Depending on my mood, I might even slow down.  It wouldn't make me go faster.

[1995hoo]

Unrelated to the above, but a topic that greatly interests me because of where I live, is that VDOT published its report with the results of the study for improvements to Van Dorn Street from Kingstowne Boulevard to the Beltway. Note it's a 139-page .PDF. I have no comments to offer yet because I haven't had time to read it so far.

[Beltway]

Michigan did something similar - they took a general purpose lane from I-94 and turned it into a separated "express" lane.  It just made congestion worse.  I fail to see why Virginia's experience would be different, tolls or no tolls.

Not quite the same situation.

On I-64 in Hampton Roads, most of the conversion involves turning underused HOV lanes into dynamically priced Express Lanes while keeping three free general-purpose lanes. In a few short segments they do take a GP lane, but the overall network is designed around pricing that keeps the managed lane flowing and gives drivers a choice.

Simply restriping a busy general-purpose lane into a separated "express" lane with no (or weak) demand management is what tends to make the remaining GP lanes worse. Virginia's priced Express Lanes systems (both Northern Virginia and the expanding Hampton Roads network) use variable tolls specifically to avoid that outcome. The two approaches are not interchangeable.

"Flashing your brights to make someone go faster" isn't a great strategy for those single lane segments.  If that driver is like me, they will, at best, maintain the same speed.  Depending on my mood, I might even slow down.  It wouldn't make me go faster.

If that doesn't work give him the horn. I was assuming he is going below the speed limit in the HOT lane while not held up by traffic ahead. No excuse for that.

[sprjus4]

Underutilized? The HOV lanes are unrestricted 22 hours of the day, unrestricted on weekends, have no barrier, and serve as a 4th general purpose lane in each direction. And with little to no enforcement, they effectively act as a general purpose lane during rush hour as well.

You are, indeed, taking a lane away with this project. They get plenty of utilization, and flow plenty fine as is. Especially on the Peninsula.

I-64's converted express lanes in Chesapeake now remains empty throughout most of the day, seeing some utilization around rush hour. The area where Greenbrier Parkway's ramp merge into I-64 WB and around Indian River Road now sees some slow down in general purpose lanes during rush hour - those slowdowns did not previously occur. Traffic on the mainline only has 3 lanes to maneuver with as opposed to the previous 4.

[Beltway]

" I-64's converted express lanes in Chesapeake now remains empty throughout most of the day"

It is never "empty" there is always some traffic there during the day.

I am always there and in the low hours it is the cost of a Big Gulp which I will gladly pay and benefit from. Two Big Gulps during peak periods. Beats the GP lanes hands down.

Same with Hampton and Newport News -- I expect to be always there so no lanes are being taken away.

The real breakthrough will be when HREL Hampton Segment 4C and HRBT Expansion are completed by Fall 2027.

My use of US-460 between Richmond and South Hampton Roads will cease and I will use I-64 all the way, and US-460 will no longer be needed as a designated alternate route.  Many people will feel likewise.

An 8-lane HRBT will handle the volumes with ease and I-664 and US-17 JRB will be relieved as well. I predict --

2022   AADT
I-664 MMMBT   69,530
I-64 HRBT   83,098
US-17 JRB   29,000
Total   181,628
    
2027   AADT
I-664 MMMBT   52,000
I-64 HRBT   104,000
US-17 JRB   26,000
Total   182,000
   
2032-35   AADT
I-664 MMMBT   60,000
I-64 HRBT   120,000
US-17 JRB   30,000
Total   210,000