US 50/301(Chesapeake Bay Bridge)

[Beltway]

The scariest bridge I've ever driven on with wind is the Tydings Bridge. I stay in the middle lane because without shoulders, those nasty gusts easily push my small car 2 feet.

So there are "nasty gusts" every time you cross over that bridge?  I crossed that at least 50 times in my 1968 VW Beetle (dating myself) and maybe I was just lucky but I don't recall having any problem with wind there.
Maybe next time I will be 'unlucky' and encounter an EF5 tornado when crossing.

Stop trying to intentionally be a dick in so many threads at once. You're spreading yourself too thin. I never said "every time".

Well, my take on it is that there are some posters who have a habit of being annoying and irritating and overly defensive of their worldview and who don't react well when challenged.  Maybe they don't realize they are doing that; maybe so, maybe not.  Most of the time I ignore it, but sometimes I don't.

Let me know how you enjoy your EF5.

I am enjoying my very well funded retirement! 

[US71]

The scariest bridge I've ever driven on with wind is the Tydings Bridge. I stay in the middle lane because without shoulders, those nasty gusts easily push my small car 2 feet.

So there are "nasty gusts" every time you cross over that bridge?  I crossed that at least 50 times in my 1968 VW Beetle (dating myself) and maybe I was just lucky but I don't recall having any problem with wind there.
Maybe next time I will be 'unlucky' and encounter an EF5 tornado when crossing.

Stop trying to intentionally be a dick in so many threads at once. You're spreading yourself too thin. I never said "every time".

Well, my take on it is that there are some posters who have a habit of being annoying and irritating and overly defensive of their worldview and who don't react well when challenged.  Maybe they don't realize they are doing that; maybe so, maybe not.  Most of the time I ignore it, but sometimes I don't.

Let me know how you enjoy your EF5.

I am enjoying my very well funded retirement! 

Hope you have your water wings

[Beltway]

I am enjoying my very well funded retirement! 

Hope you have your water wings

Water wings?  The only thing that comes up on a search are these arm flotation devices for people who are learning how to swim.  I grew up in a beach front community in Florida and learned how to swim at 8 years old, and how sail a sailboat at 9.

[froggie]

I think he's referring to what you're about to get in 72-96 hours...

[Beltway]

I think he's referring to what you're about to get in 72-96 hours...

The latest track prediction has Richmond at the edge where winds would probably be 20 mph or less.  Obviously the track can change in 4 days.

[ipeters61]

I think he's referring to what you're about to get in 72-96 hours...

My grandparents rented a house in Bowers Beach to stay in for my birthday (about 15 minutes away).  Just called them to tell them they should cancel since I'm sure Bowers Beach Road will be impassible by then (it's impassible now according to DelDOT).  Bummer.

[Alps]

I think he's referring to what you're about to get in 72-96 hours...

My grandparents rented a house in Bowers Beach to stay in for my birthday (about 15 minutes away).  Just called them to tell them they should cancel since I'm sure Bowers Beach Road will be impassible by then (it's impassible now according to DelDOT).  Bummer.

You guys got hammered down in greater Philadelphia.

[froggie]

I think he's referring to what you're about to get in 72-96 hours...

The latest track prediction has Richmond at the edge where winds would probably be 20 mph or less.  Obviously the track can change in 4 days.

It's not the wind that's going to be your problem.  The "water wings" comment from previously is very appropriate.

[1995hoo]

The rain forecast makes it sound like parts of Virginia may experience flashbacks to Hurricane Camille.

[cpzilliacus]

The rain forecast makes it sound like parts of Virginia may experience flashbacks to Hurricane Camille.

Or Agnes.

[Beltway]

I think he's referring to what you're about to get in 72-96 hours...

The latest track prediction has Richmond at the edge where winds would probably be 20 mph or less.  Obviously the track can change in 4 days.

It's not the wind that's going to be your problem.  The "water wings" comment from previously is very appropriate.

Not yet known whether rainfall will be any serious problem, the track is now bending to the south.  Any James River flooding and severity depends on where the remnants wind up.

I do have a problem with when a "Global Moderator" makes sniping, "joking" remarks about possible severe weather impacting where I live. 

How would he like it if I made "joking" cracks about EF4 and EF5 tornadoes hitting urban areas in Missouri and Oklahoma?  I wouldn't wish that on anybody.

[CentralPAGal]

I just drove across the bridge for the first time today, was pretty impressed with the scale of it. While I don't recall seeing anyone pull over because I was not paying attention to that, I can certainly see how people with a fear of heights, or anxiety might be intimidated by it (particularly the narrower older span, and/or in adverse conditions.)

There are no shoulders on the CBB. Are you talking about the CBBT?

I mean the lead up to the bridge around the toll booths. Someone mentioned a driving service and that is what I was referring to. I have never traversed the CBBT.

[Beltway]

There are no shoulders on the CBB. Are you talking about the CBBT?

I mean the lead up to the bridge around the toll booths. Someone mentioned a driving service and that is what I was referring to. I have never traversed the CBBT.

The US-50/US-301 approach highway is a freeway with full shoulders, including the toll plaza area. 

[CentralPAGal]

There are no shoulders on the CBB. Are you talking about the CBBT?

I mean the lead up to the bridge around the toll booths. Someone mentioned a driving service and that is what I was referring to. I have never traversed the CBBT.

The US-50/US-301 approach highway is a freeway with full shoulders, including the toll plaza area.

again, this is what I'm referring to. I did not see anyone pulled over on the shoulder BEFORE the bridge

[jeffandnicole]

There are no shoulders on the CBB. Are you talking about the CBBT?

I mean the lead up to the bridge around the toll booths. Someone mentioned a driving service and that is what I was referring to. I have never traversed the CBBT.

The US-50/US-301 approach highway is a freeway with full shoulders, including the toll plaza area.

again, this is what I'm referring to. I did not see anyone pulled over on the shoulder BEFORE the bridge

It doesn't happen all that often

[cpzilliacus]

MDTA news release (08/27/2019): FEDERAL NEPA PROCESS TO INCLUDE FOUR PRELIMINARY BAY CROSSING STUDY ALTERNATIVES: THREE CORRIDORS AND NO BUILD

The Bay Crossing Study Tier 1 is retaining the No-Build alternative and these Preliminary Corridor Alternatives Retained for Analysis (CARA):

• Corridor 6: MD 100 to US 301 between Pasadena (Anne Arundel County), Rock Hall (Kent County) and Centreville (Queen Anne's County);
• Corridor 7: existing Bay Bridge corridor, US 50/301 to US 50 between Crofton (Anne Arundel County) and Queenstown (Queen Anne's County); and
• Corridor 8: US 50/301 between Crofton (Anne Arundel County) and Easton (Talbot County).

Data indicate that each of the three corridor alternatives could have a positive impact on traffic. Corridor 7, the corridor where the existing Bay Bridge is today, provides the most congestion relief. This corridor best relieves congestion at the existing Bay Bridge on both non-summer weekdays and summer weekends compared to all other corridors. Corridor 7 would best reduce backups at the existing Bay Bridge, provide the greatest reduction in the duration of unacceptable congestion levels, and is more compatible with existing land-use patterns, according to the study data.

Washington Post: A new bridge close to Chesapeake Bay Bridge would provide the most traffic relief, study says

Baltimore Sun: Bay Bridge study narrows options to three crossings from Anne Arundel County

[BrianP]

I've always thought a new bridge at the existing crossing is the most likely scenario.  You get the most bang for the buck since the other options would need to include new highways to connect to a new bridge.  And I think you would get much less opposition as well. 

I'd like to see a new cable stayed bridge there.  But not like the Sunshine Skyway. More like the Ravenel bridge in SC. 
https://goo.gl/maps/6zJyHrRMnjJtycB8A
Because then the cables are on the outside of the bridge instead of in the middle.  This would allow for the possibility of reversible lanes to handle the single direction peak traffic that the crossing has. Either 7 lanes with one reversible lane or 8 lanes which probably would not need any reversible lanes should what's strived for.  A cost cutting measure could be 5 lanes with reversible lane(s) or 6 lanes to match the highway on either side. 

I don't think we'll see a new bridge until at least 2030.  Next up for MDTA is the Nice bridge. 

[Beltway]

Washington Post: A new bridge close to Chesapeake Bay Bridge would provide the most traffic relief, study says

No revelation here.  That has been documented repeatedly over the last 20 years.  Presumably a third span in the current complex.

The northern crossing at Tolchester Beach or the southern crossing at Taylors Island, would have only a fraction of the catchment as compared to the existing crossing.  Maps alone are more than sufficient to demonstrate this.

What are they talking about with extending MD-100 across the bay or building a crossing to Easton?  Those bridges would be so long, over 10 miles, that they must be taking reefer to come up with alternatives like that.

[cpzilliacus]

I don't think we'll see a new bridge until at least 2030.  Next up for MDTA is the Nice bridge. 

I agree.

This has to go through a full NEPA process to get to a Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) which will take several years on its own. Then there will be litigation (and opponents of a new bridge will again demand that ferries be part of the solution, which they are clearly not - and others will demand a Metro or light rail line from Washington and Baltimore to Ocean City), which probably brings us to 2030. 

One nice thing about 2030 - a lot of the debt that was issued by MDTA to build the initial part of the I-95 Express Toll Lanes and MD-200 will have been paid-off or paid-down by then, which means there should be some bonding capacity available to build a new (and quite expensive) new structure.

[cpzilliacus]

No revelation here.  That has been documented repeatedly over the last 20 years.  Presumably a third span in the current complex.

The northern crossing at Tolchester Beach or the southern crossing at Taylors Island, would have only a fraction of the catchment as compared to the existing crossing.  Maps alone are more than sufficient to demonstrate this.

A new crossing at Tolchester Beach or Rock Hall is nice from a network redundancy point of view, but the impacts on Kent County are probably not acceptable - also, it is a remarkably LONG way to get to U.S. 301, U.S. 50, MD-313 or MD-404 from either of those Eastern Shore proposed landing points.

Those alternatives are useful to MDTA to be able to demonstrate to the courts when the inevitable lawsuit happens from anti-highway and anti-auto groups and persons that the planning process considered three highway alternatives and the no-build (and an alll-transit alternative was studied some years ago and rejected as  unworkable).

[BrianP]

There is the other option to get a bridge built sooner which would be a P3.  I think that's an option since that's the route being taken for the HOT lanes being proposed.  The private entity would build the new bridge and probably even demolish the existing bridges.  I would guess that they may even take over the existing facility when a deal is finalized.  And after the lease expires the facility reverts back to the MDTA.

I agree that the other alternatives are there so they can say they looked at alternatives.

[Beltway]

There is the other option to get a bridge built sooner which would be a P3.  I think that's an option since that's the route being taken for the HOT lanes being proposed.  The private entity would build the new bridge and probably even demolish the existing bridges.  I would guess that they may even take over the existing facility when a deal is finalized.  And after the lease expires the facility reverts back to the MDTA.

A PPP for a new 8-lane bridge and the demolition of the 2 existing bridges?

Wonder what the tolls would be.

I agree that the other alternatives are there so they can say they looked at alternatives.

But as I said they have been doing this for over 20 years.

[cpzilliacus]

There is the other option to get a bridge built sooner which would be a P3.  I think that's an option since that's the route being taken for the HOT lanes being proposed.  The private entity would build the new bridge and probably even demolish the existing bridges.  I would guess that they may even take over the existing facility when a deal is finalized.  And after the lease expires the facility reverts back to the MDTA.

A PPP for a new 8-lane bridge and the demolition of the 2 existing bridges?

Wonder what the tolls would be.

I agree that the other alternatives are there so they can say they looked at alternatives.

But as I said they have been doing this for over 20 years.

IMO, I think it unlikely that either of the existing bridges will be torn-down. Even the older bridge (opened to traffic in 1952) has quite a bit of useful life left (supposedly it was designed with an estimated life span of 100 years). Same applies to the newer span, opened in 1972 or 1973 (I do not feel like looking it up). 

I seriously doubt that Maryland's elected officials would consent to the tear-down of either structure.

[BrianP]

Wonder what the tolls would be.

I wonder if they could do congestion based or some type of variable toll rates.  You likely couldn't get many drivers to divert to another route north or south around the bay.  But you could get them to change the time of their crossing using a variable toll to help spread out traffic during peak periods. 

As for the amount of the toll, I think it would likely go up. But I don't think it would surpass the amount paid in the NYC area or the CBBT. 

Sooner might also be better because I don't know how long until the existing bridges need major work done to them. 

But as I said they have been doing this for over 20 years.

I would imagine what's included in studies could have changed significantly in that time. 

A new crossing at Tolchester Beach or Rock Hall is nice from a network redundancy point of view...

Also beside redundancy, one thing a separate crossing brings is a better likelihood of more capacity.  If you expand the existing crossing you likely would go from 5 lanes to 8 lanes.  Building a second crossing could bring you from 5 lanes to 11 lanes with a new 6 lane crossing. 

Granted that leaves you with continuing to use the existing bridges and eventually still having to replace them.  And that's probably more capacity than is needed.

[BrianP]

IMO, I think it unlikely that either of the existing bridges will be torn-down. Even the older bridge (opened to traffic in 1952) has quite a bit of useful life left (supposedly it was designed with an estimated life span of 100 years). Same applies to the newer span, opened in 1972 or 1973 (I do not feel like looking it up). 

I seriously doubt that Maryland's elected officials would consent to the tear-down of either structure.

The problem is not the lifespan of the bridge it's the maintenance. We don't build truss and suspension bridges anymore because of the maintenance required for them.  Instead of sinking more funds into maintenance on an obsolete bridge it's likely more cost effective to build a new bridge. 

This supports the idea about needing 8 lanes with reversible lanes:

In order to accommodate the highest projected 2040 eastbound and westbound volumes (6,225 vph on Friday afternoon, and 6,330 vph on Sunday evening in the eastbound and westbound direction, respectively) at Level of Service D or E, a minimum of 5 lanes in the peak direction would be required. However, due to the highly directional nature of seasonal volumes, no more than three lanes will be needed in the off‐peak direction. To minimize the footprint of the bridge, these operating conditions lend themselves well to the use of reversible lanes.

https://mdta.maryland.gov/sites/default/files/Files/Bay_Bridge_LCCA_Report_12-2015.pdf

So at minimum you need a third span with three lanes.  I'd question how five lanes in either direction would work with the adjacent freeway segments.  How do you need five lanes when the adjacent highways only have 3 in each direction?  Will MDSHA be able widen US 50 or would that need to be added to the P3 in the form of reversible HOT lanes?