U.S. 301 toll road project in Delaware

[sprjus4]

The City of Chesapeake wanted these projects built, took them on as local projects, designed them as they pleased within basic VDOT standards, and funded them as they pleased.  BTW the Oak Grove Connector and the Great Bridge Bypass were built by the state as toll-free highways, as was relocated US-17 south of Dominion Blvd.

Go to an amortization program, there are many online.

$152 million at 4.6% for 34 years   = $300,892,552
$151 million at 3.33% for 34 years = $252,465,394

North Carolina is a very high taxed state, figure about 30 to 40% more each for state general taxes, income taxes, local taxes and road user taxes.  Pick your poison.

Chesapeake wanted both projects, yes, however they've been competing for state funding for 15+ years before each of them came from drawing board to pavement.

I would rather pay slightly more in taxes and know I'm getting a good investment out of them. I don't agree with toll roads, never have, and never will. If the money was spent properly, a lot of these toll road projects could be avoided. I would support a tax increase in Virginia, especially on fuel, if I knew I was going to get a good investment, one seen down in North Carolina. Toll roads aren't a good investment, and for a daily user, that adds up to hundreds of dollars wasted per year. In rural areas (not southern Chesapeake, but in the middle of nowhere rural) like many of the turnpikes are, those make more sense, there's not a lot of daily users in those areas. If a Washington D.C. bypass was ever built, I could see a $5-10 toll on a 50+ mile road like that, and for good reason. In urban areas where there's a lot of daily users however, one has to invest hundreds per year just to commute, or sit through traffic on shunpiking routes.

At least these aren't as bad as the Downtown Tunnel joke.

[Beltway]

I wouldn't mind paying slightly more in taxes, but have no interest in the tax gouging in some states.  Toll road financing is used in many places around the country and world, and when the demand is high they are a good investment.  The tolls in Chesapeake are low for the regular users.  I feel sympathy for the people living in the states with border-to-border turnpikes, now there is a situation were tolling may be excessive especially where these highway were built 50+ years ago.

[jeffandnicole]

The City of Chesapeake wanted these projects built, took them on as local projects, designed them as they pleased within basic VDOT standards, and funded them as they pleased.  BTW the Oak Grove Connector and the Great Bridge Bypass were built by the state as toll-free highways, as was relocated US-17 south of Dominion Blvd.

Go to an amortization program, there are many online.

$152 million at 4.6% for 34 years   = $300,892,552
$151 million at 3.33% for 34 years = $252,465,394

North Carolina is a very high taxed state, figure about 30 to 40% more each for state general taxes, income taxes, local taxes and road user taxes.  Pick your poison.

Chesapeake wanted both projects, yes, however they've been competing for state funding for 15+ years before each of them came from drawing board to pavement.

I would rather pay slightly more in taxes and know I'm getting a good investment out of them. I don't agree with toll roads, never have, and never will. If the money was spent properly, a lot of these toll road projects could be avoided. I would support a tax increase in Virginia, especially on fuel, if I knew I was going to get a good investment, one seen down in North Carolina. Toll roads aren't a good investment, and for a daily user, that adds up to hundreds of dollars wasted per year. In rural areas (not southern Chesapeake, but in the middle of nowhere rural) like many of the turnpikes are, those make more sense, there's not a lot of daily users in those areas. If a Washington D.C. bypass was ever built, I could see a $5-10 toll on a 50+ mile road like that, and for good reason. In urban areas where there's a lot of daily users however, one has to invest hundreds per year just to commute, or sit through traffic on shunpiking routes.

At least these aren't as bad as the Downtown Tunnel joke.

A $5 toll on a 50 mile road around DC would be a joke.  Modern building costs in a very built-up area would actually probably have tolls more in the $25-$30 range for that entire route.

The bad thing about gas taxes is that there are so many projects that are needed, that money would be going to projects throughout the entire state.  Tolls tend to remain dedicated to one road (not always, as numerous examples would show), but it does allow a road to be built faster.  Between the two, if a certain area wanted a road badly, tolls are still the way to go. Someone on the other end of the state wouldn't want their taxes raised for a road they're probably never going to use.

[sprjus4]

I wouldn't mind paying slightly more in taxes, but have no interest in the tax gouging in some states.  Toll road financing is used in many places around the country and world, and when the demand is high they are a good investment.  The tolls in Chesapeake are low for the regular users.  I feel sympathy for the people living in the states with border-to-border turnpikes, now there is a situation were tolling may be excessive especially where these highway were built 50+ years ago.

Dominion Blvd gets good demand, and especially because the shunpiking routes are longer, it is used by most that used it before. The toll on Dominion Blvd is cheap now, but in the next 10 years, it will be way higher. The issue with the Expressway is most stick to Battlefield, even with low .75 cent tolls for locals. I travel Battlefield Blvd daily, and witness all the traffic myself. When entering the Expressway at Hillcrest Pkwy (Exit 8) going north, I rarely see cars coming over the overpass from the toll road, all them are entering at Hillcrest Pkwy from Battlefield Blvd. Many would rather pay $0.00 a day rather than $1.50 a day for a commute, when the option is available. One thing I believe the city could do is complete a full diamond interchange at Exit 5, and have a ramp toll. That would allow commuters from Indian Creek Rd, etc. to have the option to use the toll road, because currently they are locked to Battlefield Blvd. Another incentive to draw more traffic is to raise the speed limit to 65 MPH. Currently, most of Battlefield Blvd is 50, some areas 55 MPH. The speed is the same on Expressway. If it was 15-20 MPH faster, it would offer an overall faster ride. They wanted to do that three years ago, however the city complained a study would have to be done, and instead lowered the north part of Battlefield Blvd from 55 to 45 MPH.

The turnpikes have always been tolled from the beginning, and were intended to be tolled indefinitely. States with them also benefit from them, as revenue from them can turn toward other transportation improvements in the state. In Indiana, the state built over 90 continuous miles of new-location Interstate 69 in 2012 and 2016, and are currently upgrading over 30+ miles of arterial road to interstate standards. A lot of the funding, I believe over $1 billion came from revenue on the Indiana Toll Road. The original plan was to toll I-69 as a Southern Turnpike, however it was not necessary, and all 90+ miles are free to travel on.

The City of Chesapeake wanted these projects built, took them on as local projects, designed them as they pleased within basic VDOT standards, and funded them as they pleased.  BTW the Oak Grove Connector and the Great Bridge Bypass were built by the state as toll-free highways, as was relocated US-17 south of Dominion Blvd.

Go to an amortization program, there are many online.

$152 million at 4.6% for 34 years   = $300,892,552
$151 million at 3.33% for 34 years = $252,465,394

North Carolina is a very high taxed state, figure about 30 to 40% more each for state general taxes, income taxes, local taxes and road user taxes.  Pick your poison.

Chesapeake wanted both projects, yes, however they've been competing for state funding for 15+ years before each of them came from drawing board to pavement.

I would rather pay slightly more in taxes and know I'm getting a good investment out of them. I don't agree with toll roads, never have, and never will. If the money was spent properly, a lot of these toll road projects could be avoided. I would support a tax increase in Virginia, especially on fuel, if I knew I was going to get a good investment, one seen down in North Carolina. Toll roads aren't a good investment, and for a daily user, that adds up to hundreds of dollars wasted per year. In rural areas (not southern Chesapeake, but in the middle of nowhere rural) like many of the turnpikes are, those make more sense, there's not a lot of daily users in those areas. If a Washington D.C. bypass was ever built, I could see a $5-10 toll on a 50+ mile road like that, and for good reason. In urban areas where there's a lot of daily users however, one has to invest hundreds per year just to commute, or sit through traffic on shunpiking routes.

At least these aren't as bad as the Downtown Tunnel joke.

A $5 toll on a 50 mile road around DC would be a joke.  Modern building costs in a very built-up area would actually probably have tolls more in the $25-$30 range for that entire route.

The bad thing about gas taxes is that there are so many projects that are needed, that money would be going to projects throughout the entire state.  Tolls tend to remain dedicated to one road (not always, as numerous examples would show), but it does allow a road to be built faster.  Between the two, if a certain area wanted a road badly, tolls are still the way to go. Someone on the other end of the state wouldn't want their taxes raised for a road they're probably never going to use.

Hampton Roads uses taxes collected in the area, along with local funding to fund projects here. Only Smart Scale projects use taxes from other parts of the state, and there's been hundreds of millions contributed by HRTAC and local taxes.

As for a toll road around DC, I suppose $15-20, but not $25-30. Notice I said bypass, not through developed areas. DC is surrounded by rural land on both sides, more so on the west side. This wouldn't be no suburban 50 mile road, it would be road around 100 miles long, rural, and completely avoid DC and it's sprawl outside it for long-distance travelers. 70 MPH, six lanes, interchanges at major access points only, similar to a turnpike. Think like the Austin Bypass (SH 130) toll road in Texas, completely avoids Downtown Austin which I-35 goes through, 90 miles long, and I believe it costs around $18-20 to travel the entire length. That's the road famous for its 85 MPH speed limit.

[Beltway]

"The turnpikes have always been tolled from the beginning, and were intended to be tolled indefinitely."

That is really not true, at least that was not stated in the beginning, and some had declared that they would go toll-free after the bonds were paid off.

My point was that this is a far more aggressive tolling scheme than what you were complaining about, to have that many miles of tollroad that now are the principal Interstate highway in the state connecting the biggest metro areas.  Your point that the revenue can be moved to other parts of the state just means that the tollroad users are massively subsidizing roads in other parts of the state, and providing them with toll-free highways in the Indiana case you offered.

[sprjus4]

"The turnpikes have always been tolled from the beginning, and were intended to be tolled indefinitely."

That is really not true, at least that was not stated in the beginning, and some had declared that they would go toll-free after the bonds were paid off.

My point was that this is a far more aggressive tolling scheme than what you were complaining about, to have that many miles of tollroad that now are the principal Interstate highway in the state connecting the biggest metro areas.  Your point that the revenue can be moved to other parts of the state just means that the tollroad users are massively subsidizing roads in other parts of the state, and providing them with toll-free highways in the Indiana case you offered.

They might be the principal Interstate Highway, however it has always been there from the beginning. For example, much of I-95 is tolled up north connecting major cities such as Baltimore, New York City, Boston, etc. and it has always been.

Edit - I will agree though, some turnpikes have outrageous pricing these days even after paid off, especially up northeast. One's like Indiana though, it costs $11.00 to travel 157 miles through a relatively rural area, and is for passing through traffic. Also, according to the Indiana Toll Road's website, they've also spent hundreds of millions of toll dollars on replacing aging travel plazas, repaving 50 miles, replacing bridges, etc. I guess the extra revenue goes toward other state projects, or there could have also been a special agreement between I-69 and Indiana Toll Road, similar to Chesapeake Expressway and Dominion Boulevard. Still, Indiana still benefited from having a pre-existing turnpike, or else I-69 would've been a turnpike itself.

As for the Indiana toll example, that road is a mainly rural route that carries traffic through Indiana, not local or state traffic. It has always been tolled from the start. The road is paid off, and instead of removing the tolls, the state knows that it will continue to get lots of traffic, and chose to keep the tolls to act as a revenue generator for state transportation projects. It may not be right, but it's definitely smart for the state. Most of these travelers don't plan on doing much in Indiana, so the state tolls them to come through.

As for the point of declaring toll roads would go free once paid off, and sharing revenue between one toll road and another, a perfect example is in Chesapeake. The expressway was originally supposed to only be tolled for 10-15 years (as per what officials told locals back in the 90s), then it was 2032, now it's 2051. It just keeps on getting longer and longer. The expressway will actually be paid fully off in 2032 (or sooner), but then its revenue collected after that will go fully to help pay off another road, Dominion Blvd.

[Alps]

sprjus it sounds like you're advocating for this 301 bypass to have a speed limit of 85 mph also. Maybe they'll number it I-366?

[sprjus4]

sprjus it sounds like you're advocating for this 301 bypass to have a speed limit of 85 mph also. Maybe they'll number it I-366?

Maybe haha. The mention about the speed limit was just a one-off statement, not trying to suggest anything. Don't worry, still some people will do 85 MPH.

[Beltway]

My point was that this is a far more aggressive tolling scheme than what you were complaining about, to have that many miles of tollroad that now are the principal Interstate highway in the state connecting the biggest metro areas.  Your point that the revenue can be moved to other parts of the state just means that the tollroad users are massively subsidizing roads in other parts of the state, and providing them with toll-free highways in the Indiana case you offered.

They might be the principal Interstate Highway, however it has always been there from the beginning. For example, much of I-95 is tolled up north connecting major cities such as Baltimore, New York City, Boston, etc. and it has always been.

So what?  It's not like the turnpikes are the only toll roads, there are at least 20 major tunnels and bridges that are tolled from Baltimore to Wilmington to Philadelphia to New York.

As for the Indiana toll example, that road is a mainly rural route that carries traffic through Indiana, not local or state traffic. It has always been tolled from the start. The road is paid off, and instead of removing the tolls, the state knows that it will continue to get lots of traffic, and chose to keep the tolls to act as a revenue generator for state transportation projects. It may not be right, but it's definitely smart for the state. Most of these travelers don't plan on doing much in Indiana, so the state tolls them to come through.

The over one million people living in Northwest Indiana and South Bend area would disagree with that.  While Chicagoland is in Illinois it connects to the Indiana Tollroad and generates a huge amount of local traffic for the tollroad, which comes right to the border of Chicago.  The Indiana Tollroad is loaded with local traffic on its western half.

As for the point of declaring toll roads would go free once paid off, and sharing revenue between one toll road and another, a perfect example is in Chesapeake. The expressway was originally supposed to only be tolled for 10-15 years (as per what officials told locals back in the 90s), then it was 2032, now it's 2051. It just keeps on getting longer and longer. The expressway will actually be paid fully off in 2032 (or sooner), but then its revenue collected after that will go fully to help pay off another road, Dominion Blvd.

I have a major well-researched website article on the VA-168 Chesapeake Expressway and I do not recall that 10-15 year claim.  The obvious reason for the longer time now is the aforementioned Chesapeake Transportation System which includes the Chesapeake Expressway and the Dominion Blvd. freeway and river bridge.

Virginia is one of the few states that has conducted major detollings, although major expansion projects have retolled three of them.  Still toll-free is HRBT, US-17 James River Bridge, VA Beach Expwy., Norris Bridge and Richmond-Petersburg Turnpike.  Expanded HRBT will have HOT lanes, but 2 general purpose lanes each way will remain toll-free.

[sprjus4]

My point was that this is a far more aggressive tolling scheme than what you were complaining about, to have that many miles of tollroad that now are the principal Interstate highway in the state connecting the biggest metro areas.  Your point that the revenue can be moved to other parts of the state just means that the tollroad users are massively subsidizing roads in other parts of the state, and providing them with toll-free highways in the Indiana case you offered.

They might be the principal Interstate Highway, however it has always been there from the beginning. For example, much of I-95 is tolled up north connecting major cities such as Baltimore, New York City, Boston, etc. and it has always been.

So what?  It's not like the turnpikes are the only toll roads, there are at least 20 major tunnels and bridges that are tolled from Baltimore to Wilmington to Philadelphia to New York.

My point is that I-95 is a principal highway connecting major cities, and is a toll road in many locations, as you mentioned, bridges, tunnels, etc.

As for the Indiana toll example, that road is a mainly rural route that carries traffic through Indiana, not local or state traffic. It has always been tolled from the start. The road is paid off, and instead of removing the tolls, the state knows that it will continue to get lots of traffic, and chose to keep the tolls to act as a revenue generator for state transportation projects. It may not be right, but it's definitely smart for the state. Most of these travelers don't plan on doing much in Indiana, so the state tolls them to come through.

The over one million people living in Northwest Indiana and South Bend area would disagree with that.  While Chicagoland is in Illinois it connects to the Indiana Tollroad and generates a huge amount of local traffic for the tollroad, which comes right to the border of Chicago.  The Indiana Tollroad is loaded with local traffic on its western half.

Agreed, those two portions of the toll road most likely have local traffic, but the toll is much lower as they are not traveling all 157 miles. Also, the western part also has I-65 and I-94/80 as non-tolled freeways, and South Bend has U.S. 31 and U.S. 20 as non-tolled freeways, U.S. 30 is a continuous link to I-94 in Michigan as well.

As for the point of declaring toll roads would go free once paid off, and sharing revenue between one toll road and another, a perfect example is in Chesapeake. The expressway was originally supposed to only be tolled for 10-15 years (as per what officials told locals back in the 90s), then it was 2032, now it's 2051. It just keeps on getting longer and longer. The expressway will actually be paid fully off in 2032 (or sooner), but then its revenue collected after that will go fully to help pay off another road, Dominion Blvd.

I have a major well-researched website article on the VA-168 Chesapeake Expressway and I do not recall that 10-15 year claim.  The obvious reason for the longer time now is the aforementioned Chesapeake Transportation System which includes the Chesapeake Expressway and the Dominion Blvd. freeway and river bridge.

I've been told by locals who lived here before and while the thing was being built, they were told the tolls would only be in effect for 10-15 years, then they would be removed. Them extending the toll duration may be apart of the "CTS" but it's also a way to use tolls on the Expressway to pay off Dominion. They may be branded as one facility, however they are two different routes and serve different purposes.

Virginia is one of the few states that has conducted major detollings, although major expansion projects have retolled three of them.  Still toll-free is HRBT, US-17 James River Bridge, VA Beach Expwy., Norris Bridge and Richmond-Petersburg Turnpike.  Expanded HRBT will have HOT lanes, but 2 general purpose lanes each way will remain toll-free.

Agreed, and it's nice they've been removed. Most of the current toll roads however, won't be untolled after paid off, the money will just flow into private company's pockets or pay for other things (such as the Dulles Toll Road in North Virginia paying for the Metro extension, not the actual road which is already paid off).

The retolling implemented on the Downtown Tunnel was something that never should've happen - again, the tolls on the Downtown Tunnel are paying for a completely different project, the only reason it's tolled is because it has more traffic than the Midtown Tunnel. There were no major improvements done to the Downtown Tunnel that warrants 50 years of $2-3 tolling and dividing two cities apart.

[Beltway]

I have a major well-researched website article on the VA-168 Chesapeake Expressway and I do not recall that 10-15 year claim.  The obvious reason for the longer time now is the aforementioned Chesapeake Transportation System which includes the Chesapeake Expressway and the Dominion Blvd. freeway and river bridge.

I've been told by locals who lived here before and while the thing was being built, they were told the tolls would only be in effect for 10-15 years, then they would be removed. Them extending the toll duration may be apart of the "CTS" but it's also a way to use tolls on the Expressway to pay off Dominion. They may be branded as one facility, however they are two different routes and serve different purposes.

So?  Pooled toll facilities are common around the country, rather than have every toll road stand alone they are their own toll system.  Maryland MdTA has 8 toll facilities and they all serve different routes and serve different purposes.  Illinois ISTHA has 4 toll facilities and they all serve different routes and serve different purposes.   There are arguments that can be made either way.

The retolling implemented on the Downtown Tunnel was something that never should've happen - again, the tolls on the Downtown Tunnel are paying for a completely different project, the only reason it's tolled is because it has more traffic than the Midtown Tunnel. There were no major improvements done to the Downtown Tunnel that warrants 50 years of $2-3 tolling and dividing two cities apart.

The current EZPass tolls are $1.79 offpeak and $2.20 peak, and low income people get a major subsidy.  Both Downtown Tunnels received major renovations in the ERT Tunnels project including structural, lighting, ventilation, electrical, plumbing and electronic, it had been almost 30 years since the second was built and the original was rehabbed.

The main reason it was tolled is because the ERT Tunnels project cost $1.4 billion in construction, no federal funding was involved, and a major traffic imbalance would have occured if the Midtown Tunnel was tolled and the Downtown Tunnel was not tolled.  The project also provided the MLK Freeway extension which provides a relief route for the Downtown Tunnel.

Given the amount of military presence in the area, the federal government should IMO provide special funding outside of normal FHWA allocations for these tunnel projects of at least 50%, but they don't.

I was in agreement with the detollings in the 1970s and 1980s, for economic reasons, and because I thought that future Interstate tunnel projects would get 90% FHWA funding, like did with 64, 264 and 664.  VA-164 and the Midtown Tunnel could have become I-164.  Since now they get nothing, it looks like some retollings are needed to finance these projects, which are -far- more expensive to construct today than they were back then (the parallel Downtown Tunnel cost $130 million).

Baltimore Harbor has never had a detolling, and they got 90% FHWA funding to build the I-95 Fort McHenry Tunnel and also an exception so that they could charge tolls, it has been 33 years and they apparently will never detoll the FMHT, of course that would also create a major traffic imbalance if tolls remained on the other 2 crossings.  But they have 16 lanes on 3 Interstate crossings and with those 3 they have not yet had a serious traffic bottleneck.

[epzik8]

I was against the Middletown bypass before, but it was just recently added to Google Maps, so I guess it opened, and now I actually think it's really appealing.

[Roadsguy]

I was against the Middletown bypass before, but it was just recently added to Google Maps, so I guess it opened, and now I actually think it's really appealing.

It actually opens on New Year's Day, but Google is being Google.

[Tonytone]

I was against the Middletown bypass before, but it was just recently added to Google Maps, so I guess it opened, and now I actually think it's really appealing.

Why were you against it? Have you not seen middletown traffic?


iPhone

[Beltway]

I was against the Middletown bypass before, but it was just recently added to Google Maps, so I guess it opened, and now I actually think it's really appealing.

Why were you against it? Have you not seen middletown traffic?

I first drove US-301 from the D.C. area to northern Delaware in 1972.  It has all been 4-laned in Maryland by then.  It dropped to 2 lanes at the Delaware border, and then the preferred route was the 2-lane DE-299 to US-13 at Odessa, and then US-13 to the Wilmington area and I-295.

There was an obvious need for a 4-lane connector even back then.  At that point it probably would have been a relocation to bypass Middletown and Odessa and connect to US-13 near Odessa.

[ixnay]

From https://blogs.deldot.gov/2018/12/14/outline-anticipated-construction-schedule-associated-lane-closures-work-us-301-mainline-project-next-week-24/

The new SR 1 northbound on-ramp will be opening to traffic at 5:00 a.m. on Tuesday, December 18, 2018. New directional signs will direct traffic to access the on-ramp just south of Biddles Toll Plaza at Port Penn Road. Once the new on-ramp has opened, the existing on-ramp will permanently close.

Does this mean the Scott Run [free] connector is now closed?

ixnay

[ipeters61]

From https://blogs.deldot.gov/2018/12/14/outline-anticipated-construction-schedule-associated-lane-closures-work-us-301-mainline-project-next-week-24/

The new SR 1 northbound on-ramp will be opening to traffic at 5:00 a.m. on Tuesday, December 18, 2018. New directional signs will direct traffic to access the on-ramp just south of Biddles Toll Plaza at Port Penn Road. Once the new on-ramp has opened, the existing on-ramp will permanently close.

Does this mean the Scott Run [free] connector is now closed?

ixnay

A new free ramp will be opening on December 20: https://deldot.gov/About/news/index.shtml?dc=release&id=7441

[Roadsguy]

Wait, did it open yesterday or will it open tomorrow?

[ipeters61]

Wait, did it open yesterday or will it open tomorrow?

The one I posted is titled as an update so I'm interpreting it as opening tomorrow.  I very rarely go up that way during the week though so I'm not sure.  Google traffic this morning still showed some backups at the "old" free ramp from US-13 to DE-1 North.

Also the one I posted has a publish date of yesterday morning from the DelDOT US-301 project website: https://deldot.gov/information/projects/us301/

[ipeters61]

Just drove up DE-1 around 10am today and noticed three interesting things:

1. The signs for DE-1 Exit 142, heading northbound, have the US-13 and "To US-301" greened out. https://goo.gl/maps/Mj5jT694Jb32

2. The signage denoting the exit from DE-1 southbound to US-301 southbound is installed and has an exit tab.  There's a black cover over the signage though, so no info on what's on them.

3. There were portable VMSes denoting that the new US-13 to DE-1 northbound ramp in the area of the Biddles Corner toll plaza would be open today, but around 10am, traffic was still directed onto the old ramp from US-13 to DE-1 northbound.

[NE2]

Just drove up DE-1 around 10am today and noticed three interesting things:

1. The signs for DE-1 Exit 142, heading northbound, have the US-13 and "To US-301" greened out. https://goo.gl/maps/Mj5jT694Jb32

That doesn't make sense. How do they expect northbound traffic to reach US 301? U-turning at DE 72?

[ipeters61]

Just drove up DE-1 around 10am today and noticed three interesting things:

1. The signs for DE-1 Exit 142, heading northbound, have the US-13 and "To US-301" greened out. https://goo.gl/maps/Mj5jT694Jb32

That doesn't make sense. How do they expect northbound traffic to reach US 301? U-turning at DE 72?

Consider US-301's destinations.  Traffic to central and southern Middletown is better served by taking DE-299 WB (Exit 136) and traffic to northern Middletown is better served by taking DE-896 NB to DE-71 SB (remember that DE-896 NB between DE-1 and DE-71 is heading predominately west).

Any traffic headed to the eastern shore of Maryland or the Bay Bridge from the south is much better off taking the two lane local roads from their area (e.g. from Dover, I'd just take DE-8 WB to US-301 SB to the Bay Bridge...if I wanted to go to Chestertown I'd take DE-6 WB to MD-291 WB).

[Alps]

Just drove up DE-1 around 10am today and noticed three interesting things:

1. The signs for DE-1 Exit 142, heading northbound, have the US-13 and "To US-301" greened out. https://goo.gl/maps/Mj5jT694Jb32

That doesn't make sense. How do they expect northbound traffic to reach US 301? U-turning at DE 72?

I would expect the default to go back to DE 299, but something ought to be signed. It's weird that they wouldn't have built ramps accommodating this movement at a new freeway to freeway interchange, per MUTCD/FHWA standard, and for a US highway terminus. At the very least build out 142 so that traffic can U-turn!

[ipeters61]

Just drove up DE-1 around 10am today and noticed three interesting things:

1. The signs for DE-1 Exit 142, heading northbound, have the US-13 and "To US-301" greened out. https://goo.gl/maps/Mj5jT694Jb32

That doesn't make sense. How do they expect northbound traffic to reach US 301? U-turning at DE 72?

I would expect the default to go back to DE 299, but something ought to be signed. It's weird that they wouldn't have built ramps accommodating this movement at a new freeway to freeway interchange, per MUTCD/FHWA standard, and for a US highway terminus. At the very least build out 142 so that traffic can U-turn!

Access to US-113 isn't signed from DE-1 NB either, and US-113 NB terminates at DE-1 as well.

[froggie]

It's weird that they wouldn't have built ramps accommodating this movement at a new freeway to freeway interchange, per MUTCD/FHWA standard

In my experience, FHWA only gets picky on this when it's an Interstate.  But even then they've granted waivers...I-494/US 169 for example.

Where is it shown in the MUTCD?