Maryland

[TheOneKEA]

Does anyone know where to look or who to contact to find out what MDOT SHA's current plans are for signing additional highways at 70mph?

[cpzilliacus]

Does anyone know where to look or who to contact to find out what MDOT SHA's current plans are for signing additional highways at 70mph?

Only the text below, from an SHA press release that I-68 was (mostly) being increased to 70 MPH:

SHA will study other 65 mph highways for potential increases to 70 mph. Traffic engineers evaluate and set speed limits based on several factors including crash data, traffic volume, concentration of truck traffic, actual average speeds, and roadway conditions such as lane width, presence and width of shoulders, hills/grades, alignments and curves.

[cpzilliacus]

Baltimore Sun editorial: Road warriors

In Maryland, decisions about transportation construction projects have always required a sometimes unsettling combination of professional planning and political muscle. There is the dry engineering, soliciting of local input and long-term civic planning behind every highway, bridge, public transit project, port improvement, airport runway or redesigned traffic light. And then there is the final choice of a sitting governor and the transportation department he controls over whether any specific proposal gets funded.

Baltimore learned first-hand about the uncertainties of transportation choices last year when Gov. Larry Hogan killed the $2.9 billion Red Line, the light rail project that was two decades in the making, that was a top priority in the state's Consolidated Transportation Program and for which elected leaders from Towson to Washington, D.C. had pledged hundreds of millions of dollars in support. It was a painful, costly and wasteful move given the huge sum already spent on planning the east-west line, but it was also well within a sitting governor's authority.

[kj3400]

On the topic of the Hanover Street Bridge, I ride across that bridge every day and the issue is the potholes but one can't exactly repave a bridge, because that bridge could use a new bed of concrete. I do hope that it can be renovated, it's such a nice bridge and the only one in the city I can think of with reversible lanes.

If it were my call - do a complete deck replacement, with a total closure of the bridge.

To ease some of the traffic impact on areas south of the bridge like Brooklyn and Brooklyn Park, add movements that were never built at the I-895 Exit 7 (Md. 2 Potee Street or Patapsco Avenue) or at Shell Road to allow northbound traffic to exit and traffic to enter southbound (use ramp tolls, E-ZPass only, to avoid angering the bondholders). Also add ramps from I-895 southbound to Md. 295 northbound, and from Md. 295 southbound to I-895 northbound.

It's funny because I've never understood why 895 is the way it is. It wouldn't stop being a bypass just because it had some extra exits. And it could have toll booths on the ramps if that's what they want. I don't know if shutting down the whole bridge would work though, considering it's the only way to downtown from the south and two bus routes run over it. Maybe close half. It being reversible helps.

[cpzilliacus]

It's funny because I've never understood why 895 is the way it is. It wouldn't stop being a bypass just because it had some extra exits. And it could have toll booths on the ramps if that's what they want. I don't know if shutting down the whole bridge would work though, considering it's the only way to downtown from the south and two bus routes run over it. Maybe close half. It being reversible helps.

I-895 has nearly always been true to its name - it is the Baltimore Harbor Tunnel Thruway. With the emphasis on thru.  Only in recent years have "free" ramps opened north of the tube at (for example) Lombard Street, and no part of the road south of the tube has ever been free.  Consider also that it does have that much capacity, since nearly the entire road (with a few short exceptions) is two lanes each way.

The primary idea behind I-895 was to get traffic from U.S. 1, the Baltimore-Washington Parkway and the Md. 3 corridor through the tunnel to U.S. 40 (Pulaski Highway).  Remember that the road was designed well before any part of I-95 was built.

[noelbotevera]

Remember that the road was designed well before any part of I-95 was built.

So at some point in time, before i-95 through Baltimore was completed, this would have been I-95? That does make sense in some way.

[1995hoo]

Remember that the road was designed well before any part of I-95 was built.

So at some point in time, before i-95 through Baltimore was completed, this would have been I-95? That does make sense in some way.

Well, it functioned as though it were I-95 for a long time. But it existed before any of I-95 and it was unnumbered for many years.

[Alps]

Remember that the road was designed well before any part of I-95 was built.

So at some point in time, before i-95 through Baltimore was completed, this would have been I-95? That does make sense in some way.

This is how it was signed:

[cpzilliacus]

This is how it was signed:

Indeed. Precisely.  Did you snap that? Was probably prior to the opening of the Fort McHenry Tunnel in 1985.

There were assemblies on the Baltimore-Washington Parkway prior to the opening of the "Between the Beltways" section of I-95, but they were more conventional looking:

TO
I-95

or

TO
NORTH (or SOUTH)
I-95

On the assemblies on the Parkway, the TO and NORTH or SOUTH plates were black-on-white, not white-on-blue.

[noelbotevera]

Remember that the road was designed well before any part of I-95 was built.

So at some point in time, before i-95 through Baltimore was completed, this would have been I-95? That does make sense in some way.

This is how it was signed:

But if I-95 wasn't completed inside Baltimore, did you have to use I-895 to piece together the two segments?

So what I take from this is that I-95 at the time ended at the two I-895 interchanges outside Baltimore. So before the Fort Mchenry Tunnel, you would use I-895 in order to connect the two.

[Alex]

There was another toward the north end that lasted until maybe 2010. Here it was in 2001:

[1995hoo]

Remember that the road was designed well before any part of I-95 was built.

So at some point in time, before i-95 through Baltimore was completed, this would have been I-95? That does make sense in some way.

This is how it was signed:

But if I-95 wasn't completed inside Baltimore, did you have to use I-895 to piece together the two segments?

So what I take from this is that I-95 at the time ended at the two I-895 interchanges outside Baltimore. So before the Fort Mchenry Tunnel, you would use I-895 in order to connect the two.

It varied over the years. In the early 1980s you could take I-95 into Baltimore from the south if, say, you were going to the aquarium. But not all the signs were marked I-95. There were BGSs on I-695 at its southern junction with I-95 that had blank Interstate shields for the road into Baltimore. I always assumed it was because of the risk of people thinking it was the way to New York and following it and getting lost (which also used to happen in Virginia and DC until I-95 was renumbered as I-395).

[cpzilliacus]

But if I-95 wasn't completed inside Baltimore, did you have to use I-895 to piece together the two segments?

So what I take from this is that I-95 at the time ended at the two I-895 interchanges outside Baltimore. So before the Fort Mchenry Tunnel, you would use I-895 in order to connect the two.

To supplement what Hoo wrote above:

(1) The Fort McHenry Tunnel (FMT) was the final section of I-95 to open to traffic in Maryland. 
(2) It opened in 1985.
(3) Prior to the opening of the FMT, I-95 traffic southbound was "naturally" directed and signed to I-895.   I-95 was completed almost to the FMT on the north side (Keith Avenue, if memory serves), and to I-395 on the south side before 1985.  It was carefully not signed as I-95 northbound at the I-695 interchange (I-95 traffic was signed to follow I-695 to I-895 - which remained that way even after I-895 was extended from U.S. 1 to I-95, providing a convenient direct connection for I-95 traffic).
(4) There were indeed blank Interstate shields on I-95 at the southern I-95/I-695 interchange.

[Alps]

This is how it was signed:

Indeed. Precisely.  Did you snap that? Was probably prior to the opening of the Fort McHenry Tunnel in 1985.

More recently. Also this one:

[cpzilliacus]

There was another toward the north end that lasted until maybe 2010. Here it was in 2001:

That goes back to the days before the Fort McHenry Tunnel opening in 1985.  Because it was facing southwest and I-895 is pretty low at that point (under U.S. 40), the sun did not fade it much at all.

[mrsman]

It's funny because I've never understood why 895 is the way it is. It wouldn't stop being a bypass just because it had some extra exits. And it could have toll booths on the ramps if that's what they want. I don't know if shutting down the whole bridge would work though, considering it's the only way to downtown from the south and two bus routes run over it. Maybe close half. It being reversible helps.

I-895 has nearly always been true to its name - it is the Baltimore Harbor Tunnel Thruway. With the emphasis on thru.  Only in recent years have "free" ramps opened north of the tube at (for example) Lombard Street, and no part of the road south of the tube has ever been free.  Consider also that it does have that much capacity, since nearly the entire road (with a few short exceptions) is two lanes each way.

The primary idea behind I-895 was to get traffic from U.S. 1, the Baltimore-Washington Parkway and the Md. 3 corridor through the tunnel to U.S. 40 (Pulaski Highway).  Remember that the road was designed well before any part of I-95 was built.

OK.  Originally, this was the only way for thru traffic to bypass Downtown Baltimore and provide the connection from the road to Washington (US 1) to the road to Wilmmington (US 40).  To limit the amount of traffic on the roadway, given that it was only two lanes in each direction, all the traffic on the thruway had to use the tunnel (i.e. one could not use this as a connector from Halethorpe or MD 2/MD 3/I-97 corridor to the Hanover Street Bridge).  The original Dulles Access Road was similiarly restricted to serving only to airport traffic without being able to get on and get off before reaching the airport until the consturction of the Dulles Toll Road.

But after the Fort McHenry Tunnel is completed and we see that the Thruway is being underutilized, why couldn't the connections be added now?  The roadway has just as many lanes as the BW Pkwy south of MD 175 and we don't see that as being so severely limited in its use.  I say that it would help remove a lot of traffic from surface roads to the south of Baltimore if I-97 traffic can use the roadway to get into Downtown Baltimore without paying toll, while stilll maintaining the toll for those using the tunnel itself.

[TheOneKEA]

It's funny because I've never understood why 895 is the way it is. It wouldn't stop being a bypass just because it had some extra exits. And it could have toll booths on the ramps if that's what they want. I don't know if shutting down the whole bridge would work though, considering it's the only way to downtown from the south and two bus routes run over it. Maybe close half. It being reversible helps.

I-895 has nearly always been true to its name - it is the Baltimore Harbor Tunnel Thruway. With the emphasis on thru.  Only in recent years have "free" ramps opened north of the tube at (for example) Lombard Street, and no part of the road south of the tube has ever been free.  Consider also that it does have that much capacity, since nearly the entire road (with a few short exceptions) is two lanes each way.

The primary idea behind I-895 was to get traffic from U.S. 1, the Baltimore-Washington Parkway and the Md. 3 corridor through the tunnel to U.S. 40 (Pulaski Highway).  Remember that the road was designed well before any part of I-95 was built.

OK.  Originally, this was the only way for thru traffic to bypass Downtown Baltimore and provide the connection from the road to Washington (US 1) to the road to Wilmmington (US 40).  To limit the amount of traffic on the roadway, given that it was only two lanes in each direction, all the traffic on the thruway had to use the tunnel (i.e. one could not use this as a connector from Halethorpe or MD 2/MD 3/I-97 corridor to the Hanover Street Bridge).  The original Dulles Access Road was similiarly restricted to serving only to airport traffic without being able to get on and get off before reaching the airport until the consturction of the Dulles Toll Road.

But after the Fort McHenry Tunnel is completed and we see that the Thruway is being underutilized, why couldn't the connections be added now?  The roadway has just as many lanes as the BW Pkwy south of MD 175 and we don't see that as being so severely limited in its use.  I say that it would help remove a lot of traffic from surface roads to the south of Baltimore if I-97 traffic can use the roadway to get into Downtown Baltimore without paying toll, while stilll maintaining the toll for those using the tunnel itself.

I-895 might look underutilized, but it really isn't. Peak hour traffic is very heavy, and off-peak volume can be readily discerned anytime one of the tunnels is closed for maintenance. The highway looks deceptively underutilized because it is explicitly set up solely for through traffic, but any restriction in capacity easily demonstrates the number of vehicles that use it to travel across the harbor.

http://www.mdta.maryland.gov/toll_facilities/bht.html says that the 2014 volume on I-895 was 24.9 million vehicles, which corresponds to an AADT value of approximately 68,000.

[cpzilliacus]

OK.  Originally, this was the only way for thru traffic to bypass Downtown Baltimore and provide the connection from the road to Washington (US 1) to the road to Wilmmington (US 40).  To limit the amount of traffic on the roadway, given that it was only two lanes in each direction, all the traffic on the thruway had to use the tunnel (i.e. one could not use this as a connector from Halethorpe or MD 2/MD 3/I-97 corridor to the Hanover Street Bridge).  The original Dulles Access Road was similiarly restricted to serving only to airport traffic without being able to get on and get off before reaching the airport until the consturction of the Dulles Toll Road.

But after the Fort McHenry Tunnel is completed and we see that the Thruway is being underutilized, why couldn't the connections be added now?  The roadway has just as many lanes as the BW Pkwy south of MD 175 and we don't see that as being so severely limited in its use.  I say that it would help remove a lot of traffic from surface roads to the south of Baltimore if I-97 traffic can use the roadway to get into Downtown Baltimore without paying toll, while stilll maintaining the toll for those using the tunnel itself.

A few thoughts:

1. To the south, it was also connected to (what was then signed as) the Baltimore-Washington Expressway (present-day Md. 295, the Baltimore-Washington Parkway). I believe that road was completed about the same time as the Baltimore Harbor Tunnel Thruway.  That quickly became the preferred (and de-facto) routing for I-95 traffic between Baltimore and Washington (at least for automobile traffic).

2. The approach roads to the Patapsco Tunnel (as the Baltimore Harbor Tunnel was once called) were built as part of the tunnel project, and the same bonds paid to build most of what is there today, and the state has always regarded all of it as being one entity.  I do not believe it was really about limiting traffic as much as it was about the purpose and need for the project (and yes, this was years before the National Environmental Policy Act was signed into law by Nixon in 1969).  So yes, the analogy between the Baltimore Harbor Tunnel Thruway and the Dulles Airport Access Road is a pretty good one.

3. As was suggested above, the BHT is really not underutilized, and it can be extremely busy during peak commute times (it will be interesting to see where that traffic goes when the Canton Viaduct replacement project starts, and I-895 will only have three lanes - total - between the north portal of the tunnel and Boston Street).  Yes, there is not so much traffic between the southern terminus at I-95 and the tie-in to Md. 295, but from 295 all the way to its north terminus at I-95, the road is decently busy.  And the metric for determining how busy it is should be traffic volumes paying to use the tunnel. 

4. I do think that I-895 should have access added south of the main toll barrier - I think at Md. 2 (Potee Street) and  south of I-695 at Transway Road (to better-serve truck traffic in and out of the industrial area of southwestern Baltimore County off of Hollins Ferry Road).  When this was done north of the tunnel it appears to have had no impact on the performance of the tunnel itself.

[cpzilliacus]

MarylandReporter.com: Dundalk Republican proposes deep toll cuts on Key Bridge

A proposal that would allow drivers travelling across the Francis Scott Key Memorial Bridge to pay $20 per year as opposed to several hundred, was promoted on Thursday by Del. Ric Metzgar, R-Baltimore County, at the House Environment and Transportation Committee.

Metzgar's proposed bill, HB964, the Maryland Transportation Authority-Francis Scott Key Bridge-Toll Discount Plans, enjoys bipartisan support, and would align rates with those paid by commuters crossing the Thomas J. Hatem Memorial Bridge over the Susquehanna, which connects Harford and Cecil counties. The Francis Scott Key Memorial Bridge is on the southeast side of the Baltimore Beltway, 695, crossing the Patapsco River.

[mrsman]

MarylandReporter.com: Dundalk Republican proposes deep toll cuts on Key Bridge

A proposal that would allow drivers travelling across the Francis Scott Key Memorial Bridge to pay $20 per year as opposed to several hundred, was promoted on Thursday by Del. Ric Metzgar, R-Baltimore County, at the House Environment and Transportation Committee.

Metzgar's proposed bill, HB964, the Maryland Transportation Authority-Francis Scott Key Bridge-Toll Discount Plans, enjoys bipartisan support, and would align rates with those paid by commuters crossing the Thomas J. Hatem Memorial Bridge over the Susquehanna, which connects Harford and Cecil counties. The Francis Scott Key Memorial Bridge is on the southeast side of the Baltimore Beltway, 695, crossing the Patapsco River.

I agree generally with the proposed legislation, but I believe $20/month is too low.  There should be discounts for those who travel a corridor on a near-daily basis.

From the current website, it is $4 generally (for cars) to cross, $3 with MD EZ-Pass, and $1.40 for commuters (50 trips cost $70 if done within a 45 day period).  It seems like a regular commuter, at the commuter rate would pay about $500 a year to cross.  Bringing that down to about $200/year would be great, but $20/year is ridiculously too low.

[froggie]

I still find it fascinatingly stupid that, at the same time they're trying to improve the system, pay off the ICC, build a new Nice Bridge, and now plan for a third Bay Bridge span, Maryland state officials have it in their brain to CUT tolls, which is how all of that gets paid...

[Zeffy]

I still find it fascinatingly stupid that, at the same time they're trying to improve the system, pay off the ICC, build a new Nice Bridge, and now plan for a third Bay Bridge span, Maryland state officials have it in their brain to CUT tolls, which is how all of that gets paid...

I guess the logic is lowering the tolls will get more to use them in the first place. When I used the ICC and the 95 express lanes near Baltimore, I did not mind paying because they were convenient and provided a good alternative to the normal route (exception of the express lanes because well they are just additional lanes on the same roadway. 

[cpzilliacus]

I still find it fascinatingly stupid that, at the same time they're trying to improve the system, pay off the ICC, build a new Nice Bridge, and now plan for a third Bay Bridge span, Maryland state officials have it in their brain to CUT tolls, which is how all of that gets paid...

Agreed.  I suspect that this bill will get killed in the General Assembly. 

Other means can be used to induce development at Sparrows Point, and a targeted toll reduction for residents of Dundalk can be studied (that area was hurt badly by the demise of the former Sparrows Point steel mill, though the end of that was probably inevitable).

[davewiecking]

I still find it fascinatingly stupid that, at the same time they're trying to improve the system, pay off the ICC, build a new Nice Bridge, and now plan for a third Bay Bridge span, Maryland state officials have it in their brain to CUT tolls, which is how all of that gets paid...

I guess the logic is lowering the tolls will get more to use them in the first place. When I used the ICC and the 95 express lanes near Baltimore, I did not mind paying because they were convenient and provided a good alternative to the normal route (exception of the express lanes because well they are just additional lanes on the same roadway.

Logic? This is government. Gov. Hogan ran on a platform of "things cost too much", so we'll just cut toll rates by random amounts. Push the costs off to the next generation. I think I'll stop there.

[mattpedersen]

Anyhow MD 717 had been pulled from its shadows and posted on new guide signs on Route 4.