AARoads Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length

Author Topic: Virginia  (Read 904871 times)

Takumi

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3912
  • now with even more cars!

  • Age: 34
  • Location: central VA
  • Last Login: Today at 02:26:41 PM
    • The Practical Hoon (blog)
Re: Virginia
« Reply #5275 on: September 03, 2020, 09:01:42 PM »

General Braddock didn’t serve in Congress in the 20th century.
Logged
Don't pick apart my vision of complete psychotic breakdown, please.  I'm trying to make a point here.

bluecountry

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 238
  • Last Login: Today at 11:06:50 AM
Re: Virginia
« Reply #5276 on: September 08, 2020, 12:14:54 PM »

General Braddock didn’t serve in Congress in the 20th century.
Didn't answer my question...
Logged

Mapmikey

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 2997
  • Co-curator with Froggie of www.vahighways.com

  • Age: 50
  • Last Login: Today at 08:31:03 PM
    • Co-curator Virginia Highways Project
Re: Virginia
« Reply #5277 on: September 08, 2020, 12:42:21 PM »

Per the map at this entry, Braddock's expedition appears not to have followed VA 7...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Braddock_Expedition

Logged

Jmiles32

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 496
  • Age: 20
  • Location: Blacksburg, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 05:30:29 PM
Re: Virginia
« Reply #5278 on: September 08, 2020, 02:20:31 PM »

Heres an article that makes me highly doubtful that we'll see any significant projects or widenings recommedned by VDOT's ongoing I-64 study (aside from probably more HO/T lanes on I-664):
https://www.virginiamercury.com/2020/09/08/could-i-64-prove-vdots-highway-management-is-on-the-road-to-reform/
 
Quote
“The General Assembly is now on record telling VDOT the new direction they want to travel in by prioritizing transportation demand management, safety and increases to rail and transit service,” said Trip Pollard, senior attorney at the Southern Environmental Law Center. “We need to connect more jobs to less expensive and more sustainable forms of transportation than having to always get into your car and drive. This is the first corridor study taking place after this new statutory language is in effect, so it’s a significant opportunity to establish that vision.”

From purely paving to smart planning
Whereas past transportation officials have focused on congestion as an engineering problem — and consequently deployed road widening as their sole solution, a gradual cultural shift within VDOT, strengthened by the governor’s omnibus, has emphasized the importance of transportation demand management. A TDM lens takes a comprehensive, cost-effective approach to congestion by trying to help people better use existing infrastructure and providing alternatives to driving, such as mass transit, micromobility and more.

“We begin by looking at the least expensive options available which are typically operations upgrades and changes,” said Ben Mannell, assistant director of planning at VDOT and the project manager for the I-64 corridor study. Operations improvements typically entail minor tweaks to existing infrastructure such as faster towing of disabled vehicles, clearer signage and better lighting, for example — all relatively low-cost upgrades that can reduce the occurrence and severity of backups.

“Next we turn to multimodal solutions such as additional rail and transit service, adding park and rides and vanpools,” Mannell said. “It’s not just about your single occupant vehicle. Capital improvements on the highway side like interstate widening are always our last choice. We can move more people in a bus so we should do it. That’s why we look first to multimodal solutions because they provide a wider range of travel options for folks that don’t have a vehicle and help better connect folks to jobs.”

Data-based decisions
Perhaps the greatest potential effect of the Interstate Operations and Enhancement Program — the official name of the new TDM provision in the omnibus — will be its centering of data in VDOT’s decision-making processes.

Although the IOEP wasn’t the law of the land until this summer, VDOT began experimenting with data-driven highway management with its I-81 and I-95 corridor studies of the past several years. “VDOT has done a much better job of gathering the data to show people what the true problems are,” said Pollard. “When we finally got the analysis on I-81 we saw that there were geometric deficiencies, more freight trucks than expected and excessive local traffic as people hop on the interstate for short distances to avoid surface roads.”

The goal of the public input phase of VDOT’s current I-64 analysis is to identify the top 25 percent of problematic areas resulting in severe injuries and fatalities, delays of an hour or more and equivalent property damage only  — a jargony way to describe a metric for car crashes with a monetary value. After the public input period on the I-64 corridor closed last month, VDOT had logged more than 3,800 interactions with over 6,000 points dropped on the map study area. That represents a treasure trove of highlighted issues and possible solutions crowdsourced by the public ahead of the study’s second phase: presenting proposed fixes later this month.

For the sake of the forests and sensitive wetlands along I-64, Pollard hopes that further widening of the highway won’t make the list. “Thanks to this much better data we can accurately assess what is creating the safety, traffic and reliability problems with our existing transportation network,” he said. “Knowing the true causes of traffic helps us get away from the past thinking of ‘We just need more lanes.’ Experience has shown that we have thrown a ton of money at adding lanes and we have nothing to show for it in terms of congestion reduction.”

Conservation advocates may prove pleased with the results of the study according to Mannell: “Additional pavement is not going to provide a solution. We’re looking at how we can do the absolute minimum widening possible and, when we can, to widen to the inside to avoid issues with right of way and protected wetlands.”

That’s not to say that the study won’t result in major changes to the corridor. A network of roughly 45 miles of express lanes around Hampton Roads — similar to the HOT lanes found across Northern Virginia — appears to be a done deal. “We’re really trying to put forward the most cost effective solutions,” said Mannell. “With the potential for express lanes we see, those are definitely going to come online in the region.”

While adding rail and transit service within major metro areas is fine, I'm not sure how they're expecting thru and beach traffic to use it, especially on the heavily travelled rural stretch of I-64 between Richmond and Williamsburg (over 60,000 ADDT). Will be interesting to see what the proposed projects are and whether or not the public will subsequently support. Do not think that is wise to automatically rule out widening between Richmond and Williamsburg. 
Logged
Aspiring Transportation Planner at Virginia Tech. Go Hokies!

plain

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 918
  • Age: 41
  • Location: Richmond Virginia
  • Last Login: October 26, 2020, 09:38:48 PM
Re: Virginia
« Reply #5279 on: September 08, 2020, 07:17:15 PM »

I really wouldn't read too much into that article to be honest.
Logged
Newark born, Richmond bred

sprjus4

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 5019
  • Location: Hampton Roads, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 08:30:26 PM
Re: Virginia
« Reply #5280 on: September 08, 2020, 09:08:04 PM »

Regardless of what happens with the remainder of the I-64 corridor west of Richmond (which IMO, outside of potentially Charlottesville, doesn't need widening), the segment from I-295 to Williamsburg is going to get widened. It has had a full Environmental Impact Statement already complete and is a high priority for the Hampton Roads and Richmond districts. It's far more than a proposal at this point, and 25 miles of the project have already been complete or are under construction (3 phases Hampton Roads, 1 phase Richmond), with an additional 9 miles to the New Kent County line that HRTPO is currently working to secure funding for.

Other than that, the only other hotspot that needs additional lanes would be Afton Mountain, climbing lanes in each direction. I-64 between I-81 and Richmond carries around 40,000 AADT, similar to I-81, but doesn't carry nearly as much truck traffic as I-81 does, which significantly cuts down widening needs. That stretch usually flows, while full during peak travel periods, at a consistent 75 - 80 mph with very little interruption. Obviously, there's the I-81 overlap as well, but that would fall in with the I-81 corridor as a whole that needs widening. I-64 west of I-81 is perfectly adequate with 4 lanes, only reaching around 20,000 AADT for "high" volumes.
Logged

bluecountry

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 238
  • Last Login: Today at 11:06:50 AM
Re: Virginia
« Reply #5281 on: September 09, 2020, 11:22:18 AM »

Per the map at this entry, Braddock's expedition appears not to have followed VA 7...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Braddock_Expedition
Right but he still doesn't follow VA 620/705; so why are they called Braddock Road?
Logged

1995hoo

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 11673
  • Age: 47
  • Location: Fairfax County, Virginia
  • Last Login: Today at 06:35:00 PM
Re: Virginia
« Reply #5282 on: September 09, 2020, 01:49:17 PM »

Per the map at this entry, Braddock's expedition appears not to have followed VA 7...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Braddock_Expedition
Right but he still doesn't follow VA 620/705; so why are they called Braddock Road?

Because the people who named the roads that became the modern road thought that was the route he had followed. What difference does it make? Van Dorn Street is named for General Earl Van Dorn, who was from Mississippi and apparently never served in Northern Virginia.
Logged
"You know, you never have a guaranteed spot until you have a spot guaranteed."
—Olaf Kolzig, as quoted in the Washington Times on March 28, 2003,
commenting on the Capitals clinching a playoff spot.

"That sounded stupid, didn't it?"—Kolzig, to the same reporter a few seconds later.

Alps

  • Everybody Obeys the Octagon
  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 13613
  • Elimitante the truck trarffic,

  • Age: 37
  • Location: New Jersey
  • Last Login: Today at 07:44:19 PM
    • Alps' Roads
Re: Virginia
« Reply #5283 on: September 09, 2020, 06:32:03 PM »

Per the map at this entry, Braddock's expedition appears not to have followed VA 7...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Braddock_Expedition
Right but he still doesn't follow VA 620/705; so why are they called Braddock Road?

Because the people who named the roads that became the modern road thought that was the route he had followed. What difference does it make? Van Dorn Street is named for General Earl Van Dorn, who was from Mississippi and apparently never served in Northern Virginia.
I don't understand. George Washington never crossed the George Washington bridge.

DeaconG

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 728
  • Location: Port St. John, FL
  • Last Login: Today at 05:08:48 PM
Re: Virginia
« Reply #5284 on: September 09, 2020, 09:41:18 PM »

Per the map at this entry, Braddock's expedition appears not to have followed VA 7...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Braddock_Expedition
Right but he still doesn't follow VA 620/705; so why are they called Braddock Road?

Because the people who named the roads that became the modern road thought that was the route he had followed. What difference does it make? Van Dorn Street is named for General Earl Van Dorn, who was from Mississippi and apparently never served in Northern Virginia.
I don't understand. George Washington never crossed the George Washington bridge.
But Billie Joe McAllister jumped off the Tallahatchie Bridge! :rolleyes: :pan: :sombrero:
Logged
Dawnstar: "You're an ape! And you can talk!"
King Solovar: "And you're a human with wings! Reality holds surprises for everyone!"
-Crisis On Infinite Earths #2

bluecountry

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 238
  • Last Login: Today at 11:06:50 AM
Re: Virginia
« Reply #5285 on: September 18, 2020, 03:05:20 PM »

Per the map at this entry, Braddock's expedition appears not to have followed VA 7...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Braddock_Expedition
Right but he still doesn't follow VA 620/705; so why are they called Braddock Road?

Because the people who named the roads that became the modern road thought that was the route he had followed. What difference does it make? Van Dorn Street is named for General Earl Van Dorn, who was from Mississippi and apparently never served in Northern Virginia.
I always thought Braddock Road, 620, WAS Braddock's road.  Guess not.
Logged

bluecountry

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 238
  • Last Login: Today at 11:06:50 AM
Re: Virginia
« Reply #5286 on: September 18, 2020, 03:08:04 PM »

Looks like the 28 bypass (Godwin Drive Extension) is dead (for now...) and that VA-28 from the Bull Run to Liberia Avenue will be widened to six lanes:
https://www.insidenova.com/news/transportation/prince_william/prince-william-county-supervisors-reject-route-28-bypass/article_79fea08a-d662-11ea-bf98-b329beaba1d4.html
Quote
After securing $300 million and spending years developing a bypass for busy Va. Route 28, the Prince William Board of County Supervisors rejected the proposal Tuesday night, leaving any fix for Manassas-area commuters in limbo.
The Prince William Board of County Supervisors voted 8-0 at its meeting to deny staff’s recommendation to move to the design phase of the project.

In a subsequent vote, the board voted 8-0 to endorse widening Route 28. County staff estimate that widening the road from four to six lanes would require an additional $100 million.

Supervisor Yesli Vega, who represents the Coles District that is home to the road, announced Monday she doesn’t support the proposed bypass due to its impacts on residents and the environment, among other reasons.

“This option will not alleviate traffic congestion on 28 from where it is today,” Vega said in an email to InsideNoVa. “Due to the negligible traffic impact, combined with the environmental, fiscal and human impact my constituents will face by being forcefully removed from their homes, I cannot support this proposal.”

County staff had backed the bypass, saying it would reduce congestion in the busy commuter corridor between Manassas and Centreville, improve access to transit and provide pedestrian and bicycle facilities.

Property Impacts   Bypass Route   Widening
Total Impacted                72               185
Residential Displaced        54                7
Commercial Displaced      5                       79
Total Cost                 $300 million   $400 million

County staff estimate Va. Route 28 will see an increase from the 50,500 daily traffic count in 2018. Without any project build, Route 28 from Liberia Avenue to Orchard Bridge Dr. will see an estimated 75,000 daily traffic count. Staff estimated traffic count on that stretch of Route 28 with the proposed extension project would see about 62,500 daily traffic count in 2040, while widening the road is estimated to increase daily traffic count to 85,000, according to the county.

While the massive number of residential impacts were likely the nail in the coffin, in my opinion those traffic estimates also contributed because even with the bypass, things on VA-28 were only gonna get worse. Was never convinced that the bypass was actually going to take current traffic off of VA-28. Still however, an 85,000 daily traffic count by 2040 doesn't look too good either so in addition to widening VA-28, if I were VDOT, PWCDOT, NVTA, etc, I would also seriously consider adding interchanges at both New Braddock Road and Comption Road, prioritization of the Sudley Manor interchange on the VA-234 bypass with the possibility of six lane widening there, and finally, dare I say, traffic improvements on Yates Ford Road and Henderson Road through Clifton (Don't worry no widening, only straightening out some curves and some roundabouts). Still, wouldn't be surpised if even that idea is opposed by the NIMBYS there though.

Also, it was brought to my attention that $400 million for the widening might be a bit of an overestimation due to the portion of VA-28 through Manassas Park already being six lanes divided. Not clear to me if that section had been accounted for. Will also be interesting to see where that extra funding comes from ($300 million was what they had saved up). Either way, I think this was ultimately the right decision and just hope that other improvements are also made in addition by 2040.
PHEW!
Common sense prevailed, bypass will happen:

https://www.princewilliamtimes.com/news/breaking-county-board-reverses-course-votes-along-party-lines-to-endorse-proposed-va-28-bypass/article_268e2fd2-f21f-11ea-bbda-ab1f50e7ca4c.html

Quote
The Prince William Board of County Supervisors voted last week to keep the Va. 28 bypass alive, reversing course after unanimously rejecting the $300 million road project Aug. 4. All five Democrats on the board voted to endorse the project, while all three Republicans voted against it.

The move allows the county to begin designing the new road. The board will have to take another vote on whether to proceed with the construction of the bypass once the design is near completion.
Logged

Jmiles32

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 496
  • Age: 20
  • Location: Blacksburg, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 05:30:29 PM
Re: Virginia
« Reply #5287 on: September 19, 2020, 12:49:51 PM »

^based off of the public backlash seen at the latest Prince William BOCS meeting, I think that this saga is far from over. There are significant problems with both the bypass and the widening alternatives and that's assuming the army corps of engineers even ends up approving the bypass in the first place. Definitely do not believe that the bypass is the "common sense" option traffic wise. If anything, its the "we don't lose out on $89 million in NVTA funding" option. Will be interesting to see what happens ahead.
« Last Edit: September 19, 2020, 12:53:05 PM by Jmiles32 »
Logged
Aspiring Transportation Planner at Virginia Tech. Go Hokies!

MillTheRoadgeek

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 99
  • Age: 18
  • Location: Prince William County, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 11:16:51 AM
Re: Virginia
« Reply #5288 on: September 20, 2020, 08:39:28 PM »

PHEW!
Common sense prevailed, bypass will happen:

How do you prefer the bypass? I'm just curious and I would like a quick debate.

Honestly, I used to appreciate it but now oppose it quite so. Come to think - the 28 corridor past Manassas is hardly going to benefit from such a bypass, with no local configuration pouring money into the communities and providing for revitalization. There are also risks of pollution being next to Bull Run, and noise levels increasing in adjacent communities. I've even found a few sources that suggest that this bypass will struggle with traffic issues later on - the 6-lane segment in Fairfax will create a bottleneck between the two roadbeds (original and bypass), the intersections along the way are scheduled to operate at a weak LoS, and even overpasses will be needed down the line (along existing Godwin Dr.). I'm hoping there's still time for them to reconsider and finally get things going.
Logged

Jmiles32

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 496
  • Age: 20
  • Location: Blacksburg, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 05:30:29 PM
Re: Virginia
« Reply #5289 on: September 20, 2020, 11:01:31 PM »

Here’s an interesting idea that I could potentially support: https://sites.google.com/view/novatransportationsolutions/rethinking-route-28-yorkshire?authuser=0
Essentially, a new 4-lane roadway would be built about a block west of current VA-28 through Yorkshire and would feature one general purpose lane and one HOV or transit lane in each direction. This would be done in conjunction with the current Route 28 STARS improvement recommendations for the existing VA-28 roadway. While I personally believe that a better option would be to simply make these new lanes all southbound and convert the current VA-28 to northbound only, I’m not sure whether or not that would garner business support. This may have been the original version of the idea but either way, VA-28 would (essentially) be three lanes in each direction with a fourth one dedicated to transit or HOV. There would also appear to be far less business and residential impacts than both the bypass and regular widening proposals. While I would love for this idea to get more serious consideration, I unfortunately doubt it will.

The NOVA Transporation Solutions website is very interesting and there a bunch of neat ideas for a variety of DC-area transportation needs in which some I agree with and others I don't. Definitely recommend taking a look.
https://sites.google.com/view/novatransportationsolutions/home?authuser=0
« Last Edit: September 20, 2020, 11:09:15 PM by Jmiles32 »
Logged
Aspiring Transportation Planner at Virginia Tech. Go Hokies!

MillTheRoadgeek

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 99
  • Age: 18
  • Location: Prince William County, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 11:16:51 AM
Re: Virginia
« Reply #5290 on: September 21, 2020, 04:37:03 PM »

Here’s an interesting idea that I could potentially support: https://sites.google.com/view/novatransportationsolutions/rethinking-route-28-yorkshire?authuser=0
Essentially, a new 4-lane roadway would be built about a block west of current VA-28 through Yorkshire and would feature one general purpose lane and one HOV or transit lane in each direction. This would be done in conjunction with the current Route 28 STARS improvement recommendations for the existing VA-28 roadway. While I personally believe that a better option would be to simply make these new lanes all southbound and convert the current VA-28 to northbound only, I’m not sure whether or not that would garner business support. This may have been the original version of the idea but either way, VA-28 would (essentially) be three lanes in each direction with a fourth one dedicated to transit or HOV. There would also appear to be far less business and residential impacts than both the bypass and regular widening proposals. While I would love for this idea to get more serious consideration, I unfortunately doubt it will.

The NOVA Transporation Solutions website is very interesting and there a bunch of neat ideas for a variety of DC-area transportation needs in which some I agree with and others I don't. Definitely recommend taking a look.
https://sites.google.com/view/novatransportationsolutions/home?authuser=0


That would be a nice alternative, alongside simply widening 28 through the corridor. Said area could certainly use some good redevelopment. I'm definitely going to campaign for this one if I can.

Other than that, those are all solid ideas for the most part. I don't really understand why the PW Parkway (the 234 portion) is to keep some of those signalized intersections. Some other bypass highways (Leesburg, Culpeper) have continuous highway portions.
Logged

sprjus4

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 5019
  • Location: Hampton Roads, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 08:30:26 PM
Re: Virginia
« Reply #5291 on: September 21, 2020, 05:09:55 PM »

New Speed Limit Posted on Route 3, Route 301 in King George County
Quote
FREDERICKSBURG, Va. – The speed limit is increasing from 55 mph to 60 mph on several sections of Route 3 and Route 301 in King George County.

New 60 mph speed limit signs are posted today on several sections of Route 301, and new signs will be installed on Route 3 on Monday, Sept. 21, weather permitting.

The speed limit is increasing to 60 mph at the following locations:

* Route 3, from just east of Route 665 (Birchwood Creek Lane) to just west of Route 206 (Dahlgren Road)
* Route 301, from just north of the Rappahannock River to just south of Route 3
* Route 301, from just north of Route 205 (Ridge Road) to just south of Route 206 (Dahlgren Road)

The Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) conducted a study of these segments of Route 3 and Route 301 following legislation passed by the Virginia General Assembly. Following VDOT’s review of vehicle speeds, crash data, and the physical characteristics of these roadways, these locations were recommended to have the speed limit increased to 60 mph.
Logged

Jmiles32

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 496
  • Age: 20
  • Location: Blacksburg, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 05:30:29 PM
Re: Virginia
« Reply #5292 on: September 21, 2020, 08:06:25 PM »

I don't really understand why the PW Parkway (the 234 portion) is to keep some of those signalized intersections. Some other bypass highways (Leesburg, Culpeper) have continuous highway portions.

Combination of poor planning and lack of funding. Ideally, VA-234 north of VA-294 would have gotten the same treatment that VA-7 and VA-28 got and would have gradually become a full freeway. IMO this would have been a far smarter investment that a VA-28 bypass (because both would likely serve Bristow area residents with the difference being an improved VA-234 takes some of those commuters off of VA-28). However, it now looks like it'll be more or less similar to VA-286 (Fairfax County Parkway) with a mix of both lights and occasional interchanges. The upcoming plan for a quadrant intersection at University Blvd is of particular annoyance to me. I can only hope that an interchange is eventually built at Sudley Manor Drive/Wellington Road (although the chances of that decrease every year as inflation gradually makes it more and more expensive).
Logged
Aspiring Transportation Planner at Virginia Tech. Go Hokies!

sprjus4

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 5019
  • Location: Hampton Roads, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 08:30:26 PM
Re: Virginia
« Reply #5293 on: September 21, 2020, 08:42:41 PM »

^

The VA-234 Manassas Bypass should've been built as a full freeway when it was constructed, or at least with a master plan and reserved right of way for eventual build out.
Logged

MillTheRoadgeek

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 99
  • Age: 18
  • Location: Prince William County, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 11:16:51 AM
Re: Virginia
« Reply #5294 on: September 21, 2020, 09:14:34 PM »

That I can understand - at least, these will be improvements that make movements down the line faster. The rest of the parkway seems strongly at-grade, so I can understand that too.


^

The VA-234 Manassas Bypass should've been built as a full freeway when it was constructed, or at least with a master plan and reserved right of way for eventual build out.

At the very least, I know the Dumfries/Brentsville intersection complex has ROW reserved for an interchange (that's actually coming soon). It was originally planned as a modified cloverleaf, but has as of late been modified into a hybrid interchange. It certainly fits better with each maneuver, in my opinion.
Logged

cpzilliacus

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 10659
  • Age: 61
  • Location: Maryland
  • Last Login: Today at 05:53:32 PM
Re: Virginia
« Reply #5295 on: September 21, 2020, 09:29:05 PM »

^

The VA-234 Manassas Bypass should've been built as a full freeway when it was constructed, or at least with a master plan and reserved right of way for eventual build out.

I do not know if they have land at the at-grade intersections purchased or at least reserved for highway use.  I do know that VDOT (in some cases [much of VA-286, f/k/a VA-7100] the county government) has designed and built many of the post-1990 parkways in Northern Virginia as expressways and not as freeways for one big reason - cost.
Logged
Opinions expressed here on AAROADS are strictly personal and mine alone, and do not reflect policies or positions of MWCOG, NCRTPB or their member federal, state, county and municipal governments or any other agency.

Old Dominionite

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 17
  • Location: Fairfax County, VA
  • Last Login: October 24, 2020, 09:23:26 AM
Re: Virginia
« Reply #5296 on: October 07, 2020, 03:41:09 AM »

Yesterday I drove US 17 from Newport News to Fredericksburg for the first time. I wanted a change of scenery and I had some extra time on my hands. The drive only took about two hours; that included following the business routes through Gloucester C.H. and Saluda. Aside from some expected minor congestion around Yorktown, Gloucester, and Tappahannock, I was amazed by how empty the roadway was. I found it far more scenic and less stressful than 64 and 95. I wished the dual carriageway continued beyond Port Royal, but we can’t have everything in life, right?

Anyway, I found my new preferred route outside of rush hour between Hampton Roads and northern Virginia. Granted, it might take a little more time overall, but it’s worth it to me.

What are your thoughts about this stretch of road? While I know it would be both costly and disruptive in places, I wonder if more could be done to promote 17 as a viable alternative to 64 and 95...
« Last Edit: October 07, 2020, 04:03:50 AM by Old Dominionite »
Logged

sprjus4

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 5019
  • Location: Hampton Roads, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 08:30:26 PM
Re: Virginia
« Reply #5297 on: October 07, 2020, 07:04:55 AM »

^

I’ve taken it a few times to avoid congestion on I-64 / I-95, it’s a nice stretch of road, and with the rural areas mostly 60 mph, easy to maintain around 70 mph the whole way.

The reason I don’t take it more - congestion closer to Newport News, and the fact it crosses the tunnels, specifically since I’m heading to the Southside. In that case, to avoid congestion, I’ll usually take US-460.

VA-105 is a nice 55 mph cutover from Yorktown to I-64 to avoid the commercialization / congestion of US-17 between Yorktown and I-64 in lower Newport News.
Logged

Jmiles32

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 496
  • Age: 20
  • Location: Blacksburg, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 05:30:29 PM
Re: Virginia
« Reply #5298 on: October 07, 2020, 01:05:57 PM »

I wished the dual carriageway continued beyond Port Royal, but we can’t have everything in life, right?

I've always found it interesting that the only part of US-17 between Yorktown and Fredericksburg that is not 4 lanes is the part just south of Fredericksburg through the moderately populated Spotsylvania area. Perhaps this could be because parallel VA-3 in 4 lanes right on the other side of the Rappahannock River? While the bridge over I-95 will soon be widened, it doesn't appear that there any plans to extend this any further south (east). However, with continued housing development and sprawl, it's possible that we could see 4 lanes at least all the way to New Post.
Logged
Aspiring Transportation Planner at Virginia Tech. Go Hokies!

Mapmikey

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 2997
  • Co-curator with Froggie of www.vahighways.com

  • Age: 50
  • Last Login: Today at 08:31:03 PM
    • Co-curator Virginia Highways Project
Re: Virginia
« Reply #5299 on: October 07, 2020, 01:52:20 PM »

Pretty sure US 17 is not 4-laned between Port Royal and Fredericksburg because it is the hardest segment to do that and there isn't sufficient traffic to force it.  There are some terrain issues in addition to being right on the Fort AP Hill boundary in places.  Terrain is also likely why the segment from Port Royal to Essex County took a lot longer to get 4-laned than south of there.

AADT of US 17 between VA 2 and US 301 tops out at 7300 (2019) while VA 3 is over 20k for most spots between Fredericksburg and US 301.

US 301's AADT does rise by 5400 north leaving US 17 but the AADT before and after VA 3 is unchanged.  A couple thousand AADT appear to be cutting over to VA 3 via SR 607 which I assume is local and not through travelers.  There is a fair amount of traffic using US 17 to US 301 to Maryland, especially trucks.

I used to use US 17 exclusively going to anywhere in the Tidewater region but now that the sprawl has reached to Gloucester it doesn't matter as much to use VA 105 or VA 134 to get to I-64.

I tend to use VA 30 (by way of VA 2) if I am heading to somewhere on the north side of Hampton Roads or the Little Creek area (Not much traffic but it is 2-lane throughout.  Only real town is West Point.) but use US 460 to go most other parts of Tidewater or are heading to the Outer Banks. 
Logged

 


Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.