AARoads Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

New rules for political content in signatures and user profiles. See this thread for details.

Author Topic: Virginia  (Read 622402 times)

cpzilliacus

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 9970
  • Age: 59
  • Location: Maryland
  • Last Login: June 20, 2018, 12:50:05 AM
Re: Virginia
« Reply #2950 on: March 04, 2018, 09:33:16 PM »

Heh. Long-time Delgate David Albo of Springfield (who recently retired from the House) came in for special criticism. He was the main sponsor of those so-called "abusive driver fees" that created mega-controversy a few years ago—I'm sure you recall the fuss about those. The reason he in particular got criticized over that is that he's an attorney who specializes in traffic ticket defense work, so the "abusive driver fees" law was potentially beneficial to his business. Classic conflict of interest.

I remember that fiasco very well.  With VDOT being bled so badly that its senior staff warned the Senators and Delegates that Virginia was going to have to leave federal transportation dollars "on  the table" because they had no state dollars to match them with, those abusive driver fees were intended to be a "substitute" for increased Virginia state per-gallon motor fuel taxes - instead of such an increase, just make traffic offenders pay (and pay and pay and pay). 

After that crashed and burned (I sometimes wonder if that law might have been struck-down by the federal courts as a violation of the Eighth Amendment had such a case gotten to the Fourth Circuit), Gov. Bob McDonnell (R) was able to get an increase through both houses of the Virginia General Assembly by making it a "stealth" tax, to be imposed on the wholesale sale of gasoline and Diesel fuel and not on at-the-pump sales.
« Last Edit: March 04, 2018, 09:35:30 PM by cpzilliacus »
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.

Beltway

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2670
  • Roads to the Future

  • Location: Richmond, VA
  • Last Login: June 20, 2018, 11:33:15 PM
Re: Virginia
« Reply #2951 on: March 04, 2018, 11:14:42 PM »

With VDOT being bled so badly that its senior staff warned the Senators and Delegates that Virginia was going to have to leave federal transportation dollars "on  the table" because they had no state dollars to match them with,

Wha?? During that span of years, VDOT's annual budget never dropped below $4 billion, and the construction budget never dropped below $1 billion, and they were never in danger of losing federal funds.
Logged
Scott M. Savage
-- Borders, Language and Culture
http://www.roadstothefuture.com
http://www.capital-beltway.com

LM117

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1400
  • Age: 29
  • Location: Danville, VA 👎
  • Last Login: June 20, 2018, 04:14:23 PM
Re: Virginia
« Reply #2952 on: March 04, 2018, 11:23:43 PM »

At least you admitted that it was crap, that's a start.  And that article was not about the reckless driving charge, and I like the word "baloney" because it is milder than what some people deserve.
The point I made in my post was that the loss of revenue is a big reason why efforts to raise the Reckless Driving limit keeps getting shot down. The first article I linked had everything to do with it. More money is made off of Reckless Driving charges than regular speeding charges. When VA raised the speed limit to 70 while keeping the RD limit at 80, places like Hopewell (who famously uses I-295 as a cash cow) hit a gold mine.

If you are stupid enough to go over 80 when the limit is 70 then you need to blame yourself, not someone else.

I don’t exceed 80 in VA, so spare the lecture.

Quote
That article was from 2013 and does not say what you claimed

I’m well aware what year the article was from and yes, it DOES say what I claimed. For the umpteenth and final time, I claimed that revenue was a big reason that previous attempts to raise the Reckless Driving threshold failed. Here is the key tidbit from the article again since you chose to ignore it the first time:

Quote
The Criminal Subcommittee of the House Committee on Courts of Justice voted 7-2 against the bill. Opponents cited several concerns, including a possible fiscal impact and that faster speeds lead to more crashes.

Notice the bolded. “Fiscal impact”. Fiscal=$$$. Case closed.
Logged
"You forget a thousand things everyday. How about you make sure this is one of them?"--Michael De Santa, GTA V

Beltway

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2670
  • Roads to the Future

  • Location: Richmond, VA
  • Last Login: June 20, 2018, 11:33:15 PM
Re: Virginia
« Reply #2953 on: March 04, 2018, 11:34:42 PM »

If you are stupid enough to go over 80 when the limit is 70 then you need to blame yourself, not someone else.
I don’t exceed 80 in VA, so spare the lecture.
Quote
That article was from 2013 and does not say what you claimed
I’m well aware what year the article was from and yes, it DOES say what I claimed. For the umpteenth and final time, I claimed that revenue was a big reason that previous attempts to raise the Reckless Driving threshold failed. Here is the key tidbit from the article again since you chose to ignore it the first time:
Quote
The Criminal Subcommittee of the House Committee on Courts of Justice voted 7-2 against the bill. Opponents cited several concerns, including a possible fiscal impact and that faster speeds lead to more crashes.
Notice the bolded. “Fiscal impact”. Fiscal=$$$. Case closed.

The only thing that is closed is your mind, and like a steel trap.

1) It is a newspaper.  What more to say?
2) "Fiscal impact" could mean a number of different things, and negative or positive.
3) If you like the cite then you have to acknowledge the part about increased accidents, and the "fiscal impact" may have been the costs related to higher accident totals, such as for emergency services (police, firefighting, ambulance, towing), coroner, traffic delays and social costs.
« Last Edit: March 04, 2018, 11:39:36 PM by Beltway »
Logged
Scott M. Savage
-- Borders, Language and Culture
http://www.roadstothefuture.com
http://www.capital-beltway.com

VTGoose

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 174
  • Age: 2013
  • Location: Blacksburg, VA
  • Last Login: June 20, 2018, 03:09:48 PM
Re: Virginia
« Reply #2954 on: March 05, 2018, 10:17:01 AM »


I’d much rather share the road with someone going 80 in a 70 that’s not causing a problem than I would someone that’s doing the speed limit or less while playing on their phone and swerving all over the goddamn place or causing other problems.

Virginia is trying to do something about those who insist on using their phones for just about everything while driving. Right now, the law only prohibits texting while driving. HB 181, "Improper driving; use of handheld communication device while driving vehicle" (hung up in the Senate) would expand the law to cover any use of a smartphone.

“The current law is very difficult to enforce,” Collins [Del. Chris Collins, R-Frederick County, sponsor of the bill] said earlier this week. “If you pull someone over and catch them on Facebook, that is not a crime."

https://pilotonline.com/news/government/virginia/article_7352f4b1-cce8-5189-b699-5adb79ca3155.html
Logged

Beltway

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2670
  • Roads to the Future

  • Location: Richmond, VA
  • Last Login: June 20, 2018, 11:33:15 PM
Re: Virginia
« Reply #2955 on: March 07, 2018, 11:13:26 PM »

https://www.enr.com/articles/44124-contractor-to-bear-chesapeake-bay-project-spoil-disposal-cost

Contractor To Bear Chesapeake Bay Project Spoil Disposal Cost
March 7, 2018

With tunneling on a new one-mile tube for the Chesapeake Bay Bridge-Tunnel set to begin next year, project officials are readying plans for handling an estimated 500,000 cu yd of potentially tainted spoil to be produced by a 42-ft-dia tunnel-boring machine, currently under construction in Germany.  The Dragados USA Inc. and Schiavone Construction Co. LLC design-build joint venture’s “worst-case” permitting strategy assumes all bored material will contain sufficient levels of petroleum-based TBM lubricants to require disposal at a designated landfill.  Once tunneling begins, sample testing coordinated with state environmental officials will determine whether contaminant levels will allow for other, less expensive disposal options.  Regardless of where the bored material goes, all disposal costs are to be borne by the Dragados-Schiavone team under its $756-million contract.

....

The CBBTD is having a naming contest for the TBM, and they typically are assigned a female name.

I like Borella  ... is that a real name?
Logged
Scott M. Savage
-- Borders, Language and Culture
http://www.roadstothefuture.com
http://www.capital-beltway.com

Alps

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

  • Posts: 11645
  • Views expressed are my own, not my employer's.

  • Age: 35
  • Location: New Jersey
  • Last Login: Today at 01:59:19 AM
    • Alps' Roads
Re: Virginia
« Reply #2956 on: March 07, 2018, 11:31:29 PM »

https://www.enr.com/articles/44124-contractor-to-bear-chesapeake-bay-project-spoil-disposal-cost

Contractor To Bear Chesapeake Bay Project Spoil Disposal Cost
March 7, 2018

With tunneling on a new one-mile tube for the Chesapeake Bay Bridge-Tunnel set to begin next year, project officials are readying plans for handling an estimated 500,000 cu yd of potentially tainted spoil to be produced by a 42-ft-dia tunnel-boring machine, currently under construction in Germany.  The Dragados USA Inc. and Schiavone Construction Co. LLC design-build joint venture’s “worst-case” permitting strategy assumes all bored material will contain sufficient levels of petroleum-based TBM lubricants to require disposal at a designated landfill.  Once tunneling begins, sample testing coordinated with state environmental officials will determine whether contaminant levels will allow for other, less expensive disposal options.  Regardless of where the bored material goes, all disposal costs are to be borne by the Dragados-Schiavone team under its $756-million contract.

....

The CBBTD is having a naming contest for the TBM, and they typically are assigned a female name.

I like Borella  ... is that a real name?
Dang, only open to 6th graders. I wonder if they're socially aware enough to choose Borey McBoreFace.
Logged
~ Steve
http://www.alpsroads.net
I've listened many times, and I still can't figure out what the fox says.

"YOUR NAME IS NAMED AFTER A BUTT"

MNHighwayMan

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2611
  • RIP MN-110 1965–2018

  • Age: 26
  • Location: Des Moines
  • Last Login: June 20, 2018, 10:33:17 PM
Re: Virginia
« Reply #2957 on: March 07, 2018, 11:43:58 PM »

Dang, only open to 6th graders. I wonder if they're socially aware enough to choose Borey McBoreFace.

10/10  :sombrero:
Logged

Beltway

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2670
  • Roads to the Future

  • Location: Richmond, VA
  • Last Login: June 20, 2018, 11:33:15 PM
Re: Virginia
« Reply #2958 on: March 08, 2018, 01:24:59 PM »

Anyone else here visit the Walkerton Bridge?

The new bridge was built in 1996, is about 1,200 feet long, and cost about $2 million for the bridge and approaches project.  Part of the old bridge is preserved on the site.

Interesting to drive and has interesting photo opportunities.

Walkerton Bridge, Spanning Mattaponi River at State Route 629, Walkerton, King and Queen County, VA
https://www.loc.gov/item/va1618/
....

The swing span only carries pedestrian traffic formerly carries State Route 629 on Walkerton Road
The Walkerton Bridge, originally known as the Mattaponi River Bridge, is one of a handful of swing-truss crossings remaining in Virginia and an early project conducted by the Virginia Department of Transportation after they assumed control of the county road system in 1932. With the proposed demise of the Great Wicomico bridge, the Walkerton crossing is a manually operated swing that is not assisted by electrical or mechanical power. The Walkerton Bridge has become a rare artifact, representing a type of bridge technology that once was ubiquitous, but now is on the verge of extinction.
http://bridgehunter.com/va/king-and-queen/mattaponi-river/
....

https://www.shothotspot.com/hotspot/king-william-county-va-usa/walkerton-bridge
....

https://www.google.com/maps/@37.7233604,-77.0249191,1448a,35y,18.65h/data=!3m1!1e3
« Last Edit: March 08, 2018, 01:28:18 PM by Beltway »
Logged
Scott M. Savage
-- Borders, Language and Culture
http://www.roadstothefuture.com
http://www.capital-beltway.com

Jmiles32

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 305
  • Age: 18
  • Location: Gainesville, VA
  • Last Login: June 19, 2018, 01:00:23 PM
Re: Virginia
« Reply #2959 on: March 08, 2018, 09:47:49 PM »

Three scenarios for transportation improvements at the Route 29-Hydraulic Road intersection have been recently released to the public for review and commentary:
http://www.route29solutions.org/documents/march_8_community_meeting_displays.pdf

While I'm not exactly in love with any of these three scenarios, I'll admit I had similar initial doubts about the US-29/Rio Road interchange(which I now believe to be a huge improvement to the unfortunate US-29 situation in Charlottesville). If I had to pick one, I'd probably lean towards Scenario 1(Grade Separated Interchange).
Logged

Beltway

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2670
  • Roads to the Future

  • Location: Richmond, VA
  • Last Login: June 20, 2018, 11:33:15 PM
Re: Virginia
« Reply #2960 on: March 08, 2018, 10:19:06 PM »

Three scenarios for transportation improvements at the Route 29-Hydraulic Road intersection have been recently released to the public for review and commentary:
http://www.route29solutions.org/documents/march_8_community_meeting_displays.pdf
While I'm not exactly in love with any of these three scenarios, I'll admit I had similar initial doubts about the US-29/Rio Road interchange(which I now believe to be a huge improvement to the unfortunate US-29 situation in Charlottesville). If I had to pick one, I'd probably lean towards Scenario 1(Grade Separated Interchange).

Be nice if they would include cost estimates.  This was a $170 million project back in 2003.
Logged
Scott M. Savage
-- Borders, Language and Culture
http://www.roadstothefuture.com
http://www.capital-beltway.com

froggie

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 9372
  • Location: Greensboro, VT
  • Last Login: June 20, 2018, 01:27:25 PM
    • Froggie's Place
Re: Virginia
« Reply #2961 on: March 08, 2018, 11:00:31 PM »

^ They do for some elements.  Last page of the PDF includes construction and some utility cost estimates, but admittedly not PE or ROW costs.

It's also worth noting that these proposals are of a different scale than what was considered 15 years ago, though if you add in all the additional "side projects" with the current proposal, it may well add up.
Logged

Beltway

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2670
  • Roads to the Future

  • Location: Richmond, VA
  • Last Login: June 20, 2018, 11:33:15 PM
Re: Virginia
« Reply #2962 on: March 08, 2018, 11:50:13 PM »

^ They do for some elements.  Last page of the PDF includes construction and some utility cost estimates, but admittedly not PE or ROW costs.
It's also worth noting that these proposals are of a different scale than what was considered 15 years ago, though if you add in all the additional "side projects" with the current proposal, it may well add up.

Oh OK ... the “Grade-Separated Intersection” or the “Grade-Separated Roundabout” is about 1/2 the cost of the Rio Road project.  That doesn't sound logical.

The 2003 project also addressed the NB movement from the US-29 bypass onto the US-29 arterial.  That document does not.  All that traffic has to pass thru a tight low-speed one-lane loop, and that needs to be fixed, and that will be expensive.

This local planning team is only concerned about providing better circulation for the local traffic.  They have little if any concern about the needs of the thru traffic.
Logged
Scott M. Savage
-- Borders, Language and Culture
http://www.roadstothefuture.com
http://www.capital-beltway.com

1995hoo

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 8997
  • Age: 45
  • Location: Fairfax County, Virginia
  • Last Login: June 20, 2018, 07:08:27 PM
Re: Virginia
« Reply #2963 on: March 09, 2018, 07:34:29 AM »

I notice Scenario 1 calls for left-turners on Hydraulic to use the roundabouts to make U-turns. That doesn't sound like something that'll work out well in practice.
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.

LM117

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1400
  • Age: 29
  • Location: Danville, VA 👎
  • Last Login: June 20, 2018, 04:14:23 PM
Logged
"You forget a thousand things everyday. How about you make sure this is one of them?"--Michael De Santa, GTA V

cpzilliacus

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 9970
  • Age: 59
  • Location: Maryland
  • Last Login: June 20, 2018, 12:50:05 AM
Re: Virginia
« Reply #2965 on: March 09, 2018, 07:59:10 PM »

Anyone else here visit the Walkerton Bridge?

Crossed it about 1973 or 1974.  The operators were having a tough time getting the bridge to lock down in the closed position after a vessel had passed, so traffic had to wait quite a while until the operators were able to get the  swing span secured.
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.

D-Dey65

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1764
  • Age: 52
  • Last Login: June 15, 2018, 03:43:59 PM
Re: Virginia
« Reply #2966 on: March 13, 2018, 04:21:25 PM »

Maybe I missed a news article, or a website or two, but who has details on these decorations along US 301 at Exit 45 on I-95 in Kingwood?

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:NB_US_301_Spires_West_of_I-95_Exit_45_South_of_Petersburg.jpg




http://www.progress-index.com/news/20160821/plan-to-make-exit-45-lure-for-visitors-shifts-to-high-gear

http://www.progress-index.com/news/20170226/gateway-project-reaches-milestone-with-installation-of-spires

One of my favorite commercial signs from the far past still stands at this exit...

https://goo.gl/maps/1qGp5AFVJov
I’ve apparently been taking this exit for granted for over a decade.
I think that one used to have statues of Yogi Bear, Boo Boo Bear, and Cindy Bear there. One night I was on a Greyhound bus along I-95 and some guy was telling his kid who they were. I forgot the name of Yogi's female counterpart and mistakenly called her "Daisy." The guy suspected I was on some kind of mind altering psychotropic prescription medication.

Or maybe this was somewhere else along the way, I forget.

Logged

Beltway

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2670
  • Roads to the Future

  • Location: Richmond, VA
  • Last Login: June 20, 2018, 11:33:15 PM
Re: Virginia
« Reply #2967 on: March 14, 2018, 05:03:36 PM »

SMS:  Hopefully they will upgrade it to Interstate standards.  It is currently a 6-lane expressway.

http://www.virginiadot.org/projects/hamptonroads/u.s._route_460-58-13_connector_study.asp

U.S. Route 460/58/13 Connector Study

About the Study
The Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) have initiated an Environmental Assessment for the U.S. Route 460/58/13 corridor, examining potential transportation improvements in the Cities of Chesapeake and Suffolk.

The area of interest for this study includes the segment of U.S. Route 460/58/13 from near the Bowers Hill interchange of Interstate 664 to the interchange of Portsmouth Boulevard (Business U.S. Route 460) and the Suffolk Northern Bypass (U.S. Route 460/58/13).

The study will be presenting concepts and strategies for potential alternatives to address existing and future transportation needs in the corridor for the next 20 years.

Study History
Recognizing the potential need for improvements along the U.S. Route 460/58/13 corridor, the Hampton Roads Transportation Planning Organization (HRTPO) Board approved the U.S. Route 460/58/13 Connector, including interchanges at the SPSA Regional Landfill and Hampton Roads Executive Airport, as a regional priority project in October 2013. HRTPO subsequently approved these improvements as a candidate project and included them in the amended Hampton Roads 2034 Long-Range Transportation Plan in September 2014.
Logged
Scott M. Savage
-- Borders, Language and Culture
http://www.roadstothefuture.com
http://www.capital-beltway.com

Jmiles32

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 305
  • Age: 18
  • Location: Gainesville, VA
  • Last Login: June 19, 2018, 01:00:23 PM
Re: Virginia
« Reply #2968 on: March 14, 2018, 08:18:47 PM »

SMS:  Hopefully they will upgrade it to Interstate standards.  It is currently a 6-lane expressway.
^Agreed and if it is, it'll be interesting to see if any calls arise for a western I-264 extension to Suffolk.


https://pilotonline.com/news/local/transportation/article_a3d02807-7daf-57f3-9880-7e3c00f9b91e.html
I was not aware that there are plan to upgrade the Bower's Hill interchange. Apparently according to this article(although perhaps a little dated):
Quote
Improvements to Bower’s Hill Interchange, by 2031; $568 million
The estimated cost leads me to believe that these "improvements" are probably a complete interchange overhaul. Is the interchange today really that bad?
Logged

Thing 342

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1172
  • you should really just relax

  • Age: 20
  • Location: NRV / HR, VA
  • Last Login: June 20, 2018, 11:35:03 PM
    • Thing 342's Road Photos
Re: Virginia
« Reply #2969 on: March 14, 2018, 08:58:49 PM »

SMS:  Hopefully they will upgrade it to Interstate standards.  It is currently a 6-lane expressway.
^Agreed and if it is, it'll be interesting to see if any calls arise for a western I-264 extension to Suffolk.


https://pilotonline.com/news/local/transportation/article_a3d02807-7daf-57f3-9880-7e3c00f9b91e.html
I was not aware that there are plan to upgrade the Bower's Hill interchange. Apparently according to this article(although perhaps a little dated):
Quote
Improvements to Bower’s Hill Interchange, by 2031; $568 million
The estimated cost leads me to believe that these "improvements" are probably a complete interchange overhaul. Is the interchange today really that bad?
It's not great; when I worked in Chesapeake, I drove through that interchange daily, and the combination of both lanes from I-264 dropping and fairly heavy volume merging in from the loop ramp from 58 EB meant that that section was pretty consistently jammed during rush hour. In fact, it was often faster to use the ramp to 58 EB, make a u-turn at Jolliff, and take the ramp back onto 664 when heading northbound. It's generally fine otherwise, though again, the 58 EB -> 664 NB merge can get hairy at times. Not sure what the proposed improvements are, but hopefully they involve the removal of most of the existing loop ramps, especially the SB pair that have pretty bad weaving problems.
Logged
Github: https://github.com/Thing342
Road Photos: http://wesj.org/roads/
Note: Insulting people is not a great way to get them to agree with you.

Beltway

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2670
  • Roads to the Future

  • Location: Richmond, VA
  • Last Login: June 20, 2018, 11:33:15 PM
Re: Virginia
« Reply #2970 on: March 14, 2018, 09:47:46 PM »

Quote
Improvements to Bower’s Hill Interchange, by 2031; $568 million
The estimated cost leads me to believe that these "improvements" are probably a complete interchange overhaul. Is the interchange today really that bad?
It's not great; when I worked in Chesapeake, I drove through that interchange daily, and the combination of both lanes from I-264 dropping and fairly heavy volume merging in from the loop ramp from 58 EB meant that that section was pretty consistently jammed during rush hour. In fact, it was often faster to use the ramp to 58 EB, make a u-turn at Jolliff, and take the ramp back onto 664 when heading northbound. It's generally fine otherwise, though again, the 58 EB -> 664 NB merge can get hairy at times. Not sure what the proposed improvements are, but hopefully they involve the removal of most of the existing loop ramps, especially the SB pair that have pretty bad weaving problems.

I didn't see the $568 million figure in the article ... that sounds more like a figure for the Improvements to Bower’s Hill Interchange plus the US-58/US-13/US-460 Connector (the interchanges at the landfill and at the airport, i.e. a full freeway upgrade to the highway between the Suffolk Bypass and the Bower’s Hill Interchange).
Logged
Scott M. Savage
-- Borders, Language and Culture
http://www.roadstothefuture.com
http://www.capital-beltway.com

Jmiles32

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 305
  • Age: 18
  • Location: Gainesville, VA
  • Last Login: June 19, 2018, 01:00:23 PM
Re: Virginia
« Reply #2971 on: March 14, 2018, 10:05:41 PM »

I didn't see the $568 million figure in the article ... that sounds more like a figure for the Improvements to Bower’s Hill Interchange plus the US-58/US-13/US-460 Connector (the interchanges at the landfill and at the airport, i.e. a full freeway upgrade to the highway between the Suffolk Bypass and the Bower’s Hill Interchange).

It was listed on the left side of the article. Seems like the Bower's Hill Interchange and the US-58/US-13/US-460 Connector are separate projects.
Quote
THE PLAN
Widening of I-64 to six lanes from Newport News through Williamsburg, done by 2022; $624 million
Improvements to I-64/264 interchange, by 2021; $347 million
Widening the High-Rise Bridge and I-64, by 2020; $600 million
Study the U.S. 460/58/13 connector, by 2019; $5 million
Expansion of HRBT, by 2024; $4 billion
Phase II of widening the High-Rise Bridge and I-64, by 2031; $1.5 billion
Improvements to Bower’s Hill Interchange, by 2031; $568 million
Build the U.S. 460/58/13 connector, by 2035; $368 million

Improvements to the I-64/Ft. Eustis Boulevard Interchange, by 2035; $297 million
Inclusion of $7 million to study the Patriots Crossing, expansion of I-664 and Monitor-Merrimac Memorial Bridge-Tunnel and expansion of VA 164; those projects would be in a long term vision plan
Logged

Beltway

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2670
  • Roads to the Future

  • Location: Richmond, VA
  • Last Login: June 20, 2018, 11:33:15 PM
Re: Virginia
« Reply #2972 on: March 14, 2018, 11:08:29 PM »

It was listed on the left side of the article. Seems like the Bower's Hill Interchange and the US-58/US-13/US-460 Connector are separate projects.
Quote
THE PLAN
Widening of I-64 to six lanes from Newport News through Williamsburg, done by 2022; $624 million
Improvements to I-64/264 interchange, by 2021; $347 million
Widening the High-Rise Bridge and I-64, by 2020; $600 million
Study the U.S. 460/58/13 connector, by 2019; $5 million
Expansion of HRBT, by 2024; $4 billion
Phase II of widening the High-Rise Bridge and I-64, by 2031; $1.5 billion
Improvements to Bower’s Hill Interchange, by 2031; $568 million
Build the U.S. 460/58/13 connector, by 2035; $368 million

Improvements to the I-64/Ft. Eustis Boulevard Interchange, by 2035; $297 million
Inclusion of $7 million to study the Patriots Crossing, expansion of I-664 and Monitor-Merrimac Memorial Bridge-Tunnel and expansion of VA 164; those projects would be in a long term vision plan

I can't imagine what would be done to the Bower’s Hill Interchange that would cost that much.  It is a very large interchange complex that was completed in two stages in 1980 and in 1992.  Adding lanes on some of the ramp-highways would seem to be needed in the future.  Maybe that project also includes upgrading the I-64/I-264/I-664 interchange?  I hadn't thought that was considered part of the Bower’s Hill Interchange, though.

Same for the U.S. 460/58/13 connector.  Now if those costs were inflation-factored out to 2035 and 2031, then those figures might be more realistic.
Logged
Scott M. Savage
-- Borders, Language and Culture
http://www.roadstothefuture.com
http://www.capital-beltway.com

froggie

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 9372
  • Location: Greensboro, VT
  • Last Login: June 20, 2018, 01:27:25 PM
    • Froggie's Place
Re: Virginia
« Reply #2973 on: March 15, 2018, 01:10:57 PM »

If VDOT intends to address the eastbound weaving at Bower's Hill (which is much more pronounced than the westbound weave), that would explain some of the high cost.

I came up with a concept back in the fall that addresses both the weaves and incorporates HO/T lanes (plus eliminates the left-side exit/entrance on WB 264 and "WB" 64), but I don't remember if I posted it here or not.
Logged

Beltway

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2670
  • Roads to the Future

  • Location: Richmond, VA
  • Last Login: June 20, 2018, 11:33:15 PM
Re: Virginia
« Reply #2974 on: March 15, 2018, 05:16:43 PM »

If VDOT intends to address the eastbound weaving at Bower's Hill (which is much more pronounced than the westbound weave), that would explain some of the high cost.
I came up with a concept back in the fall that addresses both the weaves and incorporates HO/T lanes (plus eliminates the left-side exit/entrance on WB 264 and "WB" 64), but I don't remember if I posted it here or not.

On the 8-lane section of I-664 between the Bower's Hill Interchange and the original I-64/I-264/US-58 interchange that was built in the late 1960s?  Like I suggested that is really two separate interchanges, and that project may have a much larger scope than just upgrading the Bower's Hill Interchange of 1980 and 1992.
« Last Edit: March 15, 2018, 05:19:27 PM by Beltway »
Logged
Scott M. Savage
-- Borders, Language and Culture
http://www.roadstothefuture.com
http://www.capital-beltway.com

 


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.