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 667384 times)

jakeroot

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 8835
  • U/Wash - Urban Design

  • Age: 23
  • Location: Seattle & Tacoma, Wash. Vancouver (BC) | Arlington (VA)
  • Last Login: Today at 05:57:44 PM
Re: Virginia
« Reply #3350 on: November 27, 2018, 10:40:34 PM »

Shoulder driving is a questionable benefit at best.  There are plenty of VMS signs on the corridor to advise of incidents and lane closures, and I am not sure if variable speed limits are a major benefit (and they don't close lanes).

Variable speed limits can reduce speeds prior to an accident, to keep traffic from piling into one another. If traffic is really slow or stopped ahead, the speed limit can drop from 65 to 45 or 35 (or less) to slow traffic in advance of the backup. This can prevent high-speed "didn't see it coming" rear-end collisions.

The three-lane portion of the I-95 HO/T lanes has a variable speed limit, although I've never seen it posted at anything other than 65 mph

I am referring to the overhead per-lane variable speed signs like those utilized by WSDOT. These can close lanes and alert drivers of other lane-specific conditions, such as heavy merging traffic. I think they are far more effective at slowing traffic than side-only variable limits, as those aren't screaming at drivers like those overhead can.



(The later design for the I-66 shoulder lanes, with the different-colored surface and the lane control lights, both of which were done away with earlier this year, was in part a reaction to the problems they had on I-95. The idea was to make it clearer that it was not an ordinary lane.)

Thanks for bringing this up. I was about finished writing about it in my post, but you took care of that for me. The digital signs are still up, right? Weren't they just installed?

The peak-time shoulder lane is utilized on Seattle's 405 to extend an exit only about two miles south from where it starts during most hours of the day. It is also used on I-5 as a bus-only lane, on the inside shoulder to the left of the heavily-used HOV lane.

Here's it in operation. Note that it's a fully digital setup, not one of those dinky "shoulder use permitted 4-6pm M-F" signs that have no ability to change on the fly to adjust to crashes or stopped vehicles, etc. This one can be closed immediately if someone is stopped, unlike the former I-66 and I-95 setups.

Logged

Beltway

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3505
  • Roads to the Future

  • Location: Richmond, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 04:48:33 PM
Re: Virginia
« Reply #3351 on: November 27, 2018, 10:52:26 PM »

Variable speed limits can reduce speeds prior to an accident, to keep traffic from piling into one another. If traffic is really slow or stopped ahead, the speed limit can drop from 65 to 45 or 35 (or less) to slow traffic in advance of the backup. This can prevent high-speed "didn't see it coming" rear-end collisions.

That assumes 1) that most motorists pay much attention to speed limits, and 2) that the smart traffic center has fine enough data to post the reduced speed limit at the right place and not so far in advance that they appear to "cry wolf" to someone who doesn't see the reason for the slowdown, and 3) that the reduced speed limit is applied in a timely manner and then restored in a timely manner, and that also depends on whether the smart traffic center has fine enough data.
Logged
Scott M. Savage
-- Borders, Language and Culture
http://www.roadstothefuture.com
http://www.capital-beltway.com

jakeroot

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 8835
  • U/Wash - Urban Design

  • Age: 23
  • Location: Seattle & Tacoma, Wash. Vancouver (BC) | Arlington (VA)
  • Last Login: Today at 05:57:44 PM
Re: Virginia
« Reply #3352 on: November 27, 2018, 11:24:14 PM »

Variable speed limits can reduce speeds prior to an accident, to keep traffic from piling into one another. If traffic is really slow or stopped ahead, the speed limit can drop from 65 to 45 or 35 (or less) to slow traffic in advance of the backup. This can prevent high-speed "didn't see it coming" rear-end collisions.

That assumes 1) that most motorists pay much attention to speed limits, and 2) that the smart traffic center has fine enough data to post the reduced speed limit at the right place and not so far in advance that they appear to "cry wolf" to someone who doesn't see the reason for the slowdown, and 3) that the reduced speed limit is applied in a timely manner and then restored in a timely manner, and that also depends on whether the smart traffic center has fine enough data.

I can say from personal experience that motorists do not obey the overhead limits to a tee, but drivers definitely slow down a bit (maybe from 70 to 55 or less, even if the ATM dropped the limit from 60 to 45), if only because they know the decreased limit is advanced warning of heavy traffic or a collision. The ATM system operates based on induction loops placed in the freeway every so many thousand feet. The computers adjust the limit based on real-time traffic data, so it's rather punctual in adjusting the limits.

From WSDOT's Gray Notebook...

Quote from: WSDOT Gray Notebook
The [northbound I-5 ATM-enabled carriageway between Tukwila and Seattle] was compared to three [non-ATM] freeway groupings: southbound I-5 from Shoreline to downtown Seattle; I-5 comparison segments (noted in the graph below); and all King County freeways collectively. These sections saw collision rates increase between 2.4% and 4.4% using the six-year comparison. Conversely, during the same period, the ATM section saw collisions drop 4.1%. These trends are illustrated in the graph below.


Logged

Beltway

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3505
  • Roads to the Future

  • Location: Richmond, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 04:48:33 PM
Re: Virginia
« Reply #3353 on: November 27, 2018, 11:44:20 PM »

As mentioned the express lanes on I-95 have a variable speed limit.  The corridor in general does not, but the freeways in Northern Virginia are heavily implemented with ITS.

http://www.virginiadot.org/travel/smart-traffic-center-nova.asp
Excerpt:

The Northern Virginia Traffic Operations Center Operators have more than 5,000 pieces of equipment in the field to help them do their job including:
109 cameras
222 variable message signs
24 gates on I-66 HOV lanes for use during peak travel hours
21 gate groups on I-95/I-395 for reversible HOV lanes
25 ramp meters for inside the beltway on I-66 and I-395
30 lane control signals
23 vehicle classification stations
177 controllers with sensors and loop detectors

Loop detectors and pavement sensors that are embedded in the roadways prompt an automatic incident detection system that alert Operations Center controllers when and where there is likely to be an accident.  This equipment also gathers speed volume and occupancy data.

« Last Edit: November 27, 2018, 11:50:43 PM by Beltway »
Logged
Scott M. Savage
-- Borders, Language and Culture
http://www.roadstothefuture.com
http://www.capital-beltway.com

jakeroot

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 8835
  • U/Wash - Urban Design

  • Age: 23
  • Location: Seattle & Tacoma, Wash. Vancouver (BC) | Arlington (VA)
  • Last Login: Today at 05:57:44 PM
Re: Virginia
« Reply #3354 on: November 28, 2018, 12:30:02 AM »

As mentioned the express lanes on I-95 have a variable speed limit.  The corridor in general does not, but the freeways in Northern Virginia are heavily implemented with ITS.

Right, I got that. I very rarely drive outside Arlington and the district, so my experience with NoVA freeways is limited. Would still like to press the difference between WSDOT-style variable limits, and side-only limits. None of the side-only variable limits seem to be effective. Only the overhead ones seem to have any serious effect.

I am surprised that you seem uncertain about the benefits of traffic/demand management systems. Has VDOT not published any data about how positively or negatively their systems have affected roadways? Most countries in Europe practice some form of ATDM with apparent success.
Logged

Beltway

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3505
  • Roads to the Future

  • Location: Richmond, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 04:48:33 PM
Re: Virginia
« Reply #3355 on: November 28, 2018, 12:37:28 AM »

As mentioned the express lanes on I-95 have a variable speed limit.  The corridor in general does not, but the freeways in Northern Virginia are heavily implemented with ITS.
Right, I got that. I very rarely drive outside Arlington and the district, so my experience with NoVA freeways is limited.
I am surprised that you seem uncertain about the benefits of traffic/demand management systems. Has VDOT not published any data about how positively or negatively their systems have affected roadways?

I am not uncertain about the benefits, it is just not an area I have studied in depth, so that limits my ability to discuss it in depth.  As you know there are many sub topics of interest in roads and highways.

I-66 does have an Active Traffic Management system that was implemented in 2015, and the Virginia Transportation Research Council (VTRC) has a very long and detailed report about that system that you can read at your leisure--

Evaluation of the Impact of the I-66 Active Traffic Management System 
http://www.virginiadot.org/vtrc/main/online_reports/pdf/17-r5.pdf
Logged
Scott M. Savage
-- Borders, Language and Culture
http://www.roadstothefuture.com
http://www.capital-beltway.com

Beltway

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3505
  • Roads to the Future

  • Location: Richmond, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 04:48:33 PM
Re: Virginia
« Reply #3356 on: November 28, 2018, 12:54:54 AM »

Coming through there on summer weekends is endless crawling traffic. It gets bad enough that sometimes I go out to Warrenton to go around it. 

Presumably to bypass D.C.?  I used to do that sometimes, but when the Wilson Bridge Project was completed (2013) and the I-495 HOT Lanes project was completed (2012), my preferred route has been to stay on I-95 whether bypassing east or west of D.C., given the time and reliability improvements of those two projects alone.  The only reason I would detour off of I-95 was if there was radio reports of a traffic catastrophe, which has not happened to me yet.

The I-95 HOT Lanes project completion (2014) has increased my preference for staying on I-95, although before that there were still many times when I was able to take advantage of the I-95 reversibles when HOV was not in effect at that timespan.


The last few times I have driven down that stretch, the reversible lanes were mismanaged and unable to respond to obvious unidirectional congestion.  You could count the cars going the other way with your fingers, so it wasn't some perception issue where "the lanes were working properly because it was free flow in their direction."  No, they were open in the wrong direction, so all the fancy design in the world still fails the travelling public on that stretch of I-95 between DC and Fredericksburg.  It would have been better just to have added regular capacity than just fill the pockets of an operator.
At least there are legitimate reasons for NYC's lingering congestion, which has actually lessened over the years.  Lane mismanagement and lack of ability to address the congestion on I-95, partially due to noncompetition clauses with the operator, are just ridiculous and has resulted in a congested mess along the entire corridor.  The only corridor I can think of in NYC that would come close would be the LIE and even then, I bet the length of I-95 affected by congestion in VA  is longer than where the severe congestion is on the LIE.

Oh please.  I can't think of a more painful place to drive than NYC and its NY suburbs, and it is not just because of the large population, roads like the LIE, BQE, CBX, VWX and Belt Parkway are antiquated and poorly maintained in many places (atrocious bridges and horrendous pavements) and undersized, and there are astronomical tolls on some of the crossings.  The lack of an LI Sound crossing and the recent "study" that dismissed it by claiming that it would cost $55 billon to build a bridge!  Let's not talk about the LIE without mentioning the rest of unbuilt I-495 between the NJTP and the LIE including the undersized Midtown Tunnel; and if you want to leave New Jersey out of it, then consider between Midtown Manhattan and mid-LI - pain.


On the I-95/I-395 reversible roadways.  Firstly, given the high peak directional split it matches the -normal- traffic patterns.  Secondly, you can't instantly change the direction of the roadway, it is 38 miles long and 2 hours are scheduled for the operation, to let it empty of all moving vehicles and verify the same, verify that all entry gates are closed, verify that there are no disabled vehicles on the facility, and then to tow any such vehicles.  Sometimes it can be done and reopened in an hour and a half or less, but 2 hours is scheduled.

Thirdly, the traffic directions need to follow a normal schedule so that drivers can plan in advance.  Inbound (NB) in the morning on weekdays, outbound (SB) in the evening.  Outbound Saturday morning, inbound in the evening.  Sunday mornings have low traffic, inbound peaks in the evening.  These follow normal directional flows.  Holidays analyzed individually.

Given the above parameters and the time to reverse, normally a directional operation block is not less than 12 hours and like I said it needs to follow a schedule that is published.  I have never seen it "open in the wrong direction", and this is going back to the 1970s, and keep in mind that having 5 to 7 lanes in one direction does a pretty nice job of spreading out the traffic as compared to 3 or 4 lanes in the other direction.

Fourthly, FHWA refused to fund general purpose lane widening or dual-dual widening in the 1990s project to extend the reversibles from Springfield to Dumfries, they funded it as a managed lanes project.  Fifthly, the project still matched the -normal- high directional peaks on the highway.  As does the extension to Garrisonville and to Stafford.  Just because a short term peak may occur in the opposite direction doesn't override the 12-hour operation, and that could occur because of a major incident, and in an emergency situation the normal schedule can be and has been overridden.

Sixthly, there are several options currently for expanding the general purpose lanes to 4x4, it could be a tax-funded project that would assess and pay for a compensation event (if any); it could be a P3 project to add an express toll lane each way, and it could be the construction of 2-lane C-D roadways at local congestion spots.

Seventhly, VDOT had plans for an outer western Washington bypass but Maryland never would participate and consider building its part.  So no dice.  This would have bypassed I-95 and the whole area from Fredericksburg to Mount Airy MD, provided some relief to I-95 and provided a bypass for I-95 thru traffic.

I-95 in Fairfax County south of the Beltway has reached "full build out", IMHO, with its 4nb-3r-4sb configuration, it is a massively wide highway.  Currently in PW County and southward it goes from 4nb-3r-4sb to 3nb-3r-3sb to 3nb-2r-3sb.

I would argue that a 4nb-2r-4sb configuration from Woodbridge to Massaponax would be "full build out" for that segment.

For additional capacity build a new highway such as an eastern and/or western outer bypass of Washington.

Two- and 3-lane C-D roadways are planned and being constructed on I-95 between south of VA-3 and north of US-17, and these are Interstate-standard roadways.  These C-D roadways could be built in other areas north of there in the future.  But the reversible HOV/HOT/busway roadway is an ideal "core" for the expansion of I-95 in this area, IMHO.
« Last Edit: November 28, 2018, 12:58:05 AM by Beltway »
Logged
Scott M. Savage
-- Borders, Language and Culture
http://www.roadstothefuture.com
http://www.capital-beltway.com

Mapmikey

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2459
  • www.vahighways.com

  • Age: 49
  • Last Login: Today at 01:00:24 PM
    • Co-curator Virginia Highways Project
Re: Virginia
« Reply #3357 on: November 28, 2018, 06:54:08 AM »


The three-lane portion of the I-95 HO/T lanes has a variable speed limit, although I've never seen it posted at anything other than 65 mph (recognizing I normally use only a small segment of the I-95 lanes). The only other place in Northern Virginia where there was a variable speed limit in use for any length of time was on the Beltway from Springfield to the Wilson Bridge during the construction about ten years ago. Problem was, everyone ignored it when they lowered the speed limits, which should have been no surprise to anyone because everyone also ignores the 55-mph speed limit that's normally in effect through there!

The I-95 HOT lanes variable speed limits change if there are lanes blocked as do the ones on I-66 outside the beltway.  The I-66 ones only show if the speed limit is dropped?

Oddly, they do not change when it is snowing enough that going over say 35 is out of the question...
Logged
Clinched:
I: 4 12 16 17 20 26 27 30 59 64 66 68 72 73 ew74 77 78 79 82 83 ew84 85 ew86 e88 97 99
US: 4 6N 9W 11E 11W 13 15 19W 21 44 46 48 58 72 92 113 117 123 130 158 163 176 178 192 206 209 211 219 220 221 222 258 264 276 290 311 319 322 340 360 378 401 ew422 501 521 522 601 701
PriSystems: VA, DE

Rothman

  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 4115
  • Last Login: December 12, 2018, 09:00:00 AM
Re: Virginia
« Reply #3358 on: November 28, 2018, 07:44:20 AM »

Coming through there on summer weekends is endless crawling traffic. It gets bad enough that sometimes I go out to Warrenton to go around it. 

Presumably to bypass D.C.?  I used to do that sometimes, but when the Wilson Bridge Project was completed (2013) and the I-495 HOT Lanes project was completed (2012), my preferred route has been to stay on I-95 whether bypassing east or west of D.C., given the time and reliability improvements of those two projects alone.  The only reason I would detour off of I-95 was if there was radio reports of a traffic catastrophe, which has not happened to me yet.

The I-95 HOT Lanes project completion (2014) has increased my preference for staying on I-95, although before that there were still many times when I was able to take advantage of the I-95 reversibles when HOV was not in effect at that timespan.


The last few times I have driven down that stretch, the reversible lanes were mismanaged and unable to respond to obvious unidirectional congestion.  You could count the cars going the other way with your fingers, so it wasn't some perception issue where "the lanes were working properly because it was free flow in their direction."  No, they were open in the wrong direction, so all the fancy design in the world still fails the travelling public on that stretch of I-95 between DC and Fredericksburg.  It would have been better just to have added regular capacity than just fill the pockets of an operator.
At least there are legitimate reasons for NYC's lingering congestion, which has actually lessened over the years.  Lane mismanagement and lack of ability to address the congestion on I-95, partially due to noncompetition clauses with the operator, are just ridiculous and has resulted in a congested mess along the entire corridor.  The only corridor I can think of in NYC that would come close would be the LIE and even then, I bet the length of I-95 affected by congestion in VA  is longer than where the severe congestion is on the LIE.

Oh please.  I can't think of a more painful place to drive than NYC and its NY suburbs, and it is not just because of the large population, roads like the LIE, BQE, CBX, VWX and Belt Parkway are antiquated and poorly maintained in many places (atrocious bridges and horrendous pavements) and undersized, and there are astronomical tolls on some of the crossings.  The lack of an LI Sound crossing and the recent "study" that dismissed it by claiming that it would cost $55 billon to build a bridge!  Let's not talk about the LIE without mentioning the rest of unbuilt I-495 between the NJTP and the LIE including the undersized Midtown Tunnel; and if you want to leave New Jersey out of it, then consider between Midtown Manhattan and mid-LI - pain.


On the I-95/I-395 reversible roadways.  Firstly, given the high peak directional split it matches the -normal- traffic patterns.  Secondly, you can't instantly change the direction of the roadway, it is 38 miles long and 2 hours are scheduled for the operation, to let it empty of all moving vehicles and verify the same, verify that all entry gates are closed, verify that there are no disabled vehicles on the facility, and then to tow any such vehicles.  Sometimes it can be done and reopened in an hour and a half or less, but 2 hours is scheduled.

Thirdly, the traffic directions need to follow a normal schedule so that drivers can plan in advance.  Inbound (NB) in the morning on weekdays, outbound (SB) in the evening.  Outbound Saturday morning, inbound in the evening.  Sunday mornings have low traffic, inbound peaks in the evening.  These follow normal directional flows.  Holidays analyzed individually.

Given the above parameters and the time to reverse, normally a directional operation block is not less than 12 hours and like I said it needs to follow a schedule that is published.  I have never seen it "open in the wrong direction", and this is going back to the 1970s, and keep in mind that having 5 to 7 lanes in one direction does a pretty nice job of spreading out the traffic as compared to 3 or 4 lanes in the other direction.

Fourthly, FHWA refused to fund general purpose lane widening or dual-dual widening in the 1990s project to extend the reversibles from Springfield to Dumfries, they funded it as a managed lanes project.  Fifthly, the project still matched the -normal- high directional peaks on the highway.  As does the extension to Garrisonville and to Stafford.  Just because a short term peak may occur in the opposite direction doesn't override the 12-hour operation, and that could occur because of a major incident, and in an emergency situation the normal schedule can be and has been overridden.

Sixthly, there are several options currently for expanding the general purpose lanes to 4x4, it could be a tax-funded project that would assess and pay for a compensation event (if any); it could be a P3 project to add an express toll lane each way, and it could be the construction of 2-lane C-D roadways at local congestion spots.

Seventhly, VDOT had plans for an outer western Washington bypass but Maryland never would participate and consider building its part.  So no dice.  This would have bypassed I-95 and the whole area from Fredericksburg to Mount Airy MD, provided some relief to I-95 and provided a bypass for I-95 thru traffic.

I-95 in Fairfax County south of the Beltway has reached "full build out", IMHO, with its 4nb-3r-4sb configuration, it is a massively wide highway.  Currently in PW County and southward it goes from 4nb-3r-4sb to 3nb-3r-3sb to 3nb-2r-3sb.

I would argue that a 4nb-2r-4sb configuration from Woodbridge to Massaponax would be "full build out" for that segment.

For additional capacity build a new highway such as an eastern and/or western outer bypass of Washington.

Two- and 3-lane C-D roadways are planned and being constructed on I-95 between south of VA-3 and north of US-17, and these are Interstate-standard roadways.  These C-D roadways could be built in other areas north of there in the future.  But the reversible HOV/HOT/busway roadway is an ideal "core" for the expansion of I-95 in this area, IMHO.
Well, it seems we agree that improvements should be made to the corridor.  In its current state, yes, I would rather drive the Cross Bronx than this portion of I-95.

Other than that, thank you for the explanations as to why it is the way it is.
Logged
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position(s) of NYSDOT.

abefroman329

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2105
  • Old fat fucks ruin everything.

  • Age: 39
  • Location: Chicago
  • Last Login: Today at 05:13:22 PM
Re: Virginia
« Reply #3359 on: November 28, 2018, 09:08:28 AM »

Speaking of slugging, I saw a sign for a slug gathering point in DC at 14th and New York Ave last month, and wondered why, and then I remembered that the reversible lanes of the 14th Street Bridge are HOV now.  Did they replace the gathering points at the Pentagon, or are they still there?
Logged

Beltway

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3505
  • Roads to the Future

  • Location: Richmond, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 04:48:33 PM
Re: Virginia
« Reply #3360 on: November 28, 2018, 09:25:43 AM »

My thought about driving the Cross Bronx is just a hair below the thought of driving my car into the East River, or approximately equal to that of living in NYC.
Logged
Scott M. Savage
-- Borders, Language and Culture
http://www.roadstothefuture.com
http://www.capital-beltway.com

1995hoo

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 9353
  • Age: 45
  • Location: Fairfax County, Virginia
  • Last Login: Today at 04:28:53 PM
Re: Virginia
« Reply #3361 on: November 28, 2018, 09:27:53 AM »

The I-66 Active Traffic Management System is no longer in use, at least not the overhead lane control and variable speed limit signs. They were turned off earlier this year and are being removed as part of the HO/T lane construction project (most of them were still in place as of Nov. 10). The colored paint has been removed from the shoulder lane as well; it's now supposed to operate according to the hours on the sign because the lane control signals will have to come down as well.

Edited to add a link to the WTOP article about the system being removed: https://wtop.com/dc-transit/2018/01/exclusive-66-toll-construction-take-2-year-old-high-tech-traffic-management-system/

The I-66 signs were theoretically capable of displaying different speed limits for different lanes, but in practice I do not believe they ever did. They did show lower limits from time to time, usually because of some incident—the signs would be yellow with the text "SPEED ##" in black, ## obviously representing whatever they chose to post. "SPEED LIMIT" wouldn't fit, which probably explains the odd use of "SPEED." In my unscientific observation, people didn't really pay any more attention to those signs than they do to any other speed limits. The theory was, as jakeroot says, to give advance warning of an incident or collision that might slow traffic and to get people to slow down in advance rather than everyone slamming on the brakes at the incident, but it didn't really work. I think most people feel most of the speed limits are underposted anyway, so they don't take them seriously. I'd argue that I-66 between Fair Oaks and the Beltway was correctly posted at 55 but that west of Fair Oaks where it widened out and became a much better and more modern road it was definitely underposted at 55 and 60 mph.



Speaking of slugging, I saw a sign for a slug gathering point in DC at 14th and New York Ave last month, and wondered why, and then I remembered that the reversible lanes of the 14th Street Bridge are HOV now.  Did they replace the gathering points at the Pentagon, or are they still there?

The Pentagon slug lines are still there, as are a good number of others. The afternoon slug lines were never limited to the Pentagon; there have always been multiple locations throughout downtown DC, including along 18th Street, near the State Department, and in Southwest near L'Enfant Plaza. One common theme to the line locations is that there's almost always a Metro or VRE stop nearby so that people have an alternative way home if they can't get a slug ride.

The 14th Street Bridge itself is not HOV-restricted, including the "HOV bridge" (there are no reversible lanes on the bridge), and non-HOV traffic headed from DC to Route 1 through Crystal City is somewhat encouraged to use the "HOV bridge" because of the road configuration on the Virginia side—if you use the "non-HOV bridge," you wind up weaving across traffic coming out of the inner carriageway. The "HOV bridge" used to carry an HOV restriction, but that was removed in the late 1980s or early 1990s to relieve traffic in the general-purpose lanes when there was some sort of construction project going on at or near the inbound bridge. The restrictions were never re-imposed, probably because it would have caused a commuter rebellion.
« Last Edit: November 28, 2018, 09:44:32 AM by 1995hoo »
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.

abefroman329

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2105
  • Old fat fucks ruin everything.

  • Age: 39
  • Location: Chicago
  • Last Login: Today at 05:13:22 PM
Re: Virginia
« Reply #3362 on: November 28, 2018, 10:23:20 AM »

The I-66 signs were theoretically capable of displaying different speed limits for different lanes, but in practice I do not believe they ever did.
I believe the "smart road" portion of I-90 in Illinois has this capability as well.  Truth be told, I've never seen different speed limits for different lanes on a limited-access highway anywhere other than England, certainly not anywhere in the US.
Logged

hbelkins

  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 12434
  • (Censored by spoilsports. They ruin everything.)

  • Age: 57
  • Location: Kentucky
  • Last Login: December 12, 2018, 01:24:12 PM
    • Millennium Highway
Re: Virginia
« Reply #3363 on: November 28, 2018, 11:45:37 AM »

I'm getting a chuckle out of the I-95 Virginia vs. NYC comments.

Both are like a bad case of gastrointestinal distress. Which is worse, vomiting (being stuck in barely moving bumper-to-bumper traffic on the Cross Bronx) or diarrhea (getting caught up in bumper-to-bumper traffic moving at 65-70 mph in all lanes with little margin for error, risky lane changes, etc.)?

It's been awhile since I drove I-95 in Virginia between the DC metro and Richmond, but when I did, I tried to camp out in the center lane and tried not to change lanes unless it was absolutely necessary. The heavy traffic and cars darting in and out of lanes made me uncomfortable.
Logged

jakeroot

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 8835
  • U/Wash - Urban Design

  • Age: 23
  • Location: Seattle & Tacoma, Wash. Vancouver (BC) | Arlington (VA)
  • Last Login: Today at 05:57:44 PM
Re: Virginia
« Reply #3364 on: November 28, 2018, 12:20:15 PM »

The I-66 signs were theoretically capable of displaying different speed limits for different lanes, but in practice I do not believe they ever did.
I believe the "smart road" portion of I-90 in Illinois has this capability as well.  Truth be told, I've never seen different speed limits for different lanes on a limited-access highway anywhere other than England, certainly not anywhere in the US.

WSDOT does this in the Seattle area. I believe the UK variable limits were a basis for the design here...

Logged

Mapmikey

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2459
  • www.vahighways.com

  • Age: 49
  • Last Login: Today at 01:00:24 PM
    • Co-curator Virginia Highways Project
Re: Virginia
« Reply #3365 on: November 28, 2018, 12:29:21 PM »

I'm getting a chuckle out of the I-95 Virginia vs. NYC comments.

Both are like a bad case of gastrointestinal distress. Which is worse, vomiting (being stuck in barely moving bumper-to-bumper traffic on the Cross Bronx) or diarrhea (getting caught up in bumper-to-bumper traffic moving at 65-70 mph in all lanes with little margin for error, risky lane changes, etc.)?

It's been awhile since I drove I-95 in Virginia between the DC metro and Richmond, but when I did, I tried to camp out in the center lane and tried not to change lanes unless it was absolutely necessary. The heavy traffic and cars darting in and out of lanes made me uncomfortable.

A lot of it comes down to what you are used to.  I drive 95 from Fredericksburg to the DC Beltway 4 days a week (20+ yrs).  I know the lane patterns, where daily slow downs are, where else it slows down if it rains, if there's a wreck in a particular location, if there's a lane with rougher pavement than the rest, and probably a dozen other parameters that I will not know if I am driving in NYC or any other large urban area.  Therefore I am way more anxious when driving in other areas.

It is a good strategy to be in the middle lane(s) if you have more than 2 lanes available to prevent you from being forced off the freeway in an exit-only situation you weren't familiar with (and may not know how to get back on the freeway in the way you were headed).  With GMSV I also preview urban freeway interchanges so that I know which side of the freeway I need to be on to make the movement I need to make.

As for the darting nature of high speed urban traffic, if you are subjected to it enough you get used to it a little bit and can often anticipate when someone is going to want in front of you which cuts down on brake slamming.
Logged
Clinched:
I: 4 12 16 17 20 26 27 30 59 64 66 68 72 73 ew74 77 78 79 82 83 ew84 85 ew86 e88 97 99
US: 4 6N 9W 11E 11W 13 15 19W 21 44 46 48 58 72 92 113 117 123 130 158 163 176 178 192 206 209 211 219 220 221 222 258 264 276 290 311 319 322 340 360 378 401 ew422 501 521 522 601 701
PriSystems: VA, DE

1995hoo

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 9353
  • Age: 45
  • Location: Fairfax County, Virginia
  • Last Login: Today at 04:28:53 PM
Re: Virginia
« Reply #3366 on: November 28, 2018, 12:42:40 PM »

The I-66 signs were theoretically capable of displaying different speed limits for different lanes, but in practice I do not believe they ever did.
I believe the "smart road" portion of I-90 in Illinois has this capability as well.  Truth be told, I've never seen different speed limits for different lanes on a limited-access highway anywhere other than England, certainly not anywhere in the US.

WSDOT does this in the Seattle area. I believe the UK variable limits were a basis for the design here...



I found a photo of the I-66 system in operation. The signs were not limited to displaying speed limit changes. Sometimes if a lane were closed they displayed various arrows depending on what drivers in a given lane were supposed to do.

This image appears to be looking east from somewhere around the US-50 interchange at Fair Oaks.

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.

Beltway

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3505
  • Roads to the Future

  • Location: Richmond, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 04:48:33 PM
Re: Virginia
« Reply #3367 on: November 28, 2018, 03:37:21 PM »

A lot of it comes down to what you are used to.  I drive 95 from Fredericksburg to the DC Beltway 4 days a week (20+ yrs).  I know the lane patterns, where daily slow downs are, where else it slows down if it rains, if there's a wreck in a particular location, if there's a lane with rougher pavement than the rest, and probably a dozen other parameters that I will not know if I am driving in NYC or any other large urban area.  Therefore I am way more anxious when driving in other areas.

I don't drive that part of I-95 frequently enough to know those things, maybe 10 times per year.  Nevertheless it is usually a routine trip with no major delays, and if during rush hours and in that direction I take the HOT lanes which accept E-ZPass.
Logged
Scott M. Savage
-- Borders, Language and Culture
http://www.roadstothefuture.com
http://www.capital-beltway.com

Jmiles32

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 354
  • Age: 18
  • Location: Gainesville, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 05:13:01 PM
Re: Virginia
« Reply #3368 on: December 07, 2018, 04:52:53 PM »

https://www.insidenova.com/news/transportation/prince_william/deal-possible-to-add-lanes-at-i--bottleneck-say/article_2f8e556e-f9a4-11e8-bce5-b3a81c43bbcf.html
Quote
As legislators head to Richmond they have their eyes on transportation issues, including the notorious bottleneck on Interstate 95 crossing the Occoquan River into Prince William County.

Sen. George Barker, D-39th District, said Gov. Ralph Northam is trying to negotiate a deal to add one additional lane in both directions on I-95 near Va. 123 in Occoquan.

“We understand something needs to be done,” Barker said.

Del. Jennifer Carroll Foy, D-2nd District, said the governor’s office could make an announcement about plans to address the bottleneck in about a month.

Barker and Foy were among state leaders who spoke at the legislative breakfast hosted by the Prince William Chamber of Commerce on Dec. 5 at the Old Hickory Golf Club in Woodbridge. 

In 2012, the Virginia Department of Transportation entered into a public-private contract with TransUrban to allow the company to build about 29 miles of toll lanes on I-95.

As part of the agreement, VDOT agreed not make improvements to the main lanes of I-95 without compensating TransUrban for their possible revenue losses on the Express Lanes.

Del. Danica Roem, D-13th District, said the bottleneck needs to be addressed immediately.

“That backup is just getting more and more severe,” Roem said. “That has an economic development impact for us, it has an impact on quality of life.”

Reached after the legislative breakfast, Sen. Scott Surovell, D-36th District, said the bottleneck is the No. 1 traffic complaint he receives from constituents every year. Surovell said he and state Sen. Jeremy McPike, D-29th District, have pushed for three years for the state to renegotiate the contract with TransUrban.

As construction continues to extend the toll lanes north on Interstate 395, along with planned construction of an extension south toward Fredericksburg, Surovell said it’s “the perfect opportunity for Governor Northam to renegotiate the contract, and I am very optimistic he will do that so we can start focusing on solutions to the bottleneck instead of having to worry about how many tens of millions of dollars we will have to pay Transurban before we can put a shovel in the road.”

As many of us on here understand, it would be a HUGE deal if VA was to successfully make a (smart)deal with Transburban regarding the addition of new general purpose lanes south of VA-123. In doing so hopefully, it would alleviate arguably the worst bottleneck in all of Virginia. I wish Governor Northam and his team the best of luck.
Logged

cpzilliacus

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 10179
  • Age: 59
  • Location: Maryland
  • Last Login: December 11, 2018, 09:35:49 PM
Re: Virginia
« Reply #3369 on: December 07, 2018, 05:12:38 PM »

Speaking of slugging, I saw a sign for a slug gathering point in DC at 14th and New York Ave last month, and wondered why, and then I remembered that the reversible lanes of the 14th Street Bridge are HOV now.  Did they replace the gathering points at the Pentagon, or are they still there?

No, there are no HOV restrictions on the 14th Street Bridge - and have not been since the 1980's. 

The "Carpool Staging Area" (as the VDOT signs call it) is still there.
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: 3505
  • Roads to the Future

  • Location: Richmond, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 04:48:33 PM
Re: Virginia
« Reply #3370 on: December 07, 2018, 11:19:18 PM »

As many of us on here understand, it would be a HUGE deal if VA was to successfully make a (smart)deal with Transburban regarding the addition of new general purpose lanes south of VA-123.

First conduct a study to see what if any revenue loss would take place, and then go from there.  If Transurban adds the lanes perhaps they could have dyanamic tolls (not HOT but express tolls) on the inner lane each way and then they wouldn't have to be concerned about any compensation event. 
Logged
Scott M. Savage
-- Borders, Language and Culture
http://www.roadstothefuture.com
http://www.capital-beltway.com

Jmiles32

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 354
  • Age: 18
  • Location: Gainesville, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 05:13:01 PM
Re: Virginia
« Reply #3371 on: December 08, 2018, 06:25:44 PM »

As many of us on here understand, it would be a HUGE deal if VA was to successfully make a (smart)deal with Transburban regarding the addition of new general purpose lanes south of VA-123.

First conduct a study to see what if any revenue loss would take place, and then go from there.  If Transurban adds the lanes perhaps they could have dyanamic tolls (not HOT but express tolls) on the inner lane each way and then they wouldn't have to be concerned about any compensation event.

If a deal is made or the current contract is altered, a study regarding revenue loss may not be necessary. While Transburban does hold the right to add more toll lanes to I-95, I don't think the politicians want to go that route for fear that it won't sit well with local voters.
Logged

Beltway

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3505
  • Roads to the Future

  • Location: Richmond, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 04:48:33 PM
Re: Virginia
« Reply #3372 on: December 08, 2018, 06:34:39 PM »

First conduct a study to see what if any revenue loss would take place, and then go from there.  If Transurban adds the lanes perhaps they could have dyanamic tolls (not HOT but express tolls) on the inner lane each way and then they wouldn't have to be concerned about any compensation event.
If a deal is made or the current contract is altered, a study regarding revenue loss may not be necessary. While Transburban does hold the right to add more toll lanes to I-95, I don't think the politicians want to go that route for fear that it won't sit well with local voters.

Someone (Transburban and/or VDOT) will conduct a study, or already has, to determine what happens if a 4th lane each way is added for a given distance south of there, and what effect that tolls would have if it were tolled.  It may work fine without tolls, but they will have to analyze it and see.
Logged
Scott M. Savage
-- Borders, Language and Culture
http://www.roadstothefuture.com
http://www.capital-beltway.com

Jmiles32

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 354
  • Age: 18
  • Location: Gainesville, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 05:13:01 PM
Re: Virginia
« Reply #3373 on: December 08, 2018, 07:23:35 PM »

First conduct a study to see what if any revenue loss would take place, and then go from there.  If Transurban adds the lanes perhaps they could have dyanamic tolls (not HOT but express tolls) on the inner lane each way and then they wouldn't have to be concerned about any compensation event.
If a deal is made or the current contract is altered, a study regarding revenue loss may not be necessary. While Transburban does hold the right to add more toll lanes to I-95, I don't think the politicians want to go that route for fear that it won't sit well with local voters.

Someone (Transburban and/or VDOT) will conduct a study, or already has, to determine what happens if a 4th lane each way is added for a given distance south of there, and what effect that tolls would have if it were tolled.  It may work fine without tolls, but they will have to analyze it and see.

If the Governor does in fact plan to make an announcement next month regarding the Occoquan bottleneck, then yes I would agree that either an impact study has already been completed or is in the process of being completed as we speak. Definitely look forward to seeing the findings.
Logged

Thing 342

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1200
  • you should really just relax

  • Age: 21
  • Location: NRV / HR, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 02:54:30 PM
    • Thing 342's Road Photos
Re: Virginia
« Reply #3374 on: December 11, 2018, 10:54:20 AM »

Speed limit on I-64 to rise from 60 to 65 between exit 255 and 261 starting tomorrow: https://www.wavy.com/traffic/speed-limit-increasing-on-i-64-in-hampton-newport-news/1652624115
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.

 


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.