Northern Virginia HOT Lanes

[Beltway]

My point was related more to what I guess you could call the "surcharge" to use that little bypass lane in the Springfield Interchange. My concern was less about the end-to-end toll than it was about the extra $6 for what's basically that tiny little ramp. That's what I was calling a ripoff, not the end-to-end toll.

It appears to be part of a future HOV lane system built into the Springfield Interchange.

When the reversibles are running northbound, its ramp to the Outer Loop merges with this "bypass lane" and that could cause congestion at the merge if both ramps were not HOT.

[Great Lakes Roads]

Existing configuration at the Woodrow Wilson Bridge on I-95/495- 3x2x2x3
495 Southside Express Lanes (New Concept)- 4 12'-lanes in each direction with two-foot shoulders on both sides as well as 2 12'-lanes in each direction with a 10' shoulder on the right and an 18' shoulder on the left for a future Metrorail line.

https://www.fairfaxcounty.gov/boardofsupervisors/sites/boardofsupervisors/files/Assets/Documents/PDF/2026-09-22-VDOT-FCDOT-Express-Lanes-95.pdf

(It's on slide 8 for the updated plan)

[Beltway]

Existing configuration at the Woodrow Wilson Bridge on I-95/495- 3x2x2x3
495 Southside Express Lanes (New Concept)- 4 12'-lanes in each direction with two-foot shoulders on both sides as well as 2 12'-lanes in each direction with a 10' shoulder on the right and an 18' shoulder on the left for a future Metrorail line.

Bad idea -- killing the shoulders on the local roadways. The design was 3-3-3-3 with full right shoulders on each roadway, and they should keep it that way.

A future Metrorail line on the WWB is a pipe dream, there is no demand for it and there will not be for any foreseeable future.

The unopened left lane was intended to be HOV/busway, and with future ramps connecting to US-1 and I-295. That is the guideway for express bus service.

[Rothman]

*shrug*

Even though I'd wonder about how many people would use Metro to go east-west that far south, have to admit I'm much more experienced with the north side of the Metro area (i.e., I thought a line cutting across from Fort Totten to Dupont Circle would be useful when I was commuting down there).  Has to be some demand for the idea; simple Google search does result in advocacy groups and "regional officials" wanting it.  Evidently, somewhere on the east side in PG County is experiencing some kind of economic growth spurring this discussion.

Should be interesting to see how this plays out, since whatever the demand is will inevitably hit up against the cost-effectiveness of putting the Metro on the bridge.  Makes me wonder how much demand there would need to be for the area to undertake the endeavor, especially as the system as a whole is having trouble with deterioration.

[1995hoo]

If indeed the new Sphere performance venue is built next to the MGM near National Harbor, I could see that potentially helping to increase the demand for some form of public transportation serving that general area. Whether that should be Metrorail or some kind of express bus service is a separate question, as is where it should tie into the existing Metrorail system. That is, suppose there were to be consideration of some sort of Metrorail link. Tying it into the Huntington station in Fairfax County would likely be very expensive and difficult because of how it's built into the side of a hill. Tying it into the Eisenhower Avenue station might be less difficult; while it's an elevated stop, it's surrounded by a sea of asphalt, part of which is a vacant unused lot that apparently belongs to the federal courthouse. So in theory there's more room there. (For bus service, the Eisenhower stop would almost certainly be preferable than Huntington because the former has nearby direct access to the Beltway "thru" lanes via the Mill Road ramp, which is a shorter connection in both directions than the route that would be needed to go to Huntington.)

But I seem to recall that back when the new Wilson Bridge was being designed, WMATA expressed heavy doubt and skepticism about the idea of running the subway over a drawbridge. The bridge doesn't really open all that often at times of day that would impact service, though, so I wonder whether they would change that viewpoint now.

[Plutonic Panda]

Existing configuration at the Woodrow Wilson Bridge on I-95/495- 3x2x2x3
495 Southside Express Lanes (New Concept)- 4 12'-lanes in each direction with two-foot shoulders on both sides as well as 2 12'-lanes in each direction with a 10' shoulder on the right and an 18' shoulder on the left for a future Metrorail line.

Bad idea -- killing the shoulders on the local roadways. The design was 3-3-3-3 with full right shoulders on each roadway, and they should keep it that way.

A future Metrorail line on the WWB is a pipe dream, there is no demand for it and there will not be for any foreseeable future.

The unopened left lane was intended to be HOV/busway, and with future ramps connecting to US-1 and I-295. That is the guideway for express bus service.

How was this a bad idea? They're adding a new lane of traffic?

[Beltway]

The unopened left lane was intended to be HOV/busway, and with future ramps connecting to US-1 and I-295. That is the guideway for express bus service.

How was this a bad idea? They're adding a new lane of traffic?

The unopened express left lanes on the 12-lane bridge.  They were reserved for future HOV lanes.

[1995hoo]

Existing configuration at the Woodrow Wilson Bridge on I-95/495- 3x2x2x3
495 Southside Express Lanes (New Concept)- 4 12'-lanes in each direction with two-foot shoulders on both sides as well as 2 12'-lanes in each direction with a 10' shoulder on the right and an 18' shoulder on the left for a future Metrorail line.

Bad idea -- killing the shoulders on the local roadways. The design was 3-3-3-3 with full right shoulders on each roadway, and they should keep it that way.

A future Metrorail line on the WWB is a pipe dream, there is no demand for it and there will not be for any foreseeable future.

The unopened left lane was intended to be HOV/busway, and with future ramps connecting to US-1 and I-295. That is the guideway for express bus service.

How was this a bad idea? They're adding a new lane of traffic?

You're not asking why removing shoulders would be a bad idea, are you? One of the old bridge's biggest weaknesses was its lack of shoulders. Whenever there was a crash or a broken-down vehicle, at least one lane invariably wound up blocked and the traffic snarls were always terrible. Removing the full-width shoulders on the new bridge would be terrible.

[Beltway]

You're not asking why removing shoulders would be a bad idea, are you? One of the old bridge's biggest weaknesses was its lack of shoulders. Whenever there was a crash or a broken-down vehicle, at least one lane invariably wound up blocked and the traffic snarls were always terrible. Removing the full-width shoulders on the new bridge would be terrible.

The 1982 redecking project on the WWB actually did provide a wide enough deck for 7 foot right shoulders. Wide enough for a car if you position exactly. But in practice a disabled vehicle usually blocked the right lane.

[sprjus4]

Given they're going to ultimately end in Maryland on the eastern side of the bridge anyway, why not just have one express lane in each direction across the bridge, in that reserved third lane, and then open up to two express lanes each way once on the Virginia side?

[vdeane]

I don't understand why VDOT is insistent on extending the HOT lanes across the bridge.  Given that the Maryland HOT lanes project is dead (and deader than dead on this part of the beltway), why bother?  Keeping the shoulders on the bridge would be more helpful.

[Beltway]

Given they're going to ultimately end in Maryland on the eastern side of the bridge anyway, why not just have one express lane in each direction across the bridge, in that reserved third lane, and then open up to two express lanes each way once on the Virginia side?

That was the plan when the WWB Project was designed. The 7.5 mile Beltway rebuild has a third express lane (not yet opened) each way that was reserved for a future single lane HOV/busway.

[Beltway]

I don't understand why VDOT is insistent on extending the HOT lanes across the bridge.  Given that the Maryland HOT lanes project is dead (and deader than dead on this part of the beltway), why bother?  Keeping the shoulders on the bridge would be more helpful.

The future HOV lane was built into the entire 7.5 mile Beltway rebuild. So the current highway could accommodate HOV to near the St. Barnabas Road interchange.

[1995hoo]

I don't understand why VDOT is insistent on extending the HOT lanes across the bridge.  Given that the Maryland HOT lanes project is dead (and deader than dead on this part of the beltway), why bother?  Keeping the shoulders on the bridge would be more helpful.

Even with the bridge improvements, the Beltway still backs up every weekday afternoon in both carriageways at least as far back as the Telegraph Road interchange and sometimes beyond Van Dorn Street. On September 18 the delay from Springfield to the bridge was apparently at least an hour (there must have been a wreck somewhere).

[PColumbus73]

Just looking at the aerial, Exit 177 / US 1 looks like it would be barrier if Virginia tried to convert the thru lanes to HOT lanes. At Exit 177, there's only enough room for 2 local lanes, so how do they plan for the shift in volume if the local lanes become GP lanes?