The Fix to Route 286: Solutions to Fairfax County Parkway Problems
By Supervisor Pat Herrity
http://burke.patch.com/articles/the-fix-to-route-286-solutions-to-fairfax-county-parkway-problems-2822ab01

We have had some successes in improving parts of the Parkway (completing the full Parkway repaving, the Fair Lakes Interchange project, and converting the Parkway to a primary road), but even with these improvements, the Parkway is experiencing significant congestion.

In order to get in front of the problem and before we wake up and find the Parkway as congested as I-66, I have asked the Board of Supervisors at today’s meeting to request the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) conduct a Corridor Improvement Study (CIS).

A CIS will provide a comprehensive look at what improvements need to be made to the Parkway in order to keep up with increased use. The study will outline short and long term solutions, examine various methods for increasing capacity such as grade separated interchanges, adding a third lane, analyzing the feasibility of HOT and HOV lanes, and calculate which solutions will provide the greatest congestion relief.

This study is the next step in getting out in front of the problem of congestion on the Parkway. At the Parkway Visioning Town Hall Meeting I hosted last October I heard from many residents about what they thought the future of the Parkway should look like, this was a great first step. With a Corridor Improvement Study we can gauge realistic options for congestion relief.”

Secretary of Transportation Sean Connaughton and local VDOT leaders like former District Director Garrett Moore have been instrumental in the Parkway improvements we have seen over the past few years. With their help and commitment we can ensure the Parkway keeps people moving.

Several traffic lights are out along Fairfax County Parkway.
Attachments:

i have a cheaper fix -- time the goddamm lights between west ox and wiehle so you don't artifically and unnecessarily generate huge pileups. one guy coming out of a neighborhood doesn't need to stop 200 cars for 45 seconds.

greatest good for the greatest number. don't stop 200 cars for 1.

hell, don't stop 10 cars for 1. let the neighborhoods wait a few minutes.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/12/2013 07:30AM by Curmudgeon.

Better fix.. take 28 if you can.

FFX Count Parkyway is crap. All those ridiculous stop lights. It was cool when I drove down 28 one day and saw they had removed almost every damn light between Route 7 and 66. There's still two stupid lights between them that manage to fuck up traffic, but it's 100 times better than it was before.

Popes Head
Burke Center Pkwy and Roberts (it's what the 123 interchange is for--use that)

I agree with above but especially fix the timing on the lights from Sunrise Valley to Sunset Hills, which includes the toll road exit ramp lights. Jeez!

The timing to ALL the lights up and down the 286 is NEEDED, especially during rush hours. Priority needs to be given to 286 and not these feeder streets.

This is not rocket science gentlemen. Don't need a traffic management degree to figure out the problems, just a little giveash*t attitude.

The Parkway/Toll Road interchange is way underbuilt for the amount of traffic it serves. I understand there are some space issues preventing interchange expansion on the south side, and in the northwest corner (the quadrant closest to Herndon) it appears there may be environmental/wetlands issue preventing interchange expansion there (realistically, if there were no such issues that land would have been developed by now). But a simple diamond interchange like they have now is woefully inadequate for the traffic volumes.

"lolwtf," I'm guessing from your comments that you don't remember how Route 28 REALLY used to be: It used to be a two-lane road, i.e., one lane per side with a double yellow line in the middle! The recent upgrades have been outstanding and the road ought to have a 65-mph speed limit, at least on the portions north of US-50. The traffic light at Braddock and the at-grade access to that park on the west side ensure that VDOT won't post anything above 55 mph south of Route 50.

"The timing to ALL the lights up and down the 286 is NEEDED"

^^ This. X 10,000.

As FUBAR as the West Coast can be, the greater LA area has at least figured out how to TIME THE F'NG LIGHTS (and yes, even in all directions).
Recently drove from north of LAX all the way south of ManBeach (about 10 miles) at the timed speed (40, also the speed limit) with NO red lights.

Amazing, huh? And we're supposed to be the smart ones...

Hey Pat (Herrity),

No need for a study. Just have VDOT do their job!

Re-time all the lights from Springfield all the way to rt 7. The timing of the lights during rush hour is absolutely atrocious. The light at huntsman in the afternoon backs up traffic 2 miles almost everyday. Popes head is a nightmare too. VDOT and the county are absolutely clueless.

It's a simple fix. The timing of the lights is atrocious. If the signals get re-timed then there would be no back ups. I take the parkway everyday for 20 miles and am appalled how the lights are timed. Idiotic VDOT and county are throwing away money and are clueless as usual.

It's pretty simple. Give all Fairfax county residents a round sticker with the letters FFX inside of it. Anybody who doesn't have that sticker can't use the parkway.


It's called the Fairfax County Parkway, not the "Anybody who wants to Parkway."

Pope's head is a mess. During rush hour they should cut in half (or more) the signal changes at that interchange from non-rush hours to improve traffic flow. I've been on that road on both sides of the Parkway. There are other options for those drivers.

Also, how about extending the 3rd lane that runs out on 286 Southbound between 29 and Braddock. Right now it goes from 4 lanes to 2. I would think this could be done at minimal cost. That would alleviate some of the bottleneck before the Pope's head nonsense.

You guys are retards. They could spend $100M analyzing and re-timing the lights on the Parkway and the problems would persist. The mainline lights can't be green ALL OF THE DAMN TIME. Eventually you're going to have to stop. The problems on the Parkway are all volume related. What are they supposed to do at the toll road? Let cars back up onto the toll road so that cars on the parkway can zoom through the intersection in 30 seconds? Sure, 28 is great with all of the those interchanges; as long as your destination is at one of the interchanges. If you are going to or past I-66, you're screwed because all they've done is pushed the queue downstream. Same thing would happen on the parkway. There's no room for cloverleaf interchanges at the toll road -- those lights will always there and there will always be a high volume of traffic entering/exiting the toll road.

dhw Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> Also, how about extending the 3rd lane that runs
> out on 286 Southbound between 29 and Braddock.
> Right now it goes from 4 lanes to 2. I would
> think this could be done at minimal cost. That
> would alleviate some of the bottleneck before the
> Pope's head nonsense.


That's a project that's already funded, per Herrity's office who told me construction should start a year from now.

PUBLIC TRANSIT!

Glad to hear they're adding lanes somewhere, but the more important and exponentially cheaper solution is to time the lights. Don't need a study -- anyone who commutes on the god-forsaken road would volunteer to do it for free and would do a much better job than vdot.

Good to hear a Southern California observation. The thing is CalTrans would set timing on roads like Highway 39, Beach Blvd and it would be maybe 20 minutes from Brea to the beach. The problem that developed was cities along that route saw a decline in sales in business along 39. Cities went in and offset the timers in their cities and saw the sales go back up, but it made a well timed drive fall back to an hour on a good day.

I lived out there for a number of years and took the southern end of routes as opposed to the northern ones you took.

Jess1 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> "The timing to ALL the lights up and down the 286
> is NEEDED"
>
> ^^ This. X 10,000.
>
> As FUBAR as the West Coast can be, the greater LA
> area has at least figured out how to TIME THE F'NG
> LIGHTS (and yes, even in all directions).
> Recently drove from north of LAX all the way south
> of ManBeach (about 10 miles) at the timed speed
> (40, also the speed limit) with NO red lights.
>
> Amazing, huh? And we're supposed to be the smart
> ones...

its7100tome Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Good to hear a Southern California observation.
> The thing is CalTrans would set timing on roads
> like Highway 39, Beach Blvd and it would be maybe
> 20 minutes from Brea to the beach. The problem
> that developed was cities along that route saw a
> decline in sales in business along 39. Cities
> went in and offset the timers in their cities and
> saw the sales go back up, but it made a well timed
> drive fall back to an hour on a good day.
>
> I lived out there for a number of years and took
> the southern end of routes as opposed to the
> northern ones you took.
>
> Jess1 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > "The timing to ALL the lights up and down the
> 286
> > is NEEDED"
> >
> > ^^ This. X 10,000.
> >
> > As FUBAR as the West Coast can be, the greater
> LA
> > area has at least figured out how to TIME THE
> F'NG
> > LIGHTS (and yes, even in all directions).
> > Recently drove from north of LAX all the way
> south
> > of ManBeach (about 10 miles) at the timed speed
> > (40, also the speed limit) with NO red lights.
> >
> > Amazing, huh? And we're supposed to be the
> smart
> > ones...

One worker writing commands to the PLC while the other six scratch their balls.
VDOT's finest

Hmmmmm Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> You guys are retards. They could spend $100M
> analyzing and re-timing the lights on the Parkway
> and the problems would persist. The mainline
> lights can't be green ALL OF THE DAMN TIME.
> Eventually you're going to have to stop. The
> problems on the Parkway are all volume related.
> What are they supposed to do at the toll road? Let
> cars back up onto the toll road so that cars on
> the parkway can zoom through the intersection in
> 30 seconds? Sure, 28 is great with all of the
> those interchanges; as long as your destination is
> at one of the interchanges. If you are going to or
> past I-66, you're screwed because all they've done
> is pushed the queue downstream. Same thing would
> happen on the parkway. There's no room for
> cloverleaf interchanges at the toll road -- those
> lights will always there and there will always be
> a high volume of traffic entering/exiting the toll
> road.


I think that the point of retiming the lights is a CHEAP fix, not the $100M study. Retiming the light does NOT make the parkway into an expressway, it just keeps the flow of traffic moving without abrupt start/stops.

How come we park on a driveway and drive on a parkway?

LetsRock Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> How come we park on a driveway and drive on a
> parkway?

I don't. I drive on the driveway when I'm entering or exiting my garage.


Regarding the Toll Road interchange, there are designs other than a cloverleaf that might help. Cloverleaf interchanges are substantially DISFAVORED these days because they use too much land and they're a relatively inefficient design because of the weave areas they create (think about southbound I-395 at Duke Street and how the right lane slows down as people exiting and entering have to criss-cross paths).

I don't know whether a diverging diamond would be practical at the Parkway and the Toll Road, but it might be worth exploring. Distilled to its essence, with a diverging diamond interchange the road that has the traffic lights (in this case, the Fairfax County Parkway) is redesigned so the sides of the road cross over each other through the interchange area. You still have two traffic lights at the crossover points, but the lights have fewer phases because traffic entering or exiting the Toll Road doesn't have to turn at the light. For example, traffic coming off the westbound Toll Road either turns right (without a light) onto the northbound Parkway or turns left onto the southbound Parkway; the left turn does not require a light because the "crossing over" of the Parkway travel lanes puts the southbound lanes on the near side. Likewise, traffic going from the southbound Parkway to the Toll Road either turns right (without a light) onto the westbound Toll Road or crosses over to the left side and then turns left (again without a light) onto the eastbound Toll Road.

What it means is the traffic lights have only two phases to allow straight-through traffic on the Parkway instead of the three or four phases they have now to handle left-turning traffic to and from the Toll Road. Left-turning traffic never comes into conflict with traffic going the other way, either.

Some people say this sort of intersection is "confusing," but I'm not sure why. You construct medians and curbs to funnel the traffic in the proper direction. The key is that nobody has to turn across opposing traffic.

Here's a sample diagram from Minnesota. Notice how traffic to and from Route 52 doesn't have to wait at a traffic light to turn onto the other road.

The signal phasing might be tricky on the Fairfax County Parkway, however, because both roads have fairly heavy volume, meaning you might get a tailback at the lights no matter how you phase them (in other words, either thru traffic backs up or exit-ramp traffic merging onto the Parkway backs up). Another way to do this, but one that's probably not feasible in the limited space available there, would be to use overpasses where the lights are in this diagram.

Follow-up....this is a diagram of the alternative design that uses overpasses. The advantages are elimination of traffic lights and of weave areas; the disadvantages are greater cost and possibly greater space needed.

LetsRock Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> How come we park on a driveway and drive on a
> parkway?


Tss Tss double guns bitch!

stay gold, Ponyboy. stay gold.

"Retiming the light does NOT make the parkway into an expressway, it just keeps the flow of traffic moving without abrupt start/stops."

Darn it, you've now explained reality to an idiot who thought that "timed lights" meant "always green one way" or something.

Oh, and 7110 - I've heard that from several SoCal folks...

1995hoo Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> LetsRock Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > How come we park on a driveway and drive on a
> > parkway?
>
> I don't. I drive on the driveway when I'm entering
> or exiting my garage.
>
>
> Regarding the Toll Road interchange, there are
> designs other than a cloverleaf that might help.
> Cloverleaf interchanges are substantially
> DISFAVORED these days because they use too much
> land and they're a relatively inefficient design
> because of the weave areas they create (think
> about southbound I-395 at Duke Street and how the
> right lane slows down as people exiting and
> entering have to criss-cross paths).
>
> I don't know whether a diverging diamond would be
> practical at the Parkway and the Toll Road, but it
> might be worth exploring. Distilled to its
> essence, with a diverging diamond interchange the
> road that has the traffic lights (in this case,
> the Fairfax County Parkway) is redesigned so the
> sides of the road cross over each other through
> the interchange area. You still have two traffic
> lights at the crossover points, but the lights
> have fewer phases because traffic entering or
> exiting the Toll Road doesn't have to turn at the
> light. For example, traffic coming off the
> westbound Toll Road either turns right (without a
> light) onto the northbound Parkway or turns left
> onto the southbound Parkway; the left turn does
> not require a light because the "crossing over" of
> the Parkway travel lanes puts the southbound lanes
> on the near side. Likewise, traffic going from the
> southbound Parkway to the Toll Road either turns
> right (without a light) onto the westbound Toll
> Road or crosses over to the left side and then
> turns left (again without a light) onto the
> eastbound Toll Road.
>
> What it means is the traffic lights have only two
> phases to allow straight-through traffic on the
> Parkway instead of the three or four phases they
> have now to handle left-turning traffic to and
> from the Toll Road. Left-turning traffic never
> comes into conflict with traffic going the other
> way, either.
>
> Some people say this sort of intersection is
> "confusing," but I'm not sure why. You construct
> medians and curbs to funnel the traffic in the
> proper direction. The key is that nobody has to
> turn across opposing traffic.
>
> Here's a sample diagram from Minnesota. Notice how
> traffic to and from Route 52 doesn't have to wait
> at a traffic light to turn onto the other road.
>
> The signal phasing might be tricky on the Fairfax
> County Parkway, however, because both roads have
> fairly heavy volume, meaning you might get a
> tailback at the lights no matter how you phase
> them (in other words, either thru traffic backs up
> or exit-ramp traffic merging onto the Parkway
> backs up). Another way to do this, but one that's
> probably not feasible in the limited space
> available there, would be to use overpasses where
> the lights are in this diagram.
>
>

Interesting design - I've never never seen it before, but wouldn't it introduce 2 "weaves" on the left hand side of the top roads?

smell the flowers Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> I think that the point of retiming the lights is a
> CHEAP fix, not the $100M study. Retiming the
> light does NOT make the parkway into an
> expressway, it just keeps the flow of traffic
> moving without abrupt start/stops.

VDOT already does this. They really do. Volume us the limiting factor.

Hmmmmmm Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> smell the flowers Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
> > I think that the point of retiming the lights is
> a
> > CHEAP fix, not the $100M study. Retiming the
> > light does NOT make the parkway into an
> > expressway, it just keeps the flow of traffic
> > moving without abrupt start/stops.
>
> VDOT already does this. They really do. Volume us
> the limiting factor.


Volume is the limiting factor?! Not enough traffic for you? Let's hope that you don't really work for VDOT.

1995hoo Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>

So while on the overpass, you're driving on the left? I like it but you better have some damned high barriers between the traffic if you want that to work in NoVa. The morons that drive here should not be able to see the other side at any cost. Mark my words, if they see traffic going in the opposite direction through their passenger windows and nothing to their left, they will slam on their brakes.

PUBLIC TRANSIT Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> PUBLIC TRANSIT!


I'm not taking the nigger hauler.

Hey dumb fucks, ummmm, one of the factors in timing traffic lights is vehicle speed.

Tell us how to time lights when traffic is traveling anywhere from the 50 mph to 90 mph.

I would probably go with the average speed from points A to B. We are not trying to accommodate the 90 miler or the 50 miler, but trying to keep a steady traffic flow. This means that the lights will dictate the speed of traffic, not vice versa. Besides, I suppose there are sensors that can help with determining an appropriate speeds. Also, I suppose it is dependent on many factors, such as weather, time of day and seasonal volumes. Therefore, this is not a set it and forget it option, but needs to be constantly monitored. Son, I hope you really don't work for VDOT, because your a little wet behind the ears.

snowdenscold Wrote:
>
> Interesting design - I've never never seen it
> before, but wouldn't it introduce 2 "weaves" on
> the left hand side of the top roads?

That is indeed a potential issue and it's one reason why I speculated that it might not be a good solution for that particular location. I've never encountered this style of interchange in person, just in pictures; the only one I know of in the DC area is up the BW Parkway at Arundel Mills. It's a new redesign construted when the casino opened.

The alternate configuration I posted in a follow-up comment would solve the weave problem, but it would cost more and it might not be practical due to space considerations with the extra overpasses.


Regarding the question from "another kind of engineer," this style of interchange does call for careful design of curbs and medians to funnel traffic straight through. I imagine it doesn't really feel much weirder than I-95 northeast of Baltimore used to at the I-695 interchange when the two sides of the road crossed over so you were "driving on the left."

Here's a picture of one under construction in Provo, Utah. Notice how the curbs funnel traffic in the proper direction.




Here's a picture of a completed one in Missouri (the first interchange of this style in the United States):

"Tell us how to time lights when traffic is traveling anywhere from the 50 mph to 90 mph."

Another mouthbreather who doesn't understand that "timing" means the lights are set so that one driving at a predetermined speed hits green lights, while one driving faster or slower will hit a red...

And no, VDOT doesn't time - in fact, 50 W of FFaX city to the county line used to be set @ 40 MPH, but enough mouthbreathers and Greenbriar plaza lobbied to have the lights reset.

Morons.

I think if we banned all the people who complained about Popes Head we'd have less traffic.

I am a Popes Head resident and a taxpayer. Suck it if my trying to get home or go to work is bothering you, I guarantee I am paying at least three times the real estate tax as any poster on this thread, at least let me get to and from home while I subsidize the rest of you.

On the diverging diamond, I'm not sure the juice would be worth the squeeze unless you extended the overpass so that you remove both weave. I realize that probably raises the cost by 30%-40%, but otherwise that looks slightly 7 corners-ish.

carefuldriver Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I think if we banned all the people who complained
> about Popes Head we'd have less traffic.
>
> I am a Popes Head resident and a taxpayer. Suck
> it if my trying to get home or go to work is
> bothering you, I guarantee I am paying at least
> three times the real estate tax as any poster on
> this thread, at least let me get to and from home
> while I subsidize the rest of you.


I doubt you do.

carefuldriver Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I think if we banned all the people who complained
> about Popes Head we'd have less traffic.
>
> I am a Popes Head resident and a taxpayer. Suck
> it if my trying to get home or go to work is
> bothering you, I guarantee I am paying at least
> three times the real estate tax as any poster on
> this thread, at least let me get to and from home
> while I subsidize the rest of you.

So just because you might pay more in taxes than any single driver you're delaying, you get to delay thousands of those drivers.

The solution is incredibly simple. Convert the entire thing into a freeway and eliminating all the traffic lights. Build service roads alongside it with occasional bridges so some subdivisions won't be isolated, and voila! You have a proper highway.

^ Agree 100% - freeway, no lights, just flyovers with exit ramps, and a 65 MPH speed limit. Make it a toll road so the fucking tea baggers can't cut the socialist road maintenance budget.

MOAR FREEWAYS! MOAR TOLLS!

More lanes always solve congestion problems! If we just build enough lanes, interchanges, and overpasses, and add tolls.....



Or you could just live closer to your fuckin job.

Actually roads are constitutional in Article I, Section 8, Clause 7 of the United States Constitution, so they would not care.

Mr. Fixit Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ^ Agree 100% - freeway, no lights, just flyovers
> with exit ramps, and a 65 MPH speed limit. Make it
> a toll road so the fucking tea baggers can't cut
> the socialist road maintenance budget.

Some of the sharper curves will have to be straightened out for 65. 50-55 as it is right now is far too low.

MOAR FREEWAYS!! Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Or you could just live closer to your fuckin job.

The average job tenure is 4.6 years, according to the BLS. This doesn't even take into account that Northern Virginia is a mecca of sorts for consultation employment, where an employee can spend those 4.6 years at 10 different locations, easily.

In conclusion, sir, there's a multitude of stupid answers, but yours is far and away the stupidest of them all.

I'M A FIVE-STAR MAN!!

jhey Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> MOAR FREEWAYS!! Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Or you could just live closer to your fuckin
> job.
>
> The average job tenure is 4.6 years, according to
> the BLS. This doesn't even take into account that
> Northern Virginia is a mecca of sorts for
> consultation employment, where an employee can
> spend those 4.6 years at 10 different locations,
> easily.
>
In conclusion, sir, there's a multitude of stupid
answers, but yours is far and away the stupidest
of them all.
Attachments: