Left turn onto 495

[finecognac]

Originally Posted by GustavoFring

So many people from Tysons are heading N on 495 in the evening, I can't see how that will be sustainable..

I agree. Tysons as a city looks to be dead before arrival.

[tysonsengineer]

Originally Posted by finecognac

I agree. Tysons as a city looks to be dead before arrival.

... yes because of the fact that 495 turns left into it... and will not feed people into Tysons who commute there. Last I check, people live in a city, the more difficult it is for people to commute there, the more incentive to live closer.

PS if its dead, ignore the 3.5 billion dollars worth of construction in high rise development that has occurred in the first 5 years

[finecognac]

Originally Posted by brooklynborndad

how many people actually go from westbound braddock to southbound 495?

It does not matter how many. The fact is the left turn is there, it will turn red sometimes. Add to the 2 traffic lights right behind it at Port Royal and Wakefield rec center, then you have 3 very close together traffic lights on the road that is heavily used in the morning. There will be lots of cars blocking traffic light in the morning.

[brooklynborndad]

Originally Posted by finecognac

It does not matter how many. The fact is the left turn is there, it will turn red sometimes. Add to the 2 traffic lights right behind it at Port Royal and Wakefield rec center, then you have 3 very close together traffic lights on the road that is heavily used in the morning. There will be lots of cars blocking traffic light in the morning.

I guess I am not clear if the concern about the light is relative to its impact on accessing the beltway, or just that there is one more light on Braddock. If the former, that not many (yes some, of course, the folks who live between Bradlick shopping center and the beltway) use it seem to make it a lower concern, compared to the incremental cost of the extra piece of clover leaf.

It its just the impact on Braddock, well Braddock (like LRT) already has several lights. Its a suburban arterial, not an expressway.

BTW, I would guess the design questions were made to keep the total cost down, so that the tolls can cover the cost. The alternative would be not to have built the HOT lanes at all, and left the beltway as it was. I know some urbanists who feel that way, but I think they are a bit extreme.

[tysonsengineer]

Originally Posted by brooklynborndad

I guess I am not clear if the concern about the light is relative to its impact on accessing the beltway, or just that there is one more light on Braddock. If the former, that not many (yes some, of course, the folks who live between Bradlick shopping center and the beltway) use it seem to make it a lower concern, compared to the incremental cost of the extra piece of clover leaf.

It its just the impact on Braddock, well Braddock (like LRT) already has several lights. Its a suburban arterial, not an expressway.

BTW, I would guess the design questions were made to keep the total cost down, so that the tolls can cover the cost. The alternative would be not to have built the HOT lanes at all, and left the beltway as it was. I know some urbanists who feel that way, but I think they are a bit extreme.

Call me an extremist then :P if 8 lanes arent working, 10 lanes are unlikely to do much better. But atleast this is semi pay as you go construction which I favor. Just think a metro link would have been much more utilized. I know plenty of people who live in south county who would use F-S if they could access Tysons or Merrifield, instead they are forced to use 495 because going all the way to Rosslyn to double back on Orange is idiotic.

[finecognac]

Originally Posted by brooklynborndad

BTW, I would guess the design questions were made to keep the total cost down, so that the tolls can cover the cost.

No, the design was based upon that no acquisition of existing properties for expansion. No imminent domain.