Virginia

City: 
Washington DC Area
Facilities: 
I-66
Facility Type: 
Freeway shoulder
Description: 
Western most point is US 50; 5.5 mi in one direction; 6 mi in other
Objectives: 
Stop-gap measure to add capacity because of the opening of the HOV lane where the left lane was taken.
Date Implemented: 
1992
Date Terminated: 
N/A
Operational Information
Allowed Vehicles: 
All vehicles
Operating Partners: 
VDOT
Operational Hours: 
M-F, Westbound: 2 PM - 8 PM; Eastbound: 5:30 AM -11 AM
Conditions: 
The operational strategy was initially considered an interim measure but has become a long-term strategy because of funding shortfalls.
Maximum Speed: 
55 mph
Oversize Vehicles: 
No oversized vehicles concerns in this area.
Geometric Features
Cross Section Details: 
12 ft lanes and shoulder
Treatment at Interchanges: 
Designed as a through lane, but markings are different
Handling of Inlets: 
There were mostly likely design exceptions; cross slopes are slightly different from what is currently used; added inlets where drainage was an issue.
Handling of Rumble Strips: 
N/A
Guardrail and Fixed Objects: 
Extended barriers; shortened barriers for deceleration lanes;
Pull Off Areas: 
Located periodically throughout the
Traffic Control Devices
Pavement Markings: 
New pavement markings installed; typical lane skip stripe and right shoulder marking
Overhead Signs and Signals: 
Overhead lane control system is operational; scheduled to be replaced
Ground Mounted Signs: 
Post-mounted signs provide notification and termination of restricted use; indicate emergency pull-off locations
ITS: 
Loops in the shoulder pavement, camera coverage, DMS
Performance Measures
Monitoring Responsibilities: 
VDOT
Operational Effectiveness: 
Looking at speed issues on the HOV facility to ensure 45 mph operations; expanded hours of service after initial deployment to get more effective use out of the facility; facility has been very effective; no specific data is being gathered;
Safety Evaluation: 
Conducted a safety study of the corridor in 2007; results showed that there was not a significant different in crash exposure when the shoulder was open vs. when it was closed.
Costs: 
No institutional knowledge regarding initial installation; upgrade of the lane control system would cost an estimated $7 million
Enforcement
Responsibility: 
county law enforcement; Virginia Sat Police
Fines: 
unknown
Approach: 
visual inspection
Maintenance: 
VDOT hires a contractor for general maintenance; VDOT maintains ITS installation
Incident Reponse
Responsibilties: 
Common incident management approach;VDOT; regional operations
Average Response Time: 
System wide, the response time is about 90% witin 90 minutes;
Strategies: 
Safety service patrol in the corridor, particularly during operational hours
Operational Experience: 
Facility has been so successful that there is considerable interest in Northern Virigina to increase number of facilites with hard shoulder running. Virginia Transportation Research Council is conducting a study for the Virginia Secretary of Transportation regarding bus use of shoulders.
Institutional Issues
Liability: 
None
Public Outreach: 
Some city discussion, but plan was not initially a permanent idea. Became a long-term plan after implementation. Outreach was conducted prior to extension of limits.
Legislation: 
No legislation, more of a transportation board issue
Difficulty: 
None. If the shoulder use on the facility were to be removed, the public would be upset because of their reliance on the operations.