Future Ramp F at I-95/Route 895/VA-150 Interchange

Ramp F is a proposed ramp that was not built in the initial Route 895 construction. This is the ramp from I-95 southbound to Route 895 eastbound. The aerial engineering artist's rendering of the I-95/VA-150/Route 895 interchange, posted on this website article, was developed by VDOT well before the construction started. The project map from FD/MK LLC shows what they built. The resolution suffered some when Roads to the Future scanned the map, but a close look will show that "Future Ramp F" is shown by a dashed line, and that is the elevated loop ramp being referred to.

When the PPTA agreement was being worked out in 1998, revised toll feasibility studies revealed that the proposed toll structure ($1.50 for cars, $3.00 for 3-axle vehicles and $1.00 for each additional axle) wouldn't support the entire plan. That is why that ramp's construction got postponed, since it was estimated to cost $16 million, and it would carry a low volume of about 1,800 vehicles per day, a strictly local movement from the I-95/Bells Road area to Route 895 eastbound.

It would be good to see it built, since it would complete the interchange functionally as well as in the photos. I asked a Route 895 project manager about the ramp in April 2002, and he told me that there are no current plans to build the ramp. I've been up on the Route 895 James River Bridge, and the ramp stub and acceleration lane has been built as part of the bridge. He and I talked about what will undoubtedly become the unofficial freeway connection for that movement. A vehicle can enter I-95 southbound at Bells Road, exit onto VA-150 westbound, take VA-150 for 0.5 mile to the US-1 interchange, go through two consecutive loop ramps, putting it onto VA-150 eastbound leading to Route 895 eastbound.

It is a shorter distance from the I-95/Bells Road interchange, to Route 895, that way, than by using Bells Road and US-1/US-301 Jefferson Davis Highway. When the widening of VA-150 is completed in mid-2002, it will be 3 lanes each way, and the limited amount of local traffic making this movement should have free-flowing roads to travel on even in peak hours. And it will be a freeway-to-freeway connection.

Cars and trucks from the commercial area around the Port of Richmond and Philip Morris Co., will be able to use this movement. The local businesses should inform their employees and customers about how to make this movement, perhaps even draw up a little map showing it. Given the low traffic volume and the unconventional movement, I doubt that VDOT will officially announce it; but it will certainly be handy for anyone who uses it. And it will complete the I-95/Route 895 interchange movements.

Route Number Designation for Route 895

So the CTB decided to designate it as a state primary route, and not as an Interstate. That is interesting, since it was called Interstate 895 first in the early 1980s, and afterward in the VDOT Six Year Program, and it was Interstate 895 at the Design Public Hearing in 1997 and on the Design Public Hearing document (I have a copy). Normally Virginia route numbers 600 and above are only for the secondary system (599 and below are for primary or Interstate), and special exceptions were made for two route numbers, 664 and 895, to be Interstates. The VDOT state map for 2000-2001 shows Route 895 with an Interstate shield. Strangely, they even call it "I-895" on the project location map in the Location and Design Public Hearing brochure for the Airport Connector Road; for the meeting held on December 12, 2001 (see map above).

Three-digit Interstate routes have a leading digit with the last two digits being the mainline route that it supplements, so I-x95 routes would have routes such as the ones in Virginia, I-195, I-295, I-395 and I-495. I-664 is an I-x64 route. An odd-number leading digit signifies a spur route off a mainline route (examples are I-195 and I-564). An even-number leading digit signifies a loop around a city (examples are I-295 and I-495), or a branch route through a city (an example is I-264). Three-digit Interstate route numbers can duplicate, but not in the same state. AASHTO (the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials) is the national organization that has control over assigning Interstate route numbers. When VDOT obtained the I-664 number in 1972, they changed the VA-664 secondary routes in Suffolk and Chesapeake to another route number to avoid motorist confusion. No even-number leading digit I-x64 routes were available that were less than Route 600, since I-264 and I-464 had already been used in Virginia. When VDOT decided in 1983 to assign an Interstate number to the "I-95/I-85 Connector", they followed the AASHTO numbering rules and used an even-number leading digit I-x95 route, and decided to avoid I-695, even though it was available in Virginia (I-295 and I-495 were the only ones that had been used so far) because the two counties involved (Henrico and Chesterfield) already had VA-695 secondary routes but no VA-895 secondary routes, so VDOT and CTB decided to avoid the motorist confusion of another set of secondary route number changes, and they assigned Interstate 895 to the "I-95/I-85 Connector", since it would connect I-95 to I-295. So this explains how this highway, which is being signed as VA-895 as I write this in February 2002, has a number that would normally be in the Virginia secondary system, and not in the Virginia primary system as it is being signed with the Virginia primary route shield.

The upshot of this discussion is that the route number "895" came into existence when the intent was for the highway to be an Interstate, and the fact that it was changed to a primary, hasn't led the CTB to change it to a number of 599 or lower as is the normal rule for Virginia primary roads. If they wanted to follow Virginia's route numbering rules to a "T", they could simply designate it as an extension of VA-150 if they want to use a primary numbered route instead of an Interstate numbered route. Having both I-895 and VA-150 on what is essentially one seamless freeway, made sense when the portion east of I-95 was going to be signed as an Interstate highway (VA-150 Chippenham Parkway is a good freeway but it is not built to full Interstate standards); but if Route 895 is going to be designated as a primary, they (in my opinion) ought to just use one primary route number on the whole thing (Chippenham and Pocahontas), and VA-150 would seem to be the obvious choice.

I have a copy of a 1984 VDOT letter with the Section 139(b) Agreements between VDOT and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), for the addition of I-664 south of Hampton Roads, and I-895, to the Interstate system. A federal Section 139(b) Agreement (at least as performed back then) provided for the designation of new Interstate mileage, but with the specification, "The designation of a highway as part of the Interstate System under this section shall create no Federal financial responsibility with respect to such highway". (Quote is from attached copy from the U.S. Code). In other words, if the highway is built to Interstate standards, and the state DOT and FHWA consider it to be a logical addition to the Interstate system, then this agreement could be used to designate the highway as an Interstate highway, but without FHWA having the responsibility to fund 90% of the highway's construction (and right-of-way acquisition), contrary to the rule for the original Interstate system mileage which was built with 90% FHWA funding. However, this didn't prevent the state from the possibility of using some other form of FHWA federal aid allocations to build the highway, as was the case with I-664 south of Hampton Roads, which was built with 90% FHWA Interstate 4R reconstruction funds.

The CTB decided to designate Route 895 as Virginia Route 895. Perhaps they don't want an Interstate designation on a toll road, but the Richmond-Petersburg Turnpike had tolls from 1958 to 1992 and carried I-95 and I-85. A number of other states have toll roads that have Interstate designations.

The big difference between now and 1984 with Route 895, is the fact that in 1998, the public-private agreement was reached to build it as a VDOT-owned toll road, over 90% privately financed. The fact that it will be a toll road, (I would surmise) probably means that the CTB would need to revisit the Interstate route designation issue with FHWA, and get a new agreement. So perhaps the CTB will need to do that first before using I-895 signs, although they have had over four years to do that since the construction started in October 1998.

As far as precedents for using Interstate designations on toll roads, I'll grant that there are very few such examples built -after- the Interstate system construction began in 1956. Here are the ones that I can think of ---
- I-95 and I-85 Richmond-Petersburg Turnpike - construction began in 1955 and the highway was opened in 1958
- I-95 Maryland Toll Road (JFK Highway) - opened 1963
- I-95 Delaware Turnpike (JFK Highway) - opened 1963
- I-695 Baltimore Beltway, 9 miles, Key Bridge and approaches - opened 1977 as MD-695 and designated an Interstate sometime in the 1980s.
- I-355 North-South Tollway near Chicago - opened about 1989

The vast majority of the toll roads in the U.S. built -after- the Interstate system construction began in 1956, are designated with a state route number or have no route number at all.

I think that there is a good reason for designating Route 895 in Virginia as an Interstate highway. Route 895 has six different major traffic service functions. Four of these are local and interregional functions, and in my opinion the state primary route number is appropriate for them. However, there are two traffic functions that are purely interstate.

I-295 provides an outer Richmond bypass for east-west I-64 traffic, and I-295 provides an outer Richmond-Petersburg bypass for north-south I-95 traffic, and I-295 also provides an outer Richmond bypass for traffic between I-95 north of the city and I-64 east of the city. Until Route 895 opened in September 2002, a major missing link in the Richmond regional Interstate beltway was the connection between I-95 north of Richmond and I-85 south of Petersburg; the through traffic needed to follow I-95 and I-85, passing through downtown Richmond, if it wanted to stay on Interstate highways. Now that Route 895 is open, the I-95/I-85 through traffic has a freeway bypass around Richmond, using Route 895 and I-295 (given that a section of I-95 will be used between I-85 and Route 895). There is another Interstate function of Route 895 that was not served before Route 895 existed, the Richmond freeway bypass for traffic traveling between the I-85 corridor and the section of I-64 from east of Richmond to Williamsburg.

Every aspect of the design of Route 895 is built to full Interstate standards. The previously cited interstate traffic functions (in my opinion) justifies the prominence of an Interstate designation for this highway, so that the motorists traveling between I-85 south and I-95 north can clearly see that this highway will provide an Interstate-caliber bypass of the City of Richmond. They know in advance by signs that it requires a toll. The bypass of I-95 along Route 895 and I-295 requires 27 miles of travel compared to 17 miles of travel along the section of I-95 bypassed. At peak hours, the toll and extra distance may be preferable for a lot of such users, to avoid congestion on I-95 through downtown Richmond.

Perhaps the CTB will eventually decide to designate Route 895 as Interstate 895, maybe after it is open to traffic and serving the public. We'll have to wait and see. I've made my opinion clear about the issue. I think that it should be an Interstate. Throughout the Roads to the Future website, whenever I refer to the highway, I call it "Route 895", rather than with the system identifier that I normally use, with "VA-xxx" or "I-xxx"; so that I won't have to make a massive amount of changes if the CTB changes the system to Interstate.

2005 Updated Information About Route 895 Designation

This concerns the reason why the Route 895 Pocahontas Parkway near Richmond, Virginia, has not been designated as Interstate 895, even though the I-895 designation was originally approved by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) for the highway back in 1984.

The upshot of the issue is that as the tollroad Pocahontas Parkway was nearing completion (full completion of the highway occurred on September 20, 2002, and built to full Interstate standards); in December 2001, VDOT submitted a request to the FHWA Virginia Division for the Interstate I-895 designation for the tollroad; in January 2002, the FHWA Virginia Division forwarded the request to FHWA Headquarters (in Washington, D.C.) with a recommendation that the request be approved; and in March 2002, FHWA Headquarters ruled that the request could not be approved per Title 23, United States Code.

A technicality in current federal law is the obstacle...

In 1983, the Commonwealth Transportation Board (CTB) gave location approval for the I-95/I-85 Connector from the interchange of I-95 and VA-150, to I-295 and Charles City Road. The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) gave tentative approval to use Interstate 4R funds to build this new Interstate highway as a toll-free freeway. Back then, Interstate 4R was the FHWA program for Interstate Reconstruction, Restoration, Rehabilitation and Resurfacing. This approved route was very similar to today's Route 895.

Mr. Atwell forwarded me a copy of the FHWA letter that documents the final decision on the Interstate route number designation issue.

VDOT apparently got the $9.28 million from FHWA to re-evaluate the 1984 EIS and to conduct 60% of the design, before they knew whether Route 895 would be a PPTA tollroad. It took $314 million to complete the highway, none from federal funding, and then FHWA says that because the highway got some federal funding, that it cannot be tolled and also designated as an Interstate!

Route 895 opened to traffic with a 55 mph speed limit. Following traffic engineering studies, VDOT decided to increase the speed limit to mainly 65 mph. The 65 mph signs were installed Monday October 7, 2002 along 7 miles of the 8.8-mile long highway, with 60 mph signs to going up later in mid-2003 on the James River Bridge and its approaches.

I had a bit of input here ... after I e-mailed the Richmond Times-Dispatch in response to a reader who asked about the Route 895 speed limit.

Since over 90% of the funding for Route 895 is from private investors, with their investment to be recouped by tolls, I think it is wise for VDOT to increase the incentives for more people to use it; incentives such as an Interstate designation and a higher speed limit.

The article goes on to cite information about VDOT's actions with regard to traffic engineering studies and the actual raising of the speed limit. They are covered thoroughly in the following VDOT news release.

"Pocahontas Parkway Speed Limits To Increase", VDOT news release, October 3, 2002. Excerpts follow (blue text):
Beginning Oct. 7, The Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) will help motorists save even more time when using Richmond's newest highway, Route 895, The Pocahontas Parkway. VDOT will increase sections of the parkway's speed limits to 65 mph Monday morning. "This is a great opportunity for motorists to benefit even more when they 'Fly Pocahontas,'" said Joseph R. Jenkins, president of the Pocahontas Parkway Association. "Motorists can save an average of 24 minutes from their daily round-trip commute across the river." The additional time savings come as an added bonus to Smart Tag riders who can already use the parkway's high-speed, open-lane design to pay their tolls at highway speeds. Smart Tag users also currently receive a 10-percent discount off of the $1.50 toll.

The only means by which a state primary road such as Route 895 can be posted at a higher speed limit than 55 mph is through special legislation. In the 2001 session, the General Assembly passed legislation allowing interstate highways and specifically designating primary highways such as Route 288 in Chesterfield County to be posted at speed limits up to 65 mph. A clause in that legislation also allows "highways constructed pursuant to the Public Private Transportation Act of 1995" to be posted at higher speed limits after the completion of a traffic engineering study. This summer, VDOT and the Attorney General's office examined this legislation to be sure it allowed the Pocahontas Parkway to be posted at higher speed limits. The Pocahontas Parkway is the first project completed under the Public Private Transportation Act, but is not specifically referenced in the speed limit legislation. .

The speed limit is 65 mph from just east of the mainline toll plaza to approximately one-half mile west of I-295, where eastbound traffic is slowed to 55 mph to use the I-295 interchange. Speed limit increases to 60 mph west of the mainline toll plaza followed later in mid-2003 after specially designed sign structures were erected on the Route 895 James River Bridge.

The 2004 General Assembly passed into law on July 1, 2004, the provision that all limited access highways in the state could qualify for a statutory maximum of 65 mph, so that supercedes the 2002 law above. Even so, the above actions got the higher speed limit on Route 895 almost 2 years earlier than the 2004 legislation.

Private Firm Assumes Control of Pocahontas Parkway

An agreement was reached on May 2, 2006, for a private firm, Transurban, LLC, to assume the rights and obligations to manage, operate, maintain and collect tolls on the Route 895 Pocahontas Parkway, for a period of 99 years, to bring private sector resources to maintain and improve the parkway. The agreement was reached by Transurban, the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT), and the Pocahontas Parkway Association. The Association is a non-profit group created to issue and repay the bonds that financed the construction of the parkway, which opened in 2002. Financial closure on this transaction was achieved on June 29, 2006.

The agreement requires Transurban to do the following:
è Pay off all existing debt of the Pocahontas Parkway Association, approximately $500 million, with a total funding of $611 million in U.S. dollars
è Reimburse VDOT’s costs incurred to operate, maintain and repair the Pocahontas Parkway, including upgrading the existing electronic tolling equipment
è Take responsibility for the cost and management of all operations and maintenance of the toll facility, including upgrading the existing electronic tolling equipment
è Finance and build the Route 895 Airport Connector Road subject to obtaining federal government loans
è Establish limits on toll levels and increases
è Requires sharing of revenues with the Commonwealth if the facility exceeds expectations

VDOT will continue to own the road and retain significant oversight and approval rights over Transurban’s ongoing management of the parkway. The agreement requires that Transurban return the facility to VDOT in satisfactory condition at the end of the 99-year contract term. It also allows VDOT to reassume control of the road at any point after 40 years, subject to the terms of the agreement, which would include paying full market value for the highway.

Transurban is expected to take over operations of the Pocahontas Parkway by November 2006, following a six-month transition period.

Transurban is an Australian company that is a publicly listed on the Australian Stock Exchange with a market value in excess of $4.5 billion in U.S. dollars. The company is owned by about 5 million Australians who have invested in the company through their pension plans. About 15% of Transurban’s shares are owned by North American investors. Transurban focuses on the long-term ownership and management of advanced electronic toll roads.

"Agreement Reached For Private Firm to Assume Control of Pocahontas Parkway Toll Facility in the Richmond Region", VDOT news release, May 2, 2006.
"Financial Close Reached for Private Firm to Assume Control of Pocahontas Parkway Toll Facility in the Richmond Region", VDOT news release, June 29, 2006.

Roads to the Future opines:
Overall this Pocahontas Parkway concessionaire by Transurban, LLC is a very good thing. With the lower-than-forecast traffic volumes, there was a considerable possibility in the next few years, of the Pocahontas Parkway Association having insufficient toll revenues to fully cover the debt service on the toll revenue bonds, which could have led to default on some of the bond interest payments, and financial losses for the private bondholders, or could have led to the state subsidizing the amount of the interest payments that were in default. The concessionaire by Transurban effectively eliminates those possible situations, since they will pay off all the bond debt of the Pocahontas Parkway Association, and effectively there is zero possibility of the state providing any subsidies to the Transurban venture. Since Transurban is a huge enterprise with many individual projects around the world, and with access to the equity (i.e. stock) markets to raise large amounts of capital, they should be able to productively manage the Route 895 Pocahontas Parkway in accordance to the agreement.

Recently there have been several concessionaire acquisitions of toll highways in the U.S.A., by foreign private enterprises. In January 2005, the Skyway Concession Company, LLC (SCC) assumed operations on the Chicago Skyway with a 99-year operating lease, with payment to the City of Chicago (the original Skyway owner) of $1.83 billion U.S. dollars for the concession. SCC is responsible for all operating and maintenance costs of the Skyway, but has the right to all toll and concession revenue. This agreement between SCC and the City of Chicago is the first privatization of an existing toll road anywhere in the United States of America (U.S.A.). Skyway Concession Company is owned by Cintra Concesiones de Infraestructuras de Transporte S.A. and Macquarie Infrastructure Group. In June 2006, a partnership between Cintra Concesiones de Infraestructuras de Transporte S.A. and Macquarie Infrastructure Group, assumed a 75-year lease to operate and maintain the Indiana East-West Toll Road (ITR), with payment to the state of Indiana (the original ITR owner) of $3.85 billion U.S. dollars for the concession. This is the same partnership that operates and maintains the adjoining Chicago Skyway in Illinois. The Cintra-Macquarie joint-venture assumed operation of the Indiana Toll Road from the Indiana Department of Transportation (INDOT) on June 30, 2006. Toll roads operated by Cintra include 407 ETR in Ontario, Canada, the Chicago Skyway, the Indiana Toll Road, and numerous roads in Spain, as well as the Trans-Texas Corridor TTC-35 (currently in development, to be operated as a partnership with San Antonio, Texas based Zachry Construction Company). The Macquarie Infrastructure Group is one of several listed trusts managed by Macquarie Bank Limited, which is in Australia. Macquarie Infrastructure Group is one of the world's largest developers and operators of private toll roads with a portfolio (as of November 2006) of 11 toll roads across seven countries including Australia. The Macquarie Infrastructure Group is listed separately on the Australian Stock Exchange, but is managed by a wholly owned subsidiary of Macquarie Bank Limited.

Some folks in the U.S.A. have asked the question similar to, “Is it a bad thing for our public highway infrastructure to be sold to foreign private enterprises”? There are two basic fallacies contained in that question. First, these toll highways are not being “sold”, as the highways continue to belong to the associated U.S. state or city that originally owned them, and the concessionaire is a very long-term lease that conveys most of the business rights toward managing and operating the toll highway, but the associated U.S.A. state or city still has oversight rights to the toll highway. These are privatization partnering agreements between the original governmental owner of the highway and the concessionaire private company. Secondly, business people in the U.S.A. have every opportunity to establish private companies that are in the business of managing and operating toll highway concessionaires, and they could enter that market and attempt to negotiate the purchase of the concessionaires from these foreign companies, for currently concessioned highways in the U.S.A., such as the Chicago Skyway, Indiana Toll Road, Pocahontas Parkway, and any others; and for any toll highways U.S. and foreign. Business people in the U.S.A. have every opportunity to enter this global market, if they so desire, so there is really no reason for anyone in the U.S.A. to complain about these recent concessionaires, on the basis that they are currently owned by foreign private companies.

Route 895 Photo Articles

6 construction photos - Route 895 Construction
5 construction photos - Route 895 Construction - June 2000
4 construction photos - Route 895 Construction - March 2001
4 construction photos - Route 895 Construction - April 2001
10 construction photos - Route 895 Construction - May 2001
4 construction photos - Route 895 Construction - June 2001
8 construction photos - Route 895 Construction - July 2001
16 construction photos - Route 895 Construction - August 2001
6 construction photos - Route 895 Construction - September 2001
28 construction photos - Route 895 Construction - October 2001
(includes ASHE field trip)
6 construction photos - Route 895 Construction - November 2001
10 construction photos - Route 895 Construction - December 2001
4 construction photos - Route 895 Construction - January 2002
28 construction photos - Route 895 Construction - February 2002
20 construction photos - Route 895 Construction - March 2002
3 construction photos - Route 895 Construction - April 2002
12 construction photos - Route 895 Construction - May 2002
(includes ASHE field trip)
26 construction photos - Route 895 Construction - June 2002
6 construction photos - Route 895 Construction - September 2002
27 photos on opening day - Route 895 Opening - September 2002
9 photos of completed Ramp E - Route 895 - Ramp E - Completed

Pocahontas Parkway Connector page on the VDOT website.
Pocahontas Parkway, by Transurban LLC.
Fluor Daniel Venture Begins Design and Construction of Virginia's Route 895 Connector, press release by Fluor Corporation, July 27, 1998.
"InTranS Group Selected for Virginia Route 895 Toll System",
press release by ETTM, July 13, 2000.
The Route 895 Connector Pocahontas Parkway Project, by John A. Stuart, PE, Moffatt & Nichol Engineers, and past President, Old Dominion Section of the American Society of Highway Engineers.
Innovative Finance - Projects - Virginia I-895 (Pocahontas Parkway),
by innovativefinance.org, May 2001.
"Route 895 Connector", by Fluor Corporation.
"Participation in Public-Private Partnerships", by Flour Corporation, a list of public-private partnerships.
"Fitch Affirms Pocahontas Pkwy Association, VA, Sr Bonds At 'BBB-'", press release by ETTM, December 4, 2000.
"Pocahontas Parkway, Route 895, is Virginia's first PPTA project", from National Engineering Week, Richmond Times-Dispatch.
Design/Build on Pocahontas Parkway Project, from Allen Armstrong O.R. Colan & Associates, from AASHTO website.
Virginia Highway Project Boasts One of the Country's Biggest Bridges - Pump equipment is key to the first of four massive concrete pours, by Putzmeister America.
Pocahontas Parkway Evokes – and Makes – a Bit of History, by Engineering News-Record magazine, May 6, 2002. (scroll down to the article)
Route 895 (Pocahontas Parkway), Richmond, VA, SITE-Blauvelt Engineers, Inc.

All photos taken by Scott Kozel unless otherwise noted.

Copyright © 1999-2008 by Scott Kozel. All rights reserved. Reproduction, reuse, or distribution without permission is prohibited.