ACST Dec. 8, 2015 Statement to Commonwealth Transportation Board

I’m Allen Muchnick with the Arlington Coalition for Sensible Transportation (or ACST).  Since 1999, ACST has advocated "wiser, not wider" traffic management and multimodal improvements to I-66 inside the Beltway, to most effectively move more people, increase ridesharing and transit use, expand travel choices, and minimize highway congestion and travel times.

We commend Governor McAuliffe and Secretary Layne for moving forward with both Transform I-66 projects.  While we oppose expanding I-66 highway capacity as generally counterproductive, we acknowledge the current federal mandate against tolling existing general-purpose highway capacity outside the Beltway and the need for compromises to achieve regional consensus.

That said, both I-66 projects were necessitated by the Commonwealth’s decades-long failure to effectively manage I-66 as a multimodal corridor with Metrorail.  Inside the Beltway, the HOV occupancy requirements were progressively reduced from 4 to 2, while the HOV hours stayed constant and an HOV exemption for single-occupant clean-fuel vehicles was added.  Outside the Beltway, an inherently flawed unseparated HOV lane was built.

More recently, VDOT’s development of the inside the Beltway project has been a public relations disaster, needlessly generating strong fears, controversy, and objections throughout Northern Virginia.  When VDOT’s I-66 Multimodal sketch-planning Study concluded in 2012, VDOT failed to initiate a follow-up public process, to further refine the study’s recommendations in advance of a specific implementation project.  Instead, VDOT was silent until late 2014, when an implementation project was suddenly announced without details or information on potential adverse impacts, and the proposal had to be modified repeatedly in response to widespread public opposition.

We offer the following recommendations going forward:

1)    Since the tolls inside the Beltway are primarily to prevent congestion, set the toll price at each gantry to zero whenever current traffic volumes are below the highway’s capacity. 

2)    Establish a public process for adjusting the inside-the-Beltway hours and directions of tolls and HOV restrictions as well as any restoration of HOV-3.  The objectives should be to keep I-66 perpetually uncongested during peak travel times while moving the most people by ridesharing and transit.  As area motorists become accustomed to tolled express lanes and EZ pass transponders are widely used, there may be considerable public support in the future to expand the hours of congestion management on I-66.

3)    Phase the reconstruction of I-66 outside the Beltway to avoid any need for a private financing partner, to maximize the use of toll revenue for multimodal improvements and avoid any penalties for competing transit improvements. 

Thank you for this opportunity to comment on these vital regional projects.

ACST Statement at April 28, 2015 Commonwealth Transportation Board Public Hearing

Arlington Coalition for Sensible Transportation

Statement to the Commonwealth Transportation Board

by Allen Muchnick, president, April 28, 2015

I’m Allen Muchnick with the Arlington Coalition for Sensible Transportation.  VDOT’s proposal for I-66 inside the Beltway offers great potential, but we have three major concerns.  First, VDOT has not yet committed to a robust and expedient implementation of the many non-roadway multimodal improvements that previous studies have shown are essential to effectively move people in the corridor.  Second, VDOT has not yet committed to fully, fairly, and openly evaluate the purpose and need--and all reasonable alternatives--for any additional widening of I-66 and to adequately avoid, minimize, and mitigate the negative impacts of that widening.  Third, VDOT has not yet committed to daily durations of congestion pricing and HOV restrictions inside the Beltway that would largely or completely eliminate weekday congestion on I-66.

Because VDOT is subject to external political pressures, the agency has long failed to effectively manage its HOV facilities and thereby incentivize public transportation and ridesharing.  Indeed, VDOT’s chronic failure to increase the HOV hours and occupancy requirements and to prevent rampant HOV cheating on I-66 is the impetus for the newly announced I-66 projects, both inside and outside the Beltway.  The I-495 and I-95 Express Lane projects were both originally promised to include robust bus transit improvements that have not materialized, and HOV-3+ vehicles reportedly account for only one-third of the daily traffic on the new I-95 Express Lanes, a facility that was originally built as an exclusive busway. 

 

Except to eliminate short bottlenecks and facilitate merging, VDOT’s newly proposed I-66 widening—both inside and outside the Beltway--would directly undermine the National Capital Region Transportation Planning Board’s regional objectives of reduced traffic congestion, reduced VMT and carbon emissions, increased use of public transit and other SOV alternatives, and the greater vitality of regional activity centers, by increasing vehicular travel in the regional core by what could exceed 30,000 added daily trips (1,500 vehicles/lane/hour added capacity x 2 lanes x 10).  By contrast, modest I-66 corridor transit improvements, such as running all eight-car Metrorail trains and adding just 30 commuter buses per hour, would move many more people than two more I-66 vehicle lanes, and there seems to be no way to widen I-66 eastbound inside the Beltway without creating new bottlenecks.

Thus, we ask the CTB to provide three clear assurances for both I-66 projects: 1) VDOT will commit to a robust and expedient implementation schedule for the non-roadway multimodal improvements by September 2015;  2) VDOT will fully, fairly, and openly evaluate the purpose and need--and all reasonable alternatives--for any yet-unbuilt I-66 widening and will adequately avoid, minimize, and mitigate the negative impacts of that widening, including on noise, water and air quality, parkland, wetlands, and planned and existing trails; and 3) VDOT will establish daily durations of congestion pricing and HOV restrictions inside the Beltway that largely or completely eliminate weekday congestion on I-66.  

Thank you for your consideration.

ACST Statement at Feb 2015 TPB Meeting

Arlington Coalition for Sensible Transportation

Statement to the National Capital Region Transportation Planning Board

by Allen Muchnick, president, February 18, 2015

I’m Allen Muchnick with the Arlington Coalition for Sensible Transportation.  While VDOT’s proposal for I-66 inside the Beltway offers great potential, we have three major concerns.  First, VDOT has not yet committed to a robust and expedient implementation of the many non-roadway multimodal improvements that previous studies have shown are essential to effectively move people in the corridor.  Second, VDOT has not yet committed to fully, fairly, and openly evaluate the purpose and need--and all reasonable alternatives--for any additional widening of I-66 and to adequately avoid, minimize, and mitigate the negative impacts of that widening.  Third, VDOT has not yet committed to daily durations of congestion pricing and HOV restrictions that would largely or completely eliminate weekday congestion on I-66.

Because VDOT is subject to external political pressures, the agency has long failed to effectively manage its HOV facilities and thereby incentivize public transportation and ridesharing.  Indeed, VDOT’s chronic failure to increase the HOV hours and occupancy requirements and to prevent rampant HOV cheating on I-66 is the impetus for both new I-66 projects.  The I-495 and I-95 Express Lane projects were both originally promised to include robust bus transit improvements that have not materialized, and the Washington Post just reported that HOV vehicles account for only one-third of the daily traffic on the new I-95 Express Lanes, a facility that was originally built as an exclusive busway.  Consistent with this pattern, VDOT’s revised CLRP Project Description Forms for both I-66 projects lack the Congestion Management Documentation Forms, directed under Item 32c.

Except to eliminate short bottlenecks and facilitate merging, VDOT’s newly proposed I-66 widening would directly undermine the regional objectives of reduced traffic congestion, reduced VMT and carbon emissions, increased use of public transit and other SOV alternatives, and the greater vitality of regional activity centers, by increasing vehicular travel in the regional core by what could exceed 30,000 added daily trips (1,500 vehicles/lane/hour added capacity x 2 lanes x 10).  By contrast, modest I-66 corridor transit improvements, such as running all eight-car Metrorail trains and adding just 30 commuter buses per hour, would move many more people than two more I-66 vehicle lanes, and there seems to be no way to widen I-66 eastbound without creating new bottlenecks.

Thus, we ask that VDOT’s CLRP amendment for I-66 inside the Beltway provide three clear assurances: 1) VDOT will commit to a robust and expedient implementation schedule for the non-roadway multimodal improvements by September 2015;  2) VDOT will fully, fairly, and openly evaluate the purpose and need--and all reasonable alternatives--for any yet-unbuilt I-66 widening and will adequately avoid, minimize, and mitigate the negative impacts of that widening, including on noise, water quality, parkland, wetlands, and trails; and 3) VDOT will establish daily durations of congestion pricing and HOV restrictions that largely or completely eliminate weekday congestion on I-66.  

ACST Statement at Jan. 2015 TPB Meeting

Arlington Coalition for Sensible Transportation

Statement to the National Capital Region Transportation Planning Board

by Allen Muchnick, president, January 21, 2015

I’m Allen Muchnick with the Arlington Coalition for Sensible Transportation (or ACST).  Since 1999, ACST has advocated "wiser, not wider" management and multimodal improvements to I-66 inside the Beltway to most effectively move people and minimize highway congestion and travel times.

VDOT’s proposal to convert I-66 inside the Beltway into a High-Occupancy/Toll (HOT-3) facility, in both directions, during peak periods only, is the sort of smart, cost-effective, and permanent solution to I-66 traffic congestion that ACST has advocated for the past 15 years.  We thank the TPB for repeatedly pushing VDOT to conduct a full, fair, and transparent study leading to a long-term strategic plan for effectively managing the I-66 multimodal corridor, which includes two Metrorail lines, several parallel arterial roadways, two regional bikeways, and serves many commuter buses and carpools.  While not perfect or complete, VDOT’s one-year I-66 inside the Beltway Multimodal Study was a commendable beginning, especially considering its time and financial constraints, and VDOT wisely directed the project team to refine the study’s recommendations into a Supplemental Final Report dated August 2013.   We also applaud Virginia Transportation Secretary Aubrey Layne for boldly directing VDOT to implement the study’s recommended integrated multimodal packages and, in particular, to expeditiously initiate peak-period congestion pricing on I-66 in both directions.

Public opposition to HOT lanes, especially lanes that were previously toll-free, will require VDOT to conduct rigorous analyses and effective public outreach to demonstrate the wisdom of the proposed HOV-2 to HOT-3 conversion.  To be truly effective, the new HOT hours should at least equal the current eight daily hours of HOV restrictions on I-66 outside the Beltway, and the toll revenue must pay the capital and operating costs of the many recommended, but still unfunded, multimodal corridor improvements.  Notably, VDOT should promptly develop and promote a detailed implementation schedule for the associated multimodal improvements.

We appreciate that VDOT does not currently propose any new widening of I-66 east of Ballston, and that most or all of its proposed I-66 widening may remain within the existing I-66 footprint.  Nevertheless, other than to eliminate short bottlenecks and facilitate merging, VDOT’s newly proposed I-66 widening would directly undermine the regional objectives of reduced traffic congestion, reduced VMT and carbon emissions, and increased use of public transit and other SOV alternatives, by increasing daily VMT in the regional core by what could exceed 30,000 added daily trips (1,500 vehicles/lane/hour added capacity x 2 lanes x 10).  Also, widening I-66 between I-495 and the Dulles Connector Road seems completely unnecessary and could worsen the already awful eastbound merge of I-66 and the Connector Road.

Since the HOT conversion with multimodal improvements and the newly proposed I-66 widening are at cross purposes and have divergent impacts and implementation schedules, VDOT should divide its new proposal for I-66 inside the Beltway into two distinct CLRP amendments.   In addition, VDOT’s proposed NEPA study should include a range of alternatives to further widening I-66, including multimodal and operating upgrades to Route 50.