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.
