Slug-Lines.com Homepage
Forum Home Forum Home > Archived Slugging Topics > HOT Lanes Discussion
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Proposal pitched for HOV
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Forum LockedProposal pitched for HOV

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123 5>
Author
Message Reverse Sort Order
tulipgirl67 View Drop Down
New Slug
New Slug


Joined: 18 Sep 2002
Status: Offline
Points: 0
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote tulipgirl67 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Proposal pitched for HOV
    Posted: 10 Dec 2003 at 9:40am
HOT lanes will not help manage growth and congestion.

If the HOT lanes make commuting easier for those willing to pay the toll, then more people will just move south to Stafford County and beyond. Then we will have more traffic and more congestion. Actually a commute involving a little hassle (such as we have now) may be a good thing for Stafford. It won't kill growth, but it may make some people think twice about moving there.
Back to Top
Bob View Drop Down
New Slug
New Slug


Joined: 14 Dec 2001
Status: Offline
Points: 0
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Bob Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09 Dec 2003 at 6:11pm
Here is the letter I just sent to several representatives. You are welcome to send it also.

December 8, 2003


Sirs:

This letter is to express my concern about the proposal before VDOT
to convert the I95/395 HOV lane into a HOT lane. As you know, there
are two regional proposals that have been submitted. One is for
adding lanes to the Virginia Beltway and the other is to convert the
95/395 lanes to HOT lanes. The Fairfax County Board of Supervisors
has apparently just endorsed the beltway proposal. My concern is
that Prince William County or other jurisdictions may endorse the
95/395 proposal.

Conversion of the existing HOV system on 95/395 would cause
congestion and drastically reduce the incentive for mass transit in
this corridor. I have studied this proposal in detail. It would re-
stripe the existing roadway up to Springfield to make three lanes.
The portion of the HOV lane inside the beltway would remain as it is.
This is a recipe for a massive bottleneck at Springfield where three
lanes would go down to two. A key assumption of any proposal to
convert 95/395 is that there is adequate unused capacity to do this.
This is an incorrect assumption. HOV usage has soared in the past
few years and traffic is routinely heavy. There is no room to allow
thousands of single passenger vehicles into this roadway, especially
inside the beltway. And a few years down the road... no way!

Another factor that is never mentioned in any of the newspaper
articles is the impact on regional air pollution if we reduce the
incentive to carpool. As people give up on the HOV system, then we
are back to where most other cities are without a viable HOV system
and air pollution would be much worse.

Finally, what are the implications of letting the private sector fund
such projects? It seems to me that state and local governments would
be giving up control in the event of problems. In other words, the
private sector would be free to set tolls or do anything they want to
maximize revenue, and I don't believe the local goverments could do
much about it. And if (when) it fouls up HOV, it would be too late
to go back since the companies would have invested millions of
dollars.

Sincerely,
Back to Top
SlugBuddy View Drop Down
New Slug
New Slug


Joined: 21 May 2003
Status: Offline
Points: 0
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote SlugBuddy Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09 Dec 2003 at 4:28pm
As I said before, we need to stand up and fight this. This will kill slugging and we will be left paying these stupid tolls.
Back to Top
wdossel View Drop Down
New Slug
New Slug


Joined: 02 Jan 2002
Location: VA
Status: Offline
Points: 0
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote wdossel Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09 Dec 2003 at 1:05pm
quote:
Originally posted by Bob
[br]We dont have to propose another idea and we do have the right to bash this if it is our judgement that it is bad for slugging. I believe a few people bashed the Disney proposal and it is now almost universally agreed that it would have been a disaster for traffic.

Bob



Absolutely concur -- and we need to be more vocal as it appears the Fairfax County supervisors voiced their approval of this wretched concept last night...

- Will
Back to Top
Bob View Drop Down
New Slug
New Slug


Joined: 14 Dec 2001
Status: Offline
Points: 0
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Bob Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09 Dec 2003 at 12:11pm
We dont have to propose another idea and we do have the right to bash this if it is our judgement that it is bad for slugging. I believe a few people bashed the Disney proposal and it is now almost universally agreed that it would have been a disaster for traffic.

Bob
Back to Top
tdar20 View Drop Down
New Slug
New Slug


Joined: 29 Jul 2002
Location: va
Status: Offline
Points: 0
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote tdar20 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09 Dec 2003 at 11:34am
In some areas it is the result of too much progress. We cant stop the overcrowding and this is one possible solution. We need to hear more before passing judgement. If we continue to gorw, and we will you can count on that this is one thing that has to be explored as a proposal. If you have a better idea submit it instead of just bashing the ones submitted.
Back to Top
Gomez View Drop Down
New Slug
New Slug


Joined: 15 Oct 2003
Status: Offline
Points: 0
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Gomez Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09 Dec 2003 at 11:15am
quote:
Originally posted by mroyal
[br]Thanks Bob,
It's a little confusing with the journalist jumping between the two different proposals, but I am left with the question. If it's feasible and safe to convert the two HOV lanes to three lane, why doesn't the state DOT just do it? It can't be that costly. And nevermind the HOT.


Kindest Regards,

mroyal



I'll tell you why. MONEY! Somebody at Shirley Contracting Co., Clark Construction Group and Koch Performance Roads Inc. has somebody at VDOT in their hip pocket and this is gonna happen. It doesn't matter what the taxpayers want.
Back to Top
mroyal View Drop Down
New Slug
New Slug


Joined: 01 Apr 2003
Location: VA
Status: Offline
Points: 0
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote mroyal Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06 Dec 2003 at 2:38pm
Thanks Bob,
It's a little confusing with the journalist jumping between the two different proposals, but I am left with the question. If it's feasible and safe to convert the two HOV lanes to three lane, why doesn't the state DOT just do it? It can't be that costly. And nevermind the HOT.


Kindest Regards,

mroyal
Back to Top
Bob View Drop Down
New Slug
New Slug


Joined: 14 Dec 2001
Status: Offline
Points: 0
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Bob Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06 Dec 2003 at 9:45am
Hot lanes plan motoring along
Proposals could be a reality by 2010

Chris Newman
Potomac News
Friday, December 5, 2003

When high-occupancy toll lanes opened on southern California's State Route 91 in 1995, single-occupancy drivers paid a toll and avoided one of the state's most congested roads between Orange and Riverside counties.

By 2010, Prince William commuters may get the same option on Interstate 95 north to Springfield and on the Capital Beltway all the way to Tysons Corner.

Instead of sitting in 20 to 60 minutes of congested traffic, toll lane users in California cover 10 miles in less than 10 minutes.

The California high-occupancy toll lanes, or HOT lanes, are free to HOV-3 vehicles and buses. Peak tolls between 4 and 6 p.m. have gradually increased from $2.75 in 1997 to $5.50 this year. This was to keep the lanes free flowing during "super-peak times" when 3,200 to 3,299 vehicles an hour use the lanes in one direction.

Two separate public-private HOT lane proposals worth a combined $1.3 billion have been submitted to Virginia officials:

? The Flour Daniel Co. has a $800 million proposal to add four HOT lanes to the Beltway from Springfield to the Dulles Toll Road. The proposal is modeled after the California project, with toll lanes separated from regular lanes by a four-foot painted asphalt buffer and plastic poles. Flour submitted its plan in June 2002. No competing proposals were submitted, and state officials could approve it by summer 2004.

? A consortium of Shirley Contracting Co., Clark Construction Group and Koch Performance Roads Inc. submitted a $500 million public-private proposal in September to convert the two HOV lanes on Interstate 95 to three HOT lanes south from the Beltway to U.S. 17 in Stafford. A 120-day advertisement period ends March 17, during which other firms can offer competing proposals. A Flour Daniel official said they are considering a bid on that project.

"Folks coming from Woodbridge to Tysons Corner or Fair Oaks, Merrifield, all those locations in Fairfax, would see a tremendous benefit," said Virginia Deputy Secretary of Transportation Pierce Homer. Homer chairs the state advisory panel that is evaluating Flour Daniel's Beltway proposal.

The panel met for the first time this week. It will hold public hearings in mid-to-late January. The Commonwealth Transportation Board has final say on the plan, which also must meet the criteria of an environmental impact statement process that is expected to conclude by late 2004.

The panel listened to Flour Daniel's detailed presentation which was released to the public a month ago online at http://www.virginiadot.org. A written record of the panel's questions and answers to Flour Daniel will be posted online as well.

"The job of this panel is to ask very hard questions of the proposal," said Pierce, a former Prince William chief deputy executive.

The plan has a base price of $693.4 million for 12 miles of toll lanes with interchanges at Interstate 66 and the Dulles Toll Road and five slip ramp connections at Braddock Road, U.S. 50 (Arlington Boulevard), Va. 123 (Chain Bridge Road) and Va. 193 (Georgetown Pike).

At additional cost, interchanges could be built at Braddock Road, $30.8 million; U.S. 50, $26.4 million; and Va. 123, $26.4 million.

No cash tolls would be collected. Instead, tolls would be electronically taken from transponders in vehicles similar to EZPass or SmartTag so that traffic does not slow down. HOV-3 users and buses would enter in a left lane and not need a transponder. Cameras aimed at entering cars would enforce tolls and counts of high-occupancy vehicles.

"There will be people staffed 24 hours a day actively managing these lanes with more than 100 cameras," said Flour Daniel senior planner Gary Groat.

The eighth phase of the Springfield Interchange project -- a direct HOV connection from I-95 to the Beltway -- was cut by state officials to control the project's escalating costs. This piece is critical for predictable bus service from I-95 to the Beltway because without it buses would have to merge into regular lanes and then onto HOT lanes to get to Tysons.

It is an option under Flour Daniel's plan and is in the Shirley-Clark-Koch I-95 proposal as well.

Construction of Beltway toll lanes go from late 2005 to late 2009.

Tolls would be paid until 2044 to pay off the project bonds.

Under Flour Daniel's plan, lane widths and road design will meet current federal highway standards: the four regular lanes at 12 feet each are kept with a right-side shoulder. The toll lanes would have left-side shoulders with a retaining wall in the middle.

"The Beltway will be safer with HOT lanes than it is today," Groat said.

By comparison, the HOT lane proposal for I-95 would convert the two 12-foot HOV lanes and its 12-foot and 15-foot shoulders though Prince William to three 12-foot HOT lanes and 6-foot and 9-foot shoulders.

Fairfax County officials and residents criticized an initial environmental study last year that showed that more than 200 homes and 20 to 30 businesses would be displaced by a Beltway widening costing $2.5 billion to $3.25 billion.

Flour Daniel officials said their base proposal only displaces six homes because the earlier study "tried to solve too many problems." Their plan works mostly within existing Beltway right-of-way to lessen the impact. By not widening the cross-section of right-of-way they were able to cut out two-thirds of the cost, Groat said.

Environmentalists opposed the initial study because it did not include mass transit options, which state officials said would have required more displacement of homes and businesses because of stations. Localities like Prince William with OmniRide could expand their regular bus service or create bus rapid transit, Groat said.

One point raised by the advisory panel were that the cash-strapped state police force under the plan would enforce the HOT lane policies. Police would have to wait until violators exit the toll lanes, then weave through Beltway traffic to the right shoulder. Whether access is a slip ramp or direct interchange at some locations is important -- if Tysons draws a lot of traffic, the lack of ramps directly onto U.S. 7 or Va. 123 could cause regular backups into the toll lanes because the base proposal has access by slip ramps into regular Beltway lanes, panel members said.

The panel also pointed out that Flour Daniel did not include right-of-way costs for its add-on options.

Staff writer Chris Newman can be reached at (703) 878-8062.
spcr

Back to Top
SlugBuddy View Drop Down
New Slug
New Slug


Joined: 21 May 2003
Status: Offline
Points: 0
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote SlugBuddy Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 Dec 2003 at 4:21pm
That's always been VDOT's problem (and Stafford County's too). They always put the cart before the horse. They build roads after the homes are all built instead of planning ahead.
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123 5>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 11.10
Copyright ©2001-2017 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.125 seconds.