Re: I-66 reconstruction
Posted by:
1995hoo
()
Date: January 27, 2015 11:33AM
I realize this is probably too rationally thought-out a comment for this forum, but whatever....
I view I-66 as involving five pieces:
(a) The segment inside the Beltway
(b) The horrible inadequate segment from the Beltway to Fair Oaks
(c) The nice road from Fair Oaks to Gainesville that was rebuilt over the past 20 years
(d) The short segment from Gainesville to Haymarket now under construction
(e) Everything west of Haymarket to I-81, which is all rural Interstate with a 70-mph speed limit
VDOT has a few separate proposals on the table right now:
(1) They've announced they plan to restore HOV-3 on I-66 inside the Beltway in 2020 to replace the current HOV-2. Recall I-66 opened in December 1982 with peak-direction HOV-4, which was changed to HOV-3 in 1983 and to HOV-2 in 1995.
(2) Last week VDOT announced a proposal to make I-66 inside the Beltway a high-occupancy/toll (HO/T) roadway in both directions during rush hours only. Outside rush hours, it'd be open to all traffic (except trucks, consistent with current rules).
(3) They're already widening the road from Gainesville to Haymarket; they also plan to reconfigure the Haymarket interchange into a Diverging Diamond (a good move, it means you spend less time waiting at red lights).
(4) They're now proposing to rebuilt all of I-66 from the Beltway to Haymarket to have three general-purpose lanes and two HO/T lanes on each side.
It's #2 and #4 that raise the possible issues.
On #2, it seems to me the interesting point about the project inside the Beltway is that the tolling would apply only during rush hour. I think that's interesting because it means people who otherwise could not use the road will be able to do so. That is, assume the road is to be restricted to HOV-3 (because VDOT said it will be). If you allow toll-payers to use the road during HOV hours, all you're doing is selling excess capacity that would otherwise go to waste. That doesn't bother me at all. Tolling would be in BOTH directions during rush hour, whereas right now HOV applies only in the old-fashioned "peak direction" (to DC in the AM, from DC in the PM). But you know, the idea of the "reverse commute" doesn't make sense any more. There are a LOT of people going from Arlington to Tysons. However, imposing HOV-or-toll on the opposite direction is a huge change from what is now in place because in effect you are taking lanes now open to all people and restricting them during certain hours, which is similar to what was done on I-95's reversible lanes. It seems to me VDOT should wait to make a decision until they have a full year's worth of data on how the I-95 lanes' tolls affect traffic both in the "free" lanes AND on parallel Route 1. This matters because on I-66, the bailout traffic would be using primarily residential streets with schools and the like.
On project #4, I'm all for anything they can do to improve I-66 between the Beltway and Fair Oaks, especially if they can get rid of the horrible "shoulder lane" system. That road has to be one of the worst roads in this part of the country.
But further west, from Fair Oaks to Gainesville, the road is certainly congested but I'm not sure it needs a full reconstruction so soon after it was just rebuilt. The proposal, as I understand it, would give you three general-purpose lanes (no HOV, no tolls) and two barrier-separated HO/T lanes in each direction. Right now during rush hour you have three general-purpose lanes and an HOV lane that's not barrier-separated; outside rush hour, you have four lanes (I think the left lane may prohibit commercial vehicles). So it wouldn't necessarily be as huge a change as people think in terms of practical operations, but the period of reconstruction would be brutally painful. I'm not sure the benefit is worth the cost.
What I think would be good is if they could find some way to construct two express lanes in each direction (restrict them however you like: HOV, toll, HOV-or-toll, whatever) between the Beltway and just west of Route 50 at Fair Oaks. Provide NO exits and NO entrance points at all on that segment other than allowing eastbound express lane traffic to access both directions of the Beltway and to continue inbound on I-66; for westbound traffic, allow access from I-66 and from both directions of the Beltway. It seems to me this sort of thing might help move a lot of longer-distance traffic through a very messy area. (I suppose maybe there could be an intermediate exit for the Vienna Metro stop.)