I’m 100% with Rep. Don Beyer on this one (see his statement below); VERY dubious about additional asphalt, not pleased about forcing a road widening through Arlington County, which should be a regional model for smart growth and transit. I’m also in full agreement with Greater Greater Washington (GGW) that “McAuliffe’s original tolling proposal had already been significantly compromised,” so this is a worse compromise on an already less-than-ideal compromise. I further agree with GGW on this: “This new compromise is a blow to Arlington, which has long supported investments like transit, cycling, and transportation demand management as alternatives to widening I-66. It is also a blow to Virginia’s moves toward a more data-driven transportation decision-making process, as the lawmakers pushing for widening ignore data saying it’s not necessary.” And, as GGW points out, $140 million doesn’t just come from nowhere; where’s that money coming out of exactly?!? On the positive side, “the majority of toll revenue will still be dedicated to transit and other multimodal improvements,” but that should always be done regardless, as building more roads – and de facto encouraging more sprawl, more fossil fuel consumption, more pollution, more global warming, etc. – is exactly the wrong way to go for a whole host of reasons.

Arlington County had a longstanding agreement that I-66 would not be widened inside the Beltway. Today’s announcement by Governor McAuliffe changes that understanding, and with no public input so far.

My initial reaction is one of concern for Northern Virginians who have worked – many of them for decades – for an alternative approach to big highways. But I continue to learn details of the proposal and to listen to constituents on all sides of this issue.

Early conversations with elected officials who represent Arlington County indicate that Arlington is more open to this partial I-66 widening than in the past, and that the potential benefits from I-66 tolls will bring important transit and multi-modal benefits to the surrounding corridor. I remain dubious about additional asphalt, and await input from my Arlington and other constituents about today’s proposal.

P.S. See after the “flip” for the Coalition for Smarter Growth’s – and several environmental groups – critical reaction to this deal.

RICHMOND, VA — Three leading smart growth, conservation, and transportation reform advocacy groups released the following joint statement on the announced agreement between Governor McAuliffe and state legislators on I-66 inside the Beltway:

Our organizations have supported the Governor’s package of transit, HOV, and tolls for I-66 inside the Beltway as a far more effective approach than widening. This package of solutions will move 40,000 more people through the corridor in the peak hours faster and more reliably, and it won the support of Fairfax, Arlington, Falls Church, and the Northern Virginia Transportation Commission.

Therefore, we are deeply disappointed by legislators of both parties who have pressed to undo this effective demand-management and people-moving package in favor of a widen-first approach. In doing so, the legislators have failed to understand the settled science of induced traffic where widened roads in metropolitan areas quickly fill up again. They also failed to understand the benefits of funding transit through the toll revenues, and the effectiveness of the package in moving more people through the corridor during peak hours.

We’re grateful to the Governor for fighting for the package of solutions he has championed for I-66 inside the Beltway. Although we are very disappointed that the widening is being accelerated before more effective solutions are given the opportunity to work, the agreement reflects a political compromise. That said, we urge the Governor and local governments to accelerate the funding and implementation of transit and supportive ride-matching and transit marketing necessary to ensure we maximize the number of people using transit and carpooling before the widening takes effect in 2019.

We urge legislators to understand that an economically successful region like ours cannot build our way out of congestion through highway expansion. That widening is just a band-aid with an increasing cost to people’s homes, neighborhoods, schools, parks, and health.

We have long made the case that investment in transit and smart growth, which can be coupled with road and parking pricing, is the most effective approach to addressing traffic congestion in the near, medium, and long term. Creating a network of walkable, transit-oriented centers and communities allows us to maximize walking, biking, and transit trips, while minimizing driving. It reduces the sprawling development which is the chief contributor to our traffic congestion, and creates the types of communities so in demand today.

Finally, it is important to recognize that Arlington County’s internationally recognized success in coupling transit-oriented development (TOD) with transit investment has done more to reduce regional traffic congestion than any other jurisdiction or any highway expansion in Northern Virginia, while increasing the region’s economic competitiveness. Arlington’s success is a compelling case for why we should continue to maximize our investment in transit and TOD across Northern Virginia rather than widen highways all the way to DC.

The Coalition for Smarter Growth is the leading organization in the Washington DC region dedicated to making the case for smart growth. Its mission is to promote walkable, inclusive, and transit-oriented communities, and the land use and transportation policies needed to make those communities flourish. Learn more at smartergrowth.net.

The Southern Environmental Law Center is a regional nonprofit using the power of the law to protect the health and environment of the Southeast (Virginia, Tennessee, North and South Carolina, Georgia, and Alabama). Founded in 1986, SELC’s team of over 60 legal experts represent more than 100 partner groups on issues of climate change and energy, air and water quality, forests, the coast and wetlands, transportation, and land use. Learn more at SouthernEnvironment.org.

The Virginia Chapter of the Sierra Club is 15,000 members strong. We are your friends and neighbors working to build healthy, livable communities, and to conserve and restore our natural environment. Learn more at sierraclub.org/virginia.

Since 1972, the Piedmont Environmental Council has proudly promoted and protected the natural resources, rural economy, history and beauty of the Virginia Piedmont. Learn more about the Piedmont Environmental Council at pecva.org.

The Arlington Coalition for Sensible Transportation has campaigned for a ‘wiser, not wider’ I-66 inside the Beltway since 1999. Learn more at acstnet.blogspot.com.

Click here to read the original story.

A deal announced in Virginia on Wednesday could have a big impact on your commute.

Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe announced a compromise deal on Interstate 66 that will add an eastbound lane inside the Beltway.

“We are now fixing the most congested road in the most congested region in the nation,” McAuliffe said.

Here’s the plan: by 2017, the HOV rush hour times will become consistent both inside and outside the Beltway — eastbound from 5:30 to 9:30 a.m. and westbound from 3 to 7 p.m. Late next year, tolling will start inside the Beltway. But it will apply only to solo drivers, with no tolls for carpools.

“If you are HOV today, you ride for free, you ride for free after,” McAuliffe said. “All we’re offering here is an option to solo drivers who today are prohibited from going on 66 during rush hour.”

By 2020, drivers will have to have at least three people in the car to use the HOV lanes. Also that year, a third lane will open on I-66 eastbound, stretching from the Dulles Connector to Ballston.

The proposed eastbound lane is the most controversial part of the transportation deal between the Democratic governor and Republican leaders.

“This agreement is a big win for Virginia’s economy and for the commuters who spend too much time on the most congested road in the most congested region in the country,” McAuliffe said.

The proposed new lane would only run from the Beltway to the Fairfax Drive/Glebe Road exit in Arlington. After that point, they don’t have enough right-of-way to add a lane.

However, Arlington lawmakers say they’ve been told that 40 percent of traffic exits at that point, alleviating concerns of creating a traffic bottleneck.

“If we don’t take this deal now, it’s not going to happen for a generation,” State Sen. Barbara Favola said.

Planners reportedly will not have to take over any properties to add the lane.

Back when McAuliffe and transportation officials proposed HOT lane tolling on the highway inside the Beltway, the plan was met with fierce opposition by GOP lawmakers, who said it was unfair to toll drivers and did not add road capacity.

The new compromise is aimed at addressing that criticism by adding another lane.

The deal between McAuliffe and Republicans concerns the entirety of I-66, both inside and outside the Beltway. While the part of the deal concerning I-66 inside the Beltway was the most controversial, the plan for outside the Beltway is essentially what McAuliffe and his transportation secretary had proposed before: two HOT lanes in each direction to Gainesville.

The plan will also create more park-and-ride locations on I-66, similar to I-95 in that regard. It would also add more bus service.

Officials in Fairfax County have applauded the compromise.

“This plan relieves congestion on I-66, maintains regional and local control over toll revenue, does not divert funding from other local and regional priorities,” said Sharon Bulova, chairman of the Fairfax County Board of Supervisors.

Work to widen I-66 east will begin this year, the governor said Wednesday. The Arlington County Board says they are disappointed with how soon the widening will take place.

“We will do all we can to mitigate harm from the widening, and we will explore possible improvements to accompany the widening,” said Arlington County Board Chair Libby Garvey.

Stewart Schwartz of the Coalition for Smarter Growth called on lawmakers to carefully weigh the plan.

“I think it’s incumbent upon the administration and Northern Virginia to invest as much in transit as fast as possible before the widening comes online,” he said.

Del. Bob Marshall (R-Prince William County) said he plans to battle the plan.

“It may be a done deal, but I intend to fight it,” he said. As the governor spoke, he and his wife held signs that read “Stop $17 tolls on I-66.”

“You’re going to bankrupt people. People making the minimum wage can’t even use this road. Period,” he said.

All of the revenue from the tolls will be used by the Northern Virginia Transportation Commission. The tolls are expected to make $18 million in 2018.

Click here to read the original story.

When the No. 37 bus arrived at Wisconsin Avenue and Porter Street N.W. on Wednesday morning, 10 passengers quickly formed a line to board the bus. The first three entered, tapped the farebox and moved on to their seats. The fourth stopped, SmarTrip and cash in hand. The rider tried to figure out how to add value to his card while those behind him grew impatient in the frigid 20-degree morning.

Reloading SmarTrip cards has in a way become one of the greatest sins aboard a Metrobus– riders and transportation officials blame such transactions for bus delays and unreliability.

At Thursday’s Metro board meeting, officials discussed an idea the transit agency has been flirting with for years:  should Metro eliminate the SmarTrip loading option aboard Metrobuses?

“Each individual transaction may be relatively short, but over the course of an entire bus route the load transactions can lead to increased dwell times and slower average speeds,” Metro’s written presentation to the board says.

Taking the reloading option away could lead to faster bus trips, Metro officials have said. It happened in Alexandria, where the “add value” option was eliminated in April.

“People are getting on the bus quicker, buses are staying on schedule and the riders are happy because they are making their connections and getting to their destination faster,” said Sandy Modell, chief executive and general manager of DASH, the Alexandria transit system. “It’s been an amazing success.”

The change has been so positive, she said, that DASH is revamping some schedules this spring to adjust the time savings. On one route, the AT6 bus connecting the King Street Metro station to Northern Virginia Community College, DASH will eliminate one bus because the buses are making their rounds more quickly and the same service can be provided with one less bus, Modell said.

Metro is looking at the Alexandria experience, but such a change would have larger implications for a system that serves about 465,000 weekday passengers. Taking away the “add value” option could have a significant impact on travel time, especially in speeding travel for buses that are often stuck in traffic and in some of the region’s busy corridors traveling at speeds of under 10 miles per hour. However, it also could impact lower-income riders who only travel by bus and never go through a Metrorail station equipped with fare machines. For them, it would be hard to access locations to load their cards, Metro says.

“In particular, there are sections of the region (primarily in Southeastern DC and Prince George’s County) that are not close to Metrorail stations and that have few retail locations available. While these passengers could still pay their bus fare directly with cash, they would not able to make a bus-to-bus transfer, which is only available with a SmarTrip® card,” Metro’s report said.

Unless Metro adds additional retail availability or other options, including off-board loading kiosks, the change could be a civil right violation.

At Thursday’s meeting, Metro board members said more discussion is needed to make a decision, but some raised concerns.

Board member Malcolm Augustine highlighted the issue of limited locations for riders to reload their SmarTrip cards. In his Prince George’s neighborhood, he said, there is only one retail store where people can add value to their cards and it isn’t an easy process. Widening the network of options would benefit riders even if reloading on board buses continues to be available, he said.

One board member suggested public libraries as possible places where people could reload their cards.

Metro’s chief financial officer, Dennis Anosike, told the board that staff will spend the next few months exploring alternatives and will come back with more details about benefits and impacts.

Some transit advocates think investment in such solutions more off-board loading locations would pay off, if it means it would minimize boarding delays. Cheryl Cort, policy director at the Coalition for Smarter Growth, said Metro ought to look at other practices such as moving the reloading machine away from the front of the bus.

“I imagine the answer is cost, but it’s worth considering,” she said. “European systems place machines to validate transit payment in locations other than at the doors.”

Metro may have already found a testing ground for a system that could expedite fare payment. The District is studying an off-board payment system in the 16th Street corridor, one of Metro’s busiest.  The question remains how soon this or any other payment system that keeps buses running instead of parked at the bus stop could be implemented.

At Thursday’s meeting, the idea was up for discussion as part of a budget work session.

Metro officials made the case to the board that “with bus speeds across the region continuing to decline, Metro is looking for ways to improve the customer experience, increase ridership, and reduce costs.”

Eventually the board will need to decide whether to eliminate SmarTrip loading on all routes, test it only on some routes or defer the idea for future consideration.

Meantime, Alexandria doesn’t mind if Metro looks at it as a case study. Modell said the success is clear: buses are spending less time at bus stops and staying on schedule; and the city is spending less on cash handling services. Although riders can’t add money to their SmarTrip card they still have the option to pay cash.

Prior to the change, Alexandria began an aggressive campaign to inform its 14,000 riders what was coming, letting them know about the places where they can load their SmarTrip cards. The plan, said Modell, was to change the habits of about 1,000 riders in the system that used to make those transactions.

By making the change, she said, DASH was trying to fulfill the mission of the SmarTrip, which was supposed to be revolutionary in the industry by significantly reducing the time buses spent at the bus stop while people paid fares with cash. SmarTrip was supposed to improve overall bus performance and reduce the amount of cash fares.

“But the result of allowing people to add money increased that dwell time and added delays that we did not anticipate as part of the program,” she said. “It inconvenienced riders who tap and go.”

It also increased DASH’s operating costs, she said.  More time at the bus stop means more time that the bus needs in the route, so it forced the system to adjust schedules and add buses to do the same amount of work.

If the concern is where to add value, she said, there are multiple ways of doing it: online, at retail stores like Giant and CVS–  and Alexandria is working with 7-Eleven as a future option. If Metro wants to do it, she said, the key is to educate riders about the change, give them plenty of notice, and make sure they have plenty of places where to add value.

“We talked about it as a region for years and finally we got to the point where we said ‘we have to do this.’ We thought it was time to make a change for the system as a whole and for all of the riders,” she said. “There was a lot of concern that once we did it that the sky was going to fall in Alexandria and on April 1st the sky did not fall and in fact we started running a more efficient and on-time bus system.”

Photo courtesy of Linda Davidson. Click here to read the original story.

Dear Dr. Gridlock:

This area will be in gridlock until we use satellite computer technology to analyze, prioritize, subsidize and design our transportation infrastructure. I say this after attending over 100 hours of citizen input sessions on everything from interchanges to tow trucks.

I have worked in road construction on and off for over 40 years. I am also a driver on these same roads. We need a better way to keep people moving.

Gary Nicely,

Sterling, Va.

I’m not about to argue for whimsy when investing billions of tax dollars in transportation programs. (Though I am getting a little impatient waiting for my jet pack.)

In fact, I’ve seen the value of aerial photography in tracking congestion hot spots, of computer modeling in anticipating the traffic patterns at new interchanges and of GPS data in creating a world of real-time traffic maps, highway information signs and navigational aids.

I’ve been on the road with a Maryland State Highway Administration crew in a teched-up truck, crammed with cameras and sensors, that gives engineers a data assist in managing infrastructure decisions.

During the fall holiday season, I saw how travelers benefited from traffic data that can predict when and where bottlenecks will develop. That same data can be used to build cases for long-term improvements in the travel system.

Makes sense, right? Scoring takes the politics out of the decision-making.

Well, not so fast. Turns out there’s plenty of room to debate which criteria should get the most weight in a scoring system.

In built-up Northern Virginia, the formula puts a huge emphasis on congestion relief, but there was considerable debate over just how huge that emphasis should be.

With congestion relief counting for 45 percent of a project’s total score, your transportation network could tilt toward big highway programs. The public could wind up pouring money into projects that reproduce some of the same old problems that developed with the 20th-century transportation network.

During one of my online chats, smart-growth advocate Stewart Schwartz described the concern about highway expansion programs: “We know that ‘if you build it, they will come.’ It’s well documented that new highway lanes in metro areas can fill up in as little as five years due to ‘induced traffic.’ ” (If you give drivers more lane space, it won’t be long before they fill it up. Then what?)

“Those pushing ‘congestion reduction’ are just looking to expand highway lanes and are only looking at the short term,” Schwartz said. “They are failing to look at the bigger picture of how land use, technology, and transit, walking and biking can reduce the amount of driving for the short, medium and long term.”

But in the long term, as the far-sighted economist John Maynard Keynes observed, “we are all dead.” Today’s commuters — today’s taxpayers — crave those short-term solutions. Short term as in “Now!” And the vast majority of those commuters/taxpayers are drivers.

Many want scoring systems tilted toward doing the greatest good for the greatest number, and they’re the greatest number.

They’re part of the travel constituency that Bob Chase of the Northern Virginia Transportation Alliance is hearing when he argues for a new Potomac River crossing, the rapid widening of Interstate 66 inside the Capital Beltway and other high-impact road projects.

No matter how rapidly a project can be built, it’s supposed to last a long time, and that gets us to another challenge for data-driven decision-making.

No matter how good the number-crunching today, the planners are making educated guesses about how the results will apply decades from now, as their projects mature. Many times, changing realities intrude on the trend lines the planners developed.

The economy gets better or worse, areas develop in unanticipated ways, businesses and government offices relocate, commuting habits change, or technology opens up new travel options. Plus, an optimism bias can affect the humans who use the travel data to anticipate the popularity of their projects.

If all these complications leave you confused and frustrated about our ability to design the future, you’ve got the right idea.

Till we’re all dead, you can trust that Nicely’s conclusion will remain relevant: “We need a better way to keep people moving.”

Photo courtesy of Manuel Balce Ceneta/AP. Click here to read the original story.