VDOT:Don't let your silly county plans override our roads (Richmond: lease, taxes)

[brooklynborndad]

Local officials blast state roads rule as 'overreach' | Washington Examiner

[tysonsengineer]

Ah VDOT.

I swear, next time they say devolution, I hope someone at the counties says hell yes, we'll take back that full dollar of revenue instead of paying out 19 cents to the dollar.

My two cents on the subject too

VDOT, Too Big To Fail | The Tysons Corner

[pcity]

I'm conflicted on this one. The bill is obviously aimed at Arlington, which managed to screw up an entire project with their opposition to HOT lanes. I think Arlington made a mistake there and the idea that one jurisdiction can hold up projects that affect the whole region is wrong.

However, the idea that VDOT can come in and dictate what happens in Tysons is also wrong. A road widening in Tysons "downtown" would affect Fairfax County mainly. Thru traffic is going to be on the Toll Road, not in Tysons itself.

If they could have a formula that allows VDOT to decide what to do on priority regional corridors (66,95,395, etc.) while the counties still decide what they want on local roads, I would support the bill. The bill, as is, though, seems like an overreach.

[tysonsengineer]

Oh and btw,

About 1 month ago I was in a heated discussion on these forums about how VDOTs policies have gone from traffic and road solution to dictating to us how our land use should be done. I was shouted and scoffed at as a crazy liberal nut job who had a vendetta against VDOT and wasn't taken seriously... even though I have more knowledge of the inner workings of VDOT than I could ever care to have.

The fact is, they are the number one purse string in the state, and they have been robbing all of us Northern Virginians for over a decade based on their ideology, their own job securities, and their overall idiocy. It's time for this area to take back its own money and better help our own transportation needs.

I am tired of my money going to fund dumb projects like the 295 spur around richmond, the 460 parallel highway to I-64. All the while projects like 495 have to be privately constructed with 99 year long lease periods for tolls.

Sometimes we need to tell VDOT, thanks but no thanks, we dont need your help, we need a solution that doesn't necessarily just mean another wasteful 400 million dollar road expansion that doesn't fix anything.

[pcity]

I think we can all agree on that one. I would much rather have my money to go a Northern Virginia transportation authority rather than a state-wide one.

[brooklynborndad]

Originally Posted by pcity

I'm conflicted on this one. The bill is obviously aimed at Arlington, which managed to screw up an entire project with their opposition to HOT lanes. .

arlington isnt AFAIK, opposed to HOT lanes per se - the proposed project would have converted existing HOV lanes to HOT lanes - it would have added one more lane on the existing footprint, by narrowing the lanes. The net net for the existing carpoolers and the buses was arguable.

If the goal here is to prevent individual counties from gumming up regional priorities, lets have a regional transportation board make these kinds of decisions. As far as I can tell my own county, Fairfax, is not interested in this rule - I don't know who on the Fairfax Bd is interested in punishing Arlington, but Im sure none are interested in giving up FFX's autonomy in order to do so. Doesnt sound from the article like Loudoun is either.

Oh, and I'm not sure this is the fault of the professionals at VDOT. The item is being inserted into a bill at the behest, IIUC, of our Governor, with the support of some legislators (the one quoted is a GOP legislator from PWC)

[tysonsengineer]

Originally Posted by pcity

I think we can all agree on that one. I would much rather have my money to go a Northern Virginia transportation authority rather than a state-wide one.

Well then let your county officials know, that we WANT devolution.

It might hurt for a couple years to take over some immediate projects that cost a bit more, but after those first couple of years our budget will catch up to the revenue and we will end up having 5 times more capabilities than we have now (not to mention the ability to possibly reduce our taxes).

[pcity]

Originally Posted by brooklynborndad

arlington isnt AFAIK, opposed to HOT lanes per se - the proposed project would have converted existing HOV lanes to HOT lanes - it would have added one more lane on the existing footprint, by narrowing the lanes. The net net for the existing carpoolers and the buses was arguable.

The net for carpoolers and buses should have been the same or better. They get an extra lane, and the tolls should pretty well control the SOV traffic getting on from the main lanes.

As I recall, Arlington was going to file suit based on the fact that rich, white people driving SOVs in the express lanes were going to cause extra pollution in a racially and ethnically diverse area (South Arlington). Looking at the congestion in South Arlington right now, it's hard for me to see that point of view. The vehicles idling for hours a day in that area can't possibly be worse than an extra lane of free-flowing traffic.

[tysonsengineer]

I dont care about the I-95 HOV, I do think it's BS that the state can come in and force Arlington to do anything though. The point is, Arlington gains nothing from it, and gets punished for being in the way of people who don't live in Arlington. No one in Arlington uses that path. They have to give up the most, put up with the most, have additional pollution from more vehicles, and have more people move out of Arlington because the commute becomes better.

Why should they give up land to appease this kind of process?

If people want to reduce traffic idle time, here's an idea, live in Arlington, stop living in Stafford county. Most people I know in FFX couldn't care less about I-95 HOT, because they use alternate paths anyways... why would anyone deal with I-95 if they didnt have to. Just another case of Richmond and republicans putting pork projects in for their conservative regions like Stafford (about as red as red can get).

[brooklynborndad]

Originally Posted by pcity

The net for carpoolers and buses should have been the same or better. They get an extra lane, and the tolls should pretty well control the SOV traffic getting on from the main lanes.

As I recall, Arlington was going to file suit based on the fact that rich, white people driving SOVs in the express lanes were going to cause extra pollution in a racially and ethnically diverse area (South Arlington). Looking at the congestion in South Arlington right now, it's hard for me to see that point of view. The vehicles idling for hours a day in that area can't possibly be worse than an extra lane of free-flowing traffic.

I dont particularly care to rehash the arguments. My point is that theres no evidence Arlington is against HOT lanes in principle. For example, had the proposal been to simply take a general purpose lane and convert it to HOT/HOV, I doubt very much Arlington would have objected.