Northern Virginia HOT Lanes

[cpzilliacus]

Washington Post op-ed: The fallacy of Virginia's love affair with privatized public services

It may seem like good news that Transurban, the Australian firm that runs the high-occupancy toll lanes in Northern Virginia, is settling with motorists who were treated poorly regarding missed tolls.

But it once again shows the fallacy of Virginia's love affair with privatized public services.

The problem with the HOT lanes was that motorists often had no idea that their E-ZPass transponders were not registering as they drove through electronic toll counters. According to lawsuits, the E-ZPasses might have been placed improperly in the cars or there wasn't enough money in the account.

One woman was initially assessed $4.15 for missing five tolls on the Capital Beltway. Transurban didn't get around to sending her a notice for 60 days. There was no other way she could have known. She tried to settle the matter by paying the tolls and $100 extra, but it didn't work. She ended up being billed $3,413.75 by Transurban in tolls and fines.

[vdeane]

This is why privatization and public private partnerships should be illegal.

[AlexandriaVA]

This is why privatization and public private partnerships should be illegal.

government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem.

What do you expect when that is the driving principle for a significant segment of the populace?

[1995hoo]

Washington Post op-ed: The fallacy of Virginia's love affair with privatized public services

....

The problem with the HOT lanes was that motorists often had no idea that their E-ZPass transponders were not registering as they drove through electronic toll counters. According to lawsuits, the E-ZPasses might have been placed improperly in the cars or there wasn't enough money in the account.

....

I don't have a whole lot of sympathy for people who fail to, or refuse to, mount the transponders correctly. The instructions are extremely clear, yet there are still people who insist on trying to hold the device in their hands or lay it on the dashboard. I feel like it's their own fault if their devices aren't read properly.

[Mapmikey]

Virginia wants to extend 95 Express lanes to Fredericksburg:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/dr-gridlock/wp/2016/03/31/virginia-officials-want-to-extend-95-express-lanes-to-fredericksburg/

Virginia Transportation Secretary Aubrey Layne on Thursday said the state hopes to extend the high-occupancy toll (HOT) lanes on I-95 about 10 miles south to Fredericksburg.

The proposal was one of several rail and road programs in the I-95 corridor that the state has clustered into a package called the "Atlantic Gateway,"  and Virginia is about to apply for federal grants to support the effort.

So the state is actually taking action to try to make this happen at some undefined point in the future...

Mike

[AlexandriaVA]

Seems to be the inevitable conclusion to all of this. Fredericksburg has always been, at least to myself, as the southern frontier of the greater DC area.

[1995hoo]

Anyone know what they're planning for the Duke Street interchange? Dr. Gridlock's article mentions that in conjunction with the I-395 HO/T project, they're planning something to deal with that annoying southbound lane drop where the right lane ends just after the westbound ramp but before the eastbound ramp, but he doesn't elaborate. It's the second time I've heard a vague mention of an improvement there with no details.

The obvious initial idea (obvious because it's theoretically the simplest) might be to extend the right lane up to the interchange and make it an exit-only lane onto the loop ramp towards the mall, but I'm not sure that'd improve traffic for two reasons–(1) people would drive all the way down to the gore area and try to shove left into the thru lanes, and (2) you have an entering loop ramp there coming from the mall and dumping them into an ending lane like that would probably cause more congestion on I-395 and on 236 as well (due to there being more traffic in the lane–at least now, bad as it is, there's a little bit of protection as ramp users enter the weave area).

I'm sure they're not building a C/D lane, even though that'd probably be the best thing, because the space there is so tight.

[AlexandriaVA]

Hoo (condolences on the loss, by the way. I had given UVA the win at the 10 minute mark)

You might want to bookmark (do people do that anymore?) this site if you haven't already: http://www.virginiadot.org/projects/northern%20virginia/default.asp It gives updates on current projects and plans for future ones.

http://www.virginiadot.org/projects/northernvirginia/i-395_south_-_duke_to_edsall.asp

[1995hoo]

Thanks. You know what, I'd heard about that but I heard "between Duke and Edsall" and assumed it was starting just south of the interchange and I thought the "fixing the lane drop" was a different project. Shame on me for not checking their site. You know what they say about "assume"!

[froggie]

A WaPo/Dr Gridlock article on VDOT's proposals for the HOV lane/Eads St interchange.  They looked at 4 options (including a DDI but not including a SPUI), and decided on an option that makes both ramps to/from the south reversible but which would close the outbound/southbound access from the HOV lanes back to the mainline near Washington Blvd.  Non-HOV/HOT traffic coming off the 14th St Bridge would be forced to the mainline before the Route 1 South exit or forced to exit at Eads St.

[Mapmikey]

The contract to extend the 95 Express Lanes south 2 miles was awarded this week ($31M).  Construction to start this summer with the SB side opening late '17/early '18 and the NB part opens in summer '18...

http://www.virginiadot.org/newsroom/statewide/2016/ctb_awards_contract_for96133.asp

[jeffandnicole]

The contract to extend the 95 Express Lanes south 2 miles was awarded this week ($31M).  Construction to start this summer with the SB side opening late '17/early '18 and the NB part opens in summer '18...

http://www.virginiadot.org/newsroom/statewide/2016/ctb_awards_contract_for96133.asp

Good!

I can't tell via what's available online: Will it be 2 lanes beyond the current end point, or just 1 lane?  In the brochure online, it shows a 900' merge area (which is a little on the short side), but it's only one lane at that point.  It's mostly just a graphic that doesn't show any real design attributes.

[Mapmikey]

It is supposed to tie into the beginning of a new 4th general purpose lane as a part of the project to rebuild Exit 140 at SR 630 - http://www.virginiadot.org/projects/fredericksburg/interstate_95-route_630_courthouse_road_interchange_relocation_and_route_630_widening.asp

This graphic strongly suggests nearly all of the extension will be 1 lane - http://www.virginiadot.org/projects/resources/Fredericksburg/95Express/Map_95_Exp._So._Terminus.pdf

Unless I am looking at it wrong that graphic also suggests a longer merge area.

[jeffandnicole]

It is supposed to tie into the beginning of a new 4th general purpose lane as a part of the project to rebuild Exit 140 at SR 630 - http://www.virginiadot.org/projects/fredericksburg/interstate_95-route_630_courthouse_road_interchange_relocation_and_route_630_widening.asp

This graphic strongly suggests nearly all of the extension will be 1 lane - http://www.virginiadot.org/projects/resources/Fredericksburg/95Express/Map_95_Exp._So._Terminus.pdf

Unless I am looking at it wrong that graphic also suggests a longer merge area.

Based on that overlay, it does show about a 2000' merge area, which is much more acceptable.  Unfortunately, part of it is alongside the merge area from Rt. 610, which means you have traffic in the right lane merging left, and traffic from the left merging right, both meeting in the center lane.  Not ideal.

And it does appear, graphic-wise, to be a single lane, for about 1.75 miles.  Imagine any highway where you get stuck behind someone for a short distance because they're going slower than most, and you wait to find a gap to pass.  Once you get one of those slower-than-mosts in that single lane, it'll be a ripple effect for much of rush hour. 

Glad they're extending the lanes beyond the 610 interchange, but the current plans are less than desirable.

[Mapmikey]

Hopefully the 4th through lane will be built as VDOT would like to do...that will give people from the left over 2 miles to get over if they need to use Exit 140 and almost 4 miles to merge if they are going further south...

[Jmiles32]

If Virginia wins the FASTLANE and TIGER federal grants and decides to extend the I-95 HOT lanes south another 10 miles to US-17 in Falmouth, would the new SB and NB slip ramp project still happen(south of Garrisonville road)?

[Mapmikey]

If Virginia wins the FASTLANE and TIGER federal grants and decides to extend the I-95 HOT lanes south another 10 miles to US-17 in Falmouth, would the new SB and NB slip ramp project still happen(south of Garrisonville road)?

I think the answer to that depends on how VDOT intends to have access to/from the lanes at SR 630 (Exit 140).  If they don't want flyovers or direct connections at the interchange itself, the new ramps could serve that purpose...

[1995hoo]

Minor bit of semi-interesting signage news....I drove out to Fairfax earlier this afternoon and I noted the HO/T lane signs on the Beltway with the white "E-ZPASS EXPRESS" banners are gradually being converted to the purple banner used for the I-95 signs (recall the Beltway project was approved prior to current MUTCD standards for such things). I did not get a chance to notice whether the exit BGSs in the HO/T lanes are being converted to the green "EXPRESS EXIT" banners, simply because I only passed one HO/T lane exit on my way home (Braddock Road) and I didn't get to look at the sign due to the amount of traffic.

[Mapmikey]

The time that the NB lanes close is switching to 10 a.m. so that SB travel can use the lanes by 11:30.  Effective today.

This is being done during weekdays to help alleviate summer traffic which they say would benefit from the earlier switch.

http://wtop.com/sprawl-crawl/2016/06/virginia-hov-lanes-adjusted-for-summer-travel/

[1995hoo]

Minor bit of semi-interesting signage news....I drove out to Fairfax earlier this afternoon and I noted the HO/T lane signs on the Beltway with the white "E-ZPASS EXPRESS" banners are gradually being converted to the purple banner used for the I-95 signs (recall the Beltway project was approved prior to current MUTCD standards for such things). I did not get a chance to notice whether the exit BGSs in the HO/T lanes are being converted to the green "EXPRESS EXIT" banners, simply because I only passed one HO/T lane exit on my way home (Braddock Road) and I didn't get to look at the sign due to the amount of traffic.

Following up on this, it appears they're changing most of the signs leading TO the lanes but not necessarily the ones OVER the lanes–or at least, they aren't changing those yet, which I suppose makes some sense because those would be the most disruptive to express lane traffic to alter.

[cpzilliacus]

Dr. Gridlock in the Washington Post: Virginia panel okays tougher carpool standard for I-66 HOT lanes

Carpoolers who want to get a free ride on Interstate 66 outside the Capital Beltway when Virginia opens High Occupancy Toll lanes will need to pick up an extra passenger.

The Commonwealth Transportation Board, Virginia's top policy-making panel on transportation, voted unanimously Tuesday to upgrade the carpool standard from HOV2 to HOV3 when the HOT lanes open, probably in late 2020. That means the HOV standard for getting a free ride in the I-66 HOT lanes will match today's rules for the free drive in the HOT lanes on the Capital Beltway and Interstates 95 and 395.

The board also agreed to award a five-year contract to the TransCore company to set up and operate HOT lanes on I-66 inside the Beltway. Construction of the tolling system, including the gantries, is scheduled to start this summer, with actual operations starting in summer 2017. The inside-the-Beltway system will be different from all others in Northern Virginia. It will be under the direct control of the state, rather than a private partner. The state will collect and distribute the toll revenue.

[AlexandriaVA]

Never understood why those in the western suburbs were entitled to a sweetheart HOV-2 scenario while those of us in the southern suburbs were held to an HOV-3 (and my understanding previously an HOV-4) standard. I say have one passenger standard across the region, which is probably needed if you want near-seamless integration of the burgeoning Northern Virginia HOT network.

[cpzilliacus]

Never understood why those in the western suburbs were entitled to a sweetheart HOV-2 scenario while those of us in the southern suburbs were held to an HOV-3 (and my understanding previously an HOV-4) standard. I say have one passenger standard across the region, which is probably needed if you want near-seamless integration of the burgeoning Northern Virginia HOT network.

I-66 inside the Beltway started out as HOV-4, then was reduced to HOV-3, and finally to HOV-2 when former Rep. Frank Wolf (R-Va. 10) gained power after the 1994 elections, and was able to force the issue at the federal level.  Wolf never represented any of the closer-in parts of Northern Virginia along the I-95/I-395 corridor, so it was probably not a big deal to him personally.

The late former Rep. Stanford Elmer "Stan" Parris (R-Va. 8) got the HOV requirement reduced in the 95/395 corridor from HOV-4 to HOV-3 in the 1980's (and reminded radio listeners of that when he aired campaign commercials, along with frequent and snide remarks about the municipal government of the District of Columbia, and its Mayor at the time, Marion Shepilov Barry, Jr. (Parris was a member of the House of Representatives District of Columbia Committee, which provided him with a convenient and taxpayer-funded venue to bash Barry and the D.C. Government)).

If the HOV/Toll system is going to work, then I think the threshold for free use by HOVs needs to be HOV-3, not HOV-2.

[AlexandriaVA]

Makes me wonder what sort of freebies or goodies that Congresspeople representing the outer suburbs will try to carve out for their constituents.

I know at the state (Richmond) level, Del. Ramadan has for years been using the "remove/reduce Dulles Greenway tolls" as a re-election stunt.

Whether its HOT-3 or HOT-4 doesn't really affect me (I either take bus during the rush hour or local lanes off-rush), but so long as its consistent across the region. Agree that HOT-3 will (or at least should) be the regional standard when it's all said and done.

If the HOV/Toll system is going to work, then I think the threshold for free use by HOVs needs to be HOV-3, not HOV-2.

HOV-2 should be called "Spousepooling" because that's often the extent of it. Our neigbors to the west are going to have to learn how to slug like our commuters to the south...

[1995hoo]

Rather than having the same occupancy standard, I'd be more interested in seeing the same HOV hours (example: I-395 has HOV from 15:30 to 18:00, but I-66 inside the Beltway is from 16:00 to 18:30). Keeping track of the different times is more of a hassle than keeping track of the different occupancy rules. I guess it won't matter at some point in the next few years.

There will still be HOV-2 on the Dulles Toll Road and on Route 1 and Washington Street through Old Town.

I don't have any objection to so-called "spousepooling" since it still takes cars off the road.

BTW, I-66 was severely underutilized when it was HOV-4. If memory serves, it was a year at most before it was changed to -3. Interesting thing on I-395 was that a fair amount of the carpooling and slugging groups didn't like the change to -3. I used to see the occasional "Restore HOV-4" bumper sticker.