AARoads Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

New rules to ensure post quality. See this thread for details.

Author Topic: I-495 and I-270 P3 Program  (Read 64074 times)

cpzilliacus

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 11132
  • Age: 64
  • Location: Maryland
  • Last Login: March 17, 2023, 12:07:39 PM
Re: I-495 and I-270 P3 Program
« Reply #350 on: August 11, 2021, 03:37:32 AM »

Logged
Opinions expressed here on AAROADS are strictly personal and mine alone, and do not reflect policies or positions of MWCOG, NCRTPB or their member federal, state, county and municipal governments or any other agency.

astralentity

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 113
  • Location: Galway, NY
  • Last Login: March 13, 2023, 07:51:15 AM
Re: I-495 and I-270 P3 Program
« Reply #351 on: August 11, 2021, 02:54:35 PM »

GROAN....

Just what we need in the Northeast and DMV areas.... more tolls!

You know that those who are gonna suffer most are travelers going through the area to get to points north and south.   I for one enjoy the drive down through Gettysburg and into Frederick to get to I-270 and points around the DMV.  This is just going to make me consider I-81 and I-64 more if I need to get down to Richmond or further south.  I did that route coming back from Florida yesterday (trip split point was in Short Pump along I-64 after leaving Orlando), and it's a hell of a lot less headache and easier on the wallet than up I-95/I-495 etc.
Logged

sprjus4

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 8135
  • Location: Hampton Roads, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 03:25:28 AM
Re: I-495 and I-270 P3 Program
« Reply #352 on: August 11, 2021, 03:05:43 PM »

None of the I-495 / I-270 / I-95 projects are adding any tolls to any existing general purpose capacity. It's all new capacity. All existing lanes will remain 100% free.

That said... can't argue with I-81 / I-64. I've done it before just to avoid DC / I-95 altogether, and while it may have added more time, it was certainly far less stressful and no traffic.
Logged

Plutonic Panda

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3212
  • Location: Los Angeles/OKC
  • Last Login: Today at 03:39:47 AM
Re: I-495 and I-270 P3 Program
« Reply #353 on: August 11, 2021, 03:26:19 PM »

I do wish they’d add at least one GP and 3 toll lanes each way. That would really go far in making a big dent in congestion.
Logged

famartin

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1015
  • Location: Trenton NJ area
  • Last Login: March 24, 2023, 04:47:19 PM
Re: I-495 and I-270 P3 Program
« Reply #354 on: August 11, 2021, 03:41:34 PM »

I do wish they’d add at least one GP and 3 toll lanes each way. That would really go far in making a big dent in congestion.

Its also a fantasy given monetary and space constraints.
Logged

Plutonic Panda

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3212
  • Location: Los Angeles/OKC
  • Last Login: Today at 03:39:47 AM
Re: I-495 and I-270 P3 Program
« Reply #355 on: August 11, 2021, 04:21:45 PM »

I do wish they’d add at least one GP and 3 toll lanes each way. That would really go far in making a big dent in congestion.

Its also a fantasy given monetary and space constraints.
The costs would be insane.
Logged

cpzilliacus

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 11132
  • Age: 64
  • Location: Maryland
  • Last Login: March 17, 2023, 12:07:39 PM
Re: I-495 and I-270 P3 Program
« Reply #356 on: August 11, 2021, 05:02:13 PM »

Washington Post: Maryland board approves first contract to design toll lanes for Beltway, I-270 - The “predevelopment agreement” gives Transurban and Macquarie the right of first refusal to build and operate the lanes over 50 years.

Quote
The first contract for companies to design billions of dollars worth of toll lanes for Interstate 270 and part of the Capital Beltway won approval Wednesday from a Maryland board, marking the start of the state’s largest project aimed at relieving traffic congestion.

Quote
The Board of Public Works — composed of the governor, treasurer and comptroller — voted 2 to 1 to approve a “predevelopment agreement” with Australian firms Transurban and Macquarie to develop plans for the lanes at their own expense over about a year.

Quote
Maryland Gov. Larry Hogan (R) and Comptroller Peter Franchot (D), who is running for governor, supported the contract, saying the expanded highways would alleviate chronic and worsening traffic congestion and its economic effects. State Treasurer Nancy K. Kopp (D) opposed it, saying she didn’t believe state officials know all of the project’s financial risks and environmental impacts.
Logged
Opinions expressed here on AAROADS are strictly personal and mine alone, and do not reflect policies or positions of MWCOG, NCRTPB or their member federal, state, county and municipal governments or any other agency.

cpzilliacus

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 11132
  • Age: 64
  • Location: Maryland
  • Last Login: March 17, 2023, 12:07:39 PM
Re: I-495 and I-270 P3 Program
« Reply #357 on: August 12, 2021, 02:31:23 AM »

WTOP Radio: In split vote, Board of Public Works approves highway design contract

Quote
In a vote that divided the state’s top leaders, the Maryland Board of Public Works on Wednesday advanced Gov. Lawrence J. Hogan Jr.’s plan to widen two highways in Montgomery County.

Quote
Hogan (R) and Comptroller Peter V.R. Franchot (D) voted to accept one contract that will allow an international consortium to begin design work on the plan to add privately financed toll lanes to portions of the Capital Beltway and Interstate 270.

Quote
A second contract sets up a one-dollar-a-year lease arrangement, over 60 years, between the Maryland Department of Transportation (MDOT) and the Maryland Transportation Authority (MdTA).
Logged
Opinions expressed here on AAROADS are strictly personal and mine alone, and do not reflect policies or positions of MWCOG, NCRTPB or their member federal, state, county and municipal governments or any other agency.

cpzilliacus

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 11132
  • Age: 64
  • Location: Maryland
  • Last Login: March 17, 2023, 12:07:39 PM
Re: I-495 and I-270 P3 Program
« Reply #358 on: August 25, 2021, 04:56:45 PM »

WTOP Radio: Losing bidder signals intent to sue MDOT over Transurban contract

Quote
Capital Express Mobility Partners (CEMP), a consortium that unsuccessfully sought a multi-billion dollar contract to finance and build toll lanes on interstate highways in Montgomery County, signaled in its strongest terms to date that it intends to sue the Maryland Department of Transportation.

Quote
The consortium’s determination to litigate is conveyed in an Aug. 10 letter sent by its attorney, former Maryland Attorney General Douglas F. Gansler (D), to the Board of Public Works.

Quote
The letter, undisclosed until now, also lays out in broad detail the legal arguments that the consortium is likely to present if its case goes to court — and it hints at a belief that MDOT’s lawyers are slow-walking the protest-resolution process to keep CEMP from filing suit.
Logged
Opinions expressed here on AAROADS are strictly personal and mine alone, and do not reflect policies or positions of MWCOG, NCRTPB or their member federal, state, county and municipal governments or any other agency.

cpzilliacus

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 11132
  • Age: 64
  • Location: Maryland
  • Last Login: March 17, 2023, 12:07:39 PM
Re: I-495 and I-270 P3 Program
« Reply #359 on: August 25, 2021, 05:50:26 PM »

Quote
WTOP Radio: Losing bidder signals intent to sue MDOT over Transurban contract

Quote
    Capital Express Mobility Partners (CEMP), a consortium that unsuccessfully sought a multi-billion dollar contract to finance and build toll lanes on interstate highways in Montgomery County, signaled in its strongest terms to date that it intends to sue the Maryland Department of Transportation.

I just noticed that this says that they want to sue MDOT.  That may be a mistake by the reporter with Maryland Matters that wrote this - or it may be a mistake by the attorney involved, Doug Gansler, who has been around a long time and presumably knows this.

I have no opinion about the merits of the case here, but I think filing a lawsuit against MDOT may be suing the wrong state agency.  Unless things have changed recently, the agency in charge of P3 transportation projects like this one is MDTA, which is not legally part of MDOT, though the chair of the MDTA board is always the Secretary of the Maryland Department of Transportation.
Logged
Opinions expressed here on AAROADS are strictly personal and mine alone, and do not reflect policies or positions of MWCOG, NCRTPB or their member federal, state, county and municipal governments or any other agency.

davewiecking

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 695
  • Age: 65
  • Location: Bethesda, MD
  • Last Login: March 26, 2023, 01:23:27 PM
Re: I-495 and I-270 P3 Program
« Reply #360 on: September 22, 2021, 04:32:32 PM »

An email received this afternoon informs me that Maryland’s P3 program will henceforth be known as “Op Lanes Maryland”.  www.oplanesmd.com. “Options and Opportunities for All”.

Now that we have that important decision out of the way…
Logged

cpzilliacus

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 11132
  • Age: 64
  • Location: Maryland
  • Last Login: March 17, 2023, 12:07:39 PM
« Last Edit: September 30, 2021, 07:01:02 PM by cpzilliacus »
Logged
Opinions expressed here on AAROADS are strictly personal and mine alone, and do not reflect policies or positions of MWCOG, NCRTPB or their member federal, state, county and municipal governments or any other agency.

cpzilliacus

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 11132
  • Age: 64
  • Location: Maryland
  • Last Login: March 17, 2023, 12:07:39 PM
Re: I-495 and I-270 P3 Program
« Reply #362 on: September 30, 2021, 07:00:07 PM »

[This project is in Virginia but is only happening because of the Maryland P3 project so I am posting it here.]

WTOP Radio: Extended Express Lanes in Virginia may help ease traffic on I-495
Logged
Opinions expressed here on AAROADS are strictly personal and mine alone, and do not reflect policies or positions of MWCOG, NCRTPB or their member federal, state, county and municipal governments or any other agency.

kernals12

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2462
  • Love highways and cars. Hate public transit.

  • Location: Suburban Boston
  • Last Login: March 26, 2023, 04:03:47 PM
Re: I-495 and I-270 P3 Program
« Reply #363 on: October 01, 2021, 07:23:39 PM »

I found something interesting.

In 2001, the Woodrow Wilson Bridge carried 200,000 vehicles per day

They then widened it from 6 lanes to 12

In 2019, traffic was just under 250,000.

So a 100% increase in capacity was followed by just a 25% increase in traffic.

That's a factoid that should be brought up every time some mouth breather claims widening the AL bridge won't reduce congestion.
Logged

Roadsguy

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1881
  • Age: 23
  • Location: Here
  • Last Login: March 26, 2023, 04:48:07 PM
Re: I-495 and I-270 P3 Program
« Reply #364 on: October 01, 2021, 08:12:17 PM »

I found something interesting.

In 2001, the Woodrow Wilson Bridge carried 200,000 vehicles per day

They then widened it from 6 lanes to 12

In 2019, traffic was just under 250,000.

So a 100% increase in capacity was followed by just a 25% increase in traffic.

That's a factoid that should be brought up every time some mouth breather claims widening the AL bridge won't reduce congestion.

While it physically supports 12 lanes, it's currently only striped for 10, so only a 66.6% increase. Still more than the increase in traffic, though!
Logged
Mileage-based exit numbering implies the existence of mileage-cringe exit numbering.

kernals12

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2462
  • Love highways and cars. Hate public transit.

  • Location: Suburban Boston
  • Last Login: March 26, 2023, 04:03:47 PM
Re: I-495 and I-270 P3 Program
« Reply #365 on: October 01, 2021, 08:20:29 PM »

I found something interesting.

In 2001, the Woodrow Wilson Bridge carried 200,000 vehicles per day

They then widened it from 6 lanes to 12

In 2019, traffic was just under 250,000.

So a 100% increase in capacity was followed by just a 25% increase in traffic.

That's a factoid that should be brought up every time some mouth breather claims widening the AL bridge won't reduce congestion.

While it physically supports 12 lanes, it's currently only striped for 10, so only a 66.6% increase. Still more than the increase in traffic, though!

An auxiliary lane is still a lane, it's 12 lanes.
Logged

plain

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2590
  • Age: 44
  • Location: Richmond Virginia
  • Last Login: March 26, 2023, 04:36:17 AM
Re: I-495 and I-270 P3 Program
« Reply #366 on: October 01, 2021, 08:23:49 PM »

I'm definitely for widening the AL bridge, but I was under the impression that the bridge wasn't the source of congestion there..
Logged
Newark born, Richmond bred

kernals12

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2462
  • Love highways and cars. Hate public transit.

  • Location: Suburban Boston
  • Last Login: March 26, 2023, 04:03:47 PM
Re: I-495 and I-270 P3 Program
« Reply #367 on: October 01, 2021, 08:34:22 PM »

I found something interesting.

In 2001, the Woodrow Wilson Bridge carried 200,000 vehicles per day

They then widened it from 6 lanes to 12

In 2019, traffic was just under 250,000.

So a 100% increase in capacity was followed by just a 25% increase in traffic.

That's a factoid that should be brought up every time some mouth breather claims widening the AL bridge won't reduce congestion.

While it physically supports 12 lanes, it's currently only striped for 10, so only a 66.6% increase. Still more than the increase in traffic, though!
Actually, that 25% increase in traffic slower than the 29% increase in population that the DC Area saw in that time frame. Induced demand my ass
Logged

1995hoo

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 15184
  • Age: 49
  • Location: Fairfax County, Virginia
  • Last Login: March 26, 2023, 04:09:46 PM
Re: I-495 and I-270 P3 Program
« Reply #368 on: October 01, 2021, 08:54:36 PM »

A shoulder is not a lane, regardless of whether jackasses in Maryland think it’s ok to bomb along at 55 mph on the shoulder to pass stopped traffic.
Logged
"You know, you never have a guaranteed spot until you have a spot guaranteed."
—Olaf Kolzig, as quoted in the Washington Times on March 28, 2003,
commenting on the Capitals clinching a playoff spot.

"That sounded stupid, didn't it?"—Kolzig, to the same reporter a few seconds later.

Plutonic Panda

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3212
  • Location: Los Angeles/OKC
  • Last Login: Today at 03:39:47 AM
Re: I-495 and I-270 P3 Program
« Reply #369 on: October 01, 2021, 10:34:47 PM »

I found something interesting.

In 2001, the Woodrow Wilson Bridge carried 200,000 vehicles per day

They then widened it from 6 lanes to 12

In 2019, traffic was just under 250,000.

So a 100% increase in capacity was followed by just a 25% increase in traffic.

That's a factoid that should be brought up every time some mouth breather claims widening the AL bridge won't reduce congestion.

While it physically supports 12 lanes, it's currently only striped for 10, so only a 66.6% increase. Still more than the increase in traffic, though!
Actually, that 25% increase in traffic slower than the 29% increase in population that the DC Area saw in that time frame. Induced demand my ass
It’s because nearly every single induced demand example comes from a cherry picked scenario especially those like the 405 through the Sepulveda pass where the issue isn’t one of simple lack of mainline capacity but also bottlenecks.

I’ve been skeptical of induced demand being a rational argument when I first heard about it ten years ago. I became interested in urban development and infrastructure as I signed up on OKCTalk a development forum for OKC. I was very shocked when I saw how many posters took shots at me and my idea of widening I-35 because it would simply become congested again therefore they shouldn’t widen it.

I-40 project near downtown was close to wrapping up as the mainline was being expanded to 5 GP lanes each way. Even with a bottleneck at I-44 it rarely gets congested outside of an accident almost 10 years later. No induced demand.

I still present my questions of exactly how traffic can be considered induced, or rather a specific number on how much traffic is induced demand and a distinction between it and latent demand. It’s a question I’ve yet to have answered when I first asked it 10 years ago. I’ve considered going to LATTC downtown for transportation planning on the side and I’ve always thought it’d be an interesting experience seeing how my ideologies would be tolerated by the undoubtably anti car stance the professors there have.
Logged

famartin

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1015
  • Location: Trenton NJ area
  • Last Login: March 24, 2023, 04:47:19 PM
Re: I-495 and I-270 P3 Program
« Reply #370 on: October 01, 2021, 10:54:00 PM »

I found something interesting.

In 2001, the Woodrow Wilson Bridge carried 200,000 vehicles per day

They then widened it from 6 lanes to 12

In 2019, traffic was just under 250,000.

So a 100% increase in capacity was followed by just a 25% increase in traffic.

That's a factoid that should be brought up every time some mouth breather claims widening the AL bridge won't reduce congestion.

While it physically supports 12 lanes, it's currently only striped for 10, so only a 66.6% increase. Still more than the increase in traffic, though!

An auxiliary lane is still a lane, it's 12 lanes.

Yea, but last I checked, it was 3-2-2-3, including auxiliaries.
Logged

kernals12

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2462
  • Love highways and cars. Hate public transit.

  • Location: Suburban Boston
  • Last Login: March 26, 2023, 04:03:47 PM
Re: I-495 and I-270 P3 Program
« Reply #371 on: October 01, 2021, 10:54:33 PM »

I found something interesting.

In 2001, the Woodrow Wilson Bridge carried 200,000 vehicles per day

They then widened it from 6 lanes to 12

In 2019, traffic was just under 250,000.

So a 100% increase in capacity was followed by just a 25% increase in traffic.

That's a factoid that should be brought up every time some mouth breather claims widening the AL bridge won't reduce congestion.

While it physically supports 12 lanes, it's currently only striped for 10, so only a 66.6% increase. Still more than the increase in traffic, though!
Actually, that 25% increase in traffic slower than the 29% increase in population that the DC Area saw in that time frame. Induced demand my ass
It’s because nearly every single induced demand example comes from a cherry picked scenario especially those like the 405 through the Sepulveda pass where the issue isn’t one of simple lack of mainline capacity but also bottlenecks.

I’ve been skeptical of induced demand being a rational argument when I first heard about it ten years ago. I became interested in urban development and infrastructure as I signed up on OKCTalk a development forum for OKC. I was very shocked when I saw how many posters took shots at me and my idea of widening I-35 because it would simply become congested again therefore they shouldn’t widen it.

I-40 project near downtown was close to wrapping up as the mainline was being expanded to 5 GP lanes each way. Even with a bottleneck at I-44 it rarely gets congested outside of an accident almost 10 years later. No induced demand.

I still present my questions of exactly how traffic can be considered induced, or rather a specific number on how much traffic is induced demand and a distinction between it and latent demand. It’s a question I’ve yet to have answered when I first asked it 10 years ago. I’ve considered going to LATTC downtown for transportation planning on the side and I’ve always thought it’d be an interesting experience seeing how my ideologies would be tolerated by the undoubtably anti car stance the professors there have.

The "induced demand" argument is much older than you think, it's been used since at least the 70s to argue against road building. Clearly it's not really influential.
Logged

kernals12

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2462
  • Love highways and cars. Hate public transit.

  • Location: Suburban Boston
  • Last Login: March 26, 2023, 04:03:47 PM
Re: I-495 and I-270 P3 Program
« Reply #372 on: October 01, 2021, 10:56:48 PM »

I found something interesting.

In 2001, the Woodrow Wilson Bridge carried 200,000 vehicles per day

They then widened it from 6 lanes to 12

In 2019, traffic was just under 250,000.

So a 100% increase in capacity was followed by just a 25% increase in traffic.

That's a factoid that should be brought up every time some mouth breather claims widening the AL bridge won't reduce congestion.

While it physically supports 12 lanes, it's currently only striped for 10, so only a 66.6% increase. Still more than the increase in traffic, though!

An auxiliary lane is still a lane, it's 12 lanes.

Yea, but last I checked, it was 3-2-2-3, including auxiliaries.

You're right, i just checked streetview. So why does everyone describe as being 12 lanes?
Logged

NJRoadfan

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1754
  • Location: New Jersey
  • Last Login: March 22, 2023, 09:07:11 PM
Re: I-495 and I-270 P3 Program
« Reply #373 on: October 01, 2021, 11:02:53 PM »

Actually, that 25% increase in traffic slower than the 29% increase in population that the DC Area saw in that time frame. Induced demand my ass

Total traffic capacity is limited by the roads feeding it. The bridge only has to contend with 8 lanes of thru-traffic and some traffic generated by the 2 auxiliary lanes from I-295 to the ramps in Alexandria. Traffic counts would grow a bit more linear if 10 thru lanes of the Capital Beltway were feeding the bridge.
Logged

jeffandnicole

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 13986
  • Age: 48
  • Location: South Jersey
  • Last Login: March 26, 2023, 11:50:44 PM
Re: I-495 and I-270 P3 Program
« Reply #374 on: October 01, 2021, 11:15:58 PM »

I found something interesting.

In 2001, the Woodrow Wilson Bridge carried 200,000 vehicles per day

They then widened it from 6 lanes to 12

In 2019, traffic was just under 250,000.

So a 100% increase in capacity was followed by just a 25% increase in traffic.

That's a factoid that should be brought up every time some mouth breather claims widening the AL bridge won't reduce congestion.

While it physically supports 12 lanes, it's currently only striped for 10, so only a 66.6% increase. Still more than the increase in traffic, though!

An auxiliary lane is still a lane, it's 12 lanes.

Yea, but last I checked, it was 3-2-2-3, including auxiliaries.

You're right, i just checked streetview. So why does everyone describe as being 12 lanes?

Who's everybody?  Or, it could be people mistakenly thinking it is.

Personally, I've learned to take the Local lanes, where there's 3 lanes, vs the 2 lanes inside.  Almost always faster.

Logged

 


Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.