Hampton Roads, Va. area toll crossings and toll roads

[cpzilliacus]

Virginian Pilot/PilotOnline.com: Transportation committees dissect funding, sequencing of water crossing projects

While the public shares its opinions on the best water-crossing projects for the region, financial wonks are working behind the scenes to identify the most effective way to pay for it.

"Over the next few months, we will be making the most important regional transportation decision of this generation,"  Suffolk Mayor Linda Johnson and Virginia Beach Mayor Will Sessoms wrote in a letter to committee members. "This decision will be critical to the transportation mobility in our region as well as our regional economy, port and military asset."

The main goal of the Hampton Roads Water Crossing study is to alleviate congestion on the traffic-plagued Interstate 64 corridor and the Hampton Roads Bridge-Tunnel.

The Virginia Department of Transportation is studying four alternatives, ranging from $3.3 billion to $12.5 billion. All of those figures are in 2016 dollars but have a 2.5 percent inflation rate and a 40 percent contingency built in.

[amroad17]

Could there be an Alternative E--none of the above/do nothing?  I mean Alternative D is all of the above. 

Seriously though, I believe the best solution would be to make the HRBT eight lanes--if it could be feasibly done.  Building the two new bridge trestles and tunnels would not be the problem; it would be connecting them to where I-64 is on land.  Most people would not really want to drive south on I-664, go east on the third crossing, and take I-564 to I-64 east.  Perceptively, it would be considered out of the way.

Now, as for me driving from Northern Kentucky to Va. Beach, I would take I-664 to Bowers Hill and go on I-64 to I-264 to get to the Oceanfront.  I know how hellish the HRBT can be.  I would go that way just to avoid it--much like I would avoid Chicago by taking I-74 out of Cincinnati to Bloomington-Normal IL and taking I-39 north to Rockford if I needed to go to Madison, WI or Minneapolis/St. Paul.

As far as Alternative A, how would the six lanes work?  I know that the proposed new tunnel will not have two-way traffic.  Would it be set up so four lanes go one way and two go the other and be switched later that day?  Or will it be set up so that the left-most lane in each direction uses the new tunnel (if it is built between the current ones) with a Jersey barrier separating the lanes?  Or if a new tunnel is built either east or west (HRBT actually is north/south) of the current ones, will one of the original tubes be used in the situation described above?

Since I moved out of the Hampton Roads area in 1994, traffic has become a lot more congested.  When I left, I-664 was open for only 2.5 years and was not very busy then.  The last time I was in the area was 2006 and I was a bit surprised at the amount of traffic on it then.  I bet it is very busy now--especially with only two lanes each way.  That area of Chesapeake and Suffolk has built up considerably since I left.  I guess VDOT did not plan on that happening--since I-664 was built with the two lanes in each direction.  I also remember when I could take Towne Point Road from VA 135 to US 17 in Belleville--riding through farms and fields.  That got obliterated when I-664 and VA 164 were built. 

With hindsight being 20/20 (cliche), what should have been done back in the mid-1970's was that I-64 should have been built with 3 lanes in each direction throughout Norfolk--from the HRBT to I-264.  However, this probably would have made westbound traffic worse, merging from three lanes to two when approaching the HRBT as the new bridge-tunnel opened in 1976.  I-664 should also have been built with 3 lanes each way through Suffolk and Chesapeake to anticipate future growth in that area.  As I said before, when I-664 and VA 164 opened in 1992 and 1993, there was nothing around that area.  However, if any DOT builds a freeway near a metropolitan area, there is going to be growth in that area.

As far as the other Alternatives, Alternative B would not be overly bad.  VA 164 would have to widened from the connection both ways for this to work properly.  Doing this would keep VDOT from having to build a massive interchange over the James River to hook up with the MMMBT.  I just cannot wrap my mind about how that interchange would look like from the Tidewater Community College campus shoreline.

I'm glad I do not live in Hampton Roads anymore.  I would be wondering why some of my money is gone--no, I would know!  It has become a modern version of the 1970's and early 1980's--tolls at tunnels, without having to stop at tollbooths.  Also, instead of paying 25 or 50 cents, it now costs $2 or $3.

[74/171FAN]

As far as Alternative A, how would the six lanes work?  I know that the proposed new tunnel will not have two-way traffic.  Would it be set up so four lanes go one way and two go the other and be switched later that day?  Or will it be set up so that the left-most lane in each direction uses the new tunnel (if it is built between the current ones) with a Jersey barrier separating the lanes?  Or if a new tunnel is built either east or west (HRBT actually is north/south) of the current ones, will one of the original tubes be used in the situation described above?

See page 16 from Chapter 2 of the DEIS.  (this is based on Alt. A)

Basically, the existing tunnels would become two tubes for I-64 WB (the existing WB HRBT would become one lane while the EB HRBT would be two WB lanes).  A new third tube with 3 lanes would be built for I-64 EB.   

[amroad17]

That is rather interesting.  I was basing my reasoning on the typical two-lane tunnel--not even giving thought to a three-lane tunnel. 

Got to like the thought of travelling on a 24-foot wide lane instead of a 12-foot wide one.

[cpzilliacus]

Fitch Ratings: Fitch Affirms Chesapeake Bay Bridge & Tunnel Dist, VA's Sub GRBs at 'A-'; Outlook Stable

The rating affirmation and Stable Outlook are due to continued solid financial metrics and steadily growing traffic, coupled with a senior lien that remains open. The facility has a mature traffic base with an exposure to cyclical commercial vehicle traffic. Construction of the parallel Thimble Shoal Tunnel will require significant additional debt; as part of the financing it is expected that the existing debt outstanding will be fully cash defeased and, therefore, should not impact the financial profile of the existing bonds.

Mature Traffic Base with Commercial Exposure: The District's monopolistic bridge and tunnel facility is the only link between the metropolitan Hampton Roads region and Virginia's eastern shore. Volume has been relatively stable over recent years, with a 0.76% compound annual growth rate (CAGR) over the last decade and a more recent five-year 1.9% CAGR. However, the facility is exposed to cyclically volatile seasonal leisure traffic and is moderately dependent on heavy truck volume, which over the past five audited years generated 22% of toll revenues.

[Revive 755]

Got to like the thought of travelling on a 24-foot wide lane instead of a 12-foot wide one.

I don't - I see too many drivers trying to use that tunnel as if it had two lanes.

[amroad17]

VDOT should give serious thought about re-striping the proposed westbound lane to 12- or 14-feet wide.  Give drivers an extra foot and they will take an extra 11. 

[cpzilliacus]

The Gloucester-Mathews Gazette-Journal: Supervisor works to reduce, eliminate tolls

One member of the Gloucester County Board of Supervisors is behind an initiative to push for the elimination or restructuring of the tolls on the Coleman Bridge, making the trip home across the bridge less costly to local commuters.

York district supervisor Phillip Bazzani, who represents Gloucester as a legislative committee member and voting member on the Hampton Roads Transportation Planning Organization, is encouraging state legislators to ask VDOT to refinance the current debt still owed on the bridge, which is close to $40 million, restructure toll rates to make them less burdensome on local residents or other solutions to the toll dilemma.

"According to VDOT data, about 70 percent of the (Coleman Bridge) debt is paid by Gloucester residents,"  Bazzani said. "This represents an unfair tax to our citizens."  He said the average Gloucester resident spends approximately $700-$800 a year on tolls, while a family of four spends upwards of $1,500 a year on tolls.

[Thing 342]

The Gloucester-Mathews Gazette-Journal: Supervisor works to reduce, eliminate tolls

One member of the Gloucester County Board of Supervisors is behind an initiative to push for the elimination or restructuring of the tolls on the Coleman Bridge, making the trip home across the bridge less costly to local commuters.

York district supervisor Phillip Bazzani, who represents Gloucester as a legislative committee member and voting member on the Hampton Roads Transportation Planning Organization, is encouraging state legislators to ask VDOT to refinance the current debt still owed on the bridge, which is close to $40 million, restructure toll rates to make them less burdensome on local residents or other solutions to the toll dilemma.

"According to VDOT data, about 70 percent of the (Coleman Bridge) debt is paid by Gloucester residents,"  Bazzani said. "This represents an unfair tax to our citizens."  He said the average Gloucester resident spends approximately $700-$800 a year on tolls, while a family of four spends upwards of $1,500 a year on tolls.

$700-$800 per year per person doesn't sound right, especially at the bridge's current rate of 2$ / 85¢  EZPass, northbound-only.

[Rothman]

The Gloucester-Mathews Gazette-Journal: Supervisor works to reduce, eliminate tolls

One member of the Gloucester County Board of Supervisors is behind an initiative to push for the elimination or restructuring of the tolls on the Coleman Bridge, making the trip home across the bridge less costly to local commuters.

York district supervisor Phillip Bazzani, who represents Gloucester as a legislative committee member and voting member on the Hampton Roads Transportation Planning Organization, is encouraging state legislators to ask VDOT to refinance the current debt still owed on the bridge, which is close to $40 million, restructure toll rates to make them less burdensome on local residents or other solutions to the toll dilemma.

"According to VDOT data, about 70 percent of the (Coleman Bridge) debt is paid by Gloucester residents,"  Bazzani said. "This represents an unfair tax to our citizens."  He said the average Gloucester resident spends approximately $700-$800 a year on tolls, while a family of four spends upwards of $1,500 a year on tolls.

$700-$800 per year per person doesn't sound right, especially at the bridge's current rate of 2$ / 85¢  EZPass, northbound-only.

I'd imagine you could get up there if you refused to get E-ZPass in a year, commuting into Hampton Roads.

[Mapmikey]

$700 a year is 350 round trips a year. To say the average resident does this suggests that some people do even more than that which is dubious because Gloucester County has plenty of businesses. Additionally I'm sure plenty of folks have EZ-pass which would result in an average of $700 requiring well over 350 round trips. So IMO the $ figure is made up

[jeffandnicole]

The average commuter, at 85 cents/day, working 250 days a year, would spend about $212.50 in tolls.

The average tinfoil hat commuter, at $2/day, working 250 days a year, would spend about $500 in tolls.

I don't know if I ever heard of average toll costs in the terms of "a family of four".  It's not like more people in the car equals more tolls.

[cpzilliacus]

The average commuter, at 85 cents/day, working 250 days a year, would spend about $212.50 in tolls.

The average tinfoil hat commuter, at $2/day, working 250 days a year, would spend about $500 in tolls.

That seems more reasonable.

I don't know if I ever heard of average toll costs in the terms of "a family of four".  It's not like more people in the car equals more tolls.

There were once toll roads and toll crossings in Virginia that charged per-passenger.  I think the HRBT may have done that when it was a toll crossing.  Maybe the CBBT too, in its early  days.

[Rothman]

The average tinfoil hat commuter, at $2/day, working 250 days a year, would spend about $500 in tolls.

...and I suppose the tinfoil hats would stay off the roads on weekends.

Not saying the cost estimate isn't a stretch; just figuring out where it come from.  Probably just had someone multiply 6*52*2, ignoring the E-ZPass discount.

[jeffandnicole]

The average tinfoil hat commuter, at $2/day, working 250 days a year, would spend about $500 in tolls.

...and I suppose the tinfoil hats would stay off the roads on weekends.

Not saying the cost estimate isn't a stretch; just figuring out where it come from.  Probably just had someone multiply 6*52*2, ignoring the E-ZPass discount.

Well, you figure there's some vacation days when the person wouldn't be working, but some weekends when they have to cross the bridge for a special event.  It all averages out.

[cpzilliacus]

To say the average resident does this suggests that some people do even more than that which is dubious because Gloucester County has plenty of businesses.

I crossed the Coleman Bridge (U.S. 17) after not having used it for quite a few years earlier this year, and yes, there has been a lot of growth in commecial businesses in Gloucester County over the past 10 or 15 years.

[froggie]

"According to VDOT data, about 70 percent of the (Coleman Bridge) debt is paid by Gloucester residents,"  Bazzani said. "This represents an unfair tax to our citizens."

Most of those residents also chose to live across a major river, instead of living closer in to the metropolitan region.  I have zero sympathy for those who live farther out, knowing the tolls are there, and then complain about the tolls.

Nevermind that the tolls are only charged one-way...

[Mapmikey]

"According to VDOT data, about 70 percent of the (Coleman Bridge) debt is paid by Gloucester residents,"  Bazzani said. "This represents an unfair tax to our citizens."

Also...(am I missing something?) shouldn't the majority of the users pay the majority of the tolls?

I can accept arguments along the lines of the bridge prior to that had no tolls for a number of years and now there are tolls.  But people do choose to live up there and commute southward.  And it is likely that if they moved south of the river the cost of their housing alone would outweigh the tolls they pay now.

[plain]

"According to VDOT data, about 70 percent of the (Coleman Bridge) debt is paid by Gloucester residents,"  Bazzani said. "This represents an unfair tax to our citizens."

Also...(am I missing something?) shouldn't the majority of the users pay the majority of the tolls?

I can accept arguments along the lines of the bridge prior to that had no tolls for a number of years and now there are tolls.  But people do choose to live up there and commute southward.  And it is likely that if they moved south of the river the cost of their housing alone would outweigh the tolls they pay now.

Definitely correct. I have seen homes in Gloucester County listed at $100k-$150k and homes in York County list at $250k for the same sq. footage. To say Gloucester residents shouldn't complain too much about an 85 cent toll one way is an understatement lmao. Whoever that Board Of Supervisors member is they're obviously just trying to set themselves up for a future run in office somewhere. Politics as usual smdh

[cpzilliacus]

"According to VDOT data, about 70 percent of the (Coleman Bridge) debt is paid by Gloucester residents,"  Bazzani said. "This represents an unfair tax to our citizens."

Most of those residents also chose to live across a major river, instead of living closer in to the metropolitan region.  I have zero sympathy for those who live farther out, knowing the tolls are there, and then complain about the tolls.

Nevermind that the tolls are only charged one-way...

All correct.  The swing span(s) had to be replaced to allow river traffic and vehicle traffic to cross where U.S. 17 crosses the York River.  VDOT got the replacement done using an innovative approach, which minimized the amount of time that the crossing had to be closed, but since they did not have the cash laying around to fund the project, they  had to borrow to get the project completed.

These people (and their elected officials) have no right to complain.  If they do not like the bridge tolls, there's a simple solution.  Move. 

My sympathy meter is on zero.

"According to VDOT data, about 70 percent of the (Coleman Bridge) debt is paid by Gloucester residents,"  Bazzani said. "This represents an unfair tax to our citizens."

Also...(am I missing something?) shouldn't the majority of the users pay the majority of the tolls?

I can accept arguments along the lines of the bridge prior to that had no tolls for a number of years and now there are tolls.  But people do choose to live up there and commute southward.  And it is likely that if they moved south of the river the cost of their housing alone would outweigh the tolls they pay now.

They  made their choices, and it was pretty clear that U.S. 17 at the York River (Coleman Bridge) was going to be (re)tolled several years before the swing span replacement project was done.

"According to VDOT data, about 70 percent of the (Coleman Bridge) debt is paid by Gloucester residents,"  Bazzani said. "This represents an unfair tax to our citizens."

Also...(am I missing something?) shouldn't the majority of the users pay the majority of the tolls?

I can accept arguments along the lines of the bridge prior to that had no tolls for a number of years and now there are tolls.  But people do choose to live up there and commute southward.  And it is likely that if they moved south of the river the cost of their housing alone would outweigh the tolls they pay now.

Definitely correct. I have seen homes in Gloucester County listed at $100k-$150k and homes in York County list at $250k for the same sq. footage. To say Gloucester residents shouldn't complain too much about an 85 cent toll one way is an understatement lmao. Whoever that Board Of Supervisors member is they're obviously just trying to set themselves up for a future run in office somewhere. Politics as usual smdh

To pay a modest toll and a relatively short added travel distance for that much less in property cost seems like a pretty good deal to me.

[cpzilliacus]

Virginian Pilot/PilotOnline.com [Editorial]: Third crossing will require planning, vision

THERE ARE NOW two ways to cross the harbor: The Hampton Roads Bridge-Tunnel and the Monitor-Merrimac Memorial Bridge-Tunnel, with the upriver James River Bridge adding a third way north and south.

It's not enough. Nowhere near.

It's not enough for commerce or tourism. It's not enough for commuting. It's not enough for a major American metropolitan region that struggles with connectivity and unity within and without. Or one that must compete, for jobs and people and federal dollars, with regions that are better connected and better united.

For a generation, doing something about that lack of transportation capacity in Hampton Roads was a frustrating fool's errand. Richmond's anti-tax ethos was the primary problem, ensuring that there was never enough transportation money to do what needed doing in the state's burgeoning metropolitan areas, namely here and Northern Virginia.

[74/171FAN]

The Navy has concerns with all alternatives except Alternative A.  This seems to be due to accessibility at Craney Island.

[LM117]

The Navy has concerns with all alternatives except Alternative A.  This seems to be due to accessibility at Craney Island.

I guess Alternative D was just too good to be true.

[cpzilliacus]

The Navy has concerns with all alternatives except Alternative A.  This seems to be due to accessibility at Craney Island.

If it was my decision (it's not ), I would do Alternative A, but with eight lanes instead of six (two new tubes - or maybe one new w-i-d-e tube to carry four lanes of traffic). 

Seems that this is something that the U.S. Navy and their friends at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers could go along with. 

Does anyone know why Alternative A was not proposed as an eight lane crossing?

[74/171FAN]

The Navy has concerns with all alternatives except Alternative A.  This seems to be due to accessibility at Craney Island.

If it was my decision (it's not ), I would do Alternative A, but with eight lanes instead of six (two new tubes - or maybe one new w-i-d-e tube to carry four lanes of traffic). 

Seems that this is something that the U.S. Navy and their friends at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers could go along with. 

Does anyone know why Alternative A was not proposed as an eight lane crossing?

Looking at Chapter 2 of the DEIS, the best I could find was this.  (referring to the Build-8 and other alternatives studied)

During the public review of the HRBT DEIS, there was a clear lack of public or political support for the level
of impacts associated with any of the build alternatives. Specifically, potential impacts to the historic
district at Hampton University, Hampton National Cemetery, and the high number of displacements were
key issues identified by the public, elected officials, and University and Veterans Affairs officials. Given
this public opposition, a Preferred Alternative was not identified and the study did not advance. On August
20, 2015, FHWA rescinded its Notice of Intent to prepare the HRBT DEIS, citing public and agency
comments and concerns over the magnitude of potential environmental impacts to a variety of resources,
such as impacts to historic resources as well as communities and neighborhoods.

I am not sure how eight lanes over six lanes means less significant impacts in this scenario.