Hampton Roads, Va. area toll crossings and toll roads

[Thing 342]

The issue with the Express Lanes isn't the toll (which will almost always be a pittance because these aren't sections where traffic backs up without an accident) but the physical divider between lanes preventing users from passing other cars between the entry and exit points, making the whole roadway less flexible. As I currently understand the plan, there will be no entry or exit points from Segment 4 for 10 miles between MM 254 / Denbigh Blvd and MM 264 / I-664, bypassing several busy intersections that add and remove significant amounts of traffic from the freeway. Drivers heading to or from the Coleman Bridge, the James River Bridge, or Langley AFB (via exit 261) will be unable to use the lanes.

Since HRT vehicles will be using the lanes (and presumably be driving the speed limit) and there's no room to pass them, it raises the question of how "express" these lanes are supposed to be. The mainline currently flows at at least 70MPH at all hours of the day, even during rush hour. For these lanes to be a success the current level of service of the freeway will have to drop from its current level, either due to the general lane reduction (caused directly by this project) or some unknown growth factor. I don't have historic AADT figures in front of me but, the Hampton Roads area is currently not growing and traffic on this section of I-64 has been roughly the same since I moved to the area in 2002. With current toll rates I'm not sure if they're even paying back the costs of running the billing infrastructure, let alone funding other projects. (The HRBT express lanes will do plenty of business, but I suspect they'll move slower than many will expect)

Ultimately I kind of think this project exists solely because someone liked the experience of driving to Northern Virginia and not having to deal with "common" traffic, so they wanted continuous lanes regardless if they made sense or not.

[sprjus4]

Since HRT vehicles will be using the lanes (and presumably be driving the speed limit) and there's no room to pass them, it raises the question of how "express" these lanes are supposed to be.

That was my experience one time on the I-64 lanes near the High Rise Bridge - there was me and about 8-10 cars stuck behind an HRT bus traveling between 55-60 mph and struggling to go up the new bridge. Meanwhile, the mainline was moving 70+ mph by us on the right. No ability to pass for miles in some cases.

The mainline currently flows at at least 70MPH at all hours of the day, even during rush hour. For these lanes to be a success the current level of service of the freeway will have to drop from its current level, either due to the general lane reduction (caused directly by this project) or some unknown growth factor.

Based on my experience with I-64 in Chesapeake where it previously had a similar cross section (8 lanes), the conversion of the HOV lane into an express lane has caused the speeds in the mainline to slightly decrease and for traffic to become a lot more dense than it previously was. It's more notable around the Indian River Rd interchange where there is a number of entering / exiting traffic at a cloverleaf with no C/D road. It often slows down in this area in the afternoon. Similarly near Greenbrier Pkwy, where the C/D road merges with the mainline heading westbound (toward Va Beach), it has formed a new slowdown area.

Unfortunately I feel like a similar effect will be produced on the Peninsula, especially near US-17 and Victory Blvd, where a new slight slowdown will be created. I feel the average speeds will also be slightly reduced during rush hour, to around or below the 65 mph limit.

I don't have historic AADT figures in front of me but, the Hampton Roads area is currently not growing and traffic on this section of I-64 has been roughly the same since I moved to the area in 2002. With current toll rates I'm not sure if they're even paying back the costs of running the billing infrastructure, let alone funding other projects. (The HRBT express lanes will do plenty of business, but I suspect they'll move slower than many will expect)

Ultimately I kind of think this project exists solely because someone liked the experience of driving to Northern Virginia and not having to deal with "common" traffic, so they wanted continuous lanes regardless if they made sense or not.

They don't make sense north of I-664. That portion of interstate highway is well designed and carries a high volume of traffic and operates without any issues. This project is spending money to address an issue that does not exist, and will only cause more issues that currently don't exist.

I don't understand why the HO/T lanes cannot end around I-664 and transition into the existing 8 lane interstate that exists north of there.

I have a similar opinion about south/west of I-264 in Norfolk, where that segment of I-64 (at least to I-464) operated without any issues and carried a high volume of traffic adequately and often above the posted speed limit even during peak hours.

[Thing 342]

I expect the following areas to become new trouble spots:

- Between Exit 262 and 263 (weaving between VA-134 and US-258)
- Exit 261 (the merge for the on-ramp from Hampton Roads Center Parkway WB to I-64 WB is too short and causes minor slowdowns in the right lane during rush hour; lots of interchanging traffic headed from I-64 EB to Langley)
- Exit 258 (cloverleaf with short merge sections and lots of interchanging traffic to / from York County and Gloucester)

These are fixable issues that will be exacerbated rather than resolved by the express lanes.

[Beltway]

That was my experience one time on the I-64 lanes near the High Rise Bridge - there was me and about 8-10 cars stuck behind an HRT bus traveling between 55-60 mph and struggling to go up the new bridge. Meanwhile, the mainline was moving 70+ mph by us on the right. No ability to pass for miles in some cases.

Once again -- I have not yet seen that happen. Congested times have worked the other way around -- GP traffic is traveling between 55-60 mph and the HOT lane is at 65 or 70. Most people are decent enough not to hold up traffic given that you can't pass. It is a driving error in my book to not maintain the speed limit if possible on a roadway like that and people behind deserve to make their annoyance known with lights and/or horn.

I'm of course not saying that it can never happen.

I also don't know why HRT busses can't go 65 mph (or more) up that shallow grade of about 3%. I rode GRTC express buses for over 30 years and they have more than enough power even fully loaded to go the speed limit up that grade. Plus they have at least 2 miles before the bridge to get there.

[Thing 342]

Tolls on the Coleman Bridge could end this year:

https://www.wavy.com/news/local-news/potential-end-to-coleman-bridge-tolls-could-spark-growth-in-gloucester/

This doesn't make much sense other than as a handout to Gloucester County voters; the bridge still has nearly a decade's worth of bonds to pay off, and there's other construction projects in the area that still need funding sources (the VA-3 Norris Bridge, for example). Plus, additional growth will put pressure on US-17; the tolls haven't put much of a brake on development as new housing projects and other businesses seem to constantly be springing up in the area. Corridor preservation needs to be considered as it won't be long until the segment between the bridge and Ark becomes a light-infested slog like in York County.

[Beltway]

Tolls on the Coleman Bridge could end this year:
https://www.wavy.com/news/local-news/potential-end-to-coleman-bridge-tolls-could-spark-growth-in-gloucester/
This doesn't make much sense other than as a handout to Gloucester County voters; the bridge still has nearly a decade's worth of bonds to pay off, and there's other construction projects in the area that still need funding sources (the VA-3 Norris Bridge, for example). Plus, additional growth will put pressure on US-17; the tolls haven't put much of a brake on development as new housing projects and other businesses seem to constantly be springing up in the area. Corridor preservation needs to be considered as it won't be long until the segment between the bridge and Ark becomes a light-infested slog like in York County.

Widening completed in 1996. I don't know why it should take so long to retire the debt and remove tolls.

The Coleman Bridge widening project had a total cost of $95.8 million. Here's how the financing broke down:
=>Toll Revenue Bonds: $38.1 million
=>Toll Facility Revolving Account (TFRA): $38.2 million
=> Federal and Primary Funds: $19.5 million
That means Toll Revenue Bonds covered about 40% of the total project cost. The rest came from state and federal sources, with the TFRA acting as a kind of internal loan fund.

[Thing 342]

Tolls on the Coleman Bridge could end this year:
https://www.wavy.com/news/local-news/potential-end-to-coleman-bridge-tolls-could-spark-growth-in-gloucester/
This doesn't make much sense other than as a handout to Gloucester County voters; the bridge still has nearly a decade's worth of bonds to pay off, and there's other construction projects in the area that still need funding sources (the VA-3 Norris Bridge, for example). Plus, additional growth will put pressure on US-17; the tolls haven't put much of a brake on development as new housing projects and other businesses seem to constantly be springing up in the area. Corridor preservation needs to be considered as it won't be long until the segment between the bridge and Ark becomes a light-infested slog like in York County.

Widening completed in 1996. I don't know why it should take so long to retire the debt and remove tolls.

The Coleman Bridge widening project had a total cost of $95.8 million. Here's how the financing broke down:
=>Toll Revenue Bonds: $38.1 million
=>Toll Facility Revolving Account (TFRA): $38.2 million
=> Federal and Primary Funds: $19.5 million
That means Toll Revenue Bonds covered about 40% of the total project cost. The rest came from state and federal sources, with the TFRA acting as a kind of internal loan fund.

https://www.dailypress.com/2015/11/21/after-nearly-20-years-two-thirds-of-debt-still-owed-on-coleman-bridge/

Toll revenue failed to meet expectations and maintenance costs increased, causing interest to compound. This article states that the bonds were refinanced in 2006 at 3.84%, which indicates that the state was barely servicing the debt at all during the period 2006-2019. The VDOT FY24 budget had Coleman Bridge revenue estimated at $6M (compared to $6.1M in 2015 and $6.5M in 2011), so I assume this problem isn't going to solve itself.

[Beltway]

https://www.dailypress.com/2015/11/21/after-nearly-20-years-two-thirds-of-debt-still-owed-on-coleman-bridge/
Toll revenue failed to meet expectations and maintenance costs increased, causing interest to compound. This article states that the bonds were refinanced in 2006 at 3.84%, which indicates that the state was barely servicing the debt at all during the period 2006-2019. The VDOT FY24 budget had Coleman Bridge revenue estimated at $6M (compared to $6.1M in 2015 and $6.5M in 2011), so I assume this problem isn't going to solve itself.

Paywalled. And the widening was completed in 1996, and tolled from then, so 29 years.

I still don't understand when other toll facilities were paid off in less time -- HRBT 19 years, R-P Turnpike 14 years after the 22-mile major widening project, Colemen itself opened in 1952 and detolled in 1976.

The RMA toll roads are another case of never-ending tolls. Opened in 1975-77, last major widening in 1988.