Interstate 66; CTB to include in next update certain improvements inside Capital Beltway. (HB426)

Introduced By

Del. Jim LeMunyon (R-Oak Hill) with support from co-patron Del. David Ramadan (R-South Riding)

Progress

Introduced
Passed Committee
Passed House
Passed Senate
Signed by Governor
Became Law

Description

I-66 improvements. Requires the Commonwealth Transportation Board to include in the next update of its Six-Year Improvement Program a project to add at least two non-high-occupancy vehicle lanes in each direction to I-66 inside the Capital Beltway. Read the Bill »

Outcome

Bill Has Failed

History

DateAction
01/04/2014Committee
01/04/2014Prefiled and ordered printed; offered 01/08/14 14103134D
01/04/2014Referred to Committee on Transportation
01/10/2014Assigned Transportation sub: Subcommittee #1
01/22/2014Subcommittee recommends reporting (6-Y 1-N)
01/23/2014Reported from Transportation with substitute (12-Y 10-N) (see vote tally)
01/23/2014Committee substitute printed 14104319D-H1
01/24/2014Read first time
01/27/2014Passed by for the day
01/28/2014Passed by for the day
01/29/2014Impact statement from DPB (HB426H1)
01/29/2014Motion to rerefer to committee agreed to
01/29/2014Rereferred to Transportation
02/04/2014Tabled in Transportation

Comments

Allen Muchnick writes:

This bill is sheer lunacy. Besides displaying incredible ignorance of highway operations and multimodal transportation planning in Northern Virginia, not to mention sustainable urban living, the patron evidently conceived of this bill without consulting *anyone*. I can't imagine an informed highway advocate, such as Bob Chase or Congressman Frank Wolf, recommending such incredibly misguided legislation.

Audrey Clement writes:

I'm all in favor of adding SOV lanes so that more Fairfax County fools can sit parked on I-66 during rush hour.

Aurora Brinkley writes:

Congressman Frank Wolf - by recommending this bill - enshrines himself in the ‘rino’ pantheon of clueless. Congestion on I-66 could be eliminated immediately, permanently, and with almost no construction cost or traffic disruption, simply by introducing automated, variably priced tolls to I-66 which would allow access by all autos at all times, provide an excellent express bus facility, preserve carpooling incentives, and provide much-needed transportation revenue paid for by the actual users. These guys like Frank Wolf and Bob Chase prove there’s no difference between these ‘old-school’ guys in either political party – dino or rino – there’s no difference. Voters want smart changes with users paying and you guys are not consulting voters. Basically, Wolf and Chase are clueless.

Allen Muchnick writes:

The substitute bill, requiring only a VDOT study of I-66 widening, is a vast improvement. However, ANY widening of I-66 inside the Beltway would WORSEN traffic congestion overall, unless some or all lanes are tolled during peak periods (as VDOT's extensive and year-long I-66 Multimodal Study has ALREADY concluded).

This substitute bill should be further amended to 1) clarify that any studied widening of I-66 MUST lie (at least substantially) within VDOT's existing limited-access footprint and 2) require VDOT to study the effects of peak-period-only HOT restrictions (in both directions) on some or all I-66 lanes, without and with any added lanes.

Making I-66 HOT during peak periods is the only feasible way to permanently, quickly, and cost effectively reduce or eliminate traffic congestion on I-66 and should not greatly worsen congestion on nearby parallel highways.

Allen Muchnick writes:

While I'm glad HB 426 failed and I oppose widening I-66 for more SOV commuting, I applaud Dels. LeMunyon and Ramadan for seeking I-66 improvements.

VDOT's 2012 I-66 Multimodal Study was an excellent START toward developing a strategic plan for this key travel corridor, but achieving regional consensus on I-66's future is essential to end decades of inaction, for the betterment of our region.