RK ARCHIVE - I-66 Widening? James and I Agree

Agreed, widening I-66 is a really bad idea (Catzmaw - 2/28/2007 9:49:41 AM)

and it's a violation of the firm promises made to Arlington residents when this giant scar across the county was first proposed. A lot of Arlington houses came down and the character of many Arlington neighborhoods was changed by the road. Now they want to break the promises they made and take down even more Arlington homes and ruin even more neighborhoods ... and to what effect? Widen the road through Arlington and where do you end up? Are the bridges going to be widened, too? Will the roads on the other side of the bridges be widened? I-66 is all about getting to and from DC and surroundings. You can move the congestion forward or back, but you're still going to have the congestion because there are only so many ways to cross the river. This is all about the Los Angelization of Northern Virginia and I for one am tired of it. If people want to go live in the sticks, then telecommute or move the jobs out there, too or start using public transit. Don't ask Arlingtonians to sacrifice their county to make life easier for someone driving in from Loudoun.

Arlington is not an example of good planning (PM - 2/28/2007 10:43:32 AM)

I respectfully disagree with your assertion. (And you know we agree as often as Ivory Soap is pure.) Arlington merely happened to be close to DC, and is relatively small in size. That's why Metro has stops there. And that's why there is no "sprawl." I think you are mixing correlation with causality on this one.

Remember, Arlington is the home of lovely, pedestrian-unfriendly Rosslyn, and Wilson Blvd., which gives Route 1 (oh, up and down the whole east coast) a run for the ugliness trophy. Arlington's street patterns were designed by a lunatic. There's not an inch of planning to those streets, and one could argue they add to the overall regional congestion.

(Former Minnesota Governor Ventura got into trouble for allegedly slandering an ethnic group when he said that "St. Paul's streets had been laid out by a drunken -----.")

Sorry to give you a hard time this a.m.

I'm agreeing with Lowell and pointing out that (Catzmaw - 2/28/2007 3:47:41 PM)

Arlington was never a cohesive single entity but a collection of tiny villages, trolley stops, and even some farms until the early 20th century. The reason its streets are so confusing is that a single entity had to be knitted out of all those little villages. Neighborhoods like Lyon Village and Clarendon and Ballston and Rosslyn didn't have any central planning with each other. South Arlington always seemed a little separate and generally poorer than North Arlington and had to deal with the destruction of neighborhoods for the construction of the Pentagon in the 1940s and the building of the Naval Annex at the top of Columbia Pike nearby. Meanwhile, Fort Myer and Arlington Cemetary became more clearly defined and insulated from the rest of the surrounding neighborhoods and the road system had to be modified to accommodate the rather significant federal footprint. Arlington's done a pretty good job of making it all come together, especially considering the two major cut-throughs: Route 50 (Arlington Blvd.) and I-66.

Sorry, must disagree, with a caveat (PM - 2/28/2007 10:33:55 AM)

I posted something at James' site, but it needs amending. I think we must drastically increase our use of public transportation, but I-66 is and has been woefully inadequate for years. The houses (and families) that use it are already there. That can't be undone. Ther horse(less carriage) is out of the barn.

Saying "let people move in if they don't want the commute" is an unfair argument. Homes close in cost too much for the great majority of people. I have two kids, with a third on the way. All I could afford in Arlington is a piece of crap.

Arlington's position is akin to those who say -- "I'm retired. Why should I have to pay school taxes?" (Or, "I want to send my kid to private school -- why should I pay school taxes?") We live in a community where civic responsibility includes assuming burdens that may not affect you directly.

From my piece at James' site:

James:
Normally I agree with you, but I don't think widening is going to make a whole lot of difference in noise, etc.
Let me tell you a story. Back in the early 70's a friend of mine from Arlington, a good guy on the environment, would work himself into a lather at the prospect of I-66 being built. In fact he rented a home right near the right-of-way. When the road started being built, he moved to Clifton. He immediately became a strong supporter of I-66. I kidded him, but he didn't bat an eye. We both smiled. You see, James, that's life.
I live near Stringfellow Road in Fairfax, which badly needs widening. It will be noisy and dusty while they do it, but it is needed.
I also support higher taxes for transportation, even though I'm retired and don't use the roads so much anymore.
Support I-66's widening - it's the best thing for all of us. Fairfax is built - that can't be undone.

One of the puzzling things about our transportation plan -- and I know it's been asked at transportation fora to VADOT people who don't seem to have an answer -- why is Metro going only to Tysons? Who is the genius that decided to stop the Metro at Vienna? It should have been built all the way out to Manassas along I-66, and another line should have been built out along Braddock Road.

So let's go back to my original assertion about shared responsibility. I live in Chantilly and I don't think many here or in Centreville or in Clifton or Manassas gives a hoot about whether the Metro gets built to Tysons, because our closest Metro stop is Vienna. So why should we pay for the Metro there?

You see where I'm going with this? The Tysons Metro will be nice for people who live in Arlington to shop. But I support the Metro going there because we need a much larger Metro all over. However, if Arlington doesn't want I-66 widened, why should I support with my tax dollars something that will benefit only one part of Fairfax and Arlington?

All of these plans need to be looked at (Lowell - 2/28/2007 10:38:10 AM)

with the region-wide impact in mind. I agree with you on that. As far as Metro to Dulles, I've always been skeptical that this is a great use of our limited transportation resources, but I'm willing to go along with it if it encourages smart growth in Tysons and helps people all along the Dulles corridor. That will have no direct impact on me, since I hardly ever go shopping and rarely have any reason to go to Tysons, but it will help the region so I'm for it (as long as it's a tunnel option in Tysons). In contrast, what does widening I-66 by one lane inside the Beltway accomplish? I mean, I've been on I-66 inside AND outside the Beltway many times, and the congestion is terrible in both places. It doesn't magically get better when the road switches to three lanes; in fact, it may even be worse. The bottom line is that adding a lane in Arlington doesn't make matters any better for people living in Vienna or further out. So why should we spend money on this? I don't get it.

Two-way traffic jams (Hoss - 2/28/2007 4:20:58 PM)

I-66 has outgrown its original intent of moving commuters into Washington in the morning and back to the burbs in the evening. Traffic is now heavy in both directions during rush hour. Many folks from Maryland, DC, and Virginia (including Arlington) commute to jobs in the Dulles Corridor and Tysons area so we need to keep that in mind as we plan for the future. I used to commute from Arlington to Reston every day and I could regularly count on a back up every evening as I returned home on I-66 East. Extra lanes within the existing foot-print would certainly help. Are there more productive ways to invest the same money, perhaps yes, but everyone needs to understand that the traffic flow problem is not just larger than it used to be it is fundamentally different (2-way not 1-way).

I often go from Fairfax to Arlington during rush hour (Catzmaw - 2/28/2007 4:39:54 PM)

in the evenings and there are backups at several points along the route, most particularly where I-66 meets I-495 in Fairfax County just below Tysons Corner. No one's saying let's make that intersection even bigger and wider. The other backups are at Falls Church - the Westmoreland Drive and Washington Blvd. exits. They're generally not that bad, and once you clear them it's pretty smooth sailing afterwards unless there's something going on - like basketball or baseball - in the evening in DC, which can cause backups by people trying to get to Constitution Avenue or onto I-395 North. Of course, that brings us back to the whole bridge problem, doesn't it? Also, if 66 is unusually sluggish there's always the option to exit and get on Lee Highway or Rte 50 or even Wilson Blvd. I don't think the fact that there is a little bit of slowdown in the evenings going toward Arlington is justification for widening the road and completely screwing over the people who live there and the businesses, some of which have been around forever, which operate there.

Your I-66 position would cause in revolt in Fairfax and Loudoun, and this is where the votes are (PM - 2/28/2007 5:22:17 PM)

People from the west need to get into D.C. A metro could never handle the volumes we're talking about. And, yes, a new bridge or two has to be built--actually a couple of tunnels make more sense.

But the real problem with your plan to leave I-66 untouched is this. How are you going to sell a plan that leaves Arlington without a burden? Arlington has 200,000 people. Loudoun has 255,000. Fairfax over a million.

You're also forgetting that Arlington County residents use I-66 heavily. Perhaps if you limited entrances from Arlington at morning rush hour onto I-66, and prevented exiting into Arlington for the evening rush. I mean if Arlington thinks so little of I-66, I'm sure the Arlington Board would readily agree.

Honestly, if you tell the residents of Fairfax County that they're not going to improve I-66, I think you've just lost any chance of transportation reform. The whole premise of a "blue" Fairfax turning out the GOP will be gone.

Now what they should do is to announce a 30 year plan that eventually turns Route 50 into a multi-modal rail, road freeway, largely tunneled, with light rail spurs to take people to and from the main rail line. Most of the real estate along 50 is near the end of its life -- and it's simply time to announce that in ten years there's going to be a huge eminent domain taking.

I don't want to get into a fight with my buds, but I think the idea that I-66 will remain the same will alienate a huge voter group. And the downstate GOP will be rolling in the aisles.

Westbound: there's a perceptible slowdown many days (PM - 2/28/2007 5:57:43 PM)

westbound at the Washington Blvd. entrance onto the highway -- the road seems not to be able to handle that simple influx of volume. Now I'm not an expert on traffic matters. (And I think it's Washington Blvd. -- not sure) I only travel the route occasionally now, but the pattern hasn't changed as far as I can tell. It seems to start around 2:00 but I've run into it earlier. And I think VADOT feels it's a necessity.

Inbound, my feeling is that the real bugaboo is the lack of bridge-tunnel entrances into D.C. I'd love to see a tunnel built from, say, the GW Parkway with exits in the business corridor. But I'm not sure anyone would buy just building an outbound lane. Also, the traffic is frequently terrible inbound on 66 on weekends, even though there is no jam at the bridges. That's why I think part of this is a road volume/size problem.

I think I'll call someone I know within DOT and get some expert opinion.

Ultimately the traffic solution is a much bigger deal than all of this. We've got to plan for an energy crisis 30 years out. And . . .

Those are my principles, and if you don't like them...well, I have others."

--Groucho Marx,
actor and comedian

Nonsensical to talk about a revolt (Catzmaw - 2/28/2007 6:48:40 PM)

It's rather arrogant of people to move out to the hinterlands and then turn and demand that the people remaining in town destroy their community to make life easier for people who CHOSE to move miles away from the city to traverse their community. It's also wrong to say that the promises made 30 years ago when the road was built shouldn't be kept because now it's so bloody inconvenient. And as for limiting access to I-66 from Arlington in the mornings and evenings, that's already being done. It's called HOV.

You haven't addressed the fact that there are alternative routes into Arlington in the evenings if the traffic becomes too slow. But frankly that's all it is, a little slow. It's rare for evening eastbound traffic to come to a complete stop. It's just a little sluggish. You want to talk genuine stopping take a look at any westbound road in the evening headed out to Manassas or Gainesville or Leesburg or Fairfax or Tysons Corner. Arlington's a tiny part of the congestion mess. Anyone trying to go in or out with rush hour traffic on the Dulles Toll Road or Rte 234 or Rte 50 or Rte 7 or Rte 29 or I-66 or I-495 or I-395 is going to be stuck in a lot of traffic jams all the way home. To put the onus on little, bitty 25 square mile Arlington to relieve all that congestion because the traffic is "too slow" is too much.

Here's a suggestion. Instead of everyone agreeing to move into gargantuan developments out in the middle of nowhere with only two routes of ingress and egress into the road system, maybe people should start demanding that developers focus on making these neighborhoods and developments truly accessible. Ever go out to some place like Centreville to visit someone whose development is on the right side of the road, but who can't walk across the humongous six lane highway on their border to visit the shopping center on the left hand side of the road because it's too freaking dangerous? People out there DRIVE everywhere because they have no pedestrian or bike-friendly way of getting anywhere. The whole system is built around the automobile, and they want Arlington to do the same thing they've done to themselves. You know what? It's easy to get around Arlington without ever getting in a car. I can take the Metro, the ART bus, the Metrobus, or I can just walk or bike wherever I need to go. This is because Arlington has built alternative transportation into all of its planning. But people out in McMansionland just want to pave over Arlington so they can continue with their car-only culture right into the heart of DC. Enough, already. You want easier access to your developments? Pave over some of the McMansions and create a variety of access points throughout. And while you're at it build some bike trails and pedestrian underpasses and overpasses and put in a local bus system to supplement the inadequate Metrobus and Metrorail systems.

As for more bridges across the river - the environmental impact would be devastating and once across to the other side you still have the city's limited number of roadways and congestion to deal with. With the limitations imposed by the already congested cross-town traffic planning and the disruption caused by security related street closings and re-routings you're not going to see much improvement. There's nowhere to turn.

Sorry, but several (PM - 2/28/2007 7:28:36 PM)

million people live in the area. They cannot all fit into Arlington. Do you have a solution to that?

And I must say that arguing that adding one lane to I-66 will "ruin" Arlington and its way of life seems a bit much.

You are insinuating people in the outer suburbs are environmental Neanderthals and lead some sort of life inferior to yours. That's unfair labeling. Most people here do not have McMansions. You may not be familiar with the housing and cultural diversity in western and central Fairfax. Our elementary school (and the several around ours) are like the United Nations.

Many people live here because we cannot afford Arlington, or the housing stock that is "affordable" is substandard. This is especially a problem if you have more than one child. Also, except for the area between Lee Highway and the river, and a few other patches, most of Arlington is esthetically inferior to Fairfax. There are groves of trees in our middle class neighborhood. There are still wide expanses of forest in parts of Fairfax. Biking and hiking trails galore. A huge forested park (Lawrence) nearby. A heron lives in a wetland three blocks away. We have tons of raptors flying around -- we get a visit every few days from a Cooper's Hawk -- who is after the birds at our feeder. Just look at the bird life -- we have four varieties of red birds out here, not just the cardinal. We actually have coyote and foxes here -- as well as the omnipresent deer. (A coyote ate a rabbit in our backyard last year while we watched.)

This is not some vast cement wasteland out here.

You might ask -- why do Arlingtonians not live in DC? That's a compact area and it is really close to work for many. You'll find the same sort of answers. There are lots of ingredients in any housing decision.

I'm moving on to another topic.

Didn't mean to get so heated (Catzmaw - 2/28/2007 10:18:42 PM)

but I grew up in Pimmit Hills, just outside of Tysons Corner, and watched it go from a rather bucolic area to the congested traffic mess that it is today. For 45 years I've been hearing people who keep moving farther and farther out make more and more demands on those who live closer in to accommodate them. When I was growing up there was a stables at one end of Pimmit Hills and a charming horse farm right up on Route 7, where the Idylwood condominiums are now. There was a wonderful peach orchard which was torn down to put in Peachtree of McLean. Off of Magarity Road in Pimmit Hills there was a huge meadow to which the Clyde Beatty Circus went every year. My sibs and I used to sneak in under the tents (I felt enormously guilty, if that's any help). I watched little Pimmit Run go from a great little stream with fish to a concrete culvert full of noxious storm sewage from the constant development.

Have you actually been through Arlington's parks and bike trails? Do you know that tiny Arlington has over 92 miles of bike trails? That there are still groves of trees and parks all over the place in spite of the density? I know some of the housing is substandard in Arlington. Heck, I'm living in a place I call the cinderblock shoebox, and I raised three kids there. I had to sacrifice to stay close in. So you have more space and lots of wildlife and all that. Tell me, why should I have to sacrifice what little remains of my trees and parks and wildlife access to make it easier for you to get into town? Why can't you telecommute? Why can't your employer move further out into your cheaper and more plentiful space?

And you're not talking about merely putting in another lane. You're talking about putting in two more lanes at least (one for each side), possibly with shoulders. This would require taking out the huge retaining walls and their sound buffers, destroying portions of the W&OD Trail near Falls Church and the Custis Trail in North Arlington. They run right next to the road in those spots. It would require taking out the houses which virtually back upon the trails in those areas. The margins are quite tight. Did you know there is a preserved wetland near Glebe Road on that part of I-66? It would require draining a portion of that wetland or perhaps removing it entirely. It's not a very big wetland, but there are hawks and ducks and geese there. It's a way-station for migratory birds.

It's not such a simple proposal and it would be quite destructive.

I-66 Widening? James and I Agree - We Don't Want It!

Comments