Virginia HOT Lanes: For Insiders Only

The new I-495 HOT lanes, also known as 495 Express Lanes, are expected to go into operation late this year.  Discussion of these lanes and the concept of dynamic pricing can be found in many places on the web (official site,  a previous post of mine re: the theory of HOT lanes).

My particular concern for this post is the requirement that all users must have an E-ZPass in order to use the lanes.  What this means is that only local drivers with knowledge of the system and those who are willing to bear the monthly admin charge will be able to utilize the lanes. Thus, in order to use the HOT lanes for free one must:

• Have 3+ persons in their vehicle, AND
• Have an active monthly E-ZPass Flex Account, AND
• Make sure the Flex pass is set to HOV mode

HOT Lanes Won't Siphon Off Riders

I noticed an article in the Fredericksburg Free Lance-Star reporting on a VDOT report about future commuting behavior along I-95 when HOT lanes are completed. I was unable to find the report results on VDOT's site, so I have to depend on the Free Lance-Star for what details I could glean.

The gist of the survey results is that the vast majority of vanpoolers, carpoolers, sluggers and train riders will continue to use their same mode to commute along the I-95/I-395 corridor after HOT lanes are built and implemented. In fact, the type of commuter most likely to change their behavior is the SOV driver, presumably to another, more congestion- and environment-friendly mode. For people who are concerned that the construction of HOT lanes would siphon a lot of riders out of HOV modes into their SOV vehicles, this is a heartening result.

The survey polled 3,289 commuters. Here's how many said they would will stick with their current method of commuting:

95 percent of vanpoolers
91 percent of bus riders
86 percent of train riders
82 percent slugs
81 percent of carpoolers
53 percent of solo drivers

Bikes and HOT Lanes

Sunday's Washington Post Outlook section published an op-ed piece by Bruce Wright, chairman of Fairfax Advocates for Better Bicycling that was spot on. His key point being that as Virginia moves forward with $1.7 billion of investment to move cars better (the new HOT Lanes), the state absolutely needs to think comprehensively about other modes--in particular cycling. Currently it is difficult or impossible to cross the beltway on a bicycle along most routes. Although I have heard of people doing it, it's pretty terrifying for me to imagine riding on Route 50 where it crosses I-495. Most of the other crossings are no better. There are undoubtedly thousands of people who live only a few miles from their jobs or from other places they want to go, but the Beltway is in between, forcing them to drive those short distances.

In fact, VDOT's Policy for Integrating Bicycle and Pedestrian Accommodations makes this statement: "The Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) will initiate all highway construction projects with the presumption that the projects shall accommodate bicycling and walking." Here's a golden opportunity for VDOT to demonstrate that it is not just paying lip service and--in contrast to its performance as reported in a previous post on a VDOT missed opportunity--really understands the value of bicycling and walking as viable travel choices.

Thanks, Bruce, for getting this key issue into the Post where our policy makers are more likely to see it.

HOT Lanes Getting Started Up

Today's Washington Post article announcing that work on the N. Virginia HOT lanes will start up early next year is bound to create a lot of "traffic" here, on other blogs and in forums of all types. I think it's great that so many people are really thinking about how to deal with the undeniable problem of traffic congestion in the DC area. And clearly there are differing opinions, which--at least here on the CommuterPage blog--I hope we can express with mutual respect and thoughtfulness.

Problems with traffic congestion are not unique to Washington. One of the great things about our big ol' US of A is that we are big; we have 50 states; we have scores of metropolitan areas. What that means is that we can try different things in different places and learn from those experiences. I'm sure that other metro areas will be watching to see what happens here. "But I don't wanna be the guinea pig," I can hear from some. That's NIMBYism writ large: put it somewhere else; let someone else try it first; make them pay for it. . . .Take that attitude universal and nothing ever happens anywhere at all.

Is this model perfect? I doubt it. Should we allow private ownership of a public good? There's definitely some validity to that point. Will the new HOT lanes be completely fair for all users? It's impossible to be completely fair (and definitions of fair are not even consistent). Will the money get inappropriately used, politicized or even wasted somehow? Um. . .this is DC. Do we need to do something? Absolutely.

I'm excited to see our leaders taking action on something innovative and even controversial with the potential for some real gains. If only they would take a similar attitude towards the tunnel in Tyson's corner--bold and innovative instead of trapped in a bureaucratic morass. Maybe that's the real lesson of these HOT lanes. Look how fast they went from crazy idea to implementation. And how long have we been pursuing that rail line?

Airport Story (A HOT Allegory)

Recently I was flying back to DC and had this conversation with my seatmate:
Me: Hi; I'm Steve.
Him: Pleased to meet you; I'm James.
Me: This looks bad. I see about eight planes ahead of us for takeoff. It'll probably take 20 minutes just to get off the ground.
Him: No kidding. I've noticed this is common on Thursdays.
Me: I see that this airport has two parallel takeoff runways to handle more traffic. That seems like a good idea.
(We observe a plane taxi onto the parallel runway and take off without waiting)
Me: Hey! Why didn't that plane have to get in line? Some congressman on board I presume.
Him: (chuckling) Possibly! Actually, I'm from here, and they have some interesting restrictions they've put in place for that runway.
Me: Really? Like what?
Him: Well, the other runway is reserved just for planes with certain fuel efficiency and load factors. There's never a wait on that runway like we have on this one.
Me: That's not a bad idea. I presume it would encourage airlines to improve their fleets and their operational efficiency if they know they can improve their on-time performance by not having to wait in line.
(A plane in our line takes off.)
Him: True. But it seems sort of silly right now with us waiting behind seven more planes while that runway is just waiting to be used.
Me: Well, how much does it get used?
Him: Some of the time it gets good use, but there's also some unused waiting time like now, too.
(Five minutes go by; two more planes ahead of us take off.)
Him: I often wonder why don't they let some of the planes in our queue use that runway when there are gaps like now?
Me: Yeah, like us! Wouldn't it be great if our pilot just cut out of line and took off. I'm getting a little tired of waiting.
(Another plane in our line takes off.)
Him: In fairness, maybe they could come up with a system. Airlines that paid an extra fee could get first priority to use the empty takeoff slots. Airlines that want to improve their on-time performance could pay the extra; those that don't care so much could use this one.
Me: That doesn't seem fair somehow. People with more money get some special treatment or something?
Him: I don't know. If I want to pay an extra $10 for my ticket to have a better chance of getting where I'm going on time, I might do that--particularly if I'm trying to get to an important meeting. Can you think of another way?
Me: How about planes with passengers who have names that start with "S?" I'd like that!
(Another plane ahead of us takes off. Line is down to four.)
Him: "S" or "J!"
Me: Wouldn't every airline just start paying the fee, and then that runway would be just as crowded as this one and there would be no incentive for the airlines to improve performance?
Him: Air traffic control could make sure that the taxiway for that runway has no line, so any of the preferred planes would be able to take off without delay, just like now. And obviously they still get to use that one for free. It wouldn't take long to figure out the prices to charge to control the traffic flow on that runway.
(Another plane in our queue takes off.)
Him: And, you know, our line would be shorter now, too, if a couple of planes ahead of us had been able to use that runway over there. Whatever the system, though, what we're doing right now--making everybody wait while that runway is not being used--is stupid.
Me: No kidding. Everyone would get where they're going faster. Hey! I just remembered; I'm an environmentalist. It would sure save some jet fuel if these planes weren't just sitting in this queue waiting to take off.
Him: Another good point.
(Another plane taxis onto the parallel runway and takes off without delay.)
Me: Good thing I've got my book with me. I guess I'll get an extra chapter or two read today.

Him: Enjoy.
=====================
(this is a fictional story intended to make an analogy about the value of HOT lanes)