Questions about Widening I-66
Fact or Fiction?

Will widening I-66 relieve congestion?

No. Increasing highway capacity1 typically has only a temporary and limited impact on congestion.2 Maryland's I-270 offers a classic example of a road widening project that provided only short term relief (five years) with traffic on some segments of the highway already exceeding levels projected for 2010.3

Will a wider I-66 take traffic off of neighborhood streets?

No. When road capacity is expanded near congested routes, drivers take advantage of the new facility to save time. The result is an overall increase in the total amount of driving and the total number of automobile trips in the region, not just the redistribution of traffic in the immediate surrounding area.4

Will construction decrease the amount of time spent in traffic?

No. The typical project to improve traffic flow only takes seconds or, at best, minutes off a daily commuting trip.5 Consider this: Drivers will spend more time in construction delays associated with the Springfield Interchange Project than they will ever make up from the increased road capacity.6

Will widening I-66 reduce pollution?

No. Widening I-66 will negatively affect the environment. The rate at which motor vehicles emit air pollution is dependent on driving speed, amount of braking, and acceleration. "The greater the speed of vehicles in built-up areas, the higher is the incidence of acceleration, deceleration, and braking."7 Speeding up the flow of traffic may result in lower carbon monoxide emissions, but it results in the increased release of nitrogen oxides, an ozone precursor, which plays an important role in the ozone problem.

How will construction affect the bike trail?

Widening I-66 means the destruction of bike trail and community recreation areas VDOT's "concept plan" for widening I-66 will eliminate the bike trail between Patrick Henry Drive and Jacksonville Street. The ability to use parks adjacent to I-66 (Bluemont Beaver Pond, Westover Park, the Washington & Old Dominion Bike Trail, Four Mile Run) may also be affected.

Is widening I-66 a waste of money?

Yes. The high cost of widening I-66 (estimates range from $80 million to $120 million8) is a waste of scarce taxpayer dollars that would be better spent on a comprehensive regional solution which includes alternative traffic reduction approaches.

1 Highway "capacity" is defined as, "the maximum hourly rate at which persons or vehicles can reasonable be expected to traverse a point or uniform section of a lane or roadway during a given time period under prevailing roadway, traffic, and control conditions." Transportation Research Board, Highway Capacity Manual, (1985) p. 1-3.
2 Conservation Law Foundation, Take Back Your Streets, How to Protect Communities from Asphalt and Traffic, May 1995, p. 46.
3 "Widen the Roads, Drivers will Come," Washington Post, January 4, 1999.
4 An Analysis of the Relationship Between Highway Expansion and Congestion in Metropolitan Areas, Surface Transportation Policy Project, p.5, November 1998.
5 Conservation Law Foundation, Take Back Your Streets, How to Protect Communities from Asphalt and Traffic, May 1995, p. 47.
6 "Mixing Bowl Work Questioned," Fairfax Journal, September 23, 1999.
7 See Federal Highway Administration, National Bicycling and Walking Study, Case Study No. 19, p. 17 describing the results of a German government study evaluating the effects of traffic calming projects at six varying settings and Michael Replogle, "Effects of Added Highway Capacity on Energy Use and the Environment: Minority Report," p. 8 noting that traffic calming can reduce idle time by 15%, gear shifting by 12%, and brake use by 14%.
8 "Widening 66 Won't Solve Congestion," Washington Post, January 2, 2000.

Copyright © 1999 The Arlington Coalition for Sensible Transportation