I-66 Multimodal Study Final Report - Virginia Department of ...

Recommendationsachieve the objective level of service in the lane. A traffic and revenue study could reviewmarket pricing options and refine the revenue estimates. Assuming a market pricing approachwere to be used in such an analysis, toll revenues could serve as the basis for debt financing thecapital cost of this package as is typically done with toll projects.Multimodal Package 4Multimodal Package 4 evaluated a transit-focused strategy to address the forecast mobility andcongestion in the study area. This package constructed a shoulder lane on U.S. 50, in bothdirections, throughout the study area, reserved for very high frequency buses only during themorning and evening peak periods. No vehicles would be permitted on this shoulder laneduring off-peak hours. Results showed that transit ridership could respond to substantialadded investments in the bus network. It should be noted that the commuter transit modeshare in this corridor is one of the highest nationally, making it challenging to significantlyincrease to even higher levels. Results indicate modest improvement in mobility (daily PMTincreases by 0.1 percent) compared to the Baseline condition and a modest decrease in congestion(congested VMT decreases 2 percent). The results from Multimodal Package 4 suggest thatconsideration should be given to enhancing the level of trunk route transit service on selectedbus routes in the study area.As developed, the estimated highway-related capital cost is $211 million, with annual additionalhighway operating costs of $1 million. The estimated capital cost to implement the transitservice elements of the package is $9 million. The transit service in this package requiresapproximately $46 million per year in operating expenses. Expenditures for the bicycle/pedestrian,TDM, and ICM improvements would be the same as for all other packages, as outlinedunder the discussion for Multimodal Package 1, above.The shoulder lane on U.S. 50 afforded the ability to reduce the travel time of selected busservices. The reduction in travel times, though, was significantly tempered by potential speedlimitations placed on buses operating next to congested lanes of traffic, motor vehicle ingressand egress activity in commercial areas, and the need for the buses to make stops along theway. The in-vehicle travel time improvements, coupled with the increased service frequencyalong the facility result in somewhat stronger ridership on U.S. 50 services, particularly closerto the Beltway cutline, as compared with the Baseline. However, the maximum cutline ridershipis reported as about 1,500 riders per day. As is discussed in Section 3.0 of this report, theanalysis did not provide encouragement for light rail service along U.S. 50 with the currentland use assumptions.Public CommentsDocumentation of the public information and participation effort can be found in Appendix Aof this report. A brief overview is provided here as it relates to informing the recommendationsfor the study. Methods for receiving public comment included market research performed inthe early part of this study, stakeholder interviews that were conducted throughout the study,and public comments received at the two rounds of public meetings, via e-mail, and via thededicated telephone line.4-8 I-66 Multimodal Study