Arlington will get the majority of the pollution, while residents of Fairfax, Loudoun and beyond will get any benefits that come out of it. And those benefits are dubious -- if traffic moves any faster, more drivers will just pile in from existing alternate routes. Arlington commuters would get much more benefit from investment in Metro, telecommuting, carpooling and bike trails.
But if anyone had any doubts about who's getting the worst of the deal, check out this tweet:
Arlington did not get "steamrolled". Rather, Chris Zimmerman, Arlington's TPB representative, helped craft a strong compromise that lets VDOT build only one of its three "spot widenings" (the one fully earmarked by Rep. Frank Wolf) but otherwise postpones *all* road widening until VDOT completes its long-delayed studies for the future of the corridor (e.g., the incomplete "Idea-66" study that VDOT abandoned in March 2005).
ReplyDeleteThus, the non-widening alternatives to the unnecessary, unwarranted, and counterproductive widening of I-66 are now in a stronger position than at any previous time. As recently as May 2007 and Feb. 17, 2009, the TPB had given VDOT a green light to build all three proposed westbound "spot widenings".
The TPB resolution is posted at [http://tinyurl.com/cehkbs] .