Norfolk mayor agrees to back expansion of Hampton Roads Bridge-Tunnel

pretty expensive when it only relieves congestion by 17%. does anyone remember the original study

http://www.virginiadot.org/projects/hamptonroads/hampton_roads_third_crossing.asp

the 2.75 billion figure was 4 years ago, what would that cost now?

eminent domain and home demolition are almost always part of any major transportation project, particularly in this instance where the construction isn't part of the right of way the government had mandated for public highways back when the highway system was originally in place. whether a bridge/tunnel, or a straight bridge, something would have to move in order to get this accomplished. wasn't that the primary reason for the opposition of the third crossing to begin with? it just doesn't add up; you're either going to feed the crossing or the extra lanes into the existing infrastructure to minimize damage, though doing so may be technically possible but economically unrealistic, or raze homes. either way someone is going to have to move out of the way to get this done.

Not to worry. I think Fraim is appeasing Del. Glen Oder to get him off of his back when "deciding" to add the HRBT expansion to the current 6 transportation projects. However, the project will die as Fraim will say that it hadn't gone through the government committee's and the usual hogwash bureaucracy. That will be the excuse to delete it from happening anytime soon or at all. The claim was that with another four lane tunnel was that it would require razing 155 houses, whereas a single lane tube going each way would not require taking any homes. Anyway, I don't think there should be any concern at this point about losing your home. The MPO doesn't really want to do it (expand the HRBT). They would rather build roads at our expense that don't relieve congestion for normal going to work folks and give the benefits of this taxpayer gravy train to the ports and those that represent them.

How did the project go from losing 155 homes in Ocean View and Willoughby to losing none? I live on the Spit and would hate to lose my home. And, the homes on our street have rather hefty assessments. How would the City afford these buy-outs? Was the now-failed Spectrum a consideration in all this?

The third crossing does not help soccer moms get around in less traffic. All these cheerleaders for the third crossing will make $ developing around them. That's why they cheer for these projects.

Mr. Barrett writes "But of course most of the anti tax zealots who populate these forums live at the Beach and could care less about the citizens of Norfolk or Portsmouth. You have heard them say that none of the six projects would provide any congestion relief, when those who use I-64, I-264, the mid town tunnel, the downtown tunnel, the old Expressway, and even the HRBT, know that is absolutely not the case."
Ok Mr. Barrett, tell us how the third crossing will reduce traffic bottle necks on I-264 and the downtown tunnel for the shipyard. How about when the trucks leave NIT? They will have to compete with I-564 Naval base traffic as they are restricted to use Hampton Blvd through Ghent to get to the new, expanded, and improved midtown tunnel with light rail no less. The biggest employers in this area are The Norfolk Naval Base, The Norfolk Naval Shipyard, and the Newport News Yard. Any relief at all for them will be a pittance.

So Steven is right. The MPO will humor the rest of us that it could be added and then it will die because of some state and federal administration process. Fraim even admitted that he wants the original 6 projects left in tact. So he doesn't give a rats behind whether it gets added or not. If he did, then it would have been included in the first place. He is just humoring Glen Oder hoping he'll get off his back.

Well of course, tolls are included in the funding for all of these projects. There is no way they could be done without tolls. And actually, the expanison of the HRBT was never excluded from the plan, there just was not enough money to pay for it. The Feds require that any proposal be "resource contrained" which means you have to propose a reasonable financing plan. If the expansion of the HRBT is to be studied by the CTB then the same criteria will apply.

Gee, now the pols say they are going to add to the HRBT. Well that makes a good sound bite. Fact is, the HRBT expansion was over ruled in favor of the third crossing. Therefore there is no design, EIS or anything else on anyone's immediate agenda. Fraim knows that this project isn't on the transportation improvement plan, and has zero chance of being added because we've put all our transportation money into the pols six projects. He's merely going along with this in order to get his projects pushed through. Then this add on idea will die a quick death due to lack of funds and no approval from the Feds. Don't fall for this bait and switch, the MPO has approved no such project.

Our transportation needs are so dire, and if it means tolls so be it. Afterall, if you are going to use it then pay for it.

Well you are correct, but since then, every delegate and senator that has denied we have a problem has been overwhelmed with comments from citizens who want them to do their duty and fix transportation. Delegate Welch who made such a big issue of his opposition to the projects, changed his mind at the last minute when he saw which way the wind was blowing; his constitutients voted him out of office anyway. Fact is, the consensus on the need is about 90%, anti tax zealots included. So with the Hampton Roads delegation just about unanimous that we have to find a way to build this projects, and with the Governor and the Legislature onboard with that view as well, I think chances for a deal are excellent. Now that the anti tax zealots from the taxpayers associations, led by Moss, Dean, Greenmun, Erb, and Murphy, have grossly insulted just about every political leader in this region (except Joannou and Gear), their credibility is below zero. About time.

Many of these small minded probably uneducated opponents to roads, are very selfish and really do not care about anything about their little day by day concerns. These transportation efforts for the region are essential for the Hampton Roads area to maintain viability for the NEXT fifty to hundred years. If tolls are the only way, just make sure it covers all the needs.

As a profesional urban planner, we are taught that it is essential for any community to invest in its infrastructure. This is a govt function. For industry to florish, for quality of life to improve it is essential that re-investment continues and its also important to squash the adversaries who all they care about is themselves and no one else. How sad

Taxpayers heard the same arguments in 2002 when we said NO to these projects! It's a tired old argument and voters wont go fo it this time either.

Oh that is classic divide and conquer. Nice try, but of course, it will not work. The City of Virginia Beach, the largest city in Virginia, and a city at the end of a cul de sac, had arguably the most to gain from this package of regional projects. We already know that we benefit the most from the operations of the port of Virginia, we certainly benefit from the reduction of truck traffic off the HRBT, the alterate method to get into and out of HR by SR 460, the improved I-264 over the high rise bridge, and the direct connection to the Beach via the Southeastern Parkway and Greenbelt. With this as an alternate, traffic will come off the HRBT as well, and our 3,000,000 visitors per year will certainly benefit from that. Those like Greenmun who work in Portsmouth will benefit from the expanded mid town tunnel and better access into Portsmouth and Suffolk. Fact is, the tired, retired, gray, angry old men who form the members of the taxpayers association are the only ones who claim none of us will benefit. The laughter is getting louder and louder; fortunateley, most of you can't hear it.

By the way those of us living in VB pay the MOST for roads into the state black hole in Richmond. Read your own HRPDC 2030 plan. It's in black and white, VB pays the most into the system right now. So get off your high horse and actually acknowledge that those most of us normal folks wont walk away with brand new developments around the new highways and these projects will give us taxpayers very little in return. It's in the HRPDC long range plan!

Ever wonder why certain people with financial interests in these projects constantly deride individuals that call for good governance and honest dialogue degrading names? I vote for the government to spend less of my money in ways that will line the pockets of those that want expensive toys like the third crossing. The port can buy its own driveway. Developers can pay for their own projects, I don't intend on contributing to corporate welfare.

Well let's agree on a few definitions. If the third crossing has as much as 6% of its traffic as what could be constued as port related, does that qualify as a port driven project? If the trucks pay a toll based upon weight and/or number of axels as is common on toll facilities, does that count as the port contributing to the financing of the project. Of course, that is the expected impact of the port on the third crossing, and of course the residents of Norfolk, especially those who live on Hampton Boulevard, will get their lives back. But of course most of the anti tax zealots who populate these forums live at the Beach and could care less about the citizens of Norfolk or Portsmouth. You have heard them say that none of the six projects would provide any congestion relief, when those who use I-64, I-264, the mid town tunnel, the downtown tunnel, the old Expressway, and even the HRBT, know that is absolutely not the case. The anti tax venom spewed by the spokesman for the taxpayers associations has become an embarrassment to every citizen who cares about the public interest. Let's ignore their ignorant rants and diatribes and get these projects done.

I just wish they would do something except talk about it. And the idea of adding a toll to the bridge is totally absurd. If you think traffic is bad now wait till they put a toll on it. We need some leaders that aren't afraid to raise the gas tax by a penny or two. The average user wouldn't even notice it.

It's funny that the MPO would have no problem razing 155 homes if they were not at the oceanfront and if they had an assessed value of 60-100K.
I agree with Pierre. Let the port authority pay for the third crossing and use the state money to expand the HRBT.
The port authority should start using barges to get across the river. It's environmentally friendly, fuel costs would be less, and no traffic congestion.

My humble opinion: Dump the third crossing, go ahead with light rail, AND ADD RAILS TO THE HRBT EXPANSION.

Most of this proposed 10 billion $ bill is due to the third crossing being built for the port. Let the port pay for their new driveway! It's especially important now that they are trying to privatize the port.

Dump the light rail plans and put all the $$ into this project, at least this one makes sense!

Del. Oder sure seems confused. Just because the norfolk mayor says something, he does not speak for the entire tidewater area. I did not elect him, and he does not speak for me. The mayor of norfolk speaks for norolk. The MPO is not an elected body, just a political machine driven toward mass development. Del Oder needs to ask each independent city for their opinion before heading off in the wrong direction.

I was under the impression that the new tube would be one-way depending on the time of day. Simply, in the am there would be 2 tubes going south and 1 going north and just the opposite in the pm.

If this is a long range plan, they should be talking about adding two lanes in either direction, not just one. Aside from being short-sighted, trying to send six lanes through three tubes is a recipe for more congestion due to the additonal split and merge, and having two-way traffic in one tube. Making the new lanes reversible and/or HOV-only would be a smarter short-term plan, but it wouldn't meet the goal of adding one new lane in either direction.

I wonder if it might make more sense to live and work on the same side of the tunnel?