New tunnels for Chesapeake Bay-Bridge shot down
- From: "Larry Gross" <gross.larry@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 31 Jan 2006 01:42:26 -0800
RICHMOND -- The House of Delegates shot down plans to build expensive
extra tunnels on the Chesapeake Bay Bridge-Tunnel Monday, saying the
tunnels are not justified on the little-used span at this point.
"If we don't do this, we're going to have a $1 billion tunnel over
there that has one-tenth the traffic of the Hampton Roads
Bridge-Tunnel," said Del. Leo Wardrup, R-Virginia Beach. "By any
measure, traffic there is comparatively light and will remain so for
the foreseeable future."
Wardrup's bill requires the independent state agency that operates the
17.6-mile bridge-tunnel to obtain General Assembly approval before
taking any more steps to build two additional tunnels.
While approval isn't likely in the immediate future, lawmakers said the
project would be authorized if in-depth traffic projections justify it
down the road.
"We need that data presented," said Del. Jeion Ward, D-Hampton. "If you
can convince us it is needed, and the funding is there, that it won't
impact the commonwealth in a negative way, then OK."
Bridge officials have been stockpiling money for several years to build
two additional tunnels, and raised tolls by 20 percent in 2004 to help
pay for them.
Wardrup's bill was introduced as a result of a Daily Press
investigation last summer that revealed the little-known plans for
additional tunnels, and detailed how bridge commissioners routinely
took expensive trips, including one to Paris capped by large dinner tab
at a topless cabaret.
Lawmakers were not pleased, said Del. Tom Gear, R-Hampton. "Everybody I
talked to was angry about it," he said.
Wardrup and Del. Lynwood W. Lewis, D-Accomac, exchanged some edgy words
over the bill.
Lewis argued that the bridge was well managed and that the extra
tunnels would be needed in 20 years to handle projected traffic
increases. He said additional tunnel construction was implied in
General Assembly approval in the 1990s to build two extra lanes on the
span.
"If this is a bad investment, it could fall to the taxpayers of
Virginia to pay off this debt," Wardrup shot back, noting that the
bridge commission defaulted on bonds in the 1970s in the "largest
municipal bankruptcy in U.S. history."
Those bonds were repaid after the state refused to bail out the bridge
commission.
Killing the extra tunnels would be a breach of trust, and would leave
open the possibility that the bay bridge would someday become as
congested as the Hampton Roads Bridge-Tunnel is now, Lewis argued.
"The citizens of the Eastern Shore want these new tunnels," he said.
Wardrup countered by noting that a 2005 state audit determined that
additional tunnels were premature and that the toll increase to help
pay for them was not justified through a comprehensive traffic study.
Lawmakers stood on the sidelines during the 10-minute exchange and
voted on party lines to approve the bill. The vote was 60-37.
Democrats, as a rule, objected.
Later, Republicans said they voted for it because they were
uncomfortable with allowing additional tunnels to go ahead - even if
paid for by motorists charged $12 each way (the highest in the country)
- while other transportation priorities clearly are more pressing.
The bay bridge handles 3.5 million vehicles - roughly 10,000 a day -
and traffic dropped slightly last year. Traffic is estimated to
increase to roughly 5 million by 2025.
http://www.dailypress.com/news/local/dp-63630sy0jan31,0,2890267.story?coll=dp-news-local-final
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Prev by Date: bill introduced for study of second I-95 corridor in Va
- Next by Date: Re: Who to contact about a deadly stretch of road.
- Previous by thread: bill introduced for study of second I-95 corridor in Va
- Next by thread: Re: New tunnels for Chesapeake Bay-Bridge shot down
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
