Active Prince William

Advancing active mobility in greater Prince William, Virginia

Category: Transportation (Page 1 of 13)

Promote Public Input on New Transportation Funding Requests BEFORE the Local Governing Body’s Endorsement

February 19, 2024 /

Active Prince William believes that early and proactive community involvement in the development of significant transportation improvement and planning projects would better integrate the community’s needs and preferences into the selection and scope of those projects.

Presently, however, the Prince William Board of County Supervisors (and the local governing bodies for greater Prince William’s cities and towns) routinely endorse staff recommendations for non-local transportation funding requests with minimal public notice or opportunities for citizen comment.

Typically, the public first learns of such funding requests for new transportation projects by discovering them on a Consent Agenda for an upcoming governing body meeting, held before any public comment period.  This lack of transparent decision-making, limited public notice, and precluded public comment effectively deprives the public of any opportunity to meaningfully influence the nature and scope of the transportation projects that are advanced for funding.

In the Fall of 2023, we included the following question in our survey for all Prince William Board of County Supervisor candidates:

Question 1: Do you support requiring the PWC [Prince William County] Department of Transportation to hold advertised public hearings before the Board of County Supervisors [BOCS] is scheduled to endorse any future applications for regional (e.g., NVTA, NVTC Commuter Choice), state, or federal transportation improvement funds?

Four of the current BOCS members (Andrea Bailey, Deshundra Jefferson, Bob Weir, and Margaret Franklin) responded “Yes”, three others (Victor Angry, Tom Gordy, and Kenny Boddye) selected “Need more information”, and nobody selected “No”.

To not burden the already-crowded BOCS meeting agendas, this public comment on the County’s proposed new transportation funding requests could be solicited at standalone public meetings or at a scheduled meeting of an appropriate advisory body, such as the Prince William County Planning Commission.  Ideally, however, 1) public input would also be solicited online, 2) any staff presentation and advertised public hearing would include a virtual meeting component, and 3) the PWC Department of Transportation would be required to provide both a written summary of the public comments received and a written response to those public comments.

Since non-local transportation funding programs typically have an annual or biennial schedule for new project submissions that is announced many months in advance, the Prince William County Department of Transportation should be able to present all their proposals for new transportation projects being considered in the coming months at one or two consolidated advertised public hearings each year.

We call on the Prince William Board of County Supervisors to issue a directive to the Prince William County Executive with the following components:

  1.  Require the Prince William County Department of Transportation (PWC DOT) to present–for public comment at an advertised public hearing–any proposed first-time request for regional, state, or federal funding for a new transportation or trail capital project or planning activity, in advance of bringing that funding request to the Board of County Supervisors for its endorsement.
  2. Cite all applicable non-local funding programs, including the Northern Virginia Transportation Authority’s (NVTA) 70% and 30% funds; federal RSTP or CMAQ allocations which are endorsed by the NVTA; the Northern Virginia Transportation Commission’s (NVTC) I-66 and I-95/I-395 Commuter Choice programs; National Capital Region Transportation Planning Board (TPB) technical assistance grants (e.g., Transportation-Land Use Connections, Transit within Reach, Regional Roadway, Safety Program); Transportation Alternatives Set-Aside requests submitted to either the TPB or VDOT; VDOT’s SMART SCALE, Revenue Sharing, and HSIP programs; the Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation’s Recreational Trails Program; USDOT discretionary grant programs (e.g., RAISE, SS4A); Congressional earmark requests; and the Federal Transit Administration’s Enhanced Mobility Program.
  3. Allow the PWC DOT to conduct these public hearings at any appropriate venue that includes online viewing and public comment submission components, including at scheduled Planning Commission meetings.
  4. Specify that the public hearing must be held at least 30 to 60 days before the endorsement request is scheduled to be placed on the BOCS agenda.
  5. Require the PWC DOT to compile a written summary of–and response to–the public comments received and include that summary with the other BOCS meeting materials when they present their funding request for BOCS approval.

We believe that the process outlined above would provide valuable community input–near the very beginning of the project development process–for both the PWC Department of Transportation and the Board of County Supervisors.

The Rte 234/Brentsville Rd Interchange Needs Better Bike & Ped Access to and from Bus. Rte 234/Dumfries Rd

February 11, 2024 /

Routing for bicyclists and pedestrians in the approved Route 234/Brentsville Road Interchange Project design

In early February 2024, Active Prince William asked the Prince William County Department of Transportation to improve pedestrian and bicycle access and safety between the Business Route 234/Dumfries Road corridor in the vicinity of Godwin Drive and the Route 234/Brentsville Road Interchange project, which is nearing the end of its construction.  County staff replied that they will look into our request but did not commit to any action.  Our written request is copied below.

Potomac Local’s recent update on the Route 234/Brentsville Road Interchange project reported that this $55 million project is currently $2 million under budget.

We are inquiring about the County’s plans for safe and convenient pedestrian and bicycle access along the Business Route 234/Dumfries Road corridor between the new interchange and the City of Manassas.  From previous correspondence, Mr. Belita indicated a ten-foot wide shared use path will be built along the west side of Business Route 234/Dumfries Road between the Bradley Cemetery Way area and Godwin Drive.

We firmly believe that 10-foot wide shared use paths are needed along both sides of Business Route 234 to provide reasonable and much-needed pedestrian and bicycle access to and from this Interchange.

Along the west side of Business Route 234, the shared-use path between at least Godwin Drive and the Bradley Cemetery Way area will provide safe foot and bicycle access to and from Godwin Drive heading west (including to the adjacent Mayfield Trace community) and could also connect to a future northwestern extension of the regionally significant shared-use path along the Prince William Parkway leading from the Brentsville Road Interchange.  In addition, the nearest shared-use path within the City of Manassas is along the west side of Business Route 234, between Hastings Drive and Donner Drive.

Along the east side of Business Route 234, a shared-use path from the Bradley Cemetery Way area would provide optimal access to the shared-use paths being built within this Interchange project that a) head south to cross over Route 234 to reach both Brentsville Rd heading south and the existing regional path along southbound Route 234 and that b) meander east through the Interchange to reach Liberia Avenue Extended/Route 294 toward Manassas.

A shared-use path along the east side of Business Route 234 would optimally connect to the existing Bradley Square townhome development and the proposed Bradley South (REZ2003-00027) development.  From Bradley Manor Place, the existing Bradley Square subdivision streets readily lead to South Grant Avenue in the City of Manassas, a pleasant, existing low-traffic route for bicycling and walking that connects to Wellington Road (and from there to downtown Manassas via multiple routes).

We are disappointed that the current Bradley South rezoning proposal is rather inhospitable for bicycling and walking.  Business Route 234/Dumfries Road would have a 50 MPH design speed and a 45 MPH posted speed limit, and the developer of Bradley South would only be required to proffer a sidewalk along the east side of Dumfries Rd.  By contrast, the connecting segment of Dumfries Road at the south end of the City of Manassas has only a 35 MPH posted speed limit (which is better but also too high in our opinion).

Furthermore, with continued residential, commercial, and mixed-use development along the Business Route 234/Dumfries Road corridor (including the Prince William County Fairgrounds), just south of the Manassas City Limits, the density of development will be comparable to that planned along Centreville Road (Route 28) in Yorkshire.

We ask that the budget surplus from this project and proffers from the Bradley South rezoning be used to provide a 10-foot wide shared-use path along the east side of that roadway (Dumfries Rd), from the Bradley Cemetery Way area to at least Bradley Manor Place.

Beyond that, to the extent feasible, the Interchange Project budget should also provide much-needed pedestrian infrastructure for crossing Business Route 234/Dumfries Road at Godwin Drive, including high-visibility crosswalks, at least one raised pedestrian crossing refuge within the roadway median, and either a pedestrian-activated crossing beacon (e.g., HAWK signal) or a conventional traffic signal with full pedestrian crossing components for at least two of the existing intersection legs.

Please let us know how the Route 234/Brentsville Road Interchange Project will suitably accommodate active mobility to and from the already well populated Business Route 234/Dumfries Road corridor.

Without safe and convenient foot and bike connections to the new Interchange from Business Route 234, the new Interchange will degrade active mobility to and from that populated corridor, and the new active transportation infrastructure within the interchange will be very underutilized.  Waiting five or more years for possible future rezonings along Business Route 234/Dumfries Road is not acceptable to complete these critical sections.

If the surplus funds from the Interchange project cannot be tapped to build either another shared-use path or a signalized pedestrian crossing of Business Route 234/Dumfries Road at Godwin Drive, we believe that low-cost or no-cost alternative interim improvements could readily be implemented along the east side of Business Route 234/Dumfries Road that would still substantially improve pedestrian and bicycle access and safety between the Bradley Cemetery Way area and Bradley Manor Place.

Google Street View shows that–before the Interchange was constructed–the paved width of Business Route 234/Dumfries Road was already about four or five lanes wide (i..e., 48 to 60 feet of asphalt pavement) for most of the distance between Bradley Cemetery Way and Bradley Manor Place.  There appears to be only a short stretch between Godwin Drive and the south end of Bradley Square where the pavement narrows to about 36 feet, but only two lanes are presently needed for vehicular travel along that segment.

Thus, the restriping of that roadway segment (with or without any asphalt resurfacing) should allow for at least a continuous 10-foot or wider northbound paved shoulder area leading up to the long right-turn-only lane approaching Bradley Manor Place.  That shoulder area could be protected from roadway traffic with some sort of hard physical barrier to serve as an interim shared-use path along the east side of Business Route 234/Dumfries Road between the Bradley Cemetery Way area and Bradley Manor Place.

This recent photo (below) of northbound Route 234 Business/Dumfries Road near Bradley Cemetery Way shows that a wide paved shoulder is already present at that location.  While less wide than optimal, that existing paved shoulder could serve as an interim two-way shared-use path if it’s protected from the roadway traffic with a suitable hard barrier.

Northbound Business Route 234/Dumfries Road just north of the Interchange on February5, 2024

In addition, a striped conventional bike lane in each direction may also be feasible.  In the southbound direction, a striped on-road bike lane would be especially useful, from the Manassas City Line to Godwin Drive, for the dozens of bicyclists who participate in Bull Run Bicycles Tuesday Evening Shop Ride, almost every Tuesday evening during daylight saving time.  South of Godwin Drive, a southbound bike lane should not be needed because a new shared-use path will be located along that segment.

Finally, we again request that whatever pedestrian and bicycling improvements cannot be accomplished under the current Interchange project become required proffers as part of the Bradley South rezoning.

Our Comments for the National Capital Trail Network Update in Greater Prince William

October 31, 2023 /

October 2023 draft update of the National Capital Trail Network in greater Prince William.  The green lines are supposed to depict existing trail segments, whereas the purple lines are supposed to depict “planned” trail segments.

The National Capital Trail Network (NCTN) is a 1,400-mile, continuous network of long-distance, off-street trails, serving the entire [metropolitan Washington] region and consisting of both existing and planned segments.  The network was approved by the National Capital Region Transportation Planning Board (TPB) in July 2020 and endorsed by the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments Board of Directors in August 2020.

As described by TPB staff:  The National Capital Trail Network is intended to be a network of long-distance, off-street facilities. It will be accessible for people of all ages and abilities, designed for non-motorized use, and suitable for both transportation and recreation.  Off-street path width minimums are 10 feet for new construction, 8 feet for existing paths. Paths must be paved or firm surface. On-street facilities must be protected from moving traffic (i.e. parked cars, curbs, or flexposts). All facilities must be directly connected to the network. Short on-street connections on low-volume, low speed streets are permitted to maintain network continuity. Facilities can be existing or planned, but they must be in an approved agency plan.

In June 2022, the TPB adopted a resolution (R18-2022) that called for completing the TPB’s National Capital Trail Network by 2030, as one of seven priority strategies for reducing greenhouse gas emissions from surface transportation in the Washington region.

For at least several months, the TPB staff have sought to engage the region’s localities to submit updates and corrections to the NCTN map.  The main purpose of this update is to measure progress, in miles built, toward the completion of the National Capital Trail Network since its adoption in 2020. Other purposes include adjusting routes where the existing route has proven infeasible or undesirable, addition of new routes where a new plan or new development justifies it, and correction of errors or omissions in the network [emphasis added].

To facilitate this update, Active Prince William submitted the comments below on October 30, 2023.

Comments on the Draft Update to the National Capital Trail Network Map for Prince William County and the City of Manassas
by Allen Muchnick, Co-Chair Active Prince William

1) Nonexistent/”Planned” Trail Segments Erroneously Labeled As “Existing”:  The following segments on the NCTN map should be relabeled as “planned” because they do not currently exist.

  • Nokesville Rd/Rte 28 between the Fauquier County Line and Fitzwater Dr in Nokesville. The segment of Rte 28 west of Fitzwater Dr in Nokesville has not been widened.  It’s still a two-lane road without any bicycle or pedestrian facilities.
  • Minnieville Rd, between Old Bridge Rd and Dumfries Rd, is depicted as having an existing shared use path along it except for the segment (TIP_ID BP11611) between Fowke Ln and Cardinal Drive. However, the NCTN update map erroneously shows this planned segment with a southwest terminus at Smoketown Rd, rather than at Cardinal Dr.  The segment of Minnieville Rd that currently lacks any bicycle facilities is much longer than shown on the NCTN update map.

2) NCTN Segments Currently Labeled As Planned That Have Recently Been Completed:  The following NCTN segments should now be relabeled as “existing”.

  • Nokesville Rd/Rte 28 Shared-Use Path, between Godwin Dr and the PWC Line, in the City of Manassas (TIP_ID 11606).
  • Godwin Dr Shared-Use Path (south), between Wellington Rd and the Winters Branch Trail, in the City of Manassas (TIP_ID BP11604). Note: TIP_ID BP7624 appears to be a duplicate path, possibly on the PWC side of Godwin Dr, which is probably not actually planned and, if so, should be deleted from the map.
  • US-1 Shared-Use Path in North Woodbridge (southern segment of TIP_ID BP7634): The segment between Annapolis Way and Gordon Blvd is complete.
  • Blackburn Rd Shared-Use Path near Neabsco Creek (the bulk of TIP_ID BP7641): The segment between Rippon Blvd and Good Shepherd Lutheran Church is complete.
  • Wellington Rd Shared-Use Path (the western end of TIP_ID 7632): The segment between Linton Hall Rd and University Blvd near Gainesville/Virginia Gateway is complete.
  • VA 234/Dumfries Rd Shared-Use Path (TIP_ID BP7639): This former gap segment between Country Club Dr and Exeter Dr near Montclair is complete.

3) Planned NCTN Segments Depicted On An Erroneous Alignment:

4) Planned NCTN Segments That Should Be Updated: 

  • Manassas Dr east of Signal View Dr in Manassas Park (TIP-ID BP7643): The new Manassas Park Active Transportation Plan identifies an even larger segment of eastern Manassas Dr (between Railroad Dr and Blooms Park) as a candidate for bicycle lanes implemented with a road diet (Project B-10). The NCTN map currently labels the segment of Manassas Dr east of Signal View Dr as planned for a shared-use path.

5) Nationally Significant Long-Distance Trails That Should Be Added to the NCTN Map As “Planned NCTN Segments”:

  • US Bicycle Route 1: At present, a considerable portion of US Bicycle Route 1 through Prince William County is quite hostile to bicycling, even by experienced cyclists.  However, the segments of this route along Fleetwood Dr (Fauquier County Line to Aden Rd), Aden Rd (Fleetwood Dr to Bristow Rd), Bristow Rd (Aden Rd to Independent Hill Dr), Independent Hill Rd (Bristow Rd to Route 234), all of Hoadly Rd, Minnieville Rd (the segment missing a shared-use path from Prince William Pkwy to Fowke Ln), and Old Bridge Rd (Minnieville Rd to Tanyard Hill Rd) are all identified for future shared-use paths in Prince William County’s December 2022 Comprehensive Plan and therefore should be depicted as Planned NCTN segments on the updated NCTN map.
  • East Coast Greenway and Potomac Heritage National Scenic Trail: Except to depict existing or planned sidepaths along Route 1, the current NCTN map does not depict most of the planned ultimate route(s) for the East Coast Greenway and the paved, shared-use segments of the Potomac Heritage National Scenic Trail through Prince William County.  The updated NCTN map should depict those planned routes.

###

Our Questionnaire for All 2023 PWC BOCS Candidates

September 25, 2023 /

Active Prince William emailed the following questionnaire to all 2023 nominees for Prince William Board of County Supervisors seats on September 28, 2023.  We will post each candidate’s responses below each question once we receive them. After October 20, we will also identify those candidates who have declined to respond to this questionnaire.

Please note:  As a non-partisan advocacy organization, Active Prince William will NEVER endorse or oppose any candidate for elected office.  The candidates’ responses (and non-responses) are recorded below–in the order received–simply to educate the voting public.

Active Prince William’s Questionnaire for All 2023 Candidates for the Prince William Board of County Supervisors (BOCS)

Active Prince William is an all-volunteer education and advocacy organization that seeks better walking, bicycling, and public transportation options in greater Prince William, Virginia, to create more livable, equitable, and sustainable communities.

This survey, intended for all nominated 2023 BOCS candidates, asks several multiple-choice questions concerning our organization’s current issue priorities. Each question, highlighted in bold, is preceded or followed with brief background information. Candidates are invited to elaborate on their answers in the final question.

For a few of the questions, we’ve recently added more background information.  The newly added information is underlined and bracketed by *** at the beginning and end and also shown here in a red font.

Candidate responses will be posted verbatim on Active Prince William’s website, to inform voters about your positions regarding these issues. Thank you in advance for completing our questionnaire!

Please feel free to email us at [email protected] if you need more information or clarification regarding any of these questions.

Early and proactive community involvement in the development of significant transportation improvement projects ensures that the community’s needs and preferences are well integrated into the selection and scope of those projects.  Currently, however, the Board of County Supervisors routinely endorses staff recommendations for non-local transportation funding requests with minimal public notice or opportunities for citizen comment.

*** If the BOCS were to require the PWC Department of Transportation to present–at one annual advertised public hearing–all transportation projects being considered in the coming year for various non-local transportation funding programs, both the Department and the BOCS could obtain valuable community input near the very beginning of the project development process. ***

Question 1:  Do you support requiring the PWC Department of Transportation to hold advertised public hearings before the Board of County Supervisors is scheduled to endorse any future applications for regional (e.g., NVTA, NVTC Commuter Choice), state, or federal transportation improvement funds? *

        Yes:
  • Andrea Bailey, Potomac District (incumbent)
  • Verndell Robinson, Potomac District
  • Deshundra Jefferson, Chairman At Large
  • Bob Weir, Gainesville District (incumbent)
  • Margaret Franklin, Woodbridge District (incumbent)
 
        Need more information:
  • Victor Angry, Neabsco District (incumbent)
  • Tom Gordy, Brentsville District
  • Kenny Boddye, Occoquan District (incumbent)

Except for Prince William County, virtually every local governing body in our region has an adopted master plan for active mobility (walking, rolling, and bicycling) that articulates policies, programs, and strategic actions to effectively and expeditiously develop well-connected pedestrian, bikeway, and trail networks; provide equitable non-motorized access and mobility for the entire community; and ensure the safety of vulnerable road users. 

Question 2:  Do you support directing the County’s Planning Office, Department of Transportation, and Department of Parks & Recreation to jointly develop a robust countywide plan for expanding active mobility (pedestrian, bikeway, and trails) infrastructure and programs, ideally using an extensive community engagement process and hiring an experienced outside consultant team, well versed in suburban active mobility planning, to organize and coordinate this vital community planning initiative?*

        Yes:
  • Victor Angry, Neabsco District (incumbent)
  • Tom Gordy, Brentsville District
  • Kenny Boddye, Occoquan District (incumbent)
  • Andrea Bailey, Potomac District (incumbent)
  • Verndell Robinson, Potomac District
  • Deshundra Jefferson, Chairman At Large
  • Bob Weir, Gainesville District (incumbent)
  • Margaret Franklin, Woodbridge District (incumbent)
 
        Need more information:

Prince William County is fortuitously situated along four designated long-distance non-motorized or multi-modal travel routes; namely, the Potomac Heritage National Scenic Trail, the East Coast Greenway, the Washington-Rochambeau Revolutionary Route, and U.S. Bicycle Route 1.   (The first three routes listed above would meander along the Route 1/I-95 corridor between the Town of Occoquan and Triangle, whereas US Bicycle Route 1 runs generally southwest from the Town of Occoquan to Independent Hill and Aden, exiting the County on Fleetwood Drive).  In addition, both the National Capital Region Transportation Planning Board (TPB) and the MWCOG Board of Directors endorsed a 1,400-mile National Capital Trail Network in the summer of 2020, and, in June 2022, the TPB adopted a transportation-sector climate strategy to complete all currently planned segments of the National Capital Trail Network by 2030.

Question 3:  Do you support a formal commitment by the Board of County Supervisors to complete all planned Prince William County segments of the National Capital Trail Network, the Potomac Heritage National Scenic Trail, and the East Coast Greenway by the year 2030? *

        Yes:
  • Victor Angry, Neabsco District (incumbent)
  • Tom Gordy, Brentsville District
  • Kenny Boddye, Occoquan District (incumbent)
  • Andrea Bailey, Potomac District (incumbent)
  • Deshundra Jefferson, Chairman At Large
  • Bob Weir, Gainesville District (incumbent)
  • Margaret Franklin, Woodbridge District (incumbent)
         Need more information:
  • Verndell Robinson, Potomac District

Most large NoVA localities, including Fairfax County, Arlington, and Alexandria, have citizen transportation advisory commissions—appointed by and reporting to the governing body–to act as community advocates, assist with public outreach, and give timely advice to the governing body on diverse transportation issues, policies, planning, programming, and project designs and features.   (Loudoun County still only has a Transit Advisory Board that is focused on public transportation).

*** Several years ago, the BOCS directed the PWC Department of Transportation to engage the Planning Commission as a transportation advisory body.  However, that initiative has not produced effective citizen involvement: planning commissioners may lack transportation policy expertise; the transportation project briefings are an added burden; and the meetings have not allowed meaningful public comment on transportation matters. ***

Question 4:  Do you support having the Board of County Supervisors establish a citizen Transportation Advisory Commission that is separate from the Planning Commission?*

        Yes:

  • Victor Angry, Neabsco District (incumbent)
  • Tom Gordy, Brentsville District
  • Andrea Bailey, Potomac District (incumbent)
  • Verndell Robinson, Potomac District
  • Bob Weir, Gainesville District (incumbent)
        Need more information:
  • Kenny Boddye, Occoquan District (incumbent)
  • Deshundra Jefferson, Chairman At Large
  • Margaret Franklin, Woodbridge District (incumbent)

Over the past decade, Fairfax County and other Virginia localities have actively used VDOT’s scheduled roadway resurfacing program to cost-effectively reconfigure scores of roadways to improve safe access for people walking and bicycling.

Question 5:  Do you support directing the PWC Department of Transportation to actively engage with VDOT’s annual roadway repaving program to cost-effectively reallocate existing roadway space to better serve pedestrians, bicyclists, transit riders, and motorists?*

        Yes:
  • Victor Angry, Neabsco District (incumbent)
  • Tom Gordy, Brentsville District
  • Kenny Boddye, Occoquan District (incumbent)
  • Andrea Bailey, Potomac District (incumbent)
  • Deshundra Jefferson, Chairman At Large
  • Margaret Franklin, Woodbridge District (incumbent)
        Need more information:
  • Verndell Robinson, Potomac District
  • Bob Weir, Gainesville District (incumbent)

The proposed Route 28 Bypass (Godwin Drive Extension) along the Flat Branch and Bull Run floodplains would remove more than 50 affordable housing units in a designated Equity Emphasis Area, establish a permanent freeway barrier between the West Gate/Sudley and Loch Lomond communities, foster more exurban sprawl and long-distance drive-alone commuting from west and south of Prince William County, and increase traffic congestion and delays along Centreville Road in Fairfax County.  Moreover, due to inflation since 2019, the roughly $300 million already earmarked for this project (including $200 million from the County’s 2019 transportation bond referendum that PWC taxpayers would then repay over perhaps two decades) may not cover all construction costs. 

Meanwhile, both our organization and the Prince William County Trails and Blueways Council have formally commented that the recently proposed shared-use path component of this highway project is substantially inadequate.

Question 6a:  Do you agree than any Route 28 Bypass should include a robust shared-use path component–both along and across the Flat Branch stream valley and with multiple connections to the adjacent neighborhoods—as recommended by both the Trails and Blueways Council and Active Prince William?*

        Yes:
  • Tom Gordy, Brentsville District
  • Kenny Boddye, Occoquan District (incumbent)
  • Andrea Bailey, Potomac District (incumbent)
  • Deshundra Jefferson, Chairman At Large
  • Bob Weir, Gainesville District (incumbent)
  • Margaret Franklin, Woodbridge District (incumbent)
        Need more information:
  • Victor Angry, Neabsco District (incumbent)
  • Verndell Robinson, Potomac District

Question 6b, also related to the proposed Route 28 Bypass:  Would you support asking the Upper Occoquan Service Authority (UOSA) to grant immediate public access to UOSA’s existing service road along this corridor as a key component of a shared-path network along and across the Flat Branch stream valley?*

        Yes:
  • Victor Angry, Neabsco District (incumbent)
  • Tom Gordy, Brentsville District
  • Kenny Boddye, Occoquan District (incumbent)
  • Andrea Bailey, Potomac District (incumbent)
  • Deshundra Jefferson, Chairman At Large
        Need more information:
  • Verndell Robinson, Potomac District
  • Bob Weir, Gainesville District (incumbent)
  • Margaret Franklin, Woodbridge District (incumbent)

Question 6c, also related to the proposed Route 28 Bypass:   When this highway project’s design, costs, and myriad impacts are more fully known in spring 2024, would you support the Board of County Supervisors objectively reevaluating the pros and cons of this controversial project and considering significant modifications or even a partial or full cancellation?*

*** On October 10, 2023, the BOCS authorized pursuing a potential alternative alignment (“Modified Alternative 2A”) that would not cross Bull Run into Fairfax County, because Alternative 2B, which was advanced for preliminary engineering in September 2020, may not be feasible for various reasons (cost, project impacts, and/or right-of-way acquisition issues).  Besides displacing additional affordable dwelling units, Modified Alternative 2A would create a substantial new bottleneck on Centreville Road in Yorkshire, necessitating an additional bridge and road-widening project in both Fairfax and Prince William Counties. ***

[As examples, substantial project changes might include 1) use automated tolling to both finance construction (in lieu of County bonds) and manage transportation demand and/or 2) construct the project segment across and north of Bull Run with the existing NVTA funds and separately expand Old Centreville Rd (possibly as part of an extended multi-locality, multi-modal transit-oriented-development corridor)–in lieu of extending Godwin Dr–to reduce net residential displacements and preserve the Flat Branch stream valley as valuable and much-needed regional parkland.]

        Yes:
  • Tom Gordy, Brentsville District
  • Verndell Robinson, Potomac District
  • Bob Weir, Gainesville District (incumbent)
        Need more information:
  • Victor Angry, Neabsco District (incumbent)
  • Kenny Boddye, Occoquan District (incumbent)
  • Andrea Bailey, Potomac District (incumbent)
  • Deshundra Jefferson, Chairman At Large
  • Margaret Franklin, Woodbridge District (incumbent)
Question 7 (Optional): What else would you like to share about your responses above and/or your views of active mobility and/or public transportation in Prince William County? You are welcome to elaborate here on any or all of your responses above and to provide any additional information that you wish to share with Prince William County voters.   See below for all responses received.

Tom Gordy, Brentsville District:

I am an outdoorsman. I love fishing, kayaking, hiking, boating, and fishing. I also travel extensively due to being a Navy Reservist and have been tremendously impressed by the trail networks in German cities like Stuttgart, where you see families spending their weekends on bike trails visiting local recreational sites and historical sites along with the occasional beer garden. I have a vision to be able to get from the Potomac to the Manassas Battlefield by trail, visiting local, state and national parks, and agribusinesses and agritourism sites along the way. I also support providing more and better access for blue trails in the county that allow residents to experience all of the beauty our county has to offer. Providing more bikeable and walkable communities must be a priority, but that means having a more disciplined and intentional planning and development program. Thank you for what you are doing to support these initiatives. You will always have an open door with and advocate in me if I am honored to be elected.

Kenny Boddye, Occoquan District (incumbent):

I’m committed to more transparency as it pertains to mobility in Prince William County. I gave a directive several years ago to have large scale transportation projects and grant applications heard at the Planning Commission level, which hadn’t been done before. I also still support creation of a Mobility subcommittee of the Planning Commission.

I’ve also been a vocal supporter of more robust multi-modal transportation planning. I supported and gained additional suuport for the DRPT Springfield to Quantico Enhanced Public Transportation Feasibility Study. I endorsed the Mobility chapter updates and Future Transportation Alternatives of the new Comprehensive Plan; I also directed staff to improve upon them by adding the aspirational trails map drafted by the Trails and Blueways Council. Finally, I had BOCS support for exploring bi-directional HOV lanes on I-95 added to the Comprehensive Plan Update.

I’ve also been an advocate for ped/bike/motorist safety improvements. Last year I called for a BOCS Work Session on Traffic Safety, which led to the creation of pilot programs for red light cameras and speed cameras, as well as the county getting a grant to develop its first Comprehensive Traffic Safety Plan.

Andrea Bailey, Potomac District (incumbent):

This application/questionnaire intrigued me because I am a strong advocate of improvements in transportation and mobility. I serve on the NVRC and PRTC Boards. Both boards have made major impacts on data driven solutions to improve mobility and community engaged changes for citizens to enjoy and travel in Northern Virginia. I believe that citizen participation is necessary to create transparency of needs in our region.

I need more information on item 6c in order to give a definite answer.

Verndell Robinson, Potomac District:

#3 Does this include the Potomac Tech Park that is planned next to Forest Park?

#5 What are the requirements for applying for the VDOT scheduled roadway resurfacing program?

#6a & b: this needs to be studied to determine an answer.

Deshundra Jefferson, Chairman At Large:

I am committed to using a multimodal approach to make it easier to get around the county, and I look forward to working with you to make that happen.

###

Our May 2023 Comments on the Route 28 Bypass Project

May 9, 2023 /

On April 19 and 20, 2023, the Prince William County Department of Transportation held a pair of public information meetings to present the status of its Route 28 Bypass project at roughly the 30% design stage.  In response to the information presented, Active Prince William submitted the following written comments on May 3, 2023.

Related Update:  On May 23, 2023, the Prince William County Trails and Blueways Council unanimously adopted this resolution that also calls for better shared-use path connections in the Route 28 Bypass project.

Please consider these comments on the Route 28 Bypass, based on information that was presented at the April 19 and 20 Route 28 Bypass Project Public Information Meetings:

Traffic and Environmental Studies, Sustainability, and Cost Comments

The ongoing traffic forecast and environmental studies for the Bypass should report relevant data that will help the public, the Prince William Board of County Supervisors, environmental oversight agencies, and other stakeholders determine whether building this highway project would be a prudent investment for both our region and for Prince William County taxpayers.

 1.  Please report the additional Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) and Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions this project would generate vs. the no-build alternative.

Justification:  The information will help the PWC BOCS make an informed decision about the project as it weighs competing priorities about the environment and sustainability, including consistency with Visualize 2050’s policies and the objectives of the County’s own Community Energy and Sustainability Master Plan.

2.  Please report the additional noise and air pollution this project would generate within ½ mile of the corridor vs. the no-build alternative.

Justification:  Understanding the full impacts on nearby property owners within an Equity Emphasis Area that would lack direct access to the roadway facility is paramount for PWC BOCS to make strategic future decisions about this project vs. other priorities.

3.  Please report the residency locations of the projected Route 28 Bypass users; in particular, what percentage of projected highway users would reside in a) Prince William County, b) the City of Manassas, c) localities west or south of Prince William County, and d) localities north or east of Prince William County?

Justification:  With 90%+ of the cost of the project being funded by PWC taxpayers via NVTA and the 2019 Mobility Bond, this is useful information to help the PWC BOCS make strategic future decisions about this project vs. other priorities.

4.  Please report an updated project cost estimate based on the 30% design.

Justification:  With highway construction costs increasing by 50% in the past two years, it is difficult for stakeholders to understand the viability of a 2019 $300M cost estimate as the PWC BOCS plans to invest significant taxpayer $$$ into the project soon.

* * *

Shared Use Path/Trail Comments

If located in most other suburban communities, the Flat Branch stream valley would have been developed–decades ago–as a linear regional park, with non-motorized access serving and unifying the communities on either side.  Because the County has long reserved this corridor for a potential future freeway, the development of such a stream valley park has been delayed for decades.  Construction of the Bypass would establish a permanent man-made physical highway barrier between the equity-emphasis-area communities on each side.  In the interests of environmental justice and sustainable transportation, it is essential that the Bypass include a robust network of paved (and natural-surface) trails for transportation and recreation, both along and across the stream valley.

* * *

5.  Please consider relocating the adjoining shared-use path–along the Bypass segment between Sudley Rd and the Bypass bridge over Flat Branch–to follow the west side of the Bypass, to facilitate access from the Fairmont, West Gate, and Sudley communities.

In addition, build local asphalt shared-path connections between the relocated shared-use path along the west side of the Bypass to the Fairmont, West Gate, and Sudley neighborhoods from at least these five locations:

Also, please ensure that all shared-use paths are generally designed to be as flat/level as the Bypass roadway, except where needed to achieve grade-separated roadway or stream crossings.  Provide physical barriers between the shared-use path and the roadway–such as non-mountable concrete curbs and/or jersey barriers–especially wherever the grass buffer between the shared-use path and the roadway would be less than eight feet wide

Justifications:  The Flat Branch stream would limit and complicate access to any shared-use path along the east side of the Bypass from the neighborhoods in Loch Lomond; any shared-use  along the Bypass requires frequently spaced connections to nearby neighborhoods for reasonable access by foot or bicycle; and any shared-use path near the Bypass must provide a physical barrier from roadway departures by high-speed motor vehicles.

 *  *  *

6.  Please consider developing and improving the existing UOSA access road to the east of the Bypass as a second, better separated shared-use path , with trail bridge connections across Flat Branch and its tributaries to serve the Loch Lomond neighborhood between Sudley Rd and Splashdown Waterpark.  This shared-use path should be extended beyond the current northern end of the UOSA access road, to parallel the remainder of the Bypass to its northern terminus along its east side.  Trails along UOSA easements are common in Fairfax County.

In addition, provide access to the UOSA access road/future shared-use path along the east side of the Bypass from the Loch Lomond neighborhood via asphalt shared-use paths (with ped/bike trail bridges across Flat Branch and/or its tributaries where necessary) from at least these eight locations:

Use trail underpasses in stream box culverts, the Bypass bridge over Flat Branch, or along both sides of Lomond Dr to connect the shared-use path along the current UOSA access road to the relocated shared-use path along the west side of the Bypass and from there to the Fairmont, West Gate, and Sudley communities.

Justification:  The area along Flat Branch should be developed into a linear park for enjoyment by the surrounding communities that would lack direct access to the new roadway.  By providing shared-use paths along both sides of the Bypass, the shared-use path connections under the Bypass would become much more effective in linking the low- and moderate-income, majority-minority communities that the Bypass would otherwise permanently sever

* * *

7.  Please design a shared-use path /trail connection under the Bypass bridge that crosses over Flat Branch.

Justification:  This connection would provide non-motorized access between communities on the east and west of the Bypass and provide communities on the east side of the Bypass with access to Splashdown Waterpark, thus reducing vehicle trips along neighborhood streets.  Moreover, north of the Bypass bridge over Flat Branch, only one shared-use path would be provided along the Bypass, on its east side, and the UOSA access road ends south of that crossing .  In other words, this trail connection would extend any adjacent shared-use path that begins on the west side of the Bypass at Sudley Rd though the remainder of the Bypass route.

* * *

8.  Please consider leaving all or part of the existing Old Centreville Rd Bridge over Bull Run in place as the Ped/Bike connection over the waterway.

Justification:  This reduces the cost to the project and is a much more pleasant access point and amenity to the surrounding community than walking or biking next to a 45-mph roadway

* * *

9.  Please consider including as part of the project planting hundreds/thousands of canopy trees to absorb and filter stormwater, reduce highway noise in the adjoining neighborhoods, and provide much-needed shade for trail users in warm and hot weather.  The trail(s) should also include user amenities such as trail lighting, benches, and trash receptacles.

Justification:  This project clearly bisects Equity Emphasis Areas while simultaneously not providing them access to the roadway.  It is imperative to add trail, park, and flood control amenities with the project to support the surrounding community.

* * *

Roadway Comments

10.  Please consider implementing a Continuous Green-T intersection at Route 28 Bypass/Old Centreville intersection.

Justification:  This allows for a non-stop southbound trip between existing Route 28 and Sudley Rd.

11.  Please consider providing some form of [emergency or uncontrolled] left turn capacity from Northbound Route 28 Bypass to Ordway Rd.

Justification:  During  incidents  in or around the Route 28/Compton Rd intersection, this capacity would provide a relief valve to clear traffic congestion more quickly

12.  Please consider adding a left turn from Route 28 Northbound to Route 28 Bypass Southbound (with access to Ordway Rd) and removing both left turns from Route 28 Compton Rd intersection.

Justification:  This creates a third light phase to the Route 28 Bypass/Route 28 intersection and reduces the Compton Rd/Route 28 intersection to three light phases.  Access via Ordway Rd provides the route to Compton Rd.  This will improve synchronization between the two adjacent light signals (Route 28/Route 28 Bypass & Route 28/Compton Rd).

* * *

Thank you for soliciting public comments at this early stage of project design.  We would be happy to meet with members of the project team to discuss these comments in more detail.

Sincerely,

Mark and Allen

Mark Scheufler & Allen Muchnick, Co-Chairs
Active Prince William
Advancing active mobility for a more livable, equitable, & sustainable greater Prince William, Virginia
Email: [email protected]
Website: www.activepw.org
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/ActivePW
Twitter: @Active_PW https://twitter.com/Active_PW

###

« Older posts

Archives

© 2024 Active Prince William

Theme by Anders Noren — Up ↑