Date: December 9, 2014 | Time: 10:00 a.m. - 12:00 p.m. | Location: Rooms 9 & 10, Government Center
Agenda
- Approval of Minutes of the September 16, 2014, Meeting
- I-66 (Beltway to Haymarket) – Renee Hamilton, VDOT
- Dulles Metrorail Silver Line Phase 2 Status and Funding – Mark Canale (FCDOT) and Joe LaHait (DMB)
- Richmond Highway Transit Alternatives Study – Leonard Wolfenstein and Tom Burke (FCDOT), Marianne Gardner (DPZ) and Liz Hagg (OCR)
- Herndon Metrorail Station Access Management Study – Kris Morley-Nikfar (FCDOT)
- Possible Policy on Snow Removal from Sidewalks – Eric Teitelman (FCDOT)
- New Business
Minutes
Members in Attendance
Supervisor Jeff McKay, Chair
Chairman Sharon Bulova
Supervisor John Cook
Supervisor John Foust
Supervisor Michael Frey
Supervisor Penny Gross
Supervisor Pat Herrity
Supervisor Catherine Hudgins
Supervisor Gerald Hyland
Supervisor Linda Smyth
Members in Absent:
Supervisor John Foust
County Executive: Edward L. Long Jr. and Deputy County Executive Robert A. Stalzer
Supervisor McKay called the meeting to order at 10:05 a.m.
1. Approval of Minutes of Previous Meeting
The minutes of the September 16, 2014, meeting were approved unanimously.
2. I-66 Corridor Improvement Project (Beltway to Haymarket)
Lauren Mollerup, VDOT, introduced Terry Yates, Arlington & Fairfax Preliminary Engineering Manager for VDOT.
Renée Hamilton and Susan Shaw of VDOT provided an update on the I-66 Corridor Improvements Project. This was a follow-up from their briefing at the last Board Transportation Committee meeting on September 16, 2014. The project update included environmental documentation, transit and travel demand management, park-and-ride lots, corridor operations, express lanes access locations, public outreach status, public-private partnership (P3) procurement status, and major milestones. The team is preparing for public hearing meetings in January 2015. The draft environmental document will be ready in April 2015. The transit team is working to develop a robust transit program for commuter service and express bus. VDOT is working with Fairfax and Prince William Counties to identify park-and-ride lot locations. VDOT will review the initial forecast for transit demand and park-and-ride lot demand, evaluate transit service scenarios, and continue to develop and refine TDM strategies.
Supervisor Smyth asked if there will be funding set aside for transit (express buses). Ms. Hamilton replied that it is incorporated into the cost of the project. VDOT will identify the type of transit service and the funding amount at a later time. Ms. Hamilton said that is something that the project team will continue to work on as part of the transit option for this project.
Ms. Hamilton talked about the strategies and tasks for corridor operations which include sharing real time information, active traffic management, communication, a working group, and development of a corridor vision. Ms. Hamilton said that after a detailed right-of-way analysis of typical sections, VDOT has eliminated Alternative 1 and will keep Alternatives 2A and 2B. Alternative 2A adds two express toll-lanes in each direction. Alternative 2B adds two express toll-lanes in each direction and reserves the median for future high quality transit. It will be documented in the environmental impact statement process. Ms. Hamilton stated that as the project moves forward, there will be right-of-way impacts. VDOT is very aware of the impact on residents along the I-66 corridor.
Supervisor Cook requested that VDOT coordinate with VRE on interchange points. Supervisor Herrity asked a question about how to choose between the two options, and future HOV/HOT lanes on Fairfax County Parkway. Ms. Hamilton replied that VDOT could undertake a hybrid option depending on the travel demand forecast model's output. VDOT is working with Fairfax County staff on several options for the I-66/Fairfax County Parkway interchange, but it is a very challenging project. Mr. Biesiadny stated that VDOT is working on three alternative options for this interchange and will evaluate further in the future. Supervisor Cook asked whether staff has done a study about the scenario of not having a connection at Fairfax County Parkway. Ms. Hamilton noted that traffic demand at the interchange with Monument Drive is greater than the demand at Fairfax County Parkway. Young Ho Chang, VDOT Megaprojects, explained the complex situation. Mr. Chang stated that it could have right-of-way impacts. Ms. Shaw stated that the model will examine this interchange.
Supervisor Smyth asked a question about the transition ramp between Nutley Street and the Beltway. Mr. Chang replied that the transition ramp allows users to get out of the Express Lanes and into the general purpose lanes with partial access to I-495. Mr. Biesiadny stated that Alternative 2 and the partial access to I-495 will reduce the impacts on the Beltway at I-66.
Supervisor Gross requested having translators available for the minority population like Spanish, Korean, and Vietnamese languages at the public outreach meetings. Chairman Bulova commended VDOT for adjusting the format of the meeting. She thought that the Open House and Questions & Answers period were informative and helpful. Ms. Hamilton agreed to the request for translation services.
Supervisor Smyth asked a question about replacement of bridges on I-66 and the impacts on people, noise level at night, etc. She stated that the impact areas are bigger than just homes along I-66 corridor. She asked for the plans to show the details for those bridges and homes. Ms. Hamilton replied that VDOT will have the information at the public meetings, but not to the detailed level that Supervisor Smyth requested. Supervisor Smyth asked a question about the infrastructure impact on Metro. Ms. Hamilton replied that VDOT will continue to coordinate with Metro to share information.
Chairman Bulova asked why the project timeline only shows meetings in January 2015. She mentioned the issues with the I-495 Express Lanes project in its early stage, and the effort it took to minimize impacts on communities along the way. She stated that many more public information meetings and public outreach efforts will be needed.
Supervisor Frey stated that VDOT has met with his constituents and communities. He stated that meeting with small groups and specific communities are much easier since they can focus on issues that locally impact specific areas.
Ms. Hamilton stated that public involvement is the key to the success of the project. She stated that a new interactive website that will be launched with easy access and up-to-date information. People can post their written questions on the discussion board and send emails to VDOT. The public-private partnership (P3) process will issue a request for qualifications in February 2015. She went over the key milestone dates and noted that the project needs to be incorporated into the Constrained Long-Range Plan (CLRP), and presented to the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments (MWCOG) Transportation Planning Board, and the Commonwealth Transportation Board (CTB). The project is expected to start construction by 2017.
Supervisor Smyth stated that there will be impacts to property owners whose locations are not near I-66, and the need to make those people aware of the project. She asked for the cost estimate. Ms. Hamilton replied that the cost estimate is $3 billion with funding coming from the federal, state, and local governments. Supervisor Smyth requested a noise wall for the entire length of the project. Ms. Hamilton replied that the noise wall issue will be evaluated.
Supervisor McKay wanted to know how the I-95 project relates to this I-66 project in terms of transit options, the desire not to lose the BRT option, and how the two corridors compared to each other. He emphasized that we only have one chance to make it right.
Supervisor Frey observed that VDOT has been using the start date of 2017 and expressed his concern about the interchange at Route 28 and I-66. Supervisor Herrity stated that he hopes VDOT will be able to keep the timeline. He requested information on public contributions for this project. Ms. Hamilton replied that VDOT is working to develop the number.
3. Dulles Metrorail Silver Line: Phase II Status and Funding Updates
Mark Canale (FCDOT) and Joe LaHait, County Debt Coordinator, Department of Management and Budget (DMB), briefed the Board on the status of the Dulles Rail Project. Mr. Canale provided the details of MWAA bid packages. Package A is the design and construction of an aerial guideway, stations, systems, and wayside facilities. Construction is ongoing at Dulles International Airport. Package B is the design and construction of WMATA’s rail yard and maintenance facility. Package S is the site preparation for the WMATA rail yard and maintenance facility at Dulles International Airport.
Fairfax County continues to coordinate with the Town of Herndon, adjacent land owners, and project partners. The park-and-ride facility at Wiehle-Reston East Station is at 85 percent usage. The Herndon-Monroe Park-and-Ride Garage is at 77 percent usage. The non-secure bike room at the Wiehle-Reston East Station is full every day. The Herndon and Innovation Center Park-and-Ride Garages are scheduled for construction completion in March 2018. The Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act (TIFIA) loan is scheduled to be closed on December 16, and 17, 2014. Work is continuing to close out Phase I. The project budget for Phase 2 is $2.778 billion and includes a contingency amount of $551 million.
Supervisor Hudgins asked a question about the Reston Town Center Parkway funding agreement. Mr. Canale replied that the funding agreement was authorized by the Board, and it has been signed. Supervisor Hudgins wanted to confirm that there is no Phase II impact on Soapstone Road. Mr. Canale confirmed that there is no impact on Soapstone Road.
4. Richmond Highway Transit Alternative Study
Leonard Wolfenstein and Tom Burke (FCDOT), Marianne Gardner (DPZ) and Liz Hagg (OCR) briefed the Board on the Virginia Department of Rail and Public Transportation (DRPT) Route 1 Multimodal Alternatives Analysis. The study limits are from I-95/495 to Woodbridge. The study will be completed in January 2015. The study evaluated four refined transit alternatives. The study recommended phased implementation of the multimodal investment of Alternative 4 (Metrorail from Huntington Station to Hybla Valley, and a BRT system from Hybla Valley to Woodbridge).
The study's recommendations includes amending the County’s Comprehensive Plan, conducting a market study, developing a funding plan and accompanying resources, and preparing a scope for environmental documentation. Mr. Burke went over the pros and cons of two approaches to the Comprehensive Plan Amendment for land use. Approach A is a pilot project for BRT Stations at Lockheed, Hybla Valley, and Woodlawn. Approach B is Phase 1 of BRT from Huntington to Hybla Valley for five stations. The immediate actions for the Board is to direct staff to return to the Board with information on resources required to conduct a Comprehensive Plan Amendment, a market study, and an environmental assessment.
Supervisor Cook asked staff to explain the reason behind the selection of Alternative 4. Mr. Burke replied that the decision was based on cost, economic development, and ridership projection, supporting transit based on REX ridership on Route 1, etc. Supervisor Cook asked if there is documentation to support this decision. Mr. Biesiadny replied that there is technical documentation for each alternative.
Supervisor Herrity asked if staff evaluated an option of BRT with HOV/HOT traffic. Mr. Biesiadny replied that because of the various intersections or cross sections, this option was not viable. Supervisory Herrity asked if the BRT system will remain after the Metrorail extension in complete. Mr. Burke replied that BRT will remain to supplement the Metrorail system. Supervisor McKay stated that it is important to have future connections from Fort Belvoir to the Pentagon on the BRT system. Mr. Biesiadny added that BRT will continue to provide connections on the surface between Metrorail stations.
Supervisor McKay stated that this is a unique project, because it has both transit and highway elements in one project. He believed that it will score well on the NVTA project list for funding consideration. The right-of-way cost will be for both transit and roadway projects. The long-term cost for bus operating on Route 1 will be reduced to a manageable cost.
Supervisor Hyland stated that the timeline of 2040 is a very long time plan. He requested what the cost would be for Metrorail extension into Beacon Mall, while simultaneously looking at the BRT system to Woodbridge. He stated the need for Comprehensive Plan changes to support rail and BRT.
Supervisor McKay suggested studying Approach B, because it evaluates the entire corridor, and it would provide a better understating of the exact locations of these stations. Supervisor Hyland agreed. Supervisor Gross agreed with Approach B and stated that density will affect affordable housing. Supervisory Herrity suggested doing all five stations in Phase 1 and the Metrorail extension be included in the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Biesiadny replied that staff proposes to study the BRT system first, and study the Metro later.
Supervisor McKay suggested not doing the environmental impact study for rail now; rather, focus on incorporating the rail piece analysis in the later phase, and determine a balanced plan, without delaying the project. He stated that he does not want the long-term land use effort to delay the project from moving forward. He noted that the growth of Fort Belvoir had effects on the Comprehensive Plan and the market study. Ms. Gardner stated that the study will look at the complete corridor.
Supervisor Frey requested the cost estimate information for Alternative 4. Mr. Burke replied that it is about $2.5 billion ($1 billion for BRT and $1.5 billion for Metrorail). Supervisor Frey mentioned how the cost estimate for the Phase I of Silver Line project was higher than the initial cost estimate. He also stated that a market study for such a long-term study is not realistic. He suggested looking at a much shorter time period like five to ten years. Supervisor McKay stated that this project is different from the Silver Line project. He listed the BRT system on Route 1, the cross sections, existing ridership, etc. This project will score well for the NVTA funding consideration. There are sections of Route 1 that are under construction. The cost of this project will not be placed entirely on the County.
Mr. Biesiadny clarified that the five stations are the BRT stations. The project is based on phases. Staff will study the land use for BRT first, and will study land use for Metrorail later. The funding plan will be phased as well.
Supervisor McKay stated the update on the Transportation Plan Map on the Comprehensive Plan will be in support of the long-term rail in the corridor. He cautioned against the long process of the Comprehensive Plan analysis.
Supervisor Hyland stated that he wanted to look for the changes to the Comprehensive Plan to support rail density, and to make it a reality. Supervisor Hudgins stated that land use has triggered an increase in density. Supervisor McKay emphasized a balanced approach between the two sections and phases. He stated that there is existing high density in place.
5. Potential Policy on Snow Removal from Sidewalks
Eric Teitelman and Neil Freschman (FCDOT) briefed the Board on the Potential Policy on Snow Removal from Sidewalks Study. This briefing reviewed the current status of snow removal policies, existing responsibilities, and explored possible options for the Board to consider. Currently, neither the state nor the County, clears snow and ice from public walkways. Residents and business owners are not legally required to clear snow, but are asked to keep the sidewalks clear and safe.
Fairfax County Maintenance and Stormwater Management Division manages snow removal for County facilities at the County Government Centers, County-owned commuter parking lots and transit facilities, the public safety centers, fire and police stations, two kiss-and-ride areas on the Silver Line, health centers, essential County facilities, libraries and community centers.
Neighboring jurisdictions like Prince William County, Loudoun County, Town of Vienna, and Town of Herndon, do not have an ordinance requiring the clearing of sidewalks. Some jurisdictions in the region do have ordinances requiring residents and businesses to clear sidewalks, including the City of Alexandria, City of Falls Church, City of Fairfax, Arlington County, and the District of Columbia. It is unclear if citations have been issued.
The study recommends several options for the County: Option 1) to continue the current approach with enhancements; Option 2) to take on responsibility to clear snow at selected locations; and Option 3) to establish an ordinance requiring snow and ice removal from public sidewalks. There are many legal, enforcement, cost, and other issues to consider, if the County selects to enact a snow removal ordinance.
Supervisor Hyland asked about when Fairfax County acquired the legal authority to enact an ordinance to require snow removal. County Attorney David Bobzien responded that the County does have the legal authority. He will research the date and provide information to the Board.
Mr. Biesiadny, in response to a question about trails in Tysons, said that Ashgrove Lane Trail provides access to Metrorail. It is in the Park Authority’s right-of-way. Supervisor Herrity requested the trail usage data. Mr. Biesiadny replied that the usage is high, because the trail leads to the Spring Hill Metrorail Station.
Supervisor Frey asked who plows the streets in Arlington County. Mr. Freschman replied that Arlington clears snow for its own streets. VDOT plows the Interstate Highways in the VDOT system in Arlington.
Supervisor Hudgins asked about how well the volunteer effort works for snow removal from sidewalks. Mr. Freschman replied that it depends on the area.
Supervisor McKay asked if the County has the legal authority to enact an ordinance for snow removal from sidewalks for just some areas of the county or countywide. Mr. Freschman replied that it would be countywide.
Chairman Bulova stated that she is in favor of Option 1 with consideration to combine with Option 2.
There was a discussion about the County taking responsibility to clear snow for Tysons. Supervisor Hudgins reminded the Board that the residents and their communities do their due diligence in snow removal, but the County does not. She also mentioned that VDOT often plows snow onto trails. Ms. Hagg stated that it is a growing problem that VDOT plows snow onto sidewalks. Supervisor McKay stated that it is a countywide problem and expressed his concern about snow removal around schools.
Supervisor Herrity cautioned against over-reacting, and the liability issue for residents and businesses regarding snow removal. He reminded the Board that bad winters in Fairfax County do not happen that often. Supervisor Smyth stated that there is a big problem for pedestrians who use bridges to access Metrorail platforms. Supervisor Gross stated that the County has a maintenance issue, and does not have a plan to deal with these maintenance requirements.
The Board concluded that they did not want to adopt a new snow removal ordinance, and they did not want to take on responsibilities due to budget constraints, legal and liability issues. Supervisor McKay stated that the County needs to continue to investigate, and discuss possible partnerships with business like the Tysons Partnership. The County does not anticipate major changes. He directed staff to study the major issues that were raised.
6. Herndon Metrorail Station Access Management Study
Due to the time constraint, this study was deferred to a future meeting. The meeting was adjourned at 12:15 pm.
The next meeting is scheduled for January 20, 2015 at 1:00 pm.