Date: May 19, 2015 | Time: 1:00 p.m. - 3:00 p.m. | Location: Rooms 9 & 10, Government Center
Agenda
- Approval of Minutes of the March 17, 2015 , Meeting
- I-66 Outside the Beltway Project - Renée Hamilton (VDOT)
- Dulles Metrorail Silver Line Phase 2 Status and Funding – Mark Canale (FCDOT) and Joe LaHait (DMB)
- Update on Implementation of Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) Technology on Fairfax Connector Buses – Dwayne Pelfrey (FCDOT)
- Bicycle Parking Guidelines – Adam Lind (FCDOT)
- Update of Snow Removal from Sidewalks – Tom Biesiadny and Neil Freschman (FCDOT)
- New Business
Minutes
Members in Attendance:
Supervisor Jeff McKay, Chair
Chairman Sharon Bulova
Supervisor John Cook
Supervisor Michael Frey
Supervisor John Foust
Supervisor Penny Gross
Supervisor Pat Herrity
Supervisor Catherine Hudgins
Supervisor Linda Smyth
Members Absent: Supervisor Gerald Hyland
County Executive: Deputy County Executive Robert A. Stalzer.
TAC Member in Attendance: Jeff Parnes, Chair; and Frank Cohn (Mt. Vernon).
Supervisor McKay called the meeting to order at 1:00 p.m.
1. Approval of Minutes of Previous Meeting
The minutes of the March 17, 2015, meetings were accepted without any changes.
2. I-66 Outside the Beltway Project
Susan Shaw, VDOT, discussed the multimodal solutions project for I-66 Outside the Beltway (from I-495 to Haymarket) to the Board. She said that there have been several outreach meetings, public notifications, and briefings to the public. Ms. Shaw discussed the preliminary concepts for each major interchange and the pros and cons of Alternatives 2A and 2B (with and without reserving the center median for future transit). The project goal is to “minimize the project footprint, while determining the most effective and viable solutions for the I-66 Corridor.” The presentation included charts showing the destination and origin movements of traffic traveling on the I-66 corridor, and graphics comparing speed improvements among the existing conditions in 2014, No Build option in 2040, and Build 2A and Build 2B in 2040 along the corridor during morning and afternoon peak periods. Under the No Build option, congestion will increase dramatically in 2040. Under the Build 2A and Build 2B options, the graphics show reductions from congestion in 2040.
There are four public hearings scheduled in May and June 2015. The public can provide their input at the project’s website: www.transform66.org or by email at transform66@VDOT.Virginia.gov.
Supervisor Smyth asked for the criteria for “reasonable noise wall”. Ms. Shaw replied that the criteria include cost per benefited receptor, 1,600 square feet per receptor, and homes on larger lots, and spacing between those homes. She stated that ultimately a noise wall needs to be reasonable and feasible. She also said that an expert on noise walls will be at the meeting to answer questions from the public.
Supervisor Herrity asked if homes are being displaced because of trails. Ms. Shaw replied that there are some additional rights-of-way required for trails at some sections of the project, but no homes are being displaced because of trails.
Supervisor Smyth asked why the Build 2A option has Metrorail extension, and not in the Build 2B option, and whether the Metrorail extension will be considered in the future. Ms. Shaw replied that the Build 2B option without Metrorail extension has fewer impacts than with a Metrorail extension. Tom Biesiadny, FCDOT, added that at the interchanges, the best improvements from the two options can be swapped. Improvements in the Build 2A option can be switched to Build 2B option and vice versa. Supervisor Smyth stated that in the future, this corridor will need a Metrorail extension.
Chairman Bulova asked if the project is considering transit or bus service under the two options. Ms. Shaw replied that they received input from their transit group to add bus service and to improve commuter service, and that additional transit service is an important part of the project. Supervisor Smyth asked for the assumptions for carpools. Ms. Shaw replied that she would provide the numbers to the Board.
Supervisor Foust asked how VDOT will address stormwater management issues. Ms. Shaw replied that VDOT is grandfathered for stormwater management issues, as a result VDOT will be treating for stormwater quantity, but not necessarily quality.
Supervisor Smyth asked about the impacts on ROW acquisition for neighborhoods along the corridor. Ms. Shaw replied that the impacts are primarily at the Beltway and Route 28 interchanges. She stated that it is critical to get all the traffic merged safely at the Beltway. Supervisor Smyth stated that people still have issues with the elevated ramps and that the impact is not only about properties taken, but the livability of the neighborhood.
Commissioner Parnes, TAC Chair, stated that bicycle/pedestrian uses must be considered along the corridor. He supported the addition of a protected bicycle/pedestrian pathway in the Fairfax County portion of the improvement. He stated that the bicycle community is looking for something like the Washington and Old Dominion Trail. He said that the rationale for the separate bicycle/pedestrian pathway is for safety reasons (separating the vehicular from non-vehicular traffic). He advocated for building a full interchange at I-66 at Route 28. Supervisor Smyth stated that there will be different options for bike routes at different sections of the project and the constraints for each section.
Supervisor Herrity asked for the sources of funding for this project. Ms. Shaw replied that it is a design-build project, and its funding will come from many sources like the Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act (TIFIA) loan and the Northern Virginia Transportation Authority (NVTA). This funding issue will be evaluated by a committee that will begin on July 1, 2015. Supervisor Herrity stated that the NVTA is not a good funding source for this project and wanted to see other funding options.
Mr. Biesiadny stated that staff will bring draft comments on I-66 project to the Board on June 2, 2015, for the Board’s consideration. Comments are due to VDOT on June 18, 2015. Bob Kuhns, FCDOT, reviewed a one-page document summarizing the comments that will be included in the Board item. Supervisor Herrity stated that comment 11 that read “Select ramp options that remove conflicts with future extensions of rail”, could significantly burden this project on building elevated ramps at Stringfellow Road and Monument Drive. Ms. Shaw stated that the estimate for building ramps at Monument Drive today is $75 million and $30 million for Stringfellow Road. Supervisor Herrity stated that he did not want to see $100 million spent on ramps at this time for rail that will not be available until 2040, and before knowing where the funding sources will be coming from for this project. Mr. Biesiadny explained that there are two alternative solutions for these ramps. He suggested on requesting that VDOT secure the right-of-way for these ramps as part of this project as a possible alternative. This was generally accepted.
Chairman Bulova stated that VDOT will be looking for a private partnership, and cautioned not to design to such a degree that it would exclude alternatives and prevent creativity from the private partner. Mr. Biesiadny agreed with Chairman Bulova’s observation and will address the funding issue as item 15 of the draft comments. Supervisor Smyth asked for the maximum footprint of the project as a worst case scenario. She raised a concern about a possible “non- compete” clause related to extension of Metrorail.
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. The County continues to work with the Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority (MWAA) to resolve the punch list items for Phase I. There are still about 130 open Fairfax County items. Phase I closeout is anticipated at the end of 2015. The final budget of Phase I was at $2.982 billion, instead of the previous estimated amount of $2.905 billion. The Wiehle-Reston East Metrorail Station garage is at 93 percent parking utilization. The free bike room was over capacity.
Mr. Canale reported that the overall design for Phase II is at 81 percent completion. Most of the work was the utility work at the airport. There was a change to the completion schedule for Phase 2 of an approximately 13-month delay to 2019. The Phase II budget was estimated at $2.775 billion. The contract extension costs are under negotiations between MWAA and Capital Rail Constructors (CRC). For the County activities, the team is continuing the design review for the Herndon and Innovation Center Metrorail Station garages and working with the Town of Herndon, adjacent land owners, and project partners. There is a land use application coming up for the Pavilion and the Traction Power Substations (TPSS 13) at Herndon. There were two public meetings in Herndon to discuss the Innovation Center Metrorail Station.
The Department of Public Works and Environmental Services (DPWES) has the lead for design and construction for the two garages. Both garages have zoning approval, completed schematic design, and design development. Both garages are anticipated to be completed in April or May of 2019.
Supervisor McKay asked for the number of parking spaces at the Herndon garage. Mr. Canale replied that the total number is 1,950 spaces. Chairman Bulova stated that some of the reasons for the delay in the timeline were related to safety, security, and issues that were learned in Phase I. Mr. Canale added that the number of items left open in Phase I included changes in stormwater design requirements, changes to the garage infrastructure, and better safety standards.
Supervisor Foust asked if the cost of the 13-month delay for Phase II were included in the $20 million increment. Mr. Canale replied that the cost of the delay is still an open question. He stated that the budget has not been increased for Phase II, but the contingency for Phase II may be needed. Supervisor Foust was concerned and stated that the contingency is not a blank check. Mr. Canale agreed, and stated that the County will monitor the change orders and the modifications.
4. Update on Implementation of Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) Technology on Fairfax Connector Buses
Dwayne Pelfrey, FCDOT, reported on the recent work related to ITS for Fairfax Connector buses. The goals for implementation of ITS technology are to improve passenger and employee safety, increase ridership, improve communication and information, enhance rider experience, and improve service reliability and on-time performance. Mr. Pelfrey said that the implementation will be in two phases. Phase I will have computer-aided dispatch and automatic-vehicle-location and real-time passenger information. Phase II has options for interior cameras and remote fleet component monitoring. The technology will enable bus monitoring, operations support, planning support, and provide real-time bus information. Riders will have access to bus arrival predictions by stop and will be able to view bus locations on an online map. Mr. Pelfrey stated that there were 8,500 calls per month just for inquiry about bus locations. The contract was awarded to Clever Devices in February 2014 and anticipated for system-wide deployment by Spring 2016.
Supervisor Gross asked for the number of Fairfax Connector buses. Mr. Pelfrey replied that there are 283 Connector buses. Supervisor Hudgins asked if the new technology system will interact with other systems. The answer was that it is a stand-alone system. Mr. Biesiadny stated that the Metro system also uses Clever Devices. Supervisor McKay requested staff working with Metro to share information, so passengers do not have to use two different applications to check for bus routes. Mr. Pelfrey agreed and stated that some third-party developers are already using Fairfax Connector information. Commissioner Parnes, TAC Chair, stated that Fairfax Connector is not on the Next Bus application and asked for it to be on Next Bus. Mr. Pelfrey replied that it will be the third-party developers who do that. Commissioner Parnes asked about the Google Map issues. Mr. Pelfrey reported that there was some progress on the legal issue.
Supervisor McKay asked if the ITS system will start out at heavily used bus locations and at rail stations. Mr. Pelfrey stated that the system will start out at stations like Franconia-Springfield, Wiehle-Reston East, Reston Town Center, Tysons-West Park, and will have options to add more station monitoring. Supervisor McKay asked if the options for interior cameras in Phase II of the project were constrained by technology or funding issues. Mr. Pelfrey replied that it has to do with funding issues. Supervisor McKay wanted to make sure that the camera technology will be the same regardless of whether they were implemented in Phase I or Phase II of the project. Mr. Pelfrey replied that the technology will be the same.
Supervisor Herrity asked about the timeline with the Google issues. Mr. Biesiadny replied that the issue was that Google wants the County to indemnify them. However, the County cannot indemnify under Virginia state law. The differences of the legal structure of cities and counties prevent Fairfax County from granting the indemnification clause with Google. He stated that other systems like Bing (MSN) have the Fairfax Connector information data, but Bing does not ask for indemnification. Fairfax Connector data is posted online for transit application developers to use. Supervisor Herrity asked for WIFI feature on buses. Mr. Biesiadny stated that WIFI will be available in the future.
5. Bicycle Parking Guidelines
Adam Lind, FCDOT, briefed the Board on the proposed bicycle parking guidelines. The purpose of the guidelines is to facilitate installation of correct bicycle parking to prevent stolen bikes, disruption of walkways, and enhance the appearance of the community. He said that short-term bicycle parking is generally for guests, customers, and visitors. Long-term bicycle parking is generally for employees and residents. Without the bicycle parking guidelines, incorrect bicycle parking design is more likely. The guidelines were developed with Department of Planning and Zoning (DPZ) and Office of Community Revitalization (OCR), and were reviewed and commented on by VDOT. The parking rates were based on a local/national survey. In the current Public Facilities Manual (PFM), there are no set standards for type of bicycle parking or number of spots required. There are no guidelines for proper placement or location of bicycle parking. The current proffer language often states that the location and type of bicycle parking must be approved by the FCDOT Bicycle Program. However, the development community has no guidelines, and staff has to spend a significant amount of time explaining the process. This results in errors and inconsistency. Staff is seeking the Board's input on the guidelines.
Supervisor Gross asked how existing developments are handled. Mr. Lind replied that FCDOT has a program to provide technical assistance for these cases. Mr. Biesiadny stated these developments can use our tools to improve their bicycle parking situations. Supervisor McKay mentioned undesirable bike parking configurations and asked if the guidelines will provide a universal standard. Mr. Lind replied that the goal is to show what not to do, and not to prevent creativity. There are examples of design standards in the guidelines. Supervisor Smyth asked if it would make a difference if the developers install the bike racks on the streets or in the garages. Mr. Lind explained the differences between short-term and long-term bike parking situations. For bicycles stored in the garages, his suggested that some wayfinding signs for bikers be installed, since they do not normally look for spaces in the garages.
Supervisor Herrity was concerned about the large foot print for bike racks. Mr. Lind replied that using the guidelines as the starting point for discussion, and being flexible is the key to working around those issues. Supervisor Smyth stated that someone put the bike racks at the wrong location at the Providence Community Center. Mr. Lind stated that FCDOT will follow up with DPWES.
Supervisor McKay asked about bike rack standards for schools. Mr. Lind replied that FCDOT will need to communicate with the school system about the bike rack standards.
6. Update of Snow Removal from Sidewalks
Neil Freschman, FCDOT, updated the Board on the issues regarding snow removal from sidewalks. The last time that staff provided a briefing to the Board was on December 9, 2014. On January 23, 2015, Chairman Bulova organized the Tysons Snow Summit with VDOT, the Tysons Partnership, and other property owners. VDOT indicated that they do not have resources to clear snow on sidewalks. County staff noted that any solution must work in major activity centers throughout the County, not just in Tysons. The Tysons snow removal maps were discussed in detail at that Tysons Snow Summit meeting. The landowners were concerned with liability issues associated with clearing snow on sidewalks in the VDOT right-of-way. Staff has begun to discuss a potential "Good Samaritan" law to address these concerns and will discuss them at the Board Legislative Committee in the fall.
Supervisor McKay asked for the reason that staff only looked at four Metrorail stations. Mr. Biesiadny replied that the effort was to look at the four stations in Tysons, because of the concerns raised by the Tysons Partnership. Staff will look for solutions for the entire county.
Chairman Bulova stated that the Good Samaritan law will address the issue for countywide. Supervisor Hudgins asked about the Reston Association snow removal policy. Mr. Biesiadny replied that he believed that Reston Association signed an agreement with VDOT. Ms. Mollerup, VDOT, will check on this issue. She stated that VDOT only wants to know if someone is doing something on the road. Supervisor Smyth requested that the Good Samaritan law cover neighborhoods that help clearing snow for older people in their community. Mr. Biesiadny agreed with that request. Supervisor McKay stated that the County should move forward with the Good Samaritan law.
New Business: None
The meeting was adjourned at 2:45 pm. The next meeting is scheduled for July 14, 2015, at 10:00 a.m.