FAIRFAX COUNTY TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY COMMISSION
Meeting Summary
Joint Meeting with the Trails & Sidewalks Committee – May 19, 2014 at 7:30 PM – FCDOT, 4050 Legato Rd, Fairfax, VA 22033
TAC Members in Attendance: Chairman Jeff Parnes (Sully), Vice Chairman Jenifer Joy Madden (Hunter Mill), Secretary Roger Hoskin (Mason), Alan Young (At-Large), Kevin Morse (Braddock), Micah Himmel (Providence), and Eric Thiel (Springfield).
TAC Members Absent: Mike Champness (Dranesville), Harry Zimmerman (Lee), and Frank Cohn (Mt. Vernon).
Trails & Sidewalks Committee Members in Attendance: Peter Christensen, Chair (Mt. Vernon); Jeff Anderson (Hunter Mill), and Paul Johnson (Northern Virginia Builder’s Industry Association).
Others in Attendance: Calvin Lam and Bob Kuhns (FCDOT); Susan Shaw and Minh Tonthat (VDOT), Jan Leavitt and John Matusik (DPWES); Tim Roseboom (DRPT); and Bryan Zelley (Transform 66 Wisely).
The meeting was called to order by Chairman Parnes at 7:35 p.m. The minutes of the last meeting were unanimously approved.
Note Taker: Eric Thiel
Main Topics Discussed
Multimodal Solutions: I-495 to Haymarket Briefing (Part of the topic “Transform 66 OUTSIDE the Beltway”)
Ms. Susan Shaw of VDOT presented the briefing slides that she discussed with the Fairfax County Board of Supervisors (BOS) on May 19, 2015.
TAC members inquired about potential changes to the HOV structure, specifically if HOV-2 was going to become HOV-3. Ms. Shaw noted that the original HOV on I-66 started at 4 (people per vehicle), then moved to 3, before the current HOV-2 was adopted. HOV-2 may have to be increased as it is currently routinely ‘clogged’ and is not meeting its performance goals. Part of this is due to the large number of HOV-1 hybrid vehicles, and the fact that it is adjacent to normal (slower) traffic. HOV-3 is scheduled for 2020. There are also discussions of slugging on I-66, but it will not help much since there is limited trip speed differential between the current HOV and regular traffic.
She went on to describe the complex set of options under consideration – see briefing slides for a description of Options 2A and 2B. They are closely studying “how to leave room for Metro”, but not yet “how to implement Metro”. Current meetings and presentations are structured to obtain public input.
As the slides stepped through options and locations, there was significant discussion of the “brick wall” near Route 28 as the I-66 corridor penetrates Civil War historical parklands. Ms. Shaw indicated that VDOT was preserving as much room for road, or Metro as possible, but all agreed that it would be very difficult to find a way to include both since the available right-of-way is too narrow.
TAC members also asked about Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) and service intervals on I-66. Current planning has, depending on origin and destination (O&D), hourly BRT switching to 20 minute intervals starting at Fair Lakes.
TAC members expressed the concern that the old “hub and spoke” transit pattern was breaking down based on reviews of O&D and traffic flow data. Ms. Shaw agreed. This led to the follow up question of “How many cars have to move to BRT to meet the congestion reduction goals of the plan?” Ms. Shaw explained that part of the solution is the new HOV-3, and that HOT lanes have shown an increase in HOV-3 for free access and shared cost HOV-2. However, up to 12,000 riders are desired on the overall corridor transit to meet congestion goals.
The TAC noted that experience elsewhere, such as I-95, may not apply to I-66 because while I-95 traffic has large O&D nodes, such as the Pentagon, Crystal City, and DC, I-66 traffic is more diverse, thus O&D distances are smaller making BRT and other transit more challenging. TAC members also commented that East-West BRT may need “extra capacity” in order to provide assured service to customers.
In response to questions about what entity would operate the BRT, Ms. Shaw indicated this was to be determined. VDOT is considering a full mix of options from all government to a public-private partnership similar to the Trans-Urban HOT Lanes. The VA Secretary of Transportation is reviewing options, but all are some form of demand managed tolls. Project cost is $2 to 3 billion, so large funding structures are required. VDOT is also looking at starting with, or providing infrastructure for, real-time managed traffic control. An example is the red/green X lanes on I-66 today.
TAC members asked if traffic modeling shows the project “fixes” I-66. Ms. Shaw explained that the real time control can definitely be used to reduce the “stop and surge” behavior seen today, but it cannot fix everything. Ms. Shaw also indicated that trail/bike/pedestrian crossings are following the Fairfax County Comprehensive Plan and that VDOT is looking at integrating a trail next to I-66.
TAC members commented that the plan should ensure that the crossings actually fully integrate into the extant and planned trails to provide functional connectivity.
TAC member Micah Himmel offered a multi-point critique of the plan to date: changing lane width, per ASTO recommendations, would reduce cost, stormwater runoff, and still provide the desired service. The project does not have any modeling of “induced demand” effects (i.e. un-intended increased traffic load on 66 or connecting roads.). The funding question is very much open.
TAC members also suggested that VDOT consider the impacts of autonomous vehicles. Ms. Shaw, and some TAC members, noted that this is a classic “disruptive technology” and forecasting how it will grow and deploy is unlikely to be accurate.
Sidewalk Proposed Plan Amendment Presentation
Jan Leavitt and John Matusik of DPWES presented the proposed change adds some language to increase County flexibility with respect to some cases where a developer may not be required to always build a sidewalk. The intent of the change is to streamline the process and provide more explicit language for the wavier of sidewalk building cases. The proposal will require review and approval by FCDOT, DPWES, and the BOS.
TAC members asked if this changes the County’s goals/plans with respect to sidewalks. Mr. Levitt indicated that no, the goals and plans are part of the Comprehensive Plan (CP), and this change does not impact the CP. This document is an operational document regarding details of implementing the CP.
TAC members asked if the money for sidewalk is not being spent on a sidewalk, where does it go? The money will go into specific escrow funds, but not always for a sidewalk. Thus, the proffer money can be spent on a wider set of County needs instead of always being dedicated to a sidewalk.
Other Business:
Summary of Board Transportation Committee Meeting
Jeff Parnes, TAC Chair, attended the meeting of the Board Transportation Committee on May 19, 2015, and provided a summary of the items discussed at that meeting.
TAC Achievement Award Subcommittee
Commissioners Thiel, Cohn, and Young were selected to this subcommittee. The award announcement will be placed on the County's Newslink. The deadline for nominations will be Friday, June 12, 2015.
Comment and Feedback on Previous Meeting’s Presentations: N/A
Planned Agenda for Next Meeting
• July 21, 2015: Update on Implementation of Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) Technology on Fairfax Connector Buses – Dwayne Pelfrey (FCDOT)
Topics for Future Meetings:
- August 18, 2015: Herndon Metrorail Station Access Management Study – Kris Morley-Nikfar (FCDOT)
- September 15, 2015: Huntington Area Transportation Study – Tom Burke (FCDOT)
- October 20, 2015: Richmond Highway Alternatives Analysis Next Steps – Tom Burke (FCDOT)
- November 17, 2015: Countywide Transit Network Study – Tom Burke (FCDOT)
- December 15, 2015: I-495 and I-95 Express Lanes Performance/Progress
- January 19, 2016: Proposal for Zoning Ordinance Changes Related to Parking in Transit Oriented Development (TOD) Areas around Metrorail Station – Dan Rathbone (FCDOT)
- February 16, 2016: Route 7 Core Widening – Tad Borkowski, FCDOT)
- TBD: Comprehensive Plan and Transportation staff and Planning Commission discussions with TAC on what their vision is for future development and any changes in planning and zoning guidelines that may be needed to account for future work environment given the pace and impacts of technology advances (including guest speaker to explain impact of self-driving/smart cars, buses and trucks on traffic, roadways and intersections). Joint meeting date with the Planning Commission’s Transportation Committee will be determined.
- TBD: Comprehensive Plan and Transportation staff and Planning Commission discussions with TAC on how planning for areas currently planned for future rail stations reflects the designation of the areas as future rail stations
- TBD: CTB Determination of Corridor of Statewide Importance through Loudoun/Prince William Counties
Annoucement: n/a
Adjournment:
The meeting was adjourned as 9:50 p.m.
Upcoming Events:
July 14, 2015 10:00 am Board Transportation Committee Meeting
October 13, 2015 1:00 pm Board Transportation Committee Meeting
December 1, 2015 10:00 am Board Transportation Committee Meeting
Upcoming Meetings:
June 2, 2015 7:30 pm TAC Work Session (FCDOT)
June 16, 2015 7:30 pm TAC Regular Meeting (FCDOT)
July 7, 2015 7:30 pm TAC Work Session (FCDOT)
July 21, 2015 7:30 pm TAC Regular Meeting (FCDOT)
August 4, 2015 7:30 pm TAC Work Session (FCDOT)
August 18, 2015 7:30 pm TAC Regular Meeting (FCDOT)
September 1, 2015 7:30 pm TAC Work Session (FCDOT)
September 15, 2015 7:30 pm TAC Regular Meeting (FCDOT)
October 6, 2015 7:30 pm TAC Work Session (FCDOT)
October 20, 2015 7:30 pm TAC Regular Meeting (FCDOT)
November 3, 2015 7:30 pm TAC Work Session (FCDOT)
November 17, 2015 7:30 pm TAC Regular Meeting (FCDOT)
December 1, 2015 7:30 pm TAC Work Session (FCDOT)
December 15, 2015 7:30 pm TAC Regular Meeting (FCDOT)