Advancing active mobility in greater Prince William, Virginia

Category: Public Hearing (Page 1 of 6)

Active Mobility & The Northern Virginia Transportation Authority

Active Prince William Co-Chair Allen Muchnick delivered the statement below at the Northern Virginia Transportation Authority’s annual public hearing on January 9, 2025.


Northern Virginia Transportation Authority’s Annual Public Hearing, January 9, 2025, Statement by Allen Muchnick, City of Manassas Resident

Good evening.  I’m Allen Muchnick, a City of Manassas resident.

NVTA proclaims multimodality and “core values” of equity, safety, and sustainability, but it takes effective policies and performance measures to rise above empty buzzwords and greenwashing.

For instance, NVTA still lacks any Complete Streets policy, and it doesn’t track and report the greenhouse gas emissions generated by its funded projects.  When counting the active mobility lane miles funded by NVTA (see the presentation under Agenda Item #5), it’s greenwashing to combine the 30% and 70% projects or to count the replacement active mobility facilities in road-widening projects.

Do we advance equity, safety, and sustainability by building–and perpetuating–wide and fast commercial roadways that injure or kill hundreds of pedestrians annually, increase vehicle miles traveled, and promote more auto-dependent sprawl?

Is it equitable, sustainable, or cost-effective to spend sales tax and other non-motoring revenue to expand roads in the outer NoVA counties so more people who work in NoVA or DC can commute in single-occupant vehicles from localities beyond NoVA?

VDOT’s NoVA District office has recently estimated that it would cost roughly $14 Billion (in current, year-2022 dollars) to build the active mobility facilities already described in adopted NoVA-locality plans and not part of a larger transportation project now under development.

Yet, according to NVTA’s NoVA Gateway project-tracking website, during 16 fiscal years, NVTA has so far awarded only about 3.5% ($131.4 million) out of $3.8 Billion in regional funds to 11 standalone active mobility projects (and of that amount $39.1 million has been set aside for a single project, the CC2DCA connector).  Of the 105 projects that have so far actually received NVTA regional money, less than 2.3% ($54.4 million) of the $2.4 billion allocated has flowed to a mere 7 standalone active mobility projects.

Thus, at NVTA’s historic rate of allocating its regional funds for standalone active mobility projects, it would take roughly 1700 years (at $8.2 million/year) to fully fund NoVA’s already planned active mobility facilities.

NVTA could receive more equitable, safe, and sustainable projects to evaluate for funding if the Authority were to require each locality or agency to hold an advertised public hearing before the relevant governing body endorses any project for NVTA-related funding, including from the federal CMAQ and RSTP programs.

Presently, in localities without a transportation advisory commission, such project funding submissions are often developed behind closed doors and simply placed on the governing body’s consent agenda.  Requiring advertised public hearings well before governing body endorsement could alter the mix of submitted projects—such as more standalone active mobility projects—as well as modify or expand the scope of the multimodal project submissions in light of the early public input.

Finally, NVTA should increase transparency and public trust by posting all proceedings of its Regional Jurisdiction and Agency Coordinating Committee on its website.

Thank you for this public comment opportunity.

Our Comments at the NoVA Joint Transportation Meeting, December 2, 2024

 

On December 2, 2024, Active Prince William’s co-chairs, Allen Muchnick and Mark Scheufler, separately delivered public statements at Northern Virginia’s joint annual transportation public meeting, before senior representatives of the six regional and state transportation agencies identified above  

Our statements are posted below.  As indicated in the announcement for this meeting, written comments related to any of the information presented at this meeting may be emailed or mailed through December 31, 2024.


Northern Virginia Joint Transportation Public Meeting

December 2, 2024

Statement of Allen Muchnick, Member

Virginia Bicycling Federation

and Active Prince William Boards of Directors

Good evening.  I’m Allen Muchnick, a City of Manassas resident and a long-time board member of the advocacy groups Active Prince William and the Virginia Bicycling Federation.

For more than seven decades, our region has repeatedly expanded major roadways in a futile quest to fix traffic congestion.  The result is a fiscally and environmentally unsustainable highway network, dysfunctional and ugly suburban sprawl, and inequitable and life-threatening mobility challenges, especially for households without multiple personal vehicles.

It’s time for Virginia’s transportation agencies to embrace the three guiding principles for transportation infrastructure investment articulated by the national advocacy group Transportation for America:

  • Design for safety over speed
  • Fix it first, and
  • Invest in the rest

Designing for safety over speed is essential to reduce Virginia’s unacceptable epidemic of traffic violence.  In 2023, Virginia traffic crashes killed 907 people, including 133 pedestrians, and injured nearly 64,000 people, including nearly 1700 pedestrians.  It’s past time to aggressively retrofit all of Northern Virginia’s multilane commercial arterial roadways to establish more survivable design speeds, as part of a comprehensive Vision Zero strategy.

Fixing our mobility infrastructure requires much better maintenance of Virginia’s pedestrian and bicycle facilities.   VDOT’s 2004 Policy for Integrating Bicycle and Pedestrian Accommodations states, in part:

  • VDOT will maintain bicycle and pedestrian accommodations as necessary to keep the accommodations usable and accessible ….. 
  • For sidewalks, shared use paths, and bicycle paths built within department right-of-way, built to department standards, and accepted for maintenance, VDOT will maintain these bicycle and pedestrian accommodations through replacement and repair.

However, VDOT still performs little maintenance and repair of its shared-use paths and sidewalks, except in response to reported complaints.  After construction, the pavement is left to deteriorate for decades and is fixed only after repeated complaints.  VDOT still has no annual budget or established policies and procedures to adequately and proactively assess and maintain its active mobility assets.

Thank you for this opportunity to comment.  We urge VDOT to better support active mobility in the years ahead.


Statement of Mark Scheufler, Active Prince William Co-Chair

Thank you for the opportunity to speak tonight.  I’m Mark Scheufler, Prince William County resident and 16-year VRE rider.

With the recent purchase of the Manassas Line and the planned completion of the Long Bridge in 2030, I strongly recommend VRE, region and state partner to support adding 2nd Platforms to the Manassas Park, Burke Centre, Rolling Road and Backlick Road stations to the near term Capital Improvement Plan.  This will allow for the Manassas Line to move to an all-day, all-week clock face schedule, with a few commuter train slots during peak-of-peak time frames.  The schedule along with 4-5 Amtrak trains per day will significantly increase ridership and lower capital costs due to the reduced train equipment needs that a high peak-of-peak commuter schedule requires.

More VRE service is vital for the region to take advantage of the VPRA multi-billion investment in the corridor and make better use of the VRE equipment that already carries high fixed costs regardless of the amount of service provided.  I-95 and I-66 are not getting any more capacity for the next 50 years.  VRE has the greatest ability to add significant mobility capacity in the region.

Boston/MBTA is an example of a rail system reworked their schedule to better serve people traveling in the middle of the day, in the evening and on weekends with the goal of transforming service from commuter rail to regional rail.  Their rail ridership is near pre-pandemic levels while VRE is still near 40%.

Existing plans do not go far enough to handle service disruptions with a higher frequency schedule especially with Amtrak trains and freight trains mixed in.  As a regular rider, service disruptions are a major hindrance when using the system.

I strongly recommend the 2nd platform project  be submitted for future Northern Virginia Transportation Authority regional funding.

But most importantly transportation agencies need to work with the localities/state to integrate projects such as the 2nd platform project/all day service with land use changes to increase mixed-use/residential density adjacent to stations to draw more ridership.  (This is especially needed in Fairfax County).  This only works if all-day all-week service is planned.  We have a major housing shortage in the region.  Planning housing/services adjacent to high capacity transit service is a solution.

With the completion of the I-66 and I-95 Express Lane projects, competitive bus schedules during peak periods will limit future VRE growth in some segments of the catchment area.  We need to start planning land use density improvements next to stations and 2nd platforms now to support high frequency service on the Manassas Line to begin when the Long Bridge opens.

Thank you for considering this testimony .

 

 

 

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

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.

Our May 2023 Comments on the Route 28 Bypass Project

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

###

Our Statement At The VDOT NoVA District’s Spring 2023 Joint Transportation Meeting


Annual Joint Transportation Meeting for Northern Virginia, May 1, 2023
Statement of Allen Muchnick, Member of the Virginia Bicycling Federation
and Active Prince William Boards of Directors

Good evening.  I’m Allen Muchnick.  I live in the City of Manassas, and I serve on the boards of the Virginia Bicycling Federation and Active Prince William, statewide and sub-regional active transportation advocacy organizations, respectively.

We thank VDOT for recently re-filling its statewide bicycle and pedestrian planner position and for staffing a new statewide trails office.  We look forward to seeing those offices advance safe active mobility.  We believe it’s time to review and update both VDOT’s 2011 State Bicycle Policy Plan and the CTB’s 2004 Policy for Integrating Bicycle and Pedestrian Accommodations.

I commend VDOT’s NoVA District Office for initiating a study to estimate the cost to complete all locally planned but unfunded bicycle and pedestrian facilities within the NoVA District.  While most NoVA localities have robust active mobility plans and even Vision Zero programs, Prince William County still lacks both, so its official inventory of missing pedestrian and bicycle facilities is woefully incomplete.

Since 2010, VDOT’s roadway reconfiguration program has cost-effectively retrofit bike lanes and pedestrian crossing improvements on many dozens of roadways during scheduled resurfacing, especially in Fairfax County.  Prince William County, however, has largely ignored this enormous opportunity to improve the access and safety of its vulnerable road users.  We urge the County and VDOT to actively implement this program in our communities.

The alignment of US Bicycle Route 1 through Prince William County is a prime example where retrofitted bike lanes or paved shoulders are desperately needed.  Although AASHTO and VDOT established this route more than 40 years ago and a VDOT consultant re-evaluated the route’s alignment through NoVA nearly a decade ago, the bicycling conditions on several Prince William route segments are horrendous.  For example, the County’s online Bicycle Skill Level Map labels Old Bridge Road, part of Minnieville Rd, Aden Rd, and Fleetwood Dr—all lacking bicycle facilities and posted at 45-MPH–as “Roads to Avoid” and tags Hoadly Rd and Tanyard Hill Rd as “Low Comfort”.  VDOT’s 2015 Bicycle Level of Service Map for the NoVA District rated those segments similarly.  It’s long past time for VDOT and the County to fix these embarrassing and potentially deadly deficiencies.

To address the ongoing epidemic of pedestrian fatalities, VDOT should aggressively implement design-speed reductions and pedestrian safety improvements along its multi-lane commercial arterials.  VDOT and Prince William should also establish safer bike/ped crossings of I-95 and I-66 and extend the I-66 Trail, now being built in Fairfax County, over Bull Run to connect to both Balls Ford Rd and the Northern Virginia Community College’s Manassas campus.

In closing, we strongly support the recommended SMART SCALE, CMAQ, and RSTP awards for Manassas, Manassas Park, and Prince William County.

Thank you for this opportunity to comment.

###

« Older posts