Advancing active mobility in greater Prince William, Virginia

Category: Trails

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.

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

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.

Fund a Strategic Countywide Active Mobility Plan Plus $10 Million in Pedestrian, Bicycle, & Trail Improvements in the FY 2025 County Budget

On January 9, 2024, Active Prince William sent the following message to the Prince William Board of County Supervisors (PW BOCS) to request funding for two items in the FY 2025 County Budget: $3 million to develop a strategic active mobility plan for Prince William County and $10 million to implement active mobility and trail improvements.


Please consider funding the following items in the Prince William County FY 2025 Budget to support elements approved in the Community Energy and Sustainability Master Plan (CESMP).  Strong support was received from BOCS members for two of our recent BOCS candidates’ survey questions about 1) funding an Active Mobility Plan and 2) completing PWC’s planned National Capital Trail Network (NCTN) segments by 2030.

1. Active Mobility Plan  | $3 Million, one-time FY2025 funding line item

Justification: The Active Mobility Plan must be developed to provide a strategic/prioritized effort to enable bike/pedestrian projects identified in the 2040 Mobility Chapter to become projects in the Capital Improvement Program (CIP) budget.

The Active Mobility Plan–for transportation and recreation–must assess the existing pedestrian and bicycle networks within Prince William County and identify gaps to fill that will produce the greatest improvements in overall connectivity. This should include elements such as Complete Streets; Safe Route to Schools, Parks, and other community destinations; and Vision Zero policies and programs; regionally significant trails (NCTN, PHNST, ECG, US Bike Route 1, and the I-66 Parallel Trail); crossings of I-95, I-66, the Bull Run and Occoquan Rivers, and other barriers (highways and railroads); an active roadway reconfiguration program; plus various types of purely recreational trail projects and park sites and identifying the staff capacity to plan, construct, promote, operate, maintain, and rehabilitate all the elements not managed by VDOT.  The plan must also ensure that the County’s future active transportation networks mesh with neighboring networks planned for the City of Manassas, City of Manassas Park, Stafford County, and Fairfax County, in order to create the highest overall level of connectivity region-wide.

We recommend that the county hire an experienced outside consultant team to coordinate the development of this plan and to incorporate a robust public involvement component (e.g., a set of at least two public input opportunities, the involvement of agency staff and citizen work groups [including the existing Trails and Blueways Council], and targeted outreach to low-income, ethnic minority, and immigrant communities.  This would be analogous to how the County developed the CESMP and is planning to implement the SS4A Action Plan grant.

2. Mobility and Recreation Trails (General Fund) | $10 Million (Recommended to be an ongoing budget line item) 

Justification: Sustained General Fund money for trail infrastructure is needed to advance projects through the planning, engineering, right of way, and construction stages.  With over 200 miles of identified missing sidewalks and planned shared-use paths, this sustained funding level is needed to implement the Active Mobility Plan and leverage non-general fund dollars (e.g., TRIP and other developer contributions, VDOT revenue sharing, TAP, HSIP, CMAQ/RSTP, NVTA, USDOT grants, and concurrent highway construction, etc.)

Thank you for considering these requests.

Mark Scheufler & Allen Muchnick, Co-Chairs
Active Prince William
Advancing active mobility for a more livable, equitable, & sustainable greater Prince William, Virginia
Twitter: @Active_PW https://twitter.com/Active_PW

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

###

NoVA Trails Summit, October 20, 2022

The Northern Virginia Regional Commission (NVRC) will host a Northern Virginia Recreational Trails Summit on Thursday, October 20, 2022 from 10 am to 2:30 pm at its offices at 3040 Williams Drive, Suite 200, Fairfax VA 22031.

This will be a working meeting to identify opportunities to create connections and improve communities through recreational trails in Northern Virginia.

The Northern Virginia Regional Commission and partner organizations invite all interested jurisdictions and organizations to partner and share thoughts and ideas on how to improve our communities through the coordination and development of trails and parks.

Interested representatives and staff, community organizations, and businesses can register a member or representative.   NVRC and our partners look forward to a diverse and engaging group of attendees and would love to see new faces and hear new voices!  Space is limited, so please register early!

To learn more about NVRC and its role in the Potomac Heritage National Scenic Trail visit https://www.novaregion.org/299/Potomac-Heritage-National-Scenic-Trail.