Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

VDRPT Route 1 Multimodal Alternatives Analysis


Published on

VDRPT Route 1 Mutlimodal Alternatives Analysis

Recommendations and Implementation Actions

Published in: News & Politics
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

VDRPT Route 1 Multimodal Alternatives Analysis

  1. 1. County of Fairfax, Virginia VDRPT Route 1 Multimodal Alternatives Analysis Recommendations and Implementation Actions Board Transportation Committee December 9, 2014 Leonard Wolfenstein Tom Burke Fairfax County Department of Transportation Department of Transportation 1
  2. 2. County of Fairfax, Virginia Background • County has requested that Commonwealth fund transit study in this corridor for many years • General Assembly funded study in 2013 legislative session • Executive Steering Committee comprised of state and local elected and transportation officials met throughout study and guided study • DRPT managed study • Study Limits: I-95/495 to Woodbridge (15 miles) • Study initiation: June 2013 • Public Meetings held October 2013, March 2014, and October 2014 • Study completion: January 2015 Department of Transportation 2
  3. 3. County of Fairfax, Virginia Four Refined Transit Alternatives Evaluated Alternative 1: Bus Rapid Transit 1- Curbside Alternative 2: Bus Rapid Transit 2- Median Alternative 3: Light Rail Transit Alternative 4: Metrorail- BRT Hybrid 3 Proposed P&R
  4. 4. County of Fairfax, Virginia Study Results Evaluation results suggest: •Median running Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) would provide a near-term cost-effective transportation solution to support economic development plans. •Metrorail extension to Hybla Valley would provide a higher level of local and regional mobility in the longer term and support long-term corridor development, contingent upon increased future land use density. Department of Transportation 4
  5. 5. County of Fairfax, Virginia Study Phasing Approach Phase I-III: Implement Multimodal Improvements and BRT (Median Running) Phase IV: Extend Metrorail to Hybla Valley, contingent upon future land use 3.1 mi. 7.3 mi 4.6 mi. 3.1 mi. Napper Rd Route 1 Widening Project Mount Vernon Memorial Highway Note: contingent upon future land use Department of Transportation 5
  6. 6. County of Fairfax, Virginia Final Study Recommendations • Recommends phased implementation of the multimodal investments of “Alternative 4- BRT/Metrorail Hybrid,” including: • Roadway Widening: Widen roadway from four lanes to six lanes where necessary to create a consistent, six-lane cross section along the corridor; • Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities: Create a continuous facility for pedestrians and bicyclists along the 15 mile corridor; the configuration will vary depending upon urban design, right-of-way availability, and other local considerations; • Transit: Contingent upon increased land use density and project funding, implement a median-running-Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) system from Huntington to Route 123 in Woodbridge (curb-running BRT in mixed traffic within the Prince William County portion) and a 3-mile Metrorail Yellow Line extension from Huntington to Hybla Valley as expeditiously as possible; Department of Transportation 6
  7. 7. County of Fairfax, Virginia Executive Steering Committee Resolution • Supports incorporating the recommendations in local, regional, and statewide plans so the projects will be positioned for funding; • Recognizes that supportive land uses, along with supporting infrastructure may be incorporated in local plans and regional forecasts in conjunction with the transit improvement; • Supports “Alternative 4 BRT/Metrorail Hybrid” contingent upon supportive land use and funding plan Department of Transportation 7
  8. 8. County of Fairfax, Virginia Next Steps: Planning Initiatives (as presented to ESC) 1. Comprehensive Plan Amendment 2. Market Study: understand rate of growth anticipated in the corridor based on economic conditions, transit improvements, and competing markets 3. Right of Way Survey: Needed for Route 1 and N. Kings Highway to confirm potential impacts during the environmental review phase 4. Continue involvement and engagement with citizens, business owners and economic development stakeholders Department of Transportation 8
  9. 9. County of Fairfax, Virginia Next Steps: Transportation Project Development (as presented to ESC) 1. Develop more detailed funding plan 2. Identify Project Sponsor(s) 3. Request class of action determination from FTA and FHWA 4. Initiate environmental documentation for Phases I and II (Huntington to Fort Belvoir) Department of Transportation 9
  10. 10. County of Fairfax, Virginia Draft Implementation Timeline 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 Roadway Widening and Bike/Ped, BRT Market Absorption Study Phase I Comprehensive Plan Revisions Phase II: Hybla Valley to Fort Belvoir BRT and Bicycle/Pedestrian, BRT Market Absorption Study Phase II Comprehensive Plan Revisions Phase III: Fort Belvoir to Woodbridge Improvements Roadway Widening and Bike/Ped Market Absorption Study Phase III Comprehensive Plan Revisions PhaseIV: Huntington to Hybla Valley Metrorail Extension Metrorail Market Absorption Study Phase IV Comprehensive Plan Revisions Years (2015-2040) Phase I: Huntington to Hybla Valley + Roadway Widening * Note: Timelines assume a funding stream to support projects implementation. Comprehensive Plan *Contingent upon increased future land use density. Planning Scoping/ NEPA PE Final Design Right of Way Utilities Relocation Construction Operation Legend: General Project Development Sequence Typical New Starts Funding Steps/Sequence: FTA SMALL STARTS PROJECT DEVELOPMENT PROCESS FTA NEW STARTS PROJECT DEVELOPMENT PROCESS
  11. 11. County of Fairfax, Virginia Suggested Next Steps for County Board • Direct staff to do the following: – Initiate process to amend Comprehensive Plan to reflect transportation recommendation on Transportation Plan Map (BRT designation for corridor, BRT station locations, and Metrorail stations) – Initiate Comprehensive Plan amendment process to consider land use changes at station areas (approaches below)* – Conduct Market Study* – Develop funding plan and identify resources for near-term activities – Prepare scope for environmental documentation* *contingent upon resources Department of Transportation 11
  12. 12. County of Fairfax, Virginia Key Components of Comprehensive Plan Amendment for Land Use • Work with community on land use guidance at BRT station locations • Assess infrastructure requirements due to increased land use density (schools, parks, public safety, roads – including assessment of grid of streets) • Develop refined street cross sections and corridor design standards • Refine BRT stop locations Department of Transportation 12
  13. 13. County of Fairfax, Virginia Approaches to Comprehensive Plan Amendment for Land Use • 2 Approaches: – A) Pilot BRT Stations (Amend Plan for 3 stations, e.g. Lockheed, Hybla Valley, Woodlawn) – B) Phase I of BRT (Huntington to Hybla Valley- 5 stations) Department of Transportation 13
  14. 14. County of Fairfax, Virginia Pros and Cons of Comp Plan Approaches • Approach A (Pilot Stations) Pro –Would provide detailed recommendations at 3 stations (including Woodlawn already authorized by the Board) –Would gauge community acceptance for station-related densities –Would establish a framework for efforts on remaining stations –Would identify improvements that can be made in the process before remaining station areas are planned –Would be more manageable from a staff and funding perspective Con –Would take resources and time and not include all stations –Would only provide partial assessment of impacts along the corridor Department of Transportation 14
  15. 15. County of Fairfax, Virginia Pros and Cons of Comp Plan Approaches (cont’d) • Approach B (Phase I) Pro • Would complete Plan for all 5 stations in Phase I Con • Would require significantly greater resources (consultant, staff, and community) and considerable time for extensive community engagement Department of Transportation 15
  16. 16. County of Fairfax, Virginia Implementation - Environmental Documentation • Current determination of study is that Environmental Assessment (EA) is necessary to advance BRT • Fairfax County is likely entity to conduct EA • May be logical to include BRT Phases I & II together in the EA (Huntington to Fort Belvoir) • 2 to 3 years needed to conduct EA; will use Route 1 AA study results as input • Estimated Cost to conduct EA: $3 to $6 million • Project is both road widening and transit project – FHWA and FTA will be federal agencies involved Department of Transportation 16
  17. 17. County of Fairfax, Virginia Implementation - Environmental Documentation (cont.) • EA can be initiated while Comp Plan process is underway; however, Comp Plan process should be completed before EA concludes, so that revised land use can be factored in assessment. Department of Transportation 17
  18. 18. County of Fairfax, Virginia Funding Plan • Initial funding available in Board Transportation Priorities Plan • Assess all potential funding sources – Evaluate FTA New Starts Program versus other options – Assess availability of future federal formula funds, e.g. CMAQ/RSTP – State Funding Possibilities – Availability of Regional and Local Funding – Potential for Innovative Financing, e.g. Public-Private Partnerships Department of Transportation 18
  19. 19. County of Fairfax, Virginia Immediate Actions • Direct staff to return to Board in early 2015 with information on resources required to: –Conduct Comp Plan Amendment (based on preferred option) –Conduct Market Study –Conduct Environmental Assessment Department of Transportation 19
  20. 20. County of Fairfax, Virginia • Questions and Discussion Department of Transportation 20