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.

Fairfax County and Franconia-Springfield Parkways - Alternatives Analysis and Long Term Planning Study

459 views

Published on

Fairfax County and Franconia-Springfield Parkways - Alternatives Analysis and Long Term Planning Study

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

  • Be the first to like this

Fairfax County and Franconia-Springfield Parkways - Alternatives Analysis and Long Term Planning Study

  1. 1. Fairfax County & Franconia-Springfield Parkways Alternatives Analysis & Long Term Planning Study Public Outreach Summary & Preliminary Mitigation Strategies Board Transportation Committee February 12, 2019 Thomas Burke, Department of Transportation
  2. 2. Presentation Overview Fairfax County & Franconia-Springfield Parkways Alternatives Analysis & Long-Term Planning Study  Project Background  Public Outreach Summary “Fall 2018”  Resulting Highlights and Themes  Baseline & Preliminary Mitigation Strategies  Near Term Next Steps  Overall Project Schedule 2
  3. 3. Project Background • Determine future network deficiencies using County’s Traffic Forecasting Model • Develop alternatives to remedy the deficiencies • Obtain public input on the findings and the alternatives • Refine and prioritize recommendations for improvements to the corridor through 2040 and beyond • Make recommendations for changes to existing Comprehensive Plan 3 Long-Range Planning Study – Fairfax County/Franconia Springfield Parkways
  4. 4. Project Background (continued) • Short-Term Study • VDOT, in conjunction with Fairfax County, conducted Existing Conditions study (completed in 2017) • Developed more than 350 recommendations for short-term improvements to address existing conditions • VDOT completed 49 pedestrian/traffic ops/safety projects so far • Board Transportation Committee Briefing – May 2016 • Concurrent VDOT Fairfax County Widening Project • Route 29 to Route 123, including interchange at Popes Head Road/Shirley Gate Road Extension • Currently in Design, with Design Approval anticipated in mid-2019 4
  5. 5. Public Outreach 5 • Public Meetings o 3 meetings held in October 2018 o Provided overview of the project o Presented initial traffic analyses of current Comprehensive Transportation Plan o Initiated public engagement activities • Online Survey & Input o Offered 45 days, October 16th to November 30th o Included activity tabs o Supplemented by individual feedback
  6. 6. Public Outreach Summary “Fall 2018” • Public Meetings o 75+ meeting attendees • Project website comment form, district offices, and emails o 108 recorded responses • FCDOT Facebook page o 71 comments, 281 likes, and 172 shares • Online Survey o 15,150 recorded responses Online Survey: Number of Responses by Zip Code Received responses from neighboring jurisdictions 6
  7. 7. Public Outreach Summary “Fall 2018” 2.1 2.9 3.5 3.9 1.4 HOV Lanes Bike/Ped Transit Roadway Widening Express Toll Lanes Average Ranking of Corridor Travel Priorities 7 Agree 47% Disagree 53% Average Feedback on Comprehensive Transportation Plan
  8. 8. Public Input Results / Common Themes 8 Widening and Interchanges - More than 1,500 comments • Support for Widening, but not for HOV-exclusive lane • Support for interchanges to eliminate signalized intersections • Concern about impact to property value for homes Bike/Ped - Less than 500 comments • Support for enhanced facilities • Opposition to widening if bike/ped facilities will be impacted • Support for a continuous bike/trail along the Parkways Transit - Less than 300 comments • Support of enhanced transit • Support for increase in number of Park-and-Ride lots to accommodate transit and carpooling • Support for a Metrorail line between Franconia-Springfield Parkway and Dulles Airport
  9. 9. Public Input Results / Common Themes 9 HOV - Nearly 6,000 comments • Significant opposition to HOV • Some support of HOV-2+, in lieu of HOV-3+ • Concern about impact to neighborhoods if motorists divert to alternative routes/local roads Tolls - Nearly 2,500 comments • Strong opposition to tolling • Concern about impact on residential and disadvantaged communities
  10. 10. Baseline Strategy 10 Constrained Long-Range Transportation Plan (CLRP) • CLRP projects, as adopted by the National Capital Region Transportation Planning Board on November 16, 2016 • Bicycle and Pedestrian Enhancement Projects • Improve existing facilities to meet current design guidelines • Address grading issues • Complete missing connections within the existing network
  11. 11. Preliminary Mitigation Strategies 11 • Strategy A • Expanded Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities • Strategy B • Comprehensive Plan Without HOV • Strategy C • Strategy B + Capacity Improvements • Strategy D • HOV Feeder • Strategy E • Enhanced Transit and HOV-2+ Baseline Strategy +
  12. 12. Preliminary Mitigation Strategies 12 A. Expanded Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities • Construct shared use path on both sides of Parkways • Considered by segment • Provides flexibility in access and travel for bicyclists and pedestrians Example Cross Section
  13. 13. Preliminary Mitigation Strategies 13 B. Comprehensive Plan Without HOV • Number of lanes based on Comprehensive Plan • Varies from 6 to 8 lanes • Interchange Improvements - As per existing Comprehensive Plan • Network connections – New or widened roadway connections as per existing Comprehensive Plan • Enhanced Public Transportation - Express bus service without HOV • Pedestrian and Bicycle Improvements – as in Baseline Example Cross Section • Paved shoulder • Shared use path on both sides (not necessarily required on both sides) • Graded ditches and center median
  14. 14. Preliminary Mitigation Strategies 14 C. Strategy B + Capacity Improvements • Alternative intersection treatments • Interchange (grade separated) improvements • Localized widening (e.g. auxiliary lanes) at hot spots Example of At-Grade Improvement Example of Grade-Separation
  15. 15. Preliminary Mitigation Strategies 15 D. HOV Feeder • Number of general purpose lanes based on Comprehensive Plan • Additional more direct HOV connections to/from Existing Toll Facilities (Dulles Toll Road, I-66, I-95) for short segments • Grade-separated flyover connections • More direct connections as compared to general purpose traffic access Example Cross Section • 3 GP and 1 HOV-3+ • Separated directional HOV feeder lanes
  16. 16. Preliminary Mitigation Strategies 16 E. Enhanced Transit and HOV-2+ • Increased limited access along the Parkways • Replace signals with interchanges • Greatest benefit to HOV-2+ and transit users • Express bus service in managed (HOV2+) lanes • 6 to 8 lanes total • Additional Park and Ride lots/bus stops Example Cross Section • 2 GP and 1 HOV-2+ lane
  17. 17. Near Term Next Steps 17 • Board feedback on Preliminary Strategies (current stage) • Please provide comments by February 19th • Public Outreach #2 • Late February/Early March 2019 • 3 public meetings • Summary of Online Survey • Present Preliminary Mitigation Strategies • Solicit public input on proposed strategies • Quantify the feedback • Build two preferred concepts • Potential for a unified concept for the entire corridor • Evaluate two concepts • Present results in Summer 2019
  18. 18. Overall Project Schedule 18 • Completed • Gather feedback (Outreach Fall 2018) • Develop alternative mitigation strategies • Upcoming • Gather more feedback (Outreach Spring 2019) • Evaluate, compare mitigation alternatives • Results, more feedback (Outreach Summer 2019) • Recommendations & Prioritization (Early 2020) • Documentation (Early 2020) • Board Consideration/Endorsement (Spring 2020) • Board Authorization of Appropriate Comprehensive Plan Amendment (Spring 2020)

×