PWCA comments on the I-66 Transportation Demand Management Study
Submitted to the Virginia Dept. of Rail & Public Transportation, Sept. 2009
Click here to read more on our blog.

It appears that Virginia Department of Rail and Public Transportation (VDRPT) is gathering a second round on public comments on the I-66 Transit/Transportation Demand Management Study before it releases a draft report, and DRPT will finalize the draft report without more public input meetings.

This timeframe may be driven by a determination to complete the report before the current administration changes at the end of the current governor's term.

While speedy decisionmaking is laudable, we encourage VDRPT to maximize transparency and obtain citizen comments, as well as input from local/state/Federal agencies on the draft, before completing the final report. VDRPT should provide an opportunity for public comment whenever the draft report is released, notify all participants who registered at previous public comment sessions regarding the availability of the report, and stimulate news stories to encourage input on the draft from others who may not be on the official list of stakeholders.

VDRPT should officially notify towns as well as counties in the area affected by VDRPT studies. Local towns in Virginia have authority over land use decisions. Town perspectives regarding transportation projects and their impact on local land use may differ significantly from the county perspective.

Prince William County leaves land use plans within town boundaries as a blank spot on the county land use planning maps. In particular, VDRPT should notify the Town of Haymarket when the draft I-66 Transit/Transportation Demand Management Study is available for review and comment, before finalizing the report. The Town of Haymarket has officially expressed its opposition to Gainesville-Haymarket Extension plans for locating an end-of-line Virginia Railway Express (VRE) station within the town boundaries.

Haymarket officials understand that the town would absorb costs and receive traffic congestion, but no benefits, from a VRE parking lot that encourages Culpeper/Fauquier/Warren county residents to drive to Haymarket before commuting further towards DC. DRPT should get Haymarket comments before proposing a park-and-ride lot at the intersection of Route 15/I-66.

The current study, as described at the public input session on September 24 in Gainesville, shows a serious disconnect between transportation and land use planning. The focus on increasing capacity to move commuters to job centers at Tysons, in the Rosslyn-Ballston corridor, and to DC ignores the opportunity to use taxpayer-funded investments in new transit capacity to stimulate transit-oriented development.

The I-66 corridor outside the Beltway offers a great opportunity to maximize the return on investment in transit... but the study appears to ignore the land use implications of the proposed locations for "bus rapid transit" facilities. In particular, any transit investment in a Cushing Road facility (intersection of 234 Bypass/I-66) is a waste, if you're looking for transit-oriented development.

Check the planning and zoning, and you'll see just a few miles down the Route 234 Bypass is the proposed University Town Center and the Innovation site. It's a perfect opportunity to leverage public investment in a George Mason University campus, plus the multi-jurisdictional Hylton Performing Arts Center and Freedom Aquatic & Fitness Center.

A VRE station is proposed as part of Innovation. That site offers a chance for multi-modal transportation, instead of a park-and-ride operation at Cushing Road that will become a dead-end, transportation-only facility. In partnership with VDOT, DRPT should review county comprehensive plans and identify the potential impacts regarding state-funded transportation responsibilities. The next draft of the I-66 Transit/Transportation Demand Management Study should set an example of how publicly-funded transportation in new transit capability should be integrated with land use plans for new development.

State officials should no longer turn a blind eye to the opportunities or the impacts on how new transportation capacity can stimulare sprawl vs. transit-oriented development. While it may be finally unrealistic to implement full Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) capabilities on I-66 in Prince William County, based on the current and projected low-density development patterns for residences and houses, it makes sense to retain the potential for upgrading commuter-based transit services in the future.

Any initial priority/express bus services should be capable of an upgrade, over the next 30 years, to dedicated right-of-way, specialized vehicles, and in-line BRT stations with direct access to I-66. The transit issues in western Prince William County are not restricted to commuting to job centers in other jurisdictions. Focusing exclusively on the various ways to move Prince William residents to jobs in other jurisdictions ignores the socio-economic impacts of perpetuating Prince William as a bedroom community. Prince William needs circulator bus capabilities, to improve transit within the County (such as between Gainesville and Manassas, along the 234 corridor).

Any recommendation to study Route 28 options for mass transit to Dulles should also include studying alternatives for using mass transit services (such as an upgraded Omni-Link operation) to reduce traffic congestion within Prince William/Manassas/Manassas Park.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the I-66 Transit/Transportation Demand Management Study.

PWC Road Construction Bonds in the News:

Voters decide county road bonds
Lillian Kafka, Potomac News; October 12 2006
On Nov. 7, one of three local ballot questions asks whether or not the county should sell $300 million in bonds to make huge road improvements. Should the county fund local road widening? Voters decide.

It Takes One Road to Build Another; Collateral Moves Financing Forward
Nikita Stewart, Washington Post; November 6 2005
On its way to being the first jurisdiction in the state to finance a road project by selling bonds through a quasi-government agency, Prince William County also has become the first jurisdiction to put up a road as collateral. ... The road the county put up is Prince William Parkway from Hoadly Road to Liberia Avenue, said Liz Bahrns, a spokeswoman for the county.

Board to discuss road funding
Keith Walker, Potomac News; October 19 2005
The Prince William Board of County Supervisors voted Tuesday to hold public hearings Nov. 1 to discuss alternate financing of 1998 road bond projects, including the Linton Hall Road and the Spriggs Road projects. During the 2005 General Assembly session, state law makers made it legal for localities to finance road projects with money from the Virginia Resource Authority.

Board postpones road referendum
Chadd Umble, Potomac News Friday, May 13 2005
In a busy election year, Prince William County voters will have one less thing to worry about this November: whether they want another road bond. Citing increased costs and hoping that with another year they could show more progress on current road projects, county supervisors decided to put a $170 million road bond issue on hold until 2006, instead of moving it up to 2005.

Transportation plan to cost $1.6 billion
Lillian Kafka, Potomac News; January 12 2005
Prince William's county executive outlined a 14-year, $1.6 billion transportation plan Tuesday as part of the county's 2006 capital improvement program. Craig Gerhart, county executive, presented the plan, which could kick off with a $170 million bond referendum in 2006.

County road bond proposal under construction
Lillian Kafka, Potomac News; October 26 2004
The proposed list is still very "premature" and includes measures to relieve traffic from U.S. 55 and traffic in the Linton Hall Road corridor.

County approves $87 million road bond referendum
Dusty Smith, Gainesville Times; August 8 2002
... The proposed $86.7 million bond would pay for a list of seven projects, including the extension of Sudley Manor Road to Linton Hall Road and improvements to Route 15 in the western part of the county.

Pr. William Bypasses VDOT, Builds Parkway
Michael D. Shear, Washington Post; October 15 1998
In 1988, voters approved $51 million for the parkway, which was planned at that time to be a widening of Davis Ford Road. In 1990, after a citizens group persuaded county officials to instead build a new road through the heavily wooded center of the county, voters approved an additional $43 million. About $20 million in federal funds also were used, primarily for construction of a major interchange at Interstate 95 and the parkway.