September 7, 2017 Route 28 Corridor Feasibility Study

Public Information Meeting

September 7, 2017

Route 28 Corridor

Feasibility Study.

Project Team and

Study Committees

Route 28 Corridor Feasibility Study

Agency Involvement


The study is fully funded by the Northern

Virginia Transportation Authority (NVTA)

Jointly administered by:

Prince William County and City of Manassas

Study Team

Steve BurkeCity of Manassas

Co-Project Manager

Randy Boice

JMT Project Manager

Brian CurtisJMT Deputy Project

Manager

Rodney Hayzlett

JMT Senior Advisor

Rick CanizalesPrince William

County

Co-Project Manager


Sujith RachaJMT Senior Traffic

Engineer

Ian FrostJMT Senior

Environmental Lead

Technical staff from jurisdictions/agencies

Technical Committee Members


Prince William County

City of Manassas

City of Manassas Park

Fairfax County

Northern Virginia Transportation

Authority (NVTA)

Virginia Department of

Transportation (VDOT)

Virginia Railway Express (VRE)

Potomac and Rappahannock

Transportation Commission (PRTC)

Bull Run Regional Park

Virginia Department of Rail and Public

Transportation (DRPT)

Federal Highway Administration

(FHWA)

Prince William County Service Authority

Executive Committee Members


Senator George Barker Virginia General Assembly

Senator Richard Black Virginia General Assembly

Senator Jeremy McPike Virginia General Assembly

Delegate Tim Hugo Virginia General Assembly

Delegate Randy Minchew Virginia General Assembly

Delegate Bob Marshall Virginia General Assembly

Delegate Jackson Miller Virginia General Assembly

Chairman Corey Stewart Prince William County

Supervisor Martin Nohe Prince William County

Mayor Hal Parrish City of Manassas

Council Member Pamela Sebesky City of Manassas

Mayor Jeanette Rishell City of Manassas Park

Councilman Preston Banks City of Manassas Park

Chairman Sharon Bulova Fairfax County

Supervisor Kathy Smith Fairfax County - Sully District

Supervisor Pat Herrity Fairfax County – Springfield

District

Chris Price Prince William County

Monica Backmon NVTA

Helen Cuervo VDOT

Renee Hamilton VDOT

Maria Sinner VDOT

Todd Horsley DRPT

Scott Kasprowicz CTB

Mary Hughes Hynes CTB

Gary Garczynski CTB

Chief Executive Officer Doug Allen VRE

Paul Gilbert Northern Virginia Regional Parks

Authority

Short-Term

Recommendations

From VDOT 2015 Study


Previous Study

Short-Term Recommendations from

VDOT 2015 Study


VDOT completed a corridor safety and traffic operations study on Route 28 in 2015 from Liberia Avenue to I-66.

The report identified low-cost, short-term improvements to address congestion and safety improvements along Route 28.

Many recommendations have been completed and others are underway.

Study Area and

Goals and Objectives


Study Area


GOAL

Study Goals and Objectives


The project goals for the Route 28 Corridor Feasibility

Study are to identify long-term infrastructure

improvements that will improve travel times and

network reliability within the Route 28 Corridor through

Prince William County, the City of Manassas and City of

Manassas Park and develop a plan to implement these

improvement project(s).

Study Goals and Objectives


Obj. 1: Reduce Congestion (Historic Downtown Manassas)

Obj. 2: Reduce Congestion (Liberia Ave to Compton Rd)

Obj. 3: Facilitate Peak Period Commute Flows

Obj. 4: Increased Opportunities for Alternative Modes of Travel

Obj. 5: Improved Access to Transit Facilities

Obj. 6: Improvement Projects with Public Consensus

Obj. 7: Improvement Projects with Minimal Environmental Impacts

Obj. 8: Improvement Projects with Minimal Existing Conditions Impacts

Obj. 9: Improvement Projects that Complement Route 28 Operations

Key O

bje

ctives S

um

mary

Key Objectives


Project Development Process

Step 1: Route 28 Corridor Feasibility Study

• Subject of tonight’s meeting

• Includes development and analysis of alternatives to meet study

goals and objectives

• Identification of a highest ranked alternative

Step 2: Complete National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Process.

• Preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) in

accordance with FHWA implementing regulations

• Additional opportunities for public input

• Selection of a Preferred Alternative

Step 3: Final Design of the Preferred Alternative

Step 4: Construction

Existing and Future

Traffic Conditions


Existing Conditions


Route 28 has

• 2 continuous through lanes in each direction from Godwin Drive to Route 29

• Additional through lanes around Manassas Drive

• 24 signals between Godwin Drive and Route 29

Observed Peak Hours

• AM peak hour (7:45 – 8:45 a.m.)

• PM peak hour (5:30 – 6:30 p.m.)


2040 No-Build Alternative

• Maintains existing lane configurations along Route 28

• Includes Fairfax Design Build Project

• 4 lanes in each direction from Old Centreville Road to the Prince William

County line

• Includes transportation projects from 2016 MWCOG Constrained Long

Range Plan

• I-66 Improvements

• Extension of New Braddock Road across I-66

• Includes 2040 MWCOG population and employment growth forecasts

Volumes


Existing and Future Traffic Conditions

Route 28 Average Daily Traffic (ADT)

• Historic Downtown: 2016 21,300 2040 No-Build 29,200

• Between Liberia Ave and Manassas Dr: 2016 46,000 2040 No-Build 60,800

• Bull Run: 2016 57,300 2040 No-Build 76,200

1.4% Annual Growth Rate

Travel Times


Traffic Operations

* Travel time in the northbound

direction remains essentially the

same compared to the existing

conditions due to the Route 28

widening in Fairfax County

mitigating the northbound delays.

Southbound delays increase due to

no-build condition south of

Compton Road.

4846*

19 23

2237

27

54

Levels of Service (LOS) Results


Traffic Operations

• Intersections in study area operating over capacity (LOS F)* in

either AM or PM peak hour:

2016 - 4 out of 29 – 14%

2040 No-Build - 16 out of 29 – 55%

* Queuing along the corridor causes additional intersections to operate at

capacity (LOS E)

Qu

eu

ein

g

Alternatives Evaluation

and Screening


01

02

03

04

Preliminary Alternatives

03

02Criteria: Meeting study goals objectives

Environmental Impacts

Property Impacts

Traffic Benefits

Policy Considerations/ Long Term Solution

Initial Screening

Four Advanced for Further Evaluation and Study

Feasible Alternatives

Alternatives Evaluation

Alternatives Screening / Evaluation

0101

01

0303

04

05

05 Highest Ranked Alternative

Criteria: Project Cost

Project Benefits


Socioeconomic / Right of Way Impacts

c0101

01


Preliminary

Alternatives


ALT. 1: No Build

ALT. 2A: Godwin Drive extended to match existing Route 28 south of Bull Run

ALT. 2B: Godwin Drive extended to match existing Route 28 north of Bull Run

ALT. 3: Godwin Drive extended to match I-66 near the existing Compton Road crossing (the former Tri-County Parkway alignment)

ALT. 4: Widening Route 28 on existing alignment between Liberia Avenue and the Fairfax County line

ALT. 5: New Route 28 Reversible Lanes between Liberia Avenue and the Fairfax County Line

ALT. 6: Widening Old Centreville Road/Ordway Road throughout its length

ALT. 7: Converting Old Centreville Road/Ordway Road to a reversible facility

ALT. 8: Transit Alternatives to include BRT and/or VRE expansion along the corridor (Not Shown)

ALT. 9A: Euclid Avenue extension north and south

ALT. 9B: Euclid Avenue extension north and south

ALT. 9C: Euclid Avenue extension north and south

ALT. 10A: A new southern alignment (Hastings Drive/Signal View Drive)

ALT. 10B: A new southern alignment (Hastings Drive/Signal View Drive)

ALT. 10C: A new southern alignment (Hastings Drive/Signal View Drive)

Alternatives Carried Forward for Further Study



Alternatives Carried Forward for Further Study


Alternatives

Alt 2B – Godwin Drive

Extended to north of Bull

Run

Alt 2A – Godwin Drive

Extended to south of Bull

Run

Access Points:

• Sudley Road

• Lomond Drive

• Old Centreville Rd

• Route 28 south of Bull Run

Access Points:

• Sudley Road

• Lomond Drive

• Old Centreville Rd

• Ordway Rd – partial access

• Route 28 north of Bull Run

Alternatives


Alt 4 – Widen Route 28

• Add a lane in each direction

between Liberia Avenue and

end of Fairfax County widening.

• Ties into Fairfax County Design

Build Project south of Compton.


Alt 9 – Euclid Avenue Extension

North to Rte. 28 & South to

Sudley Rd / Rte. 28 Intersection

Roundabout is being planned for Route

28/ Sudley Road intersection by City of

Manassas

Alternatives

2nd Screening

Evaluation of

Alternatives


Screening Criteria for Alternative Evaluation


Screening Criteria established

to attain study objectivesObj. 1: Reduce Congestion (Historic Downtown

Manassas)





Obj. 6: Improvement Projects with Public Consensus

Obj. 7: Improvement Projects with Minimal Environmental Impacts

Obj. 8: Improvement Projects with Minimal Existing Conditions Impacts

Obj. 9: Improvement Projects that Complement Route 28 Operations

Key O

bje

ctives S

um

mary



Alternative Rating

Planning Level Costs


Planning Level Costs


2017 Planning Level Costs

Construction Cost – using VDOT Project Cost Estimating System (PCES)

ROW Costs

Utility Costs

Environmental Mitigation Costs

Contingency – 10% (applied to total)

Ro

un

de

d u

p t

o

Ne

are

st $

5 M

illio

n

2040 No-Build N/A

Alt 2A 4.25 $240 M

Alt 2B 4.0 $190 M

Alt 4 3.5 $245 M

Alt 9 4.75 $265 MC

on

cep

tua

l Alt

ern

ati

ve

#

Alig

nm

en

t C

olo

r

Len

gth

in M

iles

2017 Planning Level

Costs

Estimated costs subject to change as the project progresses through the project

development process and costs are inflated for future construction years.

Project Benefits


Project Benefits



No. of Intersections Operating over Capacity

Multimodal Compatibility

Project Benefits

Change in 2040 ADT in Historic Downtown Manassas

2040 ADT Served by Alternative + Route 28

Ratio of 2040 ADT to Planning Level Cost

Peak Hour Travel Time in 2040 using Alternative

Peak Hour Travel Time Savings in 2040 on Route 28

1

2

3

X Key Objective Attainable

4,5

2,3

1,

2,3

1,

2,3

Obj. 1: Reduce Congestion (Historic Downtown Manassas)





Project Benefits


Byp

ass

Alt

Ro

ute

28

2

Current Volume 0 57,200 57,200

2040 No-Build 0 0 0 76,200 76,200

Alt 2A -7,700 -16,900 37,200 59,300 96,500

Alt 2B -7,700 -16,800 37,200 59,400 96,600

Alt 4 2,700 6,200 0 82,400 82,400

Alt 9 3,400 -24,300 35,000 51,900 86,900

Ch

ange

in 2

040

AD

T o

n

Ro

ute

28

(Lib

eria

Ave

to

Co

mp

ton

Rd

)

Key Objectives Attainable 1 1 2

Ch

ange

in 2

040

AD

T o

n

rou

te 2

8 in

His

tori

c D

ow

nto

wn

Man

assa

s3

2040

AD

T Se

rved

by

Alt

ern

ativ

e +

Ro

ute

28

(Lib

eria

Ave

to

Co

mp

ton

Rd

)4

Tota

lCo

nce

ptu

al A

lter

nat

ive

#

Alig

nm

ent

Co

lor

Traffic Benefits

(when compared to 2040 No-Build)

Project BenefitsTravel Times on Alternative Routes (min)


Travel Paths

Alt 2A

Alt 2B

Alt 4

Alt 9

A

B

Alternative #NB AM

Peak Hr

SB PM

Peak HrTotal

2040 No-Build 47 55 102

Alt 2A 20 31 51

Alt 2B 18 31 49

Alt 4 35 43 78

Alt 9 30 36 66

Travel Time Savings on Business

Route 28 (min)

Alternative #NB AM

Peak Hr

SB PM

Peak HrTotal

Alt 2A 24 15 39

Alt 2B 24 17 41

Alt 4 12 12 24

Alt 9 20 19 39

Godwin Drive

Route 29




4f Properties / Historic Sites / Public Recreation Areas / Wildlife or Waterfowl Refuges

Floodway / Floodplains

Streams / Wetlands

Hazardous Materials

Environmental Justice Concern

Noise Impacts

7

7



7

7

7

7



Obj. 1

Obj. 2

Obj. 3

Obj. 4

Obj. 5

Obj. 6

Obj. 7

Obj. 8

Obj. 9

Improved Access to Transit Facilities

Improvement Projects with Public Consensus

Improvement Projects with Minimal Environmental Impacts

Improvement Projects with Minimal Existing Conditions Impacts

Improvement Projects that Complement Route 28 Operations

Reduce Congestion (Liberia Ave to Compton Rd)

Reduce Congestion (Historical Downtown Manassas)

Increased Opportunities for Alternative Modes of Travel

Facilitate Peak Period Commute Flows

Key Objectives Summary

Obj. 1

Obj. 2

Obj. 3

Obj. 4

Obj. 5

Obj. 6

Obj. 7

Obj. 8

Obj. 9













Environmental Impacts within 250 Foot Corridor

2040 No-Build 0 / 0 / 0 0 / 0 0 / 0 0

Alt 2A 7.0 / 16.4 / 0 23.4 / 66.7 7370 / 5.4 9

Alt 2B 0.7 / 30.3 / 0 21.2 / 55.7 7050 / 6.2 1

Alt 4 3.9 / 1.1 / 0 5.0 /9.3 2050 / 0.9 50

Alt 9 0.6 / 8.3 / 0 16.9 / 47.8 2030 / 2.8 16

Key Objectives Attainable 3 7 7 7 7

4f P

rop

erti

es:

His

tori

c Si

tes

(acr

es)

/

Pu

blic

Rec

reat

ion

Are

as /

Wild

life

or

Wat

erfo

wl

Ref

uge

s

Flo

od

way

(A

cres

) /

Flo

od

pla

ins

(Acr

es)

Stre

ams

(Lin

ear

Feet

) /

Wet

lan

ds

(Acr

es)

Haz

ard

ou

s M

ater

ials

(#

Site

s)

Co

nce

ptu

al A

lter

nat

ive

#

Alig

nm

ent

Co

lor


Environmental impacts are preliminary, based on GIS databases and do not

have the benefit of fieldwork which will occur during the NEPA process.

Socioeconomic / ROW

Impacts


Socioeconomic / ROW Impacts



Socioeconomic/ROW Impacts

Relocations - Businesses

Relocations to Residential / Churches / Schools

Conservation Easements

8

8

8


Obj. 1

Obj. 2

Obj. 3

Obj. 4

Obj. 5

Obj. 6

Obj. 7

Obj. 8

Obj. 9











Obj. 1

Obj. 2

Obj. 3

Obj. 4

Obj. 5

Obj. 6

Obj. 7

Obj. 8

Obj. 9












2040 No-Build 0 0 / 0 / 0

Alt 2A 13 112 / 0 /0

Alt 2B 0 70 / 0 /0

Alt 4 96 5 / 0 / 0

Alt 9 24 51 / 0 / 0

Socioeconomic / Right of Way Impacts

Key Objectives Attainable 3 8 8

Re

loca

tio

ns

to B

usi

ne

sse

s

(#)

Re

loca

tio

ns

to R

esi

de

nti

al

(#)

/ C

hu

rch

es

(#)

/ S

cho

ols

(#)

Co

nce

ptu

al A

lte

rna

tiv

e #

Alig

nm

en

t C

olo

r

Socioeconomic / ROW Impacts

Right of way impacts are preliminary and subject to change as

the project progresses through the project development process.

Highest Ranked

Alternative


Highest Ranked Alternative


Ro

un

de

d u

p t

o

Ne

are

st

$5

Mil

lio

n

Ran

kin

g*

Po

ints

Ran

kin

g*

Po

ints

Ran

kin

g*

Alt 2A $240 M 2 19 pts. 2 -20 pts. 4 2.7

Alt 2B $190 M 1 20 pts. 1 -15 pts. 2 1.3 P

Alt 4 $245 M 3 8 pts. 4 -11 pts. 1 2.7

Alt 9 $265 M 4 12 pts. 3 -16 pts. 3 3.3

* Ranking Best (1) to Worse (4)

Hig

he

st R

anke

d A

lte

rnat

ive

by

Tech

nic

al C

om

mit

tee

Co

nce

ptu

al A

lte

rnat

ive

#

Ali

gnm

en

t C

olo

r

2017 Planning Level

CostsProject Benefits

Environmental /

Socioeconomic /

ROW Impacts

Average

Ranking*

Next Steps



Next Steps

Dates subject to change as the project progresses through

the project development process.


Public Information Meeting in Fairfax

Monday, September 11, 2017

6:30 p.m. to 8:30 p.m.

Centreville Elementary School Cafeteria

14330 Green Trails Blvd, Centreville, VA 20121

Presentation (same as tonight’s) and Question and Answer Session at

7:00 p.m.

Boards and Handouts (same as tonight’s)

Thank you for coming!

Comment sheets are

available


Date post:	29-Oct-2021
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	4 times
Download:	0 times

September 7, 2017 Route 28 Corridor Feasibility Study

Documents