Roads
Route 1 widening would divide Fairfax communities
The US Department of Defense has approved a $180 million plan to widen Richmond Highway in Fairfax County. The proposal is unlikely to reduce traffic over the long term. It's more likely to harm the community character, degrade historic sites, and make traffic worse.
Moving so many jobs to Fort Belvoir, far from effective transit, was a mistake in the first place. Unfortunately, that decision is out of local hands. But rather than impose an ineffective and undesirable highway, DoD and Fairfax County need to find a more creative way to address the area's congestion.
Communities along Route 1 have long fought to revitalize the corridor. The current plan, however, would turn Richmond Highway into such an expressway that it would make revitalization along its sides difficult. It would divide rather than knit together the two sides of Route 1.
Expanding the road would also harm adjacent historic sites like Woodlawn Plantation and the Woodlawn Baptist Church. It risks repeating the scale and sterility of the massive 10-lane expanse of pavement that already exists around historic Pohick Church to the south.
Lanes and other elements can be narrower
Even if the number of lanes grows, the highway doesn't need to be so wide. The current proposal for the southern portion of the project, from Telegraph Road to the new Mulligan Road, is for a whopping 148 foot-wide cross-section. That's enormous. It includes a 32-foot median reserved for future transit and overly-wide, highway-scaled lanes that are up to 14 feet across.
Several components of the highway could be a more reasonable scale without reducing the number of road lanes. Doing so would be more appropriate for the area, and would better accommodate other modes. Many arterial streets in the DC region have lanes of 11 or 12 feet wide. There is no reason why the lanes on Route 1 need to be so much wider.
It is commendable that the DoD plan designated land specifically for rapid transit in the future, but DoD and Virginia should go further. They should include transit in a dedicated right-of-way as a core component of the proposal. This could use existing buses right away. Perhaps the transit lanes could replace the new third lane of the highway in each direction.
Walking, biking, carpooling and living on post can all reduce traffic
Addressing the traffic generated by Fort Belvoir requires a comprehensive solution, including transit, bike and pedestrian access, as well as creative solutions specific to the military base.
Although it's true that many workers will commute to the base from too far away to walk or bike, the current plan would force even those who live nearby to get in their cars. That's a mistake.
While the plan appropriately includes a bike path and sidewalk, the width and speed of the road would discourage walking and biking. It would be so difficult and dangerous to cross such a wide road that few people would ever try. Furthermore, if the entrances to the fort are not designed with bicyclists and pedestrians in mind, it is even less likely that the paths would be used.
DoD should take advantage of Fort Belvoir's status as a military complex to reduce traffic congestion. One way to do this would be greater use of federal transit benefits and carpooling. For example, DoD could design parking policies with strong incentives for carpooling, especially for those with regular work schedules.
Fort Belvoir should continue to maximize opportunities for soldiers and their families to live on post. The base has earned praise and awards for its "new urbanist" military housing, and should expand those communities. This would reduce single-occupant vehicle demand and allow for a reduced number of through and turn-lanes, particularly in the areas most endangered by the current plan.
Narrowing the road in this manner, while maintaining the number of through lanes, would make the road more manageable for non-automobile modes, without disrupting car traffic too much. A narrower road would be safer, would reduce the necessity to take land from historic sites, and could potentially move more people, by converting car trips to other modes.
It is important that DoD and Fairfax County consider all options before hastily widening Route 1. The changes coming to Fort Belvoir are significant, but turning a community's main street into a through highway is not the answer.
Comments
- Cyclists are special and do have their own rules
- M Street cycle track keeps improving, draws church anger
- O'Malley announces first projects using new gas tax money
- Can Loudoun grow while protecting its rural areas?
- ICC losing bus service in classic bait and switch
- Silver Spring mall could get massive facelift, new name
- WMATA launches "Short Trip" rail pass on SmarTrip







by Jasper on Aug 2, 2012 2:08 pm • link • report
(Yeah, yeah - I know it won't happen. But it makes sense.)
by Ser Amantio di Nicolao on Aug 2, 2012 2:09 pm • link • report
Richmond Highways overall problem isn't width. Its bad design and inconsistent turn lanes and points of access.
And a bicycle lane alone Rt1 is important but in the grand scheme there are better ways to make bicycling more feasible, and safe. The neighborhoods off the highway often have very wide streets with plenty of room for striped bike routes. No matter what form of transit eventually comes to the highway, thought needs to be given to how people will access it from the neighborhoods. Better feeder bike lanes and ped improvements help that problem now, and provides a benefit no matter the transit mode, and can have traffic calming benefits.
by spookiness on Aug 2, 2012 2:58 pm • link • report
I am afraid that the ideas are terribly idealistic. South of the Woodlawn neighborhood, I see less reason to provide biking lanes due to the main attraction being the Army base. Not to mention connections to the FairCo Parkway and eventually leading to 95. That's just car traffic.
Now I agree that such car centric focus needs to be lessened NORTH of the base. Otherwise I think we just need to focus on the more civilian side of the Richmond highway for stricter multi modal.
by Billy Bob on Aug 2, 2012 3:05 pm • link • report
by dca on Aug 2, 2012 3:18 pm • link • report
And yes, obliterating the historic stables would be a real shame.
If they REALLY want people to take transit here, they need non-stop express buses from all the major Metro stations, as well as one from Kingstown (Springfield, just off Beulah Road), where a lot of people live, and another from Woodbridge, where another huge chunk of the workers here live.
by Moderately Reasonable on Aug 2, 2012 4:17 pm • link • report
by Gull on Aug 2, 2012 4:25 pm • link • report
Really? The Mt Vernon trail and the Custis trail are plenty used, and they are next to major highways as well.
by Jasper on Aug 2, 2012 4:39 pm • link • report
2. OTOH this is not the inner part of the corridor that is likely to densify anytime soon, right? Im not sure how much pedestrian activity is realistic down that way.
3. this is considered "bike route 1" and so a bike facility ON the route makes sense, and a side path is probabaly the best we can do.
4. I do not know about the traffic conditions to judge that
by AWalkerInTheCity on Aug 2, 2012 5:00 pm • link • report
As for the 148' wide road, that is better than 180' wide version in the earlier plans. My impression from the presentation is that this design and route is close to a final decision, so it may well be a done deal.
by AlanF on Aug 2, 2012 5:08 pm • link • report
I would lay the blame squarely on VDOT for its failure over two decades to support an integrated road and dedicated transit lane solution for Route 1. During the 2011 General Assembly session, Governor McDonnell promised Senator Puller and Delegate Surovell to fund a transit study for Route 1 and the General Assembly passed a resolution in support. Yet, over a year later there's no study by the state. Failure by the state to complete the study, which was only needed to make a basic selection of mode of transit and center running or side running service, has resulted in this politicized, over-sized roadway. My experience with VDOT is such that we may never see the rapid transit, but we will see another two lanes added to the six they propose here -- thanks to the extra-wide right-of-way. So this project should not move forward without the basic decision on transit alignment.
by Stewart Schwartz on Aug 2, 2012 6:52 pm • link • report
by Tax Payer on Aug 3, 2012 6:48 am • link • report
I hope that
Prince Georges County, MDFairfax County is given consideratin for any future relocation of Federal, private, and public jobs. They have the infrastructure and base (land, transportation system, such as Metro, Amtrack, VRE, major highways such as Rts 495, 95, 66&501, and a brand new metro line etc.,facilities, services, and other installations).Can anyone tell me why this county is allways bypassed for jobs, and development?
Because the BOS of Fairfax County is competent and reliable instead of corrupt and a mess?
by Jasper on Aug 3, 2012 7:00 am • link • report
by selxic on Aug 3, 2012 8:52 am • link • report
by AWalkerInTheCity on Aug 3, 2012 9:15 am • link • report
by Ser Amantio di Nicolao on Aug 3, 2012 9:59 am • link • report
The stables are actually an issue. This area has a huge equestrian history. People may not realize that most American Olympic horses live here under the patronage of Jacqueline Mars. NoVa is as important horse country as Upstate NY, Kentucky and Florida. Due to the suburbanization of Fairfax most of that has been pushed into Loudoun, but the Woodlawn stables are pretty much the only public accessible horse stables left in Fairfax County.
Coming back to the whole plan, and having read some of the background stuff, I am actually pretty satisfied. They're pretty much doing the right things: worrying about historic spots; adding bike and pedestrian infrastructure; leaving space for transit; and leaving the decision about how to use the transit space to local authorities without any preference.
Nothing is perfect, but I like the way USDOT is hitting the right points.
Now, let's push the county and state to get the Yellow Line there.
by Jasper on Aug 3, 2012 11:08 am • link • report
by Ser Amantio di Nicolao on Aug 3, 2012 1:29 pm • link • report
by selxic on Aug 3, 2012 1:51 pm • link • report
I think it is also important to note - and only fair - that the widening of Richmond Highway is something that has been on the books for more than 20 years. The real need for the widening - the basis for the VDOT plans they've been showing off and on since the mid-'90s - is the explosive growth of Lorton and other parts of South County, south of Fort Belvoir. There is VERY little tied to the widening that is related to Fort Belvoir or even to its BRAC growth - despite what most politicos and others would have you believe.
The only legitimate link to make to the military, then, is that the DOD BRAC provided the means for funding that, for whatever reason, the state and local jurisdictions had failed to provide for so many years. Even then, Congressman Moran and his cohorts had to make the case that the widening was needed specifically to support the new hospital at Belvoir and the ability of Wounded Warriors and other beneficiaries to be able to get to it. Without that, it's not very likely the $180M would have come to pass.
Finally, DOD itself has little to do with the "building" or widening of the road. Belvoir is an interested stakeholder, of course. But, the decisions on alignments and anything else related to the road are the purview of VDOT and Federal Highways.
by Don Carr on Aug 3, 2012 3:04 pm • link • report
It's just that I've found very few people are aware of the equestrian history here. After all, Middleburg is a shocking 40 miles from the Mall on US-50, so why would people know it exists? The Beltway is not only a symbol of political myopia.
http://www.christmasinmiddleburg.org/
by Jasper on Aug 3, 2012 4:06 pm • link • report
by Steve on Aug 4, 2012 6:16 am • link • report
Add a Comment