Fairfax County General :
Fairfax Underground
Welcome to Fairfax Underground, a project site designed to improve communication among residents of Fairfax County, VA. Feel free to post anything Northern Virginia residents would find interesting.
Welcome to Fairfax Underground, a project site designed to improve communication among residents of Fairfax County, VA. Feel free to post anything Northern Virginia residents would find interesting.
Transportation concerns not overlooked in BRAC 133 decision
Posted by:
Don Carr
()
Date: October 18, 2008 09:28AM
Belvoir Eagle
Oct. 16, 2008
Transportation concerns not overlooked in BRAC 133 decision
By Travis Edwards
Fort Belvoir BRAC Outreach Chief
As soon as the Army announced its decision to locate the 6,400 personnel associated with Base Realignment and Closure Recommendation 133 to a site in Alexandria, the debate quickly began whether the choice was the right one, or not. As with all other issues in Northern Virginia, transportation issues led the discussion - and ultimately played a large role in the selection of the Mark Center in Alexandria.
“The decision to select Mark Center as the future location for the BRAC 133 employees is ill conceived and is the just type of land-use decisions we used to make,” said Fairfax County Supervisor Jeff McKay of Lee District. “The (General Services Administration) site in Springfield already had a major regional transportation center, the land was already owned by the government, the employees I spoke with wanted the GSA site, and it was within walking distance to a mountain of amenities.
“While I do not think this was a smart decision at all, we cannot turn our back on the issue and those employees moving to Mark Center,” McKay said. “This is simply a major step backwards in regards to transportation and federal government policy for promoting mass transit use.”
Although Fairfax County officials vocally criticized the decision, they have taken the issue in stride along with regional and state officials.
Gov. Timothy Kaine said during a local news radio program this month that he does not think the plan “is optimal,” but believes “putting the jobs right on the Belvoir footprint would have been, I think, nearly a disaster in terms of transportation infrastructure.”
The transportation infrastructure improvements that will go on around Mark Center will not only help the BRAC 133 personnel, but other commuters in the county.
“One long-term way to reduce congestion would be to bolster bus service along the I-395 corridor and south of Alexandria, where many of the employees live,” said Virginia Transportation Secretary Pierce Homer. “Although the Springfield location was preferable from a transportation perspective, the Mark Center will be workable. We are going to try and make the transit and highway improvements necessary to serve the Mark Center. I do think we can work with them.”
The BRAC 133 decision was deferred by the initial Environmental Impact Statement study and analysis conducted at Belvoir in 2005.
“It’s important that everyone remember the effort to reevaluate placing BRAC 133 personnel at the Engineer Proving Grounds in the first place was due to community concerns about the road network around the area being able to handle that many new folks at one time,” said Don Carr, Belvoir’s director of public affairs. “The proposals received for the alternate sites allowed for an even more in-depth analysis of the realignment which in turn better positions the BRAC 133 move for success.”
To determine the best value among the proposed sites, the Army considered multiple factors, one of which was transportation management.
During the EIS study and subsequent Environmental Assessment of the BRAC 133 potential sites, it was noted there were “no challenges to the traffic analysis” that determined “long-term minor adverse impacts” at the Mark Center site.
According to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, several mitigation measures were included in the analysis designed to help alleviate congestion and improve capacity of Mark Center Drive. The analysis also laid out the need for the staffing and development of a transportation management plan that encourages alternative transit measures.
According to Jim Curren, a Fort Belvoir transportation planner, there is a robust local roadway network surrounding the Mark Center site that includes several major routes linked to the I-395 Corridor such as Little River Turnpike / Duke Street, Route 7 (King Street), Seminary Road, Braddock Road, Beauregard Street, and Van Dorn Street.
“This network allows the 45 percent of employees located in Fairfax County, Arlington County, and the City of Alexandria to disburse quickly along routes they currently use to travel to work,” Curren said.
The level of development proposed at Mark Center for the BRAC 133 relocation has been included in local and regional plans since the eighties.
“Depending on the extent of ridesharing and mass transit usage, BRAC 133 personnel will generate between 1,100 and 1,600 vehicle trips in the peak hour,” said Curren, who sited plans approved by the City of Alexandria in 2003 allowing for development that generates up to 2,000 peak hour vehicles trips and 4,839 parking spaces for the area.
The Mark Center proposal included a transportation center with covered access to the office buildings. This ‘hub’ will help link current and planned mass transit routes together.
“The site is well served by a bus routes of which there are currently 12 with direct routes to area rail transit sites,” Curren said.
The High Occupancy Travel lane project is another example of a potential traffic mitigation that will support Mark Center and its transportation management plan as well as the large amount of residential communities within easy walking or biking distance.
DoD surveys have constantly shown over the past 20 years that 77 percent of the employees affected by BRAC 133 live around the Crystal City area. Curren explained that “the analysis also found that ride sharing is a bigger component used by BRAC 133 commuters than mass transit.”
According to Carr, employees moving to the new location are familiar with the transportation requirements there.
“Seeing as it is only a few minutes from their current place of employment, and since they mostly live around the area, they are intimately aware of the arterial road network around the Mark Center. It should serve this ride sharing population well,” Carr said.
Planners continue to move ahead with the decision working together to meet the legislated completion deadline for the BRAC realignments - Sept. 15, 2011.
Oct. 16, 2008
Transportation concerns not overlooked in BRAC 133 decision
By Travis Edwards
Fort Belvoir BRAC Outreach Chief
As soon as the Army announced its decision to locate the 6,400 personnel associated with Base Realignment and Closure Recommendation 133 to a site in Alexandria, the debate quickly began whether the choice was the right one, or not. As with all other issues in Northern Virginia, transportation issues led the discussion - and ultimately played a large role in the selection of the Mark Center in Alexandria.
“The decision to select Mark Center as the future location for the BRAC 133 employees is ill conceived and is the just type of land-use decisions we used to make,” said Fairfax County Supervisor Jeff McKay of Lee District. “The (General Services Administration) site in Springfield already had a major regional transportation center, the land was already owned by the government, the employees I spoke with wanted the GSA site, and it was within walking distance to a mountain of amenities.
“While I do not think this was a smart decision at all, we cannot turn our back on the issue and those employees moving to Mark Center,” McKay said. “This is simply a major step backwards in regards to transportation and federal government policy for promoting mass transit use.”
Although Fairfax County officials vocally criticized the decision, they have taken the issue in stride along with regional and state officials.
Gov. Timothy Kaine said during a local news radio program this month that he does not think the plan “is optimal,” but believes “putting the jobs right on the Belvoir footprint would have been, I think, nearly a disaster in terms of transportation infrastructure.”
The transportation infrastructure improvements that will go on around Mark Center will not only help the BRAC 133 personnel, but other commuters in the county.
“One long-term way to reduce congestion would be to bolster bus service along the I-395 corridor and south of Alexandria, where many of the employees live,” said Virginia Transportation Secretary Pierce Homer. “Although the Springfield location was preferable from a transportation perspective, the Mark Center will be workable. We are going to try and make the transit and highway improvements necessary to serve the Mark Center. I do think we can work with them.”
The BRAC 133 decision was deferred by the initial Environmental Impact Statement study and analysis conducted at Belvoir in 2005.
“It’s important that everyone remember the effort to reevaluate placing BRAC 133 personnel at the Engineer Proving Grounds in the first place was due to community concerns about the road network around the area being able to handle that many new folks at one time,” said Don Carr, Belvoir’s director of public affairs. “The proposals received for the alternate sites allowed for an even more in-depth analysis of the realignment which in turn better positions the BRAC 133 move for success.”
To determine the best value among the proposed sites, the Army considered multiple factors, one of which was transportation management.
During the EIS study and subsequent Environmental Assessment of the BRAC 133 potential sites, it was noted there were “no challenges to the traffic analysis” that determined “long-term minor adverse impacts” at the Mark Center site.
According to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, several mitigation measures were included in the analysis designed to help alleviate congestion and improve capacity of Mark Center Drive. The analysis also laid out the need for the staffing and development of a transportation management plan that encourages alternative transit measures.
According to Jim Curren, a Fort Belvoir transportation planner, there is a robust local roadway network surrounding the Mark Center site that includes several major routes linked to the I-395 Corridor such as Little River Turnpike / Duke Street, Route 7 (King Street), Seminary Road, Braddock Road, Beauregard Street, and Van Dorn Street.
“This network allows the 45 percent of employees located in Fairfax County, Arlington County, and the City of Alexandria to disburse quickly along routes they currently use to travel to work,” Curren said.
The level of development proposed at Mark Center for the BRAC 133 relocation has been included in local and regional plans since the eighties.
“Depending on the extent of ridesharing and mass transit usage, BRAC 133 personnel will generate between 1,100 and 1,600 vehicle trips in the peak hour,” said Curren, who sited plans approved by the City of Alexandria in 2003 allowing for development that generates up to 2,000 peak hour vehicles trips and 4,839 parking spaces for the area.
The Mark Center proposal included a transportation center with covered access to the office buildings. This ‘hub’ will help link current and planned mass transit routes together.
“The site is well served by a bus routes of which there are currently 12 with direct routes to area rail transit sites,” Curren said.
The High Occupancy Travel lane project is another example of a potential traffic mitigation that will support Mark Center and its transportation management plan as well as the large amount of residential communities within easy walking or biking distance.
DoD surveys have constantly shown over the past 20 years that 77 percent of the employees affected by BRAC 133 live around the Crystal City area. Curren explained that “the analysis also found that ride sharing is a bigger component used by BRAC 133 commuters than mass transit.”
According to Carr, employees moving to the new location are familiar with the transportation requirements there.
“Seeing as it is only a few minutes from their current place of employment, and since they mostly live around the area, they are intimately aware of the arterial road network around the Mark Center. It should serve this ride sharing population well,” Carr said.
Planners continue to move ahead with the decision working together to meet the legislated completion deadline for the BRAC realignments - Sept. 15, 2011.
Re: Transportation concerns not overlooked in BRAC 133 decision
Posted by:
tubby
()
Date: October 18, 2008 03:35PM
Yeah right, injured troops from Iraq weren't "overlooked" at Walter Reed either.
BTW, since Fairfax County "lost" out to the City of Alexandria for the privelege of hosting this wonderful facility....don't you think that further discussion of this is OFF-TOPIC here at Fairfax Underground?
BTW, since Fairfax County "lost" out to the City of Alexandria for the privelege of hosting this wonderful facility....don't you think that further discussion of this is OFF-TOPIC here at Fairfax Underground?
Re: Transportation concerns not overlooked in BRAC 133 decision
Posted by:
Wrinkle
()
Date: October 18, 2008 05:48PM
Here's (Springfield Supervisor) Pat Herrity's opinion on this subject:
"The original goals of the Base Realignment and Closure Act of 2005 were to move DOD facilities to a) secure locations, b) that were government owned, and c) to reduce cost. These moves were to be accomplished by 2011.
The Army's recent announcement of the Mark Center site as its choice for the location of the Washington Headquarters Service (WHS) and related DOD components (BRAC 133) fails to meet any of these criteria. The Mark Center site is the smallest of the three sites being considered and cannot meet the preferred set back requirements for security purposes. The site is not government owned but will need to be purchased. The cost of the site will be higher than the other sites because the land will need to be purchased, Alexandria will need to be compensated for the lost tax revenue, and the increased construction costs including structured parking and blast proofing.
Although not a BRAC criteria - the site is the absolute worst possible answer from a transportation standpoint with no access to mass transit. Many of the BRAC 133 employees currently work in Crystal City where they have access to VRE, Metro and commuter busses. Mark Center has no VRE or Metro access. As many of these employees live to the south they will be forced to hit the roads and drive through Fairfax County.
Asst. Secretary Eastin's comments indicate that the decision was entirely timetable driven despite the fact that there is no penalty for failure to meet the BRAC timetable. Fairfax County, the region, taxpayers and the Army will be forced to pay the penalty for years to come for this shortsighted decision in terms of worsening traffic, poor security, poor employee morale, higher cost, and lack of flexibility for the future. My bet is that the Mark Center will even fail to meet the BRAC timeline.
The GSA site offered the best solution as the most cost effective, with the best security - full setbacks, the flexibility for the future growth, the best transportation solution - highway (FFX Pkwy, 395,95,495), HOV, Metro, Bus, VRE, etc, and provided the best answer for the BRAC 133 employees. The GSA site was supported by Congressman Moran and Congressman Davis, the Fairfax County Board of Supervisors, the local business community and the BRAC 133 employees.
The decision will allow Asst. Secretary Eastin to leave his post in December with the ability to say that he met the BRAC timeline but unfortunately the region and taxpayers will be living with the impact of this poor decision for a long time."
"The original goals of the Base Realignment and Closure Act of 2005 were to move DOD facilities to a) secure locations, b) that were government owned, and c) to reduce cost. These moves were to be accomplished by 2011.
The Army's recent announcement of the Mark Center site as its choice for the location of the Washington Headquarters Service (WHS) and related DOD components (BRAC 133) fails to meet any of these criteria. The Mark Center site is the smallest of the three sites being considered and cannot meet the preferred set back requirements for security purposes. The site is not government owned but will need to be purchased. The cost of the site will be higher than the other sites because the land will need to be purchased, Alexandria will need to be compensated for the lost tax revenue, and the increased construction costs including structured parking and blast proofing.
Although not a BRAC criteria - the site is the absolute worst possible answer from a transportation standpoint with no access to mass transit. Many of the BRAC 133 employees currently work in Crystal City where they have access to VRE, Metro and commuter busses. Mark Center has no VRE or Metro access. As many of these employees live to the south they will be forced to hit the roads and drive through Fairfax County.
Asst. Secretary Eastin's comments indicate that the decision was entirely timetable driven despite the fact that there is no penalty for failure to meet the BRAC timetable. Fairfax County, the region, taxpayers and the Army will be forced to pay the penalty for years to come for this shortsighted decision in terms of worsening traffic, poor security, poor employee morale, higher cost, and lack of flexibility for the future. My bet is that the Mark Center will even fail to meet the BRAC timeline.
The GSA site offered the best solution as the most cost effective, with the best security - full setbacks, the flexibility for the future growth, the best transportation solution - highway (FFX Pkwy, 395,95,495), HOV, Metro, Bus, VRE, etc, and provided the best answer for the BRAC 133 employees. The GSA site was supported by Congressman Moran and Congressman Davis, the Fairfax County Board of Supervisors, the local business community and the BRAC 133 employees.
The decision will allow Asst. Secretary Eastin to leave his post in December with the ability to say that he met the BRAC timeline but unfortunately the region and taxpayers will be living with the impact of this poor decision for a long time."
Re: Transportation concerns not overlooked in BRAC 133 decision
Posted by:
Don Carr
()
Date: October 19, 2008 12:14PM
tubby Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
BTW, since Fairfax County "lost" out to the City of Alexandria for the privelege of hosting this wonderful facility....don't you think that further discussion of this is OFF-TOPIC here at Fairfax Underground?
-------------------------------------------------------
Maybe YES?
-------------------------------------------------------
BTW, since Fairfax County "lost" out to the City of Alexandria for the privelege of hosting this wonderful facility....don't you think that further discussion of this is OFF-TOPIC here at Fairfax Underground?
-------------------------------------------------------
Maybe YES?
Re: Transportation concerns not overlooked in BRAC 133 decision
Posted by:
Don Carr
()
Date: October 19, 2008 12:22PM
tubby Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
BTW, since Fairfax County "lost" out to the City of Alexandria for the privelege of hosting this wonderful facility....don't you think that further discussion of this is OFF-TOPIC here at Fairfax Underground?
-------------------------------------------------------
I replied, "Maybe YES."
But then Wrinkle Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
Here's (Springfield Supervisor) Pat Herrity's opinion on this subject:
"The original goals of the Base Realignment and Closure Act of 2005 were to move DOD facilities to a) secure locations, b) that were government owned, and c) to reduce cost. These moves were to be accomplished by 2011.
The Army's recent announcement of the Mark Center site as its choice for the location of the Washington Headquarters Service (WHS) and related DOD components (BRAC 133) fails to meet any of these criteria. The Mark Center site is the smallest of the three sites being considered and cannot meet the preferred set back requirements for security purposes. The site is not government owned but will need to be purchased. The cost of the site will be higher than the other sites because the land will need to be purchased,Alexandria will need to be compensated for the lost tax revenue, and the increased construction costs including structured parking and blast proofing.
Although not a BRAC criteria - the site is the absolute worst possible answer from a transportation standpoint with no access to mass transit. Many of the BRAC 133 employees currently work in Crystal City where they have access to VRE, Metro and commuter busses. Mark Center has no VRE or Metro access. As many of these employees live to the south they will be forced to hit the roads and drive through Fairfax County.
Asst. Secretary Eastin's comments indicate that the decision was entirely timetable driven despite the fact that there is no penalty for failure to meet the BRAC timetable. Fairfax County, the region, taxpayers and the Army will be forced to pay the penalty for years to come for this shortsighted decision in terms of worsening traffic, poor security, poor employee morale, higher cost, and lack of flexibility for the future. My bet is that the Mark Center will even fail to meet the BRAC timeline.
The GSA site offered the best solution as the most cost effective, with the best security - full setbacks, the flexibility for the future growth,the best transportation solution - highway (FFX Pkwy, 395,95,495), HOV, Metro, Bus, VRE, etc, and provided the best answer for the BRAC 133 employees. The GSA site was supported by Congressman Moran and Congressman Davis, the Fairfax County Board of Supervisors, the local business community and the BRAC 133 employees.
The decision will allow Asst. Secretary Eastin to leave his post in December with the ability to say that he met the BRAC timeline but unfortunately the region and taxpayers will be living with the impact of this poor decision for a long time."
-------------------------------------------------------
So now I reply, "Maybe NO? Maybe it is NOT off topic."
Is or isn't traffic throughout the entire region of relevance to those of us who drive in Fairfax? Certainly Supv Herrity seems to think so ...
-------------------------------------------------------
BTW, since Fairfax County "lost" out to the City of Alexandria for the privelege of hosting this wonderful facility....don't you think that further discussion of this is OFF-TOPIC here at Fairfax Underground?
-------------------------------------------------------
I replied, "Maybe YES."
But then Wrinkle Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
Here's (Springfield Supervisor) Pat Herrity's opinion on this subject:
"The original goals of the Base Realignment and Closure Act of 2005 were to move DOD facilities to a) secure locations, b) that were government owned, and c) to reduce cost. These moves were to be accomplished by 2011.
The Army's recent announcement of the Mark Center site as its choice for the location of the Washington Headquarters Service (WHS) and related DOD components (BRAC 133) fails to meet any of these criteria. The Mark Center site is the smallest of the three sites being considered and cannot meet the preferred set back requirements for security purposes. The site is not government owned but will need to be purchased. The cost of the site will be higher than the other sites because the land will need to be purchased,Alexandria will need to be compensated for the lost tax revenue, and the increased construction costs including structured parking and blast proofing.
Although not a BRAC criteria - the site is the absolute worst possible answer from a transportation standpoint with no access to mass transit. Many of the BRAC 133 employees currently work in Crystal City where they have access to VRE, Metro and commuter busses. Mark Center has no VRE or Metro access. As many of these employees live to the south they will be forced to hit the roads and drive through Fairfax County.
Asst. Secretary Eastin's comments indicate that the decision was entirely timetable driven despite the fact that there is no penalty for failure to meet the BRAC timetable. Fairfax County, the region, taxpayers and the Army will be forced to pay the penalty for years to come for this shortsighted decision in terms of worsening traffic, poor security, poor employee morale, higher cost, and lack of flexibility for the future. My bet is that the Mark Center will even fail to meet the BRAC timeline.
The GSA site offered the best solution as the most cost effective, with the best security - full setbacks, the flexibility for the future growth,the best transportation solution - highway (FFX Pkwy, 395,95,495), HOV, Metro, Bus, VRE, etc, and provided the best answer for the BRAC 133 employees. The GSA site was supported by Congressman Moran and Congressman Davis, the Fairfax County Board of Supervisors, the local business community and the BRAC 133 employees.
The decision will allow Asst. Secretary Eastin to leave his post in December with the ability to say that he met the BRAC timeline but unfortunately the region and taxpayers will be living with the impact of this poor decision for a long time."
-------------------------------------------------------
So now I reply, "Maybe NO? Maybe it is NOT off topic."
Is or isn't traffic throughout the entire region of relevance to those of us who drive in Fairfax? Certainly Supv Herrity seems to think so ...
Re: Transportation concerns not overlooked in BRAC 133 decision
Posted by:
RJ
()
Date: October 20, 2008 09:31AM
"Is or isn't traffic throughout the entire region of relevance to those of us who drive in Fairfax?"
Well most of the BRAC employees were going through FFX via VRE. Now they will clog 95/395 instead. Mark Center decision is still horrible.
Well most of the BRAC employees were going through FFX via VRE. Now they will clog 95/395 instead. Mark Center decision is still horrible.