The Fairfax County Board of Supervisors is expected to the vote on the matter on Tuesday, Jan. 14. If the board votes to have no opposition to the $4.1 million project, that would clear the way for the Virginia Department of Virginia to proceed with the project which has a May 2016 completion date.
Read more about the project here: Centreville Roundabout Up for Discussion at Fairfax County Supervisors Meeting
Read these letters from residents and community groups who live near the area to the supervisors about the project:
From Sully Station II Community Association
Dear Supervisor Michael Frey,
I am writing to inform you that the Sully Station II Board of Trustees has not changed its opposition to the proposed changes to the intersection of Pleasant Road Valley Road and Braddock Road. Attached is a letter documenting our opposition to the proposed motion of no opposition to the Virginia Department of Transportation’s project to construct a roundabout at the intersection of Pleasant Valley and Braddock. A signed copy will be provided to your office on Monday, January 13, 2014.
Our opposition is also supported by those who are not represented by Association. Our Board received the attached email to consider delaying the expressions of no opposition based on the reasons stated in the email.
Daniel G. Jenuleson
President, Sully Station II Community Association
From Beth Green-Tweddle, Virginia Run resident
To the Fairfax County Board of Supervisors:
The purpose of this note is to urge you to consider delaying the decision (“expression of no opposition”) on the proposed Roundabout at Pleasant Valley and Braddock Roads.
I echo the emails and concerns presented through Delegate Hugo, local HOAs, and thoughtful individuals that have extensively studied the intersection and proposed VDOT changes. Supervisor Frey does not speak for me, my family and thousands of represented residents that seek an informed decision when all information is accurately presented to not only us, but the Board of Supervisors as well.
What is currently being presented is inaccurate and misleading. Please delay the decision and conduct a formal public hearing so that you may review all available information, ask questions and hear firsthand the concerns of your constituents. Only then will you be in a position to make an informed decision.
Resident, Virginia Run
From Spencer Marker, president of the Jillians Forest HOA
Dear Supervisor Frey and Sully Board Members,
This letter is on behalf of the Jillians Forest Homeowners Association and is to urge you not to support the proposed roundabout at the Pleasant Valley Road and Braddock Road at this time, delaying your decision until after a public hearing has been conducted so that those affected by this change can express their concerns and see that they are addressed. Waiting until after the Rte 50 widening project is completed and a more accurate traffic study could be performed would be ideal. Our subdivision voted unanimously and has joined every other subdivision affected by this proposal in opposition to moving forward without adequate hearings and studies being completed. We wanted to make you aware once again of our opposition prior to your meeting. .
This roundabout is proposed simply to relieve a choke point at the Loudoun County line . . . period. It will allow traffic to siphon off down Pleasant Valley Rd when it backs up at the S curves or at Lee Rd. That is all this roundabout will accomplish. Just a 1Ž4 mile past this intersection is a very dangerous set of “S” curves which will slow any (or should slow anyhow) traffic that may have gotten through the intersection faster, down to a crawl. Just past that is the Lee Rd. intersection which is a further bottle neck. This is the road leading to the High School as well as the Westfield corporate campus. While the intersection may not be perfect as it is at least traffic is metered and hits these other points at a slower, more reasonable pace. I A more comprehensive solution, if one is needed at all would be called for.
A more prudent approach should be to let the Rte 50 project be completed then see if any improvements are warranted. If they are then lets determine a solution that moves the traffic through while still maintaining the integrity of Pleasant Valley Rd., a scenic byway. A solution that protects the wetlands, the watershed, the sensitive & rare flora and fauna as well as various species that occupy the Woodlands. A solution that works in conjunction with planned uses such as ball fields for the adjoining parcels. A solution that does not shift the problem further east to the “S” curves or further north to the Herndon Rd intersection but rather works in conjunction with improvements made to those spots as well. A solution that actually protects, benefits and has input from the Fairfax County residents that actually use that intersection.
Our main concern as an association is to preserve the quality of life in our neighborhood and Michael, your job is to help preserve it for your constituents. We feel that the proposed changes to the intersection will be detrimental to our neighborhood and to our community as a whole and we stand with our neighboring associations in opposing the changes. We request that you change your proposed “no opposition motion” and stand in support of your constituents.
Jillians Forest Homeowners Association
From Centreville Resident Ted Troscianecki
To the Fairfax County Board of Supervisors
This request is based on the following considerations:
1.Despite what you’ve been led to believe, the overwhelming majority of the Fairfax County communities and residents that are affected by this project are opposed to it. The HOA boards of Sully Station, Sully Station II, Jillian’s Forest and Virginia Run (representing over 4,000 residents) voted to oppose the project. I would challenge Supervisor Frey to produce any evidence of substantial support from his constituents other than the anecdotal references that he has made in the past.
2.The information provided in the board packet is woefully inaccurate and incomplete and appears carelessly prepared.
- A) The description of support is extremely misleading. The VDOT comments sheets were anonymous with no reference to where the respondent resided (Fairfax or Loudoun).
- B) There is no reference to letters and correspondence from Fairfax residents and communities in opposition to the project that have been sent to the Board of Supervisors over the past several months and that are part of public record.
- C) Incorrect environmental references – the wetland forest is in the NE quadrant (not NW), and there are two (not one) rare plant species in the NE (not NW) quadrant.
- D) None of the “considerations” noted (beginning on page 57) has been shared with the public. Of particular concern is the reference to “access to Rock Hill District Park”, an extremely environmentally sensitive area.
- E) Total disregard of the impact of the Route 50 widening project on the need for this project. In general, the board packet lacks sufficient information for the board to make an informed decision.
4. Unless I missed it, there was no opportunity for public comment (as promised by VDOT) after the release of the CE/4(f) environmental impact documents. The 4(f) information was not available to the public at the VDOT meetings.
5. VDOT released new traffic data suggesting that the proposed roundabout will have no impact on the surrounding communities. The report is dated December 18, 2013 but was just made publicly available today (January 10, 2014) allowing no time for the public to review and comment on the data. The release of the report at this late date appears conveniently timed. An actual VDOT traffic study was done February 28, 2013 that has conflicting information.
6. The traffic information that was used for this project conflicts with MWCOG
7. The crash rate data that was provided is incorrect. There were 10 crashes not 12 as listed in the report.
8. 1 which shows traffic growth in the area at 1%.VDOT used 2% compounded annually growth rate for 17.2% for all approaches to this intersection.
8. Changes to the Mountain Road Park are requested in this proposal but there has no opportunity for public involvement and no 2232 hearing.
9. The crash rate for the “S” curve is higher than the intersection but no improvements have been shared with the public. Does the Board support the Old Lee Road extension as the alternative in order to preserve the significant archeological resources? Will this be included in the Six Year Plan?
10. No one from Fairfax County Park Authority or Transportation Department was present at the October VDOT public hearing to address concerns by the residents.
11. Supervisor Frey’s office has been silent on this subject for several months, providing no new information to his constituents during that time despite a number of letters and emails that have been sent including letters/emails from the HOA presidents from Sully Station, Sully Station II and Virginia Run that have gone unanswered and unacknowledged.
Supervisor Frey finally released an email this afternoon on the subject announcing the agenda item.
This appears to be a hasty attempt to rationalize his position but presumably does nothing more than placate himself.
This entire process has been nothing less than a fiasco with decision made when information has been made available at the last minute and with a significant lack of transparency with the public.
I am sending this to you as an individual constituent and resident of Fairfax County, but I know that my view is shared by the majority of impacted residents in western Fairfax.
I/we implore you to delay the decision and conduct a formal public hearing so that you may review all available information, ask questions and hear firsthand the concerns of your constituents. Only then will you be in a position to make an informed decision.
Respectfully, Ted Troscianecki