County of Fairfax, Virginia Summary and Next Steps Fairfax County Department of Transportation January 15, 2013 Department of Transportation

County of Fairfax, Virginia

Summary and Next Steps

Fairfax County Department of Transportation

January 15, 2013

Department of Transportation


Snapshot of Outreach

• Survey started 9/24/12 and concluded 10/18/12

• 1,725 survey responses

• 9 public meetings, 5 additional presentations

• 220 attendees (not including elected officials and staff)

Department of Transportation 2


Other Outreach

• Community Dialogue on Transportation web site

• “Ask Fairfax” live, online Q&A on Wednesday, Oct. 10.– Answered 9 questions

• News Release issued 9/20/12, sent to:• Media, elected officials, stakeholders (TAC/Advisory group,

EDA, TMAs, NVTA, Chambers, all county agencies and Exec Staff, etc.)

• Board Members’ email subscribers, HOAs

– Update issued 10/15/12 (survey extended to 10/18/12)

• Reporter requests, media coverage– WTOP, Examiner, Patch, Connection



Survey ResultsQuestions

4: What impact does traffic congestion have on your daily commute?

– Moderate, Significant or Very Significant Impact 82%

– Little or No Impact 18%

5: Would you be supportive of a countywide effort to find a source of revenue to address transportation needs?

– Yes: 85%

– No: 15%

9: Should Fairfax County include additional funding to supplement the funding VDOT provides for secondary road maintenance?

– Yes 62%

– No 38%



Survey Results – Revenue OptionsQuestion 6

Following are the revenue options listed in order by MOST likely to support:

% of Respondents

1. Developer Contributions 79.0%

2. Vehicle Rental Tax 66.8%

3. Hotel Tax 62.7%

4. Gas Tax (cents per gallon) 59.8%

5. Increased C&I Rate 52.4%

6. Gas Tax (% of sales price) 50.8%

7. Registration Fee on New or Newly Located Vehicles 47.4%

8. Commercial Parking Fee 46.7%

9. Sales Tax 41.8%

10. Regional Vehicle Registration Fee 37.1%



Survey Results – Revenue Options (cont.) Question 6

Continued from the previous slide, revenue options are listed in order by MOST likely to support:

% of Respondents

11. Tolls 33.9%

12. Meals Tax 33.2%

13. Safety Inspection Fee 30.5%

14. Make Fewer Improvements 25.4%

15. Vehicle Miles Traveled Fee 24.4%

16. Real Estate Tax 22.4%

17. Real Estate Transfer (Grantor’s) Tax 20.8%

18. Personal Property Tax 20.6%

19. Sales Tax on Services 18.2%

20. Income Tax 17.8%

21. Vehicle Repair Tax on Labor 13.3%



Survey Results – Revenue Suggestions Question 7

Are there any other revenue options that should be considered?

857 responses, containing 1,114 suggestions (listed by % of suggestions):

• Cut other county programs, staff, services (12% of suggestions)

• Ask for/demand more State or Federal funding (10%)

• Vehicle-based taxes (by weight, number of vehicles per household) (7%)

• Require developers to contribute more* (6%)

• Gas tax increase* (5%)

• Location-based taxes (Commuter tax, special tax districts, etc.) (5%)

• Tolls* (5%)

(continued)

* These responses were variations of funding options proposed in survey question 6.




857 responses, containing 1,114 suggestions (listed by % of suggestions):

(continued from previous slide)

• Fines for traffic violations (Red light & speed cameras, cell phone use, etc.) (5% of suggestions)

• “Sin” taxes (alcohol, cigarettes, gambling, etc.) (4%)

• Transit & TDM (higher bus or rail fares, proffer enforcement, employer-provided incentives) (3%)

NOTE: 26% of suggestions fell into an “Other” category (Sell naming rights for street names, parking fees, various others). Also, 12% of responses either answered “no” or were not related to the question.






* These responses were variations of funding options proposed in survey question 6.


Question 7: 857 Responses with multiple suggestions

Revenue category Number of suggestions

Percent of suggestions

Reduce spending 135 12.13% State Fed 116 10.42% Vehicle-based 74 6.65% Developers* 64 5.49% Gas Tax* 61 5.48% Location-based 59 5.31% Tolls* 54 4.86% Driving-based 50 4.51% Sin tax 39 3.51% Transit fares, TDM 34 3.06% Other/various suggestions 289 25.95%

No Other Suggestions 127 11.41%

Unrelated Response 12 1.08%

Total suggestions 1,114


Survey Results – Project Suggestions Question 8

• What priority transportation projects should the county consider funding?

1,186 responses, containing 1,608 suggestions (listed by % of suggestions):

• Transit improvements (28% of suggestions)

• Major road improvements (28%)

• Bike & Pedestrian improvements (12%)

• Road repair/maintenance (6%)

• ITS/Signals (5%)

• Intersection improvements (4%)





443 (or 28%) of the 1,608 suggestions related to transit:

• Bus or no mode specified - 186 (42%) – Shuttle/community buses; more weekend bus service; more frequent trips;

“mass transit”

• Metro / “rail” - 169 (38%)– Extend Orange line to Rt. 50/Fair Lakes/Centreville; complete Silver line;

extend Yellow line to Fort Belvoir; expand VRE to weekends

• LRT / Streetcar - 59 (13%)– Light rail on Rt. 7 Tysons to Leesburg; on Richmond Hwy., on Fairfax

County Pkwy., Columbia Pike Streetcar

• BRT - 29 (7%)– In Rt. 1 corridor; Rt. 7 from Tysons to Alexandria; Rt. 28; Gallows Rd.





448 (or 28%) of the 1,608 suggestions were for major road improvements:

• Specific widenings or interchanges - 320 (71%)– Add turn lanes to Rt. 1; widen Stringfellow; Rt. 28/I-66/Braddock Rd.

interchange

• General widenings or interchanges - 117 (26%)– All Northern VA roads; widen main roadways; heavily used roads first

• Both specific & general improvements - 11 (3%)– Another Potomac River crossing; Parkway extensions; elevate I-66 and

add 6-8 lanes inside Beltway or expand Rts. 29 and 50



SummaryThe Countywide Dialogue on Transportation has been an effective public outreach strategy.

•While there is general support for addressing the problem, responses to the survey indicate a fair amount of confusion and misunderstanding regarding:

– How much transportation improvements cost

– Process for getting state and federal funding, where the funding comes from, and why it is drying up

– Which projects cannot be completed without additional funding, or how new funding would be spent

•Outreach to date has been very helpful, but more needs to be done



Where do we go from here?• Public meetings and small group presentations have been effective in

raising awareness of transportation funding issues among those who attended.

• However, the information did not reach a significant portion of the county’s population.

• Transportation funding is a complicated issue that will remain a top concern among all those who live, work, travel or do business in Fairfax County for a long time to come.

• Helping county residents understand the federal, state and local funding issues is critical if we are to have an informed and engaged electorate.

• Continued public outreach can help educate county residents, so that they may make informed choices about their transportation future.



Proposed Next StepsDevelop a multi-layered public education campaign

•Since there is so much information to absorb, a layered approach is suggested, where one layer of information would be rolled out and discussed with the community before the next layer of information would begin.

•To compete for the attention of busy County residents, staff suggests reaching out to residents on multiple levels, many times, over an extended period of time.

•Many types of media will be used to convey our messages in many ways.

•Campaign would not commence before the General Assembly concludes.



Proposed Next StepsA multi-layered public education campaign

• Message #1 (the first layer)– Identifying the costs of transportation (sidewalks,

a mile of highway, turn lanes, a transit bus, etc.)

• Message #2 (the second layer)

– Where funding comes from; breakdown of County, State, Federal dollars

• Message #3 (the third layer)

– Potential sources for additional transportation funding (gas tax, tolls, bigger fines for traffic offenses, real estate tax, etc.)

• Message #4 (the fourth layer)

– What additional funding will buy; a list of projects and cost per resident; project schedules




Use many types of media to convey messages in many ways:

– Develop a speakers bureau and make presentations to Chambers of Commerce and other groups, do media interviews (WTOP “Ask the Transportation Professional”)

– Informational videos on County’s YouTube page, promoted through social media (Facebook, Twitter)

– Articles for publication and electronic dissemination (via internet)




Use many types of media to convey messages in many ways (continued from previous slide):

– Series of ads, for example, in malls, on buses and bus shelters with QR codes for more information

– Electronic and print informational advertising (Google ads, local news media)

– Outreach tailored for non- traditional or disadvantaged audiences

– Staff is looking at options and costs for implementing a more thorough, statistically valid countywide survey



• Questions?

• Board discussion and feedback on next steps


Documents

County of Fairfax, Virginia Summary and Next Steps Fairfax County Department of Transportation January 15, 2013 Department of Transportation