Honoring Friends of Accessibility: RAC's Community Partner Awards

This post by RCA President Colin Mills was originally published in Reston Patch.

It’s a busy time for RCA!  We’ve been engaged heavily in analysis and discussion about the RCC rec center proposal.  We’re looking at the Comprehensive Plan language proposed for the Master Plan Task Force.  Our 20/20 Committee just put the finishing touches on its updated bus service recommendations.  We’re preparing for our upcoming elections.  (The filing deadline for Board candidates is June 3^rd, so if you want to run, fill out your form today!)  There’s so much activity and controversy going on that I can hardly stop to breathe some days.

Happily, though, there’s still time for one of my favorite community activities: recognizing those who are working to make life in Reston better.  Our Citizen of the Year ceremony is a prime example of this kind of recognition.  Last week, I joined Reston Accessibility Committee chairman Ken Fredgren in honoring several Restonians who have been friends to the cause of accessibility.

RCA President Colin Mills with 2013 Community Partner Award
winners (L - R) Leila Gordon, Sherry Witowski, and Greg White

Last month, RAC was honored by Fairfax County for its efforts to make Reston’s buildings and shopping centers more accessible for people with disabilities.  But as Ken will gladly tell you, RAC couldn’t accomplish everything it does without help from our friends in the community.  It takes a village of thoughtful volunteers to move the cause of accessibility forward.

In order to give thanks to those special volunteers, this year RAC created the Community Partner Award, which recognizes individuals who show exceptional support for RAC’s disability-rights advocacy.  (Previously, RAC had established the Universal Access Leadership Award to honor members of the business community who have distinguished themselves by making modifications to their premises, thus creating safe and comfortable access for all customers.)

Last Wednesday, Ken and I attended a Rotary Club luncheon to recognize three of the inaugural Community Partner Award winners.  The Rotarians have kindly hosted previous presentations of the Universal Access Leadership Awards, and as Ken noted in his remarks, their slogan over “Service Above Self” dovetails nicely with RAC’s mission.

The three honorees at the Rotary luncheon were as follows:

Leila Gordon, Executive Director, Reston Community Center

For her welcoming, unfailing support of Reston Accessibility Committee and all people with disabilities... by advocacy for accessible parking spaces at Hunters Woods Village Center // and // For her leadership of the Center's co-sponsorship of RCA community forums on accessibility in 2010 and 2012.

When Edens & Avant planned to revamp Hunters Woods last year, RAC was concerned about preserving the improvements it had secured from the previous owner, including additional accessible parking spaces and new crosswalks and curb ramps.  Leila made the connection between RAC and Edens, and she advocated with RAC on behalf of the improvements.  Edens recently completed its parking lot revamp, and the spaces, crosswalks, and curb ramps were all preserved.  (The spaces were even moved closer to the shops.)

Also, Leila contributed to the success of our accessibility forums by providing a key element: refreshments!  I for one was most grateful for her contribution.

Greg White, Chief Operating Officer, Reston Interfaith

For his consistent, generous support of Reston Accessibility Committee, // His advocacy for all people with disabilities // and // For his leadership of Reston Interfaith's co-sponsorship of RCA community forums on accessibility in 2010 and 2012.

Reston Interfaith is a tireless advocate on behalf of those in need, including those with disabilities.  So it was no surprise that Greg and RI were enthusiastic co-sponsors of our accessibility forums.  Greg provided valuable logistical and planning assistance, and he helped us get the word out and drove turnout for the forums.  The events would not have been nearly as successful without Greg’s help.

Sherry Witowski, Vice President and Regional Manager, United Bank

In recognition of her personal demonstration of generous hospitality to Reston Accessibility Committee... by providing a meeting room in the bank branch at Temporary Road and Reston Parkway since December, 2008.

As anyone who’s ever planned an event in Reston knows, meeting space is at a premium.  And free meeting space is as rare as hen’s teeth.  So when RAC needed a place for its committee meetings, it was a blessing that Sherry offered up space at the bank gratis.  Not only has this removed a scheduling challenge from Ken’s plate, it has allowed RAC to devote its budget fully to advancing the cause of accessibility.

There was one Community Partner Award that we didn’t present at the Rotary lunch.  That’s because the award was for Reston Association CEO Milton Matthews, and RA asked us to present the award as part of the surprise farewell ceremony they held for Milton at their Thursday board meeting. 

RCA President Colin Mills (L) and RAC chairman Ken Fredgren (R)
with 2013 Community Partner Award winner Milton Matthews

Happily, we were the first of many organizations offering tributes and awards to Milton that night.  Here’s what our certificate said:

For his outreach to and generous support of Reston Accessibility Committee, // and // for his leadership of Reston Association's co-sponsorship of RCA community forums on accessibility in 2010 and 2012.

Remember what I said about free meeting space being hard to find?  Well, Milton and RA were kind enough to host both of our accessibility forums free of charge, which relieved us of an important planning burden.

But that’s not all that Milton has done for RAC.  I can’t say it better than Ken did in his remarks: “Milton, you and your staff have been a Godsend to us.  Your hallmarks of generous sharing, compassion, humility, commitment to service, professionalism, and organization have provided visibility and legitimacy for a civil rights advocacy that doesn't have the public acceptance that it should - yet.”

Kudos to all four winners of the Community Partner Award.  In different ways, each of them been an exemplar of community service and support of accessibility.  Sharing a community with these terrific folks is just another reason I’m glad to call Reston home.  And as busy as I may be, I will never be too busy to say thank you to those who help RCA and devote their time to serving Reston.

Follow-Up Report – “Reston Bus Service: Good Work in Progress”

RCA’s Reston 2020 committee recently submitted its second report to the Fairfax County Department of Transportation (FCDOT) and the Board of Supervisors regarding the county’s latest proposals for Fairfax Connector bus service when Silver Line Metrorail service begins this winter. The County's proposal calls for most Reston commuter buses are rerouted serve to the new station.

The latest Reston 2020 report, “Reston Bus Service: Good Work in Progress,” analyzes FCDOT’s April and May proposals.  The new report highlights the substantial improvements in the proposed transit plan, notes some continuing concerns, and suggests additional improvements for making it better. 

FCDOT released its initial proposals for bus service to the new Silver Line stations in January, and RCA subsequently hosted a public meeting with FCDOT representatives.  Reston 2020’s first paper, “Building on Reston’s Transit Tradition:  Enhancing Bus Service with the Arrival of Metrorail,” published in February, examined the county’s plans and provided recommendations for improvements.

The county released a revised bus plan in April adopting some of Reston 2020’s recommendations, including new mid-day and evening bus service to Wiehle Station.  The April plan was a major step forward but there were several issues, such as long gaps between peak and off-peak service, which Reston 2020 analyzed in posts on Reston 2020’s blog.

On May 7th, FCDOT presented its evolving plans to the Board of Supervisor’s Transportation Committee, which reduced but did not completely eliminate the gaps.

The county’s final recommendations for Connector bus service likely will be released this week, and reviewed by the Board of Supervisors at its June 4, 2013 meeting.

RCA Raises Questions About RCC Rec Center Proposal

This post by RCA President Colin Mills was originally published in Reston Patch.

On Monday, at the RCA Board meeting, our primary topic of discussion was one of Reston’s hottest issues: the RCC proposal to construct a new rec center. It’s no surprise that this was one of our most spirited meetings ever. We emerged with a new report that takes a hard look at the questions we need to answer before we decide whether and how to proceed with a rec center, a resolution calling for much more community input in the process, and a proposal for achieving that input.

Our report, The Reston Recreation Center Initiative: Unanswered Questions on Need, Facilities, Location, Financing, and Decision Making, was drafted by our stellar analyst Terry Maynard. The paper spotlights issues that haven’t been resolved yet in the rec center proposal, and raises questions for further exploration. These questions include:

Community Needs: If you’re familiar with RCC’s long waiting lists for popular programs (especially in aquatics) and the heavy usage of its facilities, the need for a new facility may seem like a no-brainer, particularly with the new residents coming with the Metro. But those new residents mean that Reston will have other needs too.

We’ll need new schools. We’ll need updated and expanded public facilities, such as a new library. We’ll need to maintain RA’s aging infrastructure, and likely provide new amenities as well. And as RCA has stated repeatedly, we’ll need major transportation improvements to keep Reston moving and preserve our quality of life.

Unfortunately, we can’t afford to build everything we might want. Given that, where does a new rec center fall in our list of priorities? Should public funding be used to meet the demand for new indoor recreation space, or will private recreation and fitness providers be sufficient?

The updated market survey that’s due on June 3^rd should provide insight on the second question. But the first question can only be answered through a community-wide discussion of priorities.

Facilities and Services: If we do build a rec center, what should be in it? The centerpiece of the rec center proposal is an indoor pool. Should it be a 25-yard pool (like the one RCC has currently), or a 50-meter pool? Should a leisure pool or a therapy pool also be included? What about weight rooms or gymasiums? What about meeting rooms? Should we include features targeted at seniors (such as reading rooms) and youth (such as a game room?

In general, we believe that the new rec center, if it’s built, should be as comprehensive as we can make it. Whatever we build will need to meet our community’s needs for decades to come. We should be as forward-looking as possible in thinking about future demand. Hopefully, the updated market survey can provide some guidance here as well.

Location: This has been the most contentious issue so far, with many speakers at the public hearings opposing the idea of building at Baron Cameron Park, which has been discussed. RCC says that they have made no decisions on the location, but the Baron Cameron option is the only one presented so far. According to RCC representatives at our Monday meeting, they have not conducted a systematic study of alternative locations.

Our paper presented options that could be plausible alternatives: at Tall Oaks, on FCPA land near the North County Government Center, at Isaac Newton Square, and in the southwest corner of Lake Fairfax Park. Surely there are others. Maybe some won’t prove to be feasible, but the only way to know is to fully evaluate the options. Our paper also proposes criteria for evaluating potential sites.

Financing: Currently, RCC proposes to build the facility using their existing Small Tax District #5. Most other public recreation centers in Fairfax County, however, were built and funded using the County-wide real estate tax, and maintained by the Park Authority.

One possibility would be to lobby the County to build the rec center, as they have done elsewhere. But that would mean waiting at least a decade – and maybe more – before County capital funds became available. Do we want to wait that long, or is this a high enough priority that we in Reston should fund it ourselves?

Other factors may come into play. For instance, how many Restonians vs. non-Restonians are expected to use the rec center? If it will be used predominantly by non-Restonians, perhaps County funding makes more sense. If we do use Small District 5, would adding the facility require raising the current tax rate? The expected influx of new residents and businesses will provide more revenue within the current rate, but will the growth be enough to offset the costs?

The updated market survey should provide help here as well. In addition to providing updated estimates of how much the rec center might cost, it will also give us an idea of how much of the center’s operating budget might need to be subsidized by Reston taxpayers.

Decision Process: If Small Tax District #5 is to be used to fund the rec center, the RCC Board will make the decision to proceed or not. And ultimately, the citizens of Reston will have the final say, as they would vote on the rec center bond referendum.

But before we reach that point, much more community input is needed, to answer the questions described above and more. I give RCC credit for soliciting public input earlier in the process compared to the Brown’s Chapel proposal in 2009, and they’ve done quite a bit of preliminary research to get us to this point. But the issues we’ve discussed above impact all of Reston, and we need a community-wide conversation. Involving the entire community in the discussion also makes it more likely that the bond referendum, if one occurs, would pass.

How do we hold that community-wide conversation? Our recommendation is for a panel with representatives from RCC, RCA, and the Reston Association to review the options (including the questions asked above), take in the full breadth of community opinion, and recommend a proposal that would provide the best possible outcome for Reston. At the meeting, Terry cited the example of Aurora, Illinois, which convened a task force with a broad cross-section of community representatives working in concert to generate a proposal for its rec center. I like that model of widespread participation.

Whatever model we choose, we should ensure that the whole community is represented in the discussion, and that there are multiple opportunities for them to speak and be heard on this issue. A series of community forums throughout Reston would be a good way to gather this input.

If you’d like to know more about our recommendations, you can read our report in full here. And rest assured that we at RCA are far from done talking about this; we’re going to continue studying the issue, debating it, and pushing for a process that generates the best outcome for the community.

RCA Resolution on RCC Rec Center Proposal

At its meeting on Monday, May 20th, RCA passed the following resolution regarding the RCC rec center proposal:

(1) RCA endorses and approves the RCA white paper, “The Reston Recreation Center Initiative: Unanswered Questions on Need, Facilities, Location, Financing, and Decision Making” as an official Association position.

 

(2) RCA strongly recommends that much more community input be sought before it is decided whether and how to proceed with a rec center.

 

(3) RCA recommends that a joint Community panel comprising representatives from RCC, Reston Association, and RCA be formed to address the issues in the paper and others it deems appropriate, and to develop a community-wide proposal for a recreation center consistent with its findings for consideration by the appropriate community and county officials.

Minutes from April 22 RCA Board Meeting

Location:      Reston Community Center

Attendees:   C.J. Basik, Hank Blakely, Sridhar Ganesan, John Hanley, Diane Lewis, Colin Mills, Terry Maynard, Tammi Petrine, Gary Lee Thomas, Dick Rogers, Gary Walker

Meeting Minutes

Agenda:        The agenda was adopted as proposed.

April Meeting Minutes:  The minutes were adopted as written.  Resigning Board member Debra Eastham has provided copies of the minutes from her tenure to the RCA dropbox.  President Mills lauded Mrs. Eastham’s excellent service as Secretary during the past 2 years.   

Treasurer’s Report:  Treasurer Diane Lewis provided the Treasurer’s Report’ which was approved as written. The ending balance for the Operating account was $287.54 and Restricted funds totalled $1,586.13.

RCC Facility Meeting:  Colin Mills stated that the meeting was well-attended, with over 50 attendees.  Leila Gordon presented an overview of the project.  The public discussion was lively.  General sentiment was supportive of the proposal, but not at Baron Cameron. There was some discussion of financing.  The meeting was a learning opportunity and an example of a successful RCA forum.  Terry Maynard reported that 2020 had met about the RCC proposal and he had worked up a document, which he shared with the Board.  He will rework the paper to incorporate members’ suggestions.  Discussion will continue next month.

RCA Election:  Board members not up for election will comprise the Election Committee.  The initial work on the election materials was done last year.  Some revision of the documents will be necessary.  Colin Mills will serve as chair and send an email out to the members of the committee.  Gary Walker needs the election announcement updated for the website by May 1^st.  Colin Mills will send the candidate recruitment document and form out to the group.  9 possible candidate names were compiled.  Those who proposed the candidates will contact them to ask about their willingness to run for the Board.

NOVA Labs Tour:  Gary Thomas reported that the NOVA Labs tour the previous Saturday took about 1 hour.  They were able to see the sub-labs within NOVA Labs, which has doubled in size in the past year.  They will probably need to move in 2 years.  Plans are afoot to hold a “Maker Fair” in 2014.  Colin Mills asked Gary Thomas to put together a proposal for RCA’s possible participation with NOVA Labs in the Maker Fair. 

Letter of Thanks to Cathy Hudgins:  10 Board members approved Colin Mills'  proposal to send a “thank you” letter to the Supervisor.  There was 1 abstention.

Soapstone Crossing:  Dick Rogers presented his 2020 white paper which prioritizes the 5 County options for this crossing, calling for a focus on the Wiehle Station, on the impacts upon Reston’s south side, modifications to options and to the bridge width, as well as the need for agency coordination.

Education Task Force:  Tammi Petrine met with Supervisor Hudgins, to discuss the need for entry level jobs in the community, getting developers on board with addressing this need and to present the education initiative.

RCA 2020:  Terry Maynard mentioned the committee’s memo to Planning & Zoning on short and long-term school needs. They also sent a letter to Pat Hynes asking about the various school issues.  There will be a meeting on Thursday at the County Government Center. 

In the matter of traffic, he discussed the importance of specifying that no development should proceed unless the 6 “gateway” intersections [Wiehle Avenue/Sunrise Valley, Wiehle Avenue/Sunset Hills, Reston Parkway/Sunrise Valley, Reston Pkwy/Sunset Hills, Fairfax County Pkwy/Sunrise Valley, Fairfax County Pkwy/Sunset Hills] are at the level “E” standard, less than 1 minute stoppage.

Dick Rogers noted that the County has revised the bus plan, adding midday and early evening service to North & South Reston.  The Pentagon and Crystal City runs will continue with reduced runs.  Riders need to lobby the Department of Transportation for bus scheduling needs. Runs every 10 minutes between Reston Town Center and the station are now proposed.

Official RCA Communications:  Gary Thomas asked about when to use RCA letterhead in public comments. Sridhar Ganesan suggested adding a disclaimer to personal commentary.  It was agreed that guidelines are needed. This discussion was postponed due to lack of time.

Technology Update:  Gary Walker proposed that RCA hire a hosting service to administer email addresses for Board members to avoid harvesting of individual email addresses from the website.  It would also establish a path of continuity for the committee chair emails.  Discussion was tabled and will be continued in the Technology Working Group.  

Other Business:  Tammi Petrine reported that there has been no contact from the McGuire family about the license plate forms.

Next Meeting:  The Next Board meeting will be held on May 20, 2013. It will again take place at the RCC.

Adjournment:  The meeting was adjourned at 9:35 p.m.

Draft Agenda for May RCA Board Meeting

Updated 5/17: Note that the times of several agenda items have changed.

DRAFT Agenda

RCA Board of Directors Meeting

May 20, 2013

RCC Hunters Woods

Item	Time	Topic	Disposition	Presenters
1	7:30 PM	Adopt  Agenda	Action	Colin Mills, RCA Board
2	7:35 PM	Approve April Meeting Minutes	Action	Diane Lewis
3	7:40 PM	Treasurer’s Report	Action	Diane Lewis
4	7:45 PM	Bus Report	Discussion	Rob Bonham
5	7:55 PM	Technology: Website, RCA Email Addresses, Facebook Presence	Discussion	Gary Walker
6	8:05 PM	RCA Finances – Plan Moving Forward	Discussion	John Hanley, Sridhar Ganesan
7	8:15 PM	Official RCA Communications	Discussion	Gary Lee Thomas
8	8:30 PM	RCC Facility Paper	Discussion, Action	Terry Maynard, RCA Board
9	9:15 PM	Community Calendar	Discussion	Gary Lee Thomas
10	9:20 PM	Wiehle Station Access – Hudgins Response	Discussion	Dick Rogers
11	9:25 PM	Other Business	Discussion	RCA Board
12	9:30 PM	Location and Time of Next Meeting; Adjourn	Action	RCA BoardRe

RCA Draft Report Regarding RCC Recreation Center Proposal

Below is an excerpt of the Executive Summary of a white paper to be considered for approval by the RCA Board of Directors at its regular monthly meeting on May 20, at 7:30pm, at the RCC-Hunters Woods facility.  It is on the agenda for discussion at 8:30pm.  The paper looks at a number of open issues concerning the RCC proposal to build a recreation center at Baron Cameron Park financed by Reston special tax district funds.  It proposes the creation of a joint RCC, RA, and RCA panel to address the issues before proceeding with the RCC initiative.

A PDF of the entire Draft Resolution is available here 

Excerpt of the Executive Summary

For the second time in a half-dozen years, Reston Community Center (RCC) has proposed the construction and operation of recreation center in Reston.  It has proposed that the recreation center be located at Baron Cameron Park and financed through Small Tax District #5—a real estate property tax covering all Reston residences and businesses.   The proposal would need the approval of the majority of Reston voters in a bond referendum before a recreation center could be built.

Before deciding on whether Reston should proceed with this major initiative, a number of key issues need to be addressed.  Drawing on work by Brailsford & Dunlavey (B&D), market consultants to RCC on this project, and Robert Charles Lesser Company (RCLCo), this paper identifies key issues and some of the important considerations in a decision on whether and how to proceed with construction of a Reston Recreation Center.

DOWNLOAD the PDF version (DRAFT) 

Wiehle Station Access & Transit Preparations Dominate RCA Reston 2020 Blog in April

By Terry Maynard

With the Silver Line scheduled to arrive at the end of the year, RCA’s Reston 2020 Committee focused much of its attention in April to the state of local preparations to provide access to the new rail transit service.  Much of Reston 2020’s work followed up on baseline papers it had prepared in February on the limited progress in roadway and other improvements at Wiehle and the growing dialogue on the need to improve bus transit in Reston. 

Reston 2020 continued to participate in the second round of the County’s Fairfax Connector (FC) public meetings and kept the public informed about the upcoming input opportunities.  Based on what committee members heard there and Fairfax County postings on its County website on the proposed new schedules,  Reston 2020 identified an important new issue in the planned bus schedules:  major gaps in service between morning rush, mid-day, evening rush, and last evening bus service.    As Fairfax County continued to update its bus plan, Reston 2020 continued to highlight gaps in service.    It is planning to publish a more comprehensive examination of Fairfax County transit plans for Reston in May. 

The committee also provided extensive commentary on its blog concerning the continuing shortfalls in completing the many traffic, pedestrian, and biking improvements needed to enable Restonians safe, convenient, and easy access to the new Metrorail station.   A baseline post on the Reston 2020 blog highlighted the 32 improvements the County planned for the station area and the fact that only three will be completed by the opening of Wiehle Station.  The committee also published—and sent to Supervisor Hudgins—a report on the priority need to build a cost-efficient, well-located Soapstone Connection across the Dulles Corridor to ease traffic around the Wiehle Station.  

To put an exclamation point on these Reston 2020 initiatives, RCA President Colin Mills sent a Board-approved letter to Supervisor Hudgins thanking her for her responsiveness to the concerns detailed in the several Reston 2020 papers. 

RCA: Working Hard for Reston

This post by RCA President Colin Mills was originally published in Reston Patch.

It’s been a few months since I last wrote about RCA’s Reston Accessibility Committee, and the changes they achieved at South Lakes Village Center. Well, Ken Fredgren and his hard-working group have remained quite active since January, when I last wrote about them, and it’s high time that I shine the spotlight on their latest work. RAC continues to champion the cause of ensuring accessibility for everyone throughout Reston.

On the heels of their success at South Lakes, RAC turned its attention to the Reston Hospital Center. As you would imagine, accessibility is paramount at a hospital. So when a RAC member reported that she had had experienced problems opening the bathroom doors at the hospital, not only did RHC staff test the doors and fix them quickly, but they also reached out to RAC to talk about how the hospital could be made more accessible.

RAC performed a survey of the hospital property and made several suggestions for improvement. And the RHC staff listened! The hospital now has more accessible parking spaces, access aisles, curb ramps, curb cuts, and crosswalks. Some of the existing accessible spaces were relocated to provide a more accessible route to the hospital buildings. They even moved their valet parking service to the main entrance to provide safer and more comfortable access for patients with disabilities.

I’m delighted to know that RHC is now a friendlier place for those with disabilities. Kudos to RAC for another successful project! And kudos to RHC for their proactive approach to improving accessibility. Ken reported that RHC Community & Government Relations VP Tracey White and COO Jane Raymond, who were the liaisons to RAC on the project, were tremendously helpful and pleasant to work with. I feel great knowing that we have a hospital that cares about ensuring access for all of its patients and visitors.

The RHC effort is just one of several Reston projects that RAC has been working on these last few months. The other efforts are still in progress, and I’ll be sure to share the news once they’ve been completed.

In addition to his work in Reston, Ken has also been at work in Richmond. He is continuing to push for the Board of Housing and Community Development to approve the building code changes that his working group proposed. It’s been a slow process, as the Board has been reluctant to adopt the changes. This has meant that Ken has had to spend a lot of time and energy revising the proposed changes and driving back and forth from Richmond to attend hearings.

But Ken has not given up; he’s continued to advocate for the changes, and to work to find a compromise that will allow these changes to move forward. If he is successful (and I believe he will be), people with disabilities all over the Commonwealth will benefit from his efforts.

RAC’s dedication and hard work has earned recognition even beyond Reston’s borders. In honor of Building Safety Month, last week RAC received the Community Partnership Award from the Fairfax County Department of Public Works and Environmental Services. The award was presented at a ceremony before the Board of Supervisors. I’m delighted to see RAC receive the recognition it deserves, and I hope that the award might spur others throughout the County to create an Accessibility Committee in their own communities.

Ever the advocate, Ken took a moment during his acceptance speech to call on the Supervisors to create a process to enforce requirements for compliant accessible parking signs throughout the County. In order for a parking space to be truly “accessible,” it needs to be properly designed (on level ground, with access aisles) and properly signed. Ken called on the County to perform inspections of accessible parking signs and spaces. Better yet, both Chairman Bulova and Supervisor Hudgins made a public commitment to address the issue. I’m hopeful that this will come to pass, and if it does, it will be another move forward for people with disabilities.

As you can see, RAC has kept itself active working on behalf of Restonians with disabilities. If you’re inspired by what they’re doing, you can now tell them in person, because RAC is getting out into the community. Last Saturday, for the first time, RAC had a booth at the Reston Farmer’s Market at Lake Anne. Their booth was stocked with information about RAC and its accomplishments, and they did a fine job spreading the word.

So if you have any questions about RAC, or if you’d like to give them a donation or join the committee, or if you’d just like to say thanks for what they’re doing, stop by their booth. They’re planning to return to the Market on May 18^th, and they’re hoping to be there every other week while the market is in operation.

As always, I’m inspired by the example Ken and RAC are setting. Improving access for the disabled is not an easy or high-profile task, but the success of RAC’s volunteer activists is a sight to behold. With hard work, good will, and a firm interest in the community welfare, RAC is making Reston a better place to live, work, play, and get around.

Accessibility Committee Honored With County Award

Congratulations to RCA's Reston Accessibility Committee, which was honored on April 30th with the Building Safety Month Community Partnership Award from the Fairfax County Department of Public Works and Environmental Services (DPWES).  RAC was honored for its work to ensure that Reston's public buildings and facilities are accessible to everyone, including those with disabilities.

RAC Chairman Ken Fredgren (center) holds the Community Partnership Award.

Photo Credit: Fairfax County Office of Public Affairs

Ken Fredgren had some thoughtful remarks on accepting the award.  They are reproduced below.

A Connection to Less Congestion

This post by RCA President Colin Mills was originally published in Reston Patch.

As the opening of the Silver Line draws ever closer, Reston’s citizens are keeping a close eye on traffic. How will our roads be affected by the new Wiehle Metro station? What is being done (or not being done) to alleviate congestion and ensure that Restonians will be able to access our own station?

After the activism on this issue by RCA and others, Supervisor Hudgins has begun taking action to improve access in the station area. (Last week, I sent a letter to her on behalf of RCA thanking her for her efforts.) One of the keys to reducing congestion around the station, the Supervisor and most Restonians agree, is additional crossings of the Dulles Toll Road.

The north-south roads that pass over the Toll Road are Reston’s biggest traffic choke points. (I can attest to this, as I sit in backups every evening on Reston Parkway traveling to pick up my daughter after work.) The congestion will only get worse as thousands of people from inside and outside of Reston try to get to the station. With only a handful of crossings to carry all that demand, we’re going to need additional outlets to keep Reston moving.

The top priority for a new crossing is what’s known as the “Soapstone Connector.” This would start around the current end of Soapstone Drive and connect Sunrise Valley with Sunset Hills, passing over the Toll Road near the Wiehle station. This would not only provide an alternate route for people accessing the station from south Reston, but it would also serve as a relief valve for cross-town traffic seeking to avoid the backups at Wiehle or Reston Parkway.

Supervisor Hudgins has called for making the Soapstone Connector a priority, and the County is studying several possible alignment options. RCA’s Reston 20/20 Committee looked at the options and last week, we issued a paper, The Soapstone Connection: A Bridge to Reston’s Future, outlining our recommendations.

Reston 20/20’s paper, written by the hard-working Dick Rogers, doesn’t just pick a favorite of the options on the table. It also looks at the criteria being used to evaluate the options, and suggests a few new criteria to ensure that the Connector provides the greatest possible benefit to Reston.

The County’s evaluation criteria are pretty broad, like “Connect Sunrise Hills and Sunrise Valley” and “Reduce traffic impact on Wiehle.” These are good goals, but by themselves, they might not lead us to the best solution. We suggested adding several criteria for a more thorough evaluation. I’ll describe some of them here.

Expedite Construction

The Wiehle station is supposed to open at the end of this year. There’s not a lot of time! The Soapstone Connector won’t be ready for the station opening, but we should aim to complete it as quickly as possible, in keeping with Supervisor Hudgins’ recommendation.

One way to speed construction is to reduce the land acquisition and demolition needed. Acquiring buildings and land costs money and takes time, and both are at a premium. Unfortunately, most of the proposed alignments would require either demolishing buildings or buying up much developable land on the south side of the Toll Road.

As an alternative, 20/20 suggests routing the Connector along existing Association Drive. The road would need to be improved, but since there’s already an existing right-of-way, land acquisition costs would be minimized and construction could move much faster.

Consider a “Bridge Diet”

The current plan under consideration for the Connector includes four lanes for vehicles, two bike lanes, a sidewalk and a 17-foor-wide “shared use path.” That seems like overkill. I understand that the County is looking at a “worst-case scenario” for the amount of land required, but we should be looking at what we’re actually going to need.

For one thing, one bike lane is probably enough. And if the bikes have a dedicated lane, we probably don’t need the shared-use path either. Also, it might be worth considering a two-lane bridge. After all, Soapstone is a two-lane road. We’ll need a four-lane bridge eventually, but might it save time and money to build two lanes now and include footings for future expansion? Something to think about.

Give Higher Priority to Reducing Wiehle Avenue Congestion and Providing Access to the Station

If a prime goal of the Connector is to get people to the station, wouldn’t it make sense to run it as close to the station as possible? When the Reston Metrorail Access Group originally called for the Soapstone Connector in 2009, they recommended running it right next to the station. That turned out not to be feasible, but we should still keep it as close as possible.

Some of the proposed alignments run well west of the station. Routing the Connector there would serve Plaza America much better than it would the station. Wherever the Connector is routed, there will need to be another street connecting it to the station. The farther away the Connector is, the longer it will take for that street to be built. And if the Connector just winds up taking the traffic jam from Wiehle and dumping it on Sunset Hills, we’re not helping ourselves.

Require a Direct Connection to Soapstone Drive

Several of the proposed alignments of the so-called “Soapstone Connector” don’t connect to Soapstone at all! One starts as far east as Commerce Park Drive (smack in the middle of the existing backups on Sunrise Valley), while another starts way to the west at Indian Ridge Drive (which doesn’t serve anyone, unless they plan to develop Reston National). Soapstone is a natural collector for the roads from South Reston. Providing a direct connection will provide the smoothest possible traffic flow. Adding another traffic light on Sunrise Valley will just make things worse.

I know some of the residents along Soapstone don’t want a direct connection, for fear of turning the road into an expressway. The recent road diet on Soapstone will help keep speeds down. Also, no matter where the Connector is built, people will use Soapstone to get there. A direct connection will reduce the possibility of major backups.



These are only some of the recommendations we made. If you want to see more, you can read the paper on Reston 20/20’s blog. I hope that the County will take a serious look at our criteria, and that we can work together to select an alignment that provides the most possible relief for our traffic woes.