Home > General, Va Politics > Prince William County, A cheap one night stand for the state?

Prince William County, A cheap one night stand for the state?

March 4th, 2013
Standing room only for many county residents

Standing room only for many county residents

Apparently many Prince William County residents are extremely concerned about the negative impact of the proposed North/South Corridor, also called the Tri-County Parkway.  This roadway will pick up at Dumfries Road and run down the western end of Prince William Parkway.  The new road will begin and  follow Pageland to Route 50 in Loudoun County.  The actual details are still murky.   Apparently Supervisor Candland was only expecting a small crowd. Well, instead of around 50, there were 250, at least– standing room only in the cafeteria.

Residents were forced to look at maps that had little information, vague descriptions of how the road will function, and little to no firm dates of when the road will be built.  The VDOT segment of the meeting was incredibly boring, of little value and frustrating to say the least.

What was made abundantly clear, was the intent of the road  to “move traffic from 95 through to the Dulles Corridor because that is where the state has its priority in the economic engine of  Dulles Airport.”  Additionally there is a need “to move cargo trucks to Dulles”.

I was livid.  Can you imagine, it was like someone telling you to your face you are disposable.  Finally, it was the citizens’ turn to speak.

I said, ” all I have heard tonight is about the economic engine of  Dulles.  What  you are planning on is to move traffic, including cargo, from 95 to the Dulles Corridor. What about Prince William County and her needs?  What about our economic engine?  What about OUR economic needs?  What about our way of life?  What about the decimation of the Rural Crescent in the western end? You  might as well admit that Prince William County is being used like a cheap one night stand!”

And that my folks, is what we have been reduced to in this county, a booty call for the state.

I expect each and every Supervisor to join the citizens in their outrage over the State’s intended  blatant misuse of our county.

 

 

 

 

  1. clueless
    March 5th, 2013 at 09:03 | #1

    Booty call? That is old school. The cargo traffic has been and always will be a ruse.

  2. Elena
    March 5th, 2013 at 09:10 | #2

    agreed clueless, the real goal is open up cheap land for developers. What is really outrageous is that not only is PWC being used as a cut through from 95, not only is the road going to decimate the western end of the county, but on top of all those negatives, PWC residents get an additional tax from the state to pay for a road with NO real benefit to our county. Talk about getting screwed over!

  3. George S. Harris
    March 5th, 2013 at 10:25 | #3

    “I expect each and every Supervisor to join the citizens in their outrage over the State’s intended blatant misuse of our county.”

    I know you don’t smoke Elena, so what have you been drinking or snorting? Maybe, but doubtful, that Pete Candland might be against it. For Stewart and his lap dog Nohe, they must be dancing with delight. Think of Nohe in his tutu ;-(.

    Delegate Rich Anderson tried to get JLARC to review the need for this road expansion but they apparently are two years behind on their various studies. It is rumored that Sir Sean Cannaughton is going to review the financial impact of this road on PWC. That should be interesting.

  4. George S. Harris
    March 5th, 2013 at 12:13 | #4

    Here is what Candland had to say this morning:

    Thanks to all who were able to attend last night’s Bi-County Parkway Town Hall meeting (often referred to as the “Tri-County Parkway”). Delegate Tim Hugo and I were grateful for the energy and obvious concerns expressed by Gainesville District citizens. I would also like to thank Delegate Marshall, Delegate Anderson, and Senator Black for participating. For those of you who were not able to make it to our town hall meeting last night, I want to give you a quick update on what proved to be an eventful evening.

    I personally have very deep concerns about the present plans for the Bi-County Parkway, and it is most important to me that the citizens who will be most impacted by the proposed pathway for this road be given priority in the planning process. Chairman Stewart, with my strong support, will be making a motion at today’s Board of County Supervisor meeting to convey to VDOT that Prince William County expects that impacted citizens will have a seat at the planning table, and that VDOT will become fully transparent in the decision-making process for the Bi-County Parkway going forward.

    The concerns of the Gainesville citizens about the Bi-County Parkway are obvious. The town hall meeting was packed! We had over 300 people attend the town hall, easily the largest Supervisor town hall meeting we’ve seen in a long time in the Gainesville District.

    I’ve posted photos from the meeting on my Facebook page and I will continue to post more information on http://www.SupervisorCandland.com. I believe that these meetings provide an important forum to listen to citizens’ concerns, and you have my commitment to continue hosting frequent town hall meetings throughout the Gainesville District.

    Secondly, let me assure you that the people of Western Prince William County were heard last night. If there had been concerns about a lack of transparency or that government was not listening to the people, then hopefully last night’s town hall meeting can help to ease those concerns. The people of the Gainesville District and the surrounding area voiced their opinions last night, and we had a productive meeting where all sides where given the opportunity to be heard. The reason that I host these town hall meetings is to facilitate a meaningful dialogue between government and citizens, and this town hall meeting was a much needed step towards a more open discussion on the Bi-County Parkway.

    Third, it appears that more outreach is needed on the Bi-County Parkway. The town hall meeting highlighted the fact there we all still need more information. As a resident, you need more details on the scope of this project, and as an elected official, I need more feedback from you so that I can best represent your needs and prerogatives. While I appreciate much of what the VDOT staff has done in working with us on this project, I believe there needs to be a much broader engagement of citizens in planning for this road as the project moves forward.

    I can tell you, the representatives from VDOT, the County Transportation Department, and the U.S. Park Service were floored by the massive crowd at last night’s town hall meeting. I want to thank Delegate Tim Hugo for joining me last night and for co-hosting this event.

    As always, a big thanks goes out to the people of the Gainesville District, who voiced their opinions and shared their concerns. Your opinions and ideas on these important issues help immensely in my efforts to represent the Gainesville District.

    I am honored to serve as your Supervisor, and you have my word that I’ll continue to reach out to all of you in every way possible.

    As soon as it becomes available, I’ll post the VDOT presentation on my website, http://www.SupervisorCandland.com.

    Sincerely,

    Pete Candland
    Gainesville District Supervisor
    Prince William Board of County Supervisors

  5. March 5th, 2013 at 12:53 | #5

    This is just a flat out developer project. The meme is that there will be no interchanges to help development and that’s just a strawman. It will start with an interchange at 234 and then the magic begins.

    Think about the Rt 28 from I66 to Rt 7. It started with 1 interchange and now has 10.

    How does this project do anything but destroy the rural crescent? There is no upside for PWC what so ever.

    I would rather Supervisor Candland oppose it than be offer us a reach where-ever, and his awesome face book posts. If maps were in the room they’re available somewhere electronically, but even the VDOT site’s last updates were done in 2010.

    Next thing you know we’ll have a “Tax District” that span the entire length and is 1 mile wide, ala the Dulles Toll Road so we can pay for it as well.

  6. Censored bybvbl
    March 5th, 2013 at 13:35 | #6

    The subdivisions along Dumfries Road from Manassas through Independent Hill to Montclair also should be aware of how much traffic will increase should one of these options presented by VDOT reach fruition. Many of the residents of these subdivisions find it hard to enter Dumfries Road at intersections without traffic lights during rush hour. A six lane road will merely increase the difficulty. It’s been suggested at one of these meetings that traffic may be linked between subdivisions without the necessity of entering Dumfries Road. I’m absolutely sure that the majority of residents within these subdivisions have no idea that this is being discussed – let alone that the road will become a major thoroughfare.

  7. Elena
    March 5th, 2013 at 15:45 | #7

    There is no upside to plannning this road through Prince William County, period. The state objective is clear, provide a more direct path to the Dulles Corrider as that generates 10 billion dollars in revenue annually and screw Prince William County, once again relegating us to more high density development as our only source of revenue.

    We are the big losers here. EVERYONE is prince william county is impacted, not just the immediate land owners.

  8. Elena
    March 5th, 2013 at 15:51 | #9

    George,
    How did that statement strike you? For me, it was alot of gobbely gook. I don’t just want a forum to have my concerns voiced only to be ignored. No, I want an elected offical who is going to be an advocate for for the Gainesville District, ALL of the Gainesville district. The “taxportation bil”l that will allow for this road to be built is what has created the sudden and immediate momentum for this unnecessary road.

  9. Elena
    March 5th, 2013 at 15:52 | #10

    Just want to say, I think my “TAXPORTATION Bill” was quite clever if I do say so myself!

  10. Lyssa
    March 5th, 2013 at 18:45 | #11

    Censored bybvbl :
    The subdivisions along Dumfries Road from Manassas through Independent Hill to Montclair also should be aware of how much traffic will increase should one of these options presented by VDOT reach fruition. Many of the residents of these subdivisions find it hard to enter Dumfries Road at intersections without traffic lights during rush hour. A six lane road will merely increase the difficulty. It’s been suggested at one of these meetings that traffic may be linked between subdivisions without the necessity of entering Dumfries Road. I’m absolutely sure that the omajority of residents within these subdivisions have no idea that this is being discussed – let alone that the road will become a major thoroughfare.

    When 234 became the I95/I66 connected no one listened.

  11. George S. Harris
    March 5th, 2013 at 19:14 | #12

    Elena–you said it right–gobbledygook. As I understand it, Candland already supports this project regardless of what he says. The comment about the “massive crowd” is as I noted in my other comment–small room + too many people = “massive crowd.” While Candland has been touted as “the people’s supervisor” we should never forget they all are first of all politicians.

    Yes, liked your “Taxportation Bill” idea. We will all ultimately pay. It has made me even begin to think about moving out of PWC although I suspect I will be long gone before it is finished and Imdon’t have as much to lose as you do.

  12. Censored bybvbl
    March 5th, 2013 at 19:41 | #13

    @Lyssa
    Add I81 truck traffic to the mix as well.

  13. Lyssa
    March 5th, 2013 at 19:59 | #14

    @Censored bybvbl

    Ah, I did mean I95 – I81 connector. Thanks.

  14. Anon
    March 5th, 2013 at 23:21 | #15

    Stewart has pulled a fast one with this. The impacted “citizen” he wants to have a voice on the committee is probably Maryann Ghadban, a developer who lives on pageland rd. she wants “access” so she can subdivide at a later time to develop her own land. She has awys been supportive of the road and stood with the economic development committee that demanded this road. She then became upset when the road was finally agreed to but as a limited access road. She does not support the rural crescent and certainly does not represent citizens.

    • March 6th, 2013 at 09:26 | #16

      Anon, please choose a name…any name. We don’t use anon or anonymous here. It gets too confusing. Thanks.

      Meanwhile, I totally agree with you.

    • March 6th, 2013 at 09:29 | #17

      Did that lady speak before the Board of Supervisors during citizen’s time several weeks ago?

  15. Elena
    March 6th, 2013 at 08:33 | #18

    Anon,
    You are absolutely correct. As long as she has access and property is valuable to sell when high density is allowed, she will be happy. Corey willl be more than happy to allow that “set up”. Lest we forget, deveopers play a long term game. They will buy this land for wicked cheap, at A1 value and make a fortune coverting it to high density zoning.

  16. March 6th, 2013 at 13:54 | #19

    Greg has done a great job with the summary of this debacle over on bbl.net.

    You should go over for a read.He captures the entire problem.

  17. March 7th, 2013 at 09:36 | #20

    More news articles on the proposed parkway and its protest meeting,

    http://gainesvillebeat.com/2013/03/05/hundreds-attend-gainesville-town-hall-protest-bi-county-parkway/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+PotomacLocal+%28PotomacLocal.com%29

    Bob Marshall is quoted as saying only the BOCS can stop this road from dividing up the county.

    Corey was singing its praises at the bocs meeting. Why should he care? He lives far away.

  18. Watching
    March 8th, 2013 at 09:30 | #21

    There is another meeting in Fairfax next Monday by the Coalition for Smarter Growth. Funny that it’s a PWC Loudoun road and the meeting is in Fairfax

    http://salsa3.salsalabs.com/o/2041/t/0/blastContent.jsp?email_blast_KEY=1240222

Comments are closed.