Discussions about a new road and bridge over the Rappahannock River continue, but the specific route the path would take is still up in the air.
That’s because a consultant hired to work on studying the issue has recommended one option, staff from the Fredericksburg Area Metropolitan Planning Organization (FAMPO) recommend another, a former Stafford County supervisor has offered yet more ideas and a major developer has also weighed in.
FAMPO, a regional transportation planning body, has been studying the proposed construction of a new river crossing west of Interstate 95 for more than a year, and its policy committee is scheduled to vote on a preferred route June 16. That would come after Stafford supervisors and Fredericksburg council members on the committee get input from their colleagues.
A consulting firm hired by FAMPO has focused on five potential river crossing paths over the past few months, and a citizens committee presented a sixth option last month.
Each of the original alternatives would span from a point near Route 17 in Stafford County to one in Fredericksburg and was judged on several factors, including its impact on environmental and cultural resources, its effect on the existing transportation network, and public input.
Proponents say a new crossing would provide more north/south routes for local traffic, emergency responders, transit, and bicycle/pedestrian users, while reducing everyday reliance on trips accessing the I-95 corridor.
The chosen route would need approval from FAMPO as well as from Fredericksburg and Stafford elected officials, and it wouldn’t be built for at least another 10 years, officials have said.
It’s unclear exactly how much such a project would cost and how it would be funded. The price would probably be more than $200 million, FAMPO Administrator Ian Ollis said.
The route that scored highest in the consultant’s study, “Option B-1,” would stretch from Celebrate Virginia Parkway in Stafford to Gordon W. Shelton Boulevard in Fredericksburg.
It would reduce travel times significantly, but it would cross over the water into the middle of the city’s new Technology Overlay District, an area designated for data center development.
That’s one reason FAMPO’s Citizens Transportation Advisory Committee voted to recommend that the policy committee, which has the final say, look at a variation on what was originally deemed “Option C.”
It also would use Celebrate Virginia Parkway but would avoid planned homes in Stafford while requiring the shortest bridge of all the alternatives and avoiding the central part of Fredericksburg’s TOD.
But because it was the work of the citizens committee, it has not been vetted by the FAMPO consultant, Michael Baker International, Ollis told Fredericksburg City Council members at a work session last week.
It also isn’t supported by the Silver Companies, a developer who maintains it will run through the middle of land it owns in Stafford. The developer’s attorney, Charlie Payne, emailed Ollis on April 30 to make his client’s feelings known.
“As to the most recent proposed river crossing option (appears to be CTAC Option C) that traverses through my client’s property at Celebrate Virginia North, please note that we do not support this proposed option as it will have an adverse impact on my client’s property and planned investment for this site,” Payne wrote.
He also wrote that he and his client are “under the impression there is strong opposition to a crossing that would connect to Celebrate Virginia Parkway” from other property owners in the area.
Ollis told the Fredericksburg council members that FAMPO staff think using Option C, modified to address this concern and others, or pursuing a modified version of what’s known as “Option A,” would be the best choices.
The original Option A is located closer to I-95 and would start at Commerce Parkway in Stafford and end at Gordon W. Shelton Boulevard.
Ollis also said it would be good if Fredericksburg’s City Council and their counterparts in Stafford could agree on a preferred crossing route.
And he pointed out that what’s decided by FAMPO won’t be the final word on where a river crossing would go.
“It’s the corridor that we’re wanting to move forward with, and it’s going to be tweaked by engineering and by funding and by all sorts of other things,” he told the council members.
To add another wrinkle to the situation, former Stafford Supervisor Joe Brito presented yet another plan to FAMPO’s policy committee Monday. Brito said his concept would provide a number of transportation fixes in the region, connect to 20 different roads and provide 100 alternate routes.
“Connectivity is how we get out of gridlock,” he said.
The committee didn’t take any action on his proposal, though.
In terms of a river crossing in general, committee member Meg Bohmke, a Stafford supervisor, said it’s needed even though her county could see a loss in tax revenue as a result. That’s presumably because land taken for a road would no longer be taxable, and a new road could allow consumers to travel elsewhere to spend their money, meaning less sales tax revenue for Stafford.
“But, for me,” Bohmke said Monday, “it’s really about the flow of the region’s traffic.”
