Chain Bridge Road/Eaton Place Intersection Improvements

I prefer the Alternate Build Concept (Slide 35). As a resident of Mosby Woods, I have to use Eaton Pl when picking up/dropping off my children at either Providence and KJMS. This alternate build design preserves the traffic flow into the Cobbdale neighborhood while addressing the heavy traffic flow off of the Willow Crest service road.

I would strongly discourage the Recommended Build (Slide 34) at this time. If this design were implemented, it would increase the time it takes to return from Providence and KJMS by redirecting traffic onto 123 and then requiring another light for Mosby Woods residents. School traffic would continue to overflow into Cobbdale, causing more problems at the smaller traffic circle. Because of the one-way from the Assembly to Norman, residents of the Assembly and along Cobbs Grove would need to leave Cobbdale, drive onto 123, and then turn back into Cobbdale in order to return to their community. That's simply too much burden on those city residents and adds unnecessary traffic to 123. I also support the Cobbdale resident's concerns regarding the damage/loss of trees due to the improvements identified in the Recommended Build design.

My recommendation is to approve the Alternate Build design at this time. Because this design is similar to the Recommended Build option but excludes traffic changes to the Cobbdale/Assembly neighborhood, it would allow the city to observe how changes to 123 truly impact and improve commuter/pedestrian safety. If additional changes are needed in the future, then the city can assess future road improvements between The Assembly and the Cobbdale neighborhood.

First, why such a small photo above? I'm on a desktop and it is hard to see details of the proposal and pretty sure it is NOT the latest rendering. Look at all of the space on the EAST side frontage (lower side of Rt. 123) vs. the WEST side frontage (upper in photo side of Rt. 123) where city staff wants to put the SUP, plus widen the one way road, plus a sidewalk that knocks out historic bushes and trees. At the work session, staff said that the topography won't allow the bike path on the East side. It is FLATTER on the EAST side than the narrow berm Cobbdale has now, that will ultimately be leveled! So they can level topography on one side, but not the other? Why didn't any council or mayor ask more about this? Does everyone realize more trees and screening will be taken out of that photo than left to live? I sense transportation has chosen to dig their heels in, instead of working with hundreds of Cobbdale residents. This will affect EVERYONE LIVING IN THE AREA FOR THE REST OF THEIR LIFETIME while people driving through the city polluting the air are being prioritized. I feel like I'm living in a comic book world and the villain is in control. Where is our Super(wo)man to stop this evil intrusion into our beloved Cobbdale community in Fairfax City?

Too many drivers use Eaton Place as a cut thru. Too many drivers don't understand the road signs at lights on Eaton Pl and 123. When turning left off 123 onto Eaton Pl and car in turning lane across, it's almost impossible to get a clear view of oncoming traffic. Pedestrians don't pay attention when crossing, many on cell phone or wearing headphones. Cut down drivers cutting thru Eaton Pl, even school buses use it as a cut thru. Make it a $500 fine.

Anything that fixes that dangerous intersection is better than what we have now. Drivers headed west on Eaton regularly go through the first red light to be able to turn right on 123. And I have seen drivers on 123 north turning right on Eaton come close to hitting pedestrians headed for the bus stop. Many city residents use this route to cut through Cobbdale in both directions to avoid traffic on Rt. 50. Not sure how the one-way changes would affect that use. I suspect Cobbdale residents would be happy if it reduced through traffic! But cutting down all the trees will make the neighborhood noisier, for sure.

Removed by moderator.

Make sure the share-use path and sidewalks are at least 10 feet wide on both sides. There are missing crosswalks at Eaton and at the connection to the future Snyder Trail. It's unreasonable to plan and build for cars to make movements in any direction a driver wants and force people walking and biking to make indirect and confusing movements because you don't want to slow down cars with a crosswalk. Chain Bridge Road needs a road diet, it's an excessive and unnecessary amount of asphalt for cars. You could plant a bunch of native trees in the third right lane providing shade for people walking and biking and a much-needed return of green space.

Great work. I particularly appreciate the multi-use path, as it will allow me to connect to other trails in the area. Please ensure that the multi-use path remains in the recommended and adopted configuration, or provide protected bike lanes.

This road needs a road diet. Please add protected bike lanes.

I hate that the trees will be destroyed.

Chain Bridge Road should undergo a road diet in a residential area. You need to add sidewalks and bicycle lanes on both sides

Good idea

I am a Fairfax City resident who drives through this intersection several times per day. I prefer Option 2 because it maintains the majority of the items addressed in the plans and also keeps the right turn lane. "Future Visual" slides should be included for ALL options listed in the presentation. It's impossible to make an equitable comparison when more information is presented for one of the plan options over the other two! When this occurs, the presentation is then perceived as being persuasive rather than informative, leading to the opportunity for the viewer to assume that the other two options are not being seriously considered.

The current crosswalks at Eaton and the frontage road by the Best Western and Eaton are not safe for pedestrians. Eliminating the frontage road exit onto Eaton should hopefully make it more safe for pedestrians.

Save the bern on Cobbdale side of 123. Don’t do too much change all at once, use temporary barriers when possible in case traffic doesn’t flow as assumed. Put proposed bike path on the hotel side of 123, NOT Cobbdale side. Please save the mature trees in the median strip. Such an inviting entry into the City, and we are the Tree City. No cement walls!! Leave as much of nature as possible.

I have owned my home on Perry Street for more than 21 years. These changes are necessary with the growth in the area, but one change that needs to be made is the location of the bike path. It should be on the east side of Chain Bridge Road to connect to the George Snyder Trail. We should keep as many trees as possible on the west of side of Chain Bridge Road for both the planet and for sound deadening. once their gone, their gone forever...

I’m a long-term resident and homeowner in the Cobbdale community and do not support this intrusion into our community. I’d like to know why a sound barrier is not being built to insulate the non-stop vehicle sound from I-66 and Chain Bridge Rd. Yet, a sound wall continues to grow across Chain Bridge (as recent as 10/21/2022) in front of the Best Western while our community has little to no no sound barrier. Sound now ricochets off of the opposing wall back into our community. This makes no sense.

Native trees which used to surround our community are being torn down at every turn. The City does nothing to prevent this not to mention enforcing developers and/or landowners to plant native species, not invasive species. Native hundred year old trees, tulip poplars and cedars are disappearing at alarming rates. We have no protection from the constant influx of traffic, emergency vehicles and non-stop I-66, and increased Chain Bridge Road traffic.

This is a poor plan with funding secured by the City though they failed to calm traffic on Norman Avenue.

This Plan must be stopped. Adding an exit at the new light and adding sidewalks is fine, but the new plan will damage residents between Eaton and Norman and harm the entire Cobbdale neighborhood.

The entrance to Cobbdale is defined in part by 100+ year old boxwoods along the west side of the service road and the graceful and ancient Walnut trees in front of the historic Cobb farmhouse--the City's plan makes a mockery of its claim to be a tree City, by ripping out all of these ancient trees and bushes.

The City is doing this entirely to put in a bike path (formally a "Shared Use Path") from the new light to nowhere. The Staff report claiming the shared use path along the west side of Chain Bridge Road "is part of the I-66 project" being coordinated with the City is disingenous. If you go back to the November 2017 plans, they clearly show the Shared Use Path as required up to the new traffic light on Chain Bridge Road. The path is NOT required to go to Eaton Place on the west side of the road. They are simply trying to put 10 pounds of matter into a 5 pound bag.

The staff also claims they are preserving the green buffer, but that is only partially true. There will be no buffer north of Norman to the new light--because they are paving it over with a bike path. There will be no buffer near Eaton Place--because they paving it over with a bike path. The remaining buffer will be stripped down because the bike path is going into the root zone, so they will suddenly discover they need rip those trees out too.

Once they have destroyed all this greenery and put in the bike path, there will be no way to reverse the harm they caused and the traffic pattern if this plan does not fix the intersection.

Can you please add a pedestrian refuge island on ChBr Rd at Eaton? ChBr Rd is 7 lanes of traffic there and that's too much to cross in one go, esp if cars are zipping by. Lead pedestrian intervals to cross ChBr Rd would be welcome too.

Good morning,

Why can't the exit from the Assembly include through traffic onto Eaton Place? Forcing residents to exit at the new intersection (further north) just moves the issue of Assembly residents not being able to exit the neighborhood. Will the city hold a meeting for the residents of the Assembly as was done for Cobbdale?

Thanks!
Jim Worthen

Hi - thanks for receiving all of our comments. I am a homeowner in the Assembly, and my parents live a half-mile away and own a home on Oak Place. Needless to say, I can easily speak on behalf of both neighborhoods.

I agree with Hawks Nest’ comment regarding access to Eaton Place from the Assembly. The current plan requires all of Assembly’s residents to travel up Oak Place to then make a right on 123, and then move into the far left lanes quickly. I foresee accidents occurring in both locations — in making the right, and trying to merge to the left lanes. In addition, there is NO guarantee that you won’t have residents from the Assembly trying to go straight onto Eaton from the right turn only lane, as currently planned, just to avoid the frustration of having to drive in a big circle.

I’m unsure how the one-lane one-direction Oak Place will not get backed up. The new plan requires vehicles waiting to get to Oak Place (beyond the Masonic Lodge) to wait for all the traffic to clear at the new light to enter Chain Bridge Road. That doesn’t even include cut-through traffic from Jermantown who use Norman to get to 123 and/or 66. In addition, vehicles from Oak Place, the portion parallel to 66, are positioned to wait for all the other vehicles waiting on Oak Place and Norman to go through the light first before they even have a chance to enter the intersection, due to the right-of-way design. In addition, the plan favors vehicles to go straight or make a left onto 123 — it would be near impossible to get through that tiny space before 123 to get into the right lane to make a right, never mind the vehicles that are waiting to just go straight on Oak Place to get beyond the Lodge. I understand the goal is to decrease conflict points — I feel like the current plan only introduces new conflict points due to the new intersection being the main exit point from the nieghborhoods. The benefit of the single entry at the Assembly/123/Eaton Place is that everybody has the same chance or likelihood to cross the intersection. The revised plan favors vehicles sitting on the northbound Oak Place lanes and Norman. Residents who live on Oak Place (parallel to 66) are now forced to wait for all other vehicles to pass through.

I am actually in favor of leaving the Assembly/123/Eaton Place intersection as-is, with adjustments. Is it possible to move back the stop sign on Oak Place further from the intersection? I understand that would remove sight lines, but perhaps that would force drivers from scooting up, causing dangerous turns for those of us who live in the Assembly. But I’m also curious if that would allow two sets of traffic lights — one for the Assembly and one for the traffic coming from Oak Place, to prevent the haggling at the light. I’m curious if leaving the light as-is, while building the new intersection might alleviate the strain on that intersection as there would then be two exit points from the neighborhoods? That could also alleviate the pain points I’ve mentioned earlier, regarding Oak Place and the folks who live on or off that street (including my parents). Two exit points would also allow residents of the Assembly to continue straight onto Eaton, or make a left directly onto 123, without joining the congestion forming along Oak Place and Norman.

I am in favor of updating the intersection as a whole, but do not feel the intersection wholly benefits all residents as it currently stands. I appreciate your work on this effort, and your time in reading all of our comments.