Chain Bridge Road/Eaton Place Intersection Improvements

Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin Email this link

This consultation has concluded. City Council voted to endorse the recommended design on April 11, 2023. 

Improving the Intersection

The City of Fairfax is evaluating potential improvements to the intersection of Chain Bridge Road (Route 123) and Eaton Place. Improvements would be in addition to a new traffic signal that will be installed north of the intersection as part of the I-66 Outside the Beltway project.

This intersection is a top priority in the city’s Two-Year Transportation Plan. The location of the intersection serves as the northern gateway to the city and connects travelers to the Northfax area, which is targeted for redevelopment.

Existing Condition

Chain Bridge Road is a National Highway System route and serves 39,000 vehicles per day. The intersection with Eaton Place experiences significant congestion due to its current operation with eight signal phases (including four separate side street phases) to control movements at seven legs. The intersection is a critical component of the regional transportation network, with access ramps to I-66 located north of the intersection. Traffic is expected in increase along Chain Bridge Road with the addition of the I-66 Express Lanes access points.

Planned Improvements

The city considered replacing the traffic signals with a two-lane roundabout, but this solution was deemed to be inefficient when considered with the new traffic signals associated with the I-66 Outside the Beltway project.

The city now plans to keep the intersection signalized but reconfigure the approaches to improve traffic flow and safety on Chain Bridge Road. The plan will leverage the new signal north of Eaton Place to relieve pressure from the primary intersection at Eaton Place and Chain Bridge Road. The frontage road signals on Chain Bridge Road will be removed, thereby simplifying the intersection.

The updated plan for the intersection can be completed using $10.7M awarded from the Northern Virginia Transportation Authority.

Next Steps

An updated plan was presented to City Council during the Feb. 7 work session. Please use the tools below to comment on the updated plan and ask questions.

An open house was held on Feb. 22 at the Sherwood Center.

City Council will be asked to formally endorse the plan April 11. Residents are invited to attend the meeting in City Hall, or watch it on Channel 12 or online.

Improving the Intersection

The City of Fairfax is evaluating potential improvements to the intersection of Chain Bridge Road (Route 123) and Eaton Place. Improvements would be in addition to a new traffic signal that will be installed north of the intersection as part of the I-66 Outside the Beltway project.

This intersection is a top priority in the city’s Two-Year Transportation Plan. The location of the intersection serves as the northern gateway to the city and connects travelers to the Northfax area, which is targeted for redevelopment.

Existing Condition

Chain Bridge Road is a National Highway System route and serves 39,000 vehicles per day. The intersection with Eaton Place experiences significant congestion due to its current operation with eight signal phases (including four separate side street phases) to control movements at seven legs. The intersection is a critical component of the regional transportation network, with access ramps to I-66 located north of the intersection. Traffic is expected in increase along Chain Bridge Road with the addition of the I-66 Express Lanes access points.

Planned Improvements

The city considered replacing the traffic signals with a two-lane roundabout, but this solution was deemed to be inefficient when considered with the new traffic signals associated with the I-66 Outside the Beltway project.

The city now plans to keep the intersection signalized but reconfigure the approaches to improve traffic flow and safety on Chain Bridge Road. The plan will leverage the new signal north of Eaton Place to relieve pressure from the primary intersection at Eaton Place and Chain Bridge Road. The frontage road signals on Chain Bridge Road will be removed, thereby simplifying the intersection.

The updated plan for the intersection can be completed using $10.7M awarded from the Northern Virginia Transportation Authority.

Next Steps

An updated plan was presented to City Council during the Feb. 7 work session. Please use the tools below to comment on the updated plan and ask questions.

An open house was held on Feb. 22 at the Sherwood Center.

City Council will be asked to formally endorse the plan April 11. Residents are invited to attend the meeting in City Hall, or watch it on Channel 12 or online.

Comments

Please share your comments on the proposed plans to improve the intersection of Chain Bridge Road and Eaton Place.

This consultation has concluded. City Council voted to endorse the recommended design on April 11, 2023. 

CLOSED: This discussion has concluded.

In response to MRoskind, it sounds like you live in a townhome along Rt. 123 if you are 'directly impacted' as all homes along the service road are against many parts of this proposal, especially the wide SUP on the west side. Now that many of us have successfully talked about the bike path 'to nowhere', the city's transportation department is now proposing the bike path continue on, all the way to Rt. 50 in their two year plan and will need eminent domain to do so. So, any of the townhomes along Rt. 123 will have even smaller back yards with a wide, 10 foot path right behind your gate. Be careful what you wish for and are being told. 'Connectivity' is a city transportation key word, so I find it interesting you use it.

Cobbydale 11 months ago

My home is directly impacted by the proposed intersection improvement, creating alternate outlets for the Cobdale neighborhood. I highly endorse the proposed placement as designed. The traffic flow is being severely impacted out of the neighborhood by increased home development and the backups to the current light at Eaton Place. This intersection regularly causes traffic backup(s) to the light, with long cycles, with the town homes feeding in and often stuck getting out at the poorly designed intersection. A second outlet will significantly improve time-distance connectivity from Cobdale. The effects of the express lane entrance is also causing increased pass-through traffic, further pressuring those intersections. This proposal remedies to the maximum extent possible those negative effects on our community.

MRoskind 12 months ago

Reading through the feedback, it's clear to me that people want both an SUP and a way to keep the trees. As a frequent pedestrian and cyclist, I am against the SUP on the West side of Chain Bridge Road. I walk to Point 50 and the other businesses along the service road. It doesn't make much sense to me to cross CBR at Eaton to get a path; it would be much easier and safer for me to travel north on an SUP on the East side of CBR and cross at the already-planned crossing on that side. That would be only 2 street crossings (once from the South side of Eaton to the North side, and twice from the East Side of CBR to the West side). The alternative has 3 crossings (once from the South side of Eaton to the North side, twice from the East Side of CBR to the West side, and third crossing the new signal to get onto the 66 trail). Given the City is claiming the intersection of Eaton and CBR is dangerous, why are they insisting pedestrians should cross there?

I'm also aware that the City has removed signs off of personal property that residents have placed to gather attention and support (a right to freedom of speech as specifically designated by the Supreme Court) , and reading the questions section, it seems the City has also asked other planners to weigh in to support their recommendation. These actions are deeply disturbing. From these actions, one could conclude that the City is aware that the community is very much against this proposal; so why wouldn't they try to find an alternative option? In the end, everyone wants to do what's best for the community (where residents are a part of the community, as well as people who transit the area)- there is certainly a solution that keeps the trees, protects residents, motorists, and makes the intersection safer; and none of the current options fit the bill.

We have one shot to get it right- why aren't we working together to make it safe for everyone... including (and not at the expense of) residents?

FairfaxPedestrian 12 months ago

Why is the city so hell-bent on an either/or scenario? A proposal that incorporates the road flow changes AS WELL as the east side SUP is possible. There are other options on the table that it seems are not being considered because it would cost $ to complete a new drawing / redesign work, at the cost of actually getting it right.
For clarity, NO to this proposal as it stands, move the SUP to the east side where it will get more use from more residents in that area.

FairfaxBiker 12 months ago

For those who say putting the shared use path on the East side of 123 would allow them to "not cross 123 twice", what are they even talking about?!?! You want to bike to Amazon Fresh - you cross once (hopefully at the new light VDOT is installing) and then cross over Eaton. For those who want to bike into Old Town Fairfax, you cross once at the new light and continue along the East Side where it's mostly paved/pathed all the way in. If you instead elect to stay on the west side, you have very sproradic sidewalks along 123 South, until you get to Rust Curve. Why would anyone choose to go that way? And if you wanted to continue south on 123, or get to Route 50 heading west, you would just stay on the Cobbdale side of the road, and either way risk your own life trying to get down Route 123. Please don't try to act like this "new connection" and shared use path are going to be the next best thing to sliced bread. It's a terrible attempt at trying to spend money in the greedy hands of staff without any consideration for the residents, their thoughts and the other horrendous decisions you've made for Cobbdale. Traffic calming? What's that? Thanks so much for listening to use for nearly 3 years and then not implementing ANYTHING we asked for.

Have you also read about the most recent tanker truck explosion along Route 15 in Frederick? Many of those homes were scorched and burned because there was no barrier/berm between their residential street and the busy highway. You're turning 123 into a through-way (let's call it what it is people) and yet you want to remove the very berm that could potentially save homes from a fire or other catastrophe?

The sheer number of people who live on the west side of Cobbdale own cars. So many of the people who live in the various apartment complexes on the east side are constantly riding bikes. Why not make the shared use path make sense for them?!? Instead you're choosing to further remove the trees along the west side, for all the taxpayers who pay these salaries for the "experts" the City supposedly has. Why not instead support all the RENTERS, who don't even pay real estate taxes, if your taxpayers are clearly fighting you on this ridiculous plan?

STOP THIS PROJECT - CONCERNED CITY RESIDENTS 12 months ago

Love the placement of the shared-use path on the west side of 123. Not having to cross 123 twice will be much safer for pedestrians and bikers.

Jim Hunter 12 months ago

I second Zachary Schrag's comment, and concur with Brian Platt's comment that providing a mixed-use path to connect Fairfax City with the I-66 mixed use trail would be most welcome. Before the pandemic, I'd commute to work at George Mason University by bicycle, CUE bus, and car. I've also helped people figure out bicycle commuting routes. I've lived near Fairfax City for more than 20 years. I'm glad that this effort to improve the section of Chain Bridge Road/ 123 immediately south of I-66 is occurring.

Are there plans to post signs to alert drivers of a mixed use trail crossing?

Can I also suggest that the Commonwealth should include in its driver education, licensing, and exam, information about safe driving with bicyclists?

Kathy Bine 12 months ago

Biking is not only the future of Fairfax, it is its present. Making safe and easy connections between existing bike and mixed use routes is essential to all of us who routinely commute to work by bicycle. As George Mason University is growing, more and more people will benefit from an expanding network of interconnected biking trails. Please make the I-66 to Mason connector available soon, we are looking forward to that! Just make sure trees are not the victim.

VS almost 1 year ago

I'm a Fairfax resident who has been biking just about everywhere for almost twenty-five year. I commute by bike to my work at George Mason University. I bike to my dentist's office, my doctor's office, and my barber. When my sons were in elementary school, we biked together to their school (and then I went on to work). My wife and I couldn't afford two vehicles for the first fifteen or so years after we moved here, so my reliance on bicycle transportation was by necessity. There have been various road improvements over the years that have made my bike travels easier and safer, and I have been grateful for them.

One of those improvements is the new shared-use trail adjacent to I-66. Because my neighborhood is south of Fairfax City, I will not need to use the new trail much. Nonetheless, it's obvious that the trail is essential to a significant expansion of bicycle commuting in Fairfax County.

However, for those who need to get to Fairfax City (or to George Mason University), the I-66 trail will be only a partial solution. As it is, getting from the trail to Fairfax City will be hazardous. A shared-use path all the way to Eaton Place--and then some sort of redesign of the intersection at Eaton place so that bicyclists can connect safely with University Drive--will help to "complete the circuit" so that more people coming from East, West, and North of Fairfax City can begin to seriously consider commuting by bike.

I'll add that in addition to the environmental benefits of a significant expansion of bicycle commuting, it will also make Fairfax more livable for people who don't have enough money to both live in this expensive area AND maintain two car payments (for two-income earning households). This was the case for me and my wife when we moved to the area. Whatever we can do to make bicycle commuting more feasible has the effect of both reducing carbon emissions and making Fairfax more affordable. I strongly urge the City to make the changes needed so that cyclists can get from the I-66 trail to Eaton Place, and then across route 50 to University Drive.

Brian Platt almost 1 year ago

I am writing to support the building of a shared-use path on Route 123 in the City of Fairfax. I work at George Mason and we need a safe route between Mason and the I-66 trail.

JCB almost 1 year ago

I am writing in support of the proposed shared use path on the west side of Route 123. This trail will provide a connection to the new I-66 Parallel Trail that will open this spring. Many people may not be aware of this major new trail that will allow cyclists and others to travel from Fairfax City west to Bull Run Park and east all the way to Gallows Road and the nearby W&OD trail. It will also intersect with the Fairfax County Parkway Trail that extends north to Route 7 and south to Route 1.

By building the trail from Eaton Pl north to the I-66 connector trail, it will allow residents who live west of Rt 123 to easily access the I-66. I strongly encourage the City to include this trail and to ensure safe access to the I-66 trail.

Bruce W about 1 year ago

If this proposed intersection is done in the same way that the city has handled "traffic calming" in Cobbdale, we're all in for some trouble! We wanted speed bumps and sidewalks and we got some lanes painted on Norman to make it feel narrower, and a couple of bikes painted on the road to show people that they should share the road...talk about NOT giving the residents what they wanted to control cut through traffic, speeding and other unsafe measures.

Do you remember the disastrous traffic circle attempt at Norman Ave and Winston Place? That lasted all of 2 or 3 days and included NO signage...how can we ever think the city can handle a project like this, that residents don't even want, now?

STOP THIS PROJECT - CONCERNED CITY RESIDENTS about 1 year ago

Thank you for hosting the open house on February 22.

I submitted handwritten comments on the paper feedback form, but I would like to elaborate on them here, so others may see them. I wish to emphasize the importance of this intersection to a much larger bicycle network, and to ask for changes to the design that would make it more useful to cyclists.

In summer 2023, VDOT plans to open the shared-use trail adjacent to I-66. That trail will feature an exit at Route 123, which will thus connect the City of Fairfax to a trail stretching from Bull Run Regional Park to Gallows Road, and from there to other trails running all the way to Washington, D.C., and Mount Vernon.

To make the most of this opportunity, cyclists need a safe route between the I-66 trail and the rest of the City of Fairfax, as well as George Mason University to the south. The City of Fairfax’s Recommended Bicycle Network of June 22, 2021, shows that the closest connection would be to extend the shared use path to Eaton Place. Once on Eaton, cyclists could turn onto the University Drive extension and cross Route 50 at University. Thus, the Chain Bridge Road/Eaton Place intersection could become a vital link in a much larger bicycle network, and it should be evaluated as such.

As a first step, the City should proceed with plans for a shared-use path as far south as Eaton Place.

The next step is to refine the design of the intersection to allow easy movements for bicycles between the shared use trail and Eaton Place.

Because the shared use trail stops at Eaton, southbound bicyclists will need to turn left (east) onto Eaton Place. That will mean waiting for an east-west green light, so cyclists can safely cross the eight-lane Chain Bridge Road. The diagram distributed at the February 22, 2023, open house, however, does not provide a place for cyclists to queue while waiting for that green. A green painted bike box could provide this space. ([Bike Boxes | National Association of City Transportation Officials](https://nacto.org/publication/urban-bikeway-design-guide/intersection-treatments/bike-boxes/))

In the opposite direction, westbound bicyclists on Eaton need to make a right turn onto the shared use trail. The current design makes this difficult. It requires bicyclists to ride in the left lane of Eaton in order to proceed straight through the intersection, and then slow to make a sharp turn onto the trail. With both hands on the brakes in order to make this turn, the cyclists will be unable to signal to any drivers behind them.

A safer alternative would be to convert part of the east side service road not to sidewalk (as shown on the February 22 diagram), but rather to another 10-foot-wide path. This would allow cyclists to ride in the right lane of Eaton and turn right onto the path there and ride along the access road to the signal where the future Synder trail will cross Chain Bridge Road. That crossing should be redesigned so that cyclists riding westbound on the Snyder trail can make an easy right onto the shared-use trail heading to I-66, rather than bumping through three pedestrian crosswalks as shown on the diagram.

Eventually, I hope that bike lanes will be added to Eaton Place, as shown on the City of Fairfax’s Recommended Bicycle Network of June 22, 2021. If this happens, it will be all the more important that cyclists be able to turn from the bike lanes onto a wide path to get to the service road.

I note that some previous comments on this plan call for a shared-use trail to be built on the east side of 123, from the Snyder Trail signal to Eaton. That might work too, but it could be challenging to design a safe left turn from that trail onto Eaton eastbound.

In its 2017 Multimodal Transportation Plan, the City of Fairfax envisioned “ a city with options for residents to easily, safely, and efficiently move within and between neighborhoods either by walking, bicycling, taking public transportation, or driving.” It identified connections to the I-66 trail as part of that effort (MM Action 1.1.4.3). To meet those goals, the Route 123/Eaton Place interchange must be evaluated and designed to allows bicyclists to travel safely between the I-66 trail and the crossing of Route 50 at University Drive.

Thank you for your consideration.

Zachary Schrag about 1 year ago

I hope the City Council reads these messages to get a sense of just how much residents are impacted every day by these proposals.

The city planners are manipulating facts (like misrepresenting the varying levels of tree health as one of many concrete examples) to push through a poorly constructed plan instead of working with residents who are very eager to engage to deliver a result that works for all.

There are more than 2 options to consider, though the City is making it seem like that’s all that is available.

The misrepresentation of facts, lack of effort to collaborate with residents, and seeming unwillingness or inability to create a “middle ground” third option says a lot about their agenda.

Jeslou about 1 year ago

Removed by moderator.

Jeslou about 1 year ago

Thank you for taking the time and effort to explain the City's attempt to make improvements to this frustrating and at times dangerous intersection. However, as some residents have already expressed, there is a sense of "railroading" us residents into the sole solution your designers came up with. The anxiety we residents have is that we will have to live for years with the only solution that you have laid out for us. Obviously, the residents and respondents have concerns for their various equities: bike and pedestrian crossings; ingress and egress for Assembly, Norman, Oak, and Eaton side properties. A concern for me is the oddly placed "New Neighborhood Exit at Traffic Signal" since it introduces congestion and back-up along a small stretch of road from Norman to the new traffic signal. A logical alternative (not proposed) is to have a traffic signal in line with Norman to Chain Bridge Road and an additional exit (with stop sign) for those exiting from Oak Place to Chain Bridge (Southbound only). This would also necessitate a separate traffic signal or signals for Cobbs Grove and Assembly but would would relieve the congestion and traffic flow through the current single point. The alternative that I am suggesting seems to work in many existing Northern Virginia neighborhoods that have outgrown their single traffic light to service road design. To me, it's just curious that other designs are not proposed (to us) or simply not discussed at a venue like the Open House with reasons why other possible designs cannot be pursued. The Open House just seemed like little presentation kiosks that separate the residents into small quiet groups to passively accept the only design that the City wants to do without any discussion. I like to believe that the City has educated, talented and creative engineers and designers that have gone through the effort of considering the many possible configurations to solve this small challenge to urban development but the presentations so far do not convey "what works, what doesn't work" and "why" to the people that have to live with your decisions.

Mike M about 1 year ago

I just attended the open house, and Timmons has no good answer to the question of the danger posed to bicyclists coming from the proposed west side bike path into the intersection near the Assembly. The first two answers I got were (a) if you are driver, don't hit a bicyclist coming off the path; and (b) if you are bicyclist, you should stop and look for cars making a right hand turn. Those are not engineering solutions and ignore the fundamental conflict posed by the configuration of the path. The third answer I got, was we could put a no right turn on red sign at the intersection, but that will just clog up traffic on 1and does not address the problem of cars making a turn at a green light. The fourth answer I got was we can reconfigure the path to cut back toward 123 earlier, which will destroy more of the buffer we are trying to preserve.

When I asked why we needed the path on the west side, the answers were (1) because the City wants it there (meaning the City as a corporate entity and not the people who actually live here and pay the taxes paying Timmons' fee); (2) because it will tie into a path along the east side of 123 that has not been studied or funded, but is instead a bureaucratic fever dream, and (3) because without the path, someone wanting to bike south to the Assembly will need to cross 123 at the new light and again at Eaton Place or go against traffic on the one way road north--even though both 123 crossings are being designed for bike traffic.

None of this makes any sense, and if council approves this wasteful and dangerous plan, we need a new council.

Cobbdale Resident about 1 year ago

As the representative for the Residence Inn Fairfax City, we support correcting the Eaton Place/123 intersection as it is currently dangerous and congested, but we would also like to ensure that our business is easily accessible to guests and residents. We have a significant concern about our patrons having the ability to access our hotel traveling southbound on Chain Bridge Road from I-66. This ease of access to I-66 is one of our greatest selling features for travelers. From these drawings it appears that our business will now only have access to our facility through another business' parking lot as the service road will no longer be used. The only alternative will require all our guests to have to make a u-turn at the large Route 50 intersection to then enter out business from northbound 123. This could be dangerous as there is a significant amount of traffic travelling northbound or turning right from Fairfax Blvd into these same lanes, creating more congestion at the Route 50/Route 123 intersection. Additionally, it adds significant confusion for our out-of-town travelers already unfamiliar with the area and will be a large detractor for our business. We endeavor to be Fairfax City's best hotel option and a great partner to our community. We hope to work together with the city and residents to find a solution that will work well for all parties concerned.

Kristin F., GM about 1 year ago

This plan is a disaster. Please listen to all the feedback from the community. They made your first ridiculous attempt at this much better, but you've shut them down ever since. Once your job is done here, you'll be long gone. The Timmons Group will move on to another project. Yet our residents will have to deal with this monstrosity for decades to come. Show us a plan that does what the residents want - move the shared use path to the east side, give us a sound barrier wall on the west side, keep all the trees in the median and then maybe we could have a reasonable conversation about what is best for our community and city.

Concerned Residents about 1 year ago

This entire plan has problems written all over it. If you're so worried about traffic turning from Chain Bridge Road South onto the Oak Place Service road, why not put painted lanes on the road? Show drivers where to go! Or shave off a portion of the median so large trucks, delivery vans, school buses, etc. can more safely enter the neighborhood? Or write big on the road "DON'T BLOCK THE BOX". These are all very basic ideas that residents have thought of...not fancy engineers and traffic experts, but regular people. If this has been such a concern for the City, it's laughable that nothing was done about this one aspect. Now your "traffic experts" show some video from the intersection and suddenly that intersection is so darn "unsafe". Your "traffic experts" have claimed the problem that now exists at The Assembly will just be moved up the road to Oak Place...so thanks for that. Spending $11 MILLION dollars to fix a problem is a total waste. Get some police to enforce out there, get smart about your signage and move on!

Removing the big trees in the median is just continuing to follow your agenda of turning this into "Asphalt/Concrete City, USA" rather than "Tree City USA". Removing the berms is criminal, and if they are in such poor shape, why hasn't the city of county taken care of it?

A Shared Use Path on the Cobbdale side is a total waste of money, the residents do NOT want it, and it serves no purpose. The larger bike traffic is over on the east side. Have your "traffic experts" actually sat out there and counted where pedestrians/bikes actually come from so you can consider making an informed decision? I know the answer to that....And your current proposal shows a sidewalk would run through the berm on the east side? For heaven's sake, why wouldn't you try to cut costs and maybe save the planet a bit by at least placing the sidewalk on the already existing asphalt area. And MOVE THE PATH already!! It is a path to nowhere. Residents trying to cross at Eaton are already at a disadvantage for many reasons, and how in the heck are bikers supposed to see traffic coming from Chain Bridge Road and The Assembly and Eaton Place all at one time? By getting whiplash trying to look everywhere? This is one of the most unsafe proposals in your entire plan! Make a beautiful cross walk at the light you're allowing VDOT to put in. Who is running this show? VDOT or the City? It sure seems like the City is behind backwards and not putting up a fight for its residents.

Where is the sound barrier wall on the west side? Cobbdale has been raped and ransacked with all the tree removal for 66, the removal of the existing sound barrier wall and now the addition of this new shorter, and much less effective sound wall. Once you try to continue your plan and remove even more trees and more berm, we're going to need to wall in every neighborhood to try to sleep at night. Again - fight for your residents! Push for a sound wall! Stop rolling over and just taking it!

Have you ever tried to bike from Cobbdale to Old Town Fairfax? We have, and we stayed on the east side of the roads the entire time, as that's where the majority of the sidewalks, very narrow bike lane and shared use path already exist! Why build a new path to nowhere? Folks can cross at Route 50 if they want to bike toward 29/50. Are you honestly going to take the property of all the homeowners along the west side of Chain Bridge Road, before Rust Curve, to make a safe space for walkers and bikers? I highly doubt it!

And onto the argument that two turn lanes are required onto Eaton - have you reviewed the city's 2017 plan where this is planned to be put on a road diet? Your own plans contradict your already existing plans. Clearly someone's not in the loop on the data, and it's causing horrific changes to be made.

Furthermore, have you actually looked at the roads throughout the city? The majority are two through lanes, even at major intersections like Route 50/123 and 50/29. They may provide additional turn lanes, but nowhere else do you actually provide 3 thru lanes - so why the heck would you start now? Even more hilarious about this is that the lanes on Chain Bridge would then go from 3, to 2, to 1. What sense does that even make???

This is supposedly one of the major entrances into our beautiful little city and you want to destroy it. You want to make a concrete/asphalt jungle. And have you noticed there isn't even a welcome sign at this entry to the city? Maybe when you finally put one out, it can say "Welcome to Fairfax City - we LOVE OUR ASPHALT AND CONCRETE".

I forgot - this is all in the name of "safety". Safety for our residents on the west side, where only 5 angle accidents have occurred. Safety where Chain Bridge Road on the south side sees mostly sideswipes and no major injuries, or even no injuries at all in many of the accidents. Have you reviewed the east side? Or have you just picked the accidents that support your cause? Cobbdale sat down and did just this and they came away with more much compelling reasons why your plan is solving a problem that doesn't exist. Those service roads and the ability to turn left onto Eaton Place at a green light are causing DEATHS! Cobbdale asked you to reconsider the left turn there years ago, yet you ignored it and look what happened.

Stop trying to play your "regional multi-modal game". No one is buying it. Keep the trees, move the shared use path already, spring for a sound barrier wall on the west side and then maybe the grown ups can sit down and talk about what should actually be done here. Because this ain't it!

STOP THIS PROJECT - CONCERNED CITY RESIDENTS about 1 year ago