AARoads Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

Author Topic: Virginia  (Read 646508 times)

1995hoo

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 9199
  • Age: 45
  • Location: Fairfax County, Virginia
  • Last Login: Today at 09:14:21 AM
Logged
"You know, you never have a guaranteed spot until you have a spot guaranteed."
—Olaf Kolzig, as quoted in the Washington Times on March 28, 2003,
commenting on the Capitals clinching a playoff spot.

"That sounded stupid, didn't it?"—Kolzig, to the same reporter a few seconds later.

cpzilliacus

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 10109
  • Age: 59
  • Location: Maryland
  • Last Login: September 18, 2018, 05:57:40 PM
Re: Virginia
« Reply #3251 on: September 04, 2018, 11:58:19 AM »

Then there are these green signs on the outbound GW Parkway approaching the Beltway. They're ugly, but I guess at least they were consistent.

https://www.google.com/maps/@38.9642265,-77.1650245,3a,75y,267.95h,93.88t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sqLKNh_UqYhwlESPM2j7EQQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

https://www.google.com/maps/@38.9637602,-77.1681394,3a,75y,328.19h,88.32t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sswNaNbmLS3EJ0mRrlfzfYg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

https://www.google.com/maps/@38.9639582,-77.1709724,3a,75y,328.19h,88.32t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sZwdu2n8pj-Wry2Wx7vW8rA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

NPS trying to comply with the requirement to do BGS while still keeping the signs small and modest. 

The BGS panels on the Baltimore-Washington Parkway approaching the Beltway in Prince George's County are much larger, at least in part because they were designed by consultants and contractor-installed when that parkway got  a major facelift in the 1990's.
Logged
Opinions expressed here on AAROADS are strictly personal and mine alone, and do not reflect policies or positions of MWCOG, NCRTPB or their member federal, state, county and municipal governments or any other agency.

D-Dey65

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1848
  • Age: 52
  • Last Login: September 18, 2018, 11:06:03 PM
Re: Virginia
« Reply #3252 on: September 05, 2018, 09:57:13 AM »

The one next to the southbound lanes (the old Knights Inn) was demolished. The one next to the northbound lanes is still there.
Well, that makes sense, since there's a huge clearing next to the Gateway Inn.

In the meantime when I go up (which is now starting to look like it might be closer to October), maybe I'll check out the traffic circle at Exit 45.

Logged

Beltway

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3096
  • Roads to the Future

  • Location: Richmond, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 09:07:14 AM
Re: Virginia
« Reply #3253 on: September 12, 2018, 10:13:16 PM »

I had wondered in the past what was the reason for this highway.
Per this article "to create a 30-mile corridor for new commercial development."
Given the rural character of much of southern Chesterfield County I can imagine that a lot of people would be opposed.
….

https://www.chesterfieldobserver.com/articles/county-reassessing-freeway-project/
County reassessing East-West Freeway project
September 12, 2018
BY JIM McCONNELL SENIOR WRITER

Excerpts:

After more than a year of occasionally contentious discussions about a proposed road project some citizens say will destroy the rural character of southern Chesterfield, the county government is headed back to the drawing board.

Jesse Smith, director of the county’s Transportation Department, confirmed last week that his staff is in the early stages of a new federal environmental assessment for the initial 2 ½-mile segment of the East-West Freeway that would link Interstate 95 with a 1,675-acre south Chester property the county may acquire for future use.

County Transportation staff began working early last year on an environmental assessment for the new road in conjunction with the Chesterfield Economic Development Authority’s plan to acquire the sprawling residential parcel south of State Route 10, rezone it and develop it as an industrial megasite.

County leaders said they needed the first two-lane stretch of the East-West Freeway to market the megasite and meet industrial manufacturers’ demands for easy access to the regional transportation network.

The Transportation Department was waiting for the federal government to issue a “finding of no significant impact” on its initial environmental assessment when community opposition prompted the EDA to withdraw its zoning application in May. Because the traffic assumptions included in that environmental assessment were tied to the development of the property for a single, large industrial end-user, Transportation staff now have to return to square one and demonstrate to the Federal Highway Administration that the county still needs the road to manage future traffic in that area.

The East-West Freeway has been included in the county’s Thoroughfare Plan, which guides future roadway construction, since the late 1980s. The plan envisions the freeway ultimately extending from Interstate 95 in Walthall to U.S. Route 360 west of Grange Hall Elementary, where it would connect with the proposed Powhite Parkway extension to create a 30-mile corridor for new commercial development.

Chesterfield leaders see that corridor as a way to bring balance to the county’s tax base, which historically has been too reliant on residential property taxes to fund local government services.

Critics of the project say it will cut a swath through southern Chesterfield and eventually lead to destruction of thousands of pristine, forested acres.

According to Smith, the preferred alignment for the road isn’t likely to change as a result of the new environmental assessment, which is expected to take about a year.

If the county gets approval from the federal government, Smith expects to hold a public hearing, then ask the Board of Supervisors for permission to begin negotiating right-of-way acquisitions with property owners who live in the path of the new road and are willing to sell.

« Last Edit: September 12, 2018, 10:16:48 PM by Beltway »
Logged
Scott M. Savage
-- Borders, Language and Culture
http://www.roadstothefuture.com
http://www.capital-beltway.com

WillWeaverRVA

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1406
  • Age: 34
  • Location: Richmond, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 09:11:44 AM
    • WillWeaverRVA Photography
Re: Virginia
« Reply #3254 on: September 13, 2018, 12:48:50 PM »

I had wondered in the past what was the reason for this highway.
Per this article "to create a 30-mile corridor for new commercial development."
Given the rural character of much of southern Chesterfield County I can imagine that a lot of people would be opposed.
….

https://www.chesterfieldobserver.com/articles/county-reassessing-freeway-project/
County reassessing East-West Freeway project
September 12, 2018
BY JIM McCONNELL SENIOR WRITER

Excerpts:

After more than a year of occasionally contentious discussions about a proposed road project some citizens say will destroy the rural character of southern Chesterfield, the county government is headed back to the drawing board.

Jesse Smith, director of the county’s Transportation Department, confirmed last week that his staff is in the early stages of a new federal environmental assessment for the initial 2 ½-mile segment of the East-West Freeway that would link Interstate 95 with a 1,675-acre south Chester property the county may acquire for future use.

County Transportation staff began working early last year on an environmental assessment for the new road in conjunction with the Chesterfield Economic Development Authority’s plan to acquire the sprawling residential parcel south of State Route 10, rezone it and develop it as an industrial megasite.

County leaders said they needed the first two-lane stretch of the East-West Freeway to market the megasite and meet industrial manufacturers’ demands for easy access to the regional transportation network.

The Transportation Department was waiting for the federal government to issue a “finding of no significant impact” on its initial environmental assessment when community opposition prompted the EDA to withdraw its zoning application in May. Because the traffic assumptions included in that environmental assessment were tied to the development of the property for a single, large industrial end-user, Transportation staff now have to return to square one and demonstrate to the Federal Highway Administration that the county still needs the road to manage future traffic in that area.

The East-West Freeway has been included in the county’s Thoroughfare Plan, which guides future roadway construction, since the late 1980s. The plan envisions the freeway ultimately extending from Interstate 95 in Walthall to U.S. Route 360 west of Grange Hall Elementary, where it would connect with the proposed Powhite Parkway extension to create a 30-mile corridor for new commercial development.

Chesterfield leaders see that corridor as a way to bring balance to the county’s tax base, which historically has been too reliant on residential property taxes to fund local government services.

Critics of the project say it will cut a swath through southern Chesterfield and eventually lead to destruction of thousands of pristine, forested acres.

According to Smith, the preferred alignment for the road isn’t likely to change as a result of the new environmental assessment, which is expected to take about a year.

If the county gets approval from the federal government, Smith expects to hold a public hearing, then ask the Board of Supervisors for permission to begin negotiating right-of-way acquisitions with property owners who live in the path of the new road and are willing to sell.



I mean, hey, I like transportation and transit development as much as anybody, but they really ought to take the hint that this really isn't needed.
Logged
Will Weaver
WillWeaverRVA Photography | Twitter

"But how will the oxen know where to drown if we renumber the Oregon Trail?" - NE2

Beltway

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3096
  • Roads to the Future

  • Location: Richmond, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 09:07:14 AM
Re: Virginia
« Reply #3255 on: September 13, 2018, 01:29:14 PM »

https://www.chesterfieldobserver.com/articles/county-reassessing-freeway-project/
I mean, hey, I like transportation and transit development as much as anybody, but they really ought to take the hint that this really isn't needed.

I can see building the 2 1/2 mile segment in the Walthall area, as a lot of that area has been zoned and developed with industrial development.  But the rest goes thru residential and semi-rural areas, and I don't see the need, especially if the only real "need" is economic development.

Planned with 6 lanes!

See pages 139 and 142 --
https://www.chesterfield.gov/DocumentCenter/View/2092/Chapter-13-Transportation-PDF
Logged
Scott M. Savage
-- Borders, Language and Culture
http://www.roadstothefuture.com
http://www.capital-beltway.com

plain

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 596
  • Age: 39
  • Location: Richmond Virginia
  • Last Login: September 18, 2018, 07:25:27 PM
Re: Virginia
« Reply #3256 on: September 14, 2018, 01:21:03 AM »

As I've said before an E-W freeway in that area is completely unnecessary (and SIX lanes???) given the fact that VA 288 is already near the proposed routing and already has plenty of ROW for widening. The most I could see for southern Chesterfield, as far as an E-W corridor goes, is maybe a standard 4-lane boulevard.
Logged
Newark born, Richmond bred

Beltway

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3096
  • Roads to the Future

  • Location: Richmond, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 09:07:14 AM
Re: Virginia
« Reply #3257 on: September 14, 2018, 03:35:22 AM »

As I've said before an E-W freeway in that area is completely unnecessary (and SIX lanes???) given the fact that VA 288 is already near the proposed routing and already has plenty of ROW for widening. The most I could see for southern Chesterfield, as far as an E-W corridor goes, is maybe a standard 4-lane boulevard.

VA-288 ranges 8 to 10 miles north of the East-West Freeway alignment, so wouldn't call that close.   But I am getting from the article that this is not for a transportation or traffic need, but to stimulate economic development.  I have already described why I don't think that is appropriate or needed.  I don't see the need or justification for it as a 4-lane arterial either.
Logged
Scott M. Savage
-- Borders, Language and Culture
http://www.roadstothefuture.com
http://www.capital-beltway.com

Beltway

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3096
  • Roads to the Future

  • Location: Richmond, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 09:07:14 AM
Re: Virginia
« Reply #3258 on: September 16, 2018, 11:52:43 PM »

There is a project that was just advertised on Jahnke Road in south Richmond.  I live only a few miles from here and I for some reason didn't know about this project, until I noticed last week that there is utility pole relocations underway parallel to the road, which is a good sign that a widening project will start soon.  It is a VDOT Six-Year Program project and has a federal project number, although the contract is city administered.

Jahnke Road is mostly 4 lanes between Powhite Parkway and Forest Hill Avenue, except for this segment which has 2 lanes.  I don't know if I like the widening scheme which is still 2 lanes but with a 16-foot median, and streetscape improvements including curb and gutter, sidewalks, storm sewer drainage, and landscaping.  It carries about 12,000 AADT now and projected about 17,000 AADT in 2030, so I would think that 4 lanes would be better.

http://www.richmondgov.com/PublicWorks/JahnkeRoadImprovementProject.aspx

The Jahnke Road Improvement Project is designed to improve traffic safety, improve traffic flow and enhance overall livability for the residents and users of the Jahnke Road Corridor. Jahnke Road not only carries automobile traffic, but also pedestrians, cyclists, GRTC bus riders and children who attend the three public schools located along the project corridor.

Important project elements within the design will include a shared use path, sidewalks, and landscaping. The existing roadway drainage will be upgraded from an open system with roadside ditches to a closed system with storm sewer pipe and curb and gutter which will eliminate areas slow to drain during prolonged periods of heavy rainfall.

Construction plans are complete and the project was advertised for construction on June 29, 2018. The acquisition of right-of-way and easements for roadway construction, drainage improvements and utility relocations has concluded by the City Consultant, Stantec, for a total of 84 parcels.

Jahnke Road Design Elements
o Raised 16-ft landscaped median separating two travel lanes (one lane in each direction)
o New curb and gutter
o New storm sewer system
o Left turn lanes are provided at Newell Road, Spruance Road, Forestview School Drive (entrance to Elizabeth Redd Elementary School), Irby Drive and Leicester Road
o 5-ft sidewalk with a 6-ft green space for landscaping on the south side of Jahnke Road
o 8-ft shared use path with a 8-ft green space for landscaping on the north side of Jahnke Road
o ADA (American with Disabilities Act) compliant for pedestrian traffic and bus commuters
o New Signal at Forestview School Drive (entrance to Elizabeth Redd Elementary School)
o Safety improvements at CSX rail crossing

Estimated Costs
o Preliminary Engineering Costs: $2,000,000
o Utility and Right of Way Costs: $1,500,000
o Roadway Construction Costs: $10,500,000
o Total Estimated Costs: $14,000,000
o The project is funded with Federal, State, and City funds.

[hyperlinks to these on the project webpage]
Jahnke Road Plans - April 2016
Improvement Plan Exhibit 1 - June 2012
Improvement Plan Exhibit 2 - June 2012
Landscape - Divided Raised Median Typical Section
« Last Edit: September 16, 2018, 11:55:03 PM by Beltway »
Logged
Scott M. Savage
-- Borders, Language and Culture
http://www.roadstothefuture.com
http://www.capital-beltway.com

WillWeaverRVA

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1406
  • Age: 34
  • Location: Richmond, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 09:11:44 AM
    • WillWeaverRVA Photography
Re: Virginia
« Reply #3259 on: September 17, 2018, 12:23:54 PM »

There is a project that was just advertised on Jahnke Road in south Richmond.  I live only a few miles from here and I for some reason didn't know about this project, until I noticed last week that there is utility pole relocations underway parallel to the road, which is a good sign that a widening project will start soon.  It is a VDOT Six-Year Program project and has a federal project number, although the contract is city administered.

Jahnke Road is mostly 4 lanes between Powhite Parkway and Forest Hill Avenue, except for this segment which has 2 lanes.  I don't know if I like the widening scheme which is still 2 lanes but with a 16-foot median, and streetscape improvements including curb and gutter, sidewalks, storm sewer drainage, and landscaping.  It carries about 12,000 AADT now and projected about 17,000 AADT in 2030, so I would think that 4 lanes would be better.

http://www.richmondgov.com/PublicWorks/JahnkeRoadImprovementProject.aspx

The Jahnke Road Improvement Project is designed to improve traffic safety, improve traffic flow and enhance overall livability for the residents and users of the Jahnke Road Corridor. Jahnke Road not only carries automobile traffic, but also pedestrians, cyclists, GRTC bus riders and children who attend the three public schools located along the project corridor.

Important project elements within the design will include a shared use path, sidewalks, and landscaping. The existing roadway drainage will be upgraded from an open system with roadside ditches to a closed system with storm sewer pipe and curb and gutter which will eliminate areas slow to drain during prolonged periods of heavy rainfall.

Construction plans are complete and the project was advertised for construction on June 29, 2018. The acquisition of right-of-way and easements for roadway construction, drainage improvements and utility relocations has concluded by the City Consultant, Stantec, for a total of 84 parcels.

Jahnke Road Design Elements
o Raised 16-ft landscaped median separating two travel lanes (one lane in each direction)
o New curb and gutter
o New storm sewer system
o Left turn lanes are provided at Newell Road, Spruance Road, Forestview School Drive (entrance to Elizabeth Redd Elementary School), Irby Drive and Leicester Road
o 5-ft sidewalk with a 6-ft green space for landscaping on the south side of Jahnke Road
o 8-ft shared use path with a 8-ft green space for landscaping on the north side of Jahnke Road
o ADA (American with Disabilities Act) compliant for pedestrian traffic and bus commuters
o New Signal at Forestview School Drive (entrance to Elizabeth Redd Elementary School)
o Safety improvements at CSX rail crossing

Estimated Costs
o Preliminary Engineering Costs: $2,000,000
o Utility and Right of Way Costs: $1,500,000
o Roadway Construction Costs: $10,500,000
o Total Estimated Costs: $14,000,000
o The project is funded with Federal, State, and City funds.

[hyperlinks to these on the project webpage]
Jahnke Road Plans - April 2016
Improvement Plan Exhibit 1 - June 2012
Improvement Plan Exhibit 2 - June 2012
Landscape - Divided Raised Median Typical Section

Some local news (not broadcast) sites mentioned this project a little while ago. It's been hung up for quite a while but some sort of improvement on Jahnke Road between Blakemore Road and Forest Hill Avenue is definitely needed. It definitely isn't pedestrian friendly, which is a problem with three schools along that stretch...and honestly, given that alone it probably should be 4 lanes. Drainage has been a problem for a long time too, but the City of Richmond honestly has an epidemic of poor drainage along various city streets.
Logged
Will Weaver
WillWeaverRVA Photography | Twitter

"But how will the oxen know where to drown if we renumber the Oregon Trail?" - NE2

froggie

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 9637
  • Location: Greensboro, VT
  • Last Login: Today at 06:28:03 AM
    • Froggie's Place
Re: Virginia
« Reply #3260 on: September 17, 2018, 12:55:50 PM »

^ If there's that many schools, that would actually be a good reason to keep it at 2 lanes.  Makes the school crossings much safer for children.  Also shortens the distance they have to cross which means they'll get across faster.
Logged

SSOWorld

  • 'Sconsin
  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2898
  • Interstate <Make up your mind!>

  • Age: 45
  • Location: MAH House!
  • Last Login: September 18, 2018, 07:58:46 PM
Re: Virginia
« Reply #3261 on: September 17, 2018, 10:07:13 PM »

The 3 post above were moved to the Tropical Cyclone tracking thread

https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=15473.msg2357318#msg2357318
Logged
Scott O.

Not all who wander are lost...
Ah, the open skies, wind at my back, warm sun on my... wait, where the hell am I?!
Raise your what?

Website not available at this time...
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/ssoworld-roads/

Wisconsin - out-multiplexing your state since 1918.

Beltway

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3096
  • Roads to the Future

  • Location: Richmond, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 09:07:14 AM
Re: Virginia
« Reply #3262 on: September 18, 2018, 07:24:04 AM »

Some local news (not broadcast) sites mentioned this project a little while ago. It's been hung up for quite a while but some sort of improvement on Jahnke Road between Blakemore Road and Forest Hill Avenue is definitely needed. It definitely isn't pedestrian friendly, which is a problem with three schools along that stretch...and honestly, given that alone it probably should be 4 lanes. Drainage has been a problem for a long time too, but the City of Richmond honestly has an epidemic of poor drainage along various city streets.

Based on seeing the utility pole relocations, many homeowners along the road are losing 20 to 25 feet strip of land.  By eyeball it looked like there will be room for 4 lanes undivided.  Adding a 16 foot median to that would bring the road very close maybe within 10 to 15 feet to those houses.  Probably the reason for not making it 4 lanes is because of the problems of a 4 lanes undivided road with respect to pedestrians.
Logged
Scott M. Savage
-- Borders, Language and Culture
http://www.roadstothefuture.com
http://www.capital-beltway.com

 


Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.