1999-01-19 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

39 be reduced by reducing the number of lanes to two or three. Mr. Reiley said an urban designed road with curbs takes less space because rural roads need room for shoulders and ditches. Mr. Cox asked how much land would be taken with a four-lane road and the pond recommended by VDOT, and Mr. Reiley said that design could take as much as 16 acres, which would include the 6 1/2 acres proposed for the pond~ Mr. Reiley said he is convinced a much smaller pond could be built and questioned the assumptions VDOT used when they recommended the larger pond. Mr. Cox expressed concern about the ramifications of four lanes and said he feels that it effectively makes 22.5 acres of land inaccessible, including the pedestrian trail. Mr. Toscano questioned what Mr. Cox means by inaccessible and cautioned against using figures that have not been confirmed. Ms. Richards noted that a pond was recommended to be studied as a recreational pond. Mr. Cox expressed concern that everything VDOT is doing is bigger than it needs to be, and said he would like to move the discussion to the two-lane option. Referring to h/Ir. Reiley's drawing of a two-lane option, Mr. Toscano asked if the two lanes could be moved over toward the pedestrian path or if an additional two lanes could not be added between where the two lanes are shown and the trail. Mr. Reiley said that Mr. Toscano makes a good point and he could look at the difference in elevations with four-lanes. Mr. Reitey recommended that whatever option is agreed upon, he feels Council should leave the door open for future lanes. Referring to ]?x/ir. Cox's comment about the pedestrian pathway and stream being .inaccessible, Mr. Reiley said that a pedestrian bridge could be constructed to make that portion more accessible. Mr: Reiley said that while the two or three-lane options would reduce the impact on the Park, it would also clearly impact the functionality of the road. Ms. Richards asked what the advantage would be of a three-lane road over two lanes, and Mr. Reiley said that one lane could be signaled separately. Ms. Richards asked if the third lane could be used for buses or an HOV lane, and Mr. Reiley said the potential exists to use it for buses or other public transit, but he feels the distance is probably too short for an HOV lane. Mr. Caravati said that it might be helpful if areas around the country could be identified where a road goes through parkland. Mr. Toscano said he thinks it is important to convey to Council what VDOT's position would be on a two-lane road and what would the implications be to the scheduling if the design is changed. Mr. Reiley said that in his discussions with Carter Myers, a member of the Transportation Board, Mr. Myers indicated that he will support whatever the City wants, including a two-lane road. Ms. Hannah Twaddell, Senior Planner with the Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission, said that the traffic eliminated by two lanes would have to be accounted for, which may mean amending the CATS Plan, which could take one to three years to complete. h/h-. Cox said he hopes a delay would not.stop people from supporting a two-lane road if they do not like four lanes. Mr. Cox said he is interested in telling VDOT that he is not interested in having them continue their work until Mr. Reiley has completed his work.