Richmond Region Transportation

[Flood Zone]

On 12/5/2023 at 2:25 PM, I miss RVA said:

i keep hoping this kind of funding will also include that which is necessary to get the process of replacing the bridge crossing the river downtown so that all north-south trains can be rerouted to serve Main Street Station.

Well, I just saw that the feds also are doling out another $729M to expand the Long Bridge over the Potomac (actually, a new two-track bridge adjacent to it), along with laying a third track in PW, Stafford, and Spotsy counties, i.e., stuff that I'm sorry to say dwarfs the James River crossing issue by orders of magnitude.

Edited December 7, 2023 by Flood Zone

[I miss RVA]

5 hours ago, Flood Zone said:

Well, I just saw that the feds also are doling out another $729M to expand the Long Bridge over the Potomac (actually, a new two-track bridge adjacent to it), along with laying a third track in PW, Stafford, and Spotsy counties, i.e., stuff that I'm sorry to say dwarfs the James River crossing issue by orders of magnitude.

Yeah - it honestly is a priority. Not fixing the bottleneck at the Potomac essentially defeats the purpose of the rest of the overall project. It's a make-or-break component and it's completely reasonable that it gets top funding and pushed to the front of the line.

Mind you - I've long been concerned that the James River crossing is going to get the short shrift, if for no other reason than the CSX A-Line is functional and not fixing the James River crossing doesn't preclude the rest of the project essentially "working" - even though Amtrak (and I believe the Virginia delegation working on this) absolutely want to route ALL trains (except for Auto Train) through Main Street Station. I almost feel like the powers that be are pushing the MSS portion into the "nice to have" and don't see it as a "must have".  Mind you, this is only conjecture on my part, but honestly, if the James River crossing portion gets funded before 2030 or -- more likely -- 2035, I'll be jolly well surprised. It's not a priority for those driving this whole project.

It TOTALLY sucks, but as Tony Soprano would say - "whaddyagonnado?" 

Edited December 8, 2023 by I miss RVA

[Flood Zone]

11 hours ago, I miss RVA said:

I almost feel like the powers that be are pushing the MSS portion into the "nice to have" and don't see it as a "must have".

Objectively, from a certain point of view,* to see it as a "nice to have" rather than a "must have" is true. At least if one were to take a 35,000 foot perspective. Not from ours, of course. 

Mind you, I suspect the Virginia delegation wouldn't have that view. But getting the funding is a mix of many different factors.

Edit: *I guess that would make it "Subjectively...." At any rate....

Edited December 8, 2023 by Flood Zone

[I miss RVA]

1 hour ago, Flood Zone said:

Objectively, from a certain point of view,* to see it as a "nice to have" rather than a "must have" is true. At least if one were to take a 35,000 foot perspective. Not from ours, of course. 

Mind you, I suspect the Virginia delegation wouldn't have that view. But getting the funding is a mix of many different factors.

Edit: *I guess that would make it "Subjectively...." At any rate....

!!!!

Unfortunately, I don't at all see that there will be the same kind of alacrity in the funding process for the MSS/James River Crossing portion of this project that there is for either the Long Bridge or the North Carolina portions. For those two portions, the funding got done QUICKLY - and instead of getting piecemealed (meaning, maybe the Long Bridge portion gets funded now, the Carolina portion gets funded next year or two years from now or five years from now) - they got funded SIMULTANEOUSLY.

As for funding of the Main Street Station/James River cross portion, I get the strong feeling that it'll be approached from a "meh... not now. We'll get to it... eventually." And to use a cliche, that "can" is gonna get "kicked down the road" repeatedly -- year after year, cycle after cycle. Eventually, someone's gonna say - "oh yeah - I guess we'd better get this part done."  Again, I think if funding comes by 2030 it'll be an absolute miracle. Would not surprise me one iota to see this pushed off at least another decade plus. Maybe money will be made available by 2035. 

Totally sucks - because "technically" the whole project could be deemed "fully operational" with the buildout for YEARS without the MSS portion included. After all, as long as trains stop at Staples Mill Road, then TECHNICALLY they're serving Richmond (and the "Raleigh to Richmond" portion will have been fulfilled). In my view, though, that's total bullscheitze - where, yet again, Richmond gets the short shrift. Amtrak will be operating out of a shiny, new, first-class downtown Raleigh terminal and, of course, will be operating out of world-class Union Station in D.C. But Richmond? Meh... who cares? Staples Mill Road - "good enough". Main Street Station - a LEGITIMATE downtown rail terminal -"a luxury".

Again, I call bullscheitze, but what do I know?

Wish to goodness folks would look at the MSS portion as a necessity.

 

Edited December 8, 2023 by I miss RVA

[Child2021]

Hard running shoulder lanes coming to 288 between Patterson Ave and Huguenot Trail. It is scheduled to be carried out by the 2028 fiscal year. 

Virginia: Work set on two Richmond-area traffic bottlenecks

Example of a Hard running shoulder: 

Where it's going to go to:

 

Between the two highlighted points. 

[blopp1234]

39 minutes ago, Child2021 said:

Hard running shoulder lanes coming to 288 between Patterson Ave and Huguenot Trail. It is scheduled to be carried out by the 2028 fiscal year. 

Virginia: Work set on two Richmond-area traffic bottlenecks

Example of a Hard running shoulder: 

Where it's going to go to:

 

Between the two highlighted points. 

Seems like this is VDOT trying to get around widening the 288 bridge. Would guess that work to widen 288 from Broad to Patterson from 4 to 6 will begin within the next 5 years. They are already working on adding a third lane between the powhite and hull on 288 now and all the growth out in that area of the metro will only further road development.

[eandslee]

20 minutes ago, blopp1234 said:

Seems like this is VDOT trying to get around widening the 288 bridge. Would guess that work to widen 288 from Broad to Patterson from 4 to 6 will begin within the next 5 years. They are already working on adding a third lane between the powhite and hull on 288 now and all the growth out in that area of the metro will only further road development.

Crazy.  Seems like yesterday 288 was constructed and opened!  Ha!

[upzoningisgood]

9 hours ago, I miss RVA said:

!!!!

Unfortunately, I don't at all see that there will be the same kind of alacrity in the funding process for the MSS/James River Crossing portion of this project that there is for either the Long Bridge or the North Carolina portions. For those two portions, the funding got done QUICKLY - and instead of getting piecemealed (meaning, maybe the Long Bridge portion gets funded now, the Carolina portion gets funded next year or two years from now or five years from now) - they got funded SIMULTANEOUSLY.

As for funding of the Main Street Station/James River cross portion, I get the strong feeling that it'll be approached from a "meh... not now. We'll get to it... eventually." And to use a cliche, that "can" is gonna get "kicked down the road" repeatedly -- year after year, cycle after cycle. Eventually, someone's gonna say - "oh yeah - I guess we'd better get this part done."  Again, I think if funding comes by 2030 it'll be an absolute miracle. Would not surprise me one iota to see this pushed off at least another decade plus. Maybe money will be made available by 2035. 

Totally sucks - because "technically" the whole project could be deemed "fully operational" with the buildout for YEARS without the MSS portion included. After all, as long as trains stop at Staples Mill Road, then TECHNICALLY they're serving Richmond (and the "Raleigh to Richmond" portion will have been fulfilled). In my view, though, that's total bullscheitze - where, yet again, Richmond gets the short shrift. Amtrak will be operating out of a shiny, new, first-class downtown Raleigh terminal and, of course, will be operating out of world-class Union Station in D.C. But Richmond? Meh... who cares? Staples Mill Road - "good enough". Main Street Station - a LEGITIMATE downtown rail terminal -"a luxury".

Again, I call bullscheitze, but what do I know?

Wish to goodness folks would look at the MSS portion as a necessity.

 

It seems like the Long Bridge and Raleigh to RVA projects are much more intensive, so you would need to announce funding as early as possible, no? Grants come out for stuff every year, so why would today's news suggest anything about the RVA bridge?

[I miss RVA]

Whelllllllllp - as much kvetching as I do about "where's the funding for the James River Crossing" portion of our "RVA as Virginia's Rail Hub" initiative, lo and behold money comes in for another portion of the overall rail resurrection that will absolutely benefit the Capital City. Axios Richmond is reporting today that the proposed "Commonwealth Corridor" connecting Charlottesville with Hampton Roads won a $500K grant last week from the USDOT for the portion between CVille and Richmond. Since the entire route is north of the river, we can expect service to connect Charlottesville to Staples Mill Road AND Main Street Station, which already serves trains coming from the Peninsula. The proposed rail service will replace the current bus connection between Richmond and Charlottesville. (See graphic - below)

Unquestionably, with the other projects - including the larger "R2R" initiative - the Commonwealth Corridor represents a big WIN for Richmond, firmly establishing River City (and ultimately -- specifically -- Main Street Station) as the Commonwealth's hub for passenger rail service. 

The Virginia Mercury went into a bit more depth on the burgeoning Commonwealth Corridor in August. (See link - below)

From today's Axios Richmond:

https://www.axios.com/local/richmond/2023/12/11/richmond-charlottesville-passenger-line-amtrak

From the August 31, 2023 Virginia Mercury:

https://www.virginiamercury.com/2022/08/31/a-new-passenger-rail-corridor-could-connect-hampton-roads-to-blacksburg-and-beyond/

 

Edited December 11, 2023 by I miss RVA

[Flood Zone]

On 12/8/2023 at 3:01 PM, Child2021 said:

Hard running shoulder lanes coming to 288 between Patterson Ave and Huguenot Trail. It is scheduled to be carried out by the 2028 fiscal year. 

Hard shoulder running works well in a lot of places. I'm not sure we'll ever have the critical mass to warrant HOV or HOT lanes, but HSR could be an effective half-measure.

(In truth, they should have laid out 288 with an eye to the future.....)

[I miss RVA]

1 minute ago, Flood Zone said:

I'm not sure we'll ever have the critical mass to warrant HOV or HOT lanes

(In truth, they should have laid out 288 with an eye to the future.....)

1.) Interesting - unless I'm missing something, Hampton Roads has had HOV lanes since they were roughly metro RVA's size (1.4 M), no? Or was this later - when the region was a bit larger population-wise? That said - what's the difference? How large would metro RVA need to be before VDOT would push for HOV lanes? OR - is it a matter that, relative to population and population density, metro RVA has always seemed to punch above its weight in terms of highways? OR - is it a matter that stuff - and thereby commuter patterns - have become increasingly diffuse in metro RVA than in other places - meaning - there's not a huge "directional" push for inbound traffic in the morning and outbound traffic in the afternoon like there might be in other metro areas?

2.) 100% agreed.

[Flood Zone]

1 hour ago, I miss RVA said:

That said - what's the difference? How large would metro RVA need to be before VDOT would push for HOV lanes? OR - is it a matter that, relative to population and population density, metro RVA has always seemed to punch above its weight in terms of highways? OR - is it a matter that stuff - and thereby commuter patterns - have become increasingly diffuse in metro RVA than in other places - meaning - there's not a huge "directional" push for inbound traffic in the morning and outbound traffic in the afternoon like there might be in other metro areas?

Probably all the stuff. I've never seen anything that suggests a study whether RVA would need such lanes, much less anything that even hints a need. We have a fairly developed highway system for a metro our size, and traffic is rather negligible. The choke points are on surface roads such as Broad in Short Pump or Hull near Woodlake. Outside of a mass wreck blocking multiple lanes, our interstate highways and interstate-standard highways don't get choked up like what happens in Hampton Roads. That's likely a product of geography and market size. I could see HSR or auxiliary lanes coming to 64/95 someday.

[I miss RVA]

8 minutes ago, Flood Zone said:

Probably all the stuff. I've never seen anything that suggests a study whether RVA would need such lanes, much less anything that even hints a need. We have a fairly developed highway system for a metro our size, and traffic is rather negligible. The choke points are on surface roads such as Broad in Short Pump or Hull near Woodlake. Outside of a mass wreck blocking multiple lanes, our interstate highways and interstate-standard highways don't get choked up like what happens in Hampton Roads. That's likely a product of geography and market size. I could see HSR or auxiliary lanes coming to 64/95 someday.

True - geography can play a big part in creating significant areas of traffic congestion. As for market size - no doubt it plays a part. I'm suggestion, however, that metro RVA is now about the same size Hampton Roads was when HOV lanes were first installed there. I'm thinking that metro RVA really DOES punch way above its weight in terms of how well developed the highways are relative to the size (in population) of the metro. What will be interesting will be to see how traffic changes over the next decade particularly in Chesterfield, where the greatest amount of the population growth is occurring within the metro.

[Child2021]

Very unlikely for the area to get HOT/HOV lanes, there's no space (95 & 64) or demand for them at this point. 

[Flood Zone]

19 hours ago, I miss RVA said:

As for market size - no doubt it plays a part. I'm suggestion, however, that metro RVA is now about the same size Hampton Roads was when HOV lanes were first installed there.

I think geography and market size aren't two boxes to check, but rather a sliding scale - more of one can outweigh rough equivalence for the other. So, for Hampton Roads geography is a major challenge, one that doesn't really exist here, and as such any tracking of market sizes over time isn't apples to apples. Geography encompasses HR's position in a potential hurricane area, so that's another reason to create traffic-alleviation (or bypass) measures. Plus, it's a military area and I'm guessing the original intent of the interstate highway system as a way to move military personnel and material plays a role in the creation of the extra lanes there. Those factors aren't really at play here.

11 hours ago, Child2021 said:

Very unlikely for the area to get HOT/HOV lanes, there's no space (95 & 64) or demand for them at this point. 

Yeah, the area where they run concurrently -- I'm not sure we'll ever see that. On 95 north or south of the city, or 64 from Staples Mill to 288, I guess it's theoretically feasible to make reversible HOV lanes set off by sticks (like that HOT-lanes stretch on the Beltway west of the mixing bowl), but even that seems unnecessary. Plus, Virginia has moved away from HOV lanes to HOT lanes, and I'm guessing it would take a generation or two for things to reach the point where people here would have to consciously make the choice to spend more (sometimes much more) to avoid traffic.

[Child2021]

The current Plan RVA plan only calls for auxiliary  lanes from 195 to Short Pump, and from reading the rest of the document no mention of us ever needing them. Indianapolis is also larger than Richmond and it doesn't have them might be due to the grid structure of it's streets doesn't warrant them. I could see them implementing HSR from the Willis Rd. exit to maybe Parham Rd. one day.  

[I miss RVA]

1 hour ago, Flood Zone said:

Plus, Virginia has moved away from HOV lanes to HOT lanes, and I'm guessing it would take a generation or two for things to reach the point where people here would have to consciously make the choice to spend more (sometimes much more) to avoid traffic.

And I think this is the biggest consideration at the end of the day - HOV-HOT lanes are bloody expensive to build and maintain. Building the shoulder lanes here -- as you said previously -- is a good half-measure.

Funny - this whole conversation (about HOV's, RVA market size vs Hampton Roads, etc.) is one of the things that for years I've both lamented and laughed/shaken my head about: seems like with so many things that other metros have out of necessity that RVA has never had and likely  never will have (such as HOV lanes) - for years and years and years, RVA's always been just not big enough or there's not been enough demand for something; then, just when RVA hits the size where having this or that thing starts to make sense, it's too damn expensive to build. So we go from "we don't need it" to "we can't afford it." 

THAT should be one of our Style Weekly throwbacks -- "You're VERY Richmond if: for decades you don't need (fill in the blank), and then by the time you DO start to need it, you can't afford it."

Edited December 12, 2023 by I miss RVA

[Flood Zone]

19 minutes ago, I miss RVA said:

RVA's always been just not big enough or there's not been enough demand for something; then, just when RVA hits the size where having this or that thing starts to make sense, it's too damn expensive to build.

Maybe it's because I'm presently slogging through Caro's biography of Robert Moses, but it seems it's just a different world we live in and only becoming more so. I don't think it's an RVA thing. We build for current need and not future capacity.

[I miss RVA]

Just now, Flood Zone said:

Maybe it's because I'm presently slogging through Caro's biography of Robert Moses, but it seems it's just a different world we live in and only becoming more so. I don't think it's an RVA thing. We build for current need and not future capacity.

I don't know of too many cities/metros that build for future capacity beyond a few years (maybe five at most) - especially in such areas as highways, where extra lanes on an expressway become outstripped almost as soon as they're open. It's not so much about building for the future that I'm talking about: it's that for years and years, RVA "doesn't need" something because our market size is just too damn small (where have you heard THAT lament before?) -- but then, when RVA get big enough to actually realistically maybe start to have need for something, it (the thing we didn't need for years) is now too damn expensive to build.

Take rail transit. How often in our community here have so many of us said how great it would be if we had some form of rail transit - street-level rail like you see in Portland and other cities (basically a throwback to the old streetcar lines for which RVA was once famous). So - we "don't need" them because we have buses and we're not "big enough" - yada yada. Thennnnnnnnnnnnnnnn - when we finally start gaining enough size to really need some form of "rapid" transit - rail is WAYYYYY more expensive now than it would have been 20, 30, 40 years ago to build an maintain - and it's SO cost prohibitive that we have to go "watered down" -- so rather than a slick, efficient, iconic street-level rail system, we're left with - you guessed it - BUSES!!! WOO HOO!!! Break out that Snoopy dance!!

THAT's the "typical Richmond" thing I'm talking about - and I'm doing so somewhat tongue in cheek, somewhat laughing and somewhat shaking my head.

[eandslee]

An interesting take on the “temporary” bus transfer station downtown. I absolutely love (and wholeheartedly agree with) the commentator’s future vision of the transfer station. We need forward thinking like this in Richmond.  For me, it seems to be a no-brainer!  Now, who will step up to the plate and integrate the transfer station in a plan to redevelop that city block with mixed use (hopefully tall) buildings on top?  Let’s go!!

https://richmond.com/zzstyling/view-oped-sig/commentary-grtc-s-transfer-station-downtown-a-positive-step-make-it-permanent/article_5baf7028-9e8c-11ee-9cf1-c72e3848e672.html

[123fakestreet]

32 minutes ago, eandslee said:

An interesting take on the “temporary” bus transfer station downtown. I absolutely love (and wholeheartedly agree with) the commentator’s future vision of the transfer station. We need forward thinking like this in Richmond.  For me, it seems to be a no-brainer!  Now, who will step up to the plate and integrate the transfer station in a plan to redevelop that city block with mixed use (hopefully tall) buildings on top?  Let’s go!!

https://richmond.com/zzstyling/view-oped-sig/commentary-grtc-s-transfer-station-downtown-a-positive-step-make-it-permanent/article_5baf7028-9e8c-11ee-9cf1-c72e3848e672.html

I drove my it for the first time yesterday, not sure how functional it is but it looks nice. Much better than the hilly crumbling parking lot.

[Shakman]

Give it a few years and this one will be a flat crumbling parking lot.

Edited December 21, 2023 by Shakman

[I miss RVA]

19 minutes ago, Shakman said:

Give a few years and this one will be a flat crumbling parking lot.

True!

[I miss RVA]

1 hour ago, eandslee said:

An interesting take on the “temporary” bus transfer station downtown. I absolutely love (and wholeheartedly agree with) the commentator’s future vision of the transfer station. We need forward thinking like this in Richmond.  For me, it seems to be a no-brainer!  Now, who will step up to the plate and integrate the transfer station in a plan to redevelop that city block with mixed use (hopefully tall) buildings on top?  Let’s go!!

https://richmond.com/zzstyling/view-oped-sig/commentary-grtc-s-transfer-station-downtown-a-positive-step-make-it-permanent/article_5baf7028-9e8c-11ee-9cf1-c72e3848e672.html

From the RT-D article:

One concern we’ve heard from city planners centers on the opportunity cost of dedicating one of the most valuable parcels of city land solely to bus transfers instead of a tower for offices, housing or retail, which is understandable. But what if we didn’t have to choose? There are several examples across the country of combining housing, commercial and office space with a transportation center.

Charlotte is moving forward with a new uptown transportation center that will include an underground concourse for buses and light rail and a mixed-use tower on top. In South Florida, MiamiCentral Station houses not only a train station, but three towers above, including a hotel, retail, offices and residences.

This is EXACTLY what Richmond/GRTC (someone!!) needs to make happen.

Again, I ask the question - if other cities can do it, why can't Richmond?

[123fakestreet]

4 hours ago, I miss RVA said:

From the RT-D article:

One concern we’ve heard from city planners centers on the opportunity cost of dedicating one of the most valuable parcels of city land solely to bus transfers instead of a tower for offices, housing or retail, which is understandable. But what if we didn’t have to choose? There are several examples across the country of combining housing, commercial and office space with a transportation center.

Charlotte is moving forward with a new uptown transportation center that will include an underground concourse for buses and light rail and a mixed-use tower on top. In South Florida, MiamiCentral Station houses not only a train station, but three towers above, including a hotel, retail, offices and residences.

This is EXACTLY what Richmond/GRTC (someone!!) needs to make happen.

Again, I ask the question - if other cities can do it, why can't Richmond?

That would be nice but we aren't exactly running out of vacant parcels around downtown. If anything we seem to be creating more (old dominion tower, public safety building, coliseum....)