Spring Street Connector?

Laurel Street neighbor Tommy Birchett continues to ask some good questions in reference to the proposed 2nd Street connector. His latest: What if they built a Spring St connector instead? Newmarket could donate land at the bottom of their hill above Tredagar and they could connect Spring through to 5th st. No disruption to canal […]

March 23, 2012; 6:07 AM • by Oregon Hill

Laurel Street neighbor Tommy Birchett continues to ask some good questions in reference to the proposed 2nd Street connector.

His latest:

What if they built a Spring St connector instead?

Newmarket could donate land at the bottom of their hill above Tredagar and they could connect Spring through to 5th st.

No disruption to canal

No steep incline

Direct connection to west meadvaco from 2nd st

Seems like it would be better for traffic

Just a thought for an alternative proposal.

In fact, this question actually goes back farther to 1991 when Ethyl was given permission to destroy the architecturally significant 2nd Street Bridge. It should be noted that Oregon Hill residents spoke against this demolition. What’s even more interesting is that according to a 1991 Richmond News Leader article, Ethyl received permission to demolish the 2nd Street bridge on the grounds that Spring Street would be extended to increase access to the river.

Local public watchdog C. Wayne Taylor shared the thought. In investigating the question, he discovered that the city entered into a deal with Ethyl (NewMarket) to remove a planned Spring Street extension from the master plan. In exchange, Ethyl agreed to provide land and partial funding for street improvements in other areas. Part of that agreement is that if the city ever extends Spring Street, the city has to pay for the other land and give back the partial funding. In other words, Ethyl may have bought protection against having to fulfill their earlier promise to extend Spring Street.

March 23, 2012 6:07 AM 0