Shockoe Revitalization Traffic plan called into question
Could Shockoe Bottom handle baseball traffic on top of another 7,500 projected daily vehicle trips?
RTD and Paul Goldman have called attention to possible gaps in Shockoe’s Traffic plan (links below) and both refer to the same source. Rick Tatnall, former Mayoral candidate, has taken a close look at the plan and doesn’t think it adds up. Basically the study doesn’t take into account anybody driving to see a baseball nor does it feel the need to take those cars into account.
The study states that existing intersections (intersections in red above were part of the study) could handle the extra 7,500 daily vehicle trips estimated to come with development around the stadium, but it doesn’t specifically address traffic coming to and from baseball games.
“Because there is no single parking destination, it is impractical to estimate the specific traffic movements associated with visitors to the stadium,” the study states.
The study assumed that stadium patrons would arrive and depart during off-peak hours, and it was “generally agreed” that studying the morning and evening peak hours would suffice. Tom Flynn, the city traffic engineer, said the morning peak hours are from about 7:30-8:30 a.m., while the afternoon rush hour is from roughly 4:30-5:45 p.m.
“Pretty much, rush hour in Shockoe Bottom area is well over by 6 o’clock,” Flynn said, adding that the city’s position is that if the grid can handle the rush-hour traffic, the other hours will “take care of themselves.”
Councilman Parker C. Agelasto, 5th District, pointed out that, according to the home schedule of the Richmond Flying Squirrels, most weeknight games begin at about 6:30 p.m.
“So you really have a small window there that I think the traffic analysis is assuming that the area will clear out before that traffic arrives,” Agelasto said. [via RTD]
Tatnall also points out that the plan uses data from 2008 which doesn’t take into account the growth that has taken place in the area over the past six years. Richmond officials however feel that valid estimates have been made and traffic will not be a concern if the stadium moves forward.
Speaking of moving forward the Shockoe Revitalization Plan took another step forward as the City Council Land Use, Housing and Transportation Committee voted to forward to the full council a new resolution introduced last week by Mayor Dwight C. Jones.
The full council expects to take a look at the new resolution on Monday. March 27th is the new deadline for all the land deals to be in place including parking.
-
Recommend this
on Facebook -
Report an error
-
Subscribe to our
Weekly Digest
Richard Hayes
When Richard isn’t rounding up neighborhood news, he’s likely watching soccer or chasing down the latest and greatest craft beer.
Notice: Comments that are not conducive to an interesting and thoughtful conversation may be removed at the editor’s discretion.
http://cityhallreview.com/2014/02/19/council-committee-ignores-rules/
http://cityhallreview.com/2014/02/19/seven-affirmative-votes-needed-for-revitalize-rva/
This is a great example of the absurdity going on. This headline makes it sound like every person going to a game will drive alone in a car. Are you people totally crazy? In the bottom many people will walk, bike and take the bus. This area is served well by GRTC. Probably no more than 2000 cars will come into the area at a sold out game. Its fine to be opposed but all these lies are just wrong.
Joe, I would be interested to see the data on how many baseball attendees utilize public transportation, or live in the neighborhoods surrounding the Bottom. Given the immense amount of traffic and cars at even a lightly attended Squirrels game, I would guess many fans are coming from outside of the City. It would be awesome if we had a fully functioning public transportation system that met the needs of all the tri-cities commuters, but until then we can bet on car traffic.
What are Rick Tatnall’s traffic bona fides? Can we compare his resume/traffic-engineering experience with that of Tom Flynn and the Timmons Group? This seems like a case of he-said/he-said where one side is extremely well-qualified and the other offers no credentials at all. Why is this news?
VCU basketball draws at least 1000 more spectators per game than do the Squirrels and while taking into consideration that a small minority of fans/students walk to the game I’ve never experienced anything more than minor traffic inconveniences before and after games at the Siegel Center. I wouldn’t expect that to be much different in the Bottom for a Squirrels game given that they do a similary solid job of directing traffic as is done with VCU basketball games.
The comments surrounding traffic concerns make it sound like we’re talking about a major league baseball team that pulls in over 30,000 fans per game. This (game traffic) is not a big deal.
Joe:
The numerical estimation says it’s based on development around the stadium, and includes the additional projects: the apartments, the grocery store, museum events, the new hotel, the completion of all existing projects, and additional growth from the natural development of the area. I used to take the bus to work downtown from the Fan, and there will likely be additional routes, but 7,500 cars is probably low. Is there anything else you think is a lie that we could address?
“As a layperson I can tell that these experts are wrong about their estimations and conclusions” – Rick Tatnall
The fact is that the City has not done a formal traffic study that accounts for stadium traffic. The fact is that the City has not done an engineering study on how a stadium would alleviate flooding problems.
To me, traffic is the silliest argument against the stadium.
1. Rush hour is over.
2. Most games don’t sell out.
3. There will be new fans and thus more pedestrian/neighborhood attendees.
4. Nobody (unlike rush hour) drives to games by themselves. I bet the average car has three people in it.
5. The best cities in the world are busy!
6. The area hosts much bigger events already.
7. And finally, maybe the stadium will help expedite the much needed Bus Rapid Transit System down Broad Street.
Matt, excellent argument using the Siegel Center! That has not been brought up before (at least what I have read) and you make a good point. I don’t know if the Stadium in the Bottom is a perfect answer but traffic is the least effective argument as far as I am concerned.
Matt – Good analogy. I am sure we could do a decent comparison if we knew number of paid ticket holders (probably drive to games) versus student ticket holders (probably walk). Then examine how many parking spaces get taken up for each game, and how the police manage traffic before and after.
The analogy of the Siegel Center is flawed. Here is why;
1. Estimated 25% of the attendees walked.
2. There are an estaimted 10-15 alternative routes around the Siegel Center (on Board)- including but not limited to Grace, Franklin, Main, Floyd, Grove, Cary, Marshall, Catherine, Clay, and Leigh.
3. There are only three alternative routes around the stadium proposal (on broad)- Main Street, Cary, and Dock. And if you familiar with the bottom, only Main provides the same traffic flow as the 10+ alternative routes around the Siegel Center.
Do you really think all those county residents coming to the bottom will arrive to a 6:30 game at 6:30 when you are estimating traffic is over?
If you want to make this a success, it’s time to stop being willfully ignorant of the problems. Denial does not solve problems. Employees leave the area across a 4:30 to 6:30 time period – the cars do not disappear at 5:45 pm. When I worked Downtown and drove to work, I used to leave after 6:00 pm to avoid the heaviest traffic periods, but there were still plenty of cars on the road then then during a weekend.
The traffic at 6:00 pm on game nights will be the 1200 cars there for the game, plus late departing workers, plus a certain percentage of people going to or coming from apartments that exist in the Bottom right now, plus the apartments already in development and the 700 new ones, plus people coming and going to restaurants and bars, plus the “attractions” that the mayor’s team says will be going into the area, plus people going to meetings and lectures at the new museum sites, plus the “growth” that is already expending the number of cars in the area.
There is already a problem with some intersections during certain times of the day. Without some solutions, there will be a gridlock problem in the Bottom.