Village Meeting March 6, 2003 with the Consulting Group Studying How to "Bury the Wires and Tame the Traffic"
Note: These notes were taken by Anne Hardy who did her best to capture the gist of each person's remarks (not the actual wording) and the essence of the group activities. A videotape was also taken of the meeting by Kimley-Horn.
A meeting was held between village and other area residents and the Loudoun County Department of Transportation's contractor, Kimley-Horn and Associates. The purpose of the meeting was to gather information about what Waterford wanted to achieve in its goal of taming the traffic and burying the wires. Approximately 65 residents attended,
Agenda:
Welcoming Remarks - Eric Breitkreutz Waterford Foundation Exec. Dir
Introduction of Project - John Martin, Kimley-Horn & Assoc.
“Vision and Values” Group Activity - Dan Burden, Facilitator
Presentation: “Success Stories - Dan Burden
“Show Us” - Activity Group Activity
Summary: “Vision and Values” - Dan Burden/Kimley-Horn & Assoc.
Next Steps - John Martin/ Eric Breitkreutz
Adjourn
Welcoming Remarks - Eric Breitkreutz Waterford Foundation Executive Director
Eric Breitkreutz started by discussing the process that allowed this study to be undertaken. The first step was obtaining TEA grants. The next step was getting a consensus, and then the hiring of the Kimley-Horn consulting team by Loudoun County Department of Transportation. This upcoming study is only an engineering study. Eric then mentioned that TEA-21 does not cover drainage except as it relates to specific road improvements. He also mentioned that we don’t know what the final hook-up costs will be for individual houses. He introduced John Martin.
Introduction of Project - John Martin, Kimley-Horn & Assoc.
John Martin introduced the Kimley-Horn team which included a traffic engineer, civil engineer, architectural engineer, environmental (NEPA) expert, and archeologist. He then gave the scope of the project. He introduced Dan Burden of Walkable Communities, Inc.
Vision and Values - Group Activity - Dan Burden, Facilitator
The first step is identify most important issues (solutions will come later). He had the audience write down its vision of Waterford in 20 years. Some in the audience then shared their visions. The visions were collected for the consulting group. Each person then used five Post-it notes to write five descriptive words of “What is Waterford”. Everyone’s five notes were grouped together with similar descriptive words from others. These were collected for the consulting team.
Dan Burden started a Power point presentation. The key points of the presentation were:
- Waterford presents an interesting challenge because in his experience (over 1000 towns modified) he has not found a rural, historic community. Waterford is unique. He showed sample communities that are similar to Waterford. Many of the issues Waterford faces are the same as the other communities; it’s just that the solutions might be a bit different.
- Studies show that higher speeds=lower home value; Higher speeds=less neighbor interaction
- The former opinion of planning groups ‘That which cannot be measured either does not exist or is not of real value, or it is best handled by the experts’ is WRONG!
- Calming Measures: Stage One—Reactive (Knee jerk stop signs/speed bumps), Stage Two—Implement Planning Measures. We are in stage two.
- School access must have top priority for vital/active community. Small scale roundabout could work in some places in town (e.g. Center). In long lane areas (Second street) we might include median strip. In a stark landscape where greenery is introduced traffic slows down. He then showed several examples of identical streets where presence of trees has reduced traffic speed considerably (When you like the view, you slow down to admire/enjoy).
Traffic Calming Tools we should consider:
- Removing asphalt and using a textured material (such as cobblestone or brick) to gain reductions of 5-10 MPH.
- Raised intersection—3 to 6 inch raise slows traffic some
- Roundabout deflects traffic forcing slow down (Seattle has 700 roundabouts now with a 93% drop in accidents)
- Speed tables (Not a bump)
- Refuge islands where pedestrian can stop between lanes
- Choker—only allows one car through at a time
- Tools can be combined (e.g. Curb extension plus speed table).
A possible idea that might work here is design the street for the pedestrian first (particularly visually) that a car can use but will use cautiously.
He gave examples of individualistic solutions in various communities to issues we face:
- Road Edge/Parking: Wood curbing in Texas
- Paths: Oyster shells (Louisiana), stamped concrete (Calf.)
He reiterated to test out all possibilities before any are rejected.
Group Activity
Everyone in the audience wrote down issues on traffic calming and burying the wires. Thirty-two suggestions were identified. Each person in the audience then voted on the seven suggestions that they thought were most important. The 26 suggestions that received votes were:
- Preserve character of village (preserve without sterilizing) (28)
- Speed (22)
- Tree canopy (21)
- Bury wires (19)
- Hidden but extremely expandable buried utility (18)
- Traffic diversion (bypass) (17)
- Traffic volume (16)
- Drainage (12)
- Less lighting (9)
- Replacement of trees/maintain existing trees (9)
- Water (Future Piping) (9)
- Authentic Looking Streets (7)
- Better lighting at night for walking (7)
- Safe walkway to school (7)
- Bicycle friendly including approach roads (6)
- Eliminate commuter traffic (6)
- Lower pavement level (6)
- Less asphalt (thickness) (5)
- Visitor friendly town (5)
- Parking (3)
- Safe walkway (3)
- Bicycle unfriendly (2)
- Broadband access/Cable access (2)
- Restore street function (2)
- Tasteful signage (1)
- Construction vehicles (0)
- Adequate parking at Post office (0)
- Allow construction/farm vehicles (0)
- Eliminate dangerous corners (0)
Next Activity: The audience broke into three groups and while looking at a street map of Waterford, wrote down their suggestions to calm traffic and identify other ideas related to the study. All the statements were presented to the room at large. The maps were collected for use by the consulting group.
Next Steps - John Martin/ Eric Breitkreutz
John Martin gave concluding remarks and thanked particular individuals who helped in setting up the meeting. He handed out feedback forms for additional remarks.
Audience members then raised a number of concerns which were noted.
There will be feedback workshop(s) on the plan with the traffic calming committee members of the Waterford Foundation, the Waterford Citizens' Association, and the Waterford Parent Teachers' Organization.
The next public meeting between the consulting group and area residents is July 17th, 18th. This will be the presentation meeting of the Master Plan.
|
Note: There will be at least one if not more public meetings to review the progress and ideas being developed from the study. This WCA/WF/PTO meeting will not involve the contractor and will be called to report on the study's progress and act as a form to present feedback to the contractors.
|
John Martin then showed examples of they types of reports that they can prepare to present the results when the study is completed.
The meeting ended about 9:30.
traffic, bury wires, traffic calming, roads, esthetics, burying overhead wires, automobile speed reduction, waterford, va, virginia, waterford va, historic towns, loudoun county, civil war towns, villages, village, national historic landmark
