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.
| Home | Site
index |
| Waterford
history
| Loudoun
history |
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
