Traffic home page Bury wires & traffic calming home page

Meeting With VDOT– Waterford Project, April 29, 2003

Representatives from VDOT, Loudoun County, and Kimley-Horn met to discuss the Loudoun County project for Waterford, Virginia, Preliminary Engineering to “Bury the Wires and Tame the Traffic.” The purpose of the meeting was to discuss the following:

• History of VDOT planning and projects for Waterford
• TEA-21 grant program to “Bury the Wires and Tame the Traffic” in Waterford
• Scope of services for Kimley-Horn, progress to date, and anticipated meetings/deliverables
• Coordination with VDOT with respect to preliminary engineering, similar efforts, and general assistance

Attendess:
Steve Tyrrell, VDOT Leesburg Residency
Sarah McGuire, VDOT Leesburg Residency
Doug Miller, VDOT Environmental, Northern Virginia District
Hamid Misaghian, VDOT Location and Design (L&D), Northern Virginia District
Dick Pezzullo, Loudoun County General Services
Sheryl Gates, Loudoun County General Services
Scott Mingonet, Kimley-Horn
John Martin, Kimley-Horn

Discussion:
Steve Tyrell led initial discussions, outlining the history of planning for roadway and utility improvements for the Village Waterford. He related that in the 2001-2002 timeframe, VDOT responded to the citizens of Waterford and began to develop concept designs for a portion of the Village. The Department also developed cost estimates for burying power and telephone lines for two segments of High Street in the Village. Hamid handed out copies of this estimate, dated March 19, 2002. The Phase I (a portion of High Street) estimate was $1,690,2000. Phase II (an adjacent portion) was $1,560,300.

Steve indicated that Dusty Holcombe (VDOT NOVA District L&D) had been the project manager for this effort, and overall, he had estimated in June of 2000 that just relocating utilities and installing some minor traffic calming devices would cost approximately $7 million in construction. This figure did not include drainage improvements or major roadway improvements.

It was discussed at this meeting that given the budget for secondary roadway improvements that VDOT provides to Loudoun County, the County Board would have to make Waterford the top priority at the expense of other priority projects (e.g., Route 659 and Route 606) for VDOT to execute such roadway improvements.

Steve and Dick Pezzullo discussed the transition of this project from VDOT to Loudoun County through the TEA-21 Grant Program. Several meetings took place in 2002, including a large get-together on February 27, 2002. Funding from VDOT was put into Preliminary Engineering through this grant, and Loudoun County provided at 25% match. Thus, the “enhancement project” to “bury the wires and tames the traffic” was born in August 2002.

The execution of improvement project was discussed briefly. The source of funding (e.g., demonstration funds, private donations, public-private partnerships, etc.) may determine who executes final design and construction. It was agree that execution is an issue that will be resolved at a later time.

John Martin outlined the scope of services of Kimley-Horn’s contract with Loudoun County, including data collection; studies of traffic calming, utility relocation, drainage, and roadway/pavement alignments; design alternatives; and a master plan for the Village. John indicated that most of the data collection had been accomplished and that the team was well into the engineering studies. Design alternatives are starting to be developed.

A design workshop is to be held with Loudoun County and several representatives from Waterford in late May. Sheryl Gates invited VDOT to participate.

The nature of the grant was discussed in terms of recommendations that are anticipated from the Preliminary Engineering study. Dick stated that the grant provides funding for recommendations to bury the wires and tame the traffic. Any ancillary recommendations (such as drainage improvements) must be connected in some way to a utility relocation or traffic calming recommendation. Dick assured VDOT that this project is not a study to improve drainage in the Village; the grant application will be followed.

Examples of similar projects were discussed. The current VDOT project to calm traffic and enhance US Route 50 in Loudoun County (east and west of Middleburg) is a great example—and it’s local. The attendees agreed that lessons learned from this project may well apply to Waterford. Several curb and gutter details have been developed that are modifications to the VDOT Road and Bridge Standards. These are included in the current set of ROW plans for this project. Also, slot drains have been installed on Snickersville Turnpike that may be applicable for Waterford.

Steve provided Kimley-Horn a copy of a typical section developed for US 50 through Middleburg. He indicated that Jan Vaughn, VDOT PM from L&D at the District, may have copies of the entire plan set for Loudoun County’s use.

Doug Miller discussed the need for solutions to be recommended in the context of an “overarching historic basis.” Waterford is on the National Register and thus recommendations will need to be reviewed by the National Advisory Council on Historic Preservation.

Doug indicated that given Waterford’s National Historic Landmark status, which it achieved in 1970, one of three findings are possible with respect to the recommended improvements:
1. No effect (to the National Historic Landmark)
2. No adverse effect
3. Adverse effect

Given the nature of the improvements, Finding 1 will not be likely. For any set of improvements to be made, Finding 2 is imperative. Doug indicated that to accomplished the improvements, the existing conditions of the Village or the baseline will need to be described.

Scott Mingonet asked for additional detail as to what may be possible and still achieve “no adverse impact.” Doug indicated that removing telephone poles (although there in 1970) would not adversely affect the status. Installing slot drains would likely not affect status.

Dick remarked that removing poles and improving the Village may actually enhance the Landmark status, but that there is no category for enhancement.

The recent results of pavement coring efforts in the Village were also discussed. The result indicate asphalt pavement thicknesses of 4-1/2 inches to 7-3/4 inches. Steve Tyrell said that the results indicate what he believes to be the history of paving in Waterford:

Prior to 1975, when the sanitary sewer was installed, pavement in Waterford consisted of chip and seal surface over the gravel roadway. When the sewer was installed, all pavement was removed. VDOT came back in after the sewer was installed with 2 or so inches of asphalt. Later (1980’s?), the ditch along Main Street was paved to prevent further erosion. That paved ditch is the steeply sloping asphalt that lies between the curb on the south side of Main Street and the paved roadway.

Additional discussion revolved around possible traffic calming and utility relocation improvements. The issue of right-of-way was brought up, and Steve indicated that in 1932, under the Byrd Act, VDOT established a 30-foot Prescriptive Easement through the Village.
The meeting concluded just before 4:00 PM.

Action Items:
1. Loudoun County and Kimley-Horn to meet with VDOT L&D (Jan Vaughn) to discuss lessons learned with the US 50 project.
2. Sheryl Gates to invite Steve Tyrrell (and/or other VDOT representative) to the Design Workshop for the “Bury the Wires and Tame the Traffic” project.
3. VDOT, Loudoun County, and Kimley-Horn to continue to coordinate as necessary during this Preliminary Engineering project.

 

 

 

 

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