Featured Advertisers
Tue, Nov. 24  -   -  Mobile  -  RSS
  

Make a post about this story on FredTalk. Get a printer-friendly version of this page. E-mail this story to a friend.


Visit Kelly Hannon's blog: On the Road

Two plans weighed for new I-95 exit

Initial interchange sketches unveiled at regional planning group's meeting

See related multimedia

Date published: 5/19/2009

By KELLY HANNON

Both designs for a new Interstate 95 interchange near the Virginia Welcome Center in Fredericksburg have advantages and drawbacks, according to a presentation on the plans.

One route would have vehicles exit I-95 at a new interchange between the Rappahannock River and the Welcome Center.

The other possible route would place the new interchange south of the rest area, between the Fall Hill Avenue and Cowan Boulevard I-95 overpasses.

Putting the interchange closer to the river could affect a stream, parking at a proposed museum site and undeveloped commercial property.

But choosing the southern route would affect existing businesses and homes, and create a divider between shopping areas.

Traffic modeling shows both designs improve traffic flow on State Route 3, though, and neither will worsen conditions on I-95, said Lloyd Robinson, director of transportation planning for the George Washington Regional Commis- sion.

"We don't see any fatal flaws in this," Robinson said. "We're helping the interstate, not hurting it."

A committee of elected officials from Fredericksburg, Stafford and Spotsylvania reviewed both options last night at a monthly board meeting of the Fredericksburg Area Metropolitan Planning Organization.

FAMPO has been overseeing a feasibility study of the potential interchange.

According to the presentation, the interchange could connect with a new four-lane toll road that bypasses congested State Route 3.

The toll road would terminate at Route 3 and Gordon Road in Spotsylvania.

Building the interchange and toll road would cost an estimated $250 to $265 million, Robinson said.

The price tag includes the cost of widening the Rappahannock River bridge several lanes, which will be necessary for acceleration and deceleration lanes and merging space. It also covers the cost of minor upgrades at the U.S. 17 interchange in Stafford.

The Fall Hill Avenue overpass must be widened, too. Neither interchange design would affect the Cowan Boulevard bridge, which opened in 2005.

No decisions have been made yet on what drivers would pay to use the toll road.

The Virginia General Assembly passed a bill earlier this year that created the George Washington Toll Road Authority.

This allows Fredericksburg and Spotsylvania to form a toll road authority to oversee the construction of the toll road and interchange, if it chooses to advance the project.

The toll road authority would have to make decisions on project funding and toll amounts, and whether vehicles carrying three people or more would be allowed on the toll road for free, Robinson said.

This summer, a steering committee working on the interchange study will choose one of the two designs as a preferred alternative, Robinson said.

That recommendation will be presented to local governments in the Fredericksburg area, where concerns can be addressed, Robinson said. Ultimately the FAMPO board will also be asked to settle on an alternative.

After that, all documents will be submitted to the Virginia Department of Transportation and the Federal Highway Administration for approval.

Robinson said he hopes to hear a response by fall. Once federal approval is secured, a more intensive design and environmental review process could begin.

Kelly Hannon: 540/374-5436
Email: khannon@freelancestar.com



Follow us on
twitter
fredericksburg.com Facebook page


Date published: 5/19/2009


Most recent reader comments:

Viewing 5 out of 19 comments. (Sorted in reverse order, with most recent post at the top.)

Display comments on this page. | Sort:

PLEASE READ: These reader comments are not moderated. Each user is solely responsible for any message (s)he posts here. The Free Lance-Star does not endorse the views expressed within these comments. All users who post to this Web site must agree to the terms of the FredTalk User Agreement. We rely on our readers to police themselves, and report any content that violates our User Agreement. In accordance with our User Agreement, we reserve the right to remove any post at any time for any reason, and will restrict access of registered users who repeatedly violate our terms. Any reader can report inappropriate content by clicking the "Report this post to admins" link at the bottom of each comment. You need not be registered to report a post.

FAMPO / GWRC part #5 (posted by MGWork , May 24, 2009 2:13 pm)   
While YOU insist on throwing rocks rather than connecting dots, I wil conclude you only wish to stir the pot and not taste the reality. You are not being called on to agree, disagree, or even be challenged. You don't have to even look. Not knowing makes for the best of surprises, and plausible denyability. Also, has anyone read the VRE Master Agreement yet? Talk about toxic assets. Not to worry though because this message will never make it to the light of day. Happy hunting.

FAMPO/ GWRC, part #4 (posted by MGWork , May 24, 2009 1:57 pm)   
cont: stake holders in the Mallard Landing project, with 150 townhouses, under the guise of "affordable housing" are laying seige to the Spotsy Co. Proffer calculations to TRICORD's way of covering the cost of infrastructure. What better way to reduce County Proffer guidelines than to make it law, over the construction of 150 townhouses, than 5,900 home sites TRICORD cant sell to Spotsy Cty, but remains open and active with Spotsy Planning. You do the math. We're talking about very big dollars..

FAMPO/ GWRC, part #3 (posted by MGWork , May 24, 2009 1:35 pm)   
After surfing their web sites, you will definitely want to go to your local library. The DVD you will be looking for is titled "Planning Commission Meeting- 5/6/09 & 5/20/09. After viewing, unless you have already viewed on you TV or CPU...turn to the doors that were open by the Commissionn on 5/6/09, and the presentations made to the Commission by TRICORD's legal representative, Ron Maupin. The leverage being sought by TRICORD at this meeting and many prior, was to change the Co.Proffer Guide.

FAMPO/ GWRC, part #2 (posted by MGWork , May 24, 2009 1:08 pm)   
CONT.: All of YOU had to be there to better understand what Spotsylvania County has in store for our new look and forward thinking. If you want to connect the dots, I suggest you start first with the FAMPO and George Washington Regional Commission web sites. They have a calendar of meetings open to public participation. They have set aside four (4) minutes for public comment. I had to raise my hand to be recognized, but was allowed to introduce some transportation and growth speculation into the dialogue.

FAMPO & GWRC (posted by MGWork , May 24, 2009 12:51 pm)   
On Friday 15, 2009 I was the only citizen, with nothing better to do with his time, who showed up at the 12noon meeting of GWRC, FAMPO representatives, Spotsylvania County Planning, Capital Investment, Lee's Hill District Supervisor and State Transportation officials. As yet, the minutes of that meeting. have yet to be made public. Didn't see any FLS staff. Hugh Cosner, his wife and lawyer, Charles Payne sat with me in the citizen section.. The pizza served was great and the cola was free.

What do you think?
Enter your FredTalk username and password to post a comment on this story. If you are registered on FredTalk or another part of this site, use that login here. Otherwise, you can just REGISTER here... .

Username: Password:

Post title:


Please keep it brief: (512-character limit)
Please make sure CAPS LOCK is off. Posts in ALL CAPS will be deleted.)


By checking this box, you agree to the terms of the FredTalk User agreement.