28 Responses to “NBC12 Story About Traffic Circles on Forest Hill”

1. posted by Jennifer C. at October 17, 2009 3:02 pm [#]:
   

   If the city really wants to cut down on accidents in the vicinity of Crossroads, they should probably send someone out to repaint the road markings. The way the road lines were painted in the curve after the last repaving directs eastbound traffic right into the old appliance repair shop across the intersection. The yellow line was so far off to begin with they had to come and redo it – that’s why it divides as drivers get to the light. The white lane markings are just as bad.

2. posted by Jonathan Mallard at October 17, 2009 5:43 pm [#]:
   

   Given Council’s emphasis on parkland preservation and enhancement, this particular improvement suggestion at this particular intersection by the administration is interesting.

   Do they shift the road north and take land from the park? Or, do they shift the road south and perhaps require a take of the apartments and the house on the opposite corner.

3. posted by PageH at October 17, 2009 7:59 pm [#]:
   

   From the presentation I saw at the last Friends of Forest Hill Park meeting, they would take a bit of land from the park that includes two large trees. In the above video they mention that 2/10ths acre would be needed from the park.

   I wish they’d also address the big curve by patrick henry. I’ve been run up on the curb there twice by large trucks. I’m glad the curb is so low.

4. posted by Jennifer C. at October 17, 2009 9:56 pm [#]:
   

   I really think the curve is more of a problem than the controlled intersection of FH and Roanoke. People are probably too dazed trying to figure out what the hell just happened when they came around the corner to pay attention to what’s going on in front of them, whether it’s people changing lanes to turn on Roanoke or trying to get some coffee. Forest Hill is a slingshot either direction.

5. posted by sarah at October 18, 2009 9:44 am [#]:
   

   It’d be nice if there was also a circle/light/better marked pedestrian crossing near 43rd or so so pedestrians can cross the street!

6. posted by Stephanie at October 18, 2009 10:58 am [#]:
   

   I’m not clear on how this would slow traffic traveling east or west on Forest Hill Ave.

   Wouldn’t a roundabout be more appropriate at the convergence of Forest Hill, Semmes, and Dundee?

   Slingshot is certainly the right word to describe the current set-up. Area citizens have been asking for improved pedestrian crossings there as well, and we shouldn’t ignore the fact that the school we be re-opening soon.

7. posted by Ron at October 18, 2009 4:43 pm [#]:
   

   It looked like everyone at the Forest Hill neighborhood meeting had made up their minds to oppose the roundabout, even though they have not seen the proposal yet. If the engineer’s recommendation is rejected, how will the city pay for an additional pedestrian crossing?

8. posted by Jennifer C. at October 18, 2009 8:57 pm [#]:
   

   Can we try repainting the lines properly first? As for the rest, maybe we can set up a zipline from Patrick Henry’s playground to Crossroads’ parking lot.

9. posted by PageH at October 18, 2009 11:02 pm [#]:
   

   My main issue with roundabouts is that no two are ever quite the same and i guess in a way that’s one of the factors that slow traffic. But considering how many times locals will use that circle, I’m sure we’d all figure it out in short order. It is supposed to improve flow by removing stop lights so there is no complete stoppage. it slows cars down because folks are not driving in a straight line and are forced to slow down. apparently the number of wrecks is much smaller once a roundabout is put in. Also pedestrians only cross one lane at a time rather than 2 or more.

   One point made in the Friends of FHP meeting is that the city can get a $1 million grant to put in a roundabout. the money doesn’t come for any other configuration so that’s why there doesn’t seem to be a choice of remedies presented. Currently, even with the light, it’s impossible to cross forest hill without hauling ass.

   You know what else would reduce the amount of traffic through those intersections? Reduced tolls on the xpressway and powhite!!! If you work down town and live in stratford hills it can cost you more than $10 a week. I wonder how much the traffic jumped after the recent increases in tolls.

10. posted by David at October 19, 2009 8:25 am [#]:
    

    Jennifer,
    I like your suggestions, but especially the zip line. Since the Dundee-Semmes intersection is in another district, I don’t know if I have any clout, but I’ll try. It is interesting that the commentary on the Church Hill People’s News in generally very favorable about the roundabouts, while most of what we hear about FH/Roanoke is negative.

11. posted by David at October 19, 2009 8:48 am [#]:
    

    Couldn’t do anything about the zip line. Inspector will look at the painted lines this week.

12. posted by Mike at October 19, 2009 10:05 am [#]:
    

    I think something need to be done to address the pedestrian crossing problems, how about a foot over pass…or even an underpass by the creek???

13. posted by JC at October 19, 2009 10:16 am [#]:
    

    I’m disappointed that the proponents of a roundabout at Forest Hills and Roanoke initially did not want to involve the three neighborhoods affected – Forest Hills, Reedy Creek and Woodland Heights. I think the neighborhood associations should be thoroughly briefed on (1) the nature of the percieved problem, (2) proposed remedies and (3) why a roundabout is the best answer to the perceived problem. Frankly, I think removing the light at Forest Hills and Roanoke will make it impossible for pedestrians to cross Forest Hills, if the intent is to keep traffic flowing. We really need to do more to discourage traffic down Forest Hills and Semmes not encourage more traffic. The only reason I’ve heard for the roundabout is to help increase traffic flow and because the funding is there.

14. posted by Stephanie at October 19, 2009 10:27 am [#]:
    

    It seems unusual (and redundant) to me to have a roundabout put in at a ‘T’ intersection of two streets.

    Re-painting the stop lines at the intersection and painting a dotted turn guideline would probably help considerably.

15. posted by Diana V. at October 19, 2009 11:41 am [#]:
    

    I agree with others that the roundabout doesn’t seem necessary at that intersection. We should be encouraging more pedestrian traffic there with proper crosswalks, and bike lanes, which would seem to suit the PARK and SCHOOL neighborhood so much better.

16. posted by Sally K. at October 19, 2009 2:11 pm [#]:
    

    Folks who live in Forest Hill find the proposed roundabout an outrageously expensive, damaging and potentially dangerous project that creates more problems than it solves.

    And here’s why:

    1). Money. The nearly $1 million dollars to build the roundabout is not coming from the city – it’s from VDOT (the state) and is probably a federal stimulus grant. Apparently, the city will not even ENTERTAIN the idea of paying for any lower cost safety solutions, like painting stripes on the road, or installing flashing yellow lights warning: ” slow down, approaching intersection”.
    The engineer at the first meeting (I was there!) said that VDOT officials consider Forest Hill Avenue to actually be an extension of Route 60. (he kept saying “Route 60″ instead of Forest Hill Avenue.) They really don’t care about the neighbors who live here. The roundabout will ensure that Chesterfield County residents leaving downtown don’t get hung up at a traffic light and can get home faster.

    2). Damage to the park. Right now, the center of the traffic intersection is right under the traffic light. That changes with the roundabout. The center shifts north, so that the center of the circle is IN THE PARK, with 2 lanes of traffic in the park.

    That part of the park slopes downhill. The engineering project involves removing huge old trees, an old granite wall from the Depression era, a stand of pines and smaller trees, and an asphalt path used by park walkers and mountain bikers. These will all be bulldozed away. Then some kind of fill will be hauled in to bring the traffic lanes up to street level. (Does that sound problematic to anyone else?) Next, a 5 foot concrete wall would be constructed to block cars from careening in to the park.

    Why is damaging our neighborhood historic treasure even on the table?

    3). Dangerous. At the moment, the only way to drive out of our neighborhood and on to Forest Hill is to wait for a break in traffic, courtesy of the red light at Roanoke & Forest Hill.
    There will be no traffic light stopping cars with a roundabout. The roundabout means a continual flow of traffic. (you can actually watch the traffic flow of a roundabout on youTube. It’s worth it to take a minute: eye-opening).
    Pedestrians, moms with strollers, folks walking dogs, dads with kids – we’re all going to take our life in our hands trying to cross Forest Hill with no red light to stop traffic. And standing on a tiny concrete triangle in the middle of lanes of traffic (which is what is being proposed) is nuts.

    Yes, some folks at the Forest Hill Neighborhood association meeting had not attended the Friends of Forest Hill Park meeting a week and a half earlier, which is when the engineer gave his presentation. He is very eager to get this lucrative funding to start this major engineering project. He told us that there was no hard and fast deadline, and we said we wanted more neighbors to find out about it, and listen to him, before he submitted his proposal. Well, it turns out, that we learned at the second meeting, from Kathy Graziano, that the proposal is already on her desk. So much for people having a chance to find out what is being proposed!

    Kathy has not signed off on it yet, because she wants folks in the neighborhood to become aware of it first.

    That’s why the engineer has been asked to come to the next Forest Hill Neighborhood Association in November to give his presentation and answer questions. You’re welcome to come at 7 pm in the Presbyterian Church at 44th St & Forest Hill, Wednesday, Nov. 11th. Kathy Graziano encouraged Woodland Heights neighbors to attend as well.

    If the whole neighborhood is opposed to the roundabout, Kathy said, she will take it off the table.

17. posted by CSB at October 19, 2009 2:57 pm [#]:
    

    Like others have said, the roundabout isn’t going to fit at Roanoke, and shouldn’t be considered there.

    I agree that there needs to be a stop light or some sort of pedestrian crossing at or near 43rd street, or at any rate, ANYWHERE between Westover Hills Blvd and Roanoke—-Currently it is incredibly dangerous trying to cross forest hill between these roads, and I’ve seen children and adults almost mowed down by speeding cars.

    A traffic circle could be useful at the Dundee/Semmes/Forest Hill intersection, as there is ample room for one, but there is probably less interest for one here. Too bad. Again, it would need pedestrian crossing signals because of the school and walking-friendly businesses in this area.

    Under no circumstances should the city tear out part of the park to INCREASE traffic flow on Forest Hill. If anything, we need to DECREASE traffic flow and keep speeders and commuters from zooming down our NEIGHBORHOOD streets. It is so dangerous to walk on Forest Hill, and have you seen how many people go 50mph past the Westover Hills school playground? Can we get some SCHOOL ZONE signs posted on Forest Hill for the school? There are so many accidents there at Jahnke, I’m astonished that a child hasn’t been run down by a speeder yet.

    Next time you drive down Forest Hill between Jahnke and 47th, try to drive the posted 25mph speed limit. I do, and people try to kill me on a daily basis. It is insane. Hey David; tell Kathy G to get some cops to start handing out some tickets!

18. posted by PDM at October 19, 2009 3:29 pm [#]:
    

    Only about 150 yards of Forest Hill Avenue is Route 60.

    Technically only about 50% of the intersection in question is Route 60…which, when viewed on a map, takes an unnecessarily circuitous detour though Woodland Heights and Forest Hill anyway, when it could shoot up Hull then Midlothian in a more direct fashion.

    We have traffic calming curb realignment on Bainbridge, but nothing on Semmes and much of Forest Hill Ave, where traffic routinely runs in excess of 50mph.

    And now we have what smacks as an effort to grab bailout money while the gettin’ is good and shoe-horning a roundabout into a location where it is not needed, wanted and won’t fit without taking a bite out of an historic Park that is on the National Register.

19. posted by Jennifer C. at October 19, 2009 5:34 pm [#]:
    

    What are the traffic engineers looking at? I ask in all seriousness, because while I’ve seen quite a few accidents to the east of Bland St, I don’t remember any at the light at Roanoke. I’ve spent many a morning watching everyone stay in the left lane of Forest Hill between the two lights while traffic backs up.
    I looked at the FH/Semmes intersection when I drove through there this afternoon, and there appears to be plenty of room for a roundabout. The Appliance King is closed, so the city could probably get that corner without a problem. They could buy out the owner of the parking lot at Dundee and the convenience store there, and zone a package store in the middle of the roundabout. That way people who want to buy alcohol can do so at their own risk.

20. posted by PDM at October 19, 2009 6:15 pm [#]:
    

    Most accidents occur when FH Ave westbound drivers cut the turn on to Roanoke too closely and crash head on into cars waiting to turn left onto FH Ave.

    Painting a turn guideline would probably alleviate this particular problem.

    Please go spend federal $$$ where it’s actually needed and wanted, like 150 yards east at the Forest Hill-Semmes-Dundee mixing bowl.

21. posted by PDM at October 19, 2009 6:18 pm [#]:
    

    p.s.

    If the Roanoke-Forest Hll Ave intersection is midway down the list of 70 or so traffic accident ‘hot spots’, why is it in the top ten for roundabout consideration?

22. posted by Jennifer C. at October 19, 2009 7:24 pm [#]:
    

    re #20:
    If people would learn what the BIG FAT WHITE LINE means (stop entirely behind it, not with half your car hanging over it) a lot of those accidents would be avoided. Not only does that put you in the line of travel for left-turning traffic, those lines are painted like that for a reason – large vehicles can’t turn with your car in the way.

23. posted by Jennifer C. at October 19, 2009 7:27 pm [#]:
    

    re #21:
    Because trees don’t complain?

24. posted by Hills and Heights » Traffic Circle in RTD - Richmond, Virginia at October 20, 2009 8:15 am [#]:
    

    [...] RTD article has much of the same information that was in the tv report. I didn’t know it was scheduled to go before committee today. The proposal is scheduled to be [...]

25. posted by David at October 20, 2009 10:40 am [#]:
    

    The proposed resolution will not be heard in committee this afternoon. Will be continued at least one month. BTW, I have speed survey for FH and 42nd done by police department if any are interested.

26. posted by Roundabout and the traffic nazi’s. « RVA BIKE COMMUTER at October 20, 2009 11:31 am [#]:
    

    [...] a comment » Last night channel 12 and this morning the T-D are speaking to a proposal to install what the english refer to as [...]

27. posted by Peter Mollica at November 22, 2009 4:52 pm [#]:
    

    I would like to understand why the Forest Hill ave., a two lane residential street is being pressed into carrying the four lanes of traffic from Semmes and from Westover Hills. As I have seen in the Fan, traffic improved as residential streets were returned to the neighborhoods that they were designed for. Let the heavy Route 60 traffic be turned South at Roanoke to Midlothian as originally intended and use the Midlothian commercial strip for East/West commuter traffic. As it now stands the Forest Hill community is effectively cut in half by non-residential traffic.

    Transportation for America released a new study on which U.S. cities are most dangerous for pedestrians. Richmond ranks 24.

    The report blames most pedestrian deaths on what they call “poorly designed arterial roads”—they’re high-speed, multi-lane city streets lined with shopping centers, drive-throughs, apartments, and office space, yet devoid of pedestrian-friendly elements like crosswalks.

    One of the greatest concerns voiced by citizens was that the park and playground have no safe crossings for the children that are attracted to the open space. The roundabout proposal will only increase the traffic flow and create further and potentially lethal hazards for children and other residents who regularly use the park.

28. posted by Hills and Heights » Most Commented Posts of 2009 - Richmond, Virginia at December 30, 2009 7:04 am [#]:
    

    [...] Billing Error for Real Estate Taxes Confuses Recipients The Forest Getting Ready for Smoking Ban NBC12 Story About Traffic Circles on Forest Hill you might have to refresh or click on the title for the video. Leaf Collection Schedule Posted by [...]

Leave a Comment