A Gloucester resident is seeking to revisit the idea of an alternative crossing of the York River in hopes of bringing sustainable economic development to the county as well as easier access for residents to the Peninsula and Interstate 64.
Charles Records, with a background in engineering and development, pitched the idea last Wednesday night to members of the Gloucester County Board of Supervisors in hopes the governing body would approve his moving forward with a feasibility study. Though they made no promises in terms of a formal go-ahead last Wednesday night, county board members did give Records a warm reception, especially after he said he would foot the bill for the research end of the project.
Those who have lived in Gloucester for several decades may remember the upriver crossing studies that were done beginning in the late 1980s. The studies, Records said, analyzed 17 different alternatives to the Coleman Bridge. One of these alternatives went so far as to call for a tunnel under the York River linking Fort Eustis Boulevard to Guinea.
Records began his presentation by providing a bit of history on the Coleman Bridge and the ferry service that connected Gloucester Point to Yorktown prior to construction of the original bridge.
According to Records, the permit for ferry service was issued in 1887. The ferry service continued until the opening of the Coleman Bridge in 1952. The original bridge was designed for a capacity for 15,000 cars per day, Records said, and tolls were collected from users of the span until 1976.
“Population growth in the 1970s and 1980s created a problem that needed a solution,” Records said. “And that started a regional public debate on how to solve the problem.”
He said millions of public dollars were spent investigating and analyzing crossing alternatives. There were 17 alternatives that were eventually narrowed down to seven most sensible choices. The best option at the time looked to be what was considered alternative five, which called for a bridge crossing the York River linking the Peninsula to Gloucester through government-owned property on the Williamsburg side into Aberdeen Creek Road on the Gloucester side continuing finally to meet up with Burleigh Road.
All of these plans hit a snag in 1996; the year the Coleman Bridge was widened from two to four lanes. “People generally forgot about the traffic problems,” Records said. This came about after the Commonwealth Transportation Board decided the span widening was the best option. That same board, he said, also wanted to protect the right of way for alternative five.
In 2000, the most significant and latest study was done on the idea of an alternative crossing. This study, called the York River Traffic Demand Study, was completed by VDOT. The $500,000 publicly-funded study analyzed four scenarios, he said. The four scenarios included building a northern bridge and associated new road and do nothing Route 17; building a southern bridge and associated new road and doing nothing to Route 17; building a six-lane bridge and making a six-lane Route 17 all the way from Jefferson Avenue to Gloucester Court House, or doing nothing except for a six-lane highway from Route 614 to the Coleman Bridge.
“The results are concerning,” Records said. He said even if six-lane widening improvements could be made to the Coleman Bridge and to Route 17 from the bridge to the Court House, it would be obsolete in 2033. “What do we do after 2033?” he asked.
Records said advantages to an upper crossing of the York River include reducing a 50-minute commute to Williamsburg to 14 minutes; the savings of 38 miles on what is currently a 76-mile round trip; improved access to I-64 from the Middle Peninsula; increased tourism with the opportunity to preserve rural character; emergency access in the event of a natural disaster; increased economic potential for the county, and others.
He also said that instead of the Williamsburg, Jamestown, Yorktown area being considered the Historic Triangle, it could include Gloucester to be called the Historic Square. “And that is the very reason for this to happen,” Records said, “to help bring life and increase the tourism in our county.”
“I think we can start planning now and be proactive to improve the quality of life for the future of Gloucester County,” he said.
Records will be doing the preliminary work with fellow architects/engineers Don James, Bryant Goodloe and Arch Marston. Their work, Records said, would come at no cost to the county. However, he did ask the county provide some of its staff time to hold appropriate public forums and help grant access to county files for historic information that will be beneficial throughout the process.
“It’s not often we get offered these types of services for free,” said York district supervisor Carter Borden, “and that’s good.”
At-large supervisor Louise Theberge said she would like to see Records and his team move forward with the research, but said she was a bit concerned with how much staff time it would take. “We’re a little understaffed,” Theberge said, “and I’m just concerned we don’t overwhelm our staff.”
County administrator Brenda Garton said she would discuss the idea with the county departments that would be impacted to make sure they would not get too bogged down in work on their end. She agreed to come back with that report to the board of supervisors at its December meeting.