RECENT COMMENTS
Eric S. Huffstutler on What is up with the Church Hill Post Office?
lanny on then it happens to you...
JessOfRVA on then it happens to you...
Becky Metzler on Updated! Guess what's happening on Mosby/Venable?
Mary on then it happens to you...
Sid on then it happens to you...
Becky Metzler on Church Hill Startup Tackles Insurance for Freelancers
Why the loose gravel?
06/08/2009 1:00 PM by John M
Many of the streets north of Marshall have recently been resurfaced with tar and loose gravel. Anybody know the story on these streets get this unique (and bumpy) treatment?
It is undoubtly the cheapest way to do street resurfacing – other than none at all.
I believe that’s slurry seal. It’s cheaper than repaving and better than nothing. Not much fun on a motorcycle, though.
They’ve also given several blocks north of Broad (around Sette and that area) the same treatment. If you like the experience while driving your car, just try it out on a bike. It really aids with braking at the intersections.
Agreed: it’s annoying the first coupld weeks after the oil & stones are put down, but after a month or so, it looks & rides a lot better.
I always thought it was done for the St. John’s Hist. District since it kinda looks closer to 18th “historic” type street surfacing in Col. Wil’burg.
If you notice, this pebbly-surfacing stops at Marshall. Perhaps it’s more for the tourists; those folks who come to tour St. John’s Church or drive thru on the “Historic Richmond Tours”. It does look better than black aspalt, and is probably way cheaper that cobblestoning every street.
Yeah, gravel flying all over 🙂 Signs went up yesterday saying they were resurfacing Friday.
So it’s staying like that? I guess I was thinking this is the first step in a real repaving. Glad I couldn’t park on my street all day so they could throw rocks around!
This can only mean they plan to dig up the streets in a few weeks.
When it was resurfaced the roads 12-13 years ago, they used the wrong rocks on the first go round and had to pave it twice.
A month later they dug up the streets to install new utility lines. That’s why you see the long, linear asphalt patches.
All I know is that it beats the hell out of a car’s paint driving over it or having a car pass by… AND it will wash out in no time. Just like the quick asphalt fixes on the concrete highway.
I especially like the giant “FRESH OIL” signs!
The asphalt patches in that particular photo are from a ruptured water main after the street was repaved (more like 10 yrs ago, IIRC). We called it in and sat for hours, watching the underpinnings of 24th St wash away.
Elaine’s hit it. Used to be they only did the St. John’s O&H district with the brown gravel for historic look; apparently now they’ve extended it to the cross streets up to Marshall. Actually, part of the St. John’s district does extend to Marshall.
Boz #3 – where is Sette several blocks north of Broad? Don’t you mean south of Broad?
The gravel will sink in eventually. Usually they come through with a roller to press the gravel in, as I recall.
Cheaper than cobblestoning every street? Those streets already have cobblestones.. they just need to be uncovered. All that free labor that put them down and we don’t even use what was put down. I wish all historic areas in the city went back to cobblestone if they had it at all.
cadeho, i’m with ya, cobblestones: love em and can’t get enough of em. i’m aware they’re under most of our older streets. i shoulda said “uncovering and repairing the existing cobblestones underneath”.
but in icy/slushy conditions, my tires get better traction on asphalt than cobblestones, especially on a hill. now if i could just replace my truck for a horse and wagon, I might have a shot at navigating wet cobble stones.
Cobblestones ain’t so cool on a bicycle.
I don’t even like to walk on cobblestones, try out 26th Street between Franklin and Grace sometime…I can’t imagine trying to navigate them on a bicycle.
I wonder if the City realizes that this has caused a definite hazard to motorcycles? Not only can I no longer ride on the streets they’ve tossed the gravel and oil onto, but now main streets that intersect those streets have gravel on them, too. I’m always cautious and drive slow in our hood (especially on my motorcycle), but I don’t appreciate that the City isn’t considering all of its drivers (motorcyclists and cyclists) when it makes “improvements.” What if they decide to implement this solution all over Church Hill???? A little common sense in City government would be greatly appreciated. I plan to lodge a concern with the City today.
I do wonder if the city ever considered the amount of property damage caused by this way of “upgrading.” Seems pretty ignorant to create a surface that causes harm to citizens vehicles unless they drive 5 miles an hour and impede traffic flow. If the plan is to steamroll, seems like it might be nice if they went ahead and did that prior to re-opening the road.
And the safety risk to bikes and motorcycles is a great point, too.
I also sincerely wonder if this is the choice that would be made if we lived in the Fan.
#17, I sure share your concern of property damage.. I can’t speak for the City because I don’t know what their intentions are regarding the Fan, but I do know that “oil and chip” is done throughout the Country. The intent is to build up a base below the surface. As in #11’s post, “the gravel will sink in eventually. Usually they come through with a roller to press the gravel in.” Property damage, along with safety risk is a true concern though.
Even if they roll it into the ground fixing it and the intent was for aesthetics, it won’t last long as the city will only throw some hot asphalt patch over any holes making it look like crap eventually – like every other street in Richmond or our swiss cheese interstates.
A letter is en route to DPW, with a copy to the Mayor’s office and our Councilwoman. What I didn’t mention in my #16 post is that I almost crashed last week on my motorcycle when I turned onto 23rd at Sette because I didn’t see the sign until too late (cars parked too close to Main St, so you can’t see set-back sign until you turn). While I drive slow on my motorcycle, it doesn’t change the fact that it’s a slick tire on loose gravel. Braking is the real threat. And driving too slow is also dangerous. But I digress. We’re all concerned with safety here. If I receive a response from the City, I’ll post back. I’ve requested that the loose gravel be cleaned up and that this solution not be implemented elsewhere in our community.
I attended some of the Master Plan meetings and one of the ideas being tossed around by organizers was stripping the asphalt off of streets in historic neighborhoods – to reveal the cobblestones underneath (yeah – they’re still down there). What an AWESOME idea! But what happened to it?
Stripping the asphalt to the cobblestones is very expensive and the results are marginal.
For an example of how “not to do” it, take a look at the road behind Sine’s and going up to the Omni. It was stripped and never completed. It looks like crap, but is in the realm of expectations of what we as citizens mostly expect from the City. It’s been that way for years.
Cobblestones require a lot of maintenance and it is difficult to repair the utilities underneath them.
In the past year there have been ever increasing citizen complaints about people driving fast and cutting through Church Hill on their way to and from work. If we went back to cobblestones – speeds would be reduced, people would think twice about using CH as a short-cut and it would preserve the old historic look of the neighborhood.
PCP, I think that the block of Canal Street that you’re referring to had the asphalt stripped off the cobblestones in preparation to resurfacing, but the city was convinced to leave them exposed (that may be why its kind of a sloppy job). Areas on that street that are still asphalt are, I believe, the result of areas of cobblestones having been removed for utility work back before the cobblestones were exposed – the surface was still asphalt then, so the holes were just patched with more asphalt. Another interesting point is that a lot of the old streets in the city are actually brick – I know I’ve seen old brick exposed under the asphalt at the intersection of Main St. and Meadow St. in the Fan. It would be neat (although I’m not sure how practical) to expose the brick and cobblestones – but I see how riding a bike would be difficult. How do they handle this in the old cities in Europe?
The gravel streets were requested back in the 60s as having a more historic look. The gravel is pounded into the tar (or whatever) fairly quickly. (Film crews were very pleased to have that and/or cobblestones when doing period pieces.) It’s not as difficult a ride as cobblestones and sure is nicer than asphalt.
Nichole #20, “And driving too slow is also dangerous.” Sorry but I really don’t think you can drive so slowly in Church Hill as to be dangerous. On the interstate, yes, but not in this residential neighborhood.
Thanks Melinda #25 for the historical perspective.
They key is to put some tar under the gravel – these rocks and pebbles are scattered all over the asphalt. They ain’t sinkin’ in!
But I say, feck the frickin gravel.
WE WANT THE COBBLE!
WE WANT THE COBBLE!
WE WANT THE COBBLE!
C!-O!-B!-L!-E!…stooooONES!!!
How come the people who want cobblestones are writing off the fact that cobblestone are not safe for cyclists? Do we really want to discourage people from using sustainable transportation?
If you’re the kind of person who feels the need to use the fuel to move a ton of metal with them less than a mile to the bottom and back, I guess you’re the kind of people who don’t give a shit about anything, much people who are trying to make it better.
Is someone having A Case Of The Mondays? LOL.
For once I actually agree with Eric on comment #19-it’s all purely for aesthetics. Church Hill is a tourist destination for many(I get asked for directions every day by some out-of-town tourist), and the City most likely wants that retro street look to coincide with the old-ass buildings we have up here. If the City really wants to wax nostalgic, perhaps they’ll designate the neighborhood as only horse and buggy transport acceptable. Could you imagine a horse stepping into one of our “swiss cheese” holes and throwing the whole buggy off kilter? That would truly make the tourists feel like they’ve stepped back in time, especially when they’re face down in “fresh oil” and “loose gravel.” Way to go City Of Richmond. More excellent use of our tax dollars. Now get those street cleaning trucks out here to clean up the mess you made!
Cobblestones are a bad idea. They have a strong aesthetic appeal and are very durable but they cause a lot of problems. They are rough on your suspension no matter what your mode of transport is, they’re especially dangerous for bikes and motorcycles who have smaller wheels than cars and for whom it is more difficult to drive slowly. They are slick as hell when wet and to top it off, extremely expensive. It’s not like they can just uncover them and we’ll be driving on the old ones. Chances are that they would have to remove the top layer, pull up the old ones, and then reset them. Given the constant street repairs/utility work they do, costs will escalate rapidly to maintain them unless they go with cheap asphalt patches every time they need to fix something below grade. I’m not too happy with the loose gravel, it doesn’t last and gets the band-aid patches which makes it look worse, but anyone who thinks cobblestones are a good idea can drive down 23rd St between Grace and Franklin to see what they would be like. Hit your brakes at the bottom in a light rain and you’ll understand. Did I mention ice and snow on smooth stone? I say keep the cobblestone gutters but nice fresh asphalt is my vote.
Bicycles are sustainable transportation?
Maybe in good weather going downhill if there isn’t much traffic.
Wonder if you would interview someone pushing their bike up the hill how sustainable they would claim their transport to be?
Personally I’d bet on my gas tank being more sustainable than my stomach.
The gravel is a great traffic calming device. It seems the speed of traffic on these streets has previously been a major gripe from many in the neighborhood.
Gawd, I love it!!!!!!! See my post # 7. Less than one week after I predicted work in the streets and work started, they have already dug up the newly placed gravel in the 2800 Block of East Grace Street. They haven’t even finished resurfacing the block and it is already dug up…..suh-weeeeeet.
I don’t get down Grace much, but did they just pave it today and dig it up the same day?
If it weren’t so funny, it would be a sad indicator of how well the City works. Pat yourself on the back boys, you outdid yourself.
Perhaps some of our new storm water “fees” are at work here? (Do we get a rebate if there is a drought?)
When I was a child, they would oil and gravel the streets; however, they would then steam roll them. No loose gravel. DUH!
Ditto on the “DUH!” in post #35. Where are the steam rollers?
First of all, does anyone have any nice thing to say about the new resurfacing? It looks great. It only takes a couple of months of pain for years of beauty. Also, as for the “cobblestones”……. they are not cobblestones, I believe they are called “Blue Belgium brick” that were used as ballast from the voyage from Europe to America. When a ship came to America the brick was unloaded and the hold was filled with tobacco and other agricultural goods for the voyage back to Europe.
If I am wrong, I stand corrected.
I received a positive response from the Operations Manager of the Richmond Division of Roadway Maintenance this morning regarding my concern (mainly to motorcyclists and bicyclists) about all the loose gravel on the paved and intersecting streets in our neighborhood. He said that the Director and others traveled to Church Hill on Friday to assess the situation. As a result, crews are being organized to clean up our streets! Apparently, I was the 14th citizen to raise concerns about the safety and state of our streets. I am very pleased at the responsiveness of DPW, and hope that in the future they will minimize the time between paving application and clean-up.
My fellow Church Hillians. I am sorry about shooting projectiles at everybody’s parked car.
I don’t intend to stop. I will continue to be a habitual offender until there is municipal intervention.
This is, of course, because of our freshly “paved” streets. My skinny road bike tires shoot Church Hill’s wealth of fresh untethered gravel at an astonishing speed.
I have reasonable concerns that I might claim the eye of somebody walking their dog. Or worse… get chased down and knifed by a crazed dog lady for stoning her collie in a public place.
I am empathic to my victims. I love my car and have also sustained rock injuries. Sadly, I’m not going to stop riding my bike because the City of Richmond was cheap on tar and generous on gravel.
What really pisses me off was that my street didn’t need to be resurfaced at all. It was fine. Now it it looks alternately like an oil slick, a scab, or gravel road, depending where you look. The guys doing for this for the city just don’t have the process worked out for it to look consistent. Too much oil in some places, too much stone in others. But the point is, the money didn’t need to be spent on that in the first place.
Frankly, I cannot stand the loose gravel. This is absolute crappiest road re-surfacing job I have ever seen. I have already complained to Betty Squire and suggest anyone that feels as I do should complain as well.
Aesthetics my foot. This gravel is a menace. It is not getting packed down either. Instead, there are snow-drift like piles of it on the sides of road.