McIntire Park Interchange Shortfall

McIntire/250 interchange funding: $29.6M. The selected design: $35M. The forehead-slapping moment when somebody did the math? Priceless.  #

9 Responses to “McIntire Park Interchange Shortfall”


  • I’m sure that local money will make up the difference. I can’t think of any recent project off hand that was scaled back in order to stay within a proposed. When the City agreed to join in with the County to modify that stretch of 29N in front of Best Buy, I knew then the door opened for City funds being used for highway projects. Now, that the City unwisely decided to become the parkway project manager for that portion in the City, there’s no telling how much will be spent. After all, we are a World Class City Where Money Is No Object! With Gary O’Connell of recent East End Mall fame, I can easily see somewhere between $40M – $50M being spent. Mr. Huja and Mr. Taliaferro certainly won’t attempt any constraints and the rest don’t know how to.

  • I might be wrong…..but….I would like to know what became of the $25M in federal money Senator John Warner pledged to the project for the construction of the interchange when a group of city, county officials and citizens visited him 3/4 years ago in washington seeking funds for the project. The way I understood it was that this money was specifically earmarked for the construction of the interchange. This made headlines in the DP. Anybody know what happened to this money????

  • The city council dislike of this road is classic passive aggressive.
    “Sure we voted for the road but we’d like to have some way to undo that”. Approve a more expensive interchange, see if causes them to cancel it. Pretend that the last approval must come from the school board on some land. See what little thing we can do to extract some new favor or have one new delay. Insist that the fed give over 29 million dollar from the feds to get the money. (we are never going to get this money again if it’s not used now)

    All this indirectness is holding the Meadowcreek hostage to bring back the Eastern Connector; A road that almost no one wants. A road that doesn’t take into account the new traffic patterns to be caused by the Meadowcreek parkway. A road that has already had $500,000 study where it was clear that NO ONE wanted those roads. The only road the made the tinniest sense involves going right though two separate parks- “Yes we don’t like the Meadowcreek but if you let us build a big road though two parks , that road we could approve faster than we allowed Best Buy to get permitted. (and promise Best Buy a traffic light and then blame VDOT when you can’t get them one)

    It’s time for the City Council to do what they promised to do.

  • The city council dislike of this road is classic passive aggressive.
    “Sure we voted for the road but we’d like to have some way to undo that”. Approve a more expensive interchange, see if causes them to cancel it.

    To be fair, Council hasn’t voted on this. The interchange committee has simply decided that this option is the one that they’re going to recommend to Council.

  • to be fair they could have taken care of the school board land with a simple vote of council as well. But you are correct that they haven’t voted for this possibly deal killing interchange, yet.

  • And to be fair, Council can not legally deed property under school board control. If they could, there would have been no argument about Jefferson School and they would have had a say about the sale of land at Johnson School to a developer without the school board voting. Also, many people have wanted what is called the Eastern Connector for at least a couple of decades. I heard discussed in a meeting before they improved Free Bridge. The influential people were quite vocal in opporsition so a lot people didn’t push for the idea. Also, the Western Bypass-bypass was thought to be a sure thing.

  • I not sure you are right Cville Eye. I believe they could sell it even if the school board said no. Eminent domain, anyone?

  • Virginia Code: § 22.1-129. Surplus property; sale, exchange or lease of real and personal property and sections covers the disposition of school property. The interesting thing is, the land must be declared “surplus” (no further need) by the board before even they can get rid of it. If you have Google Search, type in “define: eminent domain” and you will see that all of the definitions apply to the ability of certain governmental bodies or agents of that body, such as authorities, have that power only over privately held property, it does not apply to publicly owned property. I guess it’s because they can’t confiscate, even with just compensation, property owned by the public for the use of the public. So, how does the superior governmental body, such as the state, gain rights to its inferior governmental body’s, such as the City’s, property. They pay for it through money or equal exchange or they ask for and receive easements. Thus, the State can buy local park land, exchange land for local park land, or get an easement (long-term use of the land for a limited purpose without actually gaining title. City’s are often compensating private property owners for easements for sidewalks for example.

  • I’m sorry there is no way that the school board is not subordinate to the City Council. Where does the school board get their money from? The School board is not going to refuse City Council. This is a silly point you are making.

    The property is owned by the city. The council controls the cash.
    The school board can not deny the council wishes.

Comments are currently closed.

Sideblog