1. Proposed Transit Routes in Richmond, Virginia: A plan for
environmentally responsible economic growth
December 17, 2012
By John Bardo and Mackenzie Jarvis

2. Introduction:
The Richmond, Virginia Metropolitan Area lacks a region-wide alternative pubic
transportation system. Many of the region’s jobs are inside the City of Richmond, and as a result
many people commute to Richmond from areas distantly outside the city. Automobile is the only
mode of transit into and out of Richmond for most of the Metro Area, causing people to spend
long hours in traffic emitting harmful pollutants into the atmosphere. In the distant suburbs the
average commute time can last as long as 35 minutes.
The people, economy and environment of Metro Richmond would benefit from a
supplementary transit system running out of the city and into the suburbs. Commuting times
would be reduced giving people more time to spend on leisure or completing extra work.
Economically disadvantaged towns such as Petersburg would be revitalized with new residents
and small businesses attracted by the easy access to the City of Richmond. The City of
Richmond’s medium income is 38,266 dollars, and such a project would create new jobs in the
construction industry and,upon completion, in the transportation and service industries as well as
improve air quality by reducing pollution.
The following proposes several public transit lines considering a variety of social,
economic and geographic factors to determine precise placement. Metro Richmond already has
transportation corridors along major interstate highways (64, 85, and 95). The public transit
system will not attempt to change the corridors; rather it will supplement highways to encourage
car riders to use public transit instead. In addition, the system would serve areas lacking
convenient connection to an interstate highway, allowing people in disconnected areas a reliable
connection to the City of Richmond.
Stations will be located in small existing towns to encourage development of edge cities
rather than sprawling suburbs. Population was the main determinant in deciding where to place a
station, however other factors including job location, travel time to work, and median income
were also considered. All data was collected from the United States Census Bureau’s 2010-2011
American Community Survey, and the US Census On the Map database.
Figure 1.

3. Above is a dot density map showing primary places of residence in the Richmond
metropolitan area. Most people who live outside the city live along the interstate corridors
revealing that in order to discourage people from commuting by car, public transit lines should
be built along these corridors. However, there are some exceptions of high concentration areas
outside of the highways, particularly in the southwestern corner. The unincorporated areas
should not be ignored as the population is spread evenly throughout, and living in a less-
developed area should not deny a person access to speedy public transportation to jobs in the
City of Richmond.
Figure 2.
Above is a dot density map showing primary locations of employment for people who
live in the Richmond Metropolitan area. Compared to the previous map, this map shows fewer
and smaller dots in areas outside the city of Richmond, particularly in the inner southwest corner
and along the interstate highways. This reveals that many workers who live outside the city
commute inside for work.

4. Figure 3.
Above is a map that shows the density and location of those workers who are employed in
Richmond.
Line 1:
Richmond, Mechanicsville, Glen Allen, Ashland, and Boling Green

5. Number of
meidan income Current travel time Richmond
Letter Station population (In dollars) to work (In Minutes) Workers
A Richmond 205,533 $ 38,266 21.4 28,997
B Mechanicsville 36,348 $ 68,302 23.5 3,075
C Glen Allen 14,774 $ 65,230 19.1 1,476
D Ashland 7,256 $ 46,474 21.3 358
E Boling Green* 28,674 $ 58,707 38.1 622
Line 1 would run adjacent to the I-95 Corridor. All residents along this line currently
spend less time than the state average driving to work. Mechanicsville and Glen Allen are two
major employment locations outside Richmond and they are the inner Richmond Suburbs. The
commute times over 20 minutes for people in these towns are probably due to conventional
urban traffic. A rapid public transit system could bring people from Mechanicsville to

6. Richmondand vice versa faster than a car. In addition, line 1 serves the towns with the most
Richmond workers, most notably Mechanicsville where 3,075 residents work in Richmond.
Ashland, which contributes 1,476 people to the Richmond workforce, is the only town
outside of Richmond on line 1 with a median income below the national average. Connecting
Ashland to Richmond by public transit would expand access to Richmond jobs for people less
likely to have cars and reduce commuting time for those with cars.
Although Boling Green is a town of just over 1,000 people, it will be included in the
transit system because it is relatively far from I-95 and surrounded by rural, sparsely populated
land. Public transit to Richmond would bring economic growth and housing development to
Boling Green, and attract Richmond commuters who cannot afford to live in Mechanicsville and
do not want to spend extended periods of time in the car on the way to work.
Line 2:
Richmond, Mechanicsville, Aylett,King and Queen Courthouse
Current Travel Number of
Meidan Income Time to Work (In Richmond
Letter Station Population (In Dollars) Minutes) Workers
A Richmond 205,533 $ 38,266 21.4 28,997
B Mechanicsville 36,348 $ 68,302 23.5 3,075
C Aylett* 15,981 $ 64,946 35.9 910
King and Queen
E Court House* 11,205 $ 46,235 32.8

7. Most of the stations on line 2 are located in towns too small to have their own ACS data.
However, some of these towns are located far away from interstate highways and in lower
income counties. The long drive to Richmond, or anywhere else outside of towns like Aylett,
probably explains why many of the average commute times are over 30 minutes. Like in Boling
Green, public transit in the Northeast corridor will foster economic growthin the towns where
stations are placed.
Since this corner of the region is less densely developed with comparatively few
Richmond workers (Only 5.6% of residents in King William County work in Richmond), public
transit is not as essential as in other corners. However, since there is no data on exact number of
workers who commute somewhere other than the City of Richmond, it is possible these
commutes are to other towns along the proposed transit line. If line 2 were to be constructed,
commuters in rural unincorporated areas would ideally drive to the nearest town, park their cars
and ride public transit, but many may find this even less convenient.
Line 3:
Richmond, Highland Springs, New Kent, West Point, Williamsburg

8. Current Travel Number of
Median Income Time to Work Richmond
Letter Station Population (in Dollars) (In Minutes) Workers
A Richmond 205,533 $ 38,266.00 21.4 28,997
B Highland Springs 15,711 $ 40,904.00 21.8 1,794
C New Kent* 18,822 $ 70,590.00 30.6 1,137
D West Point* 15,981 $ 64,946.00 35.9 55
E Williamsburg 14,444 $ 50,794.00 19.5 65
The I-64 corridor east of Richmond is an important commuter route. People who live in
King William and New Kent counties spend excessive amounts of time driving to work. This is a
comparatively wealthy part of Metro Richmond, especially in New Kent County where the
median income is over 70,000. It is likely almost all of these people own cars and drive on I-64.
Service to Highland Springs and New Kent are most essential because they contain a substantial
amount of Richmond workers. From an economic standpoint, Highland Springs could benefit
most because it has one of the lowest median incomes in the region at 40,904 dollars.
Williamsburg seems to function as a self-contained, satellite city as most people who
live there probably also work there because the average Williamsburg resident only spends 19.5
minutes traveling to work, and only 65 of them (0.4%) work in Richmond. However, rapid
transit connecting Richmond to Williamsburg could benefit Williamsburg because its historic
area is a tourist destination.
Line 4:
Richmond, Laurel, Glen Allen, Wyndham and Montpelier.

9. Mean Current Travel Time to Job
Letter Station Population Median Income Work (Minutes) Count
A Richmond, Va 205,533 $ 38,266.00 21.4 28,997
B Laurel, Va 16,024 $ 31,422.00 20.9 1,461
C Glenn Allen, Va 15,021 $ 38,750.00 46.5 1,476
D Wyndham, Va 9,384 $ 87,837.00 46.5 948
E Montpelier, Va 100342* 40,147* Not Available * 7902*
This line would supplement the transportation avenues in the Northwestern sector of the
Richmond Virginia Metropolitan area between I-95 and I-64. Laurel Virginia was included as a
stop because of the population density (16,024) of the area and the large amount of residents who
are employed in Richmond (1,461). The cities of Glen Allen and Wyndham were selected as
transit stops because residents of both areas have mean travel times to work that over more than
double that of the state mean (46.5 minutes each). This drastic increase in commute time
constitutes the need of supplementary transportation methods (despite the small size of
Wyndham which has only 9,384 residents). The large amounts of residents who are employed in
Richmond in each city (1,476 and 948 respectively) also constitutes the need for additional
transportation means. Mean travel time data was not available for Montpelier because it is an
unincorporated location in Charles City County, Virginia. This location was included because it
represents an area of high population density and is a historic destination; it is the location of
James Madison’s home and houses a center for Constitution Education
(http://www.montpelier.org/center).
Line 5:
Richmond, Bon Air and Midlothian.

10. Mean Current Travel Time Job Count
Letter Station Population Median Income to Work (in Minutes) from location
A Richnmond, Va 205,533 $ 38,266 21.4 28,997
B Bon Air, Va 16,366 $ 42,953 21.6 1,934
C Midilothian, Va 59,251* 45,744* 23.6* 29,989*
This line would supplement the transportation methods in the Southwest Corridor of the
Richmond Metropolitan area, which is currently served by I-64 and I-95. While both stops; Bon
Air and Midlothian, have mean travel times similar to the state wide mean (21.6 and 23.6
minutes respectively), they represent areas of high population density. Bon Air is suggested
because it sits on the edge of the city of Richmond and a transit stop here would alleviate stress
on systems within the city of Richmond. Midlothian was selected because the population density
of not only the city itself but also the surrounding area (59,251). As seen in Figure 3 the area
between Midlothian and the I-64 corridor is incredibly populated. This dense population also
leads to an incredibly high rate of employment in Richmond (29,989) and a supplemental transit
line would reduce congestion on I-64 and reduce travel time.
Line 6:
Richmond, Bellwood, Chesterfield and Petersburg.

11. Mean Current Travel Time Job Count from
Letter Station Population Median Income to Work (in Minutes) location
A Richnmond, Va 205,533 $ 38,266.00 21.4 28,997
B Bellwood, Va 5,008 $ 29,472.00 Not available 515
C Chesterield, Va 320,277* 39,894* 25.3* 29989*
D Petersburg, Va 32,349 $ 27,571.00 22.2 1,144
This line would serve the South of the Richmond Metropolitan area and supplement I-95.
Although Bellwood is home to only 515 Richmond employees and has a relatively small
population (5,008) it has been selected as a transit stop because of its convenient location along
the proposed transit line and the fact that the instillation of a transit system would encourage the
growth and development of the area. Chesterfield is a prime location for a transit stop because of
its high population and the fact that Chesterfield is home to the Chesterfield County Air Port and
its proximity to the Pocahontas State Park and Forrest. Facilitating travel to this area would
reduce travel times to and from the airport and increase use and access to the park. Petersburg is
a logical location for a transit stop, regardless of its residents typical travel time (22.2 minutes)
and relatively low population density because of the large amount of residents that are employed
in Richmond (1,144). Increasing public transit to this area would facilitate traveling to work for
those with low incomes and hopefully raise the median income, which is currently lower than
that of Richmond.
Conclusion
All in all 17 new, supplementary transit stops have been proposed for the Richmond
Virginia Metropolitan area. Stops are located in Richmond, Mechanicsville, Glen Allen, Ashland
Boling Green, Aylett, King and Queen Court House, Highland Springs, New Kent, West Point,
Williamsburg, Laurel, Wyndham, Montpelier, Bon Air, Midlothian, Bellwood, Chesterfield and
Petersburg Virginia. These proposed transit lines and stops will alleviate congestion on current
transportation routes (such as I-64 and I-95), reduce traffic times and provide more
environmentally sustainable transportation methods. They would also encourage growth in small
rural areas such as Bellwood and Boling Green. The Richmond Metropolitan area would greatly
benefit from the proposed supplemental transit systems.
*Data is from the county in which the town or Census Designated Place is located