Bedford County, Virginia DRAFT...Bedford County to employment, retail, and recreational areas. Functionally classified as a rural principal arterial by the Virginia Department of Transportation

ROUTE 460 CORRIDOR STUDY ----

Bedford County, Virginia

DRAFT

Developed by Region 2000 Regional Commission

In cooperation with

Bedford County, Virginia Virginia Department of Transportation

and Federal Highway Administration

February 2004 The contents of this report reflect the views of the authors, who are responsible for the facts and accuracy of the data presented herein. The contents do not necessarily reflect the official views or policies of the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) or the Commonwealth Transportation Board. This report does not constitute a standard specification or regulation. FHWA acceptance of this report as evidence of fulfillment of the objectives of this planning study does not constitute approval of location and design or a commitment to fund any recommended improvements. Additional project-level environmental impact assessments and/or studies of alternatives may be necessary.

Table of Contents Executive Summary.................................................................................................... ES-1 Chapter 1 – Existing Conditions................................................................................. 1 1.1 Roadway Geometry ......................................................................................... 1 1.2 Traffic Data...................................................................................................... 4

1.3 Safety Analysis ................................................................................................ 8 1.4 Roadway Operations Analysis......................................................................... 15 1.5 Public Participation and Input ......................................................................... 16 Chapter 2 – Year 2025 Traffic Forecasts and Operations ....................................... 18 2.1 2025 Traffic Forecasts ..................................................................................... 18 2.2 Year 2025 No-Build Traffic Operations.......................................................... 22 2.3 Corridor Transportation Issues ........................................................................ 23 Chapter 3 – Study Recommendations........................................................................ 25 3.1 Short-Term Recommendations........................................................................ 27 3.2 Mid-Term Recommendations.......................................................................... 29 3.3 Long-Term Recommendations........................................................................ 30 3.4 Estimated Costs for Recommendations........................................................... 31 3.5 Funding Considerations................................................................................... 34

List of Exhibits

1 Study Corridor...................................................................................................... 2 2 Year 2003 Lane Configurations ........................................................................... 3 3 Summary of Roadway Access Points................................................................... 4 4 Summary of Segment Counts............................................................................... 5 5 Year 2003 AM Peak Hour Turning Movements .................................................. 6 6 Year 2003 PM Peak Hour Turning Movements................................................... 7 7 Corridor-Wide Accident Summary ...................................................................... 9 8 Accident Summary by Year ................................................................................. 10 9 Accident Summary by Type................................................................................. 11 10 Accident Summary by Light Conditions and Severity......................................... 12 11 Accident Rates...................................................................................................... 13 12 Locations of Accidents (2000-2003).................................................................... 14 13 Summary of Segment Level of Service (Existing Conditions) ............................ 15 14 Summary of Intersection Level of Service (Existing Conditions) ....................... 15 15 Summary of Trips from New Development......................................................... 18 16 Summary of Segment Volumes and Level of Service (Year 2025) ..................... 19 17 Year 2025 AM Peak Hour Turning Movements .................................................. 20 18 Year 2025 PM Peak Hour Turning Movements................................................... 21 19 Summary of Intersection Level of Service (Year 2025) ...................................... 22 20 Corridor Transportation Issues............................................................................. 24 21 Proposed Route 460 Typical Cross-Section......................................................... 26 22 Estimated Costs for Physical Improvements........................................................ 31 23-33 Maps Showing Improvement Recommendations……….……Following Page 36

i

Executive Summary This study examines 11.26 miles of US Route 460 in Bedford County, from the east corporate limits of the City of Bedford to Route 811 (New London Road/Thomas Jefferson Road). Route 460 is a major east-west highway in Virginia, and this important road serves local, regional, and statewide travel demands for the movement of people and goods. It connects Bedford County and the City of Bedford to the metropolitan areas of Lynchburg and Roanoke, and to the major north-south routes of Interstate 81 and Route 29. Route 460 also plays an important role in connecting various communities in Bedford County to employment, retail, and recreational areas. Functionally classified as a rural principal arterial by the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT), Route 460 is a four-lane divided highway with access via at-grade intersections. There are currently two signalized intersections in the study area: one at the western end at the entrance into the Wal-Mart Shopping Center, and one at the eastern end at Route 811. This study identified transportation concerns and recommendations based on existing roadway operations and geometrics, developed traffic projections to the year 2025, and assessed the ability of the roadway to accommodate year 2025 travel demands. The safety of the existing road was determined through analysis of motor vehicle crash records between January 2000 and December 2002, as well as through field investigations. Public involvement played a key role in the study, and outreach meetings to stakeholders and the general public were held early in the study to assist in identifying transportation concerns, and later in the study to allow for public review and comment on preliminary recommendations. Public hearings to take official comment were held as part of the review and adoption process by the Bedford County Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors. This study found that, while traffic operations and safety were generally good in the study corridor today, increased travel demands between now and the horizon year of 2025 will put substantial pressures on the ability of many intersections in the study corridor to safely and effectively accommodate future travel demands. Motorists entering Route 460 from 7 of the 10 unsignalized intersections that were analyzed would experience travel delays in excess of what VDOT considers acceptable by the year 2025 (VDOT considers level of service C or better acceptable). Increased traffic on Route 460 and side streets is also expected to exacerbate some of the existing safety concerns that were identified by the study. There are a total of 208 access points in the existing study corridor today (counting both directions on Route 460), or an average of 18.5 access points per roadway mile. Increased development pressures in the study corridor are likely to increase the number of access points, and it is the desire of Bedford County to develop plans for a rational access plan that will support growth in the corridor without undue adverse impacts to traffic flow and safety. This study assessed the potential benefits of access management

ES-1

in the corridor and recommends an access plan as well as improvements to better accommodate localized circulation as well as through traffic. The study recommendations include short-, mid-, and long-term improvements. Short-term improvements are those that could be implemented within the next five years based on limited costs and environmental impacts. Mid-term recommendations are anticipated for the 5 to 10 year timeframe, while long-term recommendations would be implemented within the 10 to 20 year timeframe. Because many of the transportation concerns in the study corridor are anticipated in the future, the study recommendations would put in place plans to mitigate any future concerns. Rather than having to retro-fit solutions to major problems that are already on the ground, the study recommendations will assist Bedford County in directing growth in the corridor in an orderly manner that supports both longer-distance through traffic as well as local circulation and access concerns. The study recommendations include a combination of roadway upgrades and planning initiatives. These upgrades and planning initiatives will allow the corridor to safely and efficiently serve multiple uses rather than function as a typical suburban corridor with closely spaced traffic signals and strip development. Route 460 is recommended to ultimately have a cross-section that includes an 11-foot paved shoulder lane, which would improve safety, assist with safe U-turns, serve bicycle travel, and provide deceleration lanes for turning traffic. Wherever possible, side roads are recommended to be consolidated to a minimum number of access points, and would align with locations where median crossovers are recommended. Locations where traffic signals would be ultimately needed (whether in the 20-year study horizon or beyond) would be ideally spaced only every 2 miles, with minimum spacing no closer than 1 mile. The short-, mid-, and long-term recommendations of this study implement the goals described above. The recommendations are summarized below: Changes to the Bedford County Comprehensive Plan to provide the policy

foundation for zoning and regulatory procedures that can be used to preserve the functionality and safety of Route 460.

Update to the Corridor Overlay District portion of the Bedford County Zoning Ordinance to incorporate access management elements for this important corridor.

Ultimate construction of an 11-foot paved shoulder lane along the entire length of Route 460.

A local circulation plan at the west end of the study corridor that includes new roadways that generally run parallel to Route 460, shifts in access points onto Route 460, and long-term widening of Route 460 between the City of Bedford and Route 777. These improvements will aid in accessibility to the retail properties in this area.

Changes to property access at three key locations in the study corridor to improve long-term safety and accessibility (shopping center entrance on westbound Route 460 immediately east of Route 460 Business ramps, property in the southeast quadrant of the Route 460/Blackwater Road intersection, and property in the northwest quadrant of the Route 460/Route 811 intersection).

ES-2

Designation of median crossovers at an appropriate spacing to serve both existing and future mobility and accessibility needs. The expenditure of funds to improve any median crossovers that are not so designated is not recommended, and these non-designated crossovers would ultimately be closed. Access for existing and future land uses would be focused on the designated long-term crossover locations.

Align side roads in several locations so that two T-intersections are converted to a single 4-leg intersection. These include: Timber Ridge Road (Route 803) and Krantzs Corner Road (Route 715); Heightview Drive and Pisgah Road (Route 708); Goode Road (Route 668W) and Blackwater Road (Route 668E).

Construction of new roadways to facilitate local circulation and improve access points onto Route 460, including: new connecting road between Bells Mill Road (Route 706) to Route 460; parallel road between Goode Road and Blackwater Road.

Because the proposed improvements address a variety of transportation needs, including roadway safety, bicycle travel and safety, and access to properties, there are a number of potential funding sources. The primary sources for such funds include: Federal grant programs such as the Transportation Enhancement Program Funds,

the Recreational Trails Program Funds, or the Transportation Community and System Preservation Funds;

Federal Surface Transportation Funds that are designating by VDOT for either the Hazard Elimination Safety (HES) program or the Bicycle and Pedestrian Safety Program;

The VDOT-administered Revenue Sharing Program, which shares the costs of roadway maintenance and improvements equally between the state and local governments;

Private sources, including proffers to construct all or portions of access or circulation roads, or dedication of rights-of-way for the construction of such roadways.

ES-3

Chapter 1 – Existing Conditions US Route 460 is one of the primary east-west roadways in Virginia, extending from Norfolk to the West Virginia border just north of Bluefield, West Virginia. Approximately 31 miles of Route 460 are located in Bedford County. Functionally classified as a rural principal arterial, Route 460 plays an important role in carrying people and goods within and through Bedford County. It connects Bedford County and the City of Bedford to the metropolitan areas of Lynchburg and Roanoke, and to the major north-south routes of Interstate 81 and Route 29. As one of Bedford County’s major roadway corridors, Route 460 plays an important role in connecting various communities to employment, retail, and recreational areas. Recognizing the value of this roadway, the Route 460 Corridor Management Study was performed to develop plans and recommendations that will ensure safe and efficient transportation for both today’s users as well as those in the future. While this study identified transportation concerns and recommendations based on existing conditions (traffic and roadway geometrics), much of the analysis and many of the recommendations address concerns that will arise as traffic volumes continue to grow on Route 460. The delays that motorists experience turning onto Route 460 from side streets will increase, and safety concerns will grow, as traffic in the corridor increases. In addition, new development brings new driveways where the speed changes from vehicles entering and exiting Route 460 create new conflict points that are potential crash locations. It is, therefore, important that plans for transportation improvements in this corridor be made in advance of the expected increases in development and traffic. As shown in Exhibit 1, this study extends 11.26 miles from the corporate limits of the City of Bedford to just west of Route 811 (New London Road/Thomas Jefferson Road). At the east end, the study included analysis of the intersection of Route 460 and Route 811. While this intersection was the western terminus of a previous study of Route 460 in Campbell County and eastern Bedford County performed by the Virginia Department of Transportation, the overlap in analysis was deliberate to ensure that any recommended improvements match the recommendations being developed for the remainder of Route 460 in Bedford County. Bedford County intends to study the remainder of Route 460, west of the City of Bedford, at a future time. 1.1 Roadway Geometry Throughout the study area, Route 460 is a four-lane divided highway with varying median and shoulder widths. As with many four-lane highways in Virginia, two of the travel lanes in portions of the study area are on the roadbed of the original two-lane highway. These two lanes were built to older vertical and horizontal geometric standards, and are generally more hilly with smaller radii curves. For most of the study area, the westbound lanes of Route 460 are on the older roadbed. With the exception of the western end of the study area near the City of Bedford, the posted speed limit on Route 460 is 55 miles per hour. In the congested commercial area at the west end of the study in the vicinity of the Wal-Mart, the speed limit is reduced to 45 miles per hour.

1

With the exception of the signalized intersections at Route 811 on the east end of the study and the Wal-Mart entrance on the west end, all of the intersections on Route 460 are controlled by stop signs on the side streets. As shown in Exhibit 2, most of the side street approaches in the study corridor are single lanes with no separate turn lanes for right or left turns. Including side roads and driveways, there are 208 access points on Route 460 through the study area. This represents an average of 18.5 access points per mile (combining both directions on Route 460). These access points are shown in Exhibit 3. In addition, there are 34 median breaks, an average of just over 3 per mile.

Exhibit 3 Summary of Roadway Access Points

Segment Endpoint Number of Access Points Access Points per Mile From To

Length (miles) EB WB Total EB WB Total

Bedford City East Corporate Limits

Wal-Mart Entrance

0.20 2 1 3 10.0 5.0 15.0

Wal-Mart Entrance

Shiloh Church Road (777)

0.75 12 7 19 16.0 9.3 25.3


Twin Lake Drive (825)

0.72 6 8 14 8.3 11.1 19.4


Krantzs Corner Road (715)

2.35 12 21 33 5.1 8.9 14.0


Timber Ridge Road (803)

0.38 5 2 7 13.2 5.3 18.4

Timber Ridge Road (803)

Triggs Road (784)

1.13 13 13 26 11.5 11.5 23.0

Triggs Road (784)

Bells Mill Road (706)

0.88 7 9 16 8.0 10.2 18.2

Bells Mill Road (706)

Pisgah Road (708)

1.15 14 12 26 12.2 10.4 22.6

Pisgah Road (708)

Goode Road (668W)

0.83 7 9 16 8.4 10.8 19.3

Goode Road (668W)

Blackwater Road (668E)

0.39 6 3 9 15.4 7.7 23.1

Blackwater Road (668E)

Thomas Jefferson Road (811)

2.48 25 14 39 10.1 5.6 15.7

Total/Average 11.26 109 99 208 9.7 8.8 18.5 State route number is shown in parenthesis for crossroads. EB=eastbound, WB=westbound

1.2 Traffic Data Traffic counts were performed on Route 460 in October of 2003. Forty-eight hour machine counts were used to count traffic volumes on four segments of Route 460. These counts were performed on weekdays (excluding Monday mornings and Friday

4

afternoons) and classified vehicles by type (i.e., car and truck). The locations for these 48-hour machine counts and the 24-hour volumes at each location are summarized in Exhibit 4. For all locations in the corridor, the highest daily volumes occurred between the hours of 4:30 and 5:30 p.m. The morning peak period was generally between 7:00 and 8:00 a.m.

Exhibit 4 Summary of Segment Counts

AM Peak Hour Volumes

PM Peak Hour Volumes

Percent Trucks/Buses

Count Location

24-Hour

Traffic West-bound

East-bound

West-bound

East-bound

Single Unit

Multi-Unit

Between Route 122 and Route 460 Business (just west of the study limits)

18,631 609 (45%)

753 (55%)

747 (51%)

706 (49%)

4.9% 8.0%

Between Farrington Lane and Twin Lake Drive (Route 825)

15,522 552 (50%)

549 (50%)

681 (54%)

588 (46%)

5.2% 9.6%

Between Bells Mill Road (Route 706) and Dixie Lane (Route 1403)

15,142 519 (45%)

643 (55%)

685 (55%)

569 (45%)

4.2% 11.2%

Between Fowler Lane and Ranch Lane

15,916 489 (40%)

746 (60%)

707 (53%)

625 (47%)

7.1% 9.8%

Notes: The percent of traffic traveling in each direction is shown in parenthesis. Multi-unit trucks are tractor trailers. Intersection turning movement counts were performed at 10 locations in the corridor. These counts were conducted at 11 intersections in October 2003. The counts were conducted on weekdays between the hours of 7:00 and 9:00 a.m. and 4:00 and 6:00 p.m. at the following locations:

A. Route 460 at WalMart Entrance (signalized intersection) B. Route 460 at Shiloh Church Road (Route 777) C. Route 460 at Merriman Road (Route 715) D. Route 460 at Timber Ridge Road (Route 803) E. Route 460 at Triggs Road (Route 784) F. Route 460 at West Otter Ridge Drive (Route 1290) G. Route 460 at Bells Mill Road (Route 706) H. Route 460 at Pisgah Road (Route 708) I. Route 460 at Goode Road (Route 668) J. Route 460 at Blackwater Road (Route 668) K. Route 460 at New London/Thomas Jefferson Road (Route 811)

Peak hour turning movements for the a.m. and p.m. peak hour are shown in Exhibits 5 and 6, respectively.

5

1.3 Safety Analysis Roadway safety in the study corridor was assessed based on an analysis of vehicle crash records for the three-year period from January 2000 through December 2002. There were a total of 168 vehicular crashes during this period, with increases experienced in each successive year (45 in 2000, 55 in 2001, and 68 in 2002). The analysis of accidents included assessing the total number of accidents in any calendar year, identifying whether there was a consistent trend in the number of accidents, and determining locations where this trend was either consistent across years and/or increasing. Locations with high numbers of accidents relative to the entire study corridor were analyzed in conjunction with field investigation to determine potential causes and recommended solutions. The analysis was also supplemented by field observations of traffic safety and by input from the general public, Bedford County officials, and the VDOT Bedford Residency. For comparison with similar roadway facilities across the Commonwealth, accident rates were also calculated based on both total accidents per million vehicle miles (MVM) and for equivalent property damage only accidents per million vehicle miles. Accident rates for intersections are based on the number of accidents as compared to the total number of vehicles that enter the intersection. The calculation is based on annual accidents as compared to annual entering vehicles (measured in millions). For roadway segments, the calculation compares total annual accidents to total vehicle miles (number of annual vehicles times the length of the segment in miles). The increased severity and cost associated with accidents involving injuries or fatalities is accounted for by calculating the property damage only equivalent. Standard methodologies used by VDOT factor a fatal accident by 12, an injury accident by 3, and a property damage accident by 1 to calculate equivalent property damage accidents. For the entire study corridor, there were 83.8 accidents per million vehicle miles and 153.21 equivalent property damage accidents per million vehicle miles. This accident rate is less than average within the Commonwealth. In 2000, the average crash rate on Virginia primary arterials was 157 per million vehicle miles. Additional corridor-wide accident statistics are shown in Exhibit 7.

8

Exhibit 7 Corridor-Wide Accident Summary

Category Attribute Number of Accidents Percent

Total accidents over three years 168 Year Breakdown 2000 45 26.8% 2001 55 32.7% 2002 68 40.5% Accident Type Rear-End 30 17.9% Angle 31 18.5% Head-On 1 0.6% Sideswipe 8 4.8% Fixed Object (primarily hitting deer) 51 30.4% Other 47 28.0% Time of Day Daylight 102 60.7% Dark 56 33.3% Dawn or Dusk 10 6.0% Crash Severity Property Damage Only 103 61.3% Injury 64 38.1% Fatality 1 0.6%

Exhibits 8 through 11 show accident statistics by segment and intersection. Exhibit 12 summarizes the accidents that occurred in the corridor by VDOT-designated milepost. This graphic sums accidents by half-mile segment centered at every 0.1-mile interval on Route 460. While this results in accidents being counted more than once (the reader is cautioned not to sum all of the accidents in this graph as it will overestimate total accidents), this graphic is useful in identifying geographically where accidents are occurring. Exhibits 8 through 11 and Exhibit 12 indicate that, relative to the study corridor as a whole, those locations with safety concerns include the following: • the west end of the corridor in the vicinity of the Wal-Mart traffic signal, the

approaches to this intersection from the east, and the Route 460 Business interchange • the vicinity of Shiloh Church Road (Route 777) • the vicinity of Krantzs Corner Road (Route 715) and Timber Ridge Road (Route 803) • east of Bells Mill Road (Route 706) • between Goode Road and Blackwater Road (Routes 668 West and East) • the intersection at Thomas Jefferson Road and New London Road (Route 811)

9

Exhibit 8 Accident Summary by Year

Accidents By Year Location

Type From To Length (miles) 2000 2001 2002

All Years

Segment Start study Wal-Mart Entrance (signal)

0.53 1 6 10 17

Intersection Wal-Mart Entrance (signal)

0.08 1 0 0 1

Segment Wal-Mart Entrance (signal)


0.67 5 1 8 14

Intersection Shiloh Church Road (777)

0.08 0 0 1 1

Segment Shiloh Church Road (777)


0.64 3 3 5 11

Intersection Twin Lake Drive (825)

0.08 0 0 1 1

Segment Twin Lake Drive (825)


2.27 8 9 4 21

Intersection Krantzs Corner Road (715)

0.08 1 1 0 2

Segment Krantzs Corner Road (715)

Triggs Road (784) 1.43 2 9 6 17

Intersection Triggs Road (784) 0.08 1 1 1 3 Segment Triggs Road (784) Bells Mill Road

(706) 0.80 2 1 3 6

Intersection Bells Mill Road (706) 0.08 1 1 0 2 Segment Bells Mill Road (706) Pisgah Road (708) 1.07 4 5 6 15 Intersection Pisgah Road (708) 0.08 0 0 0 0 Segment Pisgah Road (708) Goode Road

(668W) 0.75 0 3 1 4

Intersection Goode Road (668W) 0.08 0 4 1 5 Segment Goode Road (668W) Blackwater Road

(668E) 0.31 0 0 0 0

Intersection Blackwater Road (668E)

0.08 1 2 4 7

Segment Blackwater Road (668E)


2.40 9 3 8 20

Intersection Thomas Jefferson Road (811)

0.08 4 3 9 16

Segment Thomas Jefferson Road (811)

End study 0.33 2 3 0 5

TOTALS 45 55 68 168

10

Exhibit 9 Accident Summary by Type

Accident Type

Location Type From To R

ear-

End

Ang

le

Hea

d-O

n

Side

-sw

ipe

Fixe

d O

bjec

t

Oth

er


7 6 0 2 2 0


0 1 0 0 0 0



1 2 1 1 2 7


0 1 0 0 0 0



1 0 0 0 4 6


0 0 0 0 1 0



5 3 0 0 10 3


0 0 0 0 0 2


Triggs Road (784) 0 2 0 0 5 10

Intersection Triggs Road (784) 2 1 0 0 0 0 Segment Triggs Road (784) Bells Mill Road

(706) 0 0 0 0 4 2

Intersection Bells Mill Road (706) 1 0 0 0 1 0 Segment Bells Mill Road (706) Pisgah Road (708) 1 1 0 0 8 5 Intersection Pisgah Road (708) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Segment Pisgah Road (708) Goode Road

(668W) 1 0 0 0 1 2

Intersection Goode Road (668W) 1 2 0 1 0 1 Segment Goode Road (668W) Blackwater Road

(668E) 0 0 0 0 0 0


1 5 0 0 1 0



1 1 0 1 10 7


7 6 0 1 1 1


End study 1 0 0 2 1 1

11

Exhibit 10 Accident Summary by Light Conditions and Severity

Light Conditions Severity

Location Type From To

Day

-L

ight

Dar

k

Daw

n/

Dus

k

PDO

Inju

ry

Fata

lity


15 2 0 10 7 0


1 0 0 1 0 0



6 6 2 7 6 1


0 1 0 0 1 0



7 4 0 7 4 0


1 0 0 1 0 0



15 6 0 12 9 0


0 1 1 2 0 0


Triggs Road (784) 6 11 0 8 9 0

Intersection Triggs Road (784) 3 0 0 2 1 0 Segment Triggs Road (784) Bells Mill Road

(706) 4 2 0 2 4 0

Intersection Bells Mill Road (706) 1 1 0 2 0 0 Segment Bells Mill Road (706) Pisgah Road (708) 8 5 2 9 6 0 Intersection Pisgah Road (708) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Segment Pisgah Road (708) Goode Road

(668W) 1 1 2 4 0 0

Intersection Goode Road (668W) 4 1 0 5 0 0 Segment Goode Road (668W) Blackwater Road

(668E) 0 0 0 0 0 0


5 2 0 6 1 0



9 10 1 12 8 0


13 2 1 9 7 0


End study 3 1 1 4 1 0

12

Exhibit 11 Accident Rates

Location Type From To

Accidents per Million Vehicles *

Equivalent Property Damage

Only Accidents per Million Vehicles *


165.73 302.21


5.03 5.03



107.96 285.33


5.89 17.67



105.10 181.54


76.44 76.44



56.57 105.06


11.84 11.84


Triggs Road (784) 72.70 149.67

Intersection Triggs Road (784) 17.46 29.10 Segment Triggs Road (784) Bells Mill Road

(706) 45.86 107.01

Intersection Bells Mill Road (706) 11.95 11.95 Segment Bells Mill Road (706) Pisgah Road (708) 88.53 159.35 Intersection Pisgah Road (708) 0.00 0.00 Segment Pisgah Road (708) Goode Road

(668W) 33.68 33.68

Intersection Goode Road (668W) 26.35 26.35 Segment Goode Road (668W) Blackwater Road

(668E) 0.00 0.00


35.50 45.64



49.70 89.46


53.50 100.32


End study 90.37 126.51

* -- For segments, rate is per million vehicle miles traveled (MVMT). For intersections, rate is per million entering vehicles (MEV).

13

1.4 Roadway Operations Analyses Traffic operations in the study corridor were analyzed using the concept of levels of service. The analysis grades traffic operations as a level of service rating from A to F, with A representing excellent traffic flow with minimal delays and F representing failure in traffic operations and very long delays. For most areas in the state, including the section of Route 460 examined in this study, VDOT rates levels of service A, B, or C as acceptable and levels of service D, E, or F as unacceptable. The level of service analysis using grades A through F was used for all the intersections in the study corridor. As shown in Exhibit 13, all of the roadway segments analyzed operate at level of service A for existing conditions. Two Route 460 intersections (at Timber Ridge Road and at Goode Road) operate at unacceptable levels of service (D or worse) as shown in Exhibit 14.

Exhibit 13 Summary of Segment Level of Service (Existing Conditions)

Segment From To

24-Hour Traffic

AM Peak Hour Level of Service

PM Peak Hour Level of Service

City of Bedford West Corporate Limits

Route 460 Business

18,631 A A

Route 460 Business Timber Ridge Road (Route 803)

15,522 A A

Timber Ridge Rd (Route 803)

Goode Road (Route 668)

15,142 A A


Thomas Jefferson Road (Route 811)

15,916 A A

Exhibit 14 Summary of Intersection Level of Service (Existing Conditions)

Existing Peak Hour Level of Service (average delay in

vehicle seconds) Intersection of Route 460 with: AM Peak PM Peak

Wal Mart Entrance B B Southbound approach delay 12.1 10.9 Route 777 (Shiloh Church Rd) B B Southbound approach delay 12.5 13.9 Route 715 (Merriman Rd/ Krantz’s Corner Rd)

B B

Northbound approach delay 10.8 10.5 Southbound approach delay 0.0 10.7 Route 803 (Timber Ridge Rd) D C Southbound approach delay 25.4 19.6 Route 784 (Triggs Rd) B B

15

Exhibit 14 Summary of Intersection Level of Service (Existing Conditions)



Northbound approach delay 11.3 12.8 Route 1290 (West Otter Ridge Dr) B B Northbound approach delay 10.7 10.6 Route 706 (Bells Mill Rd) C B Southbound approach delay 16.5 14.8 Route 708 (Pisgah Rd) B B Northbound approach delay 13.8 11.1 Route 668 (Goode Rd) D E Southbound approach delay 31.9 35.9 Route 668 (Blackwater Rd) C C Northbound approach delay 19.4 24.9

1.5 Public Participation and Input The traffic engineering analyses described in this chapter provide an objective and quantitative assessment of transportation operations and safety in the study corridor. Some transportation concerns do not become apparent through engineering analyses, however, and are best identified by speaking with those who live, work, and/or travel the corridor. To collect this important input, public meetings were held in the study corridor on November 13, 2003 and December 11, 2003. Approximately 25 people attended the November meeting and several others provided comments either by e-mail or telephone. The discussions and comments are summarized below: • Traffic on Route 460 has been growing and is certainly likely to continue to grow.

The impacts on Route 460 traffic volumes from potential construction on Interstate 81 (for future widening) were a concern at the meeting.

• Route 460 is a valuable transportation asset and it needs to be protected. • Control of new access points was generally seen as a good idea. Strip development

would hurt Route 460 and ultimately require a bypass with its high costs and impacts. • Improvements such as constructing a paved shoulder lane for safety, turns, and refuge

for those who make u-turns were generally supported. • A specific request was made for shifting a median crossover from west of Route 1290

to Route 1290 as the Otter Ridge neighborhood generates considerable traffic and is used by school buses.

• Changes to access in the western section of the study corridor would be significantly limited by the “Limited Access” designation that was given Route 460 when the roadway was widened. Changes would require approval by the Commonwealth Transportation Board.

16

Preliminary recommendations for improvement, including constructing a paved shoulder lane, reconfiguring crossover locations, and aligning Routes 715/803 and 668W/668E were presented for public comment at the December 11 meeting. Approximately 15 people attended this meeting. Concerns at this meeting related to specific access points and the impacts that changes in access would have on businesses and residents. A hotel owner was particularly concerned about the impact of crossover closures. Property owners in the vicinity of Route 668 East were also concerned about the impact that changes in access would have on the development potential of properties. Requests were made to the study team to reconsider some of the recommended crossover closures, particularly those that would add considerably to the travel distance to access certain properties. At this meeting, however, there was also overall support for the concept of transportation planning in the corridor. Methods to discourage “strip” development were supported. One property owner was appreciative of the fact that plans were being made and hoped to be able to make decisions on improvements to his property based on a Route 460 corridor plan.

17

Chapter 2 – Year 2025 Traffic Forecasts and Operations The transportation recommendations developed for this study are intended to accommodate both existing travel demands and demands to the year 2025. Traffic forecasts for 2025 and analysis of 2025 traffic operations were used to identify future needs and to ensure that the proposed transportation recommendations would adequately and safely accommodate future demand. 2.1 2025 Traffic Forecasts Year 2025 traffic forecasts for this study are based on historic traffic trends along with the traffic expected to be generated by several planned development projects in the corridor. To calculate expected growth in traffic between 2003 and 2025, historic traffic counts collected by VDOT were tabulated along with the 2003 traffic counts performed for this study. Depending on location within the study corridor, past trends showed growth rates between 1.6 and 2.2 percent per year. Because this study also takes into account traffic from several planned developments separately (discussed below), a growth rate close to the lower limit was chosen. In coordination with the Virginia Department of Transportation, an annual growth rate of 1.75 percent per year was used for this study. The growth over the 22 years between 2003 and 2025 was 38.5 percent. As is often typical for studies of this type, the growth rates were not compounded but rather multiplied. By not compounding, the growth rate is effectively a constant volume (rather than a constant percentage) per year. In addition to traffic growth based on historic trends, traffic from a number of land development proposals in various stages of construction or approval with Bedford County was added to the 2025 traffic forecasts developed using the growth rate described in the previous paragraph. Altogether, this development is projected to add approximately 1320 new trips in the a.m. peak hour and 1540 new trips in the p.m. peak hour. Exhibit 15 summarizes this new development and its projected trip-making characteristics. Trip rates used for this analysis are from the 6th Edition of the ITE Trip Generation Manual. Trip estimates for the New London Business Park were derived from similar analysis in the US 460 Corridor Access Management Plan (Bedford/Campbell County) performed by Parsons Brinckerhoff Quade & Douglas for the Virginia Department of Transportation.

Exhibit 15 Summary of Trips from New Development

AM Peak Trips AM Peak Trips

Location Description of New Development Entering

Site Exiting

Site Entering

Site Exiting

Site Applebees Restaurant (estimated 148 seats and 18 employees)

2 2 26 12

Retail (estimated 22,560 square feet) 14 9 40 44 Office (estimated 22,560 square feet) 31 4 6 28

South side of Route 460 across from Wal-Mart Shopping Center

Car Wash (2 buildings, 4 bays)

0 0 12 11

18

Exhibit 15 Summary of Trips from New Development

AM Peak Trips AM Peak Trips

Location Description of New Development Entering

Site Exiting

Site Entering

Site Exiting

Site North side of Route 460 (in Wal-Mart Shopping Center area)

Restaurant (estimated 60 seats) 1 1 10 6

New London Business Park

Business Park (25 lots, total of 515 acres)

1023 229 282 1062

For the new development in the retail area at the west end of the study corridor, it was assumed that 70 percent of the traffic would originate and be destined for the City of Bedford and points west, while the remaining 30 percent would travel to and from the east. Trips to the east were generally distributed based on existing turning movement percentages. For the New London Business Park, it was assumed that half the traffic would originate or be destined to the west and half to the east. Again, further distribution of the trips mirrored turning movement percentages at study corridor intersections. The amount of traffic expected to be generated by the proposed developments was added to the traffic volumes calculated using historic growth rates. While it is impossible to know how traffic will actually grow, the study team believes that the application of the growth rates described above with the addition of growth from planned development yields the best estimates of year 2025 traffic. Economic factors, changes in County plans for extending water and sewer, or changes to the implementation timetables for extending such infrastructure may result in either lower or higher growth than historic trends suggest. Expected traffic volumes and resulting levels of service for roadway segments on Route 460 are shown in Exhibit 16. Traffic volumes in the corridor are expected to be between 30,000 and 37,300 vehicles per day in the year 2025.

Exhibit 16 Summary of Segment Volumes and Level of Service (Year 2025)

Segment From To

24-Hour Traffic

AM Peak Hour Level of Service

PM Peak Hour Level of Service

City of Bedford West Corporate Limits

Route 460 Business

37,262 B B

Route 460 Business Timber Ridge Road (Route 803)

31,044 B B

Timber Ridge Rd (Route 803)


30,284 B B


Thomas Jefferson Road (Route 811)

31,832 B B

Peak hour intersection turning movement volumes for the year 2025 are shown in Exhibits 17 and 18.

19

2.2 Year 2025 No-Build Traffic Operations The No-Build scenario refers to the situation that would occur if no major improvements, only routine maintenance, were made in the study corridor between now and 2025. With increased travel demands and no major improvements, traffic operations in the Route 460 corridor would deteriorate. While the mainline of Route 460 would continue to function adequately (at level of service B as shown previously in Exhibit 16), several intersections in the corridor are expected to experience substantial delays for motorists turning onto Route 460 from side streets. While inadequate level of service does not necessarily indicate that a traffic signal is warranted (a separate traffic signal warrant analysis is required for signal installation), major delays are indicative of both the potential for signalization and of decreased safety as motorists sometimes take greater risks when frustrated with delays. Exhibit 19 shows the results of the intersection level of service analysis for 2025. As this table, shows, 7 of 10 intersections analyzed are expected to operate at unacceptable levels of service by 2025.

Exhibit 19 Summary of Intersection Level of Service (Year 2025)



Wal Mart Entrance B B Southbound approach delay 13.8 13.2 Route 777 (Shiloh Church Rd) C E Southbound approach delay 22.7 43.0 Route 715 (Merriman Rd/ Krantz’s Corner Rd)

C B

Northbound approach delay 16.9 13.4 Southbound approach delay 0 0 Route 803 (Timber Ridge Rd) F F Southbound approach delay 484.0 328.8 Route 784 (Triggs Rd) C D Northbound approach delay 19.7 25.0 Route 1290 (West Otter Ridge Dr) C B Northbound approach delay 16.4 12.3 Route 706 (Bells Mill Rd) E F Southbound approach delay 43.9 61.8 Route 708 (Pisgah Rd) F C Northbound approach delay 53.0 16.6 Route 668 (Goode Rd) F F Southbound approach delay >500 >500 Route 668 (Blackwater Rd) F F Northbound approach delay 448.7 480.1

22

2.3 Corridor Transportation Issues As described in Chapter 1, there are a number of existing transportation concerns in the study corridor. These concerns will be exacerbated by the year 2025 as traffic volumes increase, and pressures for additional strip-type development occurs. It is highly likely that there will be a need for several traffic signals in the corridor, which will affect overall transportation operations in the corridor as well as safety and aesthetics. The development of plans that identify appropriate locations for traffic signals if and when they are needed, as well as means to concentrate access points by simplifying and aligning intersections, will serve local residents and motorists well. Exhibit 20 summarizes some of the transportation issues and concerns raised both in this study’s analysis and from the public input. Improvements to address these concerns are described in the next chapter.

23

Chapter 3 – Study Recommendations As indicated at the beginning of this report, most of the transportation problems in this study corridor are ones that are likely to occur between now and the year 2025. While there are current areas of concern, traffic flow today is generally safe and adequate. In comparison to other primary arterials in Virginia, Route 460 is relatively safe. The fact that many of the transportation concerns are expected to occur in the future makes this an excellent corridor in which to put in place plans that will mitigate future concerns. Rather than having to retro-fit solutions to major problems that are already on the ground, effective transportation planning in this corridor can help the corridor develop in an orderly manner that supports both longer-distance through traffic as well as local circulation and access concerns. And, as several members of the public pointed out in public meetings, transportation plans in this corridor would also allow land-owners to make improvements to their properties that will maximize the benefits that both they and the County obtain from their land. This study recommends a combination of roadway upgrades and planning initiatives. In this report, the recommendations are described as a Corridor Transportation Plan. This Plan envisions Route 460 as a transportation corridor that safely and efficiently serves multiple uses rather than as a suburban corridor with closely spaced traffic signals and strip development. Access would be allowed but somewhat limited based on the extent to which it affects overall travel on Route 460. For example, right-in/right-out access points that do not require a median crossover would be spaced on average about 1000 feet apart while full access points that have a median crossover would be spaced on average about 5000 feet apart. As shown in the typical cross-section in Exhibit 21, Route 460 would have 11-foot paved shoulder lanes which would improve safety, assist with safe U-turns, for bicycle travel, and act as deceleration turn lanes (although major entrances should incorporate turn lanes in addition to a narrower 6-foot paved shoulder). Wherever possible, side roads would be consolidated to a minimum number of access points, which align with the locations where median crossovers are planned. Access from adjacent land uses will require traffic signals be installed on Route 460; however an ideal spacing of only every other median crossover location would result in signals only every 2 miles, but certainly no closer than the 5000 foot spacing between median crossovers. The realization of this vision for Route 460 and the implementation of the Corridor Transportation Plan will include both physical improvements and planning initiatives over the course of many years. The Plan incorporates short-, mid-, and long-term recommendations. Short-term improvements are recommended to be implemented within the next 5 years, mid-term within 5-10 years, and long-term within 10-20 years. These physical improvements, along with planning initiatives, are described in the context of these three timeframes below.

25

Exhibit 21 Proposed Route 460 Typical Cross-Section

Variable median

width

11’ shoulder lanes for turns, bicycles, and safety pull-off zones

24’ travel lanes

This Corridor Transportation Plan recommends the closure of median crossovers in each of the three timeframes (short-, mid-, and long-term). Those crossovers that are recommended for closure in the short-term are those that serve only one or two properties and were judged to provide limited benefits as compared to their impacts on roadway travel and safety. The recommendations for crossover closures in the mid- and long-term timeframes are conditional based on one of two conditions:

1. The crossover is no longer needed because the construction of recommended new roadway and/or side road re-alignments has provided necessary connections;

2. The crossover has become a problem in terms of roadway operations and safety because of higher traffic volumes or changes in traffic patterns.

Because the recommendations for closing crossovers on Route 460 are part of an overall plan for access point spacing, funds should not be expended to improve any of the crossovers that recommended for closure. When a median crossover becomes a problem, it should be closed rather have funds expended for any type of improvement. The closure of median crossovers and the consolidation of access points are key elements of access management programs. Access management is the concept of managing and controlling access in order to preserve the transportation function and safety of a roadway. The proliferation of driveways and the connections of local roads to a roadway adversely affects its capacity because vehicles need to slow and stop to both enter the driveways and to accommodate those who are entering. Safety is also affected because the number of conflict points increases, the variation in vehicle speeds widens, and sight

26

distance at access points may be less than ideal. Pedestrian and bicycle safety is also substantially degraded as the number of entrance points onto a road increases. The management of access through the consolidation of access points through shared access, care in the placement of access points, appropriate spacing of access points, and the restriction of access at some locations to right-in and right-out only provides substantial long-term benefits. Access management is recommended in the Route 460 Corridor using the tools of an overlay zoning ordinance and a local circulation plan (adopted in the short-range timeframe), as well as a number of physical improvements that serve to implement the principles of access management. In the sections below, the Corridor Transportation Plan recommendations are coded by number for each of the timeframes (i.e., Recommendation S1 is the first short-term recommendations). The improvements for all three timeframes are also depicted in Exhibits 23 through 33 using these same improvement codes. 3.1 Short-Term Recommendations The implementation of the Corridor Transportation Plan will require that a planning and regulatory framework be established. Short-term (0 to 5 years) recommendations address this requirement, and incorporate a number of physical improvements that are relatively low-cost, including closure of a number of medians. • S1: Adopt changes to the Bedford County Comprehensive Plan to provide the

foundation for corridor preservation, corridor overlay zoning, and access management in the Route 460 Corridor. Incorporate references to the Route 460 Corridor Transportation Plan.

• S2: Begin to implement the access management and local circulation plan by

incorporating additional elements into the Corridor Overlay District element of the Bedford County Zoning Ordinance. The Corridor Overlay District should extend 1,000 feet on each side of the centerline of Route 460. This will provide Bedford County with the mechanism to control the number of access points onto Route 460. The overlay zoning ordinance should: 1. Incorporate minimum frontage requirements commensurate with this US primary

highway. This study recommends a minimum parcel frontage of 850 feet for an access point and 1,250 feet of additional frontage for each additional access point (these requirements were developed based on desirable spacing to accommodate stopping sight distance).

2. Provide incentives for shared entrances, inter-parcel access, and/or access via existing or proposed secondary roads.

3. Support the development of a local circulation system so that Route 460 does not need to serve all local trips. This local circulation system should include parallel roads that can serve localized traffic along Route 460. This parallel roadway system could evolve as properties are developed or redeveloped. As properties develop, right-of-way to construct sections of this parallel road system should be

27

reserved. In some cases, large developments may construct portions of the roadway to facilitate their own internal circulation in addition to serving the interests of the entire corridor. In general, the parallel roads should be located between 300 and 700 feet of the centerline of existing Route 460 along the rear, not the front, of the adjacent land parcels.

Implementation of the access management in the Route 460 Corridor would also include several changes in procedures. These are: 1. New agreements for access onto Route 460 should incorporate language stating

that such access is temporary until such time that alternative access via localized internal or parallel roads, or a secondary road, is developed. Bedford County will need to coordinate with VDOT to apply these guidelines. Where agreements already exist between VDOT and landowners, both Bedford County and VDOT should seek to minimize the impacts that any new access points would have on traffic flow and safety.

2. The goals of the updated Comprehensive Plan, access management, and localized circulation should be integrated into the subdivision, site plan, and negotiation process with landowners and developers.

• S3: Close the shopping center entrance that is located on the westbound lanes of

Route 460 between the Wal-Mart traffic signal and the Route 460 Business ramp. This poses safety problems due to its close proximity to the Route 460 Business ramp and its inadequate entrance throat length (approximately 120 feet) that results in queue spillovers onto Route 460.

• S4: Construct connecting road north of Wendy’s and car dealership to tie Wal-Mart

parking area to Lowrey Street. • S5: Construct connection between Link Road and traffic signal at Wal-Mart entrance. • S6: Relocate Phillips Park Drive to the east. • S7: Construct new crossover at relocated Phillips Park Drive. Should a traffic signal

be required at this location, it should be tied to and coordinated with the traffic signal at the Wal-Mart intersection. Care should be taken with new access and/or signalization at this location due to sight distance issues resulting from the geometrics of westbound Route 460.

• S8: Close crossover just west of Oak Hill Lane. • S9: Close crossover just east of Little Otter River • S10: Close crossover 0.5 miles east of Timber Ridge Road • S11: Close crossover 0.15 miles west of Route 1290.

28

• S12: Construct crossover at Route 1290. The construction of this crossover will require re-grading for portions of the Route 460 mainline.

• S13: Close crossover 0.4 miles east of Bells Mill Road. • S14: Close crossover 0.2 miles east of Blackwater Road. • S15: Close crossover 0.6 miles east of Blackwater Road. • S16: Crossover improved for access to New London Industrial Park. • S17: Close crossover 0.45 miles west of New London Road. • S18: Close crossover 0.25 miles west of New London Road. 3.2 Mid-Term Recommendations Mid-term improvements are recommended to be implemented in a 5 to 10 year timeframe. • M1: Extend Link Road – Route 460 connection (S5) as frontage road east to Dillons

Way. Close median crossover at Dillons Way. • M2: Close crossover just west of Twin Lake Drive. • M3: Improve crossover just east of Twin Lake Drive. Construct new roadway

between Route 460 and Twin Lake Drive; shift access to Twin Lake Drive onto new road.

• M4: Close crossover at Oak Hill Lane. • M5: Improve crossover between two ends of Flagstone Loop. • M6: Close crossover east of eastern entrance of Flagstone Loop (when necessary for

traffic flow and safety). • M7: Improve crossover 0.1 miles west of Krantzs Corner Road. • M8: Close crossover 0.2 miles east of Timber Ridge Road (when necessary for traffic

flow and safety). • M9: Close crossover 0.3 miles west of Triggs Road (when necessary for traffic flow

and safety).

29

• M10: Improve crossover and intersection at Triggs Road. • M11: Close crossover 0.2 miles west of Heightview Drive (when necessary for traffic

flow and safety). • M12: Construct curb and/or landscaping in order to provide two well-defined

entrances into the property in the southwest quadrant of the Route 460/Blackwater Road intersections.

• M13: Close crossover at Ranch Lane (when necessary for traffic flow and safety). • M14: Improve crossover 0.7 miles west of New London Road. • M15: At gas station in northwest quadrant of Route 460/Route 811 intersection, close

entrance on Route 460 closest to Route 811; consolidate second entrance on Route 460 with entrance into shopping center parking lot.

3.3 Long-Term Recommendations Long-term improvements are anticipated to be constructed within a 10 to 20 year timeframe. • L1: Complete construction of paved shoulder lane. Pavement of sections of the

shoulder lane should be incorporated into all publicly and privately funded transportation improvements on Route 460. It is anticipated that at least portions of Route 460 will have been upgraded to include the paved shoulder lane prior to the long-term timeframe.

• L2: Widen Route 460 to 6 lanes through the retail areas between the Route 460

Business ramps (just west of the City of Bedford corporate limits) and Shiloh Church Road (Route 777).

• L3: Construct new connecting road from Shiloh Church Road (Route 777) south to

Route 714. • L4: Align Timber Ridge Road and Krantzs Corner Road with improved access point

on Route 460. • L5: Close crossover at existing Timber Ridge Road. This would be implemented in

conjunction with Improvement L4. • L6: Construct new connection from Bells Mill Road to Route 460, includes new

bridge over Big Otter River.

30

• L7: Close crossover at Bells Mill Road. This would be implemented in conjunction with Improvement L6.

• L8: Construct new road between Route 460 and Egypt Road; this roadway would

extend Heightview Drive to the south. • L9: Close crossover at Pisgah Road. This would be implemented in conjunction with

Improvement L8. • L10: Close crossover 0.4 miles east of Pisgah Road (when necessary for traffic flow

and safety). • L11: Construct connecting road between Goode Road and Blackwater Road; provide

extension of this road to New London Industrial Park; close crossover at Goode Road. 3.4 Estimated Costs Cost estimates were developed for the physical improvements described in the three previous sections using standard unit costs provided by VDOT. The resulting cost estimates were then reviewed with County and VDOT staff. These costs are in year 2003 dollars. It is important to recognize that the costs are planning-level estimates only and are subject to adjustment following more detailed engineering analysis. Unforeseen environmental impacts can also have a substantial effect on project costs. The estimated costs for each improvement are shown in Exhibit 22. The totals for each timeframe are shown below:

Short-Term: $3.54 million Mid-Term: $2.04 million Long-Term: $57.23 million

Of the total estimated cost for all of the improvements of $62.81 million, close to 70 percent of would be for the construction of the 11-foot shoulder lane for the entire 11.26-mile corridor.

Exhibit 22 Estimated Costs for Physical Improvements

Code Description

Estimated Project Length (feet)

Roadway Cost

Bridge Cost

Other Cost

Other Cost Description

Total Estimated

Cost S3 Close entrance located on the

westbound lanes of Route 460 between the Wal-Mart traffic signal and the Route 460 Business ramp.

$10,000 Close entrance

$10,000

31


Code Description


Roadway Cost

Bridge Cost

Other Cost


Total Estimated

Cost S4 Construct connecting road north

of Wendy’s and car dealership to tie Wal-Mart parking area to Lowrey Street.

750 $540,000 $540,000

S5 Construct connection between Link Road and traffic signal at Wal-Mart entrance.

1900 $1,367,000 $1,367,000

S6 Relocate Phillips Park Drive. 975 $702,000 $702,000 S7 Construct new crossover at

Phillips Park Drive Relocated. $200,000 Construct

crossover $200,000

S8 Close crossover just west of Oak Hill Lane.

$25,000 Close crossover

$25,000

S9 Close crossover just east of Little Otter River.


$25,000

S10 Close crossover 0.5 miles east of Timber Ridge Road.


$25,000

S11 Close crossover 0.15 miles west of Route 1290.


$25,000

S12 Construct crossover at Route 1290.

$500,000 Construct crossover, re-grade mainline

$500,000

S13 Close crossover 0.4 miles east of Bells Mill Road.


$25,000

S14 Close crossover 0.2 miles east of Blackwater Road.


$25,000

S15 Close crossover 0.6 miles east of Blackwater Road.


$25,000

S16 Crossover improved for access to New London Industrial Park (complete).

$0

S17 Close crossover 0.45 miles west of New London Road.


$25,000

S18 Close crossover 0.25 miles west of New London Road.


$25,000

M1 Extend Link Road – Route 460 connection (S5) as frontage road east to Dillons Way. Close median crossover at Dillons Way.

975 $702,000 $702,000

M2 Close crossover just west of Twin Lake Drive.


$25,000

32


Code Description


Roadway Cost

Bridge Cost

Other Cost


Total Estimated

Cost M3 Improve crossover just east of

Twin Lake Drive. Construct new roadway between Route 460 and Twin Lake Drive; shift access to Twin Lake Drive onto new road.

568 $409,000 $100,000 Improve crossover

$509,000

M4 Close crossover at Oak Hill Lane.


$25,000

M5 Improve crossover between two ends of Flagstone Loop.

$100,000 Improve crossover

$100,000

M6 Close crossover east of eastern entrance of Flagstone Loop.


$25,000

M7 Improve crossover 0.1 miles west of Krantzs Corner Road.


$100,000

M8 Close crossover 0.2 miles east of Timber Ridge Road.


$25,000

M9 Close crossover 0.3 miles west of Triggs Road.


$25,000

M10 Improve crossover and intersection at Triggs Road.


and intersection

$200,000

M11 Close crossover 0.2 miles west of Heightview Drive.


$25,000

M12 Construct curb and/or landscaping in order to provide two well-defined entrances into the property in the southwest quadrant of the Route 460/Blackwater Road intersections.

$50,000 $50,000

M13 Close crossover at Ranch Lane. $25,000 Close crossover

$25,000

M14 Improve crossover 0.7 miles west of New London Road.


$100,000

M15 For property in the northwest quadrant of Route 460/Route 811 intersection, close entrance on Route 460 closest to Route 811; consolidate second entrance on Route 460 with entrance into shopping center parking lot.

$100,000 $100,000

33


Code Description


Roadway Cost

Bridge Cost

Other Cost


Total Estimated

Cost L1 Complete construction of paved

shoulder lane [cost estimate reflects construction of shoulder lane on full 11.26 miles].

59450 $42,786,000 $42,786,000

L2 Widen Route 460 to 6 lanes between Route 460 Business ramps and Route 777.

5800 $4,174,000 $4,174,000

L3 Construct new connecting road between Shiloh Church Road and Route 714.

N/A Long-Term

Concept

L4 Align Timber Ridge Road and Krantzs Corner Road with improved access point on Route 460.

2503 $1,801,000 $595,000 $2,396,000

L5 Close crossover at existing Timber Ridge Road.


$25,000

L6 Construct new connection from Bells Mill Road to Route 460, includes new bridge over Big Otter River.

1897 $1,365,000 $2,069,000 $3,434,000

L7 Close crossover at Bells Mill Road.


$25,000

L8 Construct new road between Route 460 and Egypt Road; this roadway would extend Heightview Drive to the south.

1504 $1,082,000 $1,082,000

L9 Close crossover at Pisgah Road. $25,000 Close crossover

$25,000

L10 Close crossover 0.4 miles east of Pisgah Road.


$25,000

L11 Construct connecting road between Goode Road and Blackwater Road; provide extension of this road to New London Industrial Park; close crossover at Goode Road.

4525 $3,257,000 $3,257,000

Note: All costs are order-of-magnitude planning-level estimates and are in year 2003 dollars.

34

3.5 Funding Considerations The range of improvements recommended in the Route 460 Corridor Plan provide the opportunity for a number of funding sources to be tapped into to pay for portions of the improvements. The Corridor Plan includes projects that could (and in some cases, should) be paid for by private developers as part of their planned improvements. These improvements include local access and circulation roads as well as intersection improvements. Where opportunities for proffers to pay for actual improvements are not possible, donation of rights-of-way can substantially reduce the cost of some improvements. Public funding for the improvements in the Corridor Plan could come from a mix of federal, state, and local sources. Because the paved shoulder provides a substantial benefit to bicyclists in terms of travel quality and safety, potential sources that could cover some portion of project costs include federal grant programs such as the Transportation Enhancement Program Funds, the Recreational Trails Program Funds, or the Transportation Community and System Preservation Funds. Chances of obtaining grant funds for the paved shoulder facilities on Route 460 would be enhanced by the inclusion of this project in an overall, connected bicycle network plan for Bedford County. Several of the recommendations in the Corridor Plan also relate directly to improving safety. VDOT’s highway safety improvement program makes use of the 10 percent of Virginia’s allocation of the federal Surface Transportation Funds and designates it as follows: 50 percent to the Hazard Elimination Safety (HES) program, 10 percent for the Bicycle and Pedestrian Safety Program, and 40 percent for the Rail-Highway Grade Crossing Safety Improvement Program. Because the improvements in this Corridor Plan address both highway safety and bicycle/pedestrian safety, there is the potential for using funding from both the HES and Bicycle/Pedestrian Safety programs. One other primary source of funding for many of these improvements is the VDOT-administered Revenue Sharing Program, which provides funding for the maintenance and improvement of the primary and secondary systems in Virginia. This program shares costs equally between the state and local governments, with application for the funds coming from resolution of the local governing body. While there are statutory limitations on the total funding available per locality, the Revenue Sharing Program is a likely source of funds for many of the improvements recommended in this study. This program requires, however, substantial local funding. Today's fiscal climate makes many potential sources for obtaining local funds through taxes, fees, and/or assessments difficult. Options such as establishing a corridor tax district have been used in parts of Virginia, but for corridors that are much further along in terms of development and located in more dynamic development climates. General sales taxes have the benefit of having a very broad base so a very small tax increment can produce substantial revenues. Recent experience in Northern Virginia and Tidewater suggest, however, that such an initiative would be quite difficult. Potential local fees that

35

could be considered include earmarking an incremental increase in property recordation fees or even property taxes for transportation. These are an easier sell when applied only to particular transportation corridors, but such limitations have the effect of substantially decreasing the potential funds that could be collected. County-wide application of such fees would generate greater amount of funds but would likely run into substantial opposition from those who do not believe they will benefit from the increases in fees. While additional local taxes and fees may be difficult to put in place, the ability to dedicate some level of local funding to the improvements described in this report may be enhanced by the fact that such local funding could be leveraged in conjunction with the state Revenue Sharing Program and some of the federal programs listed above to finance significant portions of the recommendations. These local, state, and federal funds could be used in conjunction with some level of private landowner participation in constructing local circulation improvements to help in realizing the improvements included in the Route 460 Corridor Transportation Plan.

36

Documents

Bedford County, Virginia DRAFT...Bedford County to employment, retail, and recreational areas. Functionally classified as a rural principal arterial by the Virginia Department of Transportation