TRAFFIC TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM€¦ · roadway embankment and box culvert. The purpose of this...

TRAFFIC TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM Corridor Q Overlap Phase A

December 28, 2016 State Project No.: 0121-013-793, P102, R201, C501, D601; UPC 90282 From: Route 614 To: Route 604 Buchanan County

December 28, 2016 1

1. INTRODUCTION

The Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT), in cooperation with the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), is preparing a Reevaluation for Corridor Q Overlap Phase A, which extends approximately 2.8 miles from Route 614 to Route 604 in Buchanan County, Virginia, as shown in Figure 1. The project is part of Corridor Q of the Appalachian Development Highway System (ADHS) and also part of US 121 Section IIIB. The Reevaluation assesses the environmental consequences resulting from changes to the proposed project, changes in the affected environment, and changes in regulatory requirements and guidance since location approvals by the Commonwealth Transportation Board (CTB, February 18, 2015) and FHWA (July 20, 2015).

Since FHWA’s location approval, design modifications have been initiated to reduce project cost, including the following:

• Reduction of the roadway typical cross section from four lanes to two lanes with a truck climbing lane where necessary.

• Modification of connections to existing roadways. Instead of connecting with Route 614 (Woods Fork) as previously proposed, Corridor Q Overlap Phase A would connect to Route 604 (Poplar Creek Road). Route 614 would be severed where the new road crosses and turn-arounds would be provided on both sides of the new road. The intersection of Route 604 and Route 615 (Hoot Owl Street) would be modified due to the new intersection of Corridor Q Overlap Phase A with Route 604.

• Replacement of the previously proposed bridge spanning Route 604 and Poplar Creek with a roadway embankment and box culvert.

The purpose of this technical memorandum is to document the traffic information that has been updated since the completion of the August 4, 2014 Environmental Studies document and FHWA’s July 20, 2015 location approval and to describe the potential changes in travel patterns due to the modification of connections to existing roadways. Information in this technical memorandum, described below, will support discussions presented in the Reevaluation.

• Section 2 provides a brief background on previous traffic forecasting efforts associated with the project.

• Section 3 summarizes existing traffic volumes and 2040 forecasts on roadways within the project area.

• Section 4 includes a discussion of potential travel pattern changes resulting from the modification of connections to existing roadways.

• Section 5 presents a summary of the crash data for roadways within the project area.

Traffic Technical Memorandum Corridor Q Overlap Phase A

December 28, 2016 2

Figure 1. Corridor Q Overlap Phase A


December 28, 2016 3

2. BACKGROUND

FHWA, in accordance with provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and 23 CFR 771, completed a Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) in September 2001 and signed a Record of Decision (ROD) in November 2001 for the proposed US 121.1 The FEIS covered the full 59 miles of the proposed new four-lane divided roadway across Wise, Dickenson, and Buchanan Counties from US 23 at the Town of Pound to VA 83 at the West Virginia state line. The ROD identified Alternative F1 as the selected alternative. As part of the FEIS, existing traffic data were collected, including traffic volumes, travel times, and crash data, and traffic forecasts were prepared for a design year of 2020.

Following completion of the FEIS and issuance of the ROD, VDOT, in consultation with FHWA, identified five sections of independent utility within the original 59-mile corridor to facilitate incremental implementation of the roadway construction. Section IIIB extends approximately 15 miles in length and represents the portion of US 121 from the east end of Section IIIA at Route 614 to Route 643. Corridor Q Overlap Phase A, the subject of this traffic technical memorandum, is a part of Section IIIB.

In 2014, an Environmental Studies document was completed for Section IIIB to address proposed alignment shifts from the original selected Alternative F1 to Alternative F1 Modified. As part of the environmental analysis, design year traffic forecasts were updated to 2035.

The CTB on February 18, 2015 approved the location of Alternative F1 Modified for Section IIIB limited to the 4.1 mile portion of Section IIIB that overlaps Corridor Q of the Appalachian Regional Commission’s (ARC) Appalachian Development Highway System (ADHS)2 (see Figures 2 and 3). FHWA on July 20, 2015 approved the location of Alternative F1 Modified within the Section IIIB/Corridor Q Overlap and indicated that this overlap section may proceed to subsequent development. The 4.1-mile-long Corridor Q/Section IIIB overlap section (sometimes referred to as the “Poplar Creek” section) extends from the junction of Sections IIIA and IIIB at Route 614 to existing US 460 at the Town of Grundy.3

Given the location approval for the Corridor Q Overlap, VDOT is proceeding with the design and construction of the 4.1-mile section, albeit in phases. Phase A, which extends approximately 2.8 miles from Route 614 to Route 604 and which is the subject of the Reevaluation and this traffic technical memorandum, would be completed first. The Phase A construction also would include a short portion of US 121 Section IIIA (Hawks Nest) that was not included in the rough grade construction of that section (see Figure 3). The design and construction of the remainder of the Poplar Creek section, Phase B as shown in the inset of Figure 1, would follow as funding allows.

1 Following a series of location public hearings in April 2000, the CTB endorsed Alternative F1 in August 2000 and designated the roadway as US 121 in Virginia. 2 Congress created the Appalachian Regional Commission (ARC) in 1965 to facilitate economic and social development in the Appalachian Region. The Appalachian Development Highway System (ADHS), a 3,090-mile system of modern highways that connects with the Interstate Highway System, is the cornerstone of ARC's transportation efforts. A total of 3,090 miles of ADHS corridors are authorized to be constructed by the Appalachian Regional Development Act of 1965, as amended. Now with approximately 85 percent open to traffic, the ADHS has stimulated economic and employment opportunity throughout the Appalachian Region. 3 The approved location of the remaining portion of Section IIIB of US Route 121 outside of the Corridor Q Overlap remains on the Alternative F1 corridor as originally approved by the CTB on August 17, 2000 and by FHWA in the November 2001 ROD.


December 28, 2016 4

Figure 2. Relationship between ADHS Corridor Q and US Route 121


December 28, 2016 5

Figure 3. Corridor Q Overlap Phase A Access


December 28, 2016 6

3. TRAFFIC VOLUMES

In the 2014 Environmental Studies document, the average daily traffic volume on the section of the Corridor Q Overlap from US 460 to Route 614 was forecasted to increase approximately 17 percent, from the 12,500 vehicles per day (vpd) in 2020 reported in the 2001 FEIS to 14,600 vpd in 2035. As shown in the February 2016 Variance Requests to the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) for Concurrence (Attachment 1) and the April 2016 Design Exception Request for Route 604, the year 2040 daily forecast for Corridor Q Overlap Phase A between Route 604 and Route 614 is 14,970 vpd, which is only slightly higher than the 2035 daily forecast generated for this segment in the 2014 Environmental Studies document.

As indicated in the variance requests, the reduction in the width of the typical section from four-lane divided to two lanes plus truck climbing lane would have an impact on the capacity of the highway. The operational analysis of Corridor Q Overlap Phase A reveals an anticipated level of service (LOS)4 A with a four-lane typical cross section. With two lanes plus truck climbing lane, a LOS B was computed for seven of eight analysis points along the highway and LOS C for one analysis point. Based on the 2010 Highway Capacity Manual5, the lower of the LOS methodologies governs the results, equating to a LOS C for the two lanes plus truck climbing lane typical section. While this LOS is lower than that which is projected for the four-lane typical section that was studied in the Environmental Studies document, ARC considers LOS C adequate in mountainous terrain; therefore, the reduced typical section is still expected to effectively accommodate the projected design year traffic demand. FHWA concurred with this determination on February 24, 2016 (see Attachment 2).

With respect to other roadways in the project area, existing traffic data were collected by VDOT and 2040 forecasts were generated for Routes 604, 614, and 615 as part of the Design Exception Request for Route 604. Both existing traffic volumes and year 2040 traffic forecasts are 250 vehicles per day (vpd) or less on Routes 614 and 615, and forecasts are 650 vpd or less on Route 604 (except as it approaches US 460, where it is projected to be approximately 1,150 vpd).

4. POTENTIAL TRAVEL PATTERN CHANGES

The design modifications that have been made to Corridor Q Overlap Phase A include a change in where Corridor Q would connect to the local roadway network in this segment. The previous concept provided a connection to Route 614 while the current preliminary design shifts this connection to Route 604 just north of Route 615 (see Figure 4). The roadway distance on Corridor Q Overlap Phase A between the previous connection and the revised connection is approximately 1.9 miles. In an area with low densities of population and land development, as shown in Figure 4, this relatively small distance is expected to result in shifting travel patterns for localized trips only. For longer distance non-localized trips, the potential travel time change resulting from

4 Level of service (LOS) is a measure of traffic operating conditions based generally on a comparison of peak hour volumes (representing travel demand) to available capacity (i.e., roadway supply). As traffic volumes increase, the density of vehicles per lane mile of highway increases, the speed of the vehicles on the highway decreases, and the flow rate of the vehicles decreases, resulting in decreased LOS. Letter grades range from LOS A (representing the free flow of traffic) to LOS F (representing a forced breakdown in traffic flow). 5 The 2010 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) (Transportation Research Board of the National Academy of Sciences) contains concepts, guidelines, and computational procedures for computing the capacity and quality of service of various highway facilities, including freeways, highways, arterial roads, roundabouts, signalized and unsignalized intersections, and rural highways.


December 28, 2016 7

Figure 4. Corridor Q Overlap Phase A and Origin/Destination Points

shifting access by only two miles represents a small proportion of total trip travel time; therefore, there is less reason for longer-distance motorists to modify travel routes in order to save overall time on their trips.

Table 1 summarizes some of the potential changes between origin/destination points within the local area (these origin/destination points are also shown on the map in Figure 4). The table shows the most likely routes that motorists would have taken with a Corridor Q Overlap Phase A


December 28, 2016 8

Table 1. Potential Changes between Origin/Destination Points Due to Changes in Access*

A1: Route 614 West of Corridor Q Overlap

A2: Route 614 East of Corridor Q Overlap B: US 460 North C: US 460 South D: Route 604 South E: Grundy

A2: Route 614 East of

Corr Q Overlap

Prior routing:: Rt 614 (A1 to A2) Rt 614 (A2 to A1)

Revised routing: Rt 614 / Rt 609 / US 460 / Rt 604 / Rt 614 (A1 to A2) Rt 614 / Rt 604 / US 460 / Rt 609 / Rt 614 (A2 to A1)

Potential Effect(s): Higher traffic on Rt 604, Rt 609, US 460

B: US 460 North No effect. No effect.

C: US 460 South

Prior routing:: Rt 614 / Corr Q / US 460 (A1 to C) US 460 / Corr Q / Rt 614 (C to A1)

Prior routing:: Rt 614 / Corr Q / US 460 (A2 to C) US 460 / Corr Q / Rt 614 (C to A2)

No effect. Revised routing: Rt 614 / Rt 609 / US 460 (A1 to C) US 460 / Rt 609 / Rt 614 (C to A1)

Revised routing: Rt 614 / Rt 604 / Corr Q / US 460 (A2 to C) US 460 /Corr Q / Rt 604 / Rt 614 (C to A2)

Potential Effect(s): Higher traffic on Rt 609


D: Route 604 South

Prior routing:: Rt 614 / Route 604 (A1 to D) Rt 604 / Route 614 (D to A1)

No effect. No effect. No effect. Revised routing: Rt 614 / Rt 609 / US 460 / Rt 604 (A1 to D) Rt 604 / US 460 / Rt 609 / Rt 614 (D to A1) Potential Effect(s): Higher traffic on Rt 609, US 460

E: Grundy

Prior routing:: Rt 614 / Corr Q / Grundy (A1 to E) Grundy / Corr Q / Rt 614 (E to A1)

Prior routing:: Rt 614 / Corr Q / Grundy (A2 to E) Grundy / Corr Q / Rt 614 (E to A2)

No effect. No effect.

Prior routing: Rt 604 / Rt 614 / Corr Q / Grundy (D to E) Grundy / Corr Q / Rt 614 / Rt 604 (E to D)

Revised routing: Rt 614 / Rt 609 / US 460 (A1 to E) US 460 / Rt 609 / Rt 614 (E to A1)

Revised routing: Rt 614 / Rt 604 / Corr Q / Grundy (A2 to E) Grundy /Corr Q / Rt 604 / Rt 614 (E to A2)

Revised routing: Rt 604 / Corr Q / Grundy (D to E) Grundy / Corr Q / Rt 604 ( E to D)

Potential Effect(s): Higher traffic on Rt 609, US 460


Potential Effect(s): Lower traffic on Rt 614; higher traffic on Rt

604

F: US 121/460

Connector

Prior routing:: Rt 614 / Corr Q (A1 to F) Corr Q / Rt 614 (F to A1)

Prior routing:: Rt 614 / Corr Q (A2 to F) Corr Q / Rt 614 (F to A2)

Prior routing: Rt 604 / Rt 614 / Corr Q (B to F) Corr Q / Rt 614 / Rt 604 (F to B)

No effect.

No effect. No effect. Revised routing: Rt 614 / Rt 609 / US 460 / Rt 604 / Corr Q (A1 to F) Corr Q / Rt 604 / US 460 / Rt 609 / Rt 614 (F to A1)

Revised routing: Rt 614 / Rt 604 / Corr Q (A2 to F) Corr Q / Rt 604 / Rt 614 (F to A2)

Revised routing: Rt 604 / Corr Q (B to F) Corr Q / Rt 604 (F to B)

Potential Effect(s): Higher traffic on Rt 604, Rt 609, US 460


Potential Effect(s): Lower traffic on Rt 604, Route 614

* The cells shaded in green represent no change in route choice or a redistribution of traffic from one existing road to another; the cells in orange represent a change in route choice that would result in an increase in traffic on particular roadways; and the cells in blue represent a change in route choice that would result in a decrease in traffic on particular roadways.


December 28, 2016 9

connection at Route 614 (prior routing) as well as potential new routing based on the shift in connection from Route 614 to Route 604 (revised routing). Note that route choice assumes the paving of Section IIIA6 (shown in orange in Figure 1) and Southern Gap Road (represented by the dashed blue line in Figure 4). In Table 1, the cells shaded in green represent no change in route choice or a redistribution of traffic from one existing road to another; the cells in orange represent a change in route choice that would result in an increase in traffic on particular roadways; and the cells in blue represent a change in route choice that would result in a decrease in traffic on particular roadways.

As can be seen in Table 1, the shift in access point has the potential for a combination of increases and decreases in traffic on some of the local roads, primarily Routes 604, 609, and 614. The design modifications to Corridor Q Overlap Phase A that would sever Route 614 east and west of Corridor Q (Areas A1 and A2 in Figure 4) would result in increased traffic on Routes 604 and 609 as well as US 460, as shown in the first two columns of the table. As noted above, the 2040 forecasted volumes on Route 614 are less than 250 vehicles per day, so there would be little to no effect with respect to traffic operations if some or all of this traffic diverts to other routes. Travel times for the trips to and from Areas A1 and A2, however, would increase due to the design modifications, particularly for those originating from or destined to locations along Route 614 between Corridor Q and Route 609 (Area A1). The greatest travel time impact would be for vehicles traveling from Area A1 to Area A2; while this would likely affect a small number of motorists, the impacts with respect to travel distance and time could be an increase of up to 10.8 miles and 22 minutes. For vehicles traveling from Area A1 to Area D, the origin-destination pair that would experience the next highest impact, the increase in distance/time would be up to 7.6 miles and 14 minutes.

As shown in the table, to a large extent, the change in access from Route 614 (previous routing) to Route 604 (revised routing) would have little to no effect on the origin-destination pairs. Further, any increases in traffic that are not offset by equivalent decreases on another route would not adversely affect traffic operations because, as discussed above, Routes 604, 614, and 615 all carry low volumes of traffic. These low volumes mean that the potential traffic shifts are small and the effects of these shifts would be minor because the ratio of traffic to roadway capacity on these roads is also low.

Traffic volumes on Corridor Q Overlap Phase A between Route 614 and Route 604 could also potentially change based on the change in access point. The potential shifts in traffic from Routes 604, 614, and 615 to Corridor Q Overlap Phase A would have limited impact on traffic operations. Even if all of the volume on one of these local roads would shift to Corridor Q Overlap Phase A in response to the change in access point, the shift would represent an increase in traffic on the roadway of five percent or less.

Finally, the modifications to the intersection of Route 604 and Route 615 (Hoot Owl Street) due to the new intersection of Corridor Q Overlap Phase A with Route 604 are not expected to have an impact on travel patterns or traffic operations. All connections that are currently allowed would continue to be allowed with the modifications, which would bring Stable Drive and Route 615

6 Section IIIA, also known as the Hawks Nest Section, is approximately 2.5 miles long and runs from the US 460 Connector to Route 614. A Reevaluation for this section was completed in March 26, 2008, with CTB location approval dated June 19, 2008. With the exception of the approximately 1,500-foot-long segment that has been incorporated into this Reevaluation, this section has been constructed to rough grade and funds have been programmed for paving. Additional information can be found here: http://www.virginiadot.org/projects/bristol/route_121.asp.


December 28, 2016 10

together to meet Route 604 at a new four-legged intersection. Currently the two roadways intersect with Route 604 as two separate three-legged intersections approximately 200 feet apart. The reconfiguration is anticipated to improve safety by consolidating the existing intersections into a single intersection constructed to current geometric and sight distance standards.

5. SUMMARY OF CRASH DATA

There are two elements of the Corridor Q Overlap Phase A project as currently conceived that could potentially affect safety and crash rates:

• Elimination of the graded median and reduction of the typical cross section from four lanes to two lanes plus truck climbing lane.

• Provision of an at-grade intersection at Route 604 instead of a grade-separated interchange.

Accordingly, crash data were examined in order to assess whether the design and access changes would adversely affect highway safety or substantially increase crash rates.

Crash rates can be used to compare the crash experience of roadways in a jurisdiction, region, or state. VDOT crash data from January 2013 through 2015 and annual average daily traffic (AADT) volumes were reviewed on Routes 604, 609, and 614 and US 460 within the limits identified in Table 2. Crash rate analysis of the relative safety of a segment or intersection takes into account exposure data in the form of traffic volumes or roadway mileage. Accordingly, an average crash rate for each roadway segment was determined based on the sum of all crashes over the three-year time frame and the calculated vehicle miles traveled (VMT) over that same span. The crash rates were calculated as averages over the length of the analyzed segments, but rates may vary within some segments.

As shown in Table 2, the crash rate on US 460 is generally lower than the crash rates on Routes 604, 609, and 614. The latter are all two-lane secondary roads characterized by steep grades, sharp curves, and narrow to nonexistent shoulders. US 460, on the other hand, is a four-lane primary road with higher design standards, i.e., provision of shoulders, flatter grades, and wider curves. Corridor Q Overlap also would be a primary road and designed to meet these higher design standards. Accordingly, it can be expected that the crash rate on Corridor Q Overlap Phase A would be more in line with that of US 460 than the secondary roadways in the region.

VDOT also completed a safety analysis and submitted it to FHWA as part of a request to alter the design criteria for Corridor Q Overlap Phase A (see Attachment 1). The analysis compared predicted crashes for the four-lane divided cross section previously proposed with predicted crashes for the two lanes with truck climbing lane cross section (with and without the proposed intersection with Route 604). The two lanes with truck climbing lane cross section alternative was projected to have a total crash rate of 76 crashes per 100 million VMT, which is substantially lower than the 2012 Summary of CRASH Data average rate of 130 for all primary highways in Virginia and 142 for VA 83, the main existing alternative route to Corridor Q Overlap Phase A. FHWA’s concurrence letter (see Attachment 2) concluded that the projected safety impacts of reducing the typical cross section and providing an at-grade access point would “not be of a level to unreasonably create a travelway with a projected crash rate higher than a roadway of this category in this region of Virginia.”

The change in access point to the Route 604 location also required redesign and relocation of portions of Route 604 due to the vertical grade differential between existing Route 604 and the



Table 2. Crash Data and Crash Rates on Roadways within Study Area

Roadway and Segment Limits

Distance (mi)

Crash Type

3-year ('13-15) AADT

Crash Rate (Acc/100M

VMT) Fatal Ambulatory

Injury Visible Injury

Non-visible Injury

Property Damage

Only Total

Route 604

North of Corridor Q Overlap to US 460

1.90 0 0 1 0 2 3 1,000 144

South of Corridor Q Overlap to VA 83

7.92 0 1 4 1 6 12 670 207

Route 609

West of Route 614 to County line

5.58 0 1 4 0 6 11 660 273

East of Route 614 to US 460

2.68 0 0 2 0 11 13 1,820 243

Route 614

West of Corridor Q Overlap to Route 609

3.55 0 0 1 0 1 2 310 167

East of Corridor Q Overlap to Route 604

1.45 0 0 0 0 0 0 210 0

US 460

North/West of Route 604 to Kentucky State line

7.61 1 3 18 0 25 47 3,710 146

South/East of Route 604 to south of Grundy

7.84 1 4 18 4 40 67 7,010 115

Source: VDOT crash data for Routes 604, 609, 614 and US 460, Years 2013 to 2015.

proposed new Corridor Q Overlap Phase A roadway. The design modifications required approval of design exceptions by FHWA. On April 14, 2016, FHWA approved design exceptions that would permit sharper curves and steeper grades on sections of Route 604 to be relocated in order to make the proposed connection with Corridor Q Overlap Phase A. The purpose of design changes on Route 604, as provided in supporting documentation submitted by VDOT, was to minimize the extent of the footprint of relocated Route 604 in the intersection area, thereby reducing the extent of roadway embankment, box culvert length, and pavement. The reduction in footprint would reduce stream impacts, right of way land acquisition, and displacements of homes, as well as reduce the cost of construction. The proposed configuration of Route 604 would contain design elements that would not meet VDOT and American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) standards for horizontal and vertical alignment that are typical for highways with the same functional classification as Route 604 (rural minor collector). Accordingly, FHWA’s approvals were premised on a reasonable level of safety being provided. VDOT conducted crash analyses for Route 604, along with geometric design considerations and comparative cost analyses. VDOT also proposed features to mitigate the reduced design criteria for Route 604, including the provision of left and right turn lanes from Corridor Q Overlap to Route 604, widened curves with paved shoulders on Route 604 to accommodate larger vehicles, and enhanced warning signage relative to curvature and grade.



REFERENCES

Bizzack Construction, LLC (Bizzack)

2016 Technical Memorandum: Review of Proposed Right of Way Limits, Areas of Acquisition, and Uneconomic Remnants. Project No. 0121‐013‐793, P102, R201, C501, D601. Prepared by 3B Consulting Services, LLC. October 25, 2016.

Federal Highway Administration (FHWA)

2001a Coalfields Expressway Final Environmental Impact Statement, FHWA-VA-EIS-99-01-D, State Project R000-961-101, PE-101. September 2001.

2001b Record of Decision for Coalfields Expressway Location Study, Wise, Dickenson, and Buchanan Counties, Virginia. EIS Number: FHWA-VA-EIS-99-01-D. November 2001.

2016 Appalachian Highway Development (ADHS) Corridor Q – Popular Creek Phase A Variance Requests. Letter dated February 24, 2016 from Tim Lewis, FHWA, to Amanda J. Cox, VDOT, concurring in the changes to design criteria in VDOT’s variance requests.

Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT)

2014 Environmental Studies for Modifications to Alternative F1, Section IIIB of Proposed U.S. Route 121. State Project Number: 0121-013-772, P101; 0121-013-902, P101, R201, C501; UPC: 85126; 104094. FHWA FEIS Number: FHWA-VA-EIS-99-01-D. August 4, 2014.

2016a 2015 Virginia Department of Transportation Jurisdiction Report Daily Traffic Volume Estimates Including Vehicle Classification Estimates where available Jurisdiction Report 13 Buchanan County Town of Grundy. Prepared by Virginia Department of Transportation Traffic Engineering Division In Cooperation With U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration. May 2, 2016.

http://www.virginiadot.org/info/resources/Traffic_2015/AADT_013_Buchanan_2015.pdf

2016b Variance Requests to the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) for Concurrence Appalachian Development Highway System (ADHS), 2012 Estimate of the Cost to Complete. Letter dated February 22, 2016 from Amanda J. Cox, VDOT, to Tim Lewis, FHWA.

2016c Crash data for Routes 604, 609, 614 and US 460, Years 2013 to 2015. Received October 5, 2016.

2016d Design Exception Request. US Route 121/460 Poplar Creek Phase A Section, Buchanan County. Project No. 0121-013-793, PE-101, PE-102, RW-201, C-501; UPC 90282. Exceptions were requested for grade and horizontal alignment of Route 604. Submission dated March 21, 2016; approved by FHWA April 14, 2016.


Attachment 1

Variance Requests to the Federal Highways Administration (FHWA) for Concurrence (February 22, 2016)

Appendix A

Comparative HSM 2010

Operational Analysis

2 Lanes with Climbing Lane

K Factor 0.10 12Directional Split 55/45 10 / 8 APeak Hour Factor 0.88 0 B% No Passing 100% 65 mph CTerrain Mountainous D% Trucks 6% E% RV's 2%

Analysis Point 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4Station 236+00 249+00 282+00 353+00 249+00 266+00 353+00 364+00Roadway Grade 3.00% 0.00% 6.00% 0.00% 0.00% 2.71% 0.00% 4.85%Grade Length (mi) 0.25 0.00 1.25 0.00 0.00 0.25 0.00 0.25Demand Vol. AADT (vpd - both directions) 14969 14969 14969 14969 14969 14969 14969 14969Opposing Demand Vol. (vph) 674 674 674 674 674 674 674 674Directional Demand Vol. (vph) 823 823 823 823 823 823 823 823Free Flow Speed FFS (mph) 65 65 65 65 65 65 65 65

Grade Adjustment Factor 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97Passenger Car Equivalents for Trucks 1.3 1.4 11.0 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 2.6

Passenger Car Equivalents for RV's 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1Heavy Vehicle Adjustment Factor 0.98 0.97 0.62 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.91

No Passing Zone Adjustment Factor 1.70 1.70 1.20 1.70 1.70 1.70 1.70 1.60Adjusted Demand Opposing (vph) 781 786 1239 786 786 786 786 867Adjusted Demand Directional (vph) 954 960 1513 960 960 960 960 1059Average Travel Speed ATS (mph) 2 Lane 49.8 49.8 42.4 49.8 49.8 49.8 49.8 48.5Length of Climbing/Passing Lane 0.00 0.00 1.25 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00Downstream Length (mi.) ATS 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7Climbing/Passing Lane Factor for ATS 1.14 1.14 1.14 1.14 1.14 1.14 1.14 1.14Average Travel Speed ATS (mph) w/CL or PL 53.3 53.2 46.6 53.2 53.2 53.2 53.2 51.8Average Travel Speed ATS LOS B B C B B B B B

Grade Adjustment Factor 0.92 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Passenger Car Equivalents for Trucks 1.0 1.0 1.4 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0


No Passing Zone Adjustment Factor 24.30 26.40 25.90 26.40 26.40 26.40 26.40 26.40Base Percent Time Spent Following BPTSF 64.20 61.76 61.76 61.76 64.20 61.76 61.76 64.20Adjusted Demand Opposing (vph) 833 766 784 766 766 766 766 766Adjusted Demand Directional (vph) 895 823 843 823 823 823 823 823Percent Time Spent Following PTSF (%) 76.8 75.4 75.2 75.4 77.9 75.4 75.4 77.9Length of Climbing/Passing Lane 0.00 0.00 1.25 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00Downstream Length (mi.) PTSF 4.3 4.8 4.7 4.8 4.8 4.8 4.8 4.8Climbing/Passing Lane Factor for PTSF 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.23Percent Time Spent Following (%) w/CL or PL 61.5% 61.5% 52.2% 61.5% 61.5% 61.5% 61.5% 61.5%Percent Time Spent Following LOS C C C C C C C C

Section LOS C C C C C C C C

<40

Route 121/460 - Poplar Creek SectionCalculation of Level of Service at Critical Locations

General Parameters

LOS KEY ATS Range (Class I) Mi/hr

PTSF Range (%)Lane Width (Ft)

>80

Base Free Flow Speed (mph) >45-50 >50-65>40-45 >65-80

Westbound Lanes Eastbound Lanes

2 Lanes with Climbing Lane and Centerline Rumble Strip

AVERAGE TRAVEL SPEED LOS

PERCENT TIME SPENT FOLLOWING LOS

OVERALL LEVEL OF SERVICE

Shoulder Width Graded/Paved (Ft) >55 <35Access Points per Mile >50-55 >35-50

4 Lane Divided Section

K Factor 0.10 12Directional Split 55/45 10 /8 APeak Hour Factor 0.88 40 BTerrain Mountainous 0 C% Trucks 6% 65 D% RV's 2% E

Analysis Point 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4Station 236+00 249+00 282+00 353+00 249+00 266+00 353+00 364+00Roadway Grade 3.00% 0.00% 6.00% 0.00% 0.00% 2.71% 0.00% 4.85%Grade Length (mi) 0.25 0.00 1.25 0.00 0.00 0.25 0.00 0.25Demand Vol. AADT (vpd - both directions) 14969 14969 14969 14969 14969 14969 14969 14969Base Free Flow Speed FFS (mph) 65 65 65 65 65 65 65 65

Reduction for Lane Width 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Reduction for Lateral Clearance 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Reduction for Median Type 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Reduction for Access Points 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2

Free Flow Speed FFS (mph) 64.8 64.8 64.8 64.8 64.8 64.8 64.8 64.8Passenger Car Equivalents for Trucks 1.5 1.5 5.0 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 4.0


Adjustment Factor for Driver Population 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9Adjusted Demand Volume (pc/hr/ln) 537 537 696 537 537 537 537 650

Density pc/mi/ln 8.3 8.3 10.7 8.3 8.3 8.3 8.3 10.0 Level of Service LOS A A A A A A A A

>35-40

>0-11>11-18>18-26>26-35

Shoulder Width Graded/Paved (Ft)

Base Free Flow Speed (mph)

Median Width (Ft)Access Points per Mile



4 Lane Divided Section General Parameters

LOS KEY Density (pc/ln/mi)Lane Width (Ft)

LOS Comparison Summary

K Factor 0.10 12Directional Split 55/45 10 /8 APeak Hour Factor 0.95 1 BTerrain Rolling 65 C% Trucks 5% D% RV's 2% E

Analysis Point 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4Station 236+00 249+00 282+00 353+00 249+00 266+00 353+00 364+00

Average Travel Speed ATS LOS B B C B B B B BPercent Time Spent Following LOS C C C C C C C CSection LOS C C C C C C C C

Section LOS A A A A A A A A

2 Lanes with Climbing Lane and Centerline Rumble Strip

4 Lane Divided Section

Shoulder Width Graded/Paved (Ft)


LOS Comparison Summary General Parameters

LOS KEYLane Width (Ft)

Access Points per MileBase Free Flow Speed (mph)


Appendix B

Comparative HSM 2010

Safety Analysis

KABC PDO Total KABC PDO Total

1 3.01 6.37 9.38 68.8% 147.5% 107.9%

Total 3.01 6.37 9.38 68.8% 147.5% 107.9%

1 4.37 4.32 8.69 145.3% 67.8% 92.7%

Total 4.37 4.32 8.69 145.3% 67.8% 92.7%

KABC PDO Total KABC PDO Total

1 4.38 8.17 12.55 100.1% 189.3% 144.4%

Total 4.38 8.17 12.55 100.1% 189.3% 144.4%

1 4.37 4.32 8.69 99.9% 52.8% 69.2%Total 4.37 4.32 8.69 99.9% 52.8% 69.2%

Alternative 1 (2 LN - Undivided

w/ INT)

Poplar Creek Section A

-

Alternative 2 (4 LN - Divided)

Poplar Creek Section A-

Predicted Crash Comparison - Future Year 2040

Alternative Section DescriptionPredicted Crash Frequency

(crashes/year)Percent Reduction / Increase Based on Other Alternative

Predicted Crash Comparison - Future Year 2040

Alternative SectionPredicted Crash Frequency

(crashes/year)Percent Reduction / Increase Based on Other Alternative

Alternative 2 (4 LN - Divided)


-

Description

Alternative 1 (2 LN - Undivided)


-

Year 2040 Route 121/Route 460 Poplar Creek Section Predicted Crashes

Versus Virginia and Bristol District Crash Rates for 2012

Roadway Location Total Crash Rate *

2 Lane Plus Climbing Lanes Section Route 121/460 Poplar Creek Section

57

2 Lane Plus Climbing Lanes Sectionwith Route 604 Intersection

Route 121/460 Poplar Creek Section

76

4 Lane Divided Section Route 121/460 Poplar Creek Section

53

All Systems Virginia - Statewide 168.13

Primary Highways Virginia - Statewide 129.68

All Primaries Bristol District 128.68

US 83 Bristol District 141.69

* Rates in crashes per 100 million vehicle miles travelled.

Please note that the Route 121/460 Poplar Creek Section Crash Rates are based on the anticipated 2040 traffic and the Virginia Statewide and Bristol District rates are based on the crashes that occurred during 2012.

The table indicates that the Poplar Creek 2 Lane plus Climbing Lanes with Route 604 alternative is expected to experience crashes well below those for all primary routes statewide or in Bristol District, and about half those for US Route 83, the main local alternative route.

Interactive Highway Safety Design Model

Crash Prediction Evaluation Report

January 29, 2016

Report Overview

Report Generated: Jan 29, 2016 4:26 PM

Report Template: System: Single Page [System] (mlcpm3, Oct 27, 2014 5:04 PM)

Evaluation Date: Fri Jan 29 16:25:43 EST 2016

IHSDM Version: v10.0.0 (Sep 09, 2014)

Crash Prediction Module: v5.0.0 (Sep 09, 2014)

User Name: harlanp

Organization Name:

Phone:

E-Mail:

Project Title: Route 460/121 - Poplar Creek Section A ARC Variance

Project Comment: Created using wizard

Project Unit System: U.S. Customary

Highway Title: Route 460/121 - Poplar Creek Section A (2ln Section)

Highway Comment: Created Fri Jan 29 16:16:26 EST 2016

Highway Version: 1

Evaluation Title: Crash Prediction (2ln Section)

Evaluation Comment: Created Fri Jan 29 16:25:07 EST 2016

Minimum Station: 220+00.000

Maximum Station: 379+00.000

Policy for Superelevation: AASHTO 2011 U.S. Customary

Calibration: HSM Configuration

Crash Distribution: HSM Configuration

Model/CMF: HSM Configuration

Empirical-Bayes Analysis: None

First Year of Analysis: 2016

Last Year of Analysis: 2040

Section 1 Evaluation

Section: Section 1

Evaluation Start Location: 220+00.000

Evaluation End Location: 379+00.000

Area Type: Rural

Functional Class: Arterial

Type of Alignment: Undivided, Two Lane

Model Category: Rural, Two Lane

Crash Prediction Evaluation Report Section 1 Evaluation

Interactive Highway Safety Design Model 1

Calibration Factor: 2U=1.0;

Figure 1. Crash Prediction Summary (Section 1)

Section 1 Evaluation Crash Prediction Evaluation Report

2 Interactive Highway Safety Design Model

Table 1. Evaluation Highway - Homogeneous Segments (Section 1)

Seg.No. Type Start Location End Location Length (ft) Length(

mi) AADT

LeftLane

Width(ft)

RightLane

Width(ft)

LeftShoulderWidth (ft)

RightShoulderWidth (ft)

Grade(%)

DrivewayDensity

(driveways/mi)

HazardRating

CenterlineRumble Strip

PassingLanes

TWLTLane Lighting Automated Speed

Enforcement Radius (ft) Superelevation (%) AdverseDesignSpeed(mph)

1 2U 220+00.000 223+90.890 390.89 0.0740 2016-2040: 14,969 12.00 12.00 8.00 8.00 1.25 0.0 3 true 0 false false false

2 2U 223+90.890 227+42.890 352.00 0.0667 2016-2040: 14,969 12.00 12.00 8.00 8.00 1.25 0.0 3 true 0 false false false 1,210.00 8.0 false 60






8 2U 248+96.640 268+00.000 1,903.36 0.3605 2016-2040: 14,969 12.00 12.00 8.00 8.00 2.71 0.0 3 true 0 false false false



11 2U 274+00.000 296+08.498 2,208.50 0.4183 2016-2040: 14,969 12.00 12.00 8.00 8.00 6.00 0.0 3 true 1 false false false 5,063.00 3.2 false 60












Table 2. Expected Highway Crash Rates and Frequencies (Section 1)

First Year of Analysis 2016

Last Year of Analysis 2040

Evaluated Length (mi) 3.0114

Average Future Road AADT (vpd) 14,969

Expected Crashes

Total Crashes 234.43

Fatal and Injury Crashes 75.25

Fatal and Serious Injury Crashes 41.26

Property-Damage-Only Crashes 159.18

Percent of Total Expected Crashes

Percent Fatal and Injury Crashes (%) 32

Percent Fatal and Serious Injury Crashes (%) 18

Percent Property-Damage-Only Crashes (%) 68

Expected Crash Rate

Crash Rate (crashes/mi/yr) 3.1139

Fatal and Injury Crash Rate (crashes/mi/yr) 0.9996

Fatal and Serious Injury Crash Rate (crashes/mi/yr) 0.5481

Property-Damage-Only Crash Rate (crashes/mi/yr) 2.1144

Expected Travel Crash Rate

Total Travel (million veh-mi) 411.33

Travel Crash Rate (crashes/million veh-mi) 0.57

Travel Fatal and Injury Crash Rate (crashes/million veh-mi) 0.18

Travel Fatal and Serious Injury Crash Rate (crashes/million veh-mi) 0.10

Travel Property-Damage-Only Crash Rate (crashes/million veh-mi) 0.39



Table 3. Expected Crash Frequencies and Rates by Highway Segment (Section 1)

Segment Number/Intersection Name/Cross Road Start Location End Location Length (mi) Expected No. Crashes for

Evaluation PeriodCrash Rate

(crashes/mi/yr)

Travel Crash Rate(crashes/million

veh-mi)

1 220+00.000 223+90.890 0.0740 6.439 3.4788 0.64

2 223+90.890 227+42.890 0.0667 6.284 3.7705 0.69

3 227+42.890 232+47.950 0.0957 9.017 3.7705 0.69

4 232+47.950 234+93.833 0.0466 4.390 3.7705 0.69

5 234+93.833 242+44.750 0.1422 13.406 3.7705 0.69

6 242+44.750 245+96.710 0.0667 6.283 3.7705 0.69

7 245+96.710 248+96.640 0.0568 4.940 3.4788 0.64

8 248+96.640 268+00.000 0.3605 31.352 3.4788 0.64

9 268+00.000 272+83.010 0.0915 5.967 2.6091 0.48

10 272+83.010 274+00.000 0.0222 1.462 2.6394 0.48

11 274+00.000 296+08.498 0.4183 30.360 2.9033 0.53

12 296+08.498 319+33.920 0.4404 31.967 2.9033 0.53

13 319+33.920 328+45.680 0.1727 12.390 2.8700 0.52

14 328+45.680 335+57.893 0.1349 9.910 2.9388 0.54

15 335+57.893 342+70.040 0.1349 9.910 2.9388 0.54

16 342+70.040 351+00.000 0.1572 11.278 2.8700 0.52

17 351+00.000 361+77.360 0.2040 14.640 2.8700 0.52

18 361+77.360 373+67.060 0.2253 16.596 2.9461 0.54

19 373+67.060 378+94.823 0.1000 7.764 3.1068 0.57

20 378+94.823 379+00.000 0.0010 0.076 3.1068 0.57



Table 4. Expected Crash Frequencies and Rates by Horizontal Design Element (Section 1)

Title Start Location End Location Length(mi)

Expected No.Crashes for

Evaluation Period

Crash Rate(crashes/mi/y

r)

Travel CrashRate

(crashes/million veh-mi)

Tangent 220+00.000 223+90.890 0.0740 6.439 3.4788 0.64

Spiral Curve 1 223+90.890 227+42.890 0.0667 6.284 3.7705 0.69

Simple Curve 2 227+42.890 242+44.750 0.2844 26.812 3.7705 0.69

Spiral Curve 3 242+44.750 245+96.710 0.0667 6.283 3.7705 0.69

Tangent 245+96.710 272+83.010 0.5088 42.259 3.3225 0.61

Simple Curve 4 272+83.010 319+33.920 0.8809 63.789 2.8967 0.53

Tangent 319+33.920 328+45.680 0.1727 12.390 2.8700 0.52

Simple Curve 5 328+45.680 342+70.040 0.2698 19.820 2.9388 0.54

Tangent 342+70.040 361+77.360 0.3612 25.919 2.8700 0.52

Simple Curve 6 361+77.360 396+12.220 0.6505 24.435 1.5025 0.28

Table 5. Expected Segment Crash Type Distribution (Section 1)

Element Type Crash TypeFatal and Injury Property Damage Only Total

Crashes Crashes(%) Crashes Crashes

(%) Crashes Crashes(%)

Highway Segment Collision with Animal 2.86 1.2 29.29 12.5 28.37 12.1

Highway Segment Collision with Bicycle 0.30 0.1 0.16 0.1 0.47 0.2

Highway Segment Other Single-vehicle Collision 0.53 0.2 4.62 2.0 4.92 2.1

Highway Segment Overturned 2.78 1.2 2.39 1.0 5.86 2.5

Highway Segment Collision with Pedestrian 0.53 0.2 0.16 0.1 0.70 0.3

Highway Segment Run Off Road 41.01 17.5 80.38 34.3 122.14 52.1

Highway Segment Total Single Vehicle Crashes 48.01 20.5 117.00 49.9 162.46 69.3

Highway Segment Angle Collision 7.60 3.2 11.46 4.9 19.93 8.5

Highway Segment Head-on Collision 2.56 1.1 0.48 0.2 3.75 1.6

Highway Segment Other Multiple-vehicle Collision 1.96 0.8 4.78 2.0 6.33 2.7

Highway Segment Rear-end Collision 12.42 5.3 19.42 8.3 33.29 14.2

Highway Segment Sideswipe 2.86 1.2 6.05 2.6 8.67 3.7

Highway Segment Total Multiple Vehicle Crashes 27.39 11.7 42.18 18.0 71.97 30.7

Highway Segment Total Highway Segment Crashes 75.40 32.2 159.18 67.9 234.43 100.0

Total Crashes 75.40 32.2 159.18 67.9 234.43 100.0

Note:Fatal and Injury Crashes and Property Damage Only Crashes do not necessarily sum up to Total Crashes because the

distribution of these three crashes had been derived independently.





January 29, 2016

Report Overview






User Name: harlanp

Organization Name:

Phone:

E-Mail:




Highway Title: Route 460/121 - Poplar Creek Section A (2ln Section)


Highway Version: 1

Evaluation Title: Crash Prediction (2ln Section w/INT)












Section: Section 1



Area Type: Rural


Type of Alignment: Undivided, Two Lane

Model Category: Rural, Two Lane



Calibration Factor: 2U=1.0; 4ST=1.0;





Seg.No. Type Start Location End Location Length (ft) Length(

mi) AADT

LeftLane

Width(ft)

RightLane

Width(ft)



Grade(%)

DrivewayDensity

(driveways/mi)

HazardRating

CenterlineRumble Strip

PassingLanes

TWLTLane Lighting Automated Speed

Enforcement Radius (ft) Superelevation (%) AdverseDesignSpeed(mph)





















Table 2. Evaluation Intersection - Section 1

Inter. No. Title Location Major AADT Minor AADT Legs Traffic Control Intersection TypeMajor road

approaches w/LeftTurn Lanes

Major roadapproaches w/Right

Turn LanesSkew1 Skew2 Lighted at

Night

1 Route 460 / Route 604 346+00.000 2016-2040: 14,969 2016-2040: 630 4 Stop-Controlled Four-Legged w/STOP control 0 0 2.70 2.70 false








Expected Crashes









Expected Crash Rate














Segment Number/Intersection Name/Cross Road Start Location End Location Length (mi)


Evaluation Period

Crash Rate(crashes/mi/yr)

Travel CrashRate


Expected No.Crashes/Year

(crashes/millionveh)

Expected CrashRate (crashes/yr)

1 220+00.000 223+90.890 0.0740 6.439 3.4788 0.64

2 223+90.890 227+42.890 0.0667 6.284 3.7705 0.69

3 227+42.890 232+47.950 0.0957 9.017 3.7705 0.69

4 232+47.950 234+93.833 0.0466 4.390 3.7705 0.69

5 234+93.833 242+44.750 0.1422 13.406 3.7705 0.69

6 242+44.750 245+96.710 0.0667 6.283 3.7705 0.69

7 245+96.710 248+96.640 0.0568 4.940 3.4788 0.64

8 248+96.640 268+00.000 0.3605 31.352 3.4788 0.64

9 268+00.000 272+83.010 0.0915 5.967 2.6091 0.48

10 272+83.010 274+00.000 0.0222 1.462 2.6394 0.48

11 274+00.000 296+08.498 0.4183 30.360 2.9033 0.53

12 296+08.498 319+33.920 0.4404 31.967 2.9033 0.53

13 319+33.920 328+45.680 0.1727 12.390 2.8700 0.52

14 328+45.680 335+57.893 0.1349 9.910 2.9388 0.54

15 335+57.893 342+70.040 0.1349 9.910 2.9388 0.54

16 342+70.040 351+00.000 0.1572 11.278 2.8700 0.52

Route 460 / Route 604 346+00.000 79.330 0.56 3.1732

17 351+00.000 361+77.360 0.2040 14.640 2.8700 0.52

18 361+77.360 373+67.060 0.2253 16.596 2.9461 0.54

19 373+67.060 378+94.823 0.1000 7.764 3.1068 0.57

20 378+94.823 379+00.000 0.0010 0.076 3.1068 0.57






Evaluation Period


r)

Travel CrashRate


Tangent 220+00.000 223+90.890 0.0740 6.439 3.4788 0.64

Spiral Curve 1 223+90.890 227+42.890 0.0667 6.284 3.7705 0.69

Simple Curve 2 227+42.890 242+44.750 0.2844 26.812 3.7705 0.69

Spiral Curve 3 242+44.750 245+96.710 0.0667 6.283 3.7705 0.69

Tangent 245+96.710 272+83.010 0.5088 42.259 3.3225 0.61

Simple Curve 4 272+83.010 319+33.920 0.8809 63.789 2.8967 0.53

Tangent 319+33.920 328+45.680 0.1727 12.390 2.8700 0.52

Simple Curve 5 328+45.680 342+70.040 0.2698 19.820 2.9388 0.54

Tangent 342+70.040 361+77.360 0.3612 25.919 2.8700 0.52

Simple Curve 6 361+77.360 396+12.220 0.6505 24.435 1.5025 0.28


Element Type Crash TypeFatal and Injury Property Damage Only Total

Crashes Crashes (%) Crashes Crashes (%) Crashes Crashes (%)

Highway Segment Collision with Animal 2.86 0.9 29.29 9.3 28.37 9.0

Highway Segment Collision with Bicycle 0.30 0.1 0.16 0.1 0.47 0.1

Highway Segment Other Single-vehicle Collision 0.53 0.2 4.62 1.5 4.92 1.6

Highway Segment Overturned 2.78 0.9 2.39 0.8 5.86 1.9

Highway Segment Collision with Pedestrian 0.53 0.2 0.16 0.1 0.70 0.2

Highway Segment Run Off Road 41.01 13.1 80.38 25.6 122.14 38.9

Highway Segment Total Single Vehicle Crashes 48.01 15.3 117.00 37.3 162.46 51.8

Highway Segment Angle Collision 7.60 2.4 11.46 3.7 19.93 6.4

Highway Segment Head-on Collision 2.56 0.8 0.48 0.2 3.75 1.2

Highway Segment Other Multiple-vehicle Collision 1.96 0.6 4.78 1.5 6.33 2.0

Highway Segment Rear-end Collision 12.42 4.0 19.42 6.2 33.29 10.6

Highway Segment Sideswipe 2.86 0.9 6.05 1.9 8.67 2.8

Highway Segment Total Multiple Vehicle Crashes 27.39 8.7 42.18 13.4 71.97 22.9

Highway Segment Total Highway Segment Crashes 75.40 24.0 159.18 50.7 234.43 74.7

Intersection Collision with Animal 0.20 0.1 0.63 0.2 0.79 0.3

Intersection Collision with Bicycle 0.03 0.0 0.04 0.0 0.08 0.0

Intersection Other Single-vehicle Collision 0.14 0.0 0.45 0.1 0.64 0.2

Intersection Overturned 0.20 0.1 0.18 0.1 0.40 0.1

Intersection Collision with Pedestrian 0.03 0.0 0.04 0.0 0.08 0.0

Intersection Run Off Road 3.21 1.0 6.50 2.1 9.68 3.1

Intersection Total Single Vehicle Crashes 3.83 1.2 7.85 2.5 11.66 3.7

Intersection Angle Collision 18.19 5.8 15.98 5.1 34.19 10.9

Intersection Head-on Collision 2.05 0.7 1.13 0.4 3.17 1.0

Intersection Other Multiple-vehicle Collision 1.44 0.5 1.67 0.5 3.09 1.0

Intersection Rear-end Collision 7.18 2.3 12.01 3.8 19.20 6.1

Intersection Sideswipe 1.50 0.5 6.50 2.1 8.01 2.6

Intersection Total Multiple Vehicle Crashes 30.36 9.7 37.28 11.9 67.67 21.6

Intersection Total Intersection Crashes 34.19 10.9 45.14 14.4 79.33 25.3

Total Crashes 109.59 34.9 204.32 65.1 313.76 100.0





January 29, 2016

Report Overview






User Name: harlanp

Organization Name:

Phone:

E-Mail:




Highway Title: Route 460/121 - Poplar Creek Section A (4ln Divided)


Highway Version: 1

Evaluation Title: Crash Prediction (4 ln Section)












Section: Section 1



Area Type: Rural


Type of Alignment: Divided, Multilane

Model Category: Rural, Multilane



Calibration Factor: 4D=1.0;





Seg.No. Type Start

Location End Location Length (ft) Length(mi) AADT

LeftLane

Width(ft)

RightLane

Width(ft)



MedianWidth

(ft)Median Type

EffectiveMedian Width

(ft)Lighting Automated Speed

Enforcement

LeftSideSlope

RightSideSlope

1 4D 220+00.000 223+90.890 390.89 0.0740 2016-2040: 14,969 12.00 12.00 8.00 8.00 32.00 Non-Traversable Median 32.00 false false





6 4D 245+96.710 272+83.010 2,686.30 0.5088 2016-2040: 14,969 12.00 12.00 8.00 8.00 32.00 Non-Traversable Median 32.00 false false
















Expected Crashes









Expected Crash Rate














Segment Number/Intersection Name/Cross Road Start Location End Location Length (mi) Expected No. Crashes for

Evaluation PeriodCrash Rate

(crashes/mi/yr)

Travel CrashRate

(crashes/millionveh-mi)

1 220+00.000 223+90.890 0.0740 5.341 2.8858 0.53

2 223+90.890 227+42.890 0.0667 4.810 2.8858 0.53

3 227+42.890 234+93.833 0.1422 10.261 2.8858 0.53

4 234+93.833 242+44.750 0.1422 10.260 2.8858 0.53

5 242+44.750 245+96.710 0.0667 4.809 2.8858 0.53

6 245+96.710 272+83.010 0.5088 36.705 2.8858 0.53

7 272+83.010 296+08.498 0.4404 31.775 2.8858 0.53

8 296+08.498 319+33.920 0.4404 31.774 2.8858 0.53

9 319+33.920 328+45.680 0.1727 12.458 2.8858 0.53

10 328+45.680 335+57.893 0.1349 9.732 2.8858 0.53

11 335+57.893 342+70.040 0.1349 9.731 2.8858 0.53

12 342+70.040 361+77.360 0.3612 26.062 2.8858 0.53

13 361+77.360 378+94.823 0.3253 23.467 2.8858 0.53

14 378+94.823 379+00.000 0.0010 0.071 2.8858 0.53






Evaluation Period


r)

Travel CrashRate


Tangent 220+00.000 223+90.890 0.0740 5.341 2.8858 0.53

Spiral Curve 1 223+90.890 227+42.890 0.0667 4.810 2.8858 0.53

Simple Curve 2 227+42.890 242+44.750 0.2844 20.521 2.8858 0.53

Spiral Curve 3 242+44.750 245+96.710 0.0667 4.809 2.8858 0.53

Tangent 245+96.710 272+83.010 0.5088 36.705 2.8858 0.53

Simple Curve 4 272+83.010 319+33.920 0.8809 63.550 2.8858 0.53

Tangent 319+33.920 328+45.680 0.1727 12.458 2.8858 0.53

Simple Curve 5 328+45.680 342+70.040 0.2698 19.462 2.8858 0.53

Tangent 342+70.040 361+77.360 0.3612 26.062 2.8858 0.53

Simple Curve 6 361+77.360 396+12.220 0.6505 23.538 1.4473 0.26


Element Type Crash TypeFatal and Injury Fatal and Serious

InjuryProperty Damage

Only Total

Crashes Crashes(%) Crashes Crashes

(%) Crashes Crashes(%) Crashes Crashes

(%)

Highway Segment Angle Collision 5.25 2.4 3.06 1.4 4.43 2.0 9.34 4.3

Highway Segment Head-on Collision 1.42 0.7 1.22 0.6 0.22 0.1 1.30 0.6

Highway Segment Other Collision 2.40 1.1 1.56 0.7 2.59 1.2 5.21 2.4

Highway Segment Rear-end Collision 17.82 8.2 7.75 3.6 9.50 4.4 25.20 11.6

Highway Segment Sideswipe 2.95 1.4 1.50 0.7 5.72 2.6 9.34 4.3

Highway Segment Single 79.47 36.6 52.86 24.3 85.49 39.4 166.85 76.8

Total Crashes 109.31 50.3 67.94 31.3 107.94 49.7 217.26 100.0






Attachment 2

FHWA Concurrence Letter Regarding Variance Requests (February 24, 2016)

U. S. Department Virginia Division 400 N. 8th Street, Rm. 750 of Transportation (804) 775-3348 P. O. Box 10249 Richmond, VA 23240 Federal Highway Administration February 24, 2016

Re: Appalachian Highway Development (ADHS) Corridor Q – Popular Creek Phase A Variance Requests

Ms. Amanda J. Cox 121-460 Project Manager Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) 870 Bonham Road Bristol, VA 24201

Dear Ms. Cox:

Your letter of February 22, 2016 letter requesting FHWA concurrence for the following alterations to the ADHS has been reviewed:

Variance No. 1 – Corridor Q (US Route 121/US Route 460) Typical Section C-3 (Section Q03.2.0A and Q03.2.2A) Variance No. 2 – Corridor Q (US Route 121/US Route 460) Typical Section J-3 (Section Q03.2.1A)Variance No. 3 - Corridor Q (US Route 121/US Route 460) Partial Access Control at Route 604 (Section Q03.2.1A).

FHWA has performed an independent analysis of the variances proposed and concurs in the changes to the design criteria that were indicated in the ADHS 2012 Cost-to-Complete. Our concurrence is based upon the determination that the reduction of the typical section from 4-lanes (divided) to 2-lane (with passing lane) and the addition of an at-grade access point will not degrade the traffic operations beyond a level-of-service C which is the standard presented in the AASHTO APolicy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets. In addition, the projected safety impacts of reducing the typical section and the additional access point will not be of a level to unreasonably create a travelway with a projected crash rate higher than a roadway of this category in this region of Virginia. No consideration was given to the contention that the project would be delayed if the variances were not granted as no evidence was presented to justify such a conclusion.

If there are any questions on this matter, please feel free to contact me at (804)775-3348.

Sincerely yours, Irene Rico Division Administrator

T. J. Lewis By: T. J. Lewis, P.E.

Senior Field Operations Engineer

cc: Randy Hamilton, P.E. Bristol District Engineer Bob Cumbow, Project Manager Lawrence Kiser, Project Manager Rob Griffith, P.E., Bristol District Construction Engineer

TRAFFIC TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM€¦ · roadway embankment and box culvert. The purpose of this...

Documents

Transcript of TRAFFIC TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM€¦ · roadway embankment and box culvert. The purpose of this...