Virginia 2007 Five Percent Report

This report is in response to the Federal requirement that each state describe at least 5 percent of its locations currently exhibiting the most severe highway safety needs, in accordance with Sections 148(c)(1)(D) and 148(g)(3)(A), of Title 23, United States Code. Each state's report is to include potential remedies to the hazardous locations identified; estimated costs of the remedies; and impediments to implementation of the remedies other than costs. The reports included on this web site represent a variety of methods utilized and various degrees of road coverage. Therefore, this report cannot be compared with the other reports included on this Web site.

Protection from Discovery and Admission into Evidence—Under 23 U.S.C. 148(g)(4) information collected or compiled for any purpose directly relating to this report shall not be subject to discovery or admitted into evidence in a Federal or State court proceeding or considered for other purposes in any action for damages arising from any occurrence at a location identified or addressed in the reports.

Additional information, including the specific legislative requirements, can be found in the guidance provided by the Federal Highway Administration,
http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/safetealu/fiveguidance.htm.

---

Virginia's Top Five Percent Locations with Most Severe Needs

Following the new SAFETEA-LU HSIP requirements [Section 148 (c) (1) (D)] for reducing traffic deaths and serious injuries on public roads, the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) has identified and prioritized the top 5 percent of high crash locations exhibiting the most severe safety needs including:

• Potential remedies to the identified hazardous locations,
• Estimate costs of the remedies,
• Impediments to implementation.

VDOT is fortunate that it maintains 80 percent of the 72,000 miles of public roadways in Virginia. The Highway Traffic Records Information System (HTRIS), a comprehensive data management system which interrelates and consolidates on Virginia's highway and traffic information, is the official repository for VDOT roadway used for internal management and reporting, and for all federal government reporting. VDOT maintains detailed records on current and historical road inventory, traffic volume and crashes in HTRIS.

For identifying the most hazardous crash locations, VDOT conducted two steps of data analysis using the Rate-Quality Control Method and Combined Rank Method with last three calendar years of crash and inventory data (2004 - 2006) in HTRIS. Potential countermeasures are proposed for improving safety with planning level estimates of the associated cost based on safety assessments of the identified locations.

5.1 Methodology for Identifying Hazardous Crash Locations

The Rate-Quality Control Method is used to identify hazardous crash locations. This is a well known statistical test to determine abnormal high crash locations comparing crash rate for a particular intersection or segment with the crash rates of all similar characteristic locations over the same time period. This test is based on the assumptions that traffic crashes occur randomly and are dispersed following the Poisson distribution.

The abnormal high crash rates (called Critical Crash Rate) are determined statistically as a function of the VDOT district-wide average crash rate for the category of roadway, the amount of vehicle exposure, and a factor based on the desired level of statistical significance (VDOT used 95% confidence level).

All VDOT maintained roadways are classified by construction districts, functional classification and facility type in the system. Also, a special query in HTRIS categorizes the location of crashes by intersection (crashes less than 0.03 miles to each approach from the center) and segment (crashes exclude intersection crashes but segments greater than 0.3 miles long). Thus, district-wide average crash and critical crash rates in same categories are calculated for roadway sections and intersections. The statistical test establishing critical crash rate is calculated with the following formulas for intersections and sections separately:

In which

A_CI = critical intersection crash rate (crashes per million vehicles)
A_AI = average intersection crash rate (crashes per million vehicles)
K = constant related to statistical significance using 1.645 for a 95% confidence level
M = exposure in million vehicles (365 x Number of Years x EnteringAADT/1,000,000)

In which

ACS = critical segment crash rate (crashes per 100 million vehicle miles traveled)
AAS = average segment crash rate (crashes per 100 million vehicle miles traveled)
K = constant related to statistical significance using 1.645 for a 95% confidence level
M = exposure in 100 million vehicles traveled (365 x Number of Years x length x AADT/100,000,000)

Analysis of identifying critical crash locations using the Rate-Quality Control Method was completed in HTRIS and provided the following results in Table 5-1. Table 5-1 provides a number of intersections and segments (of various lengths) by district which have annual crash rate greater than critical crash rate in 2004, 2005 and 2006, respectively.

Table 5-1 2004 - 2006 Critical Crash Locations Defined by Rate-Quality Control Method
INTERSECTIONS

	2004			2005			2006
	N	AVG. CR	AVG. CCR	N	AVG. CR	AVG. CCR	N	AVG. CR	AVG. CCR
BRISTOL	51	1.77	.25	7	1.23	.38	36	2.37	.32
SALEM	170	1.05	.31	56	1.20	.42	185	1.24	.31
LYNCHBURG	66	1.38	.39	76	1.69	.36	68	1.45	.36
RICHMOND	365	1.26	.41	378	1.37	.43	367	1.23	.41
HAMPTON ROADS	97	1.55	.34	90	1.23	.35	94	1.45	.35
FREDERICKSBURG	193	1.15	.35	98	1.09	.40	190	1.08	.35
CULPEPER	159	1.36	.39	70	1.29	.47	136	1.29	.37
STAUNTON	107	1.36	.32	35	1.07	.38	101	1.33	.34
NOVA	652	1.20	.43	629	1.21	.42	1000	1.12	.37
TOTAL/AVERAGE	1860	1.26	.39	1439	1.27	.41	2177	1.21	.36

* Rate per Million Entering Vehicles

SEGMENTS

	2004				2005				2006
	N	LEN (mile)	AVG. CR	AVG. CCR	N	LEN (mile)	AVG. CR	AVG. CCR	N	LEN (mile)	AVG. CR	AVG. CCR
BRISTOL	91	39.1	570.42	227.68	79	34.1	681.09	280.06	98	43.4	578.00	252.53
SALEM	163	77.6	527.19	179.53	184	92.6	541.41	192.93	180	92.6	481.73	223.49
LYNCHBURG	54	22.6	697.67	293.51	63	33.6	565.82	200.74	62	32.7	484.91	178.65
RICHMOND	206	125.7	580.89	307.11	208	132.4	458.58	231.13	206	130.1	420.53	232.48
HAMPTON ROADS	158	93.0	368.63	148.81	170	102.6	331.17	142.79	143	90.3	327.75	164.48
FREDERICKSBURG	153	93.6	469.61	168.22	103	65.9	525.33	294.65	92	61.6	418.57	227.90
CULPEPER	133	68.3	557.88	271.06	111	61.0	492.15	233.33	102	52.9	439.02	211.63
STAUNTON	156	74.8	443.94	203.65	105	54.4	405.51	190.70	152	72.2	470.98	230.20
NOVA	171	141.6	532.55	316.62	173	131.4	543.68	318.66	183	133.9	469.76	294.87
TOTAL	1285	736.3	515.46	233.70	1196	707.8	490.07	229.11	1218	709.7	449.72	229.04

* Rate per 100 Million Vehicle Miles Traveled

Among these identified critical crash locations, VDOT focused on the intersections and segments which were identified as repeating critical crash locations, that is those identified for three consecutive years. Intersection node ID and linear reference route milepost were used to determine the repeated/overlapped locations. Table 5-2 shows summary results for frequency of appearance and overlapped segments by districts for each location. From the analysis results, 3,438 intersections were identified at least once as being a critical crash intersection. Sixty percent of the intersections (n = 2008) are shown as appearing for any single year. However, about eighteen percent (n = 608) of the intersections are continuously shown for all three years. Most of the intersections are distributed in the NOVA and Richmond districts. Analysis of the roadway segments generated similar results to the intersection analysis. Two hundred and nine miles of the seven hundred miles of roadway segments are overlapped and most of the segments are distributed in the NOVA and Richmond districts as well. These are two of the most urbanized districts in Virginia.

TABLE 5-2 Frequency of Appearance as Critical Crash Locations for Last Three Years
INTERSECTIONS (Frequency)

DISTRICT	SINGLE YEAR APPEARED CRITICAL CRASH INT.	DOUBLE YEAR APPEARED CRITICAL CRASH INT.	TRIPLE YEAR APPEARED CRITICAL CRASH INT.	CRITICAL CRASH INT.
BRISTOL	59	16	1	76
SALEM	219	72	16	307
LYNCHBURG	120	30	10	160
RICHMOND	386	167	130	683
HAMPTON ROADS	106	53	23	182
FREDERICKSBURG	183	62	58	303
CULPEPER	160	47	37	244
STAUNTON	116	47	11	174
NOVA	659	328	322	1309
TOTAL	2008	822	608	3438

SEGMENTS (Mile)

	CRITICAL CRASH SEG. IN 2004	CRITICAL CRASH SEG. IN 2005	CRITICAL CRASH SEG. IN 2006	OVERLAPPED CRITICAL CRASH SEG. IN 2004, 2005 & 2006
BRISTOL	39.09	34.06	43.43	3.65
SALEM	77.60	92.59	92.56	13.57
LYNCHBURG	22.62	33.57	32.71	2.54
RICHMOND	125.68	132.41	130.13	53.25
HAMPTON ROADS	93.02	102.58	90.27	31.56
FREDERICKSBURG	93.55	65.88	61.55	18.68
CULPEPER	68.27	60.97	52.90	10.56
STAUNTON	74.84	54.36	72.24	10.04
NOVA	141.62	131.42	133.91	65.17
TOTAL	736.29	707.84	709.70	209.02

Next the critical crash rate locations where assessed to find the highest occurrence of severe crashes. Table 5-3 shows a summary of total and fatal and injury crash frequency by districts and frequency of annual appearances. Intersections and segments in the NOVA district have the highest total and fatal and injury crash frequencies and densities. Also, repeated critical crash intersections and segments have higher total and fatal and injury crash frequency and density than less repeated locations.

TABLE 5-3 Crash Frequency by Annual Appearances

INTERSECTIONS

	SINGLE YEAR			DOUBLE YEAR			TRIPLE YEAR
	N	AVG. CRASH FRQ	AVG. FAT+INJ FRQ	N	AVG. CRASH FRQ	AVG. FAT+INJ FRQ	N	AVG. CRASH FRQ	AVG. FAT+INJ FRQ
BRISTOL	59	3.86	1.86	16	4.53	2.28	1	4.00	1.67
SALEM	219	4.03	1.55	72	5.17	1.89	16	11.96	4.00
LYNCHBURG	120	4.08	1.75	30	5.13	2.37	10	8.67	3.33
RICHMOND	386	4.64	1.69	167	6.39	2.19	130	8.91	2.88
HAMPTON ROADS	106	3.94	1.76	53	6.10	2.78	23	6.78	2.94
FREDERICKSBURG	183	4.48	1.78	62	5.92	1.90	58	10.36	3.42
CULPEPER	160	4.62	1.79	47	6.79	2.45	37	9.22	3.03
STAUNTON	116	3.91	1.67	47	5.22	2.17	11	7.39	2.85
NOVA	659	6.53	2.32	328	9.32	3.34	322	13.48	4.79
TOTAL/AVERAGE	2008	4.45	1.80	822	6.06	2.37	608	8.97	3.21

SEGMENTS

	2004		2005		2006		OVERLAPPED IN 2004, 2005 & 2006
	CRA DEN	F+I CRA DEN	CRA DEN	F+I CRA DEN	CRA DEN	F+I CRA DEN	AVG. CRA DEN	AVG. F+I CRA DEN
BRISTOL	13.69	7.11	14.03	6.34	12.60	5.64	20.73	11.05
SALEM	18.20	6.97	17.00	6.20	18.34	6.45	26.26	9.60
LYNCHBURG	13.35	5.70	18.56	7.48	17.58	6.94	17.98	9.45
RICHMOND	34.51	11.23	32.45	10.96	37.22	11.93	48.53	15.39
HAMPTON ROADS	32.37	12.16	31.60	11.02	32.04	10.18	42.81	13.95
FREDERICKSBURG	25.40	8.37	26.85	8.39	27.39	9.00	36.65	11.80
CULLPEPER	19.32	7.00	19.85	6.63	20.51	7.11	39.99	12.47
STAUNTON	16.17	6.09	16.30	6.31	16.57	5.81	25.23	8.07
NOVA	52.62	19.21	50.67	17.58	50.07	17.48	58.34	21.20
AVERAGE	25.09	9.32	25.26	8.99	25.81	9.28	35.17	12.55

5.2 Methodology for Five Percent Locations

Some 608 intersections and 209 miles of roadway segments have been identified as high crash locations in three consecutive years. The top five percent of the locations with the most severe safety needs were determined from the lists of these locations using a combined rank method. The combined rank method gives crash frequency (or density) and crash rate equal weights. This method allows benefits from each rank method and attenuates the effectiveness of the selected rank method.

Where

CF = Crash frequency
FICF = Fatal & injury only crash frequency
CD = Crash density
FICD = Fatal & injury only crash density
CR = Crash Rate
FICR = Fatal & injury only crash rate

The top five percent locations were determined by using the combined rank method and are arranged in descending rank order. Table 5-4 provides the top five percent of intersections and segments classified by jurisdictions, district, control device (intersections) and road functional class (segments).

TABLE 5-4 Top Five Percent of High Crash Locations

INTERSECTIONS

	N	CRASH RATE			FAT&INJ CRASH FREQUENCY
		MIN	MAX	MEAN	MIN	MAX	MEAN
TOP 5 PERCENT INTs.	29	1.27	4.25	1.95	3	26	11.91
TRIPLE CC INTs.	608	.24	14.83	1.15	0	26	3.99
STATEWIDE CC INTs.	3438	.10	85.24	1.24	0	26	2.83

SEGMENTS

	MILES	CRASH RATE			FAT&INJ CRASH DENSITY
		MIN	MAX	MEAN	MIN	MAX	MEAN
TOP 5 PERCENT SEGs.	10.54	485.20	1347.54	773.87	23.7	59.60	40.00
TRIPLE CC SEGs.	209.02	86.98	2224.69	398.60	1.11	59.60	6.92
STATEWIDE CC SEGs.	717.9*	53.61	4476.68	484.91	0	106.06	9.15

* Three Year Mean

Figure 5-1 provides information for the top five percent of hazardous locations classified by jurisdictions, districts, and traffic controls such as signalized and un-signalized at intersection. Additional location specific descriptions and information are provided in the next section reporting the safety assessments and proposed countermeasures.

Figure 5-1 Virginia's Top Five Percent of the Hazardous Locations

(a) Top Five Percent of Hazardous Intersections

(b) Top Five Percent of Hazardous Segments

5.3 Assessment of Top Five Percent High Crash Locations

To determine feasible safety countermeasures for the identified high crash roadway segments and intersections, an in-house safety assessment was conducted using available data and information. Tables 5-5 and 5-6 provide information that identifies the high crash locations with the exposure and crash frequencies during 2004-06 for intersections and segments, respectively. Collision types for the recorded crashes were also reviewed to determine potential countermeasures. VDOT inventory, 2002 aerial photos and video logs (1999-2002) of the routes were used to determine existing conditions.

Based on the reviews, lower cost and high cost countermeasures were proposed based on expected time to complete, impacts and costs. Detailed costs were not developed; rather planning level estimates were developed based on similar recent safety project costs. For high impact and cost countermeasures, a lower limit of expected costs is provided given the uncertainty with right-of-way and utility impacts. For all proposed countermeasures, field review of conditions will be necessary to determine the feasibility of the improvements and whether any other options are available.

Tables 5-7 and 5-8 provide existing conditions information with the proposed low and high cost countermeasures with the associated cost estimates. Countermeasures range from signing and marking to construction of an interchange with costs from $5,000 to $20 million or more. Impediments to implementation are primarily the associated right-of-way impacts and costs; however, access management may also be difficult without major reconstruction.

Table 5-5 Top Five Percent Hazardous Intersection Characteristics

Table 5-5 Top Five Percent Hazardous Intersection Characteristics (continue)

Table 5-6 Top Five Percent Hazardous Segment Characteristics

Table 5-7 Top 5 Percent Hazardous Intersections Proposed Countermeasures and Estimated Costs

INT ID	LOCATION				EXISTING CONDITIONS	POTENTIAL REMEDITIES	ESTIMATED COSTS	IMPLEMENTATION IMPEDIMENTS
	VDOT DISTRICT	COUNTY	INT @ROUTE 1	INT @ROUTE 2
Int 1	Salem	Roanoke	SR 00419	80 00706	1.   Six-lane divided 45 mph urban arterial intersect 2 lane undivided secondary road and a 3 lane connector road. 2.   Span wire signal design on SR419 Exclusive left/right turn lane on SR419 3.   1 share/right turn and 1 exclusive left on connector.	Low Cost 1.   Coordinate and optimize signal timing on SR419 2.   Marking improvement through the intersection High Cost 1.   Redesign Signal with Mast Arm and Back plates.  Add Pedestrian phase and accessibility.	Low Cost $10K $5K High Cost $400K
Int 2	Richmond	Chesterfield	US 00060	20 00668	1.   Four lane divided intersect four lane undivided 2.   Mast Arm Traffic Signal Control 3.   Exclusive left/right turn lanes 4.   Sight distances problem vertical incline from SC677	Low Cost 1.   Reduce the speed limit on US 60 2.    Add Pedestrian phasing and accessibility 3.   Modify signal phasing and timing remove Split Phase Cycle. 4.   Add advance Red Phase Warning Devices on US 60 High Cost 1.   Remove free flowing right turn lane on SR677 and SR668	Low Cost 1.  $10K 2.  $35K 3.  $25K 4.  $140K High Cost 1.  $580k
Int 3	Richmond	Chesterfield	US 00060	20 00678	1.   Six lane divided highway 2.   Span Wire Signal Control, with exclusive dual left turn lanes.  3.   Exclusive left/right turn lanes on secondary road.	Low Cost 1.   Optimize the yellow interval 2.   Reduce the speed limit on US 60 to 35 mph or 40mph near the intersection 3.   Marking improvement through intersection High Cost 1.  Design Mast Arm Signal with Backplates. 2.  Add Pedestrian Phasing with Ped Access	Low Cost 1.  $5K 2.  $5K 3.  $2K High Cost 1. $300K 2. $100K
Int 4	Richmond	Chesterfield	US 00360	20 00604	1.   Six lanes divided 45 mph highway intersect four lane divided roadway 2.   Two exclusive left turn lanes and two through lane and one exclusive right turn lane on SR604 approaches 3.   Four through lanes and two exclusive left turn lane and right turn channelization 4.   Mast Arm Signal Control Design intersection.	Low Cost 1.   Signal Optimization  2.   Marking improvement through intersection 3.   Install/improve advance intersection warning (Pavement Markings).	Low Cost 1.  $5K 2.  $5K 3.  $5K
Int 5	Richmond	Chesterfield	US 00060	20 00645	1.   Six-lane divided 45 mph urban arterial intersect 4 lane undivided secondary road and a private drive to a mall 2.   More than 3 accesses in 740 ft on EB 60 between SR645 and 653 3.   2 through lanes and exclusive left/right turn lane on US60 4.   1 share/left turn and 1 exclusive right on 645 5.   Signalized intersection 6.   1/3 rear end, over half angle crashes, most on US 60	Low Cost 1.   Coordinate and optimize signal timing on US 60 High Cost 1.   Add exclusive left turn lane and signal on minor street (645 and mall driveway) if the left turn volume justify. 2.   Extend right turn lane along US 60 both directions and add a second left turn lane into the mall coupled with access management	Low Cost 1.  $10K High Cost 2.  $300K 3.  $500K
Int 6	Richmond	Chesterfield	SR 00010	US 00001	1.   Five lane, four approach intersection. 2.   Mast Arm Signal Control intersection with exclusive left turn lanes 3.   Free flowing right turn lane on all approaches.	Low Cost 1.   Reduce speed limit near the intersection 2.   Install/improve advance intersection warning 3.   Remove Free Flow Right Turn Lane	Low Cost 1.  $5K 2.  $20K 3.  $200K
Int 7	Fredericksburg	Spotsylvania	US 00001	88 00606	1.   Four-lane undivided primary intersect 2 lane undivided secondary road 2.   Intersection is control by Mast Arm Traffic Control Signal with Backplates. 3.   Rear End crashes on secondary road. 4.   Flashing Advance Warning Signs on all approaches	Low Cost 1.   Improve pavement markings 2.   Optimize the yellow interval	Low Cost 1.  $5K 2.  $4K
Int 8	Culpeper	Fauquier	SR 00028	US 00017	1.   Four-lane divided primary. 2.   Mast Arm Signal design	Low Cost 1.   Improve pavement markings 2.   Optimize yellow interval	Low Cost 1.  $5K 2.  $4K
Int 9	NOVA	Fairfax	SR0007	2900613	1.   Seven Corners: Busy intersection at the junction of US50, SR7 and SC613, and 338 2.   44% angle crash,23%sideswipe and 30% rear end	Low Cost: 1.   Better advance guide sign to direct traffic to the right land other than wait until last second to reduce sideswipe same direction crash. 2.   Optimize signal to balance traffic flow in each direction to prevent lock up.	Low  Cost: 1.  $6k 2.  $5k
Int 10	NOVA	Fairfax	7600613	7608113	1.   Four lane divided 8113 intersect four lane divided sc613 with SL 35mph 2.   44% angle and 39% rear end crashes	Low Cost: 1.   Check clearance time on left turn phase on both ways 2.   High crash intersection sign	Low Cost: 1.  $5k 2.  $3k
Int 11	NOVA	Fairfax	SR236	7600713	1.   Four land divided 236 intersect four lane SC713 2.   Skewed intersection and first major intersection off 395	Low Cost: 1.   Add puppy track line on 236 for left turn 2.   Check signal phasing and timing for left turn High Cost 1.   Replace span wires with master arm for signals	Low Cost: 1.  $1.5k 2.  $4k High Cost: 1.  $250k
Int 12	NOVA	Prince William	SR 784	7602490	1.   Four-lane divided urban arterial 2.   Four-leg intersection w/ plaza 3.   Adjacent to over-capacity SR 640	Low Cost 1.   Advance intersection Red Phase warning signs and markings with RLR program 2.   Restripe Rt 2490 SB approach to LTL plus T-RTL and add x-walk.  Modify signal and timing High Cost 1.   Widen Plaza exit approach 2.   Realign SR640 EB approach to provide dual LTL (may be possible within existing pavement width)	Low Cost 1,2.  $200K High Cost 1.  $500k	Private ROW and utility impacts
Int 13	NOVA	Prince William	US 1	SR 619	1.   Four-lane undivided urban (north) and rural (south) arterial 2.   Four-leg intersection 3.   Adjacent to SR 730 (Int 27 below)	Low Cost 1.   Advance intersection Red Phase warning signs with RLR program 2.   Reconfigure WB approach to remove channelized islands. Modify signal and timing High Cost 1.   Restrict movement from SR 730 to RIRO 2.   Provide raised median on north approach	Low Cost 1,2.  $200K High Cost 1.  $400k	Restricting access
Int 14	NOVA	Prince William	SR 55	US 29	1.   Four-lane divided urban arterial T intersection with two-lane undivided 2.   Skewed angle and highly congested 3.   Adjacent Rail Xing and commercial entrances	Low Cost 1.   Close adjacent Rt. SR 642 intersection and retime signal 2.   Interconnect signal with Rail Xing High Cost 1.   Existing road realignment and grade separation project in PE	Low Cost 1.  $250K 2.  $200K   High Cost 1. Part of $182M Rt. I-66 IC project	- Part of I-66 IC project - Signal mods are short term with new IC - I-66 IC only funded for PE
Int 15	NOVA	Prince William	SR 234	7601566	1.   Rt. SR 234 Commercial and commuter corridor 2.   Rt. 1566 Cross-county connector 3.  High thru and turning volumes 4.   Dual LTL and channelized RTL 5.   Some pedestrian activity	Low Cost 1.   Pedestrian crossing and signal phase upgrades is existing HES project 2.   Reduce corridor speed limit and change signal CI 3.   Upgrade lane marking and provide “puppy” tracks for TM High Cost 1.   Construct interchange	Low Cost 1. Part of $450K project 2. $10K 3. 2.5K High Cost 1. $15M	- Peak vs. off-peak speeds and mgmt - Access mgmt in corridor - Cost and Local concurrence - Commercial ROW and Utilities
Int 16	NOVA	Prince William	US 1	760 1279/3000	1.   Four-lane undivided urban arterial in 35 mph SZ 2.   Four-leg intersection with new connection to cross-county PW parkway (SR 3000)	Low Cost 1.   Advance intersection Red Phase warning signs and marking with RLR program 2.   Reconfigure EB approach to remove channelized islands and develop dual LTL. Modify signal and timing High Cost 1.   Add NB dual LTL by shifting SB lanes	Low Cost 1,2. $300K High Cost 1: 400k
Int 17	NOVA	Prince William	SR 784	7601829	1.   Four-lane rural x-section Rt. 784 w/ 45 mph SL 2.   Signalized w/ single LTL and sidewalks on north side of Rt. 784	Low Cost 1.   Advance intersection Red Phase warning signs with RLR program 2.   Restripe Rt 1826 SB approach to LTL plus T-RTL and add x-walk.  Modify signal and timing 3.   Reduce to 40 or 35 mph SL	Low Cost 1-3. $200K
Int 18	NOVA	Fairfax	2900620	2902864	1.   Four-lane road intersection  w/ 40 mph SL near freeway exit 2.   Signalized w/ single LTL on 620, right turn channelization on all four approaches 3.   Signal head span wire mounted 4.   Lack yield sign mark 5.   Vegetation l on shoulder 6.   Permissive left turn on eastbound	Low Cost 1.   Advance intersection warning signs on west approach with the advance street name sign 2.   Tighten the right turn channelzation and add yield line marking on pavement 4.   Trim tree leaves near shoulder High Cost 1.   Replace span wired signal with master arm mounted one  2.   Add pedestrian crossing pavement marking and signal	Low Cost 1.  $2k 2,3:  $6k High Cost 1,2:  $250k
Int 19	NOVA	Fairfax	2900617	2900620	1.   Four-lane road  intersection w/ 40 mph SL on Rt. 620 and 35mph on Rt 617 2.   Single LTL on four approaches; exclusive right turn lane on both approaches of Rt 617 and right turn  channelization on 620 3.   Permissive LT phase on 620 only	High Cost 1.   Increase the visibility of signal by replacing span wire with master arm 2.   High percentage of angel crash may justify a protected left turn on 620 3.   Check clearance intervals for operating speeds (e.g., LT)	High Cost 1,2,3:  $200k
Int 20	NOVA	Prince William	SR 234	761596	1.   Rt. SR 234 Commercial and commuter corridor 2.   Rt. 1596 narrows west of intersection 3.  High thru and turning volumes 4.   Dual LTL and channelized RTL 5.   Some pedestrian activity	Low Cost 1.   Pedestrian crossing and signal phase upgrades is existing HES project 2.   Reduce corridor speed limit and change signal CI 3.   Upgrade lane marking and provide “puppy” tracks for TM 4.   Change NB SR1596 approach to thru+right and remove split phasing High Cost 1.   Construct WB SR 234 second LTL and lengthen EB LTLs. Separate with raised median. 2.   Remove free flow RTL configuration and mo signal	Low Cost 1. Part of $450K project 2.  $10K 3.  $ 2.5K 4.  $ 2.5K High Cost 1.  $500K	- Peak vs. off-peak speeds and mgmt - Access mgmt in corridor - Cost and Local concurrence - Commercial ROW and Utilities
Int 21	NOVA	Fairfax	US 1	SR 235	1.   Six-lane divided 45 mph urban arterial intersect with two lane undivided secondary road 2.   Two through lanes and exclusive left/right turn lane on Rt. US 1 SB 3.   Three through lane, exclusive left turn lane and shared right turn lane on Rt. US 1 NB 4.   Signalized intersection 5.   50% of read end and 30% of angle crashes, most on Rt. US 1	Low Cost 1.   Install advance intersection warnings 2.   Reduce speed limit on Rt. US1 High Cost 1.   Add exclusive right turn lane on Rt. US 1 NB 2.   Realign intersection	Low Cost 1-2. $10K   High Cost 1. $200K 2. $300K
Int 22	NOVA	Fairfax	US 50	2901720	1.   Four-lane divided 45 mph urban arterial intersect with three lane undivided road 2.   Two through lanes and one left/right exclusive lane on Rt. US 50 approaches; exclusive let turn lane and one though and shared right turn lane on Rt. 1720 3.   High percentage (62%)of rear end crashes on Rt. US 50	Low Cost 1.   Increase the yellow interval of signal 2.   Improve signal coordination High Cost 1.   Improve/close access driveway at the intersection	Low Cost 1-2. $20K High Cost 1. $200K
Int 23	NOVA	Fairfax	643	2906197	1.   Four lane divided 40 mph intersect four lane divided 2.   Two through, exclusive left/right  turn lane on Rt. 643 3.   High percentage of angle crashes on Rt. 643	Low Cost 1.   Increase the yellow interval of signal 2.   Reduce speed limit on Rt. 643 3.   Install advance intersection warnings High Cost 1.   Add right turn lane Rt. 6197 NB	Low Cost 1-2. $15K High Cost 1. $200K
Int 24	NOVA	Fairfax	US 29	2900645	1.   Rt. US 29 four-lane divided section w/ 45 mph SL intersect four lane divided SC645 with 45mph 2.   High frequency and percentage of rear end crashes on US 29 4.   Not sure the signal timing	Low Cost 1.   Advance intersection red phase flashing warning signs 2.   Reduce the approaching speed on US 29 to 35mph if applicable  High Cost 1.   Add double LTL on US 29	Low Cost 1,2: $10k-$15K   High Cost 500K+	o
Int 25	NOVA	Fairfax	SR 28	2907783/ 2908350	1.   Four lane divided US 28 with 40 mph SL intersect four lane divided SC7783 /8350(Skewed intersection) 2.   US 28NB right turn lack marking 3.   SC8350EB lack a sign and pavement marking at the right turn channelization	Low Cost 1.   Add right turn pavement marking on US 28 2.   Add a sign indicating right turn to 28SB at the channelization point. 3.   Check signal phasing	Low Cost 1,2: $2k 3:   $25k
Int 26	NOVA	Fairfax	2900644	2900789	1.   First Intersection near I-95 exit 2.   Grade Intersection newly completed 3.   High proportion of rear end crashes	Low Cost 1.   Major improvement completed in recent years with the Spring Field Interchange project
Int 27	NOVA	Prince Willam	US001	7600730	1.   One T intersection immediately beside the signalized intersection of US1 & 619. 2.   US 1 with spd 40 mph 3.   Poor access management near the intersection	Low Cost: 1.   Restrict to RIRO High Cost: 1.   Realign intersection	Low Cost 1.  $20K High Cost 1.  $500K+	Access to local businesses
Int 28	NOVA	Prince William	SR234	SR621	1.   Four-lane rural x-section  Rt. 621 w/ 60 mph SL 2.   Double LTL on three approaches	Low Cost 1.   Advance intersection Red Phase warning signs with lane rumble strips to reduce speed. 2.   Illuminate w/ lighting 3.   Check clearance intervals for operating speeds (e.g., LT)	Low Cost 1-4. $60K
Int 29	NOVA	Fairfax	US0001	2905282	1.   Signalized Intersection close to the each other 2.   High rear end crashes frequency	Low Cost: 1.   Signal coordination 2.   Reduce speed limit 3.   Advance Intersection warning	Low Cost: 1-3: $8k

Table 5-8 Top 5 Percent Hazardous Segments Proposed Countermeasures and Estimated Costs

SEG ID	LOCATION				EXISTING CONDITIONS	POTENTIAL REMEDITIES	ESTIMATED COSTS	IMPLEMENTATION IMPEDIMENTS
	VDOT DISTRICT	COUNTY	ROUTE	LENGTH (Mile)
Seg 1	4	Henrico	US 1	0.30	1.   Undivided four-lane urban primary principal arterial roadway 2.   Two T intersection near each other 3.   68% Rear end crashes	Low Cost 1.   Reduce speed limit 2.   Advance Intersection warning sign High Cost 1.   Realign intersection	Low Cost $10k High Cost $2M+
Seg 2	4	Chesterfield	US 60	0.31	1.   Undivided four-lane w/45 mph urban primary principle arterial roadway approaching a major intersection 2.   63% rear end, intersection related 2.   Many access points near the intersection on US60, gas station	Low Cost 1.    Reduce speed limit 2.   Access management High Cost 1.   Regrade and repave for drainage	Low Cost 1-2. $15K High Cost 1:  $500k
Seg 3	4	Henrico	US 250	1.79	1.   Divided six-lane w/45 mph urban principal major arterial roadway from Glenside to Parham road 2.   Several major dealerships along this road with many access driveway 3.   Vertical slope near   Glenside 4.   55% rear end crashes 5.   Close median of some stop controlled intersection	Low Cost 1.   Install advance street name signs 2.   Revise signal phase sequence and timing; Add protect left turn phase where needed 3.   High crash location alert sign	Low Cost 1: $10K 2: $5k
Seg 4	4	Henrico	US 250	0.31	1.   Divided four-lane w/45 mph urban principal major arterial roadway from Glenside to 2.   I-64 exit entrance 3.   55% rear end crashes and 17% sideswipe same direction	Low Cost 1.    Install advance street name signs 2.   Revise signal phase sequence and timing; Add protect left turn phase where needed 3.   High crash location alert sign 4.   Add yield sign and pavement marking at glenside High Cost 1.   Eliminate right turn channelization	Low Cost 1-3. $20K High Cost 1. $250K
Seg 5	4	Henrico	US 250	0.95	1.   Divided six lane 45 mph urban principal major arterial roadway from pump road to near I-64 exit 2   74% rear end crashes and 17% sideswipe same direction and 8% sideswipe same direction	Low Cost 1.   Install advance street name signs 2.   High crash location alert sign 3.   Add guide sign for major retailer like warlmart	Low Cost 1-3 $10K
Seg 6	4	Chesterfield	US 1	0.46	1.   Undivided four-lane w/45 mph rural primary principal arterial roadway 2.   Rt 618 T intersection and Rt 859/industrial driveway 4 leg intersection 3.   Some C/G but sections without shoulder or C/G	Low Cost 1.   Reduce speed limit 2.   Advance Intersection warning sign 3.   Check signal warrants High Cost 1.   Construct intersection turn lanes 2.   Reduce driveways and delineate entrances	Low Cost 1-3 $25k w/o signals; $300k with two signals High Cost 1-2 $2M	ROW impacts Property access
Seg 7	6	Spotsylvania	US 1	0.31	1.   Divided and Undivided four-lane w/ 45 to 35 mph rural to urban primary principle arterial roadway 2.   Poor access management 3.   Ped crossings not provided 4.   Insufficient advance intersection warning signs	Low Cost 1.   Install advance intersection warning and directional signs and markings 2.   Provide ped phasing and x-walk at Rt 1489 3.   Restrict/remove driveways near intersections High Cost 1.   Provide second LTL to I-95 NB ramp and raised median at south end 2.   Improve access management from driveways at north end	Low Cost 1-3 $250K High Cost 1. $500K 2. $1M +	- High cost but low impacts expected
Seg 8	9	Prince William	7600784	0.38	1.   Divided four-lane w/35 mph urban secondary minor arterial roadway 2.   Intersection w/ SR 640 (see intersection 12 above)	Low Cost 1.   See intersection12 improvements High Cost	Low Cost High Cost
Seg 9	9	Prince William	US1	0.468	1.   Undivided four-lane w/35 mph urban major arterial roadway 2.   Intersection w/ SR 619 (see intersection 13 and 27 above)	Low Cost 1.   See intersection 13/27 improvements 2.   Restrict parking 3.   Delineate driveways and intersections with curbs 4.   Pave missing shoulder sections High Cost 1.   Create Center TWLTL w/I existing cross-section	Low Cost 2-4 $300k High Cost 1.  $500k	ROW and Utilities Property Access
Seg 10	9	Prince William	US1	1.01	1.   Four and Five lane Undivided urban principal arterial w/ 35 mph SZ 2.   Some sidewalks but incomplete; no ped signals at intersections 3.   Span wire signals	Low Cost 1.   Install advance intersection warning and directional signs and markings 2.   Provide mast arm signals ped phasing and x-walks at three intersections 3.   Restrict/remove driveways near intersections High Cost 1.   Provide second NB LTL to SR 2000 and raised median at south end 2.   Improve access management from driveways at north end 3.   Add sidewalks in missing links	Low Cost 1.  $50k 2.  $600k 3. $250k High Cost 1.  $500k 2.  $500k 3.  $300k	ROW and Utilities US 1 Corridor Study long term improvements
Seg 11	NOVA	Fairfax	US 1	0.35	1.   Divided six-lane w/45 mph urban primary arterial roadway 2.   Inadequate median entrance from driveway and poor access management 3.   Ped crossings and sidewalk provided 4.   Bus service is provided	Low Cost 1.   Reduce speed limit with and restrict right turning movement (no-turn-on-red) High Cost 1.   Add signal heads and optimize signal coordination 2.   Improve roadway surface and skid resistance 3.   Improve access management from driveway	Low Cost 1.  $5K High Cost 1.  $15K 2.  $100K 3.  $1M +
Seg 12	NOVA	Arlington	US 29	0.43	1.   Undivided four-lane w/30 mph urban primary arterial roadway 2.   Street parking allowed at both directions 3.   Sidewalk provided	Low Cost 1.   Extend/adjust amber phase for clearance 2.   Revise signal phase sequence and timing 3.   Prohibit street parking High Cost 1.   Extend LT storage	Low Cost 1-3. $20K High Cost 1.  $200K
Seg 13	NOVA	Fairfax	SR 236	0.59	1.   Divided four-lane w/40 mph urban primary arterial roadway 2.   Continuous but partially missing sidewalk and crosswalk provided 3.   Parallel frontage road exists 4.   Bus service is provided	Low Cost 1.   Install advance intersection warning sighs High Cost 1.   Provide bus station bays 2.   Improve access management from frontage   road	Low Cost 1.  $10K High Cost 1.  $200K 2.  $500K +
Seg 14	NOVA	Arlington	SR 244	1.38	1.   Undivided four-lane w/35 mph urban primary arterial roadway 2.   Ped crossing and sidewalk   provided 3.   Street parking allowed to west direction and bus service is provided	Low Cost 1.   Install advance intersection warning signs 2.   Prohibit street parking with sign High Cost 1.   Add/Extend LTL storage	Low Cost 1.  $5K 2.  $2K High Cost 1.  $200K
Seg 15	NOVA	Arlington	SR 244	1.20	1.   Undivided four-lane w/30 mph urban primary arterial roadway 2.   Commercial areas with heavy turning movements but poor access management. 3.   Sidewalk is provided	Low Cost 1.   Revise signal phase sequence and timing 2.   Install advance intersection warning signs High Cost 1.   Improve access management	Low Cost 1.  $2K 2.  $10K High Cost 1.  $500K
Seg 16	NOVA	Fairfax	SR 7	0.33	1.   Undivided four-lane w/40 mph urban primary arterial roadway 2.   Median crossover is provided for turning movements but poor access management 3.   Bus service is provided	Low Cost 1.   Reduce speed limit w/signs 2.   Revise signal phase sequence and timing High Cost 1.   Prohibit left turning movement from median barrier 2.   Add turning lanes	Low Cost 1.  $1K 2.  $200K High Cost 1.  $1M + 2.  $1M+