File Photo
By Matt de Simone
The Town of Fincastle continues its ongoing discussions with the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) about possibly adding more “No Through Trucks” signage around town. On April 18, Fincastle town staff, Sheriff Matt Ward, and county administrators met with VDOT representatives to further look into the matter of large trucks getting stuck while navigating through the narrow streets in town.
“The meeting went really well,” Town Manager Melanie McFadyen said in a recent interview. “(VDOT was) very open. They were great listening to everything.”
The town met with a couple of engineers from VDOT that included Salem Residency Engineer Brian Blevins. From that meeting, the town gained a better understanding of Springwood Road’s importance as an alternate route between Route 11 and Route 220.
The town requested an updated incident list from the Botetourt County Sheriff’s Office and documentation better describing the process of adding signage. McFadyen noted that in order to request “No Through Trucks” signs along Main Street, the town and the county would have to pass resolutions in support of increased signage, add specifics about length restrictions, and look at other creative ways to discourage 18-wheelers in the uptown area of Fincastle. The town once again made mention of a possible Springwood Road extension plan.
“After discussions, VDOT will review and thoroughly assess the situation,” Sheriff Matt Ward said in a recent statement regarding the meeting. “Of course, this is still in the preliminary stages of assessing the concerns and as we await VDOT’s suggestions, we will continue to collaborate with the town and VDOT to elevate safety issues. The streets of Fincastle remain safe for all and we will enforce any new measures VDOT recommends to ensure compliance.”
Additional requests included “No Through Trucks” signage on Herndon, Church, Back, Federal, and Roanoke Streets and moving “45 MPH” signs up to the intersection of Route 220 North and Brugh’s Mill Road and moving signs to the “Town of Fincastle” town limits sign.
During the meeting, the focus turned to the stuck trucks and better prevention. VDOT agreed to reach out to the DMV asking that trucks not be routed through the town when that department is issuing wide-load and overweight permits, according to VDOT spokesperson Jason Bond in a recent email.
Furthermore, the representative explained that VDOT is also investigating options for the county and the town to consider as solutions. These options could include additional through-truck restrictions or designating certain routes as truck routes.
“There are challenges with restricting trucks given the lack of comparable alternative routes and with designating and signing truck routes considering there are few roads that are suitable,” Bond added.
However, a through-truck restriction isn’t a ban on all trucks as it only pertains to through trucks, not deliveries. According to Bond, to request a through-truck restriction, a locality must pass a resolution asking VDOT to study and to consider one. The resolution must identify a viable alternative route using roads that are comparable to the road where the restriction would be in place. In Fincastle, Main Street is the comparable alternative route for Route 606 (Blue Ridge Turnpike) which is currently restricted to through trucks per a previous request.
As part of the resolution, the county would commit to enforce the restriction which becomes the responsibility of local police if it is implemented. Bond further explained that if VDOT supports the restriction, the locality also holds a public hearing before it is finalized. Signs are then put in place to provide adequate guidance to the trucking industry and assist with enforcement of the restriction.
One solution to this ongoing issue is for the county to revisit the Fincastle Bypass/Springwood Road extension project presented nearly 20 years ago. Once included in the county’s Six-Year Improvement Plan, the project would have provided a viable alternative for truck traffic, according to Bond. The county submitted a SMART SCALE application for the project in 2016 but was unsuccessful obtaining additional funding when projects were scored and ranked across the district and Commonwealth. Without funding to advance it, the project was removed from the plan in June 2016.
“We want to continue (bringing up the extension plan in our conversations with VDOT),” McFadyen said. “It’s no longer on the six-year plan, so we’re at least trying to get it back on that plan.”
McFadyen noted that VDOT representatives shared the cost of a project of this scale is significantly more expensive than when it was first proposed in 2006.
Bond said that the county could continue to submit SMART SCALE applications or to seek other funding sources for the project. However, any future SMART SCALE application would require that the county complete a study that supports the construction of a new secondary roadway. This was not required when the county submitted the previous application in 2016. SMART SCALE applications are developed and submitted every other year.
