Dates	Number of Participants (unique individuals)
May 27-June 10, 2025	250

 

The following needs have been identified for the area on Route 67 at the Route 460 Exit 2 ramps. Do you agree with these needs?
Safety improvement	100%

 

Rank the following needs in order of importance to you for the area on Route 67 at the Route 460Exit 2 ramps.
Corridor safety / intersection safety	66%
Reducing traffic congestion	71%
Proper pavement marking and signage	78%
Pedestrian safety and accessibility	64%
Speeding / aggressive driving	60%
Public transit access and service	57%
Bicycle safety and accessibility	53%

 

Which of the following safety issues concern you for the area on Route 67 at the Route 460 Exit 2ramps?
Inadequate pavement marking and signage	51%
Speeding / aggressive driving	46%
Sudden stopping / rear-end crashes	35%
Lack of sidewalks / missing sidewalks	34%
Insufficient / missing crosswalks and pedestrian signal timing	33%
Inadequate lighting	30%
Difficulty weaving / merging	27%
Side-impact crashes	26%
Inadequate bicycle facilities	16%
Lack of ADA ramps and accessibility	13%
Inadequate transit / bus stops	8%
Closely spaced driveways	8%
Running red lights	7%
Other	4%

 

What mobility issues do you typically experience when using the area on Route 67 at the Route 460 Exit 2 ramps?
Difficulty making left turns	43%
Lack of turn lanes	39%
Poor signal coordination	35%
Difficulty when walking	26%
Vehicles blocking entrances	23%
Difficulty accessing businesses	17%
Difficulty when riding a bicycle	17%
Other	11%

 

What mode(s) of travel do you use when traveling in the area on Route 67 at the Route 460 Exit 2 ramps?
Personal vehicle	99%
Walking	99%
Truck or commercial vehicle	7%
Cycling	5%
Carpool / Vanpool	1%
Regional transit	1%
Other	1%
Taxi / Uber / Lyft	0%

 

The following needs have been identified for the study areas along Front Street and 2nd Street. Do you agree with these needs?
Safety improvement	82%
Congestion mitigation	61%
Transportation demand management (TD)	48%

 

Rank the following needs in order of importance to you for the study areas along Front Street and 2nd Street.
Proper pavement marking and signage	74%
Pedestrian safety and accessibility	71%
Corridor safety / intersection safety	67%
Reducing traffic congestion	65%
Bicycle safety and accessibility	59%
Speeding / aggressive driving	57%
Public transit access and service	54%

 

Which of the following safety issues concern you for the study areas along Front Street and 2nd Street?
Inadequate pavement marking and signage	63%
Insufficient / missing crosswalks and pedestrian signal timing	55%
Speeding / aggressive driving	48%
Lack of sidewalks / missing sidewalks	43%
Sudden stopping / rear-end crashes	35%
Lack of ADA ramps and accessibility	28%
Inadequate lighting	27%
Difficulty weaving / merging	26%
Inadequate bicycle facilities	24%
Inadequate transit / bus stops	20%
Side-impact crashes	18%
Running red lights	17%
Closely spaced driveways	10%
Other	2%

 

What mobility issues do you typically experience when using the study areas along Front Street and 2nd Street?
Difficulty accessing businesses	53%
Lack of turn lanes	40%
Vehicles blocking entrances	38%
Poor signal coordination	35%
Difficulty when walking	29%
Difficulty making left turns	29%
Difficulty when riding a bicycle	15%
Other	9%

 

What mode(s) of travel do you use when traveling in the study areas along Front Street and 2nd Street?
Personal vehicle	98%
Walking	17%
Truck or commercial vehicle	13%
Cycling	4%
Carpool / Vanpool	3%
Regional transit	1%
Taxi / Uber / Lyft	0%
Other	0%

 

BR-25-03 Phase 1 Executive Summary - PDF, 6.5MB

The Phase 2 survey regarding proposed alternatives for Route 67, specifically at the Route 460 Exit 2 ramps, and along Front Street and 2nd Street in downtown Richlands was completed in December 2025.

Dates	Number of Participants (unique individuals)
December 8-29, 2025	88

 

Route 67 at Route 460 Exit 2 Ramps  

The proposed alternative is to narrow the road to reduce traffic speeds and left-turn crashes on Route 67 at the Exit 2 Ramps. This would require drivers to travel the posted 25 mph speed limit through the Exit 2 interchange. The proposed improvements will accommodate all interchange traffic, including large trucks, with no impact on roadway congestion. 

The proposed improvements will improve safety and operations and reduce crashes by making the following changes: 

• Improving sight distance by slowing down traffic on Route 67 approaching the Exit 2 ramps, while having no impact on roadway congestion 
• Minimizing confusion as to which lane of traffic approaching Route 67 drivers are traveling in 
• Lowering the speed at which crashes occur along Route 67, reducing collision severity 

Please rate the proposed improvement that will modify the interchange of Route 67 and Route 460 in order to improve safety and operations. Rate the concept on a scale of 1 to 5. (86 responses)

	1. Strongly oppose	2. Somewhat oppose	3. Neutral	4. Somewhat support	5. Strongly support
Narrow road to reduce traffic speeds and left-turn crashes on Route 67	36%	13%	19%	15%	17%

 

Downtown Richlands 

The study team has developed a set of alternatives for the streets in downtown Richlands. These alternatives include both intersection improvements and modifications to the number and width of travel and parking lanes within the street. The following section of the survey will ask for feedback on what each individual street in Richlands could look like in the future. It will then show two examples of these street improvements implemented in a combined nature across Richlands.

1. Intersection Improvements

The installation of curb bulb-outs at select locations along Front Street and 2nd Street is proposed as an enhancement for pedestrian visibility in crosswalks and a traffic calming measure. Curb bulb-outs, which extend the curb line into the parking lane at intersections or at mid-block crossing locations, reduce pedestrian crossing distances and improve sight lines between drivers and pedestrians. An example of a curb bulb-out is shown in the image below. Additional crosswalks are also proposed to improve pedestrian connectivity along the corridor.  

The proposed introduction of curb bulb-outs and crosswalk enhancements along Front Street and 2nd Street will support corridor operations and pedestrian mobility by making the following changes: 

• Improving pedestrian visibility at intersections and mid-block crossing locations. 
• Shortening crossing distances for pedestrians along Front Street and 2nd Street. 
• Enhancing pedestrian connectivity through the addition of new crosswalks. 
• Introducing traffic-calming elements that influence driver behavior and roadway character. 

Additional pavement marking, signage, and traffic signal upgrades are also proposed to improve information conveyed to road users. 

Please rate the proposed intersection improvements on a scale of 1 to 5. (69 responses)

	1. Strongly oppose	2. Somewhat oppose	3. Neutral	4. Somewhat support	5. Strongly support
Introduce curb bulb-outs and enhanced crosswalks	19%	12%	17%	28%	25%
Upgrade pavement markings, signage, and traffic signals	8%	5%	14%	18%	55%

 

2. 2nd Street: Front Street to Railroad Avenue

In existing conditions, 2nd Street has two travel lanes and two parallel, on-street parking lanes. In proposed conditions, 2nd Street would be restriped to a single travel lane and an angled parking lane. 

3. Front Street: Veterans Drive to 2nd Street

Front Street varies in width throughout Richlands, ranging from 42 feet in width between Veterans Drive and Railroad Avenue to 50 feet in width between Railroad Avenue and Scott Street. From Veterans Drive to 2nd Street, in existing conditions, Front Street has two wide travel lanes and two parallel, on-street parking lanes. In proposed conditions, Front Street could be restriped to either two narrower travel lanes or a single travel lane. In the two travel lanes scenario, the parking options vary by width of the roadway. In the single travel lane scenario, one angled parking lane and one parallel parking lane can be provided.  

4. Railroad Avenue: 2nd Street to Front Street

In existing conditions, for just the one block between 2nd Street and Front Street, Railroad Avenue is two lanes southbound only. North of 2nd Street and south of Front Street, Railroad Avenue is a two-way street with one travel lane per direction. In proposed conditions, the block of Railroad Avenue between 2nd Street and Front Street would also be converted to a two-way street with one travel lane per direction.  

5. Suffolk Avenue: Front Street to 2nd Street

In existing conditions, Suffolk Avenue from Front Street to 2nd Street is two narrow travel lanes, a parallel parking lane, and a very narrow angled parking lane. In proposed conditions, Suffolk Avenue would be restriped to a single wider travel lane, a parallel parking lane, and a standard width angled parking lane. The angled parking lane would flip to the other side of the street so that northbound traffic at the 2nd Street traffic signal is aligned with the travel lane on the far side of the intersection.  

6. Scott Street: 2nd Street to Front Street

In existing conditions, Scott Street is two lanes southbound only, providing limited network connectivity. In proposed conditions, Scott Street would be converted to a two-way street with one travel lane per direction. 

Please rate the proposed alternatives that will modify 2nd Street and Front Street in order to calm traffic, improve safety, and enhance pedestrian and parking access to local businesses. Rate the concepts on a scale of 1 to 5. (64 responses) 

	1. Strongly oppose	2. Somewhat oppose	3. Neutral	4. Somewhat support	5. Strongly support
Reconfigure 2nd Street to include one travel lane and angled parking	53%	17%	9%	9%	11%
Reconfigure Front Street to include two travel lanes and on-street parking	23%	11%	18%	21%	26%
Reconfigure Front Street to include one travel lane, one lane of angled parking, and one lane of parallel parking	63%	15%	3%	13%	6%

 

Please rate the proposed improvement alternatives that will convert Railroad Avenue to two-way traffic, modify Suffolk Avenue, and convert Scott Street to two-way traffic. Please rate the concepts on a scale of 1 to 5. (59 responses)

	1. Strongly oppose	2. Somewhat oppose	3. Neutral	4. Somewhat support	5. Strongly support
Reconfigure Railroad Avenue to allow two-way traffic	24%	17%	12%	20%	27%
Reconfigure Suffolk Avenue to include a single travel lane and wider parking	34%	14%	14%	19%	20%
Reconfigure Scott Street to allow two-way traffic	22%	12%	17%	17%	31%

 

7. Examples of Town-Wide Implementation

Each of the previously presented intersection or street improvement alternatives could be joined together in various combinations to create a project that enhances all of downtown Richlands. The study team prepared two possible combinations to visualize what such a project could look like; however, the two graphics shared in the survey do not represent the only possible project combinations.  

The first combination concept visualizes the following improvement features: 

• Reconfigured 2nd Street with one travel lane and an angled parking lane 
• Reconfigured Front Street with one travel lane, an angled parking lane, and a parallel parking lane 
• Two-way Railroad Avenue between 2nd Street and Front Street 
• Reconfigured Suffolk Avenue with one travel lane, a wider angled parking lane, and a parallel parking lane 
• Two-way Scott Street between 2nd Street and Front Street 
• Intersection improvements including curb bulb-outs, enhanced crosswalks, improved pavement markings, and traffic signal upgrades. 
• Sidewalk extensions adjacent to Railroad Avenue at 2nd Street and Front Street 

This project combination would provide essentially the same number of parking spaces that are currently within downtown Richlands. 

The 14 comments submitted on the proposed first combination of improvements will be summarized in the final report.

The second combination concept focuses on slowing down traffic and making 2nd Street and Front Street friendlier for pedestrians. 

• Slower Traffic Pattern: The design changes the road from a straight line to gentle "S" curve (known as a chicane). This naturally forces drivers to reduce their speed. 
• Single Lane: Both streets will be converted to one travel lane for vehicles. 
• Better Walking Environment: Narrowing the road allows for wider sidewalks and more greenery. This makes the downtown area more attractive and easier to walk around. 
• Parking Impact: While angled and parallel parking will be kept where possible, this design will remove approximately one-third of the existing parking spaces on these streets. 

The 12 comments submitted on the proposed second combination of project features will be summarized in the final report.