VDOT presents Floyd County six‑year road plan; residents urge keeping Sunny Ridge, Reedsville and other roads on priority list

Virginia Department of Transportation resident engineer David Clark presented the draft secondary six‑year construction plan to Floyd County supervisors and opened a joint public hearing, telling the board the draft is built from last year’s plan minus completed projects and that the county will be able to add several roads before the final resolution is submitted.

Clark explained constraints that affect how far projects can extend in a single contract: environmental regulations that limit the acreage of disturbance without a stormwater management pond and the need for right‑of‑way agreements with property owners. “We’re not able to go all the way to Wade due to a restriction in environmental policy…other environmental agencies have limited VDOT to an acre of disturbance of land unless you build a stormwater management pond,” Clark said, explaining why the Reedsville Road project will end at the first bridge rather than the previously planned second bridge.

Clark also noted funding rules tied to “unimproved road” monies: paving funds that are 90% designated for previously unpaved roads and available only for segments that meet a minimum traffic count (50 vehicles per day). That threshold affects whether some roads can use the county’s unpaid‑road allocation.

Public commenters asked the board to keep several roads on the six‑year priority list. Jonathan Best, Resident, Sunny Ridge Road, submitted a petition and told the board Sunny Ridge has 26 residents and that both ends of the road were prepared previously, asking the county to keep Sunny Ridge on the plan until it is paved “from one side to the other.” “We’d like to see Sunny Ridge remain in the 6‑year plan until we see it paved from 1 side to the other,” Best said.

Chip Gan, Resident, Sandy Flats Road, described a stretch that was paved up to one point and then dropped, leaving narrow one‑car sections and deep potholes that, he said, impede school buses and emergency vehicles. “There are places there…It’s basically you have 1 car width of road,” Gan said, urging the county to consider continued maintenance and possible paving.

Jack Wall, Little River District, said heavy truck traffic to a local biochar business has increased wear on a short gravel section of Sam’s Road and asked the county to consider paving the two‑tenths‑of‑a‑mile heavily traveled entrance. Several other residents urged the board to retain Reedsville Road as a top priority even though the current VDOT project will be shorter than initially planned because of environmental limits, and to add other segments that are critical for emergency access and school buses.

Clark told the board Reedsville Road remains the top priority and that work already underway will be funded; he warned the board that environmental and right‑of‑way constraints sometimes force projects to be shortened mid‑engineering. “We had hoped to get to the second bridge…and we ran into the acre of disturbance limit,” Clark said.

Several speakers suggested that residents along target roads be consulted about easements and right‑of‑way needs and offered to provide land access where feasible. Board members and VDOT staff said they expect to refine the priority list and present a resolution before the end of the fiscal year; Clark said the county will likely be able to add three or four roads to the draft plan depending on funding and right‑of‑way outcomes.

Ending: The board took public comment and closed the hearing; supervisors said they will review the draft plan and may adopt a resolution later this spring after further review and possible site visits. VDOT will return with a final prioritized list for board action before the fiscal‑year deadline.