061-07RESOLUTION
HARD SURFACE IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
RATING SYSTEM POLICY
WHEREAS, the Frederick County Transportation Committee and the Frederick
County planning staff reviewed the procedures for the Hard Surface Improvement Project Rating
System Policy for Frederick County; and,
WHEREAS, the Frederick County Transportation Committee, at its meeting on March
26, 2007, supports these procedures; and,
WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors held a public hearing on this policy on Apri125,
2007 and supports these procedures for the Hard Surface Improvement Project Rating System
Policy;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Frederick County Board of
Supervisors as follows:
The Hard Surface Road Improvement Project Rating System Policy section of the
Frederick County Secondary Road Improvement Plan appears to be in the best interest of
the public health, safety, and welfare of the citizens of Frederick County; and therefore,
the Frederick County Board of Supervisors hereby approves these procedures to delineate
the steps necessary for the application and ranking of projects for the Hard Surface
Improvement Project Rating System Policy at their public hearing held on April 25,
2007.
This resolution shall be in effect on the date of adoption.
This resolution was approved by the following recorded vote:
Aye Barbara E. Van Osten Aye
Richard C. Shickle, Chairman
Gary W. Dove
Gene E. Fisher
Philip A. Lemieux
Aye Bill M. Ewing Aye
Aye Chazles S. DeHaven, Jr. Aye
Aye
A COPY ATTEST
PDR #29-07
John ey, Jr.
Frederic County Administrator
BOS Resolution ak061-07
CC2U?~TTY of 1{REDERYCl~
Departnsent of Planning and F3eveloprnent
540/665-5651
FA%_ 540/665-6395
MEMORANDUM
TO: Board of Supervisors
FROM: Jolul A. Bishop AICP, Transportation Pl
RE: Hard Surface Improvement Project Rating System Policy update
DATE: April 18, 2007
Staff is submitting for your consideration as a public hearing item the work done by the
Transportation Committee and Staff to update the Frederick County Hard Surface Improvement
Project Rating System Policy.
At the request of the Board of Supervisors, the Transportation Committee has undertaken two
tasks in regard to the Hard Surface Improvement Project Rating System Policy:
1. Task 1 was a clean up and update of the language in the policy to recognize areas
where the existing language could be improved upon or clarified. Attached please
find a redline version of that update as well as a clean copy of the update.
2. Task 2 was to review the scoring sheet in an attempt to improve upon that process.
Staff and the Transportation Committee identified a number of scoring categories that
appear to give advantage to segments of greater length and have suggested
corrections to equalize that issue. In addition, the recommendation has been made to
decrease points for `time on plan' for roadways that have been on the plan for 5 years
or less and to increase point for `time on plan' for all other roadways. Attached
please find a redline version of the suggested changes in addition to a clean version of
the updated scoring sheet. Staff has also included two tables that show the difference
between the existing and suggested scoring system.
The Transportation Committee had its final review of these changes on Mazch 26, 2007 and
voted to forward the updates to the Board of Supervisors.
JAB/dlw
Attaclunents
107 I~?arth 1£ent Street, Suite 2t-2 ~vir~chester, ~%=:rginia 226€61-1000
HARD SURFACE IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
RATING SYSTEM POLICY
Adopted by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors on ~'~`,.R,._ ? 7°n"'
The following procedures are intended to delineate the steps necessary for the application
of this rating system policy. Adherence to these procedures will ensure consistency in
the application of this rating system policy for existing. and future hard surface road
improvement project requests. This policy shall be effective following the adoption of
these procedures through a public hearing process held by the Board of Supervisors and
shall only be altered through the same process. Information pertaining to the rating
system application for each hard surface road improvement project shall be maintained in
the Frederick County Planning Department ~aJse-systee~.
The Board of Supervisors shall have the authority to revise the Hard Surface Road
Improvement Projects section of the Frederick County Secondary Road Improvement
Plan subsequent to the application of the rating system to ensure the health, safety, and
general welfare of the citizens of Frederick County
.RATING SYSTEM REVIEW AGENCIES
• Candidate projects shall be mated evaluated by the Frederick County Planning
Department, the Frederick County Transportation Committee, and the Virginia
Department of Transportation (VDOT).
• One rating sheet shall be prepared for each candidate project ~.~:..~,r
eat~~.
• Staff from the Frederick County Planning Department and YDOT shall
coordinate to complete a rating sheet for each candidate project and submit the
results to the Transportation Committee for review.
RATING SYSTEM APPLICATION METHODOLOGY
• Candidate projects shall be rated utilizing the following information and
methodology detailed on the scoring sheet for each category:
Average Daily Traffic Count -utilize the most recent traffic counts for each
candidate project provided by the VDOT residency.
2. Occupied Structures -utilize the Frederick County Planning Department
addressing database and digital mapping system to determine the total number
of occupied structures that have duect access to, or whose only means of
ingress and egress from a private road is achieved by each candidate project.
3. Physical Road Conditions/Safety
a. Surface Width -obtain surface width data for each candidate project
through the VDOT Residency
b. Shoulder Width -obtain shoulder width data for each candidate project
through the VDOT Residency .
2
a Horizontal Curvature -horizontal curvature is determined to be deficient
if sight distance azound the curve is limited by cut sections or vegetation _
traveling at normal driving speeds.
d. Vertical Curvature -vertical curvature is determined to be deficient if
sight distance is significantly reduced ar eliminated due to the rise and fall
of the road segment traveling at normal driving speeds.
e. Drainage -candidate projects shall be determined to have good, fair, or
poor drainage utilizing the following guidelines.
Good: Pipes are of adequate size and number. Water drains away from the
roadway and creates no problem with surface maintenance.
Ditches are of adequate size which produce no flooding within the
roadway.
Fair: .Pipes are of adequate size; however, additional pipes may be
needed. Water drains away from the roadway with minimal
maintenance problems. Drainage ditches aze in good condition,
require litkle maintenance, and produce no flooding within the
roadway.
Poor: Pipes are not adequate in size or • number. Ditch .lines are _
inadequate and require extra maintenance water does not drain
from the roadway effectively, creating maintenance problems and
flooding.
f. Accident Data -obtain crash data detailing the number of accidents in the
most recent data year available
from the VDOT Residency
4. School Bus Travel -utilize information reflecting current or proposed school
bus travel routes for each candidate project provided by the Frederick County
Public Schools Transportation Supervisor.
5. Time on Road Plan -utilize information from current and previously
approved Frederick County Secondary Road Improvement Plans maintained
within the Frederick County Planning Department to determine when
candidate projects were incorporated.
3
RATING SYSTEM POINTS APPLICATION
• Total points are determined for each category element. A cumulative total is
obtained for each candidate project utilizing the total points derived from each
category element.
r a r
• b ~epa~e$t heel} r~vievr• e$4iE4~es A~ $F~ra~e~
'=ice= ~.~
• If two or more candidate projects have the same cumulative point average, atie-
- breaking system will be utilized. First priority will be given to the project that
has been on the road plan longer. Following that each affected candidate
project will be compared to the others starting with the category of greatest
weight and working through the categories of lesser weights respectively until the
tie is broken.
• The cumulative point average for each candidate project shall be final Any
citizen request to alter the termini of a current candidate project and
subsequent Board action will require a new rating sheet to be completed for the
resulting segment(s). The resulting segment(s) will retain the `time on road
plan' date of the previous segment.
HARD SURFACE ROAD IlVIPROVEMENT PLAN FORMAT
• The Hazd Surface Road Improvement Projects section of the Frederick County
Secondary Road Improvement Plan will reflect the candidate projects with the
highest cumulative point ~e~ege total that can be incorporated into the VDOT
Six-Yeaz ~isea~ltta Improvement Program based on available funding. This
information will be provided to the Frederick County Planning Department by the
VDOT Residency.
• All remaining candidate projects will be placed on an Unscheduled Hard Surface
Improvement Projects list which will be incorporated within the Frederick County
Secondary Road Improvement Plan. Candidate projects incorporated into this
section of the plan will be ranked from the highest cumulative point average total
to the lowest cumulative point ~ave~age total.
4
• VDOT will advise the Frederick County Transportation Committee when funding
is available for the inclusion of new candidate projects within the Hard Surface
Road hmprovement Projects section of the Frederick County Secondary Road
Improvement Plan. All candidate projects placed on the Unscheduled Hard
Surface Improvement Projects list, as well as newly requested candidate projects,
will be reviewed by the procedure detailed above to
determine current conditions. Appropriate ranking for all candidate projects will
be determined at that time and placed accordingly.
NEW PROJECT REQUESTS
• .New project requests and supporting materials must be received by the
Frederick County Planning Department by April 1~' to be included in the next
plan update.
• A written request must be provided to the Frederick County Planning Department
which describes the location of the candidate project, the origin and terminus of
the segment, and a petition signed by at least 51 % of all property owners fronting
on the proposed segment
a a• a; ~, .ia «~ ,.. a ..~.ie .,
r ~'~i ~ o
• The Transportation Committee shall recommend new project requests which meet
these criteria after determining that the candidate project includes a segment of a
state route that has a rational origin and terminus.. The Transportation
Committee shall have the authority to adjust the project origin and terminus to
create a more rational segment at their discretion.
PROJECT REMOVAL
• Road Improvements projects shall be removed from the plan once VDOT has
notified Frederick County that the project has been funded and advertised for bid.
• The Board of Supervisors may remove projects from the plan if VDOT has
provided notification that right-of--way efforts have been ceased.
5
HARD SURFACE IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
RATING SYSHM POLICY
Adopted by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors on .4pYil 2.i, 2007:
The following procedures are intended to delineate the steps necessary for the application
of this rating system policy. Adherence to these procedures will ensure consistency in
the application of this rating system policy for existing and future hard surface road
improvement project requests. This policy shall be effective following the adoption of
these procedures through a public hearing process held by the Board of Supervisors and
shall only be altered through the same process. Information pertaining to the rating
system application for each hard surface road improvement project shall be maintained in
the Frederick County Planning Department.
The Board of Supervisors shall have the authority to revise the Hard Surface Road
Improvement Projects section of the Frederick County Secondary Road Improvement
Plan subsequent to the application of the rating system to ensure the health, safety, and
general welfare of the citizens of Frederick County
RATING SYSTEM REVIEW AGENCIES
• Candidate projects shall be evaluated by the Frederick County Planning
Department, the Frederick County Transportation Committee, and the Virginia
Department of Transportation (VDOT}.
• One rating sheet shall be prepared for each candidate project.
• Staff from the Frederick County Planning Department and VDOT shall coordinate
to complete a rating sheet for each candidate project and submit the results to the
Transportation Committee for review.
RATING SYSTEM APPLICATION METHODOLOGY
• Candidate projects shall be rated utilizing the following information and
methodology detailed on the scoring sheet for each category:
Average Daily Traffic Count -utilize the most recent traffic counts for each
candidate project provided by the VDOT residency.
2. Occupied Structures -utilize the Frederick County Planning Department
addressing database and digital mapping system to determine-the total number
- of occupied structures that have direct access to, or whose only means of
ingress and egress from a private road is achieved by each candidate project.
3. Physical Road Conditions/Safety
a. Surface Width -obtain surface width data for each candidate project
through the VDOT Residency.
b. Shoulder Width -obtain shoulder width data for each candidate project
through the VDOT Residency.
c. Horizontal Curvature -horizontal curvature is determined to be deficient
if sight distance azound the curve is limited by cut sections or vegetation
traveling at normal driving speeds.
d. Vertical Curvature -vertical curvature is determined to be deficient if
sight distance is significantly reduced or eliminated due to the rise and fall
of the road segment traveling at normal driving speeds.
e. Drainaee -candidate projects shall be determined to have good, fair, or
poor drainage utilizing the following guidelines.
2
Good: Pipes are of adequate size and number. Water drains away from the
roadway and creates no problem with surface maintenance.
Ditches are of adequate size which produce no flooding within the
roadway.
Fair: Pipes are of adequate size; however, additional pipes may be
needed. Water drains away from the roadway with minimal
maintenance problems. Drainage ditches aze in good condition,
require little maintenance, and produce no flooding within the
roadway.
Poor: Pipes are not adequate in size or number. Ditch lines are
inadequate and require extra maintenance water does not drain
from the roadway effectively, creating maintenance problems and
flooding.
f. Accident Data -obtain- crash data detailing the number of accidents in the
most recent data year available from the VDOT Residency.
4. School Bus Travel -utilize information reflecting current or proposed school
bus travel routes for each candidate project provided by the Frederick County
Public Schools Transportation Supervisor.
5. Time on Road Plan -utilize information from current and previously
approved Frederick County Secondary Road Improvement Plans maintained
within the Frederick County Planning Department to determine when
candidate projects were incorporated.
3
RATING SYSTEM POINTS APPLICATION
• Total points aze determined for each category element. A cumulative total is
obtained for each candidate project utilizing the total points derived from each
category element.
• If two or more candidate projects have the same cumulative point average, atie-
breaking system will be utilized. First prioriTy will be given to the project that has
been on the road plan longer. Following that each affected candidate project will
be compared to the others starting with the category of greatest weight and
working through the categgries of lesser weights respectively until the tie is
broken.
• The cumulative point average for each candidate project shall be final. Any
citizen request to alter the termini of a current candidate project and subsequent
Board action will require a-new rating sheet to be completed for the resulting
segment(s). The resulting segment(s) will retain the `time on road plan' date of
the previous segment.
IIAlRD SURFACE ROAD IMPROVEMENT PLAN FORMAT
• The Hard Surface Road Improvement Projects section of the Frederick County
~~ Secondary Road Improvement Plan will reflect the candidate projects with the
highest cumulative point total that can be incorporated into the VDOT Six-Year
Improvement Program based on available funding. This information will be
provided to the Frederick County Planning Department by the VDOT Residency.
• All remaining candidate. projects will be placed on an Unscheduled Hard Surface
Improvement Projects list which will be incorporated within the Frederick County
Secondary Road Improvement Plan. Candidate projects incorporated into this
section of the plan will be ranked from the highest cumulative point total to the
lowest cumulative point total.
• VDOT will advise the Frederick County Transportation Committee when funding
is available for the inclusion of new candidate projects within the Hard Surface
Road Improvement Projects section of the Frederick County Secondary Road
Improvement Plan. All candidate projects placed on the Unscheduled Hard
Surface Improvement Projects list, as well as newly requested candidate projects,
will be reviewed by the procedure detailed above to determine current conditions.
Appropriate ranking for all candidate projects will be determined at that time and
placed accordingly.
NEW PROJECT REQUESTS
4
• New project requests and supporting materials must be received by the Frederick -
County Planning Department by April 15~ to be included in the next plan update.
• A written request must be provided to the Frederick County Planning Department
which describes the location of the candidate project, the origin and terminus of
the segment, and a petition signed by at least 51% of all property owners fronting
on the proposed- segment.
• The Transportation Committee shall recommend new project requests which meet
these criteria after dete~+~ning that the candidate project includes a segment of a
state route that has a rational origin and terminnus. The Transportation Committee
shall have the authority to adjust the project origin and terminus to create a more
rational segment at their discretion.
PROJECT REMOVAL
• Road Improvements projects shall be removed from the plan once VDOT has
notified Frederick County that the project has been funded and advertised for bid.
• The Board of Supervisors may remove projects from the plan if VDOT has
provided notification that right-of--way efforts have been ceased.
5
Rural Roadways Harm Surfarinn ~rnrinn Chart
Road Name: From: Segment Length:
Route Number. To: Number of 1/4 miles:
Category Criteria Weight Total Points
./, ....
- ~'~7-99 'vX~
{~81--7-59 33F3
l A
1
A~
~ .'V~ .
~
~
~~~y
i°T'°°T~ ~i~
1) Average Daily
Traffic Counf 3+ (3 per each 50J NA
"'~ 3~#
"\~ 3~
,~9 3*3
/"~ 3x4
2) Occupied Structures (1) 1-70 (3x1)/number of 1/4 miles
(2) 11-25 (3x2)/number of 1/4 miles
(3) 26-50 (3x3)/number of 1/4 miles
(4) 51+ (3x4)/number of 1/4 miles
3) Physical Road
Conditions/Safety _.
a) Surface Width (4) 10'-12' 4x4
(3) 12.1' - 14' 4x3
(2) 14.1' - 16' 4x2
(1) 16'+ 4x1
b) oulder Width (4) 0' 4x4
(3) 1' 4x3
(2) 2' 4x2
(1) 3'+
11 F
L 4x1
... c. nh ..
~
c) Horizontal Curvature (1) for each occurance
/A \ F number of 1/4 miles
... e.~..M ..
x num er o occurances
d) Vertical Curvature (1) for each occurance number of 1/4 miles
e) Drainage (1) good 4x1
(2) fair 4x2
(3) poor 4x3
f) Accident Data (1) 1-5 per year 4x1
(2) 6-10 per year 4x2
(3) 10+ per year 4x3
4) School Bus Travel (1) Yes 5x1
(2) No 5x0
/71 C~c~v-iv7cvr~.s 'Vn.
~~ iYkV
5) Time on Road Plan (1) 0-5 years 4x0
(2) 5-10 years 4x2
(3) 11+ years 4x3
Gh,,,JD TOTAL FOR ALL CATEGORIES------------- ---- __ ____~_
Rural Raadwavs Hard Surfacing Scoring Sheet
Road Name: From: Segment Length:
Route Number: To: Number of 1!4 miles:
Category Criteria Weight Tofal Points
1) Average Daily
Traffic Count 3+ (3 per each 50) NA
2) Occupied Structures (1) 1-10 (3x1)/number of 1!4 miles
(2) 11-25 (3x2)/number of 1/4 miles
(3} 26-50 (3x3)/number of 1/4 miles
(4) 51+ (3x4)/number of 1/4 miles
3) Physical Road
CondRionslSafety
a) Surface Width (4) 10'-12' 4x4
(3) 12.1' - 14' 4x3
(2) 14.1' - 16' 4x2
(1) 16'+ 4x1
b) Shoulder Width (4) 0' 4x4
(3) 1' 4x3
(2) 2' 4x2
(1) 3'+ 4x1
c u nce
c) Horizontal Curvature (1) for each occurance number of 1/4 miles
x num er o occurances
d) Vertical Curvature (1) for each occurance number of 1/4 miles
e) Drainage (1) good 4x1
(2) fair 4x2
(3) poor 4x3
f) Accident Data (1) 1-5 per year 4x1
(2) 6-1 D per year 4x2
(3) 10+ per year 4x3
4) School Bus Travel. (1) Yes 5x1
(2) No 5x0
5} Time on Road Plan (1) 0-5 years 4x0
(2) 5-10 years 4x2
(3) 11+ years 4x3
GRAND TOTAL FOR ALL CATEGORIES- -
L
r~
.~
Q1
R
Z
O Y
O C
O R
N ~
~
r
r O O O O 07 6] 01 O 1 OD O CO O ~ N ti ~ n O ~
r r r r
CO ~ C' CD CO CO CD (6 CD N (O N (D N CO CO CO (O CO CD CO
t17 tfy tf? t0 l1~ In lt7 ~ [f> lf ) ~O O M tf) O O 40 47 ~ 4i O
R O ~ tO O ~ 0 0 0 0 0 ~ ~ ' V '7 0 0 0 0 0 0
N N N 00 W a ~ N c0 N CO N N N o7 Op N N N N cp o~
r r r r r r r r r r r
CO
' O O et CO N N t9 ~ [fl (O aD OD O W OD eY ~ o~ N O
r N N N r r r r r r
N O d' O N V tt N O CO aD (p aD O~ N ~p ~ N O O
M N N N N r N N M N r r r r r
O~ N N N N N N N N Cfl N CD N CD N N N N W N N
r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r
O CD to N N N N N CO N N N N CO N fD [t N C CC ~'
r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r
W O O CO O N
r O O O Q M O CO O CO M (O M O M O
N
r N
r t0
r O) N
r tf)
r O CO M CD O O M l0
r l0
r O O) 1.()
r W ~
r lC)
~-
Ch CO O~ tf') M M r l1') '(p W W ~ O CV r N r M M t!7 lf')
r r r N ~ O r r 0 0 ~ O r O ~` ~ O r. N N
O r O O O O
r O ~ N i+ I~ N r O h O N U1 N N O ~O N ~ r r
h r N N O h N 'fit O f~ LO C C 1~ C O M C 61 r ~
CO CD CO *O N ~ t
O CO CO CO t~ J J O J ~D N J CO O
*
~ x
7
i }
> [6
U
O N r N 0 ~ N O O d' 47 O N CO O O O O N l0 r
O C M N l0 I~ N C O ~O N (O N I` 47 O O CO. N M f~
*D J fD (O (D *O fD CD (O CO CO t o CO CO 1~ CD LL~ O O
N I~ O O M (D ~ fD N O 00 r l f) 1 ~ V I~ O <- O a r
O O N N M I~ M M r M M CO W N CY O M I~ O M r
cD t~ [D CD N CO I~ CO O h Q O O O O CD CD CO CO c0 o~
a Y
° a
~ " O
~ N
a
~
~ i
a
U
a
~ a
a~
~ a
~
c
~ N ~' ~ N a
' a
' ~ J
N > a C Q C Y p C ~ Q L N
o` ff ~ ~ ~ ~ ° °~ ° ° a ~t i.E Y ~ a a E ~ ~
Y O . O„ N V E
' L O N ~ Y L O m
a a L N a
O L
~' "' O
L
O
f6 =
O fQ ~ . .J
N f6 C
O C
O L
to ~
I ~
6 ' C : Q 'a ~ ' ~
~ ~
7 O
d
S
U ~p
Jt
i
~
Z
Ut.
~ (6
m
U
~i
~O
W
S
S
~f O
A O
U
H
r N M ~ t 17 C O I ~ O J O O r N M I t 0 C O N O ~ 61 O r
r r r r r r r r r r N N
N
a
O
N
N
L
y
d)
C
O
U
N
O
7
.~
a
C
.~
N
fp
N
7
C
.~
[6
~x
O
Q
Q
f~
N
N
O
C
O
a
s
W
~ f~
CO r
~ t~ O
1~
I~ S t0
(p
h 11
N
~ ) N T O
r O CD
~ ~,O ~
O
cp !~ M
M M
(O f0 ~ !~
O C,4
CO (p
En
f0 V (~
~ r
O Cp M V
(p r
O .-
O
lCi i~ O
O~
O O
N N
r r N
r 00 N
r N ap N
r ~~ N
T N N
r r O CV
r N
r N N
r r N O
~~ N
r O N
r
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0
v o a- o o v v o 0 0 'c v o 0 0 0 o v o 0 0
a D N
r [O N
r N
r N N 00
r r OD N N
r r OD O] N
r N Op 00 N
T N
r OJ N
r
T
(
M M
DM
M 1~
~
N M
T
(°7 O
O
M Cp N C3
aD f~O '
N N M O
O
117 Cp N
ON
N N O O
OO
O O M
t.O
O O N
C'CO
N N O O
OO
O r r
6s
o ~~
V ~
~ r
T
(D
M M
M
M ti
V
N M
T
M O
O
CD r O~
1~ ~ O
tf) N M p
O
117 ~~
O t?
M R ti O
CD O
r 0 O
O
r.[3 O O
X 0
N V O O
0 O
O T ~
Cp
M (p r
~ M
47 (y
N N N N ~~ m ~i A~ ... ~. ~. .~ _. _ _
a
0
w
m
t
w
a~
c
.`
0
U
f6
.~
'a
c
.~
m
y
N
C
.~
N
N
(6
X
O
Q
Q
f6
y
N
O
C
N
O