TC 05-11-99 Meeting AgendaMEMORANDUM
TO: Frederick County Transportation Committee
FROM: Michael T. Ruddy, Planner H
RE: May Meeting and Agenda
DATE: April 29, 1999
There will be a meeting of the Frederick County Transportation Committee on Tuesday, May 11,
1999 at 7:30 p.m., in the Board Meeting Room in the County Administration Building, 107 North
Kent Street, Winchester, Virginia. The Transportation Committee will discuss the following items:
AGENDA
1) Discussion regarding request by VDOT to change the stop condition at the intersection of
Route 1200, Baker Lane, and Route 1322, Fort Collier Road.
2) Discussion regarding a request by VDOT to remove a section of Route 629, Laurel Grove
Road, from the Secondary Road Improvement Plan for New Hardsurfacing
3) Other.
Information pertaining to each agenda item is enclosed. Please contact our department if you have
any questions regarding this information, or if you are unable to attend this meeting.
1-07 _Nlortli Ke-nt Street . Winchester, Virginia 22601-5660
J
'COUNTY of FR ED Ej i C1
TTom�++,,
0 !mia 131',- -and ;i evelf1dPm:en,
FA _X: 540/573-0632
MEMORANDUM
TO: Frederick County Transportation Committee
FROM: Michael T. Ruddy, Planner H
RE: May Meeting and Agenda
DATE: April 29, 1999
There will be a meeting of the Frederick County Transportation Committee on Tuesday, May 11,
1999 at 7:30 p.m., in the Board Meeting Room in the County Administration Building, 107 North
Kent Street, Winchester, Virginia. The Transportation Committee will discuss the following items:
AGENDA
1) Discussion regarding request by VDOT to change the stop condition at the intersection of
Route 1200, Baker Lane, and Route 1322, Fort Collier Road.
2) Discussion regarding a request by VDOT to remove a section of Route 629, Laurel Grove
Road, from the Secondary Road Improvement Plan for New Hardsurfacing
3) Other.
Information pertaining to each agenda item is enclosed. Please contact our department if you have
any questions regarding this information, or if you are unable to attend this meeting.
1-07 _Nlortli Ke-nt Street . Winchester, Virginia 22601-5660
Item #I
Change in stop condition at Route 1200, Baker Lane and Route 1322, Fort
Collier Road.
The Frederick County Transportation Committee has received a request from the Virginia
Department of Transportation to change the stop condition at the intersection of Route 1200, Baker
Lane, and Route 1322, Fort Collier Road. VDOT is recommending that the stop condition is changed
due to the accident experience at this intersection. Signalization at this time is not recommended due
to the traffic counts, good sight -distance, and relatively low speed limits.
VDOT officials will be available at the Transportation Committee meeting to discuss this request
in greater detail.
COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DAVID R. GEHR EDINBURG RESIDENCY
COMMISSIONER 14031 OLD VALLEY PIKE
P.O. BOX 278
EDINBURG, VA 22824-0278
March 15, 1999
Mr. Mike Ruddy
Frederick County Planning Department
107 North Kent Street
Winchester, VA 22601
JERRY A- COPP
RESIDENT ENGINEER
TELE(540)984-5600
FAX(540)984-5607
Ref: Intersection of Route 1200 (Baker Lane)
And Route 1322 (Fort Collier Road)
Frederick County
Dear Mike:
Please find attached herewith the information for the above noted intersection which
Kelly Downs and I discussed with you on Thursday, March 11, 1999.
Based on this recommendation, the Department feels we should change the stop
conditions at this intersection. It would be appreciated if you would present this to the
Transportation Committee and proceed through the normal processes to receive input from
Frederick County before we initiate this change.
Please give me a call if we can provide further assistance.
JAC/vcz
Cy: Norman K. Sparks
Sincerely,
Jerry A. Copp
Transportation Resident Engineer
WE KEEP VIRGINIA MOVING
R EC
MAR I
DEPT OFPLANN.! I(:!DFFy ia.�f ; .r
I
J:\ :: V", @� Qw` li• ill �
"•' ✓� � ; ,, � l�� ' Jam' �yy� �T �At;�I�S 1
7 11 � '� =� � ���J �/J�✓� i ~` � ,F�' -- .. �'
SjR TFCC
A,
Q�r,,�t ,�cC� - .
�/ ,�� �y� r �% Kiri Jj + (�'=_' '3n l / ��� ti F Lam, cr
Nd
l; �
Q
At
GIVA
''KAI'� t?1 ®h
i
/• 7+ r / r
y;
q � `hT' jC�� '(+- f � .�.' .(� i I �✓. � � � j ' ... �'�� � �c r �' /h ��% r 'l
i Iii �t.,,!i
/`�-t.
app % ` '_' �' ! �' i—;l j F''� A
/'/v,er
Ld
'4' A IODSTOCK
CD
' � . `•� '• i r -� rrr � .�. � _ ...• , l ^ _ . � t ,l.+'' n/y �/'p in e cr,
oo \X<4�0
t- s
�',ZZCa - 00a� ral
MEMORANIMUM
TO: Mr. J. A. Copp
FROM: J. B. Diamond
SUBJECT: Turning Movement
March 12, 1999
Staunton, VA
Int. Rtes. 1200/1322
Frederick County
We have performed a turning movement at the intersection of Route 1200 and Route 1322 in Frederick County
to determine if conditions exist to justify the installation of a traffic signal. At present, there is a stop condition
on the Route 1322 approaches.
The results of the 12 -hour count indicate that none of the volume warrants were met.
A review of the crash history for the period October 1, 1995, through December 31, 1998, indicates 27 crashes.
There was $141,375 in property damage with 26 persons injured. All incidents were angle crashes attributed to
not having the right of way or disregarding the stop sign. In 1996, there were 9 incidents; in 1997, there were 8
incidents; and in 1998, there were 9 incidents. Therefore, Warrant Six, Accident Experience, was met for each
of the last three years.
Although the Accident Warrant was met for the last three years, we do not recommend signalization at this
time. This intersection has good sight distance in all four directions and it has relatively low speed limits
(35mph on both routes).
Route 1322 (east and west approaches) has higher traffic volumes, is a through road, and it appears that
development will continue. Route 1200 has lower traffic volumes, is a dead end road at 0.38 mile north of the
intersection, and has little room for new development north of the intersection. Therefore, consideration should
be given to moving the stop condition from Route 1322 to Route 1200 to improve safety and efficiency at the
intersection. If this change cannot be implemented in a relatively short time, we suggest that rumble strips be
placed on both Route 1322 approaches.
We will be glad to discuss or field review with you if you so desire.
Copies of the crash data and turning movement data are attached.
attachments
J. B. Diamond
District Traffi .-Engineer
By: /K. D wns
/ Transportation Engineer Sr.
---------------------------------- -- —
1.21 M. TO RL ..l I a
37
1323
132
832 11
V
11
12
Stp o
7
INT. ROUTES
FREDERICK
FROM:
TO:
/200 & /322
COUNTY
COLLISION DATES: /01//95 - /213//98
Il
BOX
CULVERT
v y L
27
V `7-6-97
14
2-2-98 MON 14251
SUN 0000
FATAL CRASHES
I CD -DR $2200
CL -DR $3001,
26
7-19-96
FRI 0835
11-24-97 11MON 1430
$14/,375
— - - - - - RA -WE
$3100
CL -DR / $1400
-23-2E
TUE
0 10IT4,97 TUE 2115
'I
RA -W
$1600
RAWE $2000
11 23 98
MON
160! /r( -/)AT l l
CL -DR
$6000
�� 5 0MOPED
,
-1 FRl t550
CL -DR $950
i l)-30-96 TUE 10 5
/ RA -WE $2050
i
6-17-98 WED 155 97 THU 2120
CD -DR $900 l� C -DR $2000
I l2 96 FRI 1155
8-4-98 TUE 1705 SN SN $2800
CL -DR $2200 I
2-26-97 WED 160 3
I,-,!
/4 98 FRI 14001_ AWE 56500
CL -OR 5/0.000 _ r
8-20-98 THU 2150 I -97 THL 0
C -
CL -DR $14,050
9-29-98 TUE 0655 6-6-97 FRI 220�� �C
CL -DR $20,0250 CD -DR $1500
10-22-98 THU 1135
CD -DR $35258-17 CO -DR 510,000 96 —SAT 130 i) �J
yl
lI-4-98 WED 1525 �
CL -DR $25.000 6-5-96 WED 16/0 �J
CL -DR 53800 1 1 �� \� ^
TOTAL CRASHES
27
INJURY CRASHES
14
PROPERTY DAMAGE CRASHES
/3
FATAL CRASHES
0
NO. INJURED
26
N0, KILLED
0
AMT. OF PROPERTY DAMAGE
$14/,375
RTE 1200
N
W
T5011 - No Traffic Data Available
TAP3000 HTRIS - ACCIDENT ANALYSIS 03/02/99 16:00:17
TAM3060 Accident Summary Request by Location HWY59F
Page 7 of 7
From Date: 10/01/1995 To Date: 12/31/1998
NODE: 333663 34-01200/34-01322/ RADIUS 150 FEET
Fatal Accidents: 0
Inj Accidents: 14
PD Accidents: 13
Accident Rate:
DEV:
Persons Killed: 0 Pedestrians Killed: 0
Persons Inj: 26 Pedestrians Inj: 0
Amount of PD: 141,375 Total Accidents: 27
Death Rate: Injury Rate:
LIST INDIVIDUAL ACCIDENTS INCLUDED (Y): _
PF1=Help PF3=Exit PF7=Bkwd
PF:
HTRIS - ACCIDENT ANALYSIS 03/02/99 16:00:34
TAN3360HWY59F
TAM3360 Accident Record List for Intersection Analysis page: 1
Node: 333663 34-01200/34-01322/ Distance: 150 (Radius in Feet)
No Document Mo Da Yr Route I
Number
1
952910329
10
07
95
3401200
3+
2
960310263
01
12
96
3401200
/jA
3p
3
960312386
01
23
96
3401200
1
4
960661821
03
01
96
3401200
4-�
5
961290753
04
30
96
3401200
X01\
6
961642320
06
04
96
3401200
3P'
7
961642244
06
05
96
3401200
4-f'
8
962132090
07
19
96
3401200
6A
9
962361641
08
17
96
3401200
IP
10
962830535
09
27
96.
3401200
7A
�
Enter'Number
to Select:
PF3=Exit
PF7=Bkwd
_
PF8=Frwd
2
PF1=Help
2 DH,11
3
Dir
Col
Wthr
Surf
No #Fat
#Ped #Inj #Pec
Typ
Cond
Veh
Fat In;
N
02
1
1
N
02
6
3
2-0
N
02
5
2
2 D1, i Z
N
02
"1
1
2-Di.11
5
N
02
5
2
2 Di, ll
N
02
1
1
2W,i�
1
N
02
1
1
2D( ,1
N
02
5
2
2;--i,
N
02
2
1
3D1,27--
2
N
02
2
1
2 DH,11
3
PF: —
HTRIS - ACCIDENT ANALYSIS
03/02/99 16:00:50
TAN3360HWY59F
Accident
Record List for
Intersection
Analysis
2
TAM3360
Page:
333663
34-01200/34-01322/
Distance:
150
(Radius
in Feet)
Node:
No
Document
Mo
Da
Yr
Route Id
ol
Dir Typ
Wthr
Cord
No #Fat
#Feed #Inj #Pej
Number
1
970310310
01
23
97
3401200 5P
N 02
1
5
1
2
3
2
970730619
02
26
97
3401200 4-r
N 02
02
1
�,rf
3
970990197
03
15
97
3401322 -7R
NW
NW 02
2
1
2`� . r�
4
971500627
05
15
97
3401322 9P
-+=
N 02
2
1
2 �r 34
1
5
971711185
06
06
97
3401200 -"
NW 02
1
2�izZ
6
971922698
07
06
97
3401322 j2�
Cl
N 02
5
2 '��
r
'7
973001822
10
14
97
3401200 +�
N 02
1
1
2 X1,1;
8
973460826
11
24
97
3401200 �a
`
N 02
2
1
2'"
1
9
980420908
02
02
98
98,-'
34012 =
3401322
NW 02
2
1
2
10
981871422
06
17
Enter'Number
to Select:
_
PF7=Bkwd PF8=Frwd
PF:
PF1=Help
PF3=Exit
HTRIS - ACCIDENT ANALYSIS 03/02/99 16:00:59
TAN3360
TAM3360 Accident Record List for Intersection Analysis Page
HWY5
Node: 333663 34-01200/34-01322/ Distance: 150 (Radius in Feet)
No
Document
Mo
Da
Yr
Route
Id
1
Number
1
NW 02
1
1
201,)l
982290148
08
04
98
3401200
SP
1
2
982360797
08
14
98-,"
3401322
z'
-7 P
3
982382320
08
20
98v�'
3401322
NW 02
4
982860852
09
29
98/
3401322
(,A
5
983131757
10
22
98�
3401200
6
983290522
11
04
983401322
7
983480209
11
23
98v"'
3401322
Enter -Number to Select: _
PF1=Help PF3=Exit PF7=Bkwd PF8=Frwd
Dir Col
Typ
Wthr
Surf
Cond
No #Fat #Ped
Veh Fat
#Inj #Pec
Ind
N 02
1
1
2,D'/
1
NW 02
1
1
201,)l
NW 02
1
1
2 Tit , yZ
2
NW 02
1
1
2��,
N 02
2
1
2 zz-
2
NW 02
1
1
2�
NW 02
1
1
2 v z-7—
2
PF.
VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
TRAFFIC ENGINEERING
'rectional Traffic Count at -Intersection of Routes
in 13 z- Z- County.
DATE Z J
R
� u
tIN�`ERSECTION
AP
PROACYiIN
ON ROUTE: FROM THE ON ROUTE: I Z00 FROM THE
EAST
WEST NORTH SOUTH
OUR LT TH RT P LT TU RT P LT TH RT P LT TH RT P TOTAL
7:00-7:30
Zo /Z Z ?L Z-
7:00-7:30
ZS -z-
16-7
16-7 Z 4-
36�
7:30-8:00 d I /J 4 3 / Z�
s:o�o-8:30
3 loo `l 14- 39 ' tr 13 32- -7 Z-
-7
/3 y� y c� Z 30
8:30-9:00 c
9:00-10:00 j 4-
q- Cao
10:00-11:00 i A-91
11:00-12:00 — 77-
j
-v IZ-7 /(? Z S7 Zl
i�7 G
12:00-1:00 3 Z5
r
1:00-2:00
g0 17 -71 3G 2'U 87 4 -7 �U
2:00-3:00
_ . o 17� Q3 �� ss 2� 75
�r �
3:00-4:00
2 S 9 2� 12 SO r.2
z 17 6 4S �9 42. � 4—!4:00-4:30 �
4:30-5:00
2 % /-7 2a
0
12-
-35 )2- 3� 34' 3�
5:00-5:30¢ L1
3g 2�
10 32 29' 12 2� Is' 2q 22 g 2
5:30-6:00 3 3C7
¢
� it
6:00-7:00 Z 4� 3 1 4 7 S
12 HOUR`e.-i. /.'
TOTAL
24 HOUR ��--
TOTAL
SAMPLE SKETCH ON BACK
COMPLETE SKETCH ON ANOTHER SHEET
RECORDERS
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
TRAFFIC ENGINEERING DIVISION
DIRECTIONAL TRAFFIC COUNT AT INTERSECTION OF ROUTES
1200 and 1322 IN Frederick COUNTY.
DATE: February 9, 1999 .
APPROACHING INTERSECTION
rat 1200 From the
1322 From the On Route: _
On Route: _ - - —
--
--
12
42
0 u
0
u
13� � 20 j
-
. -.12 , ` .
0
28 .7
` 22
p
�,.
r I7
266
367
7:00-07:30
0_
69 . _ . ,
26 ..,;j
. 0
.� :=
.
0
3
24 30
J 19
0
54
25
2
p
7:30-08:00
0
107
21
0
0
10
14 ., .
44
39
31
31
.r 21 _ 0
13 ..-:: 32 .,
_
_ 7-
_..
0
32 - --.25
._.
._. 3.-
0
0
258 - �v
230 '
8:00-08:30
3,
607 .; .-
9
9
4,
,
- •
_y
26 t<..-
28 0
16 28
8
0
25
23
6
430
8:30-09:00
4
36
17
0
0
13
26
67
60 0
31 48
21
0
61
29
2
0
0
4
9:00-10:00
4
58
23
0
12
61
70 0
18 46
16
0
59
44
3
11
0
49911
10:00-11:00
4
60
21
0
14
91
78 0
20 51
12
0
82
39
15
0
723 ✓
11:00-12:00
6
59
28
0
20
127
119 0
29 57
21
0
111
61
14
0
575
12:00-01:00
13
123
27
0
11
85
76 0
23 56
25
0
88
45
7
0
568
1:00-02:00
13
105
34
17
86
71 0
36 53
20
0
87
47
8
0
697 ^ �,
2:00-03:00
3:00-04.00
6
3
98
98
40
39
0
0
23
176
93 0
30 55
26.}x_. 45-;;,
26
0
0
71
39
75
42
7 4 �,•.:
0
417 •�
4:00-04:30
2--),,
59 29-.:,
,150
0
12 ._
80 137 62�Y2 0
24 30
-�0
17
29`
35
5
0
357'
4:30-05:00
12
91
40
0
2
12
52
93
20 0
66 ?i 0
33 _ � ,- 35 ..,
�-- 12 ., ,
,..p
36 �
34
6,
8
0
0
393
250
5:00-05:30
4 7
40, _
> _;'
22.
p
-
' ;
32
7
29 0
12 26
15
0
2922
0
380
5:30-06:00
3
38'
26
0
10
67
55 0
7 46
12
0
36
48
11
-
6:00-07:00
2
48
34
0
14
-
d
4-1
� Recorder. Siddle/Seaman
,t.;
4(,1,-7 -7)
Route
Route
4565
West
South
Route
1200
North
260
2276 1149
867
2289
2547
1273 I 12741_
222 616 436
1664
355
1168 1630
7-1
107
Route
1322
East
)ur
0 PM
Route
3294 1322
East
899 658 79 Y
1636 1590
Directional Turning Movement
3226
Int. Rtes. 1200 and 1322
Frederick County
February 9, 1999
7:00 AM - 7:00 PM
12 Hours
Eight Hour Volumes of Approach Vehicles
Time I
East
West
North
From To
Veh. Ped.
Veh. Peci.
Veh. ) Ped.
7 AM 8 AM
223
0
159
0
118 0
11 AM 12 PM
93
0
183
0
83 0
12 PM 1 PM
163
0
266
0
107 0
1 PM 2 PM
152
0
172
0
104 0
2 PM 3 PM
144
0
174
0
109 0
3 PM 4 PM
140
0
292
0
111 0
4 PM 5 PM
233
0
228
0
159 0
5 PM 6 PM
133
0
242
0
133 0
Totals
1281
0
1716
0
924 0
South
Veh.Ped.
133 0
132 0
187 0
147 0
141 0
154 0
154 0
135 0
1183 0
Total
Veh. Ped.
633 0
491 0
723 0
575 0
568 0
697 0
774 0
643 0
5104 0
WARRANT 1: MINIMUM VEHICULAR VOLUPVIE
The Minimum Vehicular Volume warrant is intended for application where the volume of intersecting
traffic is the principal reason for consideration of signal installation. The warrant is satisfied when, for each
of any 8 hours of an average day, the traffic voiurne is at least 500 on the major street and
150 on the higher -volume approach to the intersection.
The warrant was met for 0 hour (s).
Main Street
High Side
Warrant
Warrant
Hour of Day
Volume
St. Volume
1
8 - 1
7 AM
382
133
SIDE
SIDE
8 AM
270
114
SIDE
SIDE
9 AM
238
100
SIDE
SIDE
10 AM
228
106
SIDE
SIDE
11 AM
276
132
SIDE
SIDE
12 PM
429
187
SIDE
BOTH
1 PM
324
147
SIDE
SIDE
2 PM
318
141
SIDE
SIDE
3 PM
432
154
SIDE
BOTH
4 PM
461
159
SIDE
BOTH
5 PM
375
135
SIDE
SIDE
6 PM
220
95
BOTH
SIDE
The warrant was met for 0 hour (s).
WARRANT 2: INTERRUPTION OF CONTINUOUS TRAFFIC
The Interruption of Continuous Traffic warrant applies to operating conditions where the trafic volume
on a major street is so heavy that traffic on a minor intersecting street suffers excessive delay or hazard
in entering or crossing the major street. The warrant is satisfied when, for any 8 hours of an average day,
the traffic volume is at least 750 on the major street and at least 75
on the higher -volume minor -street approach to the intersection.
Main Street
High Side
Warrant
Warrant
Hour of Day
Volume
St. Volume
2
8-2
7 AM
382
133
SIDE
SIDE
8 AM
270
114
SIDE
SIDE
9 AM
238
100
SIDE
SIDE
10 AM
228
106
SIDE
SIDE
11 AM
276
132
SIDE
SIDE
12 PM
429
187
SIDE
SIDE
1 PM
324
147
SIDE
SIDE
2 PM
318
141
SIDE
SIDE
3 PM
432
154
SIDE
SIDE
4 PM
461
159
SIDE
SIDE
5 PM
375
135
SIDE
SIDE
6 PM
220
95
SIDE
SIDE
The warrant was
met for
0 hour (s).
WARRANT 3: MINIMUM PEDESTRIAN VOLUME
The Minimum Pedestrian Volume warrant is satisfied when, for each of any 8 hours of an average
,jay, the major street traffic volume is at least 600 and there are at least 150 pedestrians
per hour on the highest volume crosswalk crossing the major street.
The warrant was met for 0 hour(s).
Main Street
Pedestrian
Warrant
Warrant
Hour of Day
6 AM
Volume
Volume
F
3
�-
8 - 3
-0
7 AM
382
0
0
0
8 AM
270
0
0
0
9 AM
238
0
0
0
10 AM
228
0
0
0
11 AM
276
0
0
0
12 PM
429
0
0
0
1 PM
324
0
0
0
2 PM
318
0
0
0
3 PM
432
0
0
0
4 PM
461
0
0
0
5 PM
375
0
0
0
6 PM
220
0
0
0
The warrant was met for 0 hour(s).
WARRANT 8: COMBINATION OF WARRANTS
In exceptional cases, signals occasionally may be justified where no single warrant is satisfied but
where two or more of Warrants 1, 2 and 3 are satisfied to the extent of 80 percent or more of the stated
values. The number of hours met at the 80 percent level were as follows:
WARRANT 1 -- 3
WARRANT2— 0
WARRANT 3 — 0
WARRANT 8 IS NOT SATISFIED
WARRANT 1: MINIMUM VEHICULAR VOLUME
MINIMUM VEHICULAR VOLUMES FOR WARRANT 1
Number of lanes for moving traffic Vehicles per hour on major Vehicles per hour on higher
on each approach street (total of both volume minor street approach
Major Street I Minor Street approaches) (one direction only)
2 or more
1 only
600
150
2 or more
2 or more
600
200
1 only
2 or more
500
200
WARRANT 2: INTERRUPTION OF CONTINUOUS TRAFFIC
MINIMUM VEHICULAR VOLUMES FOR WARRANT 2
Number of lanes for moving traffic
on each approach
Vehicles per hour on major
street (total of both
approaches)
Vehicles per hour on higher
volume minor street approach
(one direction only)
9 only i only
IOU
to
or more 1 only
900
75
2 or more 2 or more
900
100
1 only 2 or more
750
100
WARRANT 3: MINIMUM PEDESTRIAN TRAFFIC
Vehicles per hour on major street Vehicles per hour on major Pedestrians per hour on the
without raised median of at least street with raised median of at highest volume crosswalk
four feet in width (total of both least four feet in width (total crossing the major street
approaches) both approaches)
ADDITIONAL INPUT QUESTIONS:
ENTER THE DIRECTION OF ONE MAJOR ROUTE APPROACH
1) EAST
2) WEST > 1 <
3) NORTH
4) SOUTH
ENTER THE DIRECTION OF THE OTHER MAJOR ROUTE APPROACH
1) EAST
2) WEST > 2 <
3) NORTH
4) SOUTH
ENTER THE NUMBER OF APPROACH LANES ON MAJOR ROUTE
1) ONE
2) TWO OR MORE > 1 <
ENTER THE NUMBER OF APPROACH LANES ON MINOR ROUTE
1) ONE
2) TWO OR MORE > 1 <
ENTER THE APPRORIATE NUMER FOR SPEED OF 85 PERCENTILE OF VEHICLES ON THE MAJOR ROUTE
1) 40 MPH OR UNDER
2) OVER 40 MPH > 1 <
IS THE INTERSECTION IN AN ISOLATED COMMUNITY WITH A POPULATION OF UNDER 10,000 PEOPLE?
1) NO
2) YES > 1 <
DOES THE MAJOR ROUTE HAVE A RAISED MEDIAN ISLAND OF AT LEAST FOUR FEET IN WIDTH?
1) NO
2) YES > 1 <
ENTER THE NUMER OF HOURS FOR WHICH THE TRAFFIC COUNT WAS TAKEN (e.g., 12)
> 12 <
D
z
1600
500
wQ
400
U�
cr Q 300
zw
200
> 100
FIGURE 4-5. PEAK HOUR VOLUME WARRANT
= 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800
MAJOR STREET - TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES - VPH
'NOTE: 150 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET
APPROACH WITH TWO OR MORE LANES AND 100 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER
THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET APPROACHING WITH ONE LANE.
D
.7
a
500
,2 OR
I
400
wLUQ
cc
300
2 OR MORE
LANES 2 OR
MORE LANES
A
i 0 ui
200
i � L
J
0
SOME
OEM
MEN
�v
MEN ■■■■
mom■■■�
= 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800
MAJOR STREET - TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES - VPH
'NOTE: 150 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET
APPROACH WITH TWO OR MORE LANES AND 100 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER
THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET APPROACHING WITH ONE LANE.
D
.7
a
500
,2 OR
I
400
wLUQ
cc
300
�a
iZ
A
i 0 ui
200
i � L
J
0
100
�v
FIGURE 4-7. FOUR HOUR VOLUME WARRANT
= 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400
MAJOR STREET - TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES - VPH
'NOTE: 115 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET
'g APPROACH WITH TWO OR MORE LANES AND 80 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER
THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET APPROACHING WITH ONE LANE.
,2 OR
MORE LANES & 2 OR MORE LANES
OR MOR E LANES& LANE
�v
= 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400
MAJOR STREET - TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES - VPH
'NOTE: 115 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET
'g APPROACH WITH TWO OR MORE LANES AND 80 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER
THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET APPROACHING WITH ONE LANE.
Item #2
Removal of a section of Route 629, Laurel Grove Road, from the New Hard
Surface projects section of the Secondary Road Improvement Plan.
The Frederick County Transportation Committee has received a request from the Virginia
Department of Transportation to remove a section of Route 629, Laurel Grove Road from the New
Hard surface project section of the Secondary Road Improvement Plan. VDOT further recommends
that the hard surfacing of Laurel Grove Road, from 0.22 miles east of Route 622 to 1.27 miles east
of Route 622, is left in the Secondary Road Improvement Plan.
The letter from VDOT is self-explanatory. VDOT officials will be available at the Transportation
Committee meeting to discuss the request in greater detail. I have provided a marked copy of the
section of road in question for your information.
U:\Mike\Common\Transportation\Committee\agendas\May99ag.wpd
v �
COMMONWEALTH of VIRGI NWA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DAVID R. GENR EDINBURG RESIDENCY
14031 OLD VALLEY PIKE JERRYA. COPP
COMMISSIONER 14031
BOX 278 RESIDENT ENGINEER
EDINBURG, VA 22824-0278 TELE(540)9B4-5600
FAX(540)964-5607
April 7, 1999
Mr. Mike Ruddy
Frederick County Planning Department
107 North Kent Street
Winchester, VA 22601
- -- -- -- - - - - Ref: Route 629 (Laurel Grove Road)
From: Route 608 To: 1.27 ME of Route 622
Frederick County
Dear Mike:
As you are aware, the Department has spent a significant amount of time trying to obtain a
donation of right of way for the reconstruction and paving of the above noted route.
The only section that we have been able to obtain right of way for this improvement is from 0.22
mile east of Route 622 to 1.27 miles east of Route 622. We have been unable to clear the remainder of
the right of way as there are segments where the property owners are unwilling to donate for this
improvement.
It is the Department's recommendation that we leave the above noted section which has been
cleared for right of way in Frederick County's Secondary Improvement Plan for New Hardsurfacing and
the remainder of Laurel Grove Road be dropped from the plan. Furthermore, we are requesting, if
Frederick is in agreement, we proceed with the rating system so we will have other roads placed on the
plan prior to starting the public hearing process in September, 1999.
I do want to point out there is a section that we will be improving between Route 608 and Route
622 as part of the Incidental Construction program in the 1998/99 budget. The exact description is from
1.'+0 miles west of Route 622 to 1.65 miles west of Route 622. This section will be reconstructed and
graveled, however, will not be hardsurfaced. Furthermore, I have been advised by Mrs. Kelly Boyd that
they would be willing to work with the Department for some additional incidental construction
improvements in this general area to eliminate some sharp curves. I believe this will have to be
considered along with other requests during the public hearing process in the fall.
We would appreciate Frederick County's review and decision on our recommendations.
Sincerely,
ECENED
�! APR 1 3 1999
I
Jerry A. Copp
Transportation Resident Engineer DEPT, OF PLANNINGIDEVELOPMENT
JAC/vcz
Cy: Norman K. Sparks, Ben H. Lineberry, Margaret Douglas, Mrs. Kelly Boyd
WE KEEP VIRGINIA MOVING
f, 259 j 679 870 m i �� V.4
cif\ J 0? 856
7+ sit �"'' \ °TSP Indian Hollo 608 fJain I �j 739
Hogue Creak 65C
nti 7zz
y o Hayfield 3 679 01 r•to t 2 1337
743 ° ro a o N 32
o. ® 608 � $ CD s 654 673 o2am – – – _ •
600
% 8p 0 B .ig �0 630 m p sus .
615
/ Q 0 Mc Quire o
I 3s 789
600 e�� \ 680 g o 679 o.2T o•s$ 1739 Re
Enon �0 683 ®� e ��F o) k ry 679
614 B� Albin 4 P J
�o ` P
1' Rock Enon�® °
61® ( g!
' 704 Springs 3.to o• 817 608 654
09 748 a 826
8827 37
704 , 2 ,o -�� _/.
600 616 \9a •d 3, - esboro !:•. ' .. .. .fEW-:
villa Cn bare 0.54 5rF- 11
Round
H111 803Hill � /� .50
608
1. 612°�o 0 620 F-842
841 11
® �•, 600
� 621 0® /;•;•;•'• ':/
608
851 B �• 3! 1•'•'.'.•.'.'
Fteffiri 600 ° �T r
12 608 619 0 620 9 Opequon 2 ;,;,•,:
' 1.54 \q J..;.:� •,
r 616 1 622 622 t�; .7✓
611 618 3 09 F=
Mount 622 x'07 621
a a VNiulam
�? s s q 612 oc 0 fm
dun 608 , ah 628;:
F-840
IN :6 \ 618 � 622 � o
?� ® .52 ��: 1 i✓ 522
• 629 3 628
Fawcett 6 9 .25 / °Q
G07 Run t Gap o9 732 9 25a c, 644
o;ss 608 � �
�` QJ� 622 s 628 a
790 6Q0 ��c—®m®®–a847 –ma® m-
N
PJtountain Falls a"+ 629 625 F 839
c� 628
796 ° \I
I lb I.@O Barfonsvill 642 �p�Quon
600 0.05 O'er O
"n, c;>'r' O F e�? =' 625 649 649 1090
606 ` O1- 846
649 �� •r ®�
---- ®®
V P 628. 629 629 9^,� M ' 642
F® �� '1 a I
604 09 ®c�a�,,. 623 vQ � t.>ro p".•. .�;.:•� .. ��•:;1 i.22
642
0.
622-' o _ iCCTY. a 647 9 B o.