TC 05-18-09 Meeting AgendaCOUNTY of FREDERICK
Department of Planning and Development
540/665-5651
FAX: 540/665-6395
MEMORANDUM
TO: Frederick County Transportation Committee
FROM: Toihn A. Bishop. AICP, Deputy Director - Transportation
RE: May 18, 2009 Transportation Committee Meeting
DATE: May 11, 2009
The Frederick County Transportation Committee will be meeting at 8:30 a.m. on Monday, May
18, 2009 in the first floor meeting room of the Frederick County Administration Building, 107
North Kent Street, Winchester, Virginia.
AGENDA
1. TIA Standards discussion
2. Secondary Street Acceptance Requirements
3. Inland Port Traffic
4. Other
Please contact our department if you are unable to attend this meeting.
Attachments
JAB/bad
107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000
Item 1: TIA Standards Discussion
This item is to continue the discussion from the previous meeting. Attached please find the most
recent staff draft of the TIA Standards. In addition to that is the redline version provided by the
TOP of Virginia Builders. Included in the redline version are Staff's responses to the suggested
changes. Staff responses are shown in red italics.
0
Traffic Impact Analysis Standards
Draft 4 11/24/08
A Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) ismer required in -order -to allow County Officials
and staff the opportunity to assess the impact of a proposed development. The TIA
should provide sufficient information to allow this assessment to take place. Any
application that includes a TIA, as determined by planning staff, which does not meet the
standards laid -out -herein, shall not be considered complete. These TIA standards shall be
applicable to rezonings, m^sterplansmaster tans, and subdivisions, and site plans.
No issues..
When a TIA is required
Any action that meets the thresholds outlined in the Virginia Department of
Transportation Chapter 527 regulations shall require a TIA (see attached VDOT table).
Additionally, Frederick County may choose to require a TIA under the following
scenarios;
For Site Plans: Hopefully Site Plan Requirements will be eliminated If this paragraph
must remain, we suggest the changed langual;e.
- Formatted: Font: Italic
Staff is not against removal of the site plan requirements. Formatted: Font: Italic
When one has not been done previously AND the development is expected to
generate an increase of 30%-180-oor more vehicle trip ends in the peak hour.
As the site plan process is administrative, the TIA findings are for information
only. Offsite improvements cannot be required. The scope of the study shall
be limited to the site entrances. Proposed commercial entrances shall be
located and sized per applicable VDOT standards and Commercial Entrance
Spreadsheet.
As MOT's standards use a specific trip number, sta[ffeels it is gppropriate------ Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.75^
to continue that format for the sake of consistency. `•O site improvements
cannot be required" is unnecessary language due to the fact that this is
already not allowed under the County code and it doesn't seem to be a needed
reference for a policy that regards when and how a TIA is to be conducted.
The same goes for commercial entrance location. This issue would not be
dealth with via the TIA.
Regarding the issue of whether to include the site plan requirements or not it
should be noted that VDOT's Chapter 527 requirements for site plan is 100
trips for residential and 250 trips for commercial. Aside from gathering
additional information for use in the area there is little other benefit at site
plan that would be allowable under the County Code. It would seem that the
risks ofpotentially hindering commercial development which tends to be vel
time sensitive at the site plan stage outweigh the benefits of an additional TIA
for an individual site. Further, the site plans that would be of greatest
concern would trigger the VDOT Chapter 527 requirements, - Formatted: Font: Italic
----------------------------
For Master Plans and Subdivisions:
When A TIA that models the development is required when one that-is-oeing
tor- planned or subdivid has not previously been done.—? s Vii,
"jasterplatinjager_Rlan u v i�.- Vic, s ,; s s r �._ y rtA
=Gr it !..'S1. -a oii {i J :' � �Tji;: .+ S 1?i C - Cr 1" ',,:y 41� .•Li�.
_ e SCOrn of the siti2v sie�11 ba t,r ..:,,=tc
The scope ofthe TIA should
involved at that meeting..
rte scoping session DV all tnOSe------- Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.75"
--_---_ --------------------- Formatted: Font: Italic
If item one has been satisfied, then bene-ef-the following items would not apply.-_
2L Any proposed action that has not been previously approved by the County and is------- Formatted: Indent: Left: -0.25"
expected to generate 1200 or more vehicle trip ends per day or 100 or more vehicle
trip ends in the peak hour, and has not - where a TIA done has not been
completed for a similar or greater trip generation. Additionally, staff may require
participation in a TIA for- anlevel ^f t ffie
p y � . u ge.�*'—.,n corridors facing
significant congestion or safety concerns as determined by the prof .,r ' a +
r J b
of the planning slaff•when documentation of unacceptable delays is provided by a
study conducted by VDOT or the County-. aAnecdotal evidence shall nothenot be the
basis of a TIA requirement if gh .Lo..,.«..entat: is or-pyidRd flip, staff shall
endeavor to have all ffffertN, owners alene the fF et eenfxested readWay parrt' at@
in a stud 11 �!j I -ornmeHd improvements to ease
Formatted: No bullets or numbering
Previous TIA's should be allowable evidence of issues in addition to a VDOT or
County study. While staff agrees inrp inctple that anecdotal evidence should not be the
basis of a TIA requirement, some level of judgement should be allowed when action is
proposed in an area of concern. We are open to language that allows for some sort of
middle ground.`Formatted: Font: Italic
------------------------------------- --__--__- ------
-- - '------- Formatted: Indent: Left: -0.25"
3. A change in use that has not been previously approved b ty he County and, while------ Formatted: Indent: Left: -0.25",No bullets
not resulting in greater trip generation, results in a significant change in trip demographics or or numbering
p ak travel times resulting in an unstudied impact on the transportation system as
d cumented by VDOT or the County.-.
For Rezoningsi
4 4.All rezonings shall require a
TIA unless waived by pPlanning sStaff.
Would suggest that "documented" be changed to "determined"..-_---
FAlignment:
ed: Numbered + Level: 1 +
g Style: 1, 2, 3, ... + Start at: 1 +
Left + Aligned at: 0.25" + Tab
75" + Indent at: 0.75"
----ed: Numbered + Level: 1 +
g Style: 1, 2, 3, ... + Start at: 4 +
t: Left + Aligned at: 0.25" + Indent
Formatted: Font: Italic
Process and Report Requirements
1. Submit a determination form to pPlanning &Staff which will be used to
determine whether the project requires a TIA a .0 :.hethe- it Nv 4 -e ftu Fe or a
VDOT Chapter 527 sittal.
2 --Each TIA will be required to undergo a formal scoping meeting with VDOT
and County Staff . The applicant shall
be responsible for scheduling the scoping meeting with the above agencies.
and it will be the responsibility of planning staff to make sure the), are in
attendanee. Applicants will not be required A re-scopeing meeting will not
be required in the event that one of the agencies is absent the project duete,-a
failure of planning staff to attend the b
No issues. f
•----------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------
__ .-. _ Each submittal must include the following:
1. --All required VDOT copies and payment to VDOT for Chapter 527
submittal.; and all :to on the t. l a ebeeklists h tiean he e
the Traffic impact Analysis Regulations Administrative Guidelines
published by VDOT in September-, 2007. Utilize the subdivision plat or
site plan package eheeklist F master plans
b. All items on the checklist which can be found in the Traffic Impact
Analysis Regulations Administrative Guidelines published by VDOT in
September, 2007. (Utilize the subdivision plat or site plan package
checklist for master plans).
No issues..
---------------------------------- -----------------------------------------------------------------
10ne paper copy (or PDF on CD) and I CD with modeling files. If
submitting PDF copy -of the report, both report and modeling files may be
on the same CD.
lj-l.Planning sStaff will distribute all copies to VDOT for review and will
provide comments and or approval of the TIA within 4 weeks of submittal
No issues..
Formatted: No bullets or numbering
_-- Formatted: Font: Italic
Formatted: No bullets or numbering
Formatted: Font: Italic
f ------ Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.5"
Formatted: Font. Italic
Each TIA must include the following;_
a. An executive summary which summarizes the development;i significant
findings of the TIA;; and inM3raetsresults of proposed mitigation
b.—Sections on existing traffic, existing traffic with b kV -o tdesign year
background traffic, existing traffic with bu+k +u,4dgsitzn year background
and development generated traffic=&lrrst`iei?�-full-t>tckgrot►sld
In certain situations it may be appropriate to eliminate some of the above
scenarios or to have other scenarios included; the pPlanning sStaff in
concert with VDOT isare entitled enabled to make these -modifications at
the scoping meeting with the applie
r------ Formatted: No bullets or numbering
Staff feels the two scenarios stricken above are important information------- Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.5", No bullets or
items that should still be included, but notes that these scenarios could still be numbering
included on a case by case basis as allowed by the final sentence in section b
'--------------------------------------------------,----------------- --- Formatted: Font: Italic
c. The TIA must include all proposed access points, with details about access
type.
d. Accident Data for the most recent 3 year period to include accident type
and severity i,'readily 'tfaLfc frr,,ji 9'1ie S-Fg_as P-�--
e. Appendices that include output report sheets from the analysis software,
grouped according to location.
f. Planning sStaff and/or VDOT may require additional analysis, -as required
by the uniqueness of each development.
Technical Details
1. Trip generation must be determined using the most recent addition of the ITE
Trip Generation Report unless agreed teteVDOT
aa&or thepplanning sStaff. Only trip generation methodology approved by
VDOT and pPlanning sStaff at the seeping meeting may be used.
2. The TIA must depict a worst ease scenario all ..wbi_ , ..w_, the maximum
traffic generated by the proposed zoning as determined by the pPlanning
sStaff. Thapplicant '� nt , depict ct less thanwarstease seenarie 'If their
err
proposed proffers would limits their development activities to uses that
produce equal or less traffic, a less than what is depicted in-the—TIA
maximum impact may be used.
3.be-included the
TIA. if The applicant wishes-4emay include other applicable scenarios se
that they ean vk4ed-in their presentation to the Board of Supervisors
and/or Planning Commission, that will be allowable.
4. Existing signal timings provided by VDOT must be used for existing
conditions. However, where existing signal timings are not operating
optimally as demonstrated by the applicant and agreed to by VDOT, an
improved signal timing plan may be used if that plan willis-be provided by the
applicant.te VDOT.
-5,4. Level of Service (LOS) must be considered for all signalized movements and
approaches and shown graphically in the report.
N- _When level of service does not meet the requirements of the comprehensive
plan, the report must include suggested improvements that would tn<;et-tha
i-oquireraio.ns,'�e--Eontpr�l e sire- lanmitigate the impac_�s of the
deveiep:nent as required uy the cemprehensivepian.
When a new signal is proposed, arterial level of service must be analyzed,-.
This must includeing a signal progression analysis if warranted.
7. When conditions of existing or existing with background scenarios result in_a
level of service F, additional analysis must be completeddone wlierrincludine
development traffic is added in so thff to determine the impacts of the new
developmen may be sidered. Items to include he=rAoingin this
comparison are intersection capacity utilization, changes in delays, queue
lengths, and vehicle to capacity ratio. Pla nniiig staff eould alse, .,on&ider
-- ---- Formatted: No bullets or numbering
No issues with any of the suggestions in the Technical Details section_ __ ------1 Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.75",No bullets or
numbering
Formatted: Font: Italic
Traffic Impact Analysis Standards
Draft #411/24/08
A Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) is required in order to allow County Officials and staff the
opportunity to assess the impact of a proposed development. The TIA should provide sufficient
information to allow this assessment to take place. Any application that includes a TIA, as
determined by planning staff, which does not meet the standards laid out herein, shall not be
considered complete. These TIA standards shall be applicable to rezonings, master plans,
subdivisions, and site plans.
When a TIA is required
Any action that meets the thresholds outlined in the Virginia Department of Transportation
Chapter 527 regulations shall require a TIA (see attached VDOT table). Additionally, Frederick
County may choose to require a TIA under the following scenarios:
For Site Plans:
1. When one has not been done previously AND the development is expected to
generate 100 or more vehicle trip ends in the peak hour.
For Master Plans and Subdivisions:
1. When a TIA that models the development that is being master planned or subdivided
has not previously been done.
If item one has been satisfied, then none of the following items would apply.
2. Any proposed action that is expected to generate 1,200 or more vehicle trip ends per
day or 100 or more vehicle trip ends in the peak hour and has not previously had a
TIA done for similar or greater trip generation. Additionally, staff may require a TIA
for any level of traffic generation on corridors facing significant congestion or safety
concerns as determined by the professional judgment of the planning staff.
3. A change in use that, while not resulting in greater trip generation, results in a
significant change in trip demographics or peak travel times resulting in an unstudied
impact on the transportation system.
For Rezonings:
1. All rezoning shall require a TIA unless waived by planning staff.
3
Process and Report Requirements
1. Submit a determination form to planning staff which will be used to determine
whether the project requires a TIA and whether it will require a VDOT Chapter 527
submittal.
2. Each TIA will be required to undergo a formal scoping meeting with VDOT and
County Staff at the regular VDOT engineers meeting. The applicant shall be
responsible for scheduling the scoping meeting and it will be the responsibility of
planning staff to make sure they are in attendance. Applicants will not be required to
re -scope the project due to a failure of planning staff to attend the original scoping
meeting.
3. Each submittal must include the following:
a. All required VDOT copies and payment for Chapter 527 submittal, and all items
on the attached checklists which can be found in the Traffic Impact Analysis
Regulations Administrative Guidelines published by VDOT in September, 2007.
Utilize the subdivision plat or site plan package checklist for master plans.
b. One paper copy (or PDF on CD) and one CD with modeling files. If submitting
PDF copy of the report, both report and modeling files may be on the same CD.
4. Each TIA must include the following:
a. An executive summary which summarizes the development, significant findings
of the TIA, and impacts of proposed mitigation.
b. Sections on existing traffic, existing traffic with build -out year background traffic,
existing traffic with build -out year background and development generated traffic,
existing traffic with full background traffic, and existing traffic with full
background and development traffic. In certain situations it may be appropriate to
eliminate some of the above scenarios or to have other scenarios included; the
planning staff in concert with VDOT is enabled to make these modifications at
the scoping meeting with the applicant.
c. The TIA must include all proposed access points, with details about access type.
d. Accident Data for the most recent three year period to include accident type and
severity
e. Appendices that include output report sheets from the analysis software grouped
according to location.
f. Planning staff and/or VDOT may require additional analysis as required by the
uniqueness of each development.
Technical Details
Trip generation must be determined using the most recent addition of the ITE Trip
Generation Report unless agreed to by VDOT and planning staff. Only trip
generation methodology approved by VDOT and planning staff at the scoping
meeting may be used.
0
2. The TIA must depict a worst case scenario allowable under the proposed zoning as
determined by planning staff. The applicant may depict a less than worst case
scenario if their proposed proffers would limit their development activities to uses
that produce equal or less traffic than what is depicted in the TIA.
3. Only scenarios approved by VDOT and planning staff may be included in the TIA. If
the applicant wishes to include other scenarios in their presentation to the Board of
Supervisors and/or Planning Commission, that will be allowable.
4. Existing signal timings provided by VDOT must be used for existing conditions.
However, where existing signal timings are not operating optimally as demonstrated
by the applicant and agreed to by VDOT, an improved signal timing plan may be
used if that plan will be provided to VDOT.
5. Level of Service (LOS) must be considered for all movements and approaches and
shown graphically in the report.
6. When level of service does not meet the requirements of the Comprehensive Plan, the
report must include suggested improvements that would meet the requirements of the
Comprehensive Plan.
7. When a new signal is proposed, arterial level of service must be analyzed. This must
include a signal progression analysis if warranted.
8. When conditions of existing or existing with background scenarios result in level of
service F, additional analysis must be done when development traffic is added in so
that the impacts of the new development may be considered. Items to include when
doing this comparison are intersection capacity utilization, changes in delays, queue
lengths, and vehicle to capacity ratio. Planning staff could also consider additional
analysis that would depict the development impacts in this situation.
Item 2: Secondary Street Acceptance Requirements
This is a continuation on the discussion from the April meeting. As noted at that meeting, staff
has since attended the training session held by VDOT on the new standards. Staff will be
reviewing the key new standards for the Committee as we work to address the Chairman's
directive noted below. Attached please find the VDOT summary of the standards.
The Chairman of the Board has requested that the Transportation Committee review the
standards and bring forth strategies that address this legislation and minimize the impact to
Frederick County and its taxpayers.
Con
Summary of Secondary Street .kcceptance Requirements (SEAR)
What is SSAR?
The Secondary Street Acceptance Requirements (SSAR) are the rules .that govern the
development of streets for acceptance by VDOT for perpetual public maintenance. The
regulations are a result of legislation introduced at the request of Governor Kaine and
unanimously adopted by the General Assembly during the 2007 session. The most significant
aspect of the revised regulation is that it introduces a change in public policy regarding the
design and function a street must meet in order to be added to the state system. In essence, the
regulation revises the public-private partnership between the Commonwealth and the
development community. The Commonwealth agrees to maintain streets built by developers and
accepted by counties to the benefit and marketability of their developments. In exchange, the
developer must build streets that connect with the surrounding transportation network in a
manner that enhances the capacity of the overall transportation network and accommodates
pedestrians, while also minimizing the environmental impacts of stormwater runoff by reducing
the street widths allowing the use of low impact development techniques. This is a significant
departure from the previous policy of accepting any street that served three or more homes and
was built in conformance with state design and construction standards without regards to the
impact on the overall transportation network. In addition to this policy change, the new
regulation also updates the inspection and surety processes and fees in an effort to streamline the
process and better align costs.
What are the poiicy goals of the SSAR?
These changes were initiated to address a number of problems with the previous street
acceptance process. First, the public funds available to support transportation are not adequate to
meet the ongoing demands being placed on the system by isolated insufficiently connected
roadway networks. The previous acceptance requirements created an unsustainable cycle of
street development and acceptance into the state system without consideration of the overall
public benefit provided by these streets.
The new regulations work to provide a more sustainable balance by ensuring that streets
accepted into the state's highway system are designed in a manner that better supports the
function and efficiency of the transportation system as a whole. The primary ingredient in the
new approach is the interconnection of local streets between developments. Developing streets
that are well connected to the existing local network allows local trips to be made without
placing unnecessary burdens on major roadways. Further, interconnected local street networks
help facilitate multimodal trips that reduce the burden placed on all roadways. Consider the
graphic on the following page that displays a representative development pattern prevalent today.
Because streets in the developments do not connect, trips are forced to use the major roadway in
order to make the frequent trips to adjoining neighborhoods, schools, or businesses. Failure to
provide these direct connections ensures that the major roadways in the area carry a greater
burden than would otherwise be necessary had these connections been provided. Overburdening
Page 1 of 11
the major roadway may result in operational problems that would require costly improvements to
intersections and/or the corridor as a whole. Additionally, the lack of direct connections presents
a significant obstacle for pedestrians and bicyclists that are forced to follow indirect routes not
well suited for pedestrian and bicycle travel.
In contrast, an interconnected network of streets provides for efficient trips within the
neighborhood and more appropriately accommodates pedestrian, bicycle, and transit oriented
trips. By providing an interconnected network of streets capable of accommodating local trips
Page 2 of 11
The aerial photo below shows the
development pattern around a school in
southwest Virginia. Many of the streets end
^- •d
in cul-de-sacs that fail to connect adjoining
neighborhoods to each other and also do not
connect to the adjacent school. Even the
,�� ;! • ,
local school trips are required to use the
• •� •
major roadway. This roadway's primary
• •'j;:
purpose is to serve as a regional US route
connecting multiple regions of the state and
to serve as a major connecting route within
the greater urban area. The reliance on this
roadway for local trips is unsustainable. The
failure to include pedestrian and bicycle
accommodations into the design of these streets coupled with the failure to connect local streets
to one another act as major deterrents to multimodal
transportation. This places an avoidable
burden on the major roadway.
In contrast, an interconnected network of streets provides for efficient trips within the
neighborhood and more appropriately accommodates pedestrian, bicycle, and transit oriented
trips. By providing an interconnected network of streets capable of accommodating local trips
Page 2 of 11
on local streets, major roadways can be preserved for serving longer trips resulting in a more
efficient transportation network. This improved efficiency reduces the need for costly roadway
improvements such as signalization and lane widening.
What benefits will these changes provide?
The interconnection of these local streets disperses trips throughout the network allowing each
street to carry a well distributed portion of the demand and preventing any of the residential
streets from being overburdened. The interconnection of the local street network provides direct
and alternate routes for motorists that disperses traffic throughout the system which enables the
use of a narrower street design. The narrower streets results in a reduction of impervious surface
area and stormwater runoff. Additionally, the narrower width helps manage vehicle speeds
resulting in slower operating speeds. These reduced operating speeds are appropriate for
residential and mixed use areas, and help address a major concern of many citizens — speeding
on local streets. These narrower streets effectively provide built-in traffic calming that is more
compatible with the neighborhood street environment. This translates into an improved quality
of life in residential areas where slower speeds improve safety and support walking, biking,
safety and enhanced community interaction.
Increased connectivity of the local street network will allow revisions to VDOT's street design
standards. The revised design standards allow for narrower streets than were allowed in the past.
These narrower street widths will play a significant role in reducing vehicle speeds through
neighborhoods. Additionally, these narrower roadways will reduce the amount of stormwater
runoff. While the streets are narrower, they meet the nationally accepted AASHTO minimum
design standards for the design of roadways.
In addition to the benefits of
increased efficiency and overall
capacity of the transportation
system, increased connectivity can
have other benefits for local
governments. These benefits
include reduced local service costs,
enhanced response times for
emergency responders, and a
redundant transportation network
that is better positioned to respond
to temporary detours and other
emergency demands.
A study of Charlotte -Mecklenburg
County, North Carolina fire services
compared the cost to serve areas
with a connected street network with
areas that did not have connected
street networks. The study
Page 3 of 11
concluded that a connected street network could reduce the cost of provide fire service and
increase the area served by individual stations. In particular, the study found that the annualized
life cycle costs per household for a fire station located in an area with a connectivity ratio of 1.3
was $206 while the same costs for another station located in an area with an index of 1.O9 was
$740. The connectivity ratio referenced in this study is calculated slightly different than the
SSAR connectivity index values.
How were these requirements developed?
As noted above, this revised regulation was a result of a gubernatorial initiative to improve the
coordination between transportation and land use in an effort to achieve a more sustainable and
efficient transportation network. The 2007 General Assembly unanimously adopted Senate Bill
1811 that added § 33.1-70.3 to the Code of Virginia and directed the Commonwealth
Transportation Board to create the SSAR to replace the previous Subdivision Street
Requirements. The Code specifically includes three legislative goals for the SSAR to achieve.
These goals are:
1. Ensuring the connectivity of road and pedestrian networks with the existing and future
transportation network;
2. Minimizing stormwater runoff and impervious surface area; and,
3. Addressing performance bonding needs of new secondary streets and associated cost
recovery fees.
In achieving these goals, the new regulation will serve as a vital component in the planning,
design and delivery of a street network that will promote livability, a more efficient
transportation network and the creation of more transportation choices. To guide the
development of the SSAR, the VDOT Commissioner formed a Technical Committee and the
Secretary of Transportation formed an Implementation Advisory Committee. The Technical
Committee was composed of staff from the Secretary's office and the Department of
Transportation. The Implementation Advisory Committee was composed of representatives
from local governments, developers, interested groups, associations, and private firms. In
addition to working with these committees, input was received during 21 regional meetings and
10 meetings of the Commonwealth Transportation Board (CTB).
Public benefit requirements — connectivity, pedestrian acc;,,immodation & public service
In the past, streets have been accepted into the state system without consideration of the overall
public benefit provided by the streets. The SSAR require streets to meet certain public benefit
criteria to be considered for acceptance into the VDOT-maintained public street network. The
previous standards required that each street serve a public purpose (e.g. serving a minimum of
three dwellings units); however, it did not have the same level of expected public benefit. The
new SSAR requires streets to also meet quantified connectivity requirements, be designed to
accommodate pedestrians while continuing to a public purpose (e.g. serving three or more
dwelling units). These requirements are collectively known as the public benefit requirements
and they must be met in order for streets to be added to the state system. The specific
requirements are graduated based on the location and density of the proposed development.
Page 4 of 11
Under the SSAR, the streets within a development or phase of a development will generally be
considered for acceptance as a single addition to the state system, or a "network addition."
To be accepted for perpetual public maintenance, each network addition will need to provide:
• Connectivity: new streets must connect to adjacent properties in multiple directions and
must satisfy a quantified street connectivity index established for the area type being
served.
• Pedestrian accommodations: new streets must provide appropriate pedestrian
accommodation. The type of accommodation is dependent upon the density of the
development being proposed.
o Developments with lot sizes less than '/z acre or a floor area ratio > 0.4 require
accommodations along both sides of the street.
o Developments with lot sizes between '/a acre and 2 acres require pedestrian
accommodation along one side of the street or within the development, such as a
connecting trail system.
o In both instances the accommodation may be a sidewalk, trail or other facility that
provides equivalent pedestrian mobility.
• Public service: new street networks must serve a sufficient number of homes, businesses,
and/or overall traffic demand that classifies the streets as being public in nature.
A more detailed description of each requirement follows.
What is connectivity?
is
The goal of the connectivity requirements is to ensure that the
street networks of developments and phases of developments
connect to existing communities and allow for future
connections to adjacent property. These connections will
create a more efficient transportation network. New streets
must connect to adjacent properties in multiple directions.
Additionally, in compact and suburban areas the overall i
network must satisfy a quantified street connectivity index 7 Streets
value established for the area being served by the 4 4 1-.edions
7/4 = 1.75
development. The connectivity index is defined as follows: /!
r!
/ r M Streets
Connectivity Index
# of Street Segments 'i ! intersections
= r
# of Intersections
The resulting value is a measure of the density of connections provided by a proposed network.
The street network shown to the right has a connectivity index value of 1.75. This value is
obtained by dividing the total number of street segments (denoted by the orange squares) by the
total number of intersections (denoted by the blue dots). For the purposes of the connectivity
index, cul-de-sacs are counted as intersections.
While the SSAR will be consistently applied across the state, the regulation recognizes that the
Commonwealth's density and development patterns are very diverse. Because of this, the
Page 5 of 11
regulation does not take a "one size fits all" approach. The connectivity requirements are
graduated based on the location of the proposed development. The state is divided into three
area types: compact, suburban, and rural. The perimeter of these area types will be consistent
with federal, regional, and local planning boundaries including the following:
• Smoothed urbanized area
• Smoothed urban cluster
• Metropolitan planning organization study area
• Urban development areas
• Transfer of development rights receiving areas
• Within two miles of a smoothed urban cluster, urban development area or transfer of
development rights receiving area
The regulation includes a process for local governments to work with VDOT to officially alter
the perimeter of the area type when specific situations warrant such an action. The VDOT
Commissioner, upon a resolution from the local governing body demonstrating good cause, may
approve changes to the perimeter of the area type; however, approval of such modification
requests is not assured and will be closely reviewed on an individual basis. See pages 16 and 17
in the regulation for more information on this issue.
The state map below displays the approximate location of these area types:
The requirement that new streets connect to adjacent properties in multiple directions applies to
all area types while the connectivity index value requirement is dependant upon the area type in
which the development is being proposed. The required values are as follows:
Compact Area: Connectivity Index > 1.6
Suburban Area: Connectivity Index > 1.4
Rural Area: No Connectivity Index Requirement
Page 6 of 11
Legend'
_ Compact Area Type
Suburban Area Type
,
Rural Area Type
The proposed area types may be MWMea bym Comnuss Doer
based upon a resolution from tha b 1 g g totiv 4the WnU s
'L Ay
area for ayr.,Whxa. lureslry, u.-on41MsiN,or open space
_
I i
IL .
r � _
The requirement that new streets connect to adjacent properties in multiple directions applies to
all area types while the connectivity index value requirement is dependant upon the area type in
which the development is being proposed. The required values are as follows:
Compact Area: Connectivity Index > 1.6
Suburban Area: Connectivity Index > 1.4
Rural Area: No Connectivity Index Requirement
Page 6 of 11
The example network shown below is a typical subdivision pattern that might have been
proposed under the 2005 Subdivision Street Requirements. The connectivity index of the
proposed development can be calculated by:
# of Street Segments 7
Connectivity Index = = 1.16
# of Intersections 6 _
As shown in the graphic below, the resulting value is 1.16; therefore, the development would fail
to meet the minimum required values in compact and suburban area types. Additionally, the
proposed development plan fails to meet the requirements for connecting to adjacent properties
in multiple directions. While the connection to the major street is considered as one such
connection, no other connection is planned; therefore, it fails to meet this requirement. Under
the new SSAR, this development could not be accepted into the state system.
If one of the streets in the development was extended to connect with property adjoining the
development, the number of intersections would be reduced by one and thus the resulting
connectivity index value would increase to 1.4. This value meets the minimum connectivity
index value required in suburban area types. Additionally, it satisfies the requirement that the
development connect to adjoining properties in multiple directions. However, if this
development was proposed in a compact area type, it would not meet the minimum connectivity
index requirement for compact area types of 1.6.
n A
V'�'6
eets 7 Streets
ersections 5 Intersections
17/5 = 1.4ts G 1 Streets
sections Intersections
By connecting an additional street within the proposed network to an adjoining property the
number of intersections is reduced to 4. This results in a revised connectivity index value of 1.75
which meets the requirement in both suburban and compact areas. Lastly, the network in the
next figure has a connectivity index value of 1.6 which meets the index value requirements;
however, it fails to meet the overall connectivity requirement because it does not connect streets
Page 7 of 11
to adjoining properties in multiple directions. Street networks with one-way in and one-way out
place a significant burden on the major street network and do not enhance the overall capacity of
the transportation network.
7 Streets 8 Streets
4 Intersections_ 5 Intersections
7/4 = 1.75 8/5 = 1.6
�] Streets i Q Streets
Intersections "�
� Intersections
The regulation recognizes that connectivity cannot always be achieved because of various
physical constraints and special situations. To streamline the exceptions involving physical
constraints, the regulation allows an automatic exception to address the following constraints:
— Railroad tracks
— Limited access highways
— Navigable river or a standing body of water > 4 feet deep
— Grades > 20%
— Select government owned properties (see regulation)
— Conservation easements accepted by the Virginia Outdoors Foundation
Additionally, special exceptions may be authorized by the District Administrator for situations
that require consideration on a case-by-case basis such as unique characteristics of a site
including jurisdictional wetlands and cluster developments, or incompatible land use of adjoining
property. It is important to note that the regulation specifically states that retail, office, and
residential uses are considered to be compatible.
The regulation requires developments to connect to existing stub outs. In the event that a
development is not connected to an existing stub out that is maintained by VDOT and the local
governing body approves the subdivision or development plan and requests that VDOT accept
the corresponding secondary streets, there will be a financial consequence to the local
government for this action.
Page 8 of 11
In these situations, VDOT will add the future
connection of this stub out as the Commissioner's top •
priority for expenditure of improvement funds for the
locality's six-year plan for secondary roads. This •
provides the local government with the option of
allowing the developer to construct a connection to the
existing stub out or having the secondary road • •
allocations being used to construct the connection.
Providing connections between publicly maintained
streets in neighboring developments is more cost • •
effective and sustainable than relying solely on projects
to widen major highways.
Streets
What constitutes public service? € • Intersections
To be considered for inclusion into VDOT's secondary street network, individual streets must
meet one or more of the following criteria:
• Serves three or more occupied units
• Serves a school or other similar facility open to public use
• Constitutes a missing link in the network
• Is a stub out street that facilitate future connections to adjoining properties
• Carries at least 100 VPD and is in the locality's comprehensive plan
• Satisfies specific requirements regarding acceptance of streets within multifamily
developments, retail shopping complexes, and/or acceptance of streets in nonresidential land
uses in advance of occupancy of three or more units of varied proprietorship. See pages 18 -
20 of the regulation for more details on these specific requirements.
How will this change design standards?
Under the 2005 Subdivision Street Requirements local streets were commonly designed and built
to be 36 — 40 feet wide. These widths combined with the off-street parking requirements of
many local ordinances and VDOT requirements often resulted in an effective local street lane
width of 18 feet. This width results in large impervious surface areas that exacerbate stormwater
runoff and encourages higher vehicular speeds that are generally inappropriate in residential and
mixed use areas.
A set of key elements that will contribute to the implementation of the SSAR are the revised
elements of the roadway's geometric design. The revised geometric design standards generally
allow for narrower streets (24 to 29 feet wide for local streets) than were allowed in the past.
These narrower street widths will play a significant role in reducing vehicle speeds through
neighborhoods. Additionally, these narrower roadways will reduce the amount of stormwater
runoff due to their smaller impervious area. While the streets are narrower, they meet the
nationally accepted AASHTO minimum design standards for the design of roadways.
Page 9 of 11
The direct link between speed and safety has been clearly drawn in many studies. Speed is a
very important factor for determining the severity of crashes involving pedestrians. The National
Highway Traffic Safety
Administration has produced Rgure 1. Fatal lrj uy Rates by Vehicle Speed, by Pedestrian Ages
extensive findings in this area (Florida, 1993-1996; pedestriansin single -vehicle crashes)
and has demonstrated i-14or less
compelling evidence of the B0%�15-24
importance of speed as it S0% —45-64
relates to injuries and fatalities
among pedestrians. One such
study's results (DOT HS 809
021 October, 1999), shown in
the figure on the right
demonstrate clearly the linkage
between pedestrian injuries and
fatalities and speed.
A study titled "Residential
Street Typology and Injury Accident Frequency" by Swift, Painter, and Goldstein 2006 found a
strong correlation between street widths and accident frequency suggesting that narrower streets
in residential areas can result in safer operation than standard width local streets.
Additional key elements of the new SSAR include added flexibility regarding parking
requirements and placement of stormwater best management practices or devices (also known as
low impact development techniques) within the right of way.
How are inspections, fees, and sureties being changed?
The SSAR have also revised the surety bonding and fee structure from what was found in the old
regulations. The length of surety (1 year) in the revised regulations is the same as it is today for
streets inspected using the normal VDOT staff inspection process. However, the regulation
provides additional flexibility to local governments and developers to use alternate means of
inspection that do not rely on VDOT staff. As in the previous regulation, a local government
may initiate a local certification process where, if desired by the local government, the locality
would take on the role of street inspection. Currently Prince William County and Fairfax have set
up such programs. A new provision gives developers the option of hiring a third party to inspect
the streets for VDOT. In both of these situations the surety bonding requirement would be
waived and the associated VDOT inspection fees would be reduced by 75%. The maintenance
fee is eliminated and the fee covering inspection costs is separated from the administrative cost
recovery fee.
Page 10 of 11
When does the SSAR go into effect?
A transition period will be in effect until July 1, 2009. During this period, developer's may
choose to process street acceptance requests under the older 2005 Subdivision Street
Requirements or the new 2009 Secondary Street Acceptance Requirements. However, it is
important to note that these regulations cannot be mixed. The 2009 SSAR must be used after
July 1, 2009. Developments approved prior to July 1, 2009 may use the former requirements.
Additional grandfathering provisions exist for area type changes and specific proffered
conditions. For more details on these grandfathering issues, please reference page 10 of the
regulation.
How can I get more information about the SSAR?
The new SSAR is the result of specific public policy objectives requested by the Governor and
unanimously supported by the 2007 General Assembly. They have been structured to meet the
required goals of the legislation that include:
1. Ensuring the connectivity of road and pedestrian networks with the existing and future
transportation network;
2. Minimizing stormwater runoff and impervious surface area; and,
3. Addressing performance bonding needs of new secondary streets and associated cost
recovery fees.
Clearly, this public policy change will have implications on the development process and the
transportation network. If you would like to learn more about the specifics of the SSAR visit
VDOT's website at http://www.virginiadot.org/projects/ssar/.
Page 11 of 11
Item 3: Inland Port Traffic
Staff has recently received notification of a number of complaints from neighborhoods on the
south side of Route 277 in the Stephens City area. The issue is Inland Port traffic cutting
through neighborhoods to find another way down to Route 522 instead of just taking 277 to 522.
Staff is seeking discussion and direction from the committee on this issue.
7
Item 4: Other