TC 03-25-19 Meeting MinutesTRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE REPORT to the BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
Monday, March 25, 2019
8:30 a.m.
107 NORTH KENT STREET, WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA
ATTENDEES:
Committee Members Present: Gary Lofton, Chairman (Voting), Judith McCann-
Slaughter (Voting), Gary Oates (Voting), James Racey (Voting), and Lewis Boyer (Liaison
Stephens City).
Committee Members Absent: Barry Schnoor (Voting) and Mark Davis (Liaison
Middletown).
Staff Present: Assistant Director-Transportation John Bishop, and Kathy Smith,
Secretary.
ACTION ITEM:
3-Northern Y-Revenue Sharing (see attached): The Northern Y has reached the 30% design and
cost estimate for the connection from Crossover Boulevard to Route 522 (Northern Y). Since
the 30% design has been reached it is to be reviewed by the Committee. The agreement with
the private partner contemplates a total project of $2.4 million to be shared by both parties.
The cost estimate was discussed in detail of what is included. The cost estimate has a shortfall
of $1,812,770.40. Under the agreement, either party can choose to contribute to this shortfall
or end the project. The County can address the shortfall by the pursuit of additional funding
through the revenue sharing project during the fall of 2019. Staff has discussed with the private
partner the shortfall and they have indicated that they are unwilling to put forth more funding
unless the County is doing so, however Staff was not provided an amount. This project does
play an important role for the County’s overall Comprehensive Plan.
The Committee voted to recommend the Board proceed with seeking additional revenue
sharing and continue on the project contingent upon Glaize indicating a willingness to provide
the matching funds for the revenue sharing funds and a backstop agreement to fund any
shortfalls that may arise.
ITEMS FOR INFORMATION ONLY:
1-Route 11 Access Break-Kernstown (see attached): Mr. Michael Coughlin, representing,
Winchester-81, LLC spoke to the Committee about his client’s desire for a limited access break
in the Kernstown area. He is requesting that the Committee recommend to the Board of
Supervisors to adopt a resolution supporting a full access into the property. It was noted that a
resolution was adopted by the Board of Supervisors for an access break at the location on
October 11, 2017. Winchester-81, LLC has performed another current analysis which shows that
one of the improvements that VDOT is requesting to be done is not necessary. The unnecessary
project would be that the southbound lane of Route 11 be widened to the intersection with
Commonwealth Court. After discussion, the Committee recommended for Winchester-81, LLC
to work together with VDOT’s Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) Planning Division to resolve the issue
for both parties then it will be heard by the Committee.
2-Old Charlestown Road Intersection with Route 11-Citizen Concerns (see attached): Staff and
Supervisor McCann-Slaughter has received numerous concerns from citizens related to traffic
back ups at the intersection of Route 11 and Old Charlestown Road with the upcoming Jordan
Springs Elementary School, these concerns have increased. The most recent round of
SmartScale applications, VDOT studied the intersection and it is noted a signal meets their
warrant requirement. The analysis from that SmartScale application showed a roundabout
instead of a signal would be best suited for the traffic flow of the northbound and southbound
lanes to prevent delays and safety of the area. Upon scoring of this project VDOT has not
recommended it for funding. The Stephenson Village (Snowden Bridge) rezoning proffers do
remain available. The development proffered improvements to Old Charlestown Road for a
signal at the intersection. Signalization at the intersection would need to meet VDOT warrants.
The Committee recommended that Staff coordinate with VDOT and the developer to seek a
resolution to the concerns in the area.
4-SmartScale Update and Breakdown: Staff gave an update on the steps of the SmartScale
process with the different components of the program structure. The Office of Intermodal
Planning and Investment (OIPI) provides multimodal planning which has grown through the
administrations for the different agencies under the Commonwealth Board Transportation.
Under the administrative level agency and the VTRANS which is the gate keeper of the
SmartScale process.
5-County Projects Updates: Tevis Street Extension/Airport Road/I-81 Bridge: The low bidder
on the project was Perry Engineering with a bid of $17,592,682.83. A preconstruction meeting
is scheduled for May 7, 2019 with an expected notice to proceed for May 14, 2019. The project
has an expected completion date of September 10, 2021.
Renaissance Drive: The project has the proceeding to 30% design under the new scope. Staff
has been in discussions with VDOT regarding the closure of the current Springdale Road rail
crossing and detail items on the road design such as transition of the existing curb and gutter
section into the ditch.
Northern Y: Please see item 3
Jubal Early Drive Extension and Interchange with Route 37: No activity at this time.
6-Upcoming Agenda Items: Interstate, Primary and Secondary Plan Updates.
TBD: Oakdale Crossing Traffic Calming Study.
7-Other: Staff received an informal request for general VDOT projects in the County area to be
updated and posted on the County’s web page.
Jo
b
N
o
:
FREDC18004
Da
t
e
2/25/2019
De
s
B
y
:
EDS
Ch
k
B
y
:
CLA
Se
c
t
i
o
n
S
t
a
.
t
o
S
t
a
.
C
o
s
t
R1
5
0
W
4
1
+
7
5
t
o
4
5
+
7
1
.
6
8
$
8
6
0
,
0
1
5
FL
G
6
4
B
-
A
-
7
3
B
4
5
+
7
1
.
6
8
t
o
4
7
+
8
5
$
4
6
2
,
4
8
4
FL
G
6
4
-
A
-
9
4
7
+
8
5
t
o
5
6
+
3
5
$
1
,
8
4
2
,
8
2
6
RT
.
5
2
2
1
4
+
2
6
t
o
2
1
+
2
0
$
2
,
0
3
4
,
7
5
4
El
k
s
L
o
d
g
e
/
A
c
c
e
s
s
R
o
a
d
$2
4
6
,
8
0
5
Po
n
d
$6
0
6
,
5
0
6
To
t
a
l
$
6
,
0
5
3
,
3
9
0
No
t
e
s
:
1.
T
o
t
a
l
l
i
n
e
a
r
f
o
o
t
a
g
e
f
o
r
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
,
i
n
c
l
u
d
i
n
g
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
s
R
1
5
0
W
,
F
L
G
6
4
B
-
A
-
7
3
B
,
F
L
G
6
4
-
A
-
9
,
E
l
k
s
L
o
d
g
e
/
A
c
c
e
s
s
R
o
a
d
,
a
n
d
R
t
.
5
2
2
,
i
s
2
4
9
8
L
F
.
2.
R
o
a
d
w
a
y
c
o
s
t
s
p
e
r
L
F
i
n
c
l
u
d
e
s
M
o
b
i
l
i
z
a
t
i
o
n
,
1
2
%
c
o
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
a
d
m
i
n
.
a
n
d
a
2
5
%
c
o
n
t
i
n
g
e
n
c
y
.
3.
M
O
T
i
s
i
n
c
l
u
d
e
d
i
n
R
T
.
5
2
2
.
4.
C
o
s
t
s
a
s
s
o
c
i
a
t
e
d
w
i
t
h
t
h
e
P
r
o
p
o
s
e
d
T
r
a
f
f
i
c
S
i
g
n
a
l
a
r
e
i
n
c
l
u
d
e
d
i
n
R
T
.
5
2
2
.
5.
R
o
a
d
w
a
y
c
o
s
t
s
$
1
,
6
1
3
.
1
4
p
e
r
L
F
f
o
r
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
s
R
1
5
0
W
,
F
L
G
6
4
B
-
A
-
7
3
B
,
F
L
G
6
4
-
A
-
9
.
Pe
n
n
o
n
i
A
s
s
o
c
i
a
t
e
s
I
n
c
.
Co
n
s
u
l
t
i
n
g
E
n
g
i
n
e
e
r
s
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
:
N
o
r
t
h
T
e
v
i
s
S
t
r
e
e
t
E
x
t
e
n
s
i
o
n
-
U
P
C
9
4
8
4
6
Su
b
j
e
c
t
:
E
s
t
i
m
a
t
e
B
r
e
a
k
d
o
w
n
Pe
r
c
e
n
t
a
g
e
100%30%8%14%34%4%10%
Job No: FREDC18004
Date 2/25/2019
Des By:EDS
Chk By:CLA
ITEM UNIT QUANTITY PRICE TOTAL
DEMOLITION
DEMOLITION OF EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY HOME EA 1 $10,000.00 $10,000.00
DEMOLITION OF EXISTING ELKS LODGE DRIVEWAY SY 1284 $12.00 $15,406.40
SAWCUT LF 700 $20.00 $14,000.00
FLEXIBLE PAVEMENT PLANING (0-1.5" DEPTH) SY 5,762 $1.85 $10,660.21
REMOVAL OF FENCING LF 390 $10.00 $3,900.00
REMOVE SIDEWALK RAMP SY 25 $5.00 $124.63
REMOVE EXISTING DRIVEWAY SY 282 $20.00 $5,634.22
REMOVE EXISTING STORM PIPE LF 650 $40.00 $26,000.00
REMOVE EXISTING DROP INLET EA 5 $1,200.00 $6,000.00
REMOVE EXISTING STORM STRUCTURE EA 2 $750.00 $1,500.00
REMOVE CURB AND GUTTER LF 665 $20.00 $13,293.00
EARTHWORKS
CLEARING AND GRUBBING AC 5 $10,000.00 $53,754.13
REGULAR EXCAVATION CY 19,850 $18.00 $357,300.00
SELECT MATERIAL, TYPE I TON 28,526 $10.00 $285,257.70
GRADING SY 26,000 $1.00 $26,000.00
ROADSIDE DEVELOPMENT (SEEDING, TOPSPOIL, LIME, FERTILIZER,ETC)LS 1 $125,000.00 $125,000.00
PAVEMENT
STD. COMB. CURB & GUTTER CG-6 LF 2,850 $22.17 $63,193.37
RADIAL COMB. CURB & GUTTER CG-6 LF 593 $25.00 $14,827.50
STD CURB CG-7 LF 46 $19.93 $924.75
STD CG-12 WITH DETECTABLE WARNING SURFACE SY 245 $597.22 $146,199.46
GRASS MEDIAN STRIP, M2 LF 382 $35.00 $13,356.00
CONCRETE MEDIAN STRIP, MS-1A SY 138 $100.00 $13,817.78
HYDRAULIC CEMENT CONC. 4" SIDEWALK SY 696 $48.27 $33,601.82
1.5" SURFACE COURSE - SM-9.5D TON 1,423 $75.31 $107,174.63
2" SURFACE COURSE MULTI-USE PATH- SM-9.5AL TON 157 $75.31 $11,821.41
2.5" INTERMEDIATE COURSE - IM-19D TON 2,025 $115.00 $232,821.46
BASE COURSE - BM-25.0D TON 1,491 $68.37 $101,925.55
AGGREGATE BASE - NO.21B TON 1,972 $18.40 $36,282.99
TACK COAT GAL 816 $3.50 $2,856.93
GUARDRAIL / FENCING
STD GR-MGS1 LF 236 $20.00 $4,720.00
STD GR-MGS2 EA 2 $2,500.00 $5,000.00
DRAINAGE
DRAINAGE LS 1 $450,000.00 $450,000.00
BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES (REVENUE SHARING)LS 1 $425,000.00 $425,000.00
TRAFFIC SIGNAL
TRAFFIC SIGNAL - RT.522 AND TEVIS STREET LS 1 $350,000.00 $350,000.00
SIGNAGE / PAVEMENT MARKING
SIGNAGE LS 1 $48,900.00 $48,900.00
PAVEMENT MARKINGS LS 1 $55,500.00 $55,500.00
MAINTENANCE OF TRAFFIC
MOT LS 1 $300,000.00 $300,000.00
MISCELLANEOUS
ROW LS 1 $350,000.00 $350,000.00
E&S LS 1 $200,000.00 $200,000.00
UTILITY RELOCATIONS - GAS, ELECTRIC, POWER LS 1 $300,000.00 $300,000.00
RELOCATION OF ELKS LODGE SIGN LS 1 $20,000.00 $20,000.00
TOTAL BID AMOUNT $4,241,753.93
MOBILIZATION $242,187.11
CONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATION @ 12%$509,010.47
CONTINGENCIES @ 25%$1,060,438.48
GRAND TOTAL $6,053,390.00
Pennoni Associates Inc.
Consulting Engineers
Project: Northern Tevis Street Extension - UPC 94846
Subject: 30% Submittal Estimate
WINCHESTER-81 PROPERTY ANALYSISWINCHESTER-81 PROPERTY ANALYSISPROPERTY ANALYSISSUPPLEMENTAL TRANSPORTATION ASSESSMENT
JANUARY 2019
PROPERTY ANALYSISPROPERTY ANALYSIS
FILENAME: H:\19\19471 - WINCHESTER, LLC PROPERTY\REPORT\19471_SUPPLEMENTAL TRAFFIC ANALYSIS_FINAL.DOCX
MEMORANDUM
Date: January 17, 2019 Project #: 19471
To: Winchester‐81 LLC
C/O Michael Coughlin
Walsh Colucci Lubeley & Walsh, PC
4310 Prince William County Parkway
Prince William, VA 22192
From: Chris Tiesler, PE
Project: Winchester‐81 Property Analysis
Subject: Supplemental Transportation Assessment
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Kittelson & Associates, Inc. (Kittelson) has prepared this memorandum to document the findings of a
supplemental analysis of the Winchester‐81 property traffic impact study. The main body of this
memorandum provides a thorough presentation and discussion of relevant details related to prior
studies, background growth assumptions, access configurations serving the subject Winchester‐81
property, and an updated assessment of off‐site transportation improvements considered.
Overall, the analysis demonstrates that a full break in limited access on Route 11 provides a net benefit
to the overall transportation system relative to the scenarios with no limited access break or only a partial
(ingress‐only) break. We recommend that a break in limited access be granted to provide full access to
the subject site, and the SR‐37 westbound off‐ramp be widened by year 2030. Key findings from this
supplemental assessment are summarized below.
The full April 2018 transportation impact study identified the weekday p.m. peak hour as the
most critical time period.
o This assessment focuses exclusively on weekday p.m. peak hour performance
o Traffic conditions during the weekday a.m. and Saturday midday time periods are
better that those reported for the weekday p.m. peak hour
The full April 2018 transportation impact study was required by VDOT to apply a 1.5% annual
growth rate to forecast future background volume conditions
o Long‐term historical AADT data on Route 11empirically demonstrate 0.5% is a more
appropriate growth rate for the study area.
Winchester‐81 Property Analysis Project #: 19471
January 17, 2019 Page 2
Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Reston, Virginia
o VDOT applied a 0.5% annual growth rate in their STARS Route 11 (Valley Pike/Valley
Avenue) Corridor Study
o This assessment also applies a 0.5% annual growth rate
Several access scenarios have been fully re‐evaluated to understand how the amount of
direct access provided to the Winchester‐81 site impacts intersection operations and Route
11 corridor performance, and how widening the SR‐37 westbound off‐ramp would affect
performance.
o Background (no development on Winchester‐81 property)
o Full Access
o Ingress‐Only with SB left‐turn in (all exiting traffic uses Commonwealth Court)
o Ingress‐Only with no SB left‐turn in (SB lefts must turn at Commonwealth Court; all
exiting traffic uses Commonwealth Court)
o No Access (no limited access break granted – all Winchester‐81 traffic accesses site
via Commonwealth Court)
Key findings from opening year 2021 analyses:
o Commonwealth Court intersection operates at LOS F under all access scenarios except
Full Access, which operates at LOS C
o SR‐37 WB Off‐Ramp intersection with no off‐ramp widening:
LOS C/D under all access scenarios
No ramp queue spillback under all access scenarios
o SR‐37 WB Off‐Ramp intersection with ramp widening:
LOS C/D under all access scenarios (generally slightly lower delays due to
increased capacity of widened ramp)
No ramp queue spillback under all access scenarios
Key findings from design year 2040 analyses:
o Commonwealth Court intersection operates at LOS F under all access scenarios except
Full Access, which operates at LOS D
o SR‐37 WB Off‐Ramp intersection with no off‐ramp widening:
LOS D under all access scenarios except Full Access, which operates at LOS E
Ramp queue spillback under all access scenarios
o SR‐37 WB Off‐Ramp intersection with ramp widening:
LOS C/D under all access scenarios (generally slightly lower delays due to
increased capacity of widened ramp)
Ramp queue spillback under all access scenarios except Full Access
Winchester‐81 Property Analysis Project #: 19471
January 17, 2019 Page 3
Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Reston, Virginia
Key findings regarding Route 11 corridor performance:
o As more direct access to the site is provided, traffic demands on Route 11 are
reduced. Thus, Route 11 performance is inversely related to Winchester‐81 property
access.
o By the design year 2040, the corridor operation conditions naturally deteriorate due
to additional background growth being assumed over time.
The Full Access break produces better progression on Route 11 peak direction
(southbound) relative to the No Access and Ingress‐Only access scenarios.
Key findings related to SR‐37 westbound off‐ramp queues:
o In 2021, none of the access scenario produce queue spillback to mainline SR‐37.
o By the design year 2040, the SR‐37 westbound off‐ramp queue is forecast to spill back
onto mainline SR‐37 under all access scenarios if the off‐ramp is not widened.
o If widened, the projected maximum queue is forecast to exceed the available storage
under the No Access and Ingress‐Only access scenarios.
o Providing Full Access to the Winchester‐81 site produces the shortest queues relative
to the other access scenarios and will not cause queues on the off‐ramp to spill back
onto mainline SR‐37 or adversely impact the operations along Route 11 or SR‐37
when the off‐ramp is widened to a four‐lane cross‐section.
Key findings related to off‐site transportation improvements:
o Traffic from the Winchester‐81 site adds traffic to the SR‐37 westbound off‐ramp but
does not cause queues to spill back under any access scenario in 2021.
o The additional background growth in traffic (an additional 9.5% between 2021 and
2040) will eventually cause queues to spill back to mainline SR‐37 under all access
scenarios unless the off‐ramp is widened.
If widened, only the Full Access scenario produces an acceptable queue that
will not spill back to mainline SR‐37.
o Traffic generated by the Winchester‐81 site does not necessitate widening Route 11.
Consider that by design year 2040 assuming full access, background traffic
growth on southbound represents 12.1% of the total volume, while site‐
generated traffic contributes only 0.6%.
Providing Full Access to the Winchester‐81 site minimizes its traffic impact to
Route 11 operations and produces the best overall operational results.
o Widening the SR‐37 westbound off‐ramp will be necessary under all access scenarios
by year 2040. This need is driven mostly by projected long‐term growth in background
traffic over time, and to a lesser extent by traffic generated by the Winchester‐81 site.
Sensitivity analyses suggest widening will be required by year 2030 to ensure off‐ramp
queues do not spill back to mainline SR‐37.
Winchester‐81 Property Analysis Project #: 19471
January 17, 2019 Page 4
Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Reston, Virginia
o Overall, the signal phasing/timing changes required by any access scenario are
relatively minor, and the Full Access scenario produces acceptable design year 2040
operational results at the SR‐37 Westbound Ramp Terminal signal and consistently
produces the best overall transportation system performance relative to the other
access scenarios.
o Providing access to the Winchester‐81 site will require modification of the existing
traffic signal, which the property owner has agreed to design/construct. The owner
will also construct the extension of Commonwealth Court through his own property
to facilitate access and the connection between the SR‐37 ramp and the current
terminus of Commonwealth Court.
Winchester‐81 Property Analysis Project #: 19471
January 17, 2019 Page 5
Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Reston, Virginia
INTRODUCTION
Kittelson prepared a transportation impact analysis
1 of the Winchester‐81 site in April 2018 that
comprehensively considered property access configurations and the resultant impacts on the
surrounding transportation network. The scope of the study was developed with and approved by the
Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT). Identified performance measures spanned a broad range
of network, segment, and intersection metrics focused on the operational performance of the system for
both an assumed opening year (2021) and design year (2040). The design year of 2040 was selected to
understand the potential long‐term impact of a break in the limited access line along the site’s frontage,
which would be required for two of the three access scenarios considered (ingress‐only access, full
access). It purposefully avoids mixing objectively‐measured performance metrics with subjective
assessments of other less easily measured factors.
The study demonstrated that full/direct access to the site at the SR‐37 WB Off‐Ramp produces the best
overall results/outcome for the Winchester‐81 site as well as the surrounding transportation network.
Restricting access to the Winchester‐81 site only serves to increase strain on Route 11 and the adjacent
Route 11/Commonwealth Court intersection and would have negative repercussions to development
potential, marketability, and overall value of the site itself.
The April 2018 study conclusively demonstrated two key outcomes relied upon throughout the
remainder of this document:
The weekday p.m. peak hour is the most critical time period when demands on the
transportation network are greatest – even relative to the other peak hours evaluated (weekday
a.m. and Saturday midday). If analyses demonstrate adequate performance of the transportation
system during this time period, it can be assumed that the system will operate as well or better
during all other peak and non‐peak periods.
Full access to the Winchester‐81 site consistently produces the best overall performance
relative to the other access scenarios (ingress‐only, no access).
BACKGROUND GROWTH ASSUMPTIONS
The April 2018 study was required by VDOT to apply a 1.5% annual growth rate to existing traffic volumes
through the identified design year of 2040. During this same time, VDOT commissioned a study of the
Route 11 corridor2 from Battle Park Drive to Renaissance Drive through their Strategically Targeted
Affordable Roadway Solutions (STARS) Program. This program’s goal is to develop comprehensive,
1 Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Winchester‐81 Property Analysis. April 2018.
2 Virginia Department of Transportation & WSP. Route 11 (Valley Pike/Valley Avenue) Corridor Study – Final Draft Report.
https://winfredmpo.org/wp‐content/uploads/2018/10/STARS‐Final‐Draft‐Report‐Route‐11‐08062018‐002.pdf
Winchester‐81 Property Analysis Project #: 19471
January 17, 2019 Page 6
Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Reston, Virginia
innovative transportation solutions to relieve congestion bottlenecks and solve critical traffic and safety
challenges throughout the commonwealth.
Table 1 shows the Average Annual Daily Traffic (ADT) volumes on the Route 11 corridor taken from the
STARS report. The presented linear historic growth rates show primarily low growth in the study area.
The VDOT STARS project team identified and agreed upon a 0.5% annual growth rate in its analyses. The
assumed growth rate of 0.5% per year was applied to the 2017 traffic volumes to generate projected
future year traffic volumes.
Table 1. VDOT Historic Traffic Volumes from STARS Report
Year Roadway Segment/AADT Volume
AADT Type of Count
1997 15110 Average of Selected Continuous Count Data
1998 15673 Average of Complete Continuous Data
1999 15735 Factored Short Term Traffic Count Data
2000 15801 Average of Selected Continuous Count Data
2001 15139 Average of Complete Continuous Data
2002 15854 Average of Complete Continuous Data
2003 16501 Average of Complete Continuous Data
2004 17399 Average of Selected Continuous Count Data
2005 17445 Average of Complete Continuous Data
2006 17304 Average of Selected Continuous Count Data
2007 17219 Average of Selected Continuous Count Data
2008 16305 Average of Complete Continuous Data
2009 15959 Average of Complete Continuous Data
2010 16593 Average of Complete Continuous Data
2011 16615 Average of Complete Continuous Data
2012 16772 Average of Complete Continuous Data
2013 16788 Average of Complete Continuous Data
2014 16432 Average of Complete Continuous Data
2015 16577 Average of Complete Continuous Data
2016 16707 Average of Complete Continuous Data
Table 2 shows the long‐term historical data on relevant roadways immediately adjacent to the
Winchester‐81 site. When restricting the analysis to a most recent 10‐year timeframe, the annual growth
rate on Route 11 is calculated as negative ‐0.5%.
The analysis of empirical data demonstrates that VDOT’s requirement for the Winchester‐81 study to
apply a 1.5% annual growth rate is too conservative and over‐estimates future growth and resultant
traffic operations under both the opening (2021) and design year (2040) conditions. The long‐term
historical data on Route 11 suggests 0.5% annual growth rate is more appropriate. Therefore, this
supplemental analysis applies a 0.5% annual growth rate through year 2040.
Winchester‐81 Property Analysis Project #: 19471
January 17, 2019 Page 7
Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Reston, Virginia
Table 2. VDOT Historical Average Daily Traffic (ADT) Volumes (2007‐2017)
Year
Route 11
% Change City Line to
SR‐37
2007 17000 ‐‐
2008 16000 ‐5.9%
2009 16000 0.0%
2010 17000 6.3%
2011 17000 0.0%
2012 17000 0.0%
2013 17000 0.0%
2014 16000 ‐5.9%
2015 17000 6.3%
2016 17000 0.0%
2017 16000 ‐5.9%
Average Annual Growth ‐0.5%
UPDATED TRAFFIC ANALYSES
The analyses of weekday p.m. peak hour total traffic conditions (full build out of the Winchester‐81
property) was conducted assuming no ramp widening for analysis years 2021 and 2040. Table 3 shows
the lane configuration assumptions at the westbound off‐ramp approach for each access scenario.
Figure 1 illustrates the various access scenarios and how site‐generated traffic would access the
Winchester‐81 site for each.
Winchester‐81 Property Analysis Project #: 19471
January 17, 2019 Page 8
Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Reston, Virginia
Table 3. Lane Configuration Assumptions at Route 11 / SR‐37 WB Off‐Ramp Intersection
Access Break Assumed Lane Configurations Access Break Assumed Lane Configurations
No Build/Background
No development of
subject parcel
Establish a baseline
benchmark
Ingress‐Only w/out SB Left‐In
Requires break in
limited access ‐ NBR
into the site; EBT into
the site
NO outbound traffic is
allowed
Force all exiting traffic
to leave site via
Commonwealth and
south on Route 11 to
return to SR‐37 and/or
I‐81
No Access
No break in limited access
All traffic to/from site via
Route 11 and
Commonwealth Court
Ingress‐Only w/ SB Left‐In
Requires break in
limited access ‐ NBR
into the site; EBT into
the site; and SBL into
the site
NO outbound traffic is
allowed
Force all exiting traffic
to leave site via
Commonwealth and
south on Route 11 to
return to SR‐37 and/or
I‐81
Ingress‐Only (Right In/Right Out
Only)
Requires break in limited
access ‐ NBR into the site;
and WBR out of the site
Force all exiting traffic to
leave site via
Commonwealth and
south on Route 11 to
return to SR‐37 and/or I‐
81
No changes at signal
phasing or signal timing
required
This scenario yields
similar results to that of
No Access break scenario.
No detailed analysis is
presented in this memo
Full Access
Requires break in
limited access
All movements are
allowed and provide
full access in and out
of the development
Eliminates non‐
intuitive and out‐of‐
direction travel to
access site
Winchester‐81 Property Analysis Project #: 19471
January 17, 2019 Page 10
Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Reston, Virginia
Intersection Operations
Table 4 provides a comparison of traffic operational results at key intersections. Attachment A contains
the operational analysis worksheets for all scenarios assuming the SR‐37 westbound off‐ramp is not
widened.
Route 11/Commonwealth Court
The intersection of Route 11 and Commonwealth Court is forecast to operate at LOS F in year 2021 and
2040 under No Access and Ingress‐Only scenarios. The intersection will operate at LOS C/D when a full
access break is provided.
Route 11/SR‐37 WB Ramp Terminal
The intersection of Route 11 and SR‐37 WB Off‐Ramp is forecast to operate at LOS D or better under all
access break scenarios in 2021. In 2040, the intersection will operate at LOS E when a full access break is
provided.
Table 4. Intersection Operation Results – PM Peak Hour without SR‐37 WB Off‐Ramp Widening
Intersection
2021 PM No Widened Ramp
Background No Access Ingress‐Only
w/o SBL
Ingress‐Only
w/ SBL Full Access
Route 11 / Commonwealth Ct 29.1 (C) 85.2 (F) 88.6 (F) 95.9 (F) 28.1 (C)
Route 11 / SR‐37 WB Ramps 28.0 (C) 37.1 (D) 37.4 (D)* 35.0 (C)* 50.8 (D)*
Intersection
2040 PM No Widened Ramp
Background No Access Ingress‐Only
w/o SBL
Ingress‐Only
w/ SBL Full Access
Route 11 / Commonwealth Ct 38.0 (D) 117.5 (F) 127.0 (F) 128.1 (F) 39.3 (D)
Route 11 / SR‐37 WB Ramps 32.3 (C) 52.9 (D) 47.1 (D)* 41.6 (D)* 69.2 (E)*
*HCM 2000 results since the geometry is not supported by the HCM 2010 methodology.
Route 11 Corridor Operations
Figure 2 illustrates a comparison of Route 11 southbound arterial speed. In 2021, the southbound Route
11 corridor operation conditions are comparable across all access scenarios. By the design year 2040, the
corridor operation conditions naturally deteriorate due to additional background growth being assumed
over time. Route 11 southbound is forecast to operate with an average arterial speed of 9 mph under
the No Access and Ingress‐Only Access with SB left‐in scenarios, with a decrease of 7 mph compared to
the background condition. Attachment B contains the corridor operations analysis worksheets for all
scenarios assuming the SR‐37 westbound off‐ramp is not widened.
Winchester‐81 Property Analysis Project #: 19471
January 17, 2019 Page 11
Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Reston, Virginia
Figure 2. Route 11 Southbound Arterial Speed Comparisons
Site‐Generated Traffic vs. Background Growth
Traffic generated by the subject parcel represents a small percentage of overall traffic on Route 11
southbound in the design year when compared to the cumulative increase in traffic volumes due to
assumed background growth. It is also noteworthy that as parcel access increases, site‐generated traffic
impacts on Route 11 southbound decrease. Table 5 shows the relationship between site‐generated
traffic and background traffic across the identified access scenarios under year 2040 design year
conditions.
Table 5. Percent Contribution to Route 11 Southbound Traffic Volumes – Design Year 2040
Traffic Generator
Access Scenario
No Access Ingress‐Only
w/o SBL
Ingress‐Only
w/ SBL Full Access
Site‐Generated Traffic from
Subject Site 13.8% 8.2% 8.2% 0.6%
Background Growth 8.9% 9.5% 9.5% 12.1%
Queuing Analysis at SR‐37 WB Off‐Ramp
Figure 3 illustrates a queue comparison for future analysis years. In 2021, the projected queues can be
accommodated by the available turning storage lengths under all access scenarios. No queue spill back
onto mainline SR‐37 (Winchester Bypass) will occur, and adequate sight distance to the back of queue is
provided. By the design year 2040, the forecast maximum queues are projected to spill back onto SR‐37
under all access scenarios in the off‐ramp is not widened.
Winchester‐81 Property Analysis Project #: 19471
January 17, 2019 Page 12
Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Reston, Virginia
Figure 3. Queue Lengths at SR‐37 WB Off‐Ramp Comparisons (No Ramp Widening)
OFF‐SITE IMPROVEMENTS
The property owner commissioned the Winchester‐81 study to set in motion a process to obtain a break
in the limited access line along its Route 11 frontage to provide direct access to the site. This access would
include construction of an extension of Commonwealth Court through the property to appropriate public
street standards, as well as reconstruction/modification of the existing traffic signal at the Route 11/SR‐
37 WB Ramps intersection to facilitate full access, at the owner’s sole cost.
SR‐37 Westbound Off‐Ramp Widening
The same intersection‐ and corridor‐level measures of effectiveness (MOEs) consistent with study
parameters and forecasting assumptions contained in the Winchester I‐81 Property Analysis Report are
evaluated with the assumption of the widening of the SR‐37 westbound ramp.
Table 6 presents a comparison of traffic operational results at key intersections assuming the SR‐37
Westbound Off‐Ramp is widened. Widening will not change intersection operations previously reported
for the Route 11 / Commonwealth Court intersection. With the ramp widening, the Route 11 / SR‐37 WB
Ramp intersection is forecast to operate at LOS D or better through design year 2040 under all access
scenarios. Attachment C contains the operational analysis worksheets for all scenarios assuming the SR‐
37 westbound off‐ramp is widened.
Winchester‐81 Property Analysis Project #: 19471
January 17, 2019 Page 13
Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Reston, Virginia
Table 6. Intersection Operation Results – PM Peak Hour with SR‐37 WB Off‐Ramp Widening
Intersection
2021 PM Ramp Widened
Background No Access Ingress‐Only
w/o SBL
Ingress‐Only
w/ SBL Full Access
Route 11 / Commonwealth Ct 29.1 (C) 85.2 (F) 88.6 (F) 95.9 (F) 28.1 (C)
Route 11 / SR‐37 WB Ramps 28.0 (C) 37.1 (D) 28.6 (C)* 30.2 (C)* 46.9 (D)
Intersection
2040 PM Ramp Widened
Background No Access Ingress‐Only
w/ SBL
Ingress‐Only
w/o SBL Full Access
Route 11 / Commonwealth Ct 38.0 (D) 117.5 (F) 127.0 (F) 128.1 (F) 39.3 (D)
Route 11 / SR‐37 WB Ramps 32.3 (C) 52.9 (D) 33.5 (C)* 33.3 (C)* 50.6 (D)
Figure 4 compares forecast Route 11 southbound arterial speeds across all evaluated access scenarios.
The full Access break scenario produces the highest southbound corridor speeds compared to other
access scenarios. Provision of full access to the subject site reduces congestion and provides improved
progression along southbound Route 11 in both 2021 and 2040 relative to the other access scenarios.
Attachment D contains the corridor operations analysis worksheets for all scenarios assuming the SR‐37
westbound off‐ramp is widened.
Figure 4. Route 11 Southbound Speed Comparisons – With and Without SR‐37 WB Ramp Widening
Figure 5 and Figure 6 illustrate the forecast queue lengths on the SR‐37 westbound off‐ramp. In 2021,
projected queues can be accommodated by the available turning storage lengths under all access
scenarios, though Full Access to the subject site produces the shortest queue compared to the No Access
and Ingress‐Only scenarios. By the design year 2040, the SR‐37 westbound off‐ramp queue is forecast to
spill back onto mainline SR‐37 under all access scenarios if the off‐ramp is not widened. If widened, the
projected maximum queue is forecast to exceed the available storage under the No Access and Ingress‐
Only access scenarios. Again, provision of full access to the subject site produces the shortest queues
relative to the other access scenarios and will not cause queues on the off‐ramp to spill back onto
Winchester‐81 Property Analysis Project #: 19471
January 17, 2019 Page 14
Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Reston, Virginia
mainline SR‐37 or adversely impact the operations along Route 11 or SR‐37 when the off‐ramp is widened
to a four‐lane cross‐section.
Figure 5. Year 2021 Queue Lengths at SR‐37 WB Off‐Ramp Comparisons – With and Without SR‐37 WB
Off‐Ramp Widening
Figure 6. Year 2040 Queue Lengths at SR‐37 WB Off‐Ramp Comparisons – With and Without SR‐37 WB
Off‐Ramp Widening
Winchester‐81 Property Analysis Project #: 19471
January 17, 2019 Page 15
Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Reston, Virginia
Traffic Signal Phasing/Timing
Providing a limited access break would add a signal phase to the SR‐37 Westbound Ramp Terminal traffic
signal for the Full Access scenario. Ingress‐Only access scenarios require some signal timing/green time
reallocation between various movements. All signal phasing and timing parameters were adjusted in
accordance with VDOT Traffic Engineering Memorandum TE 306.1 to account for new inbound
movements. Key findings related to signal phasing/timing for each access scenario are summarized
below.
Full Access
o Adds a signal phase to allow outbound movements.
Without SR‐37 off‐ramp widening, the eastbound/off‐ramp approach and
westbound approach must operate with split phasing (EB and WB movements
operate sequentially).
With SR‐37 off‐ramp widening, protected left‐turn phasing facilitates
concurrent EB/WB left‐turn movements, improving the efficiency of the signal
operation and operates acceptably through design year 2040.
Ingress‐Only (with SB left‐turn in & without SB left‐turn in)
o Neither scenario adds a signal phase but requires a small amount of green time
(approximately 8‐9 seconds) be reallocated from the NB Route 11 through
movement.
This reallocation of green time does not change the intersection LOS or the
specific northbound Route 11 through movement LOS in design year 2040.
Average delay increase to NB Route 11 through movement without ramp
widening:
8.7 seconds
Average delay increase to NB Route 11 through movement with ramp
widening:
6.0 seconds if SR‐37 Westbound Off‐Ramp is widened
No Access
o Does not add a signal phase.
Overall, the signal phasing/timing changes required by any access scenario are relatively minor, and the
Full Access scenario produces acceptable design year 2040 operational results at the SR‐37 Westbound
Ramp Terminal signal and consistently produces the best overall transportation system performance
relative to the other access scenarios.
WWW.KITELSON.COM
1
LIMITED ACCESS CONTROL CHANGE (LACC) PROCESS
• Requests for limited access control changes (LACC) shall be initiated at the District level and
made to the District Administrator in writing by the party or entity requesting the LACC.
Following review at the District level, the District Administrator shall discuss the requested
change with their respective CTB member(s), and subsequently submit a written
recommendation to approve or deny the request, which summarizes the details of the LACC and
includes each disciplines recommendations, conditions, requirements for the LACC; specific
stations for and widths of the break(s) or shifts; whether lands shall be donated for increased
right of way citing if the area to be acquired was included in the original NEPA document for the
project, (If not included in the original NEPA document for the project then determine if one is
needed and so state and provide a copy when complete and a title report); any impacts of the
change on future transportation planning and construction; whether the location of the proposed
LACC is within an air quality non-attainment area and if so whether the proposed LACC has
been through the air quality conformity review, and cite the findings; and ownership of the
control rights will also be addressed., along with the review package with all supporting reports
and data to the Chief Engineer no later than the 10th of the month prior to the anticipated month
of the CTB meeting at which the LACC will be considered. The complete request package
should be copied to the Director of Right of Way and Utilities and the Assistant L&D Engineer
as assigned to that District in Central Office.
Activities prior to submission and documentation needed are as follows:
• Posting of a deposit by requestor sufficient to cover the estimated costs of the Department’s
expenses in accomplishing the required reviews, postings, approvals, etc. (include invoices in
package). The amount of the deposit will be determined by the estimated amount of research,
2
engineering and cost of the appraisal prior to consideration by the CTB. The requestor shall pay
the actual Department expenses if greater than the deposit. These costs are in addition to the
monetary compensation required. Requests by a locality for consideration of change of access
control for public transportation purposes are exempted from posting of a deposit at the Chief
Engineer’s discretion.
• Preparation of a global traffic analysis by requestor.
• A resolution, letter of support and/or a formal request from the locality and copy of same.
• A Posting of Willingness by the Department for public comment on the proposed LACC, (at
requestor’s expense) with copies of the advertisements and any resulting written comments
received.
• The Resident Administrator, District Traffic Engineering, Location and Design (L&D), Right of
Way and Utilities, Planning, Environmental Sections and/or other disciplines, as needed and/or
identified by circumstance of the LACC, will review the request and provide a discipline specific
written summary of recommendations/requirements/conditions to the District Administrator
including but not limited to signalization, whether break is at grade or aerial, turning movements,
lane/ramp additions, median breaks or adjustments, whether the location of the proposed LACC
is within an air quality non-attainment area and if so whether the proposed LACC has been
through the air quality conformity review, provide a copy of that report and cite the findings in
the summary. Also if there is to be additional right of way acquired as a result of the proposed
LACC, cite whether the area to be acquired was included in the original NEPA document for the
project and provide that determination in the summary. If not included in the original NEPA
document for the project then determine if one is needed and so state and provide a copy when
complete, development plats showing the proposed LACC.
• The review package shall include any reports; marked title and plan sheets for both the project on
which the control rights were acquired and the most recent plans showing the LACC area; letter
to the State director of Right of Way and Utilities from the District Right of Way and Utility
3
Manager citing whether as a result of the proposed LACC there will be enhancement to the value
of the property adjoining the proposed LACC. Copies of the instrument(s) of acquisition are
required if a deed is to be prepared following CTB approval.
• The Chief Engineer will initiate a Central Office review through necessary Central Office
divisions. Incomplete packages shall not be considered for inclusion on the agenda and will be
postponed from consideration until all information/documentation is received.
• The Assistant State L&D Engineer shall contact the Federal Highway Administration for all
necessary review subject to existing law and policy requirements, and in all instances involving
the Interstate Highway System when federal funds were involved in the acquisition of the limited
access control. This review and approval is required prior to any CTB consideration.
• Once the CTB has approved the request, the requestor shall have 180 days from the date of CTB
approval to submit the monetary or other consideration and to secure all necessary permits from
the Department. Failure to do so shall void the CTB approval. The Department will convey any
necessary land rights as necessary to comply with the request.
• Upon approval by the CTB, the Chief Engineer or his delegate will advise the District
Administrator and all parties of the approval with a notice to proceed to effect the action.
• Upon approval of the Chief Engineer, the Right of Way and Utilities Division will establish the
compensation enhancement. Non-public use LACC requires monetary or other good and
valuable consideration and is determined through the Department’s appraisal process for the
establishment of fair market value using the before and after valuation process as set forth in the
Right of Way and Utilities Division’s Manual of Instructions’ Chapter 4. Approval of value for
any LACC shall be by the Director of the Right and Utilities Division at his discretion. Once the
compensation enhancement is approved, the Director of the Right of Way and Utilities Division
will advise the District Administrator and the District Right of Way and Utilities Manager of this
determination.
4
• The District Administrator shall ensure that the collection of any consideration, conveyance of
control rights, and construction of safety and operational improvements are completed.
Typically, the District Right of Way and Utilities section will collect the consideration and
handle any conveyance issues regarding the LACC and/or land. The Right of Way and Utilities
Division will prepare any necessary deed conveying or exchanging LACC and/or land as
required by circumstance. Many changes in control do not require the conveyance of any rights,
etc. Except for the completion of safety and/or operational improvements, no conveyance,
right of entry or permit is to be issued until all specifics of the CTB resolution are met and
fulfilled (including, the collection of all funds or other compensation owed the
Commonwealth for granting the change). The District Location and Design Engineer will, as
a minimum, revise the most recent project plans accurately reflecting the area of the change to
show all changes effective with the date of the CTB resolution.
PROPOSED
INTERSECTION
P
R
O
P
O
S
E
D
A
C
C
E
S
S
B
R
E
A
K
P
R
O
P
O
S
E
D
E
X
T
E
N
D
E
D
C
O
M
M
O
N
W
E
A
L
T
H
C
T
15
1
W
i
n
d
y
H
i
l
l
L
a
n
e
Wi
n
c
h
e
s
t
e
r
,
V
i
r
g
i
n
i
a
2
2
6
0
2
Te
l
e
p
h
o
n
e
:
(
5
4
0
)
6
6
2
-
4
1
8
5
Fa
x
:
(
5
4
0
)
7
2
2
-
9
5
2
8
ww
w
.
g
r
e
e
n
w
a
y
e
n
g
.
c
o
m
F
N
D
1
9
7
1
E
N
G
I
N
E
E
R
I
N
G