The URL can be used to link to this page

TCAgenda2023January231.Route 37 Study Update 1.A.Route 37 Study Update 2.Gainesboro Road at Route 522 Intersection Update 2.A.Review of VDOT Comments on Signal Justification Report 3.Frederick County Middle School/Gainesboro Elementary School Access 3.A.Review of Draft Access/Circulation Plan 4.County Project Updates 4.A.County Project Updates 5.Other 5.A.Other AGENDA TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE MONDAY, JANUARY 23, 2023 8:30 AM FIRST-FLOOR CONFERENCE ROOM FREDERICK COUNTY ADMINISTRATION BUILDING WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA TC01-23-23Route37StudyUpdate.pdf TC01-23-23GainesboroRoadRoute522IntersectionUpdate.pdf TC01-23-23FrederickCountyMSGainesboroESAccess.pdf TC01-23-23CountyProjectUpdates.pdf TC01-23-23Other.pdf 1 Transportation Committee Agenda Item Detail Meeting Date: January 23, 2023 Agenda Section: Route 37 Study Update Title: Route 37 Study Update Attachments: TC01-23-23Route37StudyUpdate.pdf 2 Item 1: Route 37 Study Update Topic Synopsis Staff is seeking Committee feedback/authorization on the attached outline of the project study Scope. Recommended Action Recommend Authorization to the Board of Supervisors. 3 RFP No. NSVRC 2022-001 On-Call Consultant Program Route 37 East Comprehensive Phasing and Feasibility Study DRAFT – Scope of work outline 12/6/22 – Page 1 The following describes the scope of work for the Route 37 feasibility study for a potential new transportation solution on the east side of Winchester VA. Task 1 - Project Management/project meetings This task includes the attendance at meetings as well as activities necessary to manage the project to completion. We understand and assume this project will have a full notice to proceed of January 2, 2023 with a limited NTP already issued to attend the Transportation Forum on November 10, 2022. Task 2 – Review and Assemble background data A key element of this task will be the assembly of GIS layers assumed to be readily available from the County as noted below. 1. GIS webmap for data collection (MT Lead) • Anticipated Developments (Will need County support) • Socioeconomics (census; Community Context Audit (CCA) – especially related to diversity / inclusivity concerns) i. McCormick Taylor will use the most recent US Census data for the area to compile demographic information on the project area to include population (total, by age); income (including % poverty level); households with no car; major industries / employers; race (for Environmental Justice purposes); and up to 5 other readily available census data categories relevant to the study • Section 106 (Historic / known archaeology / archaeology probability) – background / secondary source • Noise receptors (lay out preliminary NSAs/CNEs) 1. McCormick Taylor will develop a GIS layer that identifies single story residences, multistory residential buildings, parks, churches, cemeteries, schools, and other noise sensitive receptors in the project area. This layer will be a point layer showing types of property use, as noted. In addition, a conceptual layout of Common Noise Environments (CNEs) will be provided in GIS, if desired for noise analyses purposes. Noise modeling, monitoring, or analyses is not included in this task. • Wetlands / streams (background / secondary source; limited field walkthrough to collect photos and use a GPS unit to locate and verify general locations and boundaries of wetlands and stream alignments, as well as other specific features and other critical points) i. NWI layer ii. Stream layer iii. McCormick Taylor will conduct a field view of the project area with up to two MT staff over no more than two days to verify stream and wetland locations. Approximate boundaries of wetland areas will be field GPS’d if necessary. No formal wetland delineations, identification of inclusion upland areas, vegetative analysis / identification, etc. will be conducted. Similarly, at the same time, field staff will GPS, if necessary, stream alignments within up to two 500 foot wide corridors, identified prior to the field visit. No macro studies or other stream 4 RFP No. NSVRC 2022-001 On-Call Consultant Program Route 37 East Comprehensive Phasing and Feasibility Study DRAFT – Scope of work outline 12/6/22 – Page 2 analyses will be conducted. The purpose of this field work is to visually verify wetland / stream information included in the GIS. More detailed delineations will be required when projects advance and are beyond this scope of work. • Section 4(f)/ 6(f) / Stafford, other protected properties, etc. – background / secondary source only (could identify through the CCA) • Land use / Ag, etc. – assessment from aerial photography. No Anderson land use classifications will be developed. 1. McCormick Taylor will identify, using existing aerial photography, the following land uses and include each as a layer in the GIS: a. Farmland / agricultural use b. Forested areas c. Other vacant lands • Potential hazardous / residual wastes (background / secondary source, aerials). Assumed all secondary source data from RCRA, UST, LUST, etc. We assume that the County or VDOT could likely assist in obtaining this information. • LIDAR information for the development of possible projects and alternatives Task 3 – Review and Re-State Purpose and Need A key element of re-stating the purpose and need will be the development of agreed upon traffic forecasts for the project area as well as the understanding of travel patterns and existing safety/operational concerns in the study area. An initial discussion was held with VDOT, County and study team members that resulted in an agreement that VDOT’s existing WinFred model would be used for this initial phase of study and that later demographic updates and model updates (expected in 12-18 months) would be used to further any potential project or NEPA evaluation required after this study. Task 3a -Traffic Forecasting (WRA Lead) The basis for the traffic forecasting will be the existing WinFred Regional Travel Demand Model. The model includes a base year of 2015 and forecast year of 2045. Traffic forecast efforts will include review of the existing model, model enhancements to support the analysis of the corridor, and final running of the forecast model under different network scenarios. The following series of tasks have been developed to support this effort. • Review of Existing WinFred Model: The WinFred model will be reviewed to assess its usability for this effort. This will include requesting the model from VDOT, running the model and verification of results, documenting the validation in the project area, and development of recommended enhancements to support the forecasting effort. i. Model Request: A formal request to VDOT for the existing TDM will be made by the project sponsors. Upon receipt of the model, the consultant will run the model for both base and future year conditions. Model results will be compared against documented results to verify the model is running correctly. 5 RFP No. NSVRC 2022-001 On-Call Consultant Program Route 37 East Comprehensive Phasing and Feasibility Study DRAFT – Scope of work outline 12/6/22 – Page 3 ii. Review Existing validation: Traffic counts will be identified in the project area. The model validation will be assessed on the key corridors intersecting and parallel to the corridor being studied. The findings will be used in developing recommended model enhancements. iii. Review of traffic analysis zone (TAZ) and Network Resolution: The existing network and zone structure will be reviewed to ensure adequate resolution to effectively model the project. TAZ refinement and network detail that will be needed for the application will be identified. iv. Review Forecast Assumptions: Using existing model inputs, the socio-economic growth assumptions, external assumptions, and planned projects in the network will be documented and verified with the project team. • Update TDM: Based upon the findings of the Model Review, updates will be made to the existing model including TAZ splits with allocation of existing SocioEconomic data, network additions and other updates identified to improve the use of the model for the study. i. TAZ Refinement: TAZ structures will be updated to support the study. Where TAZs are split, existing zonal datasets will be allocated between the new refined zones. Regional totals will not be changed. ii. Network Refinement: Additional network details will be coded to support the TAZ refinements for the base conditions. iii. Network Attribute Update: The base year network will be reviewed to ensure consistency with network conditions iv. Model Updates: The model code will be updated as required to be compatible with updated network and TAZ structure. • Model Validation: To support the forecasting effort, a 2019 model will be developed. This will be done by interpolating model inputs to 2019 from existing model years. The resulting model will be compared against critical links in the network and project area. i. Development of 2019 Model: Interpolation of existing model inputs to 2019 from existing model years. The network will be reviewed to ensure major projects completed since 2015 are captured. ii. VDOT TMPD: Coordinate with VDOT TMPD staff regarding appropriate level of validation. iii. Streetlight GPS OD Data: Using Streetlight Data (available through VDOT), compare demand patterns from the model to observed data. Major differences will be documented. iv. Define Counts for 2019: Identify available count data for 2019 at key locations in the model network. Scope assumes study team will rely on readily available data from VDOT and the County. v. Model Validation: Perform model adjustments to refine model to improve overall fit of the 2019 model to counts consistent with expectation of VDOT TMPD staff. • Develop Baseline Forecasts: Using the 2019 validated model, the consultant will develop the 2045 baseline forecast model. i. Update Model Inputs: Update roadway network to support study to confirm consistent with latest planning assumptions. This will include the additional network identified and added to the 2019 network. SE data will be allocated to the refined zone structure for the forecast year. 6 RFP No. NSVRC 2022-001 On-Call Consultant Program Route 37 East Comprehensive Phasing and Feasibility Study DRAFT – Scope of work outline 12/6/22 – Page 4 ii. Model Parameters: Update other model parameters as necessary to align the existing model with the updated forecast year(s) and study related changes. iii. Document Forecasts: Establish baseline / No Build forecasts for use in comparison to build scenarios. • Scenario Analysis: The baseline forecast model will be updated for five scenarios to be evaluated by the consultant. Scenarios will be identified by the project team. i. Model Preparation: Code Model scenarios including new network, access points and link attributes to the corridor and surrounding roadways if applicable. ii. Model Execution: Execute model scenarios and develop outputs consistent with baseline scenario for comparison. • Analysis of Scenarios: The five scenarios tested using the model will be evaluated by the project team. To support the study, analysis of the scenarios will be based on comparison to the baseline forecast scenario. i. Select Link Analysis (SLA): SLA will be used by the consultant to identify travel patterns on specific segments or locations in the network. ii. Segment Usage: Model results will be defined by segment to allow comparison between scenarios. iii. Demand Generators: Using results of the SLA, key demand generators will be identified for the corridor. Demand segmentation will include external (through and external/internal) and internal trips. iv. No Build vs Build OD Analysis: For each scenario, the consultant will conduct a No Build vs Build Analysis. This will utilize the Build network to identify users and identify routes used to complete the same trips under the No Build condition. v. Comparative Evaluation: The 2019, baseline forecast and three scenario results will be documented using a set of performance measures decided upon the project team. Metrics may include: 1. Average segment Level of Service 2. Daily hours of delay 3. VMT changes (regional and project study area) 4. Others based on the refined Purpose and Need Note that post-processing of model data and formal capacity/operations analysis will not be performed as part of this scope of services. Task 3b - Community Context Audit McCormick Taylor will conduct a Community Context Audit of the project area that will consider community composition, cohesion, current and planned land use, employment, access and mobility and other elements. The Community Context Audit will establish baseline conditions for consideration throughout project development and related public involvement activity. The Community Context Audit will include reviews of local communications media, including municipal and business websites, newsletters and others in addition to the identification of any events of local significance. On-site and/or virtual interviews of local stakeholders will also be conducted to identify interests and concerns that may affect the project. The interviews will include up to 15 interviews of individuals and organizations such as the County Planning Commission, a 7 RFP No. NSVRC 2022-001 On-Call Consultant Program Route 37 East Comprehensive Phasing and Feasibility Study DRAFT – Scope of work outline 12/6/22 – Page 5 Redevelopment Authority, the WinFred Metropolitan Planning Organization, the Inland Port, County Board of Supervisors, school districts, emergency service providers, key businesses and property owners. McCormick Taylor will prepare survey questions, for review by the County and VDOT, to support the on-site and/or virtual interviews. Data collected will be assembled in a Community Context Audit Summary Report. A one-page project summary overview will be prepared to develop interviewee understanding of the project to facilitate informed feedback. Feedback received in the interviews with inform the Project Team regarding transportation (modal) needs, development needs, sensitive features within the project area, key recreational areas and major events that draw visitors to the area. Information assembled in the Community Context Audit will also assist McCormick Taylor in the identification of key stakeholder contacts, available public meeting locations, and the refinement of the overall public involvement plan. The Community Context Audit will be completed within 45 days after notice to proceed. Task 3c - Development of draft Purpose and Needs (MT Lead) McCormick Taylor will use traffic data, geometric analysis, public / agency input (CCA), and a review of the previous studies to develop a succinct list of project transportation related needs. A brief memo that references the other studies included in this work (traffic analysis, etc.) will be prepared to summarize the needs development process and the resultant needs. Where possible, needs will be identified by specific area where the problem occurs, in order to assist with the logical termini / independent utility analysis discussed below). • Consider needs of Inland Port and how project might address those (this may require a stakeholder / special interest meeting with the Port) Task 3 DELIVERABLES: • Community Context Audit (CCA) Contact List • CCA interview questions • Project summary one-pager • CCA interview summary forms • Key stakeholder data base • Media Contact List • Public and Elected Officials Contact List • Potential Meeting Locations • Community Demographics • CCA summary report 8 RFP No. NSVRC 2022-001 On-Call Consultant Program Route 37 East Comprehensive Phasing and Feasibility Study DRAFT – Scope of work outline 12/6/22 – Page 6 Task 4 – Development and prioritization of possible independent projects/corridors (Task D from the original solicitation) (MT Lead) 1. Development of conceptual alignment corridors a. Consideration of logical termini / independent utility (LT/IU) i. If legally defendable LT/IU cannot be identified, then identify likely construction segments within the corridors b. Internal workshop to develop corridors 2. Traffic analysis of corridors once identified. This will link to the traffic forecasting in Task 3b 3. Development of estimated project costs Task 5 – Public and Agency Engagement (This is Task F from the original solicitation) (MT Lead) A variety of public engagement methods will be used to gather the following elements for the study 1. Input on purpose and needs 2. Input on alternatives / concepts 3. Agency input on environmental, permitting concerns and possible mitigation 4. Input on prioritization (whether independent projects with LT/IU OR construction segments) The first public outreach assignment will be the attendance at the Frederick County Transportation Forum on November 10, 2022. Three members of the MT team will attend this meeting to be available to discuss the project and be introduced to the planning process in Frederick County. Task 5a - Development of the Public Engagement Plan McCormick Taylor will develop an adaptable, measurable, and responsive public engagement plan (PEP) working closely with Frederick County, VDOT, and the City of Winchester. This document will be comprised of the specific communications strategies, tasks and engagement activities designed to deliver meaningful public engagement opportunities to the public over the course of the project. The PEP will be developed to align with VDOT’s Governance Document Public Involvement Manual (Rev November 2021). It is anticipated that the PEP will be completed in a draft format following the completion of the Community Context Audit (CCA) process. It will be presented to Frederick County, VDOT, the NSVRC and the City for review and comment before finalization. It is anticipated that the final version of the PEP may still be subject to updates and/or modification over the course of the project in response to public need and/or direction from the project owners. Project communications protocols and/or processes are integral to the effective performance of the consultant project team as well as the public engagement strategy. One of the first tasks for this project will be to establish a mutual understanding of the communications protocols and practices to be utilized on this project. 9 RFP No. NSVRC 2022-001 On-Call Consultant Program Route 37 East Comprehensive Phasing and Feasibility Study DRAFT – Scope of work outline 12/6/22 – Page 7 This task will involve establishing a mutual understanding of VDOT, the County and the NSVRC project communications protocols and/or processes for use over the course of the project. In collaboration with the noted parties, the McCormick Taylor team will develop a written protocol and/or processes to be incorporated into the project’s Public Engagement Plan to cover communications with the following audiences: 1) Public and elected officials 2) Print and broadcast media 3) Key Stakeholders (business owners, special interest groups, professional organizations) 4) Public inquiries Reviews of project-related information, visuals, and other materials generated for public consumption will undergo a review process by the McCormick Taylor team before hand-off to the client. Understanding the client’s review process will allow for more predictable turnaround times for final deliverables and effective schedule management. The deliverable review process will also be established as a part of this task. The PEP will be updated as needed over the course of the project with a final version to be prepared upon the project completion. Deliverables: Public Engagement Plan, a documented project communications and review process. Task 5b - Stakeholder Coordination For this task McCormick Taylor will lead the project team’s efforts to identify key stakeholders for the creation of a stakeholder database that will be maintained and updated over the course of the project. This database will be utilized to support a communications network to be established for the effective dissemination of project information throughout the project area, and for the solicitation of relevant feedback for use over the project development process. The population of this database will include stakeholders identified by the County, VDOT, and the City, Agency contacts, public and local elected officials, representatives of key organizations, business communities, and special interest groups. It is anticipated that the primary means of communications with the stakeholders will include e-mail and use of the U.S. Postal Service for postcards and other types of paper correspondence, and hybrid meetings (in-person with a virtual option for participation). Additional detail on meetings follows in the Meetings Task. Deliverables: A comprehensive stakeholder database to be maintained electronically over the course of the project with monthly updates through project completion. Task 5c - Meetings This task covers the planning, logistics, implementation of project-related public and/or stakeholder meetings to be held at key milestones in the project development process. It is anticipated that two (2) public and local officials’ briefings, two (2) key stakeholders meetings, and two (2) public meetings, one 10 RFP No. NSVRC 2022-001 On-Call Consultant Program Route 37 East Comprehensive Phasing and Feasibility Study DRAFT – Scope of work outline 12/6/22 – Page 8 of which will be held to present the results of the existing conditions analysis and the completion of the draft Purpose and Need statement, while the other will present the proposed alternatives. These meetings reflect the need to provide an environment for an open and transparent dialogue between all stakeholders, the County, VDOT and the consultant project team. The meetings will likely be scheduled to occur within timeframes that will allow for the most efficient use of time, resources and staff. The planning phase for meetings will be a collaborative effort involving the County, VDOT and key members of the McCormick Taylor team. Each meeting will be planned as an in-person meeting with an option for virtual participation. The McCormick Taylor team will prepare in coordination with the County and VDOT the meeting plan, advertisements, social media posts, invitations, handouts, presentations, graphic displays, comment forms, and other relevant materials such as sign-in sheets, nametags, and a summary of each meeting. Follow-up actions will be determined by the consultant project team in collaboration with the County and VDOT. It is anticipated that one dry-run will be conducted for each milestone meeting (for a total of 3) to allow the team to address necessary changes or modifications in advance of the event. It is also anticipated that the meeting summary will include the compilation of comment forms and/or surveys for each meeting. The consultant team representation for each meeting will be determined during the planning phase. Deliverables: A total of six (6) meetings, planning, logistics, preparation of collateral materials for each meeting; planning, advertising, social media forms, compilation of survey/comment forms and meeting summaries, project team representation at each meeting. Task 5d – Special Events This task involves planning, coordination, and implementation of the project team’s participation in up to three (3) well-attended local events for the purpose of providing up to date project information, increasing the number of local subscribers for project updates and meeting invitations, and encouraging a two-way dialogue with community members regarding the importance of the project and public participation in the process. It is anticipated that the consultant project team will have up to three (3) project team members, along with representatives from the County and/or City to staff a booth or table at the event, interact with the attendees and respond to questions. Materials for distribution at the events along with other visual displays such as mapping (as appropriate) will be compiled from existing project resources. Some event-specific materials may need to be created as directed by the County. The types of materials for these types of events may include a single-page project update similar to a newsletter or a project brief sheet with Project Manager contact information, a survey and/or comment form, and project area mapping, and a display that conveys opportunities for public participation in terms of a schedule for upcoming meetings, the URL for the County’s project website, and other information as is relevant to the phase of project development at the time. A couple of the events could include the Apple Blossom Festival which is scheduled for April 28 – May 7, and the Frederick County Fair which will run from July 31 through August 5, 2023. Exact events will be discussed and agreed upon with the County at a later date. Deliverables: 11 RFP No. NSVRC 2022-001 On-Call Consultant Program Route 37 East Comprehensive Phasing and Feasibility Study DRAFT – Scope of work outline 12/6/22 – Page 9 Up to three (3) special events, planning, logistics, preparation of collateral materials for each meeting; planning, advertising, social media content, compilation of survey/comment forms and event summaries, up to three (3) project team representatives at each meeting. Task 5e – Digital and Social Media This task involves collaboration with the County to establish a web-based resource for project information on the County’s website. The project team will be responsible for the development of content to be placed on the County’s website to publicize milestone progress points over the course of the project development process. The project team will also be responsible for providing digital versions of mapping and other visual explanations created during the project development process to further public comprehension of the project. McCormick Taylor will also provide social media graphics and content for use on the County’s established social media platforms to expand our outreach and communications network for the benefit of the project and our public engagement efforts. The content, graphics, mapping and visual explanations will be developed in draft format for review and comment by the County with final approval for publication to come from the County. It is anticipated that up to five (5) informational pieces will be developed for publication on the County’s website and up to five (5) social media graphics with content will be developed for publication on at least two of the County’s social media platforms. It is anticipated that the publication of content on the County’s website and posting of the social media content will be managed by County staff. Deliverables: Up to five (5) project-specific informational articles for publication on the County’s website and up to five (5) social media graphics with content to be generated for posting on two of the County’s social media platforms. Task 6 - Summary Report (MT Lead) 1. Development of a programming document (Mini-TIP) a. Planning level cost estimates by phase (PE, RW/UTIL, CN) – to be developed based on major construction items that are most likely to affect costs, and materials that are showing the highest inflation rates (bridge beams, asphalt, etc); conceptual costs for other items (such as guiderail, drainage, E&S, etc.) will likely be estimated based on percentages. b. Identification of red flags / risks by LT/IU project area c. Preliminary, conceptual environmental impacts for alternative concepts developed as part of a separate task, based on GIS analysis, using anticipated limit of disturbance d. Anticipated environmental document level – McCormick Taylor will identify for each project whether a CE, EA or EIS might be appropriate and whether any supporting documents (Section 4(f), 6(f), historic effects, etc.) would be anticipated e. Anticipated timing by phase – an estimated year of expenditure for preliminary engineering, right-of-way/utilities, and construction for each LT/IU project will be provided. f. Potential funding / non-traditional / grant funding – McCormick Taylor will include a brief summary of the most likely funding source for each LT/IU project that is identified, by phase. (This is Task G from the original solicitation) 12 RFP No. NSVRC 2022-001 On-Call Consultant Program Route 37 East Comprehensive Phasing and Feasibility Study DRAFT – Scope of work outline 12/6/22 – Page 10 2. McCormick Taylor will provide a summary report, up to 50 pages (not including appendices), for the study, generally to include the following major sections: i. Introduction / Project History ii. Purpose and Need iii. Environmental Overview iv. Engineering and Traffic Analyses v. Alternatives Analysis vi. Public / Agency Involvement Summary vii. Mini TIP 1. Cost Estimating procedures 2. Risks 3. Conceptual environmental impacts 4. Funding (YOE) by phase 5. Prioritization 13 Transportation Committee Agenda Item Detail Meeting Date: January 23, 2023 Agenda Section: Gainesboro Road at Route 522 Intersection Update Title: Review of VDOT Comments on Signal Justification Report Attachments: TC01-23-23GainesboroRoadRoute522IntersectionUpdate.pdf 14 Item 2: Gainesboro Road at Route 522 Intersection Update Topic Synopsis Timmons Group has provided and VDOT has comment on the draft Signal Justification Report. As expected, VDOT is not currently accepting of the idea of a signal as the solution and has requested other updates to the study as well. Staff is seeking Committee review and guidance. Recommended Action NA 15 Gainesboro Road SJR Review Comments 12/8/2022 VDOT Staunton District Traffic Engineering and Planning completed a review of the Signal Justification Report (SJR) submitted 12/1/2022 by Timmons Group. VDOT requests that the analysis be revised per the comments below and conclusions be updated to reflect the findings. In short, our findings are that: • A signal is not justified with the continuous-green T-intersection because the unsignalized version of the continuous-green T-intersection operates effectively. • A signal is not justified with the restricted-crossing U-turn (RCUT) intersection the unsignalized version of the RCUT operates effectively. • As we have two unsignalized intersection alternatives that are viable, VDOT Traffic Engineering concluded that a traffic signal is not justified at this location. • The modeling approach used for both unsignalized alternatives may be leading to an inaccurate result for delays, with VDOT finding much lower delays with our recommended modeling approach. • The SJR needs to evaluate the RCUT and continuous-green T-intersection for the unsignalized condition. 1. The report needs to take into consideration safety outcomes when comparing alternatives and not just operations. There is a clear safety benefit in implementing the unsignalized RCUT versus the signalized alternative. The following Crash Modification Factors apply to the three alternatives: • Signal: 0.64 (36% reduction in fatal & injury crashes relative to stop control) • Unsignalized RCUT: 0.37 (63% reduction in fatal & injury crashes relative to stop control) • Unsignalized Green T: 0.85 F+I crashes (15% reduction in fatal & injury crashes relative to signal) 2. With regard to the unsignalized continuous-green T-intersection: • Our finding is that the signal is not justified for this alternative. • VDOT’s modeling approach to the continuous-green T-intersection is to remove the westbound through movement from the intersection because that through movement bypasses the intersection completely. (See the attached model.) Doing this, we get reduced delays of 49.3 seconds in the AM peak period and 21.2 seconds in the PM peak period. • As modelled, the HCM formulas apply increased delay to the NB left turn, assuming a conflict with WB through traffic. The SJR’s finding was that the left-turn out of Gainesboro Drive had 70.0 seconds of delay in the AM peak period and 50.4 seconds in the PM peak period. • Note that, even with the scenario as modeled with greater delay, Warrant 3A delays do not reach the 4 vehicle-hours of delay required to satisfy the warrant in the MUTCD. 3. With regard to the unsignalized RCUT: • For RCUT modeling, VDOT recommends against coding divided highways as a two-way link to produce the most reliable results to reflect real world dynamics of how vehicles interact with the movements. Instead, we request that the models be revised to code the boulevard as a pair of parallel one-way links. What this does is that the U-turn movements are more 16 like a left-turn movement from a one-way street onto another, since people have to turn 90° before they reach the stop bar and then turn another 90° to complete the turn. The Michigan Department of Transportation (MDOT), in their Traffic Signal Optimization Guidelines (see PDF page 23), provides guidance on this approach. • Note that Warrant 3A delays do not reach the 4 vehicle-hours of delay required to satisfy the warrant in the MUTCD for either movement at Gainesboro Rd (right out, left in). • With a revised model using our recommended approach (attached), the eastbound U-turn yields 10.8 seconds of delay in the AM peak; at 34 U-turns per hour, we get 0.1 vehicle- hours of delay. For the PM peak, we get 14.8 seconds of delay at the U-turn; with 89 U-turns per hour we get 0.37 vehicle-hours of delay. With delay values below the MUTCD criteria in warrant 3A, we disagree with the stated need for the U-turn signal westbound. 4. Page 2 of the report indicates the 45 mph School Speed Zone is used for all of the analyses scenarios. While it is acceptable to perform the analyses using the reduced school speed limit in order to determine operating levels during the peak times for the school, additional analyses should be performed using the posted 55mph speed limit in order to verify adequate sight distances. 17 VDOT Signal Justification Report Template – Version 1.1 - January 25, 2021 US Route 522 at Gainesboro Road Page 1 of 17 VDOT Signal Justification Report (SJR) Richmond District Date: December 1, 2022 I. Study Intersection Major Street Route # and Name: US Route 522 (North Frederick Pike) Direction: East/West for purposes of this analysis Minor Street Route # and Name: Gainesboro Road (Route 684) Direction: North/South County or Locality: Frederick County, Virginia Intersection on Arterial Preservation Network (APN)? Yes If on APN, type of APN Corridor? N/A Sketch/Diagram/Aerial of the Intersection Geometry: Describe the Origin and Nature of Request. If this SJR is based on a recommendation from another study (e.g., Traffic Impact Analysis or Safety Study), then note the name/date of the study and attach the study to this SJR. Timmons Group prepared a Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis for the US Route 522/Gainesboro Road intersection on October 27, 2022. A copy of the signal warrant analysis is included as Appendix A. Subsequent to the submission of the signal warrant, Timmons Group prepared a VJuST screening of potential intersection treatments to determine the appropriate innovative intersections to include in the SJR. The results of the VJuST were submitted to VDOT on November 1, 2022. See Section III below for the innovative intersections included in this SJR and Appendix B for the VJuST worksheets. VDOT issued concurrence with the Signal Warrant Analysis and VJuST results on November 21, 2022. As noted in the signal warrant analysis, Frederick County is planning to relocate the main school access point to a newly constructed access road off of Gainesboro Road. With the relocation, the existing median break at the school entrance will be closed and the access limited to right-in/right-out only. A build year of 2025 is assumed. Stephen Schmidt, PE, PTOE 12/1/22 Timmons Group Richmond, Virginia TRAFFIC ENGINEER 12/01/2022 18 VDOT Signal Justification Report Template – Version 1.1 - January 25, 2021 US Route 522 at Gainesboro Road Page 2 of 17 The existing US Route 522/Gainesboro Road intersection is located approximately 760 feet (centerline to centerline) from the unsignalized/median break US Route 522/School Access intersection. US Route 522 is classified as a principal arterial thoroughfare with a posted speed limit of 55 mph. However, this location is subject to a school zone reduction of 45 mph. Given the analysis/need for a signal is being evaluated in conjunction with a school entrance relocation, the 45 mph speed limit is used in all analysis scenarios. In accordance with Appendix F of VDOT’s Road Design Manual, the required spacing between a traffic signal and a partial access entrance on US Route 522 is 305 feet for the 45 mph school zone speed limit and 495 for the 55 mph non-school zone speed limit. Under either speed limit, an Access Management Exception will not be required with this SJR. A copy of the Signal Warrant Analysis and VDOT correspondence is included in Appendix A. A copy of the VJuST results is included in Appendix B. If the origin of this SJR comes from another study, what were the key conclusions from that study that are related to this intersection?. As indicated in the attached Signal Warrant Analysis, the relocation of the main school entrance will warrant a traffic signal at the US Route 522/Gainesboro Road intersection under 2025 future conditions. The traffic at the intersection meets Warrant 2 (100% thresholds) and Warrant 3 (70% thresholds). 19 VDOT Signal Justification Report Template – Version 1.1 - January 25, 2021 US Route 522 at Gainesboro Road Page 3 of 17 II. Signal Warrant Analysis Summary Intersection Approach Information: The intersection approach information described in this section, including approach directions, should be consistent with the information described in Section 1. Approach Direction Road Name/Route Number Approach Speed Approach Speed Type Approach Speed Notes1 Number of Through Lanes Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT) Westbound US Route 522 45 MPH Posted Speed Limit N/A 2 18,000 (Two-way) Eastbound US Route 522 45 MPH Posted Speed Limit N/A 2 18,000 (Two-way) Northbound Gainesboro Road 45 MPH Posted Speed Limit N/A 1 800 (Two-way) 1 If approach speed type is not the posted/statutory speed limit, explain the reason why the posted/statutory speed limit was not used. Summary of Traffic Count Source: The 13-hour (6 AM – 7 PM) directional turning movement (DTM) counts were collected at the subject intersection (and school entrance) on Wednesday, September 14, 2022. See Section 2.2 of the signal warrant analysis for a discussion of the COVID-19 comparison/adjustments. The completed count data is included with the Signal Warrant Analysis in Appendix A. Summary of MUTCD Signal Warrant Analysis: MUTCD Signal Warrants Warrant Satisfied? Notes / Summary Warrant 1: Eight-Hour Vehicular Volume ☐ Yes ☒ No ☐ N/A Not met Warrant 1: VDOT ADT Option1 ☐ Yes ☐ No ☒ N/A N/A Warrant 2: Four-Hour Vehicular Volume ☒ Yes ☐ No ☐ N/A Met with future volumes (70% threshold) Warrant 3: Peak Hour2 ☒ Yes ☐ No ☐ N/A Met with future volumes (100% thresholds) Warrant 4: Pedestrian Volume ☐ Yes ☐ No ☒ N/A N/A Warrant 5: School Crossing ☐ Yes ☐ No ☒ N/A N/A Warrant 6: Coordinated Signal System ☐ Yes ☐ No ☒ N/A N/A Warrant 7: Crash Experience ☐ Yes ☒ No ☐ N/A 5 crashes in past 5 years Warrant 8: Roadway Network ☐ Yes ☐ No ☒ N/A N/A Warrant 9: Intersection Near a Grade Crossing ☐ Yes ☐ No ☒ N/A N/A 1 The VDOT ADT Option for Warrant 1 may only be used if it is not reasonable or feasible to count actual traffic volumes, such as at a proposed intersection in the preliminary engineering phase and therefore not yet open to traffic. Refer to Section 4C.02 of the Virginia Supplement to the MUTCD for additional information on the use of this option for satisfying Warrant 1. 2 As per MUTCD Section 4C.04, Warrant 3 shall only be applied in unusual cases, such as facilities that attract or discharge large numbers of vehicles over a short period of time. Are the signal warrant analyses based on current volumes or anticipated future volumes? ☐ Current volumes ☒ Anticipated future volumes/conditions If the signal warrant is only met under future conditions, provide a summary of trip generation assumptions and anticipated development thresholds that will trigger the signal being justified: There is no new development to trigger the signal being justified. Rather, the main school entrance to the Frederick County Middle School and Gainesboro Elementary School will be relocated to Gainesboro Road. With the relocation, the existing median break at the school entrance will be closed and the access limited to right-in/right- out only. See Section 5 of the Signal Warrant Analysis for the detailed assumptions on the rerouting of traffic for the relocation. 20 VDOT Signal Justification Report Template – Version 1.1 - January 25, 2021 US Route 522 at Gainesboro Road Page 4 of 17 III. VJuST Innovative Intersection Consideration. Summary of Potentially Feasible Innovative Intersections according to VJuST results: Innovative Intersection Type Feasibility Decision and Reason Two-Way Stop Control Is two-way stop control feasible? ☐ Yes ☒ No Explanation: While geometrically feasible, the existing two-way stop control intersection cannot accommodate the future volumes at the intersection. As detailed below, with the relocation, the northbound (Gainesboro Road) approach will fail in both peak hours and experience delay in excess of two minutes in the AM peak hour. Further, the maximum queue will extend back more than 650 feet. The TWSC scored the worst in both peak hour in the VJuST results with a v/c ratio of 0.84 in the AM peak. Conventional Signal Is a conventional signal feasible? ☒ Yes ☐ No Explanation: The conventional signal intersection treatment scored as the 1st options in both peak hours in the VJuST screening tool of the treatments forwarded for full analysis. The v/c ratio is 0.49 and 0.26 in the AM/School PM peak hours leaving ample capacity for future corridor growth. Restricted Crossing U-Turn Is this Innovative Intersection type feasible? ☒ Yes ☐ No Explanation: The Restricted Crossing U-Turn scored as the 2nd option in both peak hours in the VJuST screening tool of the treatments forwarded for full analysis. The v/c ratio of the RCUT is 0.49 and 0.29 in the AM/PM peak hours. It is noted the VJuST results assume a signalized RCUT. See below for analysis results with and without signalization of the RCUT. Continuous Green-T Is this Innovative Intersection type feasible? ☒ Yes ☐ No Explanation: The Continuous Green-T scored as the 3rd option in both peak hours in the VJuST screening tool of the treatments forwarded for full analysis. The v/c ratio of the Green-T is 0.62 and 0.36 in the AM/PM peak hours. It is noted the VJuST results assume a signalized Green-T. See below for analysis results with and without signalization of the Green-T. IV. Intersection Configuration and Control Recommendations and Signal Justification 21 VDOT Signal Justification Report Template – Version 1.1 - January 25, 2021 US Route 522 at Gainesboro Road Page 5 of 17 Intersection Configuration and Control Recommendations: To determine the impact of the intersection configuration and control recommendations, a capacity and queueing analysis was completed for both the subject intersection. The analysis examines a two-way stop-controlled intersection, a conventional signal, a Restricted Crossing U-Turn (RCUT) (signalized and unsignalized), and a Continuous Green-T (signalized and unsignalized). The primary focus of this analysis is the performance of the mainline eastbound and westbound approaches along US Route 522. The analysis was based on the 2025 traffic volumes shown in Table 5A of the signal warrant analysis. With the relocation of the school entrance, it was assumed that a westbound left turn lane (200’ by 200’) and an eastbound right turn lane (200’ by 200’) would be constructed at the US Route 522/Gainesboro Road intersection. The intersection alternatives including signalized/unsignalized options were analyzed using SYNCHRO Version 11 based on 2000 HCM methodologies as HCM 6th does not support the non-NEMA phasing required for the signalized RCUT and Green-T options. SimTraffic maximum queues are reported for each option and are the average maximum queues after 10 runs of 60 minutes each in accordance with TOSAM guidance. The analysis for each alternative examines the AM peak hour (7:00-8:00 AM) and the school PM peak hour (3:00- 4:00 PM) as these represent the highest volume two hours of the day. All signalized options assume yellows of 4.0 seconds, reds of 2.0 seconds and the lowest reasonable cycle length (60-90 seconds depending on the option). The results of the analysis for each of the proposed intersection controls are summarized below: 22 VDOT Signal Justification Report Template – Version 1.1 - January 25, 2021 US Route 522 at Gainesboro Road Page 6 of 17 Two-Way Stop Control Alternative (Synchro/SimTraffic Analysis) The results of the two-way stop control alternative analysis are included in Appendix C and summarized in Table 1. As shown in Table 1, with a two-way stop control, the eastbound and westbound approach operates at LOS A in both the AM and PM peaks. In the AM peak the northbound approach operates at LOS F with an average delay greater than 2 minutes and a maximum queue of more than 650 feet. In the PM peak hour, the northbound approach operates at LOS F with an average delay approach 1 minute and a maximum queue of 180 feet. Given the poor operational results for the westbound approach, maintaining two-way stop control is not a feasible long-term solution for the US Route 522/Gainesboro Road intersection. Further, with the school relocation, the northbound approach will need to accommodate a large number of school buses. This will render the large median (40 feet) ineffective for two-stage left turns. Table 1: Intersection Level of Service, Delay, and Queue Summary 2025 Future Traffic Volumes Two-way Stop Control Alternative Delay 1 (sec/veh)LOS 1 SYNCHRO 95th Percentile Queue Length (ft) SimTraffic Maximum Queue Length (ft) Delay 1 (sec/veh)LOS 1 SYNCHRO 95th Percentile Queue Length (ft) SimTraffic Maximum Queue Length (ft) 1. US Route 522 (E-W) at EB Thru 0.0 A 0 2 0.0 A 0 0 Gainesboro Road (N-S) EB Right 150 0.0 A 0 0 0.0 A 0 0 Unsignalized EB Approach 0.0 A -- -- 0.0 A -- -- WB Left 300 14.1 B 44 221 8.9 A 12 85 WB Thru 0.0 A 0 88 0.0 A 0 0 WB Approach 6.1 A -- -- 1.3 A -- -- NB Left-Right 125.0 F 148 651 54.9 F 93 180 NB Approach 125.0 F -- -- 54.9 F -- -- 1 Overall intersection LOS and delay reported for signalized intersections and roundabouts only. SimTraffic Queues are average maximum queues after 10 runs of 60 minutes each. Intersection and Type of Control Movement and Approach Effective Turn Lane Storage (ft) AM PEAK HOUR (7:00-8:00 AM) PM PEAK HOUR (3:00-4:00 PM) 23 VDOT Signal Justification Report Template – Version 1.1 - January 25, 2021 US Route 522 at Gainesboro Road Page 7 of 17 Traditional Signal Control Alternative (Synchro/SimTraffic Analysis) The results of the traditional signal control alternative analysis are included in Appendix D and summarized in Table 2. As shown in Table 2, the proposed conventional signalized intersection operates at an overall LOS B in both the AM and PM peaks. The northbound approach operates at LOS C in both peak hours and the mainline eastbound and westbound approaches operate at LOS B or better in both the AM and PM peaks. All queues are contained within the existing storage. A conventional signal will likely not require additional right-of-way beyond a potential small area needed for the signal equipment. This option will also not require the construction of any additional lanes along US Route 522 (beyond the eastbound right and westbound left assumed in all options) or any additional lanes along Gainesboro Road. The conventional signal will be the most cost-effective solution to the intersection. In summary, the conventional signal control option: · Operates at a LOS B in both peak hours; · Will not require significant additional right-of-way; · Will not require additional lanes along US Route 522 or Gainesboro Road; and · Will be the most cost-effective solution. Table 2: Intersection Level of Service, Delay, and Queue Summary 2025 Future Traffic Volumes Traditional Signal Alternative Delay 1 (sec/veh)LOS 1 SYNCHRO 95th Percentile Queue Length (ft) SimTraffic Maximum Queue Length (ft) Delay 1 (sec/veh)LOS 1 SYNCHRO 95th Percentile Queue Length (ft) SimTraffic Maximum Queue Length (ft) 1. US Route 522 (E-W) at EB Thru 18.1 B 340 256 15.3 B 122 154 Gainesboro Road (N-S) EB Right 150 0.0 A 0 0 12.7 B 3 19 Signalized EB Approach 18.1 B -- -- 15.3 B -- -- WB Left 300 28.6 C 196 196 17.3 B 95 127 WB Thru 2.7 A 35 82 5.1 A 109 121 WB Approach 13.8 B -- -- 7.0 A -- -- NB Left-Right 30.9 C 67 109 20.4 C 78 98 NB Approach 30.9 C -- -- 20.4 C -- -- Overall 17.6 B -- -- 10.6 B -- -- 1 Overall intersection LOS and delay reported for signalized intersections and roundabouts only. SimTraffic Queues are average maximum queues after 10 runs of 60 minutes each. Intersection and Type of Control Movement and Approach Effective Turn Lane Storage (ft) AM PEAK HOUR (7:00-8:00 AM) PM PEAK HOUR (3:00-4:00 PM) 24 VDOT Signal Justification Report Template – Version 1.1 - January 25, 2021 US Route 522 at Gainesboro Road Page 8 of 17 RCUT (Synchro, SimTraffic Analysis) Unsignalized Option - The results of the unsignalized Restricted Crossing U-Turn (RCUT) control alternative analysis are included in Appendix E and summarized in Table 3. The RCUT will require the construction of a 200’ by 200’ eastbound left turn lane at the US Route 522/School Entrance intersections and a loon on the north side of US Route 522 to accommodate the U-turns. As shown in Table 3, all movements at the proposed unsignalized RCUT intersection operates at an overall LOS D or better in both the AM and PM peaks. The northbound approach operates at LOS C/B in both peak hours and the mainline eastbound and westbound approaches operate at LOS B or better in both the AM and PM peaks. All queues are contained within the existing storage. At the US Route 522/School Entrance median break (unsignalized), the U-turn traffic will operate at a LOS B/D in both peak hours with an average delay of 25.0 seconds/vehicle in the PM peak hour. The maximum queue in either peak hour is 67 feet. The U-turn operation may require signalization as discussed below. Table 3: Intersection Level of Service, Delay, and Queue Summary 2025 Future Traffic Volumes RCUT Alternative (Unsignalized) Signalized Option - As noted above, the US Route 522/School Entrance may require signalization to accommodate the U-turns. The results of the signalized Restricted Crossing U-Turn (RCUT) control alternative analysis are included in Appendix F option and summarized in Table 4. The signalization will only require westbound traffic on US Route 522 to stop. Eastbound traffic will not be impacted by the signal. As shown in Table 4, with signalization of the U-turn movement, the intersection will operate at an overall LOS A. The eastbound U-turn will operate at LOS C and the westbound through will operate at LOS A in both peak hours. Delay 1 (sec/veh)LOS 1 SYNCHRO 95th Percentile Queue Length (ft) SimTraffic Maximum Queue Length (ft) Delay 1 (sec/veh)LOS 1 SYNCHRO 95th Percentile Queue Length (ft) SimTraffic Maximum Queue Length (ft) 1. US Route 522 (E-W) at EB Thru 0.0 A 0 6 0.0 A 0 0 Gainesboro Road (N-S) EB Right 150 0.0 A 0 0 0.0 A 0 0 Unsignalized EB Approach 0.0 A -- -- 0.0 A -- -- WB Left 300 14.1 B 44 232 8.9 A 12 79 WB Thru 0.0 A 0 108 0.0 A 0 0 WB Approach 5.7 A -- -- 1.2 A -- -- NB Right 200 15.3 C 24 85 10.8 B 14 62 NB Approach 15.3 C -- -- 10.8 B -- -- 2. US Route 522 (E-W) at EB U-Turn 300 12.6 B 6 33 25.0 D 38 67 School Entrance (N-S) EB Thru 0.0 A 0 0 0.0 A 0 2 Unsignalized EB Approach 0.4 A -- -- 3.9 A -- -- WB Thru 0.0 A 0 0 0.0 A 0 0 WB Approach 0.0 A -- -- 0.0 A -- -- NB Right 14.2 B 15 80 10.2 B 4 66 NB Approach 14.2 B -- -- 10.2 B -- -- 1 Overall intersection LOS and delay reported for signalized intersections and roundabouts only. SimTraffic Queues are average maximum queues after 10 runs of 60 minutes each. Intersection and Type of Control Movement and Approach Effective Turn Lane Storage (ft) AM PEAK HOUR (7:00-8:00 AM) PM PEAK HOUR (3:00-4:00 PM) 25 VDOT Signal Justification Report Template – Version 1.1 - January 25, 2021 US Route 522 at Gainesboro Road Page 9 of 17 Table 4: Intersection Level of Service, Delay, and Queue Summary 2025 Future Traffic Volumes RCUT Alternative (Signalized) The RCUT will require the construction of a 200’ by 200’ eastbound left turn lane at the US Route 522/School Entrance intersections and a loon on the north side of US Route 522 to accommodate the U-turns. The loon may not be feasible given the steep grade along the north side of US Route 522. See the picture below for the approximate loon location. Delay 1 (sec/veh)LOS 1 SYNCHRO 95th Percentile Queue Length (ft) SimTraffic Maximum Queue Length (ft) Delay 1 (sec/veh)LOS 1 SYNCHRO 95th Percentile Queue Length (ft) SimTraffic Maximum Queue Length (ft) 1. US Route 522 (E-W) at EB Thru 0.0 A 0 6 0.0 A 0 0 Gainesboro Road (N-S) EB Right 150 0.0 A 0 0 0.0 A 0 0 Unsignalized EB Approach 0.0 A -- -- 0.0 A -- -- WB Left 300 14.1 B 44 198 8.9 A 12 79 WB Thru 0.0 A 0 0 0.0 A 0 0 WB Approach 5.7 A -- -- 1.2 A -- -- NB Right 200 15.3 C 24 86 10.8 B 14 65 NB Approach 15.3 C -- -- 10.8 B -- -- 2. US Route 522 (E-W) at EB U-Turn 300 20.4 C 58 33 20.0 C 59 78 School Entrance (N-S) EB Thru 0.2 A 0 0 0.1 A 0 0 Signalized EB Approach 0.8 A -- -- 3.2 A -- -- WB Thru 3.2 A 107 0 5.4 A 132 143 WB Approach 3.2 A -- -- 5.4 A -- -- NB Right 2.7 B 56 80 3.6 A 0 40 NB Approach 2.7 B -- -- 3.6 A -- -- Overall 1.6 A -- -- 4.5 A -- -- 1 Overall intersection LOS and delay reported for signalized intersections and roundabouts only. SimTraffic Queues are average maximum queues after 10 runs of 60 minutes each. Intersection and Type of Control Movement and Approach Effective Turn Lane Storage (ft) AM PEAK HOUR (7:00-8:00 AM) PM PEAK HOUR (3:00-4:00 PM) 26 VDOT Signal Justification Report Template – Version 1.1 - January 25, 2021 US Route 522 at Gainesboro Road Page 10 of 17 If signalized, the RCUT will require a traffic signal at the US Route 522/School entrance intersection. This option will be more costly than the conventional signal with no apparent operational gains. In summary, the RCUT option: · Operates at a LOS C or better in both peak hours at the US Route 522/Gainesboro Road intersection; · Will require construction of a 200’ by 200’ eastbound left turn lane at the US Route 522/School entrance intersection; · Will require construction of a loon along the north side of US Route 522 to accommodate the U- turns; o The loon may not be feasible given the grade difference along the north side of US Route 522 · May require signalization at the US Route 522/School Entrance median break; and · Will be more costly than the conventional signal with no apparent operational gains. 27 VDOT Signal Justification Report Template – Version 1.1 - January 25, 2021 US Route 522 at Gainesboro Road Page 11 of 17 Continuous Green-T (Synchro, SimTraffic Analysis) Unsignalized Option - The results of the unsignalized Continuous Green-T (Green-T) control alternative analysis are included in Appendix G and summarized in Table 5. The Green-T will require the construction of a westbound receiving lane of approximately 400 feet. This lane can be constructed within the existing median in the middle of US Route 522. The unsignalized Green-T option will require the construction of a separate northbound right turn lane with 200 feet of storage. Without this lane, the northbound left traffic will not be able to effectively utilize the westbound receiving lane. This lane will require significant right-of-way acquisition. As shown in Table 5, the northbound left will operate at LOS F in both the AM and PM peak hours with a maximum queue of 82 feet. There will not be enough gaps in oncoming traffic for left turns to cross the eastbound travel lanes and entering the westbound receiving lane. The mainline movements operate at LOS B or better in both peak hours. The Green-T operation may require signalization as discussed below. Table 5: Intersection Level of Service, Delay, and Queue Summary 2025 Future Traffic Volumes Green-T Alternative (Unsignalized) Signalized Option - As noted above, the US Route 522/Gainesboro Road intersection may require signalization to accommodate the northbound left turns. The results of the signalized Green-T control alternative analysis are included in Appendix H option and summarized in Table 6. The signalization will only require eastbound traffic and westbound left traffic on US Route 522 to stop. Westbound through traffic will not be impacted by the signal. Further, the separate northbound right turn lane noted under the unsignalized option is not required with signalization. As shown in Table 6, with signalization of the Green-T, the intersection will operate at an overall LOS B/A in both peak hours. The northbound shared left-right will operate at a LOS C with a maximum queue of 115 feet. The eastbound mainline approach will operate at LOS B in both peak hours. Delay 1 (sec/veh)LOS 1 SYNCHRO 95th Percentile Queue Length (ft) SimTraffic Maximum Queue Length (ft) Delay 1 (sec/veh)LOS 1 SYNCHRO 95th Percentile Queue Length (ft) SimTraffic Maximum Queue Length (ft) 1. US Route 522 (E-W) at EB Thru 0.0 A 0 2 0.0 A 0 0 Gainesboro Road (N-S) EB Right 150 0.0 A 0 0 0.0 A 0 0 Unsignalized EB Approach 0.0 A -- -- 0.0 A -- -- WB Left 300 14.1 B 44 162 8.9 A 12 63 WB Thru 0.0 A 0 0 0.0 A 0 0 WB Approach 6.1 A -- -- 1.3 A -- -- NB Left 70.0 F 114 77 50.4 F 93 82 NB Right 200 0.0 A 0 39 0.0 A 93 3 NB Approach 70.0 F -- -- 54.9 F -- -- 1 Overall intersection LOS and delay reported for signalized intersections and roundabouts only. SimTraffic Queues are average maximum queues after 10 runs of 60 minutes each. Intersection and Type of Control Movement and Approach Effective Turn Lane Storage (ft) AM PEAK HOUR (7:00-8:00 AM) PM PEAK HOUR (3:00-4:00 PM) 28 VDOT Signal Justification Report Template – Version 1.1 - January 25, 2021 US Route 522 at Gainesboro Road Page 12 of 17 Table 6: Intersection Level of Service, Delay, and Queue Summary 2025 Future Traffic Volumes Green-T Alternative (Signalized) The Green-T will require an additional 400’ receiving lane along westbound US Route 522, may require a northbound right turn lane with 200 feet of storage, and likely still will require signalization to operate effectively. The Green-T will be more costly than the conventional signal with no apparent operational gains. In summary, the Green-T option: · Will require construction of a 400’ westbound receiving lane along westbound US Route 522; · Will require construction of a separate northbound right turn lane with 200 feet of storage if unsignalized; o This lane will require significant right-of-way acquisition. · Will still require signalization to operate effectively; and · Will be more costly than the conventional signal with no apparent operational gains. Delay 1 (sec/veh)LOS 1 SYNCHRO 95th Percentile Queue Length (ft) SimTraffic Maximum Queue Length (ft) Delay 1 (sec/veh)LOS 1 SYNCHRO 95th Percentile Queue Length (ft) SimTraffic Maximum Queue Length (ft) 1. US Route 522 (E-W) at EB Thru 18.8 B 340 268 15.6 B 122 131 Gainesboro Road (N-S) EB Right 150 0.0 A 0 0 12.9 B 3 16 Signalized EB Approach 18.8 B -- -- 15.6 B -- -- WB Left 300 27.5 C 196 197 17.0 B 95 101 WB Thru 0.1 A 0 0 0.2 A 0 0 WB Approach 11.9 B -- -- 2.7 A -- -- NB Left-Right 30.1 C 67 112 20.1 C 78 115 NB Approach 30.1 C -- -- 20.1 C -- -- Overall 17.4 B -- -- 8.0 A -- -- 1 Overall intersection LOS and delay reported for signalized intersections and roundabouts only. SimTraffic Queues are average maximum queues after 10 runs of 60 minutes each. Intersection and Type of Control Movement and Approach Effective Turn Lane Storage (ft) AM PEAK HOUR (7:00-8:00 AM) PM PEAK HOUR (3:00-4:00 PM) 29 VDOT Signal Justification Report Template – Version 1.1 - January 25, 2021 US Route 522 at Gainesboro Road Page 13 of 17 Signal Justification: At-grade alternatives were reviewed and evaluated relative to construction costs, right-of-way acquisition, access, operations, and overall feasibility and context. This review culminated in the selection of the following four (4) potential at-grade intersection alternatives: 1. Two-Way Stop Control 2. Conventional Traffic Signal 3. Restricted Crossing U-Turn (RCUT) 4. Continuous Green-T (Green-T) The preliminary analysis of each aforementioned alternative indicated the two-way stop control is not a viable long- term solution. Conventional Signal As detailed above, the conventional signal provides adequate capacity and queueing for future conditions, has minimal impact on adjacent parcels, and is the most cost effective. In summary, the conventional signal: · Operates at a LOS B in both peak hours; · Will not require significant additional right-of-way; · Will not require additional lanes along US Route 522 or Gainesboro Road; and · Will be the most cost-effective solution. RCUT As detailed above, the RCUT option provides adequate capacity and queueing for future conditions and has minimal impact on adjacent parcels but does require additional improvements some of which may not be feasible. In summary, the RCUT: · Operates at a LOS C or better in both peak hours at the US Route 522/Gainesboro Road intersection; · Will require construction of a 200’ by 200’ eastbound left turn lane at the US Route 522/School entrance intersection; · Will require construction of a loon along the north side of US Route 522 to accommodate the U- turns; o The loon may not be feasible given the grade difference along the north side of US Route 522 · May require signalization at the US Route 522/School Entrance median break; and · Will be more costly than the conventional signal with no apparent operational gains. Green-T As detailed above, the Green-T option, if signalized, provides adequate capacity and queueing for future conditions, has impact on adjacent parcels, and will require additional improvements along US Route 522. In summary, the Green T: · Will require construction of a 400’ westbound receiving lane along westbound US Route 522; · Will require construction of a separate northbound right turn lane with 200 feet of storage if unsignalized; o This lane will require significant right-of-way acquisition. · Will still require signalization to operate effectively; and · Will be more costly than the conventional signal with no apparent operational gains. 30 VDOT Signal Justification Report Template – Version 1.1 - January 25, 2021 US Route 522 at Gainesboro Road Page 14 of 17 Conclusion – It is recommended that a conventional signal be installed at the US Route 522/Gainesboro Road intersection. The conventional signal provides adequate capacity for the future conditions, has minimal impact on adjacent parcels, requires the least amount of improvements along US Route 522, and is the most cost effective solution. 31 VDOT Signal Justification Report Template – Version 1.1 - January 25, 2021 US Route 522 at Gainesboro Road Page 15 of 17 V. Approvals If the proposed traffic signal is on an Arterial Preservation Network (APN), the SJR requires approval from the District Traffic Engineer (DTE), District Engineer/Administrator (DE/DA), and State Traffic Engineer (STE). For a proposed traffic signal not on the APN, SJR only requires DTE approval. Note that new crossovers on the APN must also be approved by the DE/DA and the State Location & Design Engineer as per IIM-LU-501.1. Signal Justification Report Approvals: District Traffic Engineer (DTE): Required for all SJRs ☐ Concur ☐ Do Not Concur _______________________ _______________________ _______________________ Name Signature Date Comments: _________________________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________________________ District Engineer/Administrator (DE/DA): Only required if SJR recommends a proposed signal on the APN ☐ Concur ☐ Do Not Concur _______________________ _______________________ _______________________ Name Signature Date Comments: _________________________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________________________ State Traffic Engineer (STE): Only required if SJR recommends a proposed signal on the APN ☐ Approved ☐ Denied _______________________ _______________________ _______________________ Name Signature Date Comments: _________________________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________________________ If additional comments are necessary, please attach the comments on another sheet. 32 VDOT Signal Justification Report Template – Version 1.1 - January 25, 2021 US Route 522 at Gainesboro Road Appendix A: Signal Warrant Analysis 33 Contact: Stephen O. Schmidt, PE, PTOE 1001 Boulders Parkway, Suite 300 • Richmond, VA 23225 (804) 200-6502 phone • (804) 560-1016 fax www.timmons.com US Route 522 at Gainesboro Road Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis October 2022 Frederick County, Virginia 10-27-22 34 October 2022 US Route 522 at Gainesboro Road – Signal Warrant Analysis 35 October 2022 US Route 522 at Gainesboro Road – Signal Warrant Analysis i TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS ........................................................................................................................................ i LIST OF FIGURES .............................................................................................................................................. ii LIST OF APPENDICIES ...................................................................................................................................... ii LIST OF TABLES................................................................................................................................................ iii 1 INTRODUCTION .........................................................................................................................................1 2 EXISTING CONDITIONS ...........................................................................................................................3 2.1 2022 Existing Traffic Volumes .......................................................................................... 3 2.2 COVID-19 Adjustment .................................................................................................... 4 3 2025 BACKGROUND TRAFFIC CONDITIONS .........................................................................................7 5 2025 FUTURE TRAFFIC VOLUMES ............................................................................................................9 6 TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANT ANALYSES – US Route 522/Gainesboro Road ................................. 11 6.1 Warrant 1 (Eight-Hour Vehicular Volume) – US Route 522/Gainesboro Road Intersection .... 12 6.2 Warrant 2 (Four-Hour Vehicular Volume) ....................................................................... 14 6.3 Warrant 3 (Peak-Hour Vehicular Volume) ....................................................................... 15 6.4 Warrant 7 (Crash History) ............................................................................................. 16 7 TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANT ANALYSES – US Route 522/School Access ........................................... 19 7.1 Warrant 1 (Eight-Hour Vehicular Volume) – US Route 522/School Access Intersection ........ 21 7.2 Warrant 2 (Four-Hour Vehicular Volume) ....................................................................... 23 7.3 Warrant 3 (Peak-Hour Vehicular Volume) ....................................................................... 24 7.4 Warrant 7 (Crash History) ............................................................................................. 24 8 CONCLUSIONS ............................................................................................................................................. 27 36 October 2022 US Route 522 at Gainesboro Road – Signal Warrant Analysis ii LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE 1: SURROUNDING ROADWAY NETWORK & SITE LOCATION FIGURE 2: EXISTING GEOMETRY FIGURE 3: WARRANT 2 – 2022 EXISTING VOLUMES GAINESBORO ROAD AT ROUTE 522 FIGURE 4: WARRANT 2 – 2025 BACKGROUND VOLUMES GAINESBORO ROAD AT ROUTE 522 FIGURE 5: WARRANT 2 – 2025 FUTURE VOLUMES GAINESBORO ROAD AT ROUTE 522 FIGURE 6: WARRANT 3 – 2022 EXISTING VOLUMES GAINESBORO ROAD AT ROUTE 522 FIGURE 7: WARRANT 3 – 2025 BACKGROUND VOLUMES GAINESBORO ROAD AT ROUTE 522 FIGURE 8: WARRANT 3 – 2025 FUTURE VOLUMES GAINESBORO ROAD AT ROUTE 522 FIGURE 9: WARRANT 2 – 2022 EXISTING VOLUMES SCHOOL ACCESS AT ROUTE 522 FIGURE 10: WARRANT 2 – 2025 BACKGROUND VOLUMES SCHOOL ACCESS AT ROUTE 522 FIGURE 11: WARRANT 3 – 2022 EXISTING VOLUMES SCHOOL ACCESS AT ROUTE 522 FIGURE 12: WARRANT 3 – 2025 BACKGROUND VOLUMES SCHOOL ACCESS AT ROUTE 522 LIST OF APPENDICIES APPENDIX A: SCOPING CORRESPONDENCE APPENDIX B: 13-HOUR TURNING MOVEMENT COUNTS APPENDIX C: RIGHT TURN ADJUSTMENTS – PAGONES THEOREM 37 October 2022 US Route 522 at Gainesboro Road – Signal Warrant Analysis iii LIST OF TABLES TABLE 1: 2022 EXISTING VOLUMES – 2018 VOLUMES AND 2022 VOLUMES COMPARISON TABLES 2A AND 2B: 2022 EXISTING VOLUMES TABLES 3A AND 3B: 2022 EXISTING VOLUMES (ADJUSTED) TABLES 4A AND 4B: 2025 BACKGROUND VOLUMES (ADJUSTED) TABLES 5A AND 5B: 2025 FUTURE VOLUMES (ADJUSTED) TABLE 6: TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANT ANALYSIS 2022 EXISTING CONDITIONS – US ROUTE 522/GAINESBORO ROAD (100% VOLUMES) TABLE 7: TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANT ANALYSIS 2022 EXISTING CONDITIONS – US ROUTE 522/GAINESBORO ROAD (70% VOLUMES) TABLE 8: TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANT ANALYSIS 2025 BACKGROUND CONDITIONS – US ROUTE 522/GAINESBORO ROAD (100% VOLUMES) TABLE 9: TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANT ANALYSIS 2025 BACKGROUND CONDITIONS – US ROUTE 522/GAINESBORO ROAD (70% VOLUMES) TABLE 10: TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANT ANALYSIS 2025 FUTURE CONDITIONS – US ROUTE 522/GAINESBORO ROAD (100% VOLUMES) TABLE 11: TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANT ANALYSIS 2025 FUTURE CONDITIONS – US ROUTE 522/GAINESBORO ROAD (70% VOLUMES) TABLE 12: TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANT ANALYSIS 2022 EXISTING CONDITIONS – US ROUTE 522/SCHOOL ACCESS (100% VOLUMES) TABLE 13: TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANT ANALYSIS 2022 EXISTING CONDITIONS – US ROUTE 522/SCHOOL ACCESS (70% VOLUMES) TABLE 14: TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANT ANALYSIS 2025 BACKGROUND CONDITIONS – US ROUTE 522/SCHOOL ACCESS (100% VOLUMES) TABLE 15: TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANT ANALYSIS 2025 BACKGROUND CONDITIONS – US ROUTE 522/SCHOOL ACCESS (70% VOLUMES) 38 October 2022 US Route 522 at Gainesboro Road – Signal Warrant Analysis 1 1 INTRODUCTION Timmons Group performed a traffic signal warrant analysis investigating the need for a traffic signal on US Route 522 at the Gainesboro Road intersection and on US Route 522 at the Gainesboro School Access intersection in Frederick County, Virginia. The signal warrant was performed in conjunction with the proposed construction of a new access point for the Gainesboro Elementary School/Frederick Middle School along Gainesboro Road. Access to the Gainesboro Elementary School and Frederick County Middle School campus is currently provided by one unsignalized access point at a median break along US Route 522 (North Frederick Pike). The median break access is located approximately 745 feet from the US Route 522/Gainesboro Road intersection which is also served by a median break. Frederick County is planning to relocate the main school access point to a newly constructed access road off of Gainesboro Road. With the relocation, the existing median break at the school entrance will be closed and the access limited to right-in/right-out only. A build year of 2025 is assumed. The site location is generally located south of US Route 522 and east of Gainesboro Road as shown on Figure 1 (all figures located at the end of this report). Under existing and 2025 background conditions, access to the school will continue to be provided via the main entrance on US Route 522. Under 2025 future conditions, the median break that services the main school entrance will be closed and traffic to/from the school at the existing access will be right-in, right-out. All left turns into and out of the site will be relocated to a new entrance off of Gainesboro Road. For purposes of this analysis, the proposed development was assumed to be completed by 2025. The analysis was completed in accordance with the Manual for Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD), the Virginia Supplement to the MUTCD, VDOT IIM-TE-387.1, and the scoping meeting and subsequent correspondence between VDOT, the County, and Timmons Group. A copy of the scoping agreements are included in Appendix A. The following steps were taken to complete the signal warrant analysis at the study intersection: 1. Traffic Data – 13-hour (6 AM – 7 PM) directional turning movement (DTM) counts were collected at the US Route 522/Gainesboro Road intersection and the US Route 522/School Entrance intersection on Wednesday, September 14, 2022. 2. Background Traffic Comparison - The 2022 traffic counts were compared to 2018 counts conducted at the US Route 522/Gainesville Road intersection to determine if a COVID-19 pandemic adjustment factor should be applied. 3. Background Traffic Growth – A 1% growth rate was applied to the 2022 existing volumes to develop the 2025 background volumes. 4. Total Future Traffic Projections– The redistributed left turn traffic at the school entrance was added to the US Route 522/Gainesboro Road intersection to develop the 2025 total future volumes. 39 October 2022 US Route 522 at Gainesboro Road – Signal Warrant Analysis 2 5. Right Turn Adjustments – In accordance with VDOT IIM-TE-387.1, right turns at the subject intersections were adjusted utilizing Pagones Theorem. 6. Traffic Signal Warrant Analyses –Traffic signal warrant analyses at the US Route 522/Gainesboro Road intersection and US Route 522/School Access intersection were performed using the existing, 2025 background, and 2025 total future volumes. The warrant analyses were completed using Warrants 1, Warrant 2, Warrant 3, and Warrant 7 using the 100% and 70% thresholds from the 2009 Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD). As agreed upon during scoping, Warrant 3 was considered but would not be sufficient to warrant a signal. 40 October 2022 US Route 522 at Gainesboro Road – Signal Warrant Analysis 3 2 EXISTING CONDITIONS Access to the Gainesboro Elementary School and Frederick County Middle School campus is currently provided by one unsignalized access point at a median break along US Route 522 (North Frederick Pike). The median break access is located approximately 745 feet from the US Route 522/Gainesboro Road intersection which is also served by a median break. Frederick County is planning to relocate the main school access point to a newly constructed access road off of Gainesboro Road. With the relocation, the existing median break at the school entrance will be closed and the access limited to right-in/right-out only. A build year of 2025 is assumed. The site location is generally located south of US Route 522 and east of Gainesboro Road as shown on Figure 1 (all figures located at the end of this report). Under existing and 2025 background conditions, access to the school will continue to be provided via the main entrance on US Route 522. Under 2025 future conditions, the median break that services the main school entrance will be closed and traffic to/from the school at the existing access will be right-in, right-out. All left turns into and out of the site will be relocated to a new entrance off of Gainesboro Road. For purposes of this analysis, the proposed development was assumed to be completed by 2025. US Route 522 is a four-lane, divided principal arterial with a posted speed limit of 55 mph with a 45 mph school zone speed limit in the vicinity of the site. According to 2019 VDOT AADT data, US Route 522 services 18,000 vehicles per day in the vicinity of the site. Gainesboro Road is a two-lane, undivided local road with a posted speed limit of 45 mph. According to 2019 VDOT AADT data, Gainesboro Road services 800 vehicles per day in the vicinity of the site. The existing lane use and traffic control is shown on Figure 2. 2.1 2022 Existing Traffic Volumes The 13-hour (6 AM – 7 PM) directional turning movement (DTM) counts were collected at the US Route 522/Gainesboro Road intersection and the US Route 522/School Entrance intersection on Wednesday, September 14, 2022. At the time of the counts, no construction detours or other impacts were noted. A copy of the count data is included in Appendix B. 41 October 2022 US Route 522 at Gainesboro Road – Signal Warrant Analysis 4 2.2 COVID-19 Adjustment From January of 2020 to current time, traffic patterns have been impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic, due largely to changes in schedule, reduction of external trips and a larger population working from home. In order to account for this change, counts taken at the US Route 522/Gainesboro Road taken in 2018 for another traffic study were compared to the 2022 counts. A copy of the 2018 counts are included in Appendix B. For the purposes of this study, the twelve hours considered for the signal warrant were compared between the 2018 and 2022 volumes and are summarized in Table 1 below. Table 1: 2018 Volumes and 2022 Volumes Comparison Based on the comparison, the 2022 counts were adjusted as follows: 1. For any hour where the 2022 counts are lower than the 2018 counts, all movements at both intersections were factored upward by the percent difference. For example, in the 7:00-8:00 AM hour, since the 2022 counts are 10.9% lower than the 2018 counts, a 1.109 factor was applied to the 2022 counts in that hour. 2. For any hour where the 2022 counts are higher than the 2018 counts, no adjustments were made. This also applies to the 6:00-7:00 AM peak hour where there is no 2018 data to compare. The 2022 Adjusted Volumes are summarized in Tables 2A and 2B below. Time Period 2018 Intersection Total 2022 Intersection Total Difference (2022 - 2018) % Difference (Diff / 2022 Count) 07:00 - 08:00 1,484 1,338 -146 -10.9% 08:00 - 09:00 1,111 1,100 -11 -1.0% 09:00 - 10:00 831 879 48 5.5% 10:00 - 11:00 865 906 41 4.5% 11:00 - 12:00 857 886 29 3.3% 12:00 - 13:00 922 905 -17 -1.9% 13:00 - 14:00 968 881 -87 -9.9% 14:00 - 15:00 1,122 1,087 -35 -3.2% 15:00 - 16:00 1,362 1,359 -3 -0.2% 16:00 - 17:00 1,486 1,532 46 3.0% 17:00 - 18:00 1,609 1,517 -92 -6.1% 18:00-19:00 1,052 1,049 -3 -0.3% Average -1.4% 42 October 2022 US Route 522 at Gainesboro Road – Signal Warrant Analysis 5 Table 2A: 2022 Existing Volumes- US Route 522/Gainesboro Road Intersection Table 2B: 2022 Existing Volumes- US Route 522/School Access Intersection Left Right U-Turn Through Right Left U-Turn Through 06:00 - 07:00 5 45 0 749 1 13 0 155 07:00 - 08:00 2 140 3 974 0 50 3 312 08:00 - 09:00 3 63 9 625 3 40 0 358 09:00 - 10:00 4 29 8 462 3 33 1 339 10:00 - 11:00 2 26 5 482 0 24 2 365 11:00 - 12:00 4 39 2 429 3 22 0 387 12:00 - 13:00 3 21 5 445 3 17 2 425 13:00 - 14:00 5 31 2 455 4 27 0 443 14:00 - 15:00 0 51 7 433 1 37 2 590 15:00 - 16:00 1 47 7 430 1 87 0 813 16:00 - 17:00 7 66 4 465 3 72 0 915 17:00 - 18:00 3 46 6 485 2 89 0 977 18:00 - 19:00 2 23 3 351 0 33 3 637 Gainesboro Road - NB Route 522 - EB Route 522 - WB Study Intersection #1 Left Right U-Turn Through Right Left U-turn Through 06:00-7:00 1 22 0 790 32 21 0 168 07:00 - 08:00 31 205 0 920 189 157 1 329 08:00 - 09:00 61 82 0 585 117 52 2 322 09:00 - 10:00 10 9 0 486 8 7 4 361 10:00 - 11:00 3 7 1 499 6 6 1 383 11:00 - 12:00 6 11 1 452 5 6 0 406 12:00 - 13:00 3 7 5 464 5 6 1 446 13:00 - 14:00 12 9 1 466 20 12 1 470 14:00 - 15:00 22 44 0 443 46 83 1 617 15:00 - 16:00 85 141 0 420 48 40 2 831 16:00 - 17:00 45 53 0 484 43 62 3 949 17:00 - 18:00 63 65 1 493 34 69 5 1032 18:00 - 19:00 29 46 2 374 3 2 0 640 Study Intersection #2 School Access- NB Route 522- EB Route 522 - WB 43 October 2022 US Route 522 at Gainesboro Road – Signal Warrant Analysis 6 As noted above and detailed in Appendix C, in accordance with VDOT IIM-TE-387.1, the side street right turns were adjusted utilizing Pagones Theorem. The 2022 existing adjusted volumes are shown in Tables 3A and 3B. Table 3A: 2022 Existing Volumes (Adjusted) - US Route 522/Gainesboro Road Intersection Table 3B: 2022 Existing Volumes (Adjusted) - US Route 522/School Access Intersection Left Right (Adjusted) U-Turn Through Right Left U-Turn Through 06:00 - 07:00 5 18 0 749 1 13 0 155 07:00 - 08:00 2 63 3 974 0 50 3 312 08:00 - 09:00 3 25 9 625 3 40 0 358 09:00 - 10:00 4 12 8 462 3 33 1 339 10:00 - 11:00 2 10 5 482 0 24 2 365 11:00 - 12:00 4 16 2 429 3 22 0 387 12:00 - 13:00 3 8 5 445 3 17 2 425 13:00 - 14:00 5 12 2 455 4 27 0 443 14:00 - 15:00 0 20 7 433 1 37 2 590 15:00 - 16:00 1 19 7 430 1 87 0 813 16:00 - 17:00 7 26 4 465 3 72 0 915 17:00 - 18:00 3 18 6 485 2 89 0 977 18:00 - 19:00 2 9 3 351 0 33 3 637 Study Intersection #1 Gainesboro Road - NB Route 522 - EB Route 522 - WB Left Right U-Turn Through Right Left U-turn Through 06:00-7:00 1 6 0 790 32 21 0 168 07:00 - 08:00 31 62 0 920 189 157 1 329 08:00 - 09:00 61 21 0 585 117 52 2 322 09:00 - 10:00 10 2 0 486 8 7 4 361 10:00 - 11:00 3 2 1 499 6 6 1 383 11:00 - 12:00 6 3 1 452 5 6 0 406 12:00 - 13:00 3 2 5 464 5 6 1 446 13:00 - 14:00 12 2 1 466 20 12 1 470 14:00 - 15:00 22 11 0 443 46 83 1 617 15:00 - 16:00 85 35 0 420 48 40 2 831 16:00 - 17:00 45 13 0 484 43 62 3 949 17:00 - 18:00 63 16 1 493 34 69 5 1032 18:00 - 19:00 29 12 2 374 3 2 0 640 Study Intersection #2 School Access- NB Route 522- EB Route 522 - WB 44 October 2022 US Route 522 at Gainesboro Road – Signal Warrant Analysis 7 3 2025 BACKGROUND TRAFFIC CONDITIONS The 2025 background traffic volumes (without the new site access were developed based on the existing traffic volumes and a 1% annual growth rate. 3.1 2025 Background Traffic Growth The 1% annual growth rate was compounded annually for the 3-year period from 2022 to 2025 and applied to all movements at the subject intersection. As discussed above, the side street right turn volumes were adjusted utilizing Pagones Theorem. The resulting 2025 adjusted background volumes at the US Route 522/Gainesboro Road intersection and the US Route 522/School Entrance intersection are shown in Tables 4A and 4B. Table 4A – 2025 Background Volumes (Adjusted) US Route 522/Gainesboro Road Intersection Left Right (Adjusted) U-Turn Through Right Left U-Turn Through 06:00 - 07:00 5 18 0 772 1 13 0 160 07:00 - 08:00 2 72 3 1004 0 52 3 321 08:00 - 09:00 3 26 9 644 3 41 0 369 09:00 - 10:00 4 12 8 476 3 34 1 349 10:00 - 11:00 2 11 5 497 0 25 2 376 11:00 - 12:00 4 16 2 442 3 23 0 399 12:00 - 13:00 3 9 5 458 3 18 2 438 13:00 - 14:00 5 13 2 469 4 28 0 456 14:00 - 15:00 0 21 7 446 1 38 2 608 15:00 - 16:00 1 19 7 443 1 90 0 838 16:00 - 17:00 7 27 4 479 3 74 0 943 17:00 - 18:00 3 19 6 500 2 92 0 1007 18:00 - 19:00 2 10 3 362 0 34 3 656 Study Intersection #1 Gainesboro Road - NB Route 522 - EB Route 522 - WB 45 October 2022 US Route 522 at Gainesboro Road – Signal Warrant Analysis 8 Table 4B: 2025 Background Volumes (Adjusted) US Route 522/School Access Intersection Left Right U-Turn Through Right Left U-turn Through 06:00-7:00 1 5 0 814 33 22 0 173 07:00 - 08:00 32 74 0 948 195 162 1 339 08:00 - 09:00 63 21 0 603 121 54 2 332 09:00 - 10:00 10 2 0 501 8 7 4 372 10:00 - 11:00 3 2 1 514 6 6 1 395 11:00 - 12:00 6 3 1 466 5 6 0 418 12:00 - 13:00 3 2 5 478 5 6 1 460 13:00 - 14:00 12 2 1 480 21 12 1 484 14:00 - 15:00 23 11 0 456 47 86 1 636 15:00 - 16:00 88 36 0 433 49 41 2 856 16:00 - 17:00 46 14 0 499 44 64 3 978 17:00 - 18:00 65 17 1 508 35 71 5 1063 18:00 - 19:00 30 12 2 385 3 2 0 659 Study Intersection #2 School Access- NB Route 522- EB Route 522 - WB 46 October 2022 US Route 522 at Gainesboro Road – Signal Warrant Analysis 9 5 2025 FUTURE TRAFFIC VOLUMES Under 2025 future conditions, the median break that services the main school entrance will be closed and traffic to/from the school at the existing access will be right-in, right-out. A secondary access point will be constructed off of Gainesboro Road and will serve all left turning traffic into and out of the school complex. The 2025 background traffic volumes shown in Tables 4A and 4B were reassigned as follows to account for the change in access: 1. All westbound lefts from US Route 522 into the school entrance were rerouted to become westbound left turns from US Route 522 onto Gainesboro Road. a. This traffic was added to the westbound through movement at the US Route 522/School Entrance intersection. 2. No changes were made to the eastbound right turns from US Route 522 into the school entrance. 3. All northbound left turns from the school entrance onto US Route 522 were rerouted to become northbound lefts from Gainesboro Road onto US Route 522. a. This traffic was subtracted from the westbound through at the US Route 522/Gainesboro Road intersection. 4. No changes were made to the northbound right turns from the school entrance onto US Route 522. As discussed above, the side street right turn volumes were adjusted utilizing Pagones Theorem. The resulting 2025 adjusted future volumes at the US Route 522/Gainesboro Road intersection and the US Route 522/School Entrance intersection are shown in Tables 5A and 5B. 47 October 2022 US Route 522 at Gainesboro Road – Signal Warrant Analysis 10 Table 5A – 2025 Total Future Volumes (Adjusted) US Route 522/Gainesboro Road Intersection Table 5B: 2025 Total Future Volumes (Adjusted) US Route 522/School Access Intersection Left Right (Adjusted) U-Turn Through Right Left U-Turn Through 06:00 - 07:00 6 18 0 772 1 35 0 159 07:00 - 08:00 34 72 3 1004 0 214 4 289 08:00 - 09:00 66 26 9 644 3 95 2 306 09:00 - 10:00 14 12 8 476 3 41 5 339 10:00 - 11:00 5 11 5 497 0 31 3 373 11:00 - 12:00 10 16 2 442 3 29 0 393 12:00 - 13:00 6 9 5 458 3 24 3 435 13:00 - 14:00 17 13 2 469 4 40 1 444 14:00 - 15:00 23 21 7 446 1 124 3 585 15:00 - 16:00 89 19 7 443 1 131 2 750 16:00 - 17:00 53 27 4 479 3 138 3 897 17:00 - 18:00 68 19 6 500 2 163 5 942 18:00 - 19:00 32 10 3 362 0 36 3 626 Gainesboro Road - NB Route 522 - EB Route 522 - WB Study Intersection #1 Left Right U-Turn Through Right Left U-turn Through 06:00-7:00 5 0 814 33 195 07:00 - 08:00 74 0 948 195 502 08:00 - 09:00 21 0 603 121 388 09:00 - 10:00 2 0 501 8 383 10:00 - 11:00 2 1 514 6 402 11:00 - 12:00 3 1 466 5 424 12:00 - 13:00 2 5 478 5 467 13:00 - 14:00 2 1 480 21 497 14:00 - 15:00 11 0 456 47 723 15:00 - 16:00 36 0 433 49 899 16:00 - 17:00 14 0 499 44 1045 17:00 - 18:00 17 1 508 35 1139 18:00 - 19:00 12 2 385 3 661 Study Intersection #2 School Access- NB Route 522- EB Route 522 - WB 48 October 2022 US Route 522 at Gainesboro Road – Signal Warrant Analysis 11 6 TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANT ANALYSES – US Route 522/Gainesboro Road Signal warrant analyses were completed at the US Route 522/Gainesboro Road intersection using the existing traffic volumes from Table 3A, the 2025 background traffic volumes from Table 4A, and the 2025 total volumes from Table 5A. The warrant analyses were conducted following procedures from the 2009 edition of the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) and the hourly volumes from 7:00 AM to 7:00 PM. In accordance with the agreed scoping, Warrant 1 (Eight-Hour), Warrant 2 (Four-Hour), Warrant 3 (Peak Hour), and Warrant 7 (Crash History) using 100% and 70% thresholds outlined in the 2009 MUTCD was considered for the analyses and are described in detail below. The following six (6) warrants were not in included in this analysis because they are not applicable to the nature/context of the development and/or adjacent roadway infrastructure. · Warrant 4 – Pedestrian Volume · Warrant 5 – School Crossing · Warrant 6 – Coordinated Signal System · Warrant 8 – Roadway Network · Warrant 9 – Intersection Near a Grade Crossing The MUTCD contains both 100% and 70% volume thresholds that can be used in the signal warrant analysis. The 70% volume thresholds are listed as an option and “may be used” if the posted/statutory speed limit exceed 40 mph or the intersection is in a built-up area of an isolated community with a population less than 10,000. As the posted school zone speed limit adjacent to the school on US Route 522 is 45 mph, the 70% warrants were also considered As shown in Figure 3, the major street (US Route 522) has two through lanes in each direction. The minor street (Gainesboro Road) has one through lane in each direction. In accordance with MUTCD guidelines, “engineering judgment and rationale should be applied to a street approach with one lane plus a right-turn lane. In this case, the degree of conflict of minor-street right-turn traffic with traffic on the major street should be considered. Thus, right-turn traffic should not be included in the minor-street volume if the movement enters the major street with minimal conflict. The approach should be evaluated as a one-lane approach with only the traffic volume in the through/left-turn lane considered.” The lane geometry used in the traffic signal warrant analysis for the major street is assumed to be two (2) lanes and the minor street one (1) lane. The analysis is detailed below and summarized in Tables 6 to 11 for existing, background, and future conditions at the US Route 522/Gainesboro Road intersection. 49 October 2022 US Route 522 at Gainesboro Road – Signal Warrant Analysis 12 6.1 Warrant 1 (Eight-Hour Vehicular Volume) – US Route 522/Gainesboro Road Intersection According to the MUTCD, “the need for a traffic control signal shall be considered if an engineering study finds that one of the following conditions exist for each of any 8 hours of an average day”: Condition A: This warrant is intended for application at locations where a large volume of intersecting traffic is the principal reason to consider installing a traffic control signal. Volume Thresholds (100%): The volume thresholds for a two-lane major street approach and a one-lane minor street approach from the 2009 MUTCD Table 4C-1 indicate the need for a traffic control signal is considered when, for each of any eight (8) hours of an average day, a minimum of 600 vehicles per hour exist on the major street approaches and 150 vehicles per hour are present on the higher-volume minor street approach. Volume Thresholds (70%): The volume thresholds for a two-lane major street approach and a one-lane minor street approach from the 2009 MUTCD Table 4C-1 indicate the need for a traffic control signal is considered when, for each of any eight (8) hours of an average day, a minimum of 420 vehicles per hour exist on the major street approaches and 105 vehicles per hour are present on the higher-volume minor street approach. 2022 Existing Conditions: The analysis results are shown in Table 6 (100% threshold) and Table 7 (70% threshold) and indicate under 2022 existing conditions, the required vehicle volume on the minor street approach was present for zero (0) of the eight (8) required hours based on the volume thresholds for the one-lane minor street approach. Therefore, this warrant is not considered met under 2022 existing conditions. 2025 Background Conditions: The analysis results are shown in Table 8 (100% threshold) and Table 9 (70% threshold) and indicate under 2025 background conditions, the required vehicle volume on the minor street approach was present for zero (0) of the eight (8) required hours based on the volume thresholds for the one-lane minor street approach. Therefore, this warrant is not considered met under 2025 background conditions. 2025 Future Conditions: The analysis results are shown in Table 10 (100% threshold) and Table 11 (70% threshold) and indicate under 2025 future conditions, the required vehicle volume on the minor street approach was present for two (2) of the eight (8) required hours based on the volume thresholds for the one-lane minor street approach. Therefore, this warrant is not considered met under 2025 future conditions. Summary: A traffic signal is not warranted at the US Route 522/Gainesboro Road intersection under any scenario using Warrant 1A thresholds. 50 October 2022 US Route 522 at Gainesboro Road – Signal Warrant Analysis 13 Condition B: This warrant is intended for application at locations where the traffic volume on a major street is so heavy that traffic on a minor intersecting street suffers excessive delay or conflict in entering or crossing the major street. Volume Thresholds (100% Thresholds): The volume thresholds for a two-lane major street approach and a one-lane minor street approach from the 2009 MUTCD Table 4C-1 indicate the need for a traffic control signal is considered when, for each of any eight (8) hours of an average day, a minimum of 900 vehicles per hour exist on the major street approaches and 75 vehicles are present on the higher-volume minor street approach. Volume Thresholds (70% Thresholds): The volume thresholds for a two-lane major street approach and a one-lane minor street approach from the 2009 MUTCD Table 4C-1 indicate the need for a traffic control signal is considered when, for each of any eight (8) hours of an average day, a minimum of 630 vehicles per hour exist on the major street approaches and 53 vehicles are present on the higher-volume minor street approach. 2022 Existing Conditions: The analysis results are shown in Table 6 (100% threshold) and Table 7 (70% threshold) and indicate under 2022 existing conditions, the required vehicle volume on the minor street approach was present for one (1) of the eight (8) required hours based on the volume thresholds for the one-lane minor street approach. Therefore, this warrant is not considered met under 2022 existing conditions. 2025 Background Conditions: The analysis results are shown in Table 8 (100% threshold) and Table 9 (70% threshold) and indicate under 2025 background conditions, the required vehicle volume on the minor street approach was present for one (1) of the eight (8) required hours based on the volume thresholds for the one-lane minor street approach. Therefore, this warrant is not considered met under 2025 background conditions. 2025 Future Conditions: The analysis results are shown in Table 10 (100% threshold) and Table 11 (70% threshold) and indicate under 2025 future conditions, the required vehicle volume on the minor street approach was present for five (5) of the eight (8) required hours based on the volume thresholds for the one-lane minor street approach. Therefore, this warrant is not considered met under 2025 future conditions. Summary: A traffic signal is not warranted at the US Route 522/Gainesboro Road intersection under existing, background, and future scenarios using Warrant 1B thresholds. Combination of Conditions A and B This warrant reduces the volume thresholds found in Conditions A and B by 20% and considers both conditions simultaneously. Volume Thresholds (100%): The volume thresholds for a two-lane major street approach and a one-lane minor street approach from the 2009 MUTCD Table 4C-1 indicate the need for a traffic control signal is considered when, for each of any eight (8) hours of an average day, a minimum of 480 vehicles are present on the major street approaches and 120 vehicles are present on the higher volumes minor street approach (Condition A) and a minimum of 720 vehicles are present on the major street approaches and 60 vehicles are present on the higher volumes minor street approach (Condition B). 51 October 2022 US Route 522 at Gainesboro Road – Signal Warrant Analysis 14 Volume Thresholds (70%): The volume thresholds for a two-lane major street approach and a one-lane minor street approach from the 2009 MUTCD Table 4C-1 indicate the need for a traffic control signal is considered when, for each of any eight (8) hours of an average day, a minimum of 336 vehicles are present on the major street approaches and 84 vehicles are present on the higher volumes minor street approach (Condition A) and a minimum of 504 vehicles are present on the major street approaches and 42 vehicles are present on the higher volumes minor street approach (Condition B). 2022 Existing Conditions: The analysis results are shown in Table 6 (100% threshold) and Table 7 (70% threshold) and indicate under 2022 existing conditions the required vehicle volume on the minor street approach was present for zero (0) of the eight (8) required hours for Condition A and one (1) of the eight (8) required hours for Condition B. Therefore, this warrant is not considered met under 2022 existing conditions. 2025 Background Conditions: The analysis results are shown in Table 8 (100% threshold) and Table 9 (70% threshold) and indicate under 2025 background conditions the required vehicle volume on the minor street approach was present for zero (0) of the eight (8) required hours for Condition A and one (1) of the eight (8) required hours for Condition B. Therefore, this warrant is not considered met under 2025 background conditions. 2025 Future Conditions: The analysis results are shown in Table 10 (100% threshold) and Table 11 (70% threshold) and indicate under 2025 future conditions the required vehicle volume on the minor street approach was present for four (4) of the seven (7) required hours for Condition A and eight (8) of the eight (8) required hours for Condition B. Therefore, this warrant is not considered met under 2025 future conditions. Summary: A traffic signal is not warranted at the US Route 522/Gainesboro Road intersection under any scenario using the Combination of Conditions A and B thresholds. Warrant 1 Summary A traffic signal is not warranted at the US Route 522/Gainesboro Road intersection under any scenario using Warrant 1 thresholds. 6.2 Warrant 2 (Four-Hour Vehicular Volume) According to the MUTCD, this warrant is intended to be applied where the volume of intersecting traffic is the principal reason to consider installing a traffic signal. The need for a traffic control signal can be considered when, for each of any four (4) hours of an average day, the plotted points representing the vehicles per hour on the major street (total of both approaches) and the corresponding vehicles per hour on the minor street approach all fall above the applicable curve on MUTCD Figure 4C-1 and 4C-2 for the combination of approach lanes. As detailed above, the intersection is characterized by the “2 or more lanes & 1 lane” line. Figures 3, 4, and 5 plot each of the individual peak hour volumes onto the 4-hour warrant (MUTCD Figure 4C-1 and 4C-2) for the existing, background, and future scenarios, respectively. 2022 Existing Conditions: As shown in Figure 3, and summarized in Tables 6 and 7, the major and minor street traffic are above the warrant line for zero (0) of the required four (4) hours under existing conditions. Therefore, this warrant is not considered met under 2022 existing conditions. 52 October 2022 US Route 522 at Gainesboro Road – Signal Warrant Analysis 15 2025 Background Conditions: As shown in Figure 4, and summarized in Tables 8 and 9, the major and minor street traffic are above the warrant line for one (1) of the required four (4) hours under background conditions. Therefore, this warrant is not considered met under 2025 background conditions. 2025 Future Conditions: As shown in Figure 5, and summarized in Tables 10 and 11, the major and minor street traffic are above the warrant line for five (5) of the required four (4) hours under background conditions. Therefore, this warrant is met considered met under 2025 future conditions. Warrant 2 Summary A traffic signal is warranted at the US Route 522/Gainesboro Road intersection under 2025 future scenarios using Warrant 2 thresholds. 6.3 Warrant 3 (Peak-Hour Vehicular Volume) According to the MUTCD, this warrant is intended to be applied where the minor-street traffic suffers undue delay when entering or crossing the major street. The need for a traffic control signal can be considered when, for each of any four (4) hours of an average day, the plotted points representing the vehicles per hour on the major street (total of both approaches) and the corresponding vehicles per hour on the minor street approach all fall above the applicable curve on MUTCD Figure 4C-3 and 4C-4 for the combination of approach lanes. As detailed above, the intersection is characterized by the “2 or more lanes & 1 lane” line. Figures 6, 7, and 8 plot each of the individual peak hour volumes onto the 1-hour warrant (MUTCD Figure 4C-3 and 4C-4) for the existing, background, and future scenarios, respectively. 2022 Existing Conditions: As shown in Figure 6, and summarized in Tables 6 and 7, the major and minor street traffic are above the warrant line for zero (0) of the required one (1) hour under existing conditions. Therefore, this warrant is not considered met under 2022 existing conditions. 2025 Background Conditions: As shown in Figure 7, and summarized in Tables 8 and 9, the major and minor street traffic are above the warrant line for zero (0) of the required one (1) hour under background conditions. Therefore, this warrant is not considered met under 2025 background conditions. 2025 Future Conditions: As shown in Figure 8, and summarized in Tables 10 and 11, the major and minor street traffic are above the warrant line for five (5) of the required one (1) hour under background conditions. Therefore, this warrant is met considered met under 2025 future conditions. Warrant 3 Summary A traffic signal is warranted at the US Route 522/Gainesboro Road intersection under 2025 future scenarios using Warrant 3 thresholds. 53 October 2022 US Route 522 at Gainesboro Road – Signal Warrant Analysis 16 6.4 Warrant 7 (Crash History) According to the MUTCD, this warrant is intended to be applied where the severity and frequency of crashes are the principal reason for considering a traffic signal. The need for a traffic control signal can be considered when, among other requirements, a minimum of five (5) or more crashes susceptible to correction by a traffic signal have occurred within a 12-month period. A review of the last five (5) years of available crash data from VDOT Power BI indicates a total of five (5) crashes have occurred at the intersection for an average of one (1) crash per year. The crash history is less than the required and therefore a traffic signal is not warranted at the US Route 522/Gainesboro Road intersection under Warrant 7. 54 October 2022 US Route 522 at Gainesboro Road – Signal Warrant Analysis 17 Table 6 – Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis Summary (100% Thresholds) 2022 Existing Conditions – US Route 522/Gainesboro Road Table 7 – Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis Summary (70% Thresholds) 2022 Existing Conditions – US Route 522/Gainesboro Road Major 600 900 480 720 Minor 150 75 120 60 06:00-07:00 918 23 N N N N N N 07:00 - 08:00 1,342 65 N N N Y N N 08:00 - 09:00 1,035 28 N N N N N N 09:00 - 10:00 846 16 N N N N N N 10:00 - 11:00 878 12 N N N N N N 11:00 - 12:00 843 20 N N N N N N 12:00 - 13:00 897 11 N N N N N N 13:00 - 14:00 931 17 N N N N N N 14:00 - 15:00 1,070 20 N N N N N N 15:00 - 16:00 1,338 20 N N N N N N 16:00 - 17:00 1,459 33 N N N N N N 17:00 - 18:00 1,559 21 N N N N N N 18:00 - 19:00 1,027 11 N N N N N N 0 0 0 1 0 0 8 8 8 8 4 1 No No No No Time Period Threshold See Graph Minor Street Volume (Highest Approach) #1 (8-hour) #2 (4-hour)Condition A Major Street Volume # of Hours Warrant is Met # of Hours Warrant is Required to be Met Is Warrant Satisfied? No #3 ( Peak hour) See Graph 100% WARRANTS Condition B Combination Condition A Condition B Major 420 630 336 504 Minor 105 53 84 42 06:00-07:00 918 23 N N N N N N 07:00 - 08:00 1,342 65 N Y N Y N N 08:00 - 09:00 1,035 28 N N N N N N 09:00 - 10:00 846 16 N N N N N N 10:00 - 11:00 878 12 N N N N N N 11:00 - 12:00 843 20 N N N N N N 12:00 - 13:00 897 11 N N N N N N 13:00 - 14:00 931 17 N N N N N N 14:00 - 15:00 1,070 20 N N N N N N 15:00 - 16:00 1,338 20 N N N N N N 16:00 - 17:00 1,459 33 N N N N N N 17:00 - 18:00 1,559 21 N N N N N N 18:00 - 19:00 1,027 11 N N N N N N 0 1 0 1 0 0 8 8 8 8 4 1 No No No No Threshold See Graph # of Hours Warrant is Met # of Hours Warrant is Required to be Met Time Period Major Street Volume Minor Street Volume (Highest Approach) #1 (8-hour) #2 (4-hour)Condition A Condition B Combination Is Warrant Satisfied? No 70% WARRANTS #3 ( Peak hour) See Graph Condition A Condition B 55 October 2022 US Route 522 at Gainesboro Road – Signal Warrant Analysis 18 Table 8 – Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis Summary (100% Thresholds) 2025 Background Conditions – US Route 522/Gainesboro Road Table 9 – Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis Summary (70% Thresholds) 2025 Background Conditions – US Route 522/Gainesboro Road Major 600 900 480 720 Minor 150 75 120 60 06:00-07:00 946 23 N N N N N N 07:00 - 08:00 1,383 74 N N N Y N N 08:00 - 09:00 1,066 29 N N N N N N 09:00 - 10:00 871 16 N N N N N N 10:00 - 11:00 905 13 N N N N N N 11:00 - 12:00 869 20 N N N N N N 12:00 - 13:00 924 12 N N N N N N 13:00 - 14:00 959 18 N N N N N N 14:00 - 15:00 1,102 21 N N N N N N 15:00 - 16:00 1,379 20 N N N N N N 16:00 - 17:00 1,503 34 N N N N N N 17:00 - 18:00 1,607 22 N N N N N N 18:00 - 19:00 1,058 12 N N N N N N 0 0 0 1 0 0 8 8 8 8 4 1 No No No No Time Period Minor Street Volume (Highest Approach) 100% WARRANTS #1 (8-hour) #2 (4-hour) #3 ( Peak hour) Major Street Volume Condition A Condition B Combination Condition A Condition B See Graph See Graph # of Hours Warrant is Met Threshold # of Hours Warrant is Required to be Met Is Warrant Satisfied? No Major 420 630 336 504 Minor 105 53 84 42 06:00-07:00 946 23 N N N N N N 07:00 - 08:00 1,383 74 N Y N Y Y N 08:00 - 09:00 1,066 29 N N N N N N 09:00 - 10:00 871 16 N N N N N N 10:00 - 11:00 905 13 N N N N N N 11:00 - 12:00 869 20 N N N N N N 12:00 - 13:00 924 12 N N N N N N 13:00 - 14:00 959 18 N N N N N N 14:00 - 15:00 1,102 21 N N N N N N 15:00 - 16:00 1,379 20 N N N N N N 16:00 - 17:00 1,503 34 N N N N N N 17:00 - 18:00 1,607 22 N N N N N N 18:00 - 19:00 1,058 12 N N N N N N 0 1 0 1 1 0 8 8 8 8 4 1 No No No No Time Period Major Street Volume Minor Street Volume (Highest Approach) 70% WARRANTS #1 (8-hour) #2 (4-hour) #3 ( Peak hour)Condition A Condition B Combination Condition A Condition B See Graph See Graph # of Hours Warrant is Met # of Hours Warrant is Required to be Met Is Warrant Satisfied? No Threshold 56 October 2022 US Route 522 at Gainesboro Road – Signal Warrant Analysis 19 Table 10 – Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis Summary (100% Thresholds) 2025 Future Conditions – US Route 522/Gainesboro Road Table 11 – Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis Summary (70% Thresholds) 2025 Future Conditions – US Route 522/Gainesboro Road Major 600 900 480 720 Minor 150 75 120 60 06:00-07:00 967 24 N N N N N N 07:00 - 08:00 1,514 106 N Y N Y Y N 08:00 - 09:00 1,059 92 N Y N Y N N 09:00 - 10:00 872 26 N N N N N N 10:00 - 11:00 909 16 N N N N N N 11:00 - 12:00 869 26 N N N N N N 12:00 - 13:00 928 15 N N N N N N 13:00 - 14:00 960 30 N N N N N N 14:00 - 15:00 1,166 44 N N N N N N 15:00 - 16:00 1,334 108 N Y N Y Y N 16:00 - 17:00 1,524 80 N Y N Y Y N 17:00 - 18:00 1,618 87 N Y N Y Y N 18:00 - 19:00 1,030 42 N N N N N N 0 5 0 5 5 0 8 8 8 8 4 1 No No Yes No # of Hours Warrant is Required to be Met Is Warrant Satisfied? No See Graph See Graph # of Hours Warrant is Met Condition A Condition B Combination Condition A Condition B Threshold Minor Street Volume (Highest Approach) 100% WARRANTS #1 (8-hour) #2 (4-hour) #3 ( Peak hour) Time Period Major Street Volume Major 420 630 336 504 Minor 105 53 84 42 06:00-07:00 967 24 N N N N N N 07:00 - 08:00 1,514 106 Y Y Y Y Y Y 08:00 - 09:00 1,059 92 N Y Y Y Y Y 09:00 - 10:00 872 26 N N N N N N 10:00 - 11:00 909 16 N N N N N N 11:00 - 12:00 869 26 N N N N N N 12:00 - 13:00 928 15 N N N N N N 13:00 - 14:00 960 30 N N N N N N 14:00 - 15:00 1,166 44 N N N Y N N 15:00 - 16:00 1,334 108 Y Y Y Y Y Y 16:00 - 17:00 1,524 80 N Y N Y Y Y 17:00 - 18:00 1,618 87 N Y Y Y Y Y 18:00 - 19:00 1,030 42 N N N Y N N 2 5 4 7 5 5 8 8 8 8 4 1 No No Yes Yes See Graph See Graph # of Hours Warrant is Met # of Hours Warrant is Required to be Met Is Warrant Satisfied? No Condition A Condition B Combination Condition A Condition B Threshold Time Period Major Street Volume Minor Street Volume (Highest Approach) 70% WARRANTS #1 (8-hour) #2 (4-hour) #3 ( Peak hour) 57 October 2022 US Route 522 at Gainesboro Road – Signal Warrant Analysis 20 7 TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANT ANALYSES – US Route 522/School Access Signal warrant analyses were completed at the US Route 522/School Access intersection using the existing traffic volumes from Table 3B, the 2025 background traffic volumes from Table 4B, and the 2025 total volumes from Table 5B. The warrant analyses were conducted following procedures from the 2009 edition of the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) and the hourly volumes from 7:00 AM to 7:00 PM. In accordance with the agreed scoping, Warrant 1 (Eight-Hour), Warrant 2 (Four-Hour), Warrant 3 (Peak Hour), and Warrant 7 (Crash History) using 100% and 70% thresholds outlined in the 2009 MUTCD was considered for the analyses and are described in detail below. The following six (6) warrants were not in included in this analysis because they are not applicable to the nature/context of the development and/or adjacent roadway infrastructure. · Warrant 4 – Pedestrian Volume · Warrant 5 – School Crossing · Warrant 6 – Coordinated Signal System · Warrant 8 – Roadway Network · Warrant 9 – Intersection Near a Grade Crossing The MUTCD contains both 100% and 70% volume thresholds that can be used in the signal warrant analysis. The 70% volume thresholds are listed as an option and “may be used” if the posted/statutory speed limit exceed 40 mph or the intersection is in a built-up area of an isolated community with a population less than 10,000. As the posted school zone speed limit adjacent to the school on US Route 522 is 45 mph, the 70% warrants were also considered As shown in Figure 3, the major street (US Route 522) has two through lanes in each direction. The minor street (School Access) has two lanes at the intersection. In accordance with MUTCD guidelines, “engineering judgment and rationale should be applied to a street approach with one lane plus a right-turn lane. In this case, the degree of conflict of minor-street right-turn traffic with traffic on the major street should be considered. Thus, right-turn traffic should not be included in the minor-street volume if the movement enters the major street with minimal conflict. The approach should be evaluated as a one-lane approach with only the traffic volume in the through/left-turn lane considered.” The lane geometry used in the traffic signal warrant analysis for the major street is assumed to be two (2) lanes and the minor street two (2) lane. The analysis is detailed below and summarized in Tables 12 to 15 for existing, and background conditions at the US Route 522/School Access intersection. As discussed above, under future conditions the school access will become right-in/right-out and therefore future conditions were not considered for a traffic signal. 58 October 2022 US Route 522 at Gainesboro Road – Signal Warrant Analysis 21 7.1 Warrant 1 (Eight-Hour Vehicular Volume) – US Route 522/School Access Intersection According to the MUTCD, “the need for a traffic control signal shall be considered if an engineering study finds that one of the following conditions exist for each of any 8 hours of an average day”: Condition A: This warrant is intended for application at locations where a large volume of intersecting traffic is the principal reason to consider installing a traffic control signal. Volume Thresholds (100%): The volume thresholds for a two-lane major street approach and a two-lane minor street approach from the 2009 MUTCD Table 4C-1 indicate the need for a traffic control signal is considered when, for each of any eight (8) hours of an average day, a minimum of 600 vehicles per hour exist on the major street approaches and 200 vehicles per hour are present on the higher-volume minor street approach. Volume Thresholds (70%): The volume thresholds for a two-lane major street approach and a two-lane minor street approach from the 2009 MUTCD Table 4C-1 indicate the need for a traffic control signal is considered when, for each of any eight (8) hours of an average day, a minimum of 420 vehicles per hour exist on the major street approaches and 140 vehicles per hour are present on the higher-volume minor street approach. 2022 Existing Conditions: The analysis results are shown in Table 12 (100% threshold) and Table 13 (70% threshold) and indicate under 2022 existing conditions, the required vehicle volume on the minor street approach was present for zero (0) of the eight (8) required hours based on the volume thresholds for the one-lane minor street approach. Therefore, this warrant is not considered met under 2022 existing conditions. 2025 Background Conditions: The analysis results are shown in Table 14 (100% threshold) and Table 15 (70% threshold) and indicate under 2025 background conditions, the required vehicle volume on the minor street approach was present for zero (0) of the eight (8) required hours based on the volume thresholds for the one-lane minor street approach. Therefore, this warrant is not considered met under 2025 background conditions. Summary: A traffic signal is not warranted at the US Route 522/School Access intersection under any scenario using Warrant 1A thresholds. 59 October 2022 US Route 522 at Gainesboro Road – Signal Warrant Analysis 22 Condition B: This warrant is intended for application at locations where the traffic volume on a major street is so heavy that traffic on a minor intersecting street suffers excessive delay or conflict in entering or crossing the major street. Volume Thresholds (100% Thresholds): The volume thresholds for a two-lane major street approach and a two-lane minor street approach from the 2009 MUTCD Table 4C-1 indicate the need for a traffic control signal is considered when, for each of any eight (8) hours of an average day, a minimum of 900 vehicles per hour exist on the major street approaches and 100 vehicles are present on the higher-volume minor street approach. Volume Thresholds (70% Thresholds): The volume thresholds for a two-lane major street approach and a two-lane minor street approach from the 2009 MUTCD Table 4C-1 indicate the need for a traffic control signal is considered when, for each of any eight (8) hours of an average day, a minimum of 630 vehicles per hour exist on the major street approaches and 70 vehicles are present on the higher-volume minor street approach. 2022 Existing Conditions: The analysis results are shown in Table 12 (100% threshold) and Table 13 (70% threshold) and indicate under 2022 existing conditions, the required vehicle volume on the minor street approach was present for four (4) of the eight (8) required hours based on the volume thresholds for the one-lane minor street approach. Therefore, this warrant is not considered met under 2022 existing conditions. 2025 Background Conditions: The analysis results are shown in Table 14 (100% threshold) and Table 15 (70% threshold) and indicate under 2025 background conditions, the required vehicle volume on the minor street approach was present for four (4) of the eight (8) required hours based on the volume thresholds for the one-lane minor street approach. Therefore, this warrant is not considered met under 2025 background conditions. Summary: A traffic signal is not warranted at the US Route 522/School Access intersection under any scenario using Warrant 1B thresholds. Combination of Conditions A and B This warrant reduces the volume thresholds found in Conditions A and B by 20% and considers both conditions simultaneously. Volume Thresholds (100%): The volume thresholds for a two-lane major street approach and a two-lane minor street approach from the 2009 MUTCD Table 4C-1 indicate the need for a traffic control signal is considered when, for each of any eight (8) hours of an average day, a minimum of 480 vehicles are present on the major street approaches and 160 vehicles are present on the higher volumes minor street approach (Condition A) and a minimum of 720 vehicles are present on the major street approaches and 80 vehicles are present on the higher volumes minor street approach (Condition B). Volume Thresholds (70%): The volume thresholds for a two-lane major street approach and a two-lane minor street approach from the 2009 MUTCD Table 4C-1 indicate the need for a traffic control signal is considered when, for each of any eight (8) hours of an average day, a minimum of 336 vehicles are present on the major street approaches and 112 vehicles are present on the higher volumes minor street approach (Condition A) and a minimum of 504 vehicles are present on the major street approaches and 56 vehicles are present on the higher volumes minor street approach (Condition B). 60 October 2022 US Route 522 at Gainesboro Road – Signal Warrant Analysis 23 2022 Existing Conditions: The analysis results are shown in Table 12 (100% threshold) and Table 13 (70% threshold) and indicate under 2022 existing conditions the required vehicle volume on the minor street approach was present for one (1) of the eight (8) required hours for Condition A and five (5) of the eight (8) required hours for Condition B. Therefore, this warrant is not considered met under 2022 existing conditions. 2025 Background Conditions: The analysis results are shown in Table 14 (100% threshold) and Table 15 (70% threshold) and indicate under 2025 background conditions the required vehicle volume on the minor street approach was present for one (1) of the eight (8) required hours for Condition A and five (5) of the eight (8) required hours for Condition B. Therefore, this warrant is not considered met under 2025 background conditions. Summary: A traffic signal is not warranted at the US Route 522/School Access intersection under any scenario using the Combination of Conditions A and B thresholds. Warrant 1 Summary A traffic signal is not warranted at the US Route 522/School Access intersection under any scenario using Warrant 1 thresholds. 7.2 Warrant 2 (Four-Hour Vehicular Volume) According to the MUTCD, this warrant is intended to be applied where the volume of intersecting traffic is the principal reason to consider installing a traffic signal. The need for a traffic control signal can be considered when, for each of any four (4) hours of an average day, the plotted points representing the vehicles per hour on the major street (total of both approaches) and the corresponding vehicles per hour on the minor street approach all fall above the applicable curve on MUTCD Figure 4C-1 and 4C-2 for the combination of approach lanes. As detailed above, the intersection is characterized by the “2 or more lanes & 2 lane” line. Figures 9 and 10 plot each of the individual peak hour volumes onto the 4-hour warrant (MUTCD Figure 4C-1 and 4C-2) for the existing and background scenarios, respectively. 2022 Existing Conditions: As shown in Figure 9, and summarized in Tables 12 and 13, the major and minor street traffic are above the warrant line for three (3) of the required four (4) hours under existing conditions. Therefore, this warrant is not considered met under 2022 existing conditions. 2025 Background Conditions: As shown in Figure 10, and summarized in Tables 14 and 15, the major and minor street traffic are above the warrant line for four (4) of the required four (4) hours under background conditions. Therefore, this warrant is met considered met under 2025 background conditions. Warrant 2 Summary A traffic signal is warranted at the US Route 522/School Access intersection under 2025 background conditions using Warrant 2 (70%) thresholds. 61 October 2022 US Route 522 at Gainesboro Road – Signal Warrant Analysis 24 7.3 Warrant 3 (Peak-Hour Vehicular Volume) According to the MUTCD, this warrant is intended to be applied where the minor-street traffic suffers undue delay when entering or crossing the major street. The need for a traffic control signal can be considered when, for each of any four (4) hours of an average day, the plotted points representing the vehicles per hour on the major street (total of both approaches) and the corresponding vehicles per hour on the minor street approach all fall above the applicable curve on MUTCD Figure 4C-3 and 4C-4 for the combination of approach lanes. As detailed above, the intersection is characterized by the “2 or more lanes & 2 lane” line. Figures 11 and 12 plot each of the individual peak hour volumes onto the 1-hour warrant (MUTCD Figure 4C-3 and 4C-4) for the existing and background scenarios, respectively. 2022 Existing Conditions: As shown in Figure 11, and summarized in Tables 12 and 13, the major and minor street traffic are above the warrant line for one (1) of the required one (1) hour under existing conditions. Therefore, this warrant is met considered met under 2022 existing conditions. 2025 Background Conditions: As shown in Figure 12, and summarized in Tables 14 and 15, the major and minor street traffic are above the warrant line for two (2) of the required one (1) hour under background conditions. Therefore, this warrant is met considered met under 2025 background conditions. Warrant 3 Summary A traffic signal is warranted at the US Route 522/School Access intersection under 2025 background conditions using Warrant 3 (70%) thresholds. 7.4 Warrant 7 (Crash History) According to the MUTCD, this warrant is intended to be applied where the severity and frequency of crashes are the principal reason for considering a traffic signal. The need for a traffic control signal can be considered when, among other requirements, a minimum of five (5) or more crashes susceptible to correction by a traffic signal have occurred within a 12-month period. A review of the last five (5) years of available crash data from VDOT Power BI indicates a total of four (4) crashes have occurred at the intersection for an average of one (1) crash per year. The crash history is less than the required and therefore a traffic signal is not warranted at the US Route 522/School Access intersection under Warrant 7. 62 October 2022 US Route 522 at Gainesboro Road – Signal Warrant Analysis 25 Table 12 – Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis Summary (100% Thresholds) 2022 Existing Conditions – US Route 522/School Access Table 13 – Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis Summary (70% Thresholds) 2022 Existing Conditions – US Route 522/School Access Major 600 900 480 720 Minor 200 100 160 80 06:00-07:00 1,011 7 N N N N N 07:00 - 08:00 1,596 93 N N N Y Y N 08:00 - 09:00 1,078 82 N N N Y Y N 09:00 - 10:00 866 12 N N N N N N 10:00 - 11:00 896 5 N N N N N N 11:00 - 12:00 870 9 N N N N N N 12:00 - 13:00 927 5 N N N N N N 13:00 - 14:00 970 14 N N N N N N 14:00 - 15:00 1,190 33 N N N N N N 15:00 - 16:00 1,341 120 N Y N Y Y N 16:00 - 17:00 1,541 58 N N N N N N 17:00 - 18:00 1,634 79 N N N N N N 18:00 - 19:00 1,021 41 N N N N N N 0 1 0 3 3 0 8 8 8 8 4 1 No No No No Time Period Major Street Volume Minor Street Volume (Highest Approach) #1 (8-hour) Condition A Condition B # of Hours Warrant is Required to be Met Is Warrant Satisfied? No 100% WARRANTS Combination Condition A Condition B Threshold See Graph # of Hours Warrant is Met #3 ( Peak hour) See Graph #2 (4-hour) Major 420 630 336 504 Minor 140 70 112 56 06:00-07:00 1,011 7 N N N N N 07:00 - 08:00 1,596 93 N Y N Y Y N 08:00 - 09:00 1,078 82 N Y N Y Y N 09:00 - 10:00 866 12 N N N N N N 10:00 - 11:00 896 5 N N N N N N 11:00 - 12:00 870 9 N N N N N N 12:00 - 13:00 927 5 N N N N N N 13:00 - 14:00 970 14 N N N N N N 14:00 - 15:00 1,190 33 N N N N N N 15:00 - 16:00 1,341 120 N Y Y Y Y Y 16:00 - 17:00 1,541 58 N N N Y N N 17:00 - 18:00 1,634 79 N Y N Y N N 18:00 - 19:00 1,021 41 N N N N N N 0 4 1 5 3 1 8 8 8 8 4 1 No No No Yes # of Hours Warrant is Required to be Met Is Warrant Satisfied? No See Graph Condition B Combination Condition A Condition B Threshold See Graph Time Period #3 ( Peak hour) 70% WARRANTS # of Hours Warrant is Met Major Street Volume Minor Street Volume (Highest Approach) #1 (8-hour) #2 (4-hour)Condition A 63 October 2022 US Route 522 at Gainesboro Road – Signal Warrant Analysis 26 Table 14 – Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis Summary (100% Thresholds) 2025 Background Conditions – US Route 522/School Access Table 15 – Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis Summary (70% Thresholds) 2025 Background Conditions – US Route 522/School Access Major 600 900 480 720 Minor 200 100 160 80 06:00-07:00 1,042 6 N N N N N 07:00 - 08:00 1,645 106 N Y N Y N N 08:00 - 09:00 1,112 84 N N N Y N N 09:00 - 10:00 892 12 N N N N N N 10:00 - 11:00 923 5 N N N N N N 11:00 - 12:00 896 9 N N N N N N 12:00 - 13:00 955 5 N N N N N N 13:00 - 14:00 999 14 N N N N N N 14:00 - 15:00 1,226 34 N N N N N N 15:00 - 16:00 1,381 124 N Y N Y Y N 16:00 - 17:00 1,588 60 N N N N N N 17:00 - 18:00 1,683 82 N N N Y N N 18:00 - 19:00 1,051 42 N N N N N N 0 2 0 4 1 0 8 8 8 8 4 1 No No No No # of Hours Warrant is Met Time Period Major Street Volume Minor Street Volume (Highest Approach) 100% WARRANTS #1 (8-hour) #2 (4-hour) #3 ( Peak hour)Condition A Condition B Combination Condition A Condition B Threshold See Graph See Graph # of Hours Warrant is Required to be Met Is Warrant Satisfied? No Major 420 630 336 504 Minor 140 70 112 56 06:00-07:00 1,042 6 N N N N N 07:00 - 08:00 1,645 106 N Y N Y Y Y 08:00 - 09:00 1,112 84 N Y N Y Y N 09:00 - 10:00 892 12 N N N N N N 10:00 - 11:00 923 5 N N N N N N 11:00 - 12:00 896 9 N N N N N N 12:00 - 13:00 955 5 N N N N N N 13:00 - 14:00 999 14 N N N N N N 14:00 - 15:00 1,226 34 N N N N N N 15:00 - 16:00 1,381 124 N Y Y Y Y Y 16:00 - 17:00 1,588 60 N N N Y N N 17:00 - 18:00 1,683 82 N Y N Y Y N 18:00 - 19:00 1,051 42 N N N N N N 0 4 1 5 4 2 8 8 8 8 4 1 No No Yes Yes Time Period Major Street Volume Minor Street Volume (Highest Approach) 70% WARRANTS #1 (8-hour) #2 (4-hour) #3 ( Peak hour)Condition A Condition B Combination Condition A Condition B See Graph See Graph # of Hours Warrant is Met # of Hours Warrant is Required to be Met Is Warrant Satisfied? No Threshold 64 October 2022 US Route 522 at Gainesboro Road – Signal Warrant Analysis 27 8 CONCLUSIONS Signal warrant analyses were completed using the 2022 existing, 2025 background, and 2025 total traffic volumes that include existing traffic, background traffic growth, and reassigned traffic with the new school entrance. The analyses were conducted at the US Route 522/Gainesboro Road intersection and the US Route 522/School Access intersection. The analysis indicates a traffic signal is warranted at the US Route 522/Gainesboro Road intersection under 2025 future conditions. The traffic at the intersection meets Warrant 2 (100% thresholds) and Warrant 3 (70% thresholds). The analysis indicates a traffic signal is warranted at the US Route 522/School Access intersection under 2025 background conditions. The traffic at the intersection meets Warrant 2 (70% thresholds) and Warrant 3 (70% thresholds). 65 Figure 1Surrounding Roadway Network and Site Location Frederick County, Virginia1266 Figure 2Existing GeometryFrederick County, VirginiaUS Route 522Gainesboro Road School Access S’=1080’S’=245’S’=105’S’=85’S’=565’67 Figure 3Traffic Signal Warrant 22022 Existing VolumesGainesboro Road at Route 522 SOURCE: 2009 MUTCD Table 4C-1.Warrant 2, Four-Hour Vehicular Volume (100%)SOURCE: 2009 MUTCD Table 4C-2.Warrant 2, Four-Hour Vehicular Volume (70% Factor)LEGEND:7 – 8 AM (Major 1342, Minor 65)8 – 9 AM (Major 1035, Minor 28)4 – 5 PM (Major 1459, Minor 33)5 – 6 PM (Major 1559, Minor 21) SUMMARY:Warrant 2 (100%): 0 hours met (4 hours needed)Warrant 2 (70%): 0 hours met (4 hours needed)68 Figure 4Traffic Signal Warrant 22025 Background VolumesGainesboro Road at Route 522 SOURCE: 2009 MUTCD Table 4C-1.Warrant 2, Four-Hour Vehicular Volume (100%)SOURCE: 2009 MUTCD Table 4C-2.Warrant 2, Four-Hour Vehicular Volume (70% Factor)LEGEND:7 – 8 AM (Major 1383, Minor 74)8 – 9 AM (Major 1066, Minor 29)4 – 5 PM (Major 1503, Minor 34)5 – 6 PM (Major 1607, Minor 22) SUMMARY:Warrant 2 (100%): 0 hours met (4 hours needed)Warrant 2 (70%): 1 hours met (4 hours needed)69 Figure 5Traffic Signal Warrant 22025 Future Volumes (New Access)Gainesboro Road at Route 522 SOURCE: 2009 MUTCD Table 4C-1.Warrant 2, Four-Hour Vehicular Volume (100%)SOURCE: 2009 MUTCD Table 4C-2.Warrant 2, Four-Hour Vehicular Volume (70% Factor)LEGEND:7 – 8 AM (Major 1514, Minor 106)8 – 9 AM (Major 1059, Minor 92)3 – 4 PM (Major 1334, Minor 108)4 – 5 PM (Major 1524, Minor (80)5 – 6 PM (Major 1618, Minor 87) SUMMARY:Warrant 2 (100%): 5 hours met (4 hours needed)Warrant 2 (70%): 5 hours met (4 hours needed) 70 Figure 6Traffic Signal Warrant 32022 Existing VolumesGainesboro Road at Route 522 SOURCE: 2009 MUTCD Table 4C-3.Warrant 3, Peak Hour (100%)Warrant 3, Peak Hour (70%)SUMMARY:Warrant 3 (100%): 0 hours met (1 hour needed)Warrant 3 (70%): 0 hours met (1 hour needed)LEGEND:7 – 8 AM (Major 1342, Minor 65)8 – 9 AM (Major 1035, Minor 28)4 – 5 PM (Major 1459, Minor 33)5 – 6 PM (Major 1559, Minor 21) SOURCE: 2009 MUTCD Table 4C-4.71 Figure 7Traffic Signal Warrant 32025 Background VolumesGainesboro Road at Route 522 SOURCE: 2009 MUTCD Table 4C-3.Warrant 3, Peak Hour (100%)Warrant 3, Peak Hour (70%)SUMMARY:Warrant 3 (100%): 0 hours met (1 hour needed)Warrant 3 (70%): 0 hours met (1 hour needed)SOURCE: 2009 MUTCD Table 4C-4.LEGEND:7 – 8 AM (Major 1383, Minor 74)8 – 9 AM (Major 1066, Minor 29)4 – 5 PM (Major 1503, Minor 34)5 – 6 PM (Major 1607, Minor 22) 72 Figure 8Traffic Signal Warrant 32025 Future Volumes (New Access)Gainesboro Road at Route 522 SOURCE: 2009 MUTCD Table 4C-3.Warrant 3, Peak Hour (100%)Warrant 3, Peak Hour (70%)SUMMARY:Warrant 3 (100%): 0 hours met (1 hour needed)Warrant 3 (70%): 5 hours met (1 hour needed)SOURCE: 2009 MUTCD Table 4C-4.LEGEND:7 – 8 AM (Major 1514, Minor 106)8 – 9 AM (Major 1059, Minor 92)3 – 4 PM (Major 1334, Minor 108)4 – 5 PM (Major 1524, Minor (80)5 – 6 PM (Major 1618, Minor 87) 73 Figure 9Traffic Signal Warrant 22022 Existing Volumes School Access at Route 522SOURCE: 2009 MUTCD Table 4C-1.Warrant 2, Four-Hour Vehicular VolumeSOURCE: 2009 MUTCD Table 4C-2.Warrant 2, Four-Hour Vehicular Volume (70% Factor)LEGEND:7 – 8 AM (Major 1596, Minor 93)8 – 9 AM (Major 1078, Minor 82)3 – 4 PM (Major 1341, Minor 120)5 – 6 PM (Major 1634, Minor 79) SUMMARY:Warrant 2 (100%): 1 hours met (4 hours needed)Warrant 2 (70%): 3 hours met (4 hours needed)SOURCE: 2009 MUTCD Table 4C-4.74 Figure 10Traffic Signal Warrant 22025 Background VolumesSchool Access at Route 522SOURCE: 2009 MUTCD Table 4C-1.Warrant 2, Four-Hour Vehicular VolumeSOURCE: 2009 MUTCD Table 4C-2.Warrant 2, Four-Hour Vehicular Volume (70% Factor)LEGEND:7 – 8 AM (Major 1645, Minor 106)8 – 9 AM (Major 1112, Minor 84)3 – 4 PM (Major 1381, Minor 124)5 – 6 PM (Major 1683, Minor 82) SUMMARY:Warrant 2 (100%): 1 hours met (4 hours needed)Warrant 2 (70%): 4 hours met (4 hours needed)SOURCE: 2009 MUTCD Table 4C-4.75 Figure 11Traffic Signal Warrant 32022 Existing VolumesSchool Access at Route 522SOURCE: 2009 MUTCD Table 4C-3.Warrant 3, Peak Hour (100%)Warrant 3, Peak Hour (70%)SUMMARY:Warrant 3 (100%): 0 hours met (1 hour needed)Warrant 3 (70%): 1 hour met (1 hour needed)SOURCE: 2009 MUTCD Table 4C-4.LEGEND:7 – 8 AM (Major 1596, Minor 93)8 – 9 AM (Major 1078, Minor 82)3 – 4 PM (Major 1341, Minor 120)5 – 6 PM (Major 1634, Minor 79) 76 Figure 12Traffic Signal Warrant 32025 Background VolumesSchool Access at Route 522SOURCE: 2009 MUTCD Table 4C-3.Warrant 3, Peak Hour (100%)Warrant 3, Peak Hour (70%)SUMMARY:Warrant 3 (100%): 0 hours met (1 hour needed)Warrant 3 (70%): 2 hour met (1 hour needed)SOURCE: 2009 MUTCD Table 4C-4.LEGEND:7 – 8 AM (Major 1645, Minor 106)8 – 9 AM (Major 1112, Minor 84)3 – 4 PM (Major 1381, Minor 124)5 – 6 PM (Major 1683, Minor 82) 77 October 2022 The Canopy – Signal Warrant Analysis APPENDIX A Scoping Correspondence 78 1001 Boulders Parkway Suite 300 Richmond, VA 23225 P 804.200.6500 F 804.560.1016 www.timmons.com To: Rhonda Funkhouser, Joseph Johnson and Timothy Rhodes (VDOT) From: Steve Schmidt, PE, PTOE RE: US Route 522 and Gainesboro Road Signal Warrant Analysis and Signal Justification Report Revised Scoping Parameters Date: August 17, 2022 Revised August 30, 2022 Copy: Bill Shelton (ZMM), Thomas Ruff (TG) Timmons Group (TG) is assisting Frederick County with preparing a traffic signal warrant analysis and traffic signal justification report for the intersection of US Route 522 and Gainesboro Road. The purpose of this memo is to document the scoping parameters for the analyses and reports. A scoping meeting was held (virtually) with VDOT and the County on August 23, 2022 to discuss the project and scoping parameters. These scoping parameters have been revised based on that meeting and subsequent correspondence and are submitted for approval. Background Information Access to the Gainesboro Elementary School and Frederick County Middle School campus is currently provided by one unsignalized access point at a median break along US Route 522 (North Frederick Pike). The median break access is located approximately 745 feet from the US Route 522/Gainesboro Road intersection which is also served by a median break. Frederick County is planning to relocate the main school access point to a newly constructed access road off of Gainesboro Road. With the relocation, the existing median break at the school entrance will be closed and the access limited to right-in/right-out only. A build year of 2025 is assumed. The addition of the main school entrance traffic to the US Route 522/Gainesboro Road intersection may result in improvements to the intersection. This analysis will examine the need for turn lanes and intersection control improvements at the intersection. It is noted that US Route 522 is part of the Arterial Preservation Network. The analysis will be conducted in multiple steps as follows: 1. Signal Warrant Analysis a. This will include capacity and queueing analysis to determine the need for turn lanes 2. Signal Justification Report The study area is shown on Figure 1. 79 US Route 522 and Gainesboro Road Revised Scoping Parameters August 2022 Page 2 of 4 A previous signal warrant analysis was prepared at the US Route 522/Gainesboro Road intersection in 2018/2019 by Timmons Group. Data from that analysis will be used for comparison purposes (see existing data collection below). Signal Warrant Analysis The traffic signal warrant analysis will be conducted in accordance with the MUTCD, the Virginia Supplement to the MUTCD and VDOT IIM TE-387.1. The analysis will be conducted for existing, background 2025 and future 2025 volumes. Existing Data Collection 13-hour traffic counts (6 AM to 7 PM) will be collected at the US Route 522/Gainesboro Road intersection and the US Route 522/School Entrance intersection. The counts will be conducted on a typical Tuesday, Wednesday, or Thursday when public schools are in session (i.e. no holidays or teacher workdays). The 2022 traffic counts will be compared to 2018 counts conducted at the US Route 522/Gainesboro Road to determine if an adjustment to the counts is required due to the ongoing pandemic. Background Forecasts A background traffic growth rate will be applied to the through movements along US Route 522 for the three-year period from 2022 to 2025 to develop the 2025 background traffic forecasts. A minimum 1% annual growth rate will be used to develop the 2025 background traffic forecasts. If the comparison between the 2018 and 2022 counts reveal a higher growth rate, that rate will be utilized instead of the 1%. Confirm Analysis Parameters Upon collection of the existing traffic count data, TG will submit the data and assumptions on growth rate, trip distribution, pandemic adjustments, right turn volume adjustments, and 70% threshold volumes for VDOT review and comment. Once these parameters have been approved, the signal warrant analysis will be completed. Future Forecasts The future traffic forecasts will redistribute the school traffic to the new entrance and add those redistributed trips to the 2025 background traffic forecasts. Warrants Considered The signal warrant analysis will examine Warrant 1 (8-hour warrant), Warrant 2 (4-hour warrant), Warrant 3 (peak hour warrant), and Warrant 7 (crash experience) only using 100% and 70% thresholds. 80 US Route 522 and Gainesboro Road Revised Scoping Parameters August 2022 Page 3 of 4 It is noted that while Warrant 3 will be considered, a traffic signal shall not be warranted solely on the satisfaction of Warrant 3. The crash history will be reviewed for the last five (5) years of available data. Signal Warrant Submission The results of the signal warrant analysis will be submitted to VDOT and the County in a technical memorandum summarizing the approach, assumptions, and results of the analysis. Signal Justification Report Upon the approval of the signal warrant analysis, the signal justification report will be prepared in accordance with VDOT IIM TE-387.1 and as follows: VJuST Alternatives Analysis The volumes used in the signal warrant analysis will be used in conjunction with the VJuST tool to screen intersection control alternatives. At a minimum, the analysis will consider the following alternatives: 1. Conventional Two-Way Stop Control (base condition) 2. Traditional signal 3. Roundabout 4. Restricted Crossing U-Turn (with and without a signal) 5. Continuous Green T (with and without a signal) Further alternatives may also be included based on the VJuST results. The results will be submitted to VDOT for review/concurrence prior to the preparation of the full signal justification report. Signal Justification Report The signal justification report will be prepared using the VDOT Signal Justification Report Template version 1.1 (January 25, 2021). The report will include analysis of each of the alternatives identified in the step above along with a discussion of the feasibility of the alternatives. The analysis will also consider alternatives for the existing US Route 522/School Entrance intersection including a restricted crossing U-turn. The report will also list any access management exceptions required with the recommended improvements. 81 US Route 522 and Gainesboro Road Revised Scoping Parameters August 2022 Page 4 of 4 Signal Justification Report Submission The report will be submitted to VDOT for review/approval. It is noted that since US Route 522 is on the Arterial Preservation Network, the signal justification report will require approval from the District Traffic Engineer, the District Engineer/Administrator, and the State Traffic Engineer. 82 Figure 1 NOT TO SCALE Study Intersections US Route 522 and Gainesboro Road SJR Frederick County, Virginia LEGEND: Study Intersections 83 1001 Boulders Parkway Suite 300 Richmond, VA 23225 P 804.200.6500 F 804.560.1016 www.timmons.com To: Rhonda Funkhouser, Joseph Johnson, and Timothy Rhodes (VDOT) From: Steve Schmidt, PE, PTOE RE: US Route 522 and Gainesboro Road Signal Warrant Analysis Parameters Date: September 27, 2022 Copy: Bill Shelton (ZMM), Thomas Ruff (TG) Timmons Group (TG) is assisting Frederick County with preparing a traffic signal warrant analysis and traffic signal justification report for the intersection of US Route 522 and Gainesboro Road. A scoping meeting was held (virtually) with VDOT and the County on August 23, 2022, to discuss the project and scoping parameters. Revised scoping parameters were submitted on August 30, 2022, and approved by both VDOT and the County via email on August 30, 2022. As detailed in the scoping parameters, after the existing traffic count data, TG will confirm the analysis parameters before completing the signal warrant analysis. Specifically: “Upon collection of the existing traffic count data, TG will submit the data and assumptions on growth rate, trip distribution, pandemic adjustments, right turn volume adjustments, and 70% threshold volumes for VDOT review and comment. Once these parameters have been approved, the signal warrant analysis will be completed.” The purpose of this memo is to present the existing data and the assumptions detailed above. Existing Traffic Counts Existing traffic counts were conducted at the US Route 522/Gainesboro Road and US Route 522/School Entrance intersections on Wednesday, September 14, 2022, from 6:00 AM to 7:00 PM. The counts were conducted in 15 minute intervals and included heavy vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians where present. Public schools were in session at the time of the counts. The existing counts are attached in Appendix A and summarized in Tables 1 and 2 below. 84 US Route 522 and Gainesboro Road Signal Warrant Analysis Parameters September 2022 Page 2 of 5 Table 1: 2022 Existing Traffic Counts (Raw) US Route 522/Gainesboro Road Table 2: 2022 Existing Traffic Counts (Raw) US Route 522/School Entrance Left Right U-Turn Through Right Left U-Turn Through 06:00 - 07:00 5 45 0 749 1 13 0 155 07:00 - 08:00 2 126 3 878 0 45 3 281 08:00 - 09:00 3 63 9 624 3 40 0 358 09:00 - 10:00 4 29 8 462 3 33 1 339 10:00 - 11:00 2 26 5 482 0 24 2 365 11:00 - 12:00 4 39 2 429 3 22 0 387 12:00 - 13:00 3 21 5 437 3 17 2 417 13:00 - 14:00 5 28 2 414 4 25 0 403 14:00 - 15:00 0 49 7 420 1 36 2 572 15:00 - 16:00 1 46 7 422 1 85 0 797 16:00 - 17:00 7 66 4 465 3 72 0 915 17:00 - 18:00 3 43 6 457 2 84 0 921 18:00 - 19:00 2 23 3 350 0 33 3 635 Gainesboro Road - NB Route 522 - EB Route 522 - WB Study Intersection #1 Left Right U-Turn Through Right Left U-turn Through 06:00 - 07:00 1 22 0 790 32 21 0 168 07:00 - 08:00 28 185 0 830 170 142 1 297 08:00 - 09:00 61 82 0 584 117 52 2 322 09:00 - 10:00 10 9 0 486 8 7 4 361 10:00 - 11:00 3 7 1 499 6 6 1 383 11:00 - 12:00 6 11 1 452 5 6 0 406 12:00 - 13:00 3 7 5 455 5 6 1 438 13:00 - 14:00 11 8 1 424 18 11 1 428 14:00 - 15:00 21 43 0 429 45 80 1 598 15:00 - 16:00 83 138 0 412 47 39 2 815 16:00 - 17:00 45 53 0 484 43 62 3 949 17:00 - 18:00 59 61 1 465 32 65 5 973 18:00 - 19:00 29 46 2 373 3 2 0 638 Route 522 - WB Study Intersection #2 School Access- NB Route 522- EB 85 US Route 522 and Gainesboro Road Signal Warrant Analysis Parameters September 2022 Page 3 of 5 Pandemic Adjustments The 2022 existing traffic counts at the US Route 522/Gainesboro Road intersection were compared to 2018 traffic counts (included in Appendix B) at the same intersection to determine if the ongoing pandemic impacted the 2022 existing counts. The counts were compared across all hours except the 6:00 AM to 7:00 AM period as the 2018 counts did not include that hour. The comparisons are shown in Table 3 and indicate that during some hours, the 2022 counts are lower while in other hours the 2022 counts are higher than the 2018 counts. The average across all hours is a 1.4% reduction from 2018 to 2022. Table 3: 2018 vs 2022 Existing Traffic Count Comparison US Route 522/Gainesboro Road Based on the comparison, we propose to adjust the 2022 counts as follows: 1. For any hour where the 2022 counts are lower than the 2018 counts, factor all movements at both intersections upward by the percent difference. For example, in the 7:00-8:00 AM hour, since the 2022 counts are 10.9% lower than the 2018 counts, a 1.109 factor will be applied to the 2022 counts in that hour. 2. For any hour where the 2022 counts are higher than the 2018 counts, no adjustments will be made. This also applies to the 6:00-7:00 AM peak hour where there is no 2018 data to compare. Time Period 2018 Intersection Total 2022 Intersection Total Difference (2022 - 2018) % Difference (Diff / 2022 Count) 07:00 - 08:00 1,484 1,338 -146 -10.9% 08:00 - 09:00 1,111 1,100 -11 -1.0% 09:00 - 10:00 831 879 48 5.5% 10:00 - 11:00 865 906 41 4.5% 11:00 - 12:00 857 886 29 3.3% 12:00 - 13:00 922 905 -17 -1.9% 13:00 - 14:00 968 881 -87 -9.9% 14:00 - 15:00 1,122 1,087 -35 -3.2% 15:00 - 16:00 1,362 1,359 -3 -0.2% 16:00 - 17:00 1,486 1,532 46 3.0% 17:00 - 18:00 1,609 1,517 -92 -6.1% 18:00-19:00 1,052 1,049 -3 -0.3% Average -1.4% 86 US Route 522 and Gainesboro Road Signal Warrant Analysis Parameters September 2022 Page 4 of 5 Growth Rate In accordance with the August 30, 2022 scoping parameters, a 1% annual growth rate will be used to calculate future traffic volumes since the comparison between the 2018 and 2022 counts revealed an average decrease in traffic. Trip Distribution No changes to the distribution in trips will be assumed in the analysis. The existing traffic patterns will be maintained in the signal warrant analysis and reassigned as necessary. Specifically, when analyzing the need for a traffic signal at the US Route 522/Gainesboro Road intersection, the following will be assumed: 1. The new connection to Gainesboro Road will be in place. The existing US Route 522/School Entrance intersection will be restricted to right-in/right-out only. 2. All westbound lefts from US Route 522 into the school entrance will be rerouted to become westbound left turns from US Route 522 onto Gainesboro Road. a. This traffic will be added to the westbound through movement at the US Route 522/School Entrance intersection. 3. No changes will be made to the eastbound right turns from US Route 522 into the school entrance. 4. All northbound left turns from the school entrance onto US Route 522 will be rerouted to become northbound lefts from Gainesboro Road onto US Route 522. a. This traffic will be subtracted from the westbound through at the US Route 522/Gainesboro Road intersection. 5. No changes will be made to the northbound right turns from the school entrance onto US Route 522. When analyzing the need for a traffic signal at the US Route 522/School Entrance intersection, the new connection will not be assumed and no adjustments will be made to the existing turning traffic. Right Turn Adjustment In accordance with VDOT IIM-TE-387.1, we propose to utilize Pagones Theorem to calculate the side street right-turn volume adjustment. As shown below, with a single lane approach, Pagones Theorem calculates the adjusted right turn volume based on the proportion of the right turns to the overall volume. This calculation will be done for each individual hour and the side street right turn adjusted accordingly. The calculations and adjustments will be included in the signal warrant analysis. 87 US Route 522 and Gainesboro Road Signal Warrant Analysis Parameters September 2022 Page 5 of 5 70% Threshold Volumes In accordance with VDOT IIM-TE-387.1, the 70% volume thresholds will be utilized in the analysis (along with 100% thresholds) as the operating speed of the roadway exceeds 40 mph. It is understood that if the 70% threshold is utilized to conclude a signal is warranted, additional justification based on engineering judgement will need to be provided. 88 APPENDIX A 2022 Existing Traffic Counts 89 Type of peak hour being reported: Intersection Peak Method for determining peak hour: Total Entering Volume LOCATION: LOCATION: Gainesboro Rd (East) -- US 522 QC JOB #: QC JOB #: 15935801 CITY/STATE: CITY/STATE: Frederick, VA DATE: DATE: Wed, Sep 14 2022 0 0 0 0 0 971 6 0 1043 464 0.970.97 962 473 3 81 518 4 0 54 85 58 Peak-Hour: 4:45 PM -- 5:45 PMPeak-Hour: 4:45 PM -- 5:45 PM Peak 15-Min: 5:15 PM -- 5:30 PMPeak 15-Min: 5:15 PM -- 5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 5.5 12.3 5.9 12.1 0 0 11 25 0 0 0 1.7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 15-Min Count15-Min CountPeriod Period Beginning AtBeginning At Gainesboro Rd (East) Gainesboro Rd (East) (Northbound)(Northbound) Gainesboro Rd (East) Gainesboro Rd (East) (Southbound)(Southbound) US 522US 522 (Eastbound)(Eastbound) US 522US 522 (Westbound)(Westbound)TotalTotal HourlyHourlyTotalsTotalsLeftLeftThruThruRightRightUULeftLeftThruThruRightRightUULeftLeftThruThruRightRightUULeftLeftThruThruRightRightUU 6:00 AM 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 159 0 0 2 39 0 0 202 6:15 AM 0 0 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 183 1 0 4 40 0 0 240 6:30 AM 4 0 16 0 0 0 0 0 0 211 0 0 4 41 0 0 276 6:45 AM 0 0 16 0 0 0 0 0 0 196 0 0 3 35 0 0 250 968 7:00 AM 0 0 23 0 0 0 0 0 0 220 0 1 3 43 0 0 290 1056 7:15 AM 0 0 37 0 0 0 0 0 0 274 0 0 6 86 0 2 405 1221 7:30 AM 1 0 45 0 0 0 0 0 0 228 0 1 22 77 0 1 375 1320 7:45 AM 1 0 21 0 0 0 0 0 0 156 0 1 14 75 0 0 268 1338 8:00 AM 1 0 13 0 0 0 0 0 0 154 1 1 5 81 0 0 256 1304 8:15 AM 1 0 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 151 0 2 9 100 0 0 275 1174 8:30 AM 0 0 15 0 0 0 0 0 0 175 2 3 11 90 0 0 296 1095 8:45 AM 1 0 23 0 0 0 0 0 0 144 0 3 15 87 0 0 273 1100 9:00 AM 1 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 115 0 4 6 94 0 0 230 1074 9:15 AM 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 132 0 2 7 73 0 0 222 1021 9:30 AM 3 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 103 1 1 8 78 0 0 202 927 9:45 AM 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 112 2 1 12 94 0 1 225 879 10:00 AM 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 107 0 0 9 80 0 1 200 849 10:15 AM 1 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 127 0 1 3 89 0 0 231 858 10:30 AM 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 138 0 2 4 103 0 1 256 912 10:45 AM 1 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 110 0 2 8 93 0 0 219 906 11:00 AM 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 118 1 0 2 87 0 0 216 922 11:15 AM 1 0 16 0 0 0 0 0 0 85 1 0 3 90 0 0 196 887 11:30 AM 2 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 126 1 2 8 103 0 0 249 880 11:45 AM 1 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 100 0 0 9 107 0 0 225 886 12:00 PM 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 109 0 0 4 98 0 1 215 885 12:15 PM 1 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 118 0 1 6 115 0 0 251 940 12:30 PM 1 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 122 3 3 3 114 0 0 251 942 12:45 PM 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 88 0 1 4 90 0 1 188 905 1:00 PM 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 84 1 1 6 115 0 0 212 902 1:15 PM 3 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 115 0 0 4 97 0 0 225 876 1:30 PM 2 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 123 2 0 6 92 0 0 234 859 1:45 PM 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 92 1 1 9 99 0 0 210 881 2:00 PM 0 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 110 1 2 5 123 0 0 251 920 2:15 PM 0 0 14 0 0 0 0 0 0 90 0 1 5 126 0 1 237 932 2:30 PM 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 114 0 3 10 146 0 0 284 982 2:45 PM 0 0 14 0 0 0 0 0 0 106 0 1 16 177 0 1 315 1087 3:00 PM 0 0 18 0 0 0 0 0 0 110 1 1 35 171 0 0 336 1172 3:15 PM 0 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 106 0 1 9 170 0 0 296 1231 3:30 PM 1 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 111 0 4 18 222 0 0 367 1314 Page 1 of 2 90 3:45 PM 0 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 95 0 1 23 234 0 0 360 1359 4:00 PM 2 0 15 0 0 0 0 0 0 115 2 0 16 230 0 0 380 1403 4:15 PM 0 0 15 0 0 0 0 0 0 119 0 2 20 222 0 0 378 1485 4:30 PM 4 0 18 0 0 0 0 0 0 115 0 1 16 226 0 0 380 1498 4:45 PM 1 0 18 0 0 0 0 0 0 116 1 1 20 237 0 0 394 1532 5:00 PM 1 0 9 1 0 0 0 0 0 124 1 2 27 219 0 0 384 1536 5:15 PM 1 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 125 0 1 14 252 0 0 404 1562 5:30 PM 0 0 16 0 0 0 0 0 0 99 1 2 20 254 0 0 392 1574 5:45 PM 1 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 109 0 1 23 196 0 0 337 1517 6:00 PM 2 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 95 0 0 8 191 0 0 306 1439 6:15 PM 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 93 0 1 5 173 0 0 278 1313 6:30 PM 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 90 0 1 11 136 0 2 244 1165 6:45 PM 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 72 0 1 9 135 0 1 221 1049 15-Min Count15-Min CountPeriod Period Beginning AtBeginning At Gainesboro Rd (East) Gainesboro Rd (East) (Northbound)(Northbound) Gainesboro Rd (East) Gainesboro Rd (East) (Southbound)(Southbound) US 522US 522 (Eastbound)(Eastbound) US 522US 522 (Westbound)(Westbound)TotalTotal HourlyHourlyTotalsTotalsLeftLeftThruThruRightRightUULeftLeftThruThruRightRightUULeftLeftThruThruRightRightUULeftLeftThruThruRightRightUU Peak 15-MinPeak 15-Min FlowratesFlowrates NorthboundNorthbound SouthboundSouthbound EastboundEastbound WestboundWestbound TotalTotalLeftLeftThruThruRightRightUULeftLeftThruThruRightRightUULeftLeftThruThruRightRightUULeftLeftThruThruRightRightUU All Vehicles 4 0 44 0 0 0 0 0 0 500 0 4 56 1008 0 0 1616 Heavy Trucks 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 60 0 0 72 0 132 Buses Pedestrians 0 0 0 0 0 Bicycles 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Scooters Comments: Report generated on 9/20/2022 11:52 AM SOURCE: Quality Counts, LLC (http://www.qualitycounts.net) 1-877-580-2212 Page 2 of 2 91 Type of peak hour being reported: Intersection Peak Method for determining peak hour: Total Entering Volume LOCATION: LOCATION: Gainesboro Elementary School Dwy -- US 522 QC JOB #: QC JOB #: 15935802 CITY/STATE: CITY/STATE: Frederick, VA DATE: DATE: Wed, Sep 14 2022 0 0 0 0 0 1056 0 0 1113 478 0.960.96 1013 525 47 100 512 43 0 27 140 70 Peak-Hour: 4:45 PM -- 5:45 PMPeak-Hour: 4:45 PM -- 5:45 PM Peak 15-Min: 4:45 PM -- 5:00 PMPeak 15-Min: 4:45 PM -- 5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5.7 0 0 5.5 11.7 5.9 10.7 0 1 11.1 0 0 3.7 0.7 1.4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 15-Min Count15-Min CountPeriod Period Beginning AtBeginning At Gainesboro Elementary SchoolGainesboro Elementary School Dwy Dwy (Northbound)(Northbound) Gainesboro Elementary SchoolGainesboro Elementary School Dwy Dwy (Southbound)(Southbound) US 522US 522 (Eastbound)(Eastbound) US 522US 522 (Westbound)(Westbound)TotalTotal HourlyHourlyTotalsTotals LeftLeft ThruThru RightRight UU LeftLeft ThruThru RightRight UU LeftLeft ThruThru RightRight UU LeftLeft ThruThru RightRight UU 6:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 165 4 0 1 42 0 0 212 6:15 AM 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 190 9 0 4 43 0 0 249 6:30 AM 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 221 12 0 5 44 0 0 290 6:45 AM 1 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 214 7 0 11 39 0 0 283 1034 7:00 AM 1 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 221 16 0 15 42 0 1 305 1127 7:15 AM 2 0 37 0 0 0 0 0 0 243 68 0 35 86 0 0 471 1349 7:30 AM 14 0 83 0 0 0 0 0 0 214 59 0 57 85 0 0 512 1571 7:45 AM 11 0 56 0 0 0 0 0 0 152 27 0 35 84 0 0 365 1653 8:00 AM 2 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 164 11 0 12 80 0 0 280 1628 8:15 AM 2 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 135 30 0 13 101 0 1 288 1445 8:30 AM 25 0 24 0 0 0 0 0 0 151 33 0 15 72 0 1 321 1254 8:45 AM 32 0 41 0 0 0 0 0 0 134 43 0 12 69 0 0 331 1220 9:00 AM 6 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 120 6 0 1 98 0 1 236 1176 9:15 AM 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 139 0 0 1 75 0 0 218 1106 9:30 AM 2 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 108 1 0 3 86 0 2 206 991 9:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 119 1 0 2 102 0 1 225 885 10:00 AM 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 109 1 1 2 87 0 0 202 851 10:15 AM 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 132 2 0 1 90 0 0 226 859 10:30 AM 2 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 146 2 0 1 104 0 1 259 912 10:45 AM 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 112 1 0 2 102 0 0 219 906 11:00 AM 1 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 123 0 1 1 84 0 0 214 918 11:15 AM 2 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 96 1 0 2 92 0 0 196 888 11:30 AM 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 128 1 0 1 114 0 0 246 875 11:45 AM 3 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 105 3 0 2 116 0 0 231 887 12:00 PM 1 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 111 1 1 1 103 0 0 221 894 12:15 PM 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 121 2 2 3 120 0 1 252 950 12:30 PM 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 128 1 1 0 114 0 0 245 949 12:45 PM 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 95 1 1 2 101 0 0 202 920 1:00 PM 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 87 2 0 1 122 0 1 214 913 1:15 PM 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 113 4 0 3 104 0 0 226 887 1:30 PM 4 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 130 5 0 2 94 0 0 239 881 1:45 PM 6 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 94 7 1 5 108 0 0 223 902 2:00 PM 4 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 110 5 0 6 124 0 1 255 943 2:15 PM 1 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 88 14 0 17 137 0 0 264 981 2:30 PM 2 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 117 17 0 23 152 0 0 314 1056 2:45 PM 14 0 28 0 0 0 0 0 0 114 9 0 34 185 0 0 384 1217 3:00 PM 23 0 67 0 0 0 0 0 0 106 19 0 13 190 0 2 420 1382 Page 1 of 2 92 3:15 PM 5 0 14 0 0 0 0 0 0 103 12 0 15 176 0 0 325 1443 3:30 PM 37 0 37 0 0 0 0 0 0 104 12 0 8 211 0 0 409 1538 3:45 PM 18 0 20 0 0 0 0 0 0 99 4 0 3 238 0 0 382 1536 4:00 PM 17 0 22 0 0 0 0 0 0 119 5 0 6 240 0 0 409 1525 4:15 PM 8 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 124 10 0 8 234 0 1 396 1596 4:30 PM 9 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 115 11 0 14 233 0 0 391 1578 4:45 PM 11 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 126 17 0 34 242 0 2 443 1639 5:00 PM 13 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 122 9 0 23 245 0 3 424 1654 5:15 PM 5 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 124 13 0 16 261 0 2 424 1682 5:30 PM 14 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 106 8 0 20 265 0 0 417 1708 5:45 PM 27 0 45 0 0 0 0 0 0 113 2 1 6 202 0 0 396 1661 6:00 PM 16 0 26 0 0 0 0 0 0 103 2 0 2 180 0 0 329 1566 6:15 PM 7 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 102 0 1 0 174 0 0 294 1436 6:30 PM 4 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 93 0 0 0 144 0 0 246 1265 6:45 PM 2 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 75 1 1 0 140 0 0 224 1093 15-Min Count15-Min CountPeriod Period Beginning AtBeginning At Gainesboro Elementary SchoolGainesboro Elementary School Dwy Dwy (Northbound)(Northbound) Gainesboro Elementary SchoolGainesboro Elementary School Dwy Dwy (Southbound)(Southbound) US 522US 522 (Eastbound)(Eastbound) US 522US 522 (Westbound)(Westbound)TotalTotal HourlyHourlyTotalsTotals LeftLeft ThruThru RightRight UU LeftLeft ThruThru RightRight UU LeftLeft ThruThru RightRight UU LeftLeft ThruThru RightRight UU Peak 15-MinPeak 15-MinFlowratesFlowrates NorthboundNorthbound SouthboundSouthbound EastboundEastbound WestboundWestbound TotalTotalLeftLeftThruThruRightRightUULeftLeftThruThruRightRightUULeftLeftThruThruRightRightUULeftLeftThruThruRightRightUU All Vehicles 44 0 44 0 0 0 0 0 0 504 68 0 136 968 0 8 1772 Heavy Trucks 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 44 0 4 36 0 88 Buses Pedestrians 0 0 0 0 0 Bicycles 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Scooters Comments: Report generated on 9/20/2022 11:52 AM SOURCE: Quality Counts, LLC (http://www.qualitycounts.net) 1-877-580-2212 Page 2 of 2 93 APPENDIX B 2018 Existing Traffic Counts 94 File Name : N Frederick Pike and Gainesboro Rd Site Code : Start Date : 9/19/2018 Page No : 1 Groups Printed- Car N Frederick Pike Southbound N Frederick Pike Northbound Gainesboro Rd Eastbound Start Time Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Thru Left Peds App. Total Right Left Peds App. Total Int. Total 07:00 AM 0 193 0 0 193 35 2 0 37 22 0 0 22 252 07:15 AM 0 291 1 0 292 70 10 0 80 33 0 0 33 405 07:30 AM 0 271 0 0 271 65 15 0 80 40 0 0 40 391 07:45 AM 0 178 0 0 178 62 19 0 81 29 0 0 29 288 Total 0 933 1 0 934 232 46 0 278 124 0 0 124 1336 08:00 AM 0 133 2 0 135 66 10 0 76 9 0 0 9 220 08:15 AM 2 159 0 0 161 58 4 0 62 10 1 0 11 234 08:30 AM 0 188 0 0 188 77 12 0 89 22 0 0 22 299 08:45 AM 0 122 0 0 122 61 15 0 76 26 1 0 27 225 Total 2 602 2 0 606 262 41 0 303 67 2 0 69 978 09:00 AM 0 120 0 0 120 58 0 0 58 4 0 0 4 182 09:15 AM 0 129 0 0 129 66 1 0 67 4 0 0 4 200 09:30 AM 0 111 1 0 112 50 2 0 52 9 1 0 10 174 09:45 AM 0 81 0 0 81 53 2 0 55 8 1 0 9 145 Total 0 441 1 0 442 227 5 0 232 25 2 0 27 701 10:00 AM 0 103 1 0 104 61 4 0 65 2 0 0 2 171 10:15 AM 0 104 0 0 104 66 5 0 71 3 0 0 3 178 10:30 AM 0 113 0 0 113 82 2 0 84 5 1 0 6 203 10:45 AM 0 98 4 0 102 71 5 0 76 7 1 0 8 186 Total 0 418 5 0 423 280 16 0 296 17 2 0 19 738 11:00 AM 0 97 0 0 97 57 4 0 61 2 1 0 3 161 11:15 AM 1 82 0 0 83 63 1 0 64 0 0 0 0 147 11:30 AM 0 113 2 0 115 80 3 0 83 2 0 0 2 200 11:45 AM 0 100 0 0 100 82 5 0 87 6 1 0 7 194 Total 1 392 2 0 395 282 13 0 295 10 2 0 12 702 12:00 PM 1 99 0 0 100 76 4 0 80 5 1 0 6 186 12:15 PM 0 95 0 0 95 84 5 0 89 4 2 0 6 190 12:30 PM 0 95 0 0 95 105 8 0 113 7 0 0 7 215 12:45 PM 0 108 0 0 108 75 5 0 80 2 0 0 2 190 Total 1 397 0 0 398 340 22 0 362 18 3 0 21 781 01:00 PM 0 108 1 0 109 103 6 0 109 3 0 0 3 221 01:15 PM 0 90 1 0 91 92 6 0 98 5 0 0 5 194 01:30 PM 1 84 1 0 86 105 10 0 115 7 2 0 9 210 01:45 PM 0 106 1 0 107 107 2 0 109 1 0 0 1 217 Total 1 388 4 0 393 407 24 0 431 16 2 0 18 842 02:00 PM 0 83 0 0 83 99 4 0 103 8 1 0 9 195 02:15 PM 0 116 1 0 117 123 3 0 126 10 1 0 11 254 02:30 PM 1 101 0 0 102 117 9 0 126 11 1 0 12 240 02:45 PM 0 88 1 0 89 152 25 0 177 11 0 0 11 277 Total 1 388 2 0 391 491 41 0 532 40 3 0 43 966 03:00 PM 0 111 0 0 111 135 24 0 159 10 3 0 13 283 03:15 PM 1 94 0 0 95 158 7 0 165 12 1 0 13 273 03:30 PM 1 91 0 0 92 159 23 0 182 18 2 0 20 294 03:45 PM 0 96 0 0 96 202 15 0 217 11 1 0 12 325 Total 2 392 0 0 394 654 69 0 723 51 7 0 58 1175 04:00 PM 1 80 0 0 81 184 15 0 199 12 0 0 12 292 04:15 PM 0 100 1 0 101 237 13 0 250 16 3 0 19 370 04:30 PM 0 109 0 0 109 208 17 0 225 6 0 0 6 340 04:45 PM 1 89 1 0 91 216 22 0 238 10 1 0 11 340 Total 2 378 2 0 382 845 67 0 912 44 4 0 48 1342 05:00 PM 0 124 1 0 125 228 26 0 254 21 0 0 21 400 05:15 PM 0 113 0 0 113 230 28 0 258 17 1 0 18 389 05:30 PM 0 103 0 0 103 246 22 0 268 10 1 0 11 382 05:45 PM 0 91 0 0 91 194 18 0 212 11 1 0 12 315 Total 0 431 1 0 432 898 94 0 992 59 3 0 62 1486 06:00 PM 0 82 1 0 83 166 10 0 176 4 0 0 4 263 06:15 PM 0 89 2 0 91 164 13 0 177 11 1 0 12 280 06:30 PM 0 71 0 0 71 144 13 0 157 5 1 0 6 234 06:45 PM 0 51 0 0 51 121 12 0 133 5 0 0 5 189 Total 0 293 3 0 296 595 48 0 643 25 2 0 27 966 Grand Total 10 5453 23 0 5486 5513 486 0 5999 496 32 0 528 12013 Apprch %0.2 99.4 0.4 0 91.9 8.1 0 93.9 6.1 0 Total %0.1 45.4 0.2 0 45.7 45.9 4 0 49.9 4.1 0.3 0 4.4 Peggy Malone & Associates (888) 247-8602 95 File Name : N Frederick Pike and Gainesboro Rd Site Code : Start Date : 9/19/2018 Page No : 2 N Frederick Pike Southbound N Frederick Pike Northbound Gainesboro Rd Eastbound Start Time Right Thru Left App. Total Thru Left App. Total Right Left App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 07:00 AM to 01:00 PM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 07:00 AM 07:00 AM 0 193 0 193 35 2 37 22 0 22 252 07:15 AM 0 291 1 292 70 10 80 33 0 33 405 07:30 AM 0 271 0 271 65 15 80 40 0 40 391 07:45 AM 0 178 0 178 62 19 81 29 0 29 288 Total Volume 0 933 1 934 232 46 278 124 0 124 1336 % App. Total 0 99.9 0.1 83.5 16.5 100 0 PHF .000 .802 .250 .800 .829 .605 .858 .775 .000 .775 .825 Peak Hour Analysis From 01:15 PM to 06:45 PM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 04:45 PM 04:45 PM 1 89 1 91 216 22 238 10 1 11 340 05:00 PM 0 124 1 125 228 26 254 21 0 21 400 05:15 PM 0 113 0 113 230 28 258 17 1 18 389 05:30 PM 0 103 0 103 246 22 268 10 1 11 382 Total Volume 1 429 2 432 920 98 1018 58 3 61 1511 % App. Total 0.2 99.3 0.5 90.4 9.6 95.1 4.9 PHF .250 .865 .500 .864 .935 .875 .950 .690 .750 .726 .944 Peggy Malone & Associates (888) 247-8602 96 File Name : N Frederick Pike and Gainesboro Rd Site Code : Start Date : 9/19/2018 Page No : 1 Groups Printed- Truck N Frederick Pike Southbound N Frederick Pike Northbound Gainesboro Rd Eastbound Start Time Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Thru Left Peds App. Total Right Left Peds App. Total Int. Total 07:00 AM 1 19 0 0 20 6 0 0 6 1 2 0 3 29 07:15 AM 0 18 0 0 18 11 1 0 12 4 2 0 6 36 07:30 AM 0 19 0 0 19 18 2 0 20 9 0 0 9 48 07:45 AM 0 16 0 0 16 16 3 0 19 0 0 0 0 35 Total 1 72 0 0 73 51 6 0 57 14 4 0 18 148 08:00 AM 0 11 0 0 11 21 2 0 23 0 1 0 1 35 08:15 AM 0 12 0 0 12 17 1 0 18 2 1 0 3 33 08:30 AM 0 19 0 0 19 12 2 0 14 0 0 0 0 33 08:45 AM 0 12 0 0 12 15 4 0 19 1 0 0 1 32 Total 0 54 0 0 54 65 9 0 74 3 2 0 5 133 09:00 AM 0 19 0 0 19 22 0 0 22 1 0 0 1 42 09:15 AM 0 15 0 0 15 14 1 0 15 0 0 0 0 30 09:30 AM 0 11 0 0 11 15 0 0 15 0 0 0 0 26 09:45 AM 0 11 0 0 11 19 1 0 20 1 0 0 1 32 Total 0 56 0 0 56 70 2 0 72 2 0 0 2 130 10:00 AM 2 17 0 0 19 16 1 0 17 0 0 0 0 36 10:15 AM 1 14 0 0 15 18 0 0 18 0 0 0 0 33 10:30 AM 0 8 0 0 8 18 1 0 19 0 0 0 0 27 10:45 AM 0 17 1 0 18 12 0 0 12 1 0 0 1 31 Total 3 56 1 0 60 64 2 0 66 1 0 0 1 127 11:00 AM 1 18 0 0 19 19 0 0 19 1 0 0 1 39 11:15 AM 0 21 0 0 21 13 0 0 13 0 3 0 3 37 11:30 AM 0 17 0 0 17 15 0 0 15 0 0 0 0 32 11:45 AM 0 22 1 0 23 23 0 0 23 0 1 0 1 47 Total 1 78 1 0 80 70 0 0 70 1 4 0 5 155 12:00 PM 0 14 0 0 14 26 0 0 26 0 0 0 0 40 12:15 PM 0 18 0 0 18 19 0 0 19 1 1 0 2 39 12:30 PM 0 11 0 0 11 16 0 0 16 0 0 0 0 27 12:45 PM 0 15 0 0 15 19 0 0 19 1 0 0 1 35 Total 0 58 0 0 58 80 0 0 80 2 1 0 3 141 01:00 PM 1 13 0 0 14 23 0 0 23 0 0 0 0 37 01:15 PM 0 8 0 0 8 20 0 0 20 0 0 0 0 28 01:30 PM 0 16 0 0 16 16 0 0 16 0 0 0 0 32 01:45 PM 0 11 0 0 11 13 0 0 13 5 0 0 5 29 Total 1 48 0 0 49 72 0 0 72 5 0 0 5 126 02:00 PM 0 14 0 0 14 24 0 0 24 0 0 0 0 38 02:15 PM 0 15 0 0 15 17 0 0 17 4 1 0 5 37 02:30 PM 0 12 0 0 12 26 1 0 27 4 0 0 4 43 02:45 PM 0 11 0 0 11 26 0 0 26 1 0 0 1 38 Total 0 52 0 0 52 93 1 0 94 9 1 0 10 156 03:00 PM 0 19 0 0 19 30 13 0 43 1 1 0 2 64 03:15 PM 0 17 0 0 17 24 1 0 25 2 0 0 2 44 03:30 PM 0 12 0 0 12 21 1 0 22 1 0 0 1 35 03:45 PM 0 22 0 0 22 18 4 0 22 0 0 0 0 44 Total 0 70 0 0 70 93 19 0 112 4 1 0 5 187 04:00 PM 0 17 0 0 17 18 1 0 19 0 0 0 0 36 04:15 PM 0 18 0 0 18 17 1 0 18 1 0 0 1 37 04:30 PM 0 18 1 0 19 18 0 0 18 0 1 0 1 38 04:45 PM 0 17 0 0 17 14 2 0 16 0 0 0 0 33 Total 0 70 1 0 71 67 4 0 71 1 1 0 2 144 05:00 PM 0 16 0 0 16 12 0 0 12 0 0 0 0 28 05:15 PM 0 14 0 0 14 18 0 0 18 0 0 0 0 32 05:30 PM 0 13 0 0 13 22 0 0 22 0 0 0 0 35 05:45 PM 1 8 0 0 9 19 0 0 19 0 0 0 0 28 Total 1 51 0 0 52 71 0 0 71 0 0 0 0 123 06:00 PM 1 9 0 0 10 11 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 21 06:15 PM 0 8 0 0 8 8 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 16 06:30 PM 0 14 0 0 14 13 1 0 14 0 0 0 0 28 06:45 PM 0 11 0 0 11 10 0 0 10 0 0 0 0 21 Total 1 42 0 0 43 42 1 0 43 0 0 0 0 86 Grand Total 8 707 3 0 718 838 44 0 882 42 14 0 56 1656 Apprch %1.1 98.5 0.4 0 95 5 0 75 25 0 Total %0.5 42.7 0.2 0 43.4 50.6 2.7 0 53.3 2.5 0.8 0 3.4 Peggy Malone & Associates (888) 247-8602 97 File Name : N Frederick Pike and Gainesboro Rd Site Code : Start Date : 9/19/2018 Page No : 2 N Frederick Pike Southbound N Frederick Pike Northbound Gainesboro Rd Eastbound Start Time Right Thru Left App. Total Thru Left App. Total Right Left App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 07:00 AM to 01:00 PM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 11:30 AM 11:30 AM 0 17 0 17 15 0 15 0 0 0 32 11:45 AM 0 22 1 23 23 0 23 0 1 1 47 12:00 PM 0 14 0 14 26 0 26 0 0 0 40 12:15 PM 0 18 0 18 19 0 19 1 1 2 39 Total Volume 0 71 1 72 83 0 83 1 2 3 158 % App. Total 0 98.6 1.4 100 0 33.3 66.7 PHF .000 .807 .250 .783 .798 .000 .798 .250 .500 .375 .840 Peak Hour Analysis From 01:15 PM to 06:45 PM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 02:30 PM 02:30 PM 0 12 0 12 26 1 27 4 0 4 43 02:45 PM 0 11 0 11 26 0 26 1 0 1 38 03:00 PM 0 19 0 19 30 13 43 1 1 2 64 03:15 PM 0 17 0 17 24 1 25 2 0 2 44 Total Volume 0 59 0 59 106 15 121 8 1 9 189 % App. Total 0 100 0 87.6 12.4 88.9 11.1 PHF .000 .776 .000 .776 .883 .288 .703 .500 .250 .563 .738 Peggy Malone & Associates (888) 247-8602 98 File Name : N Frederick Pike and Gainesboro Rd Site Code : Start Date : 9/19/2018 Page No : 1 Groups Printed- Combined N Frederick Pike Southbound N Frederick Pike Northbound Gainesboro Rd Eastbound Start Time Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Thru Left Peds App. Total Right Left Peds App. Total Int. Total 07:00 AM 1 212 0 0 213 41 2 0 43 23 2 0 25 281 07:15 AM 0 309 1 0 310 81 11 0 92 37 2 0 39 441 07:30 AM 0 290 0 0 290 83 17 0 100 49 0 0 49 439 07:45 AM 0 194 0 0 194 78 22 0 100 29 0 0 29 323 Total 1 1005 1 0 1007 283 52 0 335 138 4 0 142 1484 08:00 AM 0 144 2 0 146 87 12 0 99 9 1 0 10 255 08:15 AM 2 171 0 0 173 75 5 0 80 12 2 0 14 267 08:30 AM 0 207 0 0 207 89 14 0 103 22 0 0 22 332 08:45 AM 0 134 0 0 134 76 19 0 95 27 1 0 28 257 Total 2 656 2 0 660 327 50 0 377 70 4 0 74 1111 09:00 AM 0 139 0 0 139 80 0 0 80 5 0 0 5 224 09:15 AM 0 144 0 0 144 80 2 0 82 4 0 0 4 230 09:30 AM 0 122 1 0 123 65 2 0 67 9 1 0 10 200 09:45 AM 0 92 0 0 92 72 3 0 75 9 1 0 10 177 Total 0 497 1 0 498 297 7 0 304 27 2 0 29 831 10:00 AM 2 120 1 0 123 77 5 0 82 2 0 0 2 207 10:15 AM 1 118 0 0 119 84 5 0 89 3 0 0 3 211 10:30 AM 0 121 0 0 121 100 3 0 103 5 1 0 6 230 10:45 AM 0 115 5 0 120 83 5 0 88 8 1 0 9 217 Total 3 474 6 0 483 344 18 0 362 18 2 0 20 865 11:00 AM 1 115 0 0 116 76 4 0 80 3 1 0 4 200 11:15 AM 1 103 0 0 104 76 1 0 77 0 3 0 3 184 11:30 AM 0 130 2 0 132 95 3 0 98 2 0 0 2 232 11:45 AM 0 122 1 0 123 105 5 0 110 6 2 0 8 241 Total 2 470 3 0 475 352 13 0 365 11 6 0 17 857 12:00 PM 1 113 0 0 114 102 4 0 106 5 1 0 6 226 12:15 PM 0 113 0 0 113 103 5 0 108 5 3 0 8 229 12:30 PM 0 106 0 0 106 121 8 0 129 7 0 0 7 242 12:45 PM 0 123 0 0 123 94 5 0 99 3 0 0 3 225 Total 1 455 0 0 456 420 22 0 442 20 4 0 24 922 01:00 PM 1 121 1 0 123 126 6 0 132 3 0 0 3 258 01:15 PM 0 98 1 0 99 112 6 0 118 5 0 0 5 222 01:30 PM 1 100 1 0 102 121 10 0 131 7 2 0 9 242 01:45 PM 0 117 1 0 118 120 2 0 122 6 0 0 6 246 Total 2 436 4 0 442 479 24 0 503 21 2 0 23 968 02:00 PM 0 97 0 0 97 123 4 0 127 8 1 0 9 233 02:15 PM 0 131 1 0 132 140 3 0 143 14 2 0 16 291 02:30 PM 1 113 0 0 114 143 10 0 153 15 1 0 16 283 02:45 PM 0 99 1 0 100 178 25 0 203 12 0 0 12 315 Total 1 440 2 0 443 584 42 0 626 49 4 0 53 1122 03:00 PM 0 130 0 0 130 165 37 0 202 11 4 0 15 347 03:15 PM 1 111 0 0 112 182 8 0 190 14 1 0 15 317 03:30 PM 1 103 0 0 104 180 24 0 204 19 2 0 21 329 03:45 PM 0 118 0 0 118 220 19 0 239 11 1 0 12 369 Total 2 462 0 0 464 747 88 0 835 55 8 0 63 1362 04:00 PM 1 97 0 0 98 202 16 0 218 12 0 0 12 328 04:15 PM 0 118 1 0 119 254 14 0 268 17 3 0 20 407 04:30 PM 0 127 1 0 128 226 17 0 243 6 1 0 7 378 04:45 PM 1 106 1 0 108 230 24 0 254 10 1 0 11 373 Total 2 448 3 0 453 912 71 0 983 45 5 0 50 1486 05:00 PM 0 140 1 0 141 240 26 0 266 21 0 0 21 428 05:15 PM 0 127 0 0 127 248 28 0 276 17 1 0 18 421 05:30 PM 0 116 0 0 116 268 22 0 290 10 1 0 11 417 05:45 PM 1 99 0 0 100 213 18 0 231 11 1 0 12 343 Total 1 482 1 0 484 969 94 0 1063 59 3 0 62 1609 06:00 PM 1 91 1 0 93 177 10 0 187 4 0 0 4 284 06:15 PM 0 97 2 0 99 172 13 0 185 11 1 0 12 296 06:30 PM 0 85 0 0 85 157 14 0 171 5 1 0 6 262 06:45 PM 0 62 0 0 62 131 12 0 143 5 0 0 5 210 Total 1 335 3 0 339 637 49 0 686 25 2 0 27 1052 Grand Total 18 6160 26 0 6204 6351 530 0 6881 538 46 0 584 13669 Apprch %0.3 99.3 0.4 0 92.3 7.7 0 92.1 7.9 0 Total %0.1 45.1 0.2 0 45.4 46.5 3.9 0 50.3 3.9 0.3 0 4.3 Peggy Malone & Associates (888) 247-8602 99 File Name : N Frederick Pike and Gainesboro Rd Site Code : Start Date : 9/19/2018 Page No : 2 N Frederick Pike Southbound N Frederick Pike Northbound Gainesboro Rd Eastbound Start Time Right Thru Left App. Total Thru Left App. Total Right Left App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 07:00 AM to 01:00 PM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 07:00 AM 07:00 AM 1 212 0 213 41 2 43 23 2 25 281 07:15 AM 0 309 1 310 81 11 92 37 2 39 441 07:30 AM 0 290 0 290 83 17 100 49 0 49 439 07:45 AM 0 194 0 194 78 22 100 29 0 29 323 Total Volume 1 1005 1 1007 283 52 335 138 4 142 1484 % App. Total 0.1 99.8 0.1 84.5 15.5 97.2 2.8 PHF .250 .813 .250 .812 .852 .591 .838 .704 .500 .724 .841 Peak Hour Analysis From 01:15 PM to 06:45 PM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 04:45 PM 04:45 PM 1 106 1 108 230 24 254 10 1 11 373 05:00 PM 0 140 1 141 240 26 266 21 0 21 428 05:15 PM 0 127 0 127 248 28 276 17 1 18 421 05:30 PM 0 116 0 116 268 22 290 10 1 11 417 Total Volume 1 489 2 492 986 100 1086 58 3 61 1639 % App. Total 0.2 99.4 0.4 90.8 9.2 95.1 4.9 PHF .250 .873 .500 .872 .920 .893 .936 .690 .750 .726 .957 Peggy Malone & Associates (888) 247-8602 100 October 2022 The Canopy – Signal Warrant Analysis APPENDIX B Traffic Counts 101 Type of peak hour being reported: Intersection Peak Method for determining peak hour: Total Entering Volume LOCATION: LOCATION: Gainesboro Rd (East) -- US 522 QC JOB #: QC JOB #: 15935801 CITY/STATE: CITY/STATE: Frederick, VA DATE: DATE: Wed, Sep 14 2022 0 0 0 0 0 971 6 0 1043 464 0.970.97 962 473 3 81 518 4 0 54 85 58 Peak-Hour: 4:45 PM -- 5:45 PMPeak-Hour: 4:45 PM -- 5:45 PM Peak 15-Min: 5:15 PM -- 5:30 PMPeak 15-Min: 5:15 PM -- 5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 5.5 12.3 5.9 12.1 0 0 11 25 0 0 0 1.7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 15-Min Count15-Min CountPeriod Period Beginning AtBeginning At Gainesboro Rd (East) Gainesboro Rd (East) (Northbound)(Northbound) Gainesboro Rd (East) Gainesboro Rd (East) (Southbound)(Southbound) US 522US 522 (Eastbound)(Eastbound) US 522US 522 (Westbound)(Westbound)TotalTotal HourlyHourlyTotalsTotalsLeftLeftThruThruRightRightUULeftLeftThruThruRightRightUULeftLeftThruThruRightRightUULeftLeftThruThruRightRightUU 6:00 AM 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 159 0 0 2 39 0 0 202 6:15 AM 0 0 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 183 1 0 4 40 0 0 240 6:30 AM 4 0 16 0 0 0 0 0 0 211 0 0 4 41 0 0 276 6:45 AM 0 0 16 0 0 0 0 0 0 196 0 0 3 35 0 0 250 968 7:00 AM 0 0 23 0 0 0 0 0 0 220 0 1 3 43 0 0 290 1056 7:15 AM 0 0 37 0 0 0 0 0 0 274 0 0 6 86 0 2 405 1221 7:30 AM 1 0 45 0 0 0 0 0 0 228 0 1 22 77 0 1 375 1320 7:45 AM 1 0 21 0 0 0 0 0 0 156 0 1 14 75 0 0 268 1338 8:00 AM 1 0 13 0 0 0 0 0 0 154 1 1 5 81 0 0 256 1304 8:15 AM 1 0 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 151 0 2 9 100 0 0 275 1174 8:30 AM 0 0 15 0 0 0 0 0 0 175 2 3 11 90 0 0 296 1095 8:45 AM 1 0 23 0 0 0 0 0 0 144 0 3 15 87 0 0 273 1100 9:00 AM 1 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 115 0 4 6 94 0 0 230 1074 9:15 AM 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 132 0 2 7 73 0 0 222 1021 9:30 AM 3 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 103 1 1 8 78 0 0 202 927 9:45 AM 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 112 2 1 12 94 0 1 225 879 10:00 AM 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 107 0 0 9 80 0 1 200 849 10:15 AM 1 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 127 0 1 3 89 0 0 231 858 10:30 AM 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 138 0 2 4 103 0 1 256 912 10:45 AM 1 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 110 0 2 8 93 0 0 219 906 11:00 AM 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 118 1 0 2 87 0 0 216 922 11:15 AM 1 0 16 0 0 0 0 0 0 85 1 0 3 90 0 0 196 887 11:30 AM 2 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 126 1 2 8 103 0 0 249 880 11:45 AM 1 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 100 0 0 9 107 0 0 225 886 12:00 PM 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 109 0 0 4 98 0 1 215 885 12:15 PM 1 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 118 0 1 6 115 0 0 251 940 12:30 PM 1 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 122 3 3 3 114 0 0 251 942 12:45 PM 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 88 0 1 4 90 0 1 188 905 1:00 PM 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 84 1 1 6 115 0 0 212 902 1:15 PM 3 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 115 0 0 4 97 0 0 225 876 1:30 PM 2 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 123 2 0 6 92 0 0 234 859 1:45 PM 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 92 1 1 9 99 0 0 210 881 2:00 PM 0 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 110 1 2 5 123 0 0 251 920 2:15 PM 0 0 14 0 0 0 0 0 0 90 0 1 5 126 0 1 237 932 2:30 PM 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 114 0 3 10 146 0 0 284 982 2:45 PM 0 0 14 0 0 0 0 0 0 106 0 1 16 177 0 1 315 1087 3:00 PM 0 0 18 0 0 0 0 0 0 110 1 1 35 171 0 0 336 1172 3:15 PM 0 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 106 0 1 9 170 0 0 296 1231 3:30 PM 1 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 111 0 4 18 222 0 0 367 1314 Page 1 of 2 102 3:45 PM 0 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 95 0 1 23 234 0 0 360 1359 4:00 PM 2 0 15 0 0 0 0 0 0 115 2 0 16 230 0 0 380 1403 4:15 PM 0 0 15 0 0 0 0 0 0 119 0 2 20 222 0 0 378 1485 4:30 PM 4 0 18 0 0 0 0 0 0 115 0 1 16 226 0 0 380 1498 4:45 PM 1 0 18 0 0 0 0 0 0 116 1 1 20 237 0 0 394 1532 5:00 PM 1 0 9 1 0 0 0 0 0 124 1 2 27 219 0 0 384 1536 5:15 PM 1 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 125 0 1 14 252 0 0 404 1562 5:30 PM 0 0 16 0 0 0 0 0 0 99 1 2 20 254 0 0 392 1574 5:45 PM 1 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 109 0 1 23 196 0 0 337 1517 6:00 PM 2 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 95 0 0 8 191 0 0 306 1439 6:15 PM 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 93 0 1 5 173 0 0 278 1313 6:30 PM 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 90 0 1 11 136 0 2 244 1165 6:45 PM 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 72 0 1 9 135 0 1 221 1049 15-Min Count15-Min CountPeriod Period Beginning AtBeginning At Gainesboro Rd (East) Gainesboro Rd (East) (Northbound)(Northbound) Gainesboro Rd (East) Gainesboro Rd (East) (Southbound)(Southbound) US 522US 522 (Eastbound)(Eastbound) US 522US 522 (Westbound)(Westbound)TotalTotal HourlyHourlyTotalsTotalsLeftLeftThruThruRightRightUULeftLeftThruThruRightRightUULeftLeftThruThruRightRightUULeftLeftThruThruRightRightUU Peak 15-MinPeak 15-Min FlowratesFlowrates NorthboundNorthbound SouthboundSouthbound EastboundEastbound WestboundWestbound TotalTotalLeftLeftThruThruRightRightUULeftLeftThruThruRightRightUULeftLeftThruThruRightRightUULeftLeftThruThruRightRightUU All Vehicles 4 0 44 0 0 0 0 0 0 500 0 4 56 1008 0 0 1616 Heavy Trucks 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 60 0 0 72 0 132 Buses Pedestrians 0 0 0 0 0 Bicycles 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Scooters Comments: Report generated on 9/20/2022 11:52 AM SOURCE: Quality Counts, LLC (http://www.qualitycounts.net) 1-877-580-2212 Page 2 of 2 103 Type of peak hour being reported: Intersection Peak Method for determining peak hour: Total Entering Volume LOCATION: LOCATION: Gainesboro Elementary School Dwy -- US 522 QC JOB #: QC JOB #: 15935802 CITY/STATE: CITY/STATE: Frederick, VA DATE: DATE: Wed, Sep 14 2022 0 0 0 0 0 1056 0 0 1113 478 0.960.96 1013 525 47 100 512 43 0 27 140 70 Peak-Hour: 4:45 PM -- 5:45 PMPeak-Hour: 4:45 PM -- 5:45 PM Peak 15-Min: 4:45 PM -- 5:00 PMPeak 15-Min: 4:45 PM -- 5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5.7 0 0 5.5 11.7 5.9 10.7 0 1 11.1 0 0 3.7 0.7 1.4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 15-Min Count15-Min CountPeriod Period Beginning AtBeginning At Gainesboro Elementary SchoolGainesboro Elementary School Dwy Dwy (Northbound)(Northbound) Gainesboro Elementary SchoolGainesboro Elementary School Dwy Dwy (Southbound)(Southbound) US 522US 522 (Eastbound)(Eastbound) US 522US 522 (Westbound)(Westbound)TotalTotal HourlyHourlyTotalsTotals LeftLeft ThruThru RightRight UU LeftLeft ThruThru RightRight UU LeftLeft ThruThru RightRight UU LeftLeft ThruThru RightRight UU 6:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 165 4 0 1 42 0 0 212 6:15 AM 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 190 9 0 4 43 0 0 249 6:30 AM 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 221 12 0 5 44 0 0 290 6:45 AM 1 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 214 7 0 11 39 0 0 283 1034 7:00 AM 1 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 221 16 0 15 42 0 1 305 1127 7:15 AM 2 0 37 0 0 0 0 0 0 243 68 0 35 86 0 0 471 1349 7:30 AM 14 0 83 0 0 0 0 0 0 214 59 0 57 85 0 0 512 1571 7:45 AM 11 0 56 0 0 0 0 0 0 152 27 0 35 84 0 0 365 1653 8:00 AM 2 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 164 11 0 12 80 0 0 280 1628 8:15 AM 2 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 135 30 0 13 101 0 1 288 1445 8:30 AM 25 0 24 0 0 0 0 0 0 151 33 0 15 72 0 1 321 1254 8:45 AM 32 0 41 0 0 0 0 0 0 134 43 0 12 69 0 0 331 1220 9:00 AM 6 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 120 6 0 1 98 0 1 236 1176 9:15 AM 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 139 0 0 1 75 0 0 218 1106 9:30 AM 2 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 108 1 0 3 86 0 2 206 991 9:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 119 1 0 2 102 0 1 225 885 10:00 AM 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 109 1 1 2 87 0 0 202 851 10:15 AM 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 132 2 0 1 90 0 0 226 859 10:30 AM 2 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 146 2 0 1 104 0 1 259 912 10:45 AM 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 112 1 0 2 102 0 0 219 906 11:00 AM 1 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 123 0 1 1 84 0 0 214 918 11:15 AM 2 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 96 1 0 2 92 0 0 196 888 11:30 AM 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 128 1 0 1 114 0 0 246 875 11:45 AM 3 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 105 3 0 2 116 0 0 231 887 12:00 PM 1 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 111 1 1 1 103 0 0 221 894 12:15 PM 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 121 2 2 3 120 0 1 252 950 12:30 PM 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 128 1 1 0 114 0 0 245 949 12:45 PM 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 95 1 1 2 101 0 0 202 920 1:00 PM 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 87 2 0 1 122 0 1 214 913 1:15 PM 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 113 4 0 3 104 0 0 226 887 1:30 PM 4 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 130 5 0 2 94 0 0 239 881 1:45 PM 6 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 94 7 1 5 108 0 0 223 902 2:00 PM 4 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 110 5 0 6 124 0 1 255 943 2:15 PM 1 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 88 14 0 17 137 0 0 264 981 2:30 PM 2 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 117 17 0 23 152 0 0 314 1056 2:45 PM 14 0 28 0 0 0 0 0 0 114 9 0 34 185 0 0 384 1217 3:00 PM 23 0 67 0 0 0 0 0 0 106 19 0 13 190 0 2 420 1382 Page 1 of 2 104 3:15 PM 5 0 14 0 0 0 0 0 0 103 12 0 15 176 0 0 325 1443 3:30 PM 37 0 37 0 0 0 0 0 0 104 12 0 8 211 0 0 409 1538 3:45 PM 18 0 20 0 0 0 0 0 0 99 4 0 3 238 0 0 382 1536 4:00 PM 17 0 22 0 0 0 0 0 0 119 5 0 6 240 0 0 409 1525 4:15 PM 8 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 124 10 0 8 234 0 1 396 1596 4:30 PM 9 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 115 11 0 14 233 0 0 391 1578 4:45 PM 11 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 126 17 0 34 242 0 2 443 1639 5:00 PM 13 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 122 9 0 23 245 0 3 424 1654 5:15 PM 5 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 124 13 0 16 261 0 2 424 1682 5:30 PM 14 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 106 8 0 20 265 0 0 417 1708 5:45 PM 27 0 45 0 0 0 0 0 0 113 2 1 6 202 0 0 396 1661 6:00 PM 16 0 26 0 0 0 0 0 0 103 2 0 2 180 0 0 329 1566 6:15 PM 7 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 102 0 1 0 174 0 0 294 1436 6:30 PM 4 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 93 0 0 0 144 0 0 246 1265 6:45 PM 2 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 75 1 1 0 140 0 0 224 1093 15-Min Count15-Min CountPeriod Period Beginning AtBeginning At Gainesboro Elementary SchoolGainesboro Elementary School Dwy Dwy (Northbound)(Northbound) Gainesboro Elementary SchoolGainesboro Elementary School Dwy Dwy (Southbound)(Southbound) US 522US 522 (Eastbound)(Eastbound) US 522US 522 (Westbound)(Westbound)TotalTotal HourlyHourlyTotalsTotals LeftLeft ThruThru RightRight UU LeftLeft ThruThru RightRight UU LeftLeft ThruThru RightRight UU LeftLeft ThruThru RightRight UU Peak 15-MinPeak 15-MinFlowratesFlowrates NorthboundNorthbound SouthboundSouthbound EastboundEastbound WestboundWestbound TotalTotalLeftLeftThruThruRightRightUULeftLeftThruThruRightRightUULeftLeftThruThruRightRightUULeftLeftThruThruRightRightUU All Vehicles 44 0 44 0 0 0 0 0 0 504 68 0 136 968 0 8 1772 Heavy Trucks 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 44 0 4 36 0 88 Buses Pedestrians 0 0 0 0 0 Bicycles 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Scooters Comments: Report generated on 9/20/2022 11:52 AM SOURCE: Quality Counts, LLC (http://www.qualitycounts.net) 1-877-580-2212 Page 2 of 2 105 October 2022 The Canopy – Signal Warrant Analysis APPENDIX C Pagones Theorem – Right Turn Adjustments 106 107 108 VDOT Signal Justification Report Template – Version 1.1 - January 25, 2021 US Route 522 at Gainesboro Road Appendix B: VJuST Input and Results Worksheets 109 U-Turn / Left Through Right 3 1004 0 217 289 0 34 0 144 0 0 0 Frederick Middle School 2025 Total Future AM Peak US Route 522 Gainesboro Road November 1, 2022 General Instructions: All intersection and interchange configurations have a default assumption of one exclusive lane per movement. No results shall be interpreted until the user has verified the lane configurations on each worksheet. VDOT Junction Screening Tool Results Worksheet Intersection Results Project Title: EW Facility: NS Facility: Date: General Information Volumes (veh/hr) Eastbound Northbound Westbound Southbound CongestionPedestrianSafetyNotes Type Dir Maximum V/C Accommodation Compared to Conventional Weighted Total Conflict Points Conventional -0.49 48 Continuous Green-T -0.62 - 12* Median U-Turn -0.47 + 20 Partial Median U-Turn -0.41 + 28 Restricted Crossing U-Turn -0.49 20 Roundabout -0.49 8 Two-Way Stop Control -0.84 48 *The continuous green-T is the only three-legged innovative intersection in this tool. To compare the continuous green-T to other innovative intersections, conflicts corresponding with the fourth leg must be removed. This has been done for the conventional intersection. Conflict point diagrams for three-legged and four-legged conventional intersections have been provided on the conventional intersection worksheet for reference. 4 110 U-Turn / Left Through Right 7 443 1 131 750 0 89 0 48 0 0 0 Frederick Middle School 2025 Total Future School PM Peak US Route 522 Gainesboro Road November 1, 2022 General Instructions: All intersection and interchange configurations have a default assumption of one exclusive lane per movement. No results shall be interpreted until the user has verified the lane configurations on each worksheet. VDOT Junction Screening Tool Results Worksheet Intersection Results Project Title: EW Facility: NS Facility: Date: General Information Volumes (veh/hr) Eastbound Northbound Westbound Southbound CongestionPedestrianSafetyNotes Type Dir Maximum V/C Accommodation Compared to Conventional Weighted Total Conflict Points Conventional -0.26 48 Continuous Green-T -0.36 - 12* Median U-Turn -0.46 + 20 Partial Median U-Turn -0.24 + 28 Restricted Crossing U-Turn -0.29 20 Roundabout -0.46 8 Two-Way Stop Control -0.62 48 *The continuous green-T is the only three-legged innovative intersection in this tool. To compare the continuous green-T to other innovative intersections, conflicts corresponding with the fourth leg must be removed. This has been done for the conventional intersection. Conflict point diagrams for three-legged and four-legged conventional intersections have been provided on the conventional intersection worksheet for reference. 4 111 U-Turn / Left Through Right 6 500 2 163 942 0 68 0 47 0 0 0 Volumes (veh/hr) Eastbound Northbound Westbound Southbound VDOT Junction Screening Tool Results Worksheet Intersection Results Project Title: EW Facility: NS Facility: Date: General Information Frederick Middle School 2025 Total Future PM Peak US Route 522 Gainesboro Road November 1, 2022 General Instructions: All intersection and interchange configurations have a default assumption of one exclusive lane per movement. No results shall be interpreted until the user has verified the lane configurations on each worksheet.CongestionPedestrianSafetyNotes Type Dir Maximum V/C Accommodation Compared to Conventional Weighted Total Conflict Points Conventional -0.31 48 Continuous Green-T -0.37 - 12* Median U-Turn -0.47 + 20 Partial Median U-Turn -0.31 + 28 Restricted Crossing U-Turn -0.33 20 Roundabout -0.53 8 Two-Way Stop Control -0.60 48 *The continuous green-T is the only three-legged innovative intersection in this tool. To compare the continuous green-T to other innovative intersections, conflicts corresponding with the fourth leg must be removed. This has been done for the conventional intersection. Conflict point diagrams for three-legged and four-legged conventional intersections have been provided on the conventional intersection worksheet for reference. 4 112 Project Title: E-W Facility: N-S Facility: Date: Through Right Eastbound 1004 0 5.00% Westbound 289 10.00% Northbound 144 7.00% Southbound 0.00% Adjustment Factor 0.80 0.95 0.85 Suggested U - 0.8 L - 0.95 0.85 Through Right Approach Eastbound 1054 0 1057 Westbound 318 0 557 Northbound 0 154 190 Southbound 0 0 0 3 217 34 U-Turn / Left Critical Lane Volume Sum Limit Right-turn Adjustment Factor Conversion of right-turning vehicles to equivalent through vehicles Left-turn Adjustment Factor Saturation value for critical lane volume sum at an intersection 0 3 239 36 1 truck = X Passenger Car Equivalents Conversion of U-turning vehicles to equivalent through vehicles Truck to PCE Factor 1600 VDOT Junction Screening Tool Input Worksheet Frederick Middle School 2025 Total Future AM Peak US Route 522 Gainesboro Road Volume (veh/hr) 2.00 U-Turn / Left Notes: U-turn Adjustment Factor Conversion of left-turning vehicles to equivalent through vehicles November 1, 2022 Equivalent Passenger Car Volume Volume (pc/hr) Traffic Volume Demand Truck Percent (%) Truck to PCE Factor Critical Lane Volume Suggested = 2.00 Direction 1 113 #Intersections Information Consider?Justification 1 Conventional -Y 2 Bowtie Link N Not feasible for roadway facility type 3 Center Turn Overpass Link N Not feasible for roadway facility type 4 Continuous Green-T Link Y 5 Echelon Link N Not feasible for roadway facility type 6 Full Displaced Left Turn Link N Not feasible for roadway facility type 7 Median U-Turn Link Y 8 Partial Displaced Left Turn Link N Not feasible for roadway facility type 9 Partial Median U-Turn Link Y 10 Quadrant Roadway N-E Link N Not feasible for roadway facility type 11 Quadrant Roadway N-W Link N Not feasible for roadway facility type 12 Quadrant Roadway S-E Link N Not feasible for roadway facility type 13 Quadrant Roadway S-W Link N Not feasible for roadway facility type 14 Restricted Crossing U-Turn Link Y 15 Single Loop Link N Not feasible for roadway facility type 16 Split Intersection Link N Not feasible for roadway facility type 17 Thru-Cut Link N Not feasible for roadway facility type 18 50 Mini Roundabout Link N Not feasible for roadway facility type 19 75 Mini Roundabout Link N Not feasible for roadway facility type 20 Roundabout Link Y 21 Two-Way Stop Control -Y #Interchanges Information Consider?Justification 22 Traditional Diamond Link N Not feasible for roadway facility type 23 Contraflow Left Link N Not feasible for roadway facility type 24 Displaced Left Turn Link N Not feasible for roadway facility type 25 Diverging Diamond Link N Not feasible for roadway facility type 26 Double Roundabout Link N Not feasible for roadway facility type 27 Michigan Urban Diamond Link N Not feasible for roadway facility type 28 Partial Cloverleaf Link N Not feasible for roadway facility type 29 Single Point Link N Not feasible for roadway facility type 30 Single Roundabout Link N Not feasible for roadway facility type Unsignalized Intersections Indicate with a "Y" or "N" if each intersection or interchange configuration should or should not be considered. Use the information links for guidance. Then, click the "Show/Hide Configurations button" to hide the worksheets for the configurations that will not be considered. Possible Configurations VDOT Junction Screening Tool Signalized Intersections 2 114 Intersections Direction TwoDirList FourDirList EchelonList TwoDirList TwoDirList TwoDirList TwoDirList SingleLoopList TwoDirList TwoDirList TwoDirList Interchanges Direction TwoDirList N/AN/A VDOT Junction Screening Tool Directional Questions and Base Lane Configurations Before entering a base number of through lanes for each direction, answer all applicable directional question for each intersection or interchange configuration selected for consideration. Navigate to the lane configuration worksheet for example diagrams, if provided. N/A NB Question N/A Select the direction associated with the "stem" of the T- intersection from the drop-down list. See example diagrams. Select the roadway with the U-turns from the drop-down list. Select the roadway with the U-turns from the drop-down list. N/A All Bowtie Continuous Green-T Echelon Median U-Turn Partial Displaced Left Turn Thru-Cut Single Loop Split Intersection Select the roadway with the U-turns from the drop-down list. N/A Partial Median U-Turn Restricted Crossing U-Turn EB-WB N/A EB-WB EB-WB N/A N/A N/A N/A Question N/A N/A N/A Southbound 1 1 2 2 Base Number of Through Lanes Enter a base number of through lanes for each direction. The number of through lanes entered will populate on each non-roundabout lane configuration worksheet. This tool also allows the user to enter the number of through lanes on the lane configuration worksheets directly. This base number may be overwritten on individual lane configuration worksheets. Turn lanes, shared lanes, and channelized lanes must still be entered in each lane configuration worksheet. Eastbound Westbound Northbound 3 115 U-Turn / Left Through Right 3 1004 0 217 289 0 34 0 144 0 0 0 Frederick Middle School 2025 Total Future AM Peak US Route 522 Gainesboro Road November 1, 2022 General Instructions: All intersection and interchange configurations have a default assumption of one exclusive lane per movement. No results shall be interpreted until the user has verified the lane configurations on each worksheet. VDOT Junction Screening Tool Results Worksheet Intersection Results Project Title: EW Facility: NS Facility: Date: General Information Volumes (veh/hr) Eastbound Northbound Westbound Southbound CongestionPedestrianSafetyNotes Type Dir Maximum V/C Accommodation Compared to Conventional Weighted Total Conflict Points Conventional -0.49 48 Continuous Green-T -0.62 - 12* Median U-Turn -0.47 + 20 Partial Median U-Turn -0.41 + 28 Restricted Crossing U-Turn -0.49 20 Roundabout -0.49 8 Two-Way Stop Control -0.84 48 *The continuous green-T is the only three-legged innovative intersection in this tool. To compare the continuous green-T to other innovative intersections, conflicts corresponding with the fourth leg must be removed. This has been done for the conventional intersection. Conflict point diagrams for three-legged and four-legged conventional intersections have been provided on the conventional intersection worksheet for reference. 4 116 Interchange ResultsCongestionPedestrianSafety Notes Type Dir Maximum V/C Accommodation Compared to Traditional Diamond Weighted Total Conflict Points Congestion Pedestrian Safety Information The maximum v/c ratio represents the worst v/c of all zones that make up an intersection. Compares the potential of each design to accommodate pedestrians based on safety, wayfinding, and delay. Potential is qualitatively defined as better (+), similar (blank cell), or worse (-) than a conventional intersection or traditional diamond interchange. Weighted Total = (2 x Crossing Conflicts) + Merging Conflicts + Diverging Conflicts 5 117 WB Critical Vol 782 NB Critical Vol 0 Conflict Type Count Crossing 3 Merging 3 Yes Yes Channelized w/ Rcv Lane? pcph pcph pcph Shared ? Shared ? No 2Note: This diagram does not reflect the actual lane configuration of the intersection Safety - Conflict Point Diagram Weight Crossing 2 Conflict Type Count Crossing Merging Diverging 16 8 8 32 1 Merging 1 Diverging 1 Weighted Total Conflict Points 48 Safety - Conflict Point Diagram (Three Legs) Weighted Total Conflict Points 12 Diverging 3 Total 9 Conflict Type Weight Crossing 2 Merging 1 Diverging Conflict Type Total 318pcph0Shared ? No 0 217 02782 2390 0 0 pcphYes Shared ?pcph00No Channelized w/ Rcv Lane?1No Shared ?pcph01pcph1060S Channelized w/ Rcv Lane? Shared ? W E No 0.49 V / C 782 pcph pcph pcph 0 0 0 0pcphNo 0 0 0 EB Critical Vol 159 1400 - 1599 ≥ 1600 No Shared ? Shared ? No No SB Critical Vol 0 Channelized w/ Rcv Lane? Enter the lane configurations in the yellow cells. Conventional Conventional EW Split?FALSE NS Split?FALSE NS Facility:Gainesboro Road VOLUME / CAPACITY RATIO:0.49 N DESIGN AND RESULTS DATA INPUT AND CONFIGURATION Project Name:Frederick Middle School 2025 Total Future AM Peak Critical Lane Volume Sum Date:November 1, 2022 EW Facility:US Route 522 < 1200 1200 - 1399 Zone 5 Zone 5 Back to Results VDOT JUNCTION SCREENING TOOL Ver 1.0 6 118 NB Continuous Green-T Intersection Continuous Green-T Intersection NB Critical Vol 219 No Channelized w/ Rcv Lane? EB Critical Vol 0 pcph0pcph0No NB EB Shared ? 0 Nopcph10542DESIGN AND RESULTS DATA INPUT AND CONFIGURATION NS Facility:Gainesboro Road VOLUME / CAPACITY RATIO:0.62Date:November 1, 2022 Project Name:Frederick Middle School 2025 Total Future AM Peak Critical Lane Volume Sum EW Facility:1200 - 1399 1400 - 1599 ≥ 1600 Step 1: Enter the lane configurations in the yellow cells. Continuous Green Movement V/C WB FALSE 0.10 NS Split? US Route 522 < 1200 TRUE WB Critical Vol 779pcph0EW Split? 998 239pcph2318pcph10 Shared ?1Yes 0 219 0 pcph pcph pcph Channelized w/ Rcv Lane? 1590.62 V / C WeightConflict Type N W Total 9 0.10 V / C 998 Note: This diagram does not reflect the actual lane configuration of the intersection Safety - Conflict Point Diagram Conflict Type Count Crossing 3 Merging 3 Diverging 3 Weighted Total Conflict Points 12 Diverging 1 E S Merging 1 Crossing 2 North arrow directions will appear once the directional question has been answered on the Input Worksheet. Zone 5 Zone 5 Back to Results Continuous Green Movement VDOT JUNCTION SCREENING TOOL Ver 1.0 7 119 EB-WB Assumptions ● This worksheet uses the CLV methodology for calculaGons at signalized zones. These calculations are based on passenger cars per hour. ● This worksheet uses the HCM, 6th Edition methodology for calculations at unsignalized zones. These calculations are based on vehicles per hour. Control Type (Zone 2) Unsignalized WB Critical Vol 224 NB Critical Vol 529 EB Critical Vol 0 NS Split?00pcphpcph36EW Split? pcph Diverging 1 Conflict Type Weight Safety - Conflict Point Diagram Conflict Type Count Crossing 4 Merging 6 Diverging 6 Total 16 Crossing 2 Merging 1 Weighted Total Conflict Points 20 WB EB Shared ? Channelized w/ Rcv Lane? No No SB pcph pcph 0 3 2 Channelized w/ Rcv Lane? No Shared ?EBNo pcph 1 239 2 Channelized w/ Rcv Lane?pcph318 pcphpcph pcph WB Shared ? FALSE 239 0 0FALSE 593 3 No No pcph Note: This diagram does not reflect the actual lane configuration of the intersection pcphpcph00753 -- pcph --39 0.14 V / C 1 NB Channelized w/ Rcv Lane? Shared ? No No 0.47 V / C 2 0pcph1541Zone 5 must be signalized753 Median U-Turn Intersection Median U-Turn Intersection W -- 0.41 V / C S N E NS Facility: < 1200 1200 - 1399 1400 - 1599 ≥ 1600 Gainesboro Road VOLUME / CAPACITY RATIO:0.47 1054 Date:November 1, 2022 North arrow directions will appear once the directional question has been answered on the Input Worksheet. --pcphDESIGN AND RESULTS DATA INPUT AND CONFIGURATION Project Name:Frederick Middle School 2025 Total Future AM Peak Critical Lane Volume Sum EW Facility:US Route 522 Enter the lane configurations in the yellow cells. SB Critical Vol 297 001 2 Control Type (Zone 1) Unsignalized pcph 239 1057 pcph Zone 5 Zone 1 Zone 2 Zone 2 Zone 1 Zone 5 Back to Results VDOT JUNCTION SCREENING TOOL Ver 1.0 8 120 EB-WB ● This worksheet uses the HCM, 6th Edition methodology for calculations at unsignalized zones. These calculations are based on vehicles per hour. Shared ? pcph pcph 239 1057 0pcph000pcph1 2 NB Critical Vol 279 529 2 0 pcphChannelized w/ Rcv Lane? No No SB NB Channelized w/ Rcv Lane? Shared ? No Yes pcph0000Shared ? Yes Shared ? No 0 WB Critical Vol DESIGN AND RESULTS DATA INPUT AND CONFIGURATION Project Name:Frederick Middle School 2025 Total Future AM Peak Critical Lane Volume Sum EW Facility:US Route 522 EB Enter the lane configurations in the yellow cells.< 1200 1200 - 1399 1400 - 1599 ≥ 1600 NS Facility:Gainesboro Road VOLUME / CAPACITY RATIO:0.41 W S N -- pcphpcph pcph 0 3 2Date:November 1, 2022 1054 0.41 V / C Control Type (Zone 1) Unsignalized -- WB 2 WB Shared ? No No Channelized w/ Rcv Lane? 529 EW Split?FALSE NS Split?FALSE NB Critical Vol 0 pcph 239 Diverging 1 North arrow directions will appear once the directional question has been answered on the Input Worksheet. Weighted Total Conflict Points 28 pcphpcph Note: This diagram does not reflect the actual lane configuration of the intersection Safety - Conflict Point Diagram Conflict Type Count Crossing 6 Merging 8 Diverging 8 Total 22 Conflict Type Weight 529 Crossing 2 Merging 1 557 3 pcph pcph 318 0 -- pcph --3 0.14 V / C 1 EB Critical Vol Control Type (Zone 2) Unsignalized Assumptions ● This worksheet uses the CLV methodology for calculaGons at signalized zones. These calculations are based on passenger cars per hour. Partial Median U-Turn Intersection Patrial Median U-Turn Intersection E pcph00pcph21700.14 V / C 1 239 pcph Zone 5 must be signalized Channelized w/ Rcv Lane? No Shared ?EBNo Zone 5 Zone 1 Zone 2 Zone 2 Zone 1 Zone 5 Back to Results VDOT JUNCTION SCREENING TOOL Ver 1.0 9 121 EB-WB Shared ?154pcph0779 SB No WB Critical Vol 0 0 239 354 0 pcph WB No pcph 2 36Channelized w/ Rcv Lane?0pcphpcph Restricted Crossing U-Turn (RCUT) Intersection Restricted Crossing U-Turn (RCUT) Intersection No 00pcph0pcphpcph pcph 1054 3 2 pcph 0 1054 3 0 pcph pcph pcph SB Critical Vol 177 0 0 DESIGN AND RESULTS DATA INPUT AND CONFIGURATION Project Name:Frederick Middle School 2025 Total Future AM Peak Critical Lane Volume Sum EW Facility:US Route 522 < 1200 1200 - 1399 1400 - 1599 ≥ 1600 Enter the lane configurations in the yellow cells. NS Facility: EB Gainesboro Road VOLUME / CAPACITY RATIO:0.49 pcph Date:November 1, 2022 0 0.11 V / C S N E North arrow directions will appear once the directional question has been answered on the Input Worksheet.Shared ? Channelized w/ Rcv Lane? EB 177 -- -- 0.28 V / C No W No Control Type (Zone 1) Unsignalized 1 2 WB 0.14 V / C Safety - Conflict Point Diagram Conflict Type Count Crossing 2 Merging 8 Diverging 8 Total 18 20 Diverging 1 Weighted Total Conflict Points Merging 1 Crossing Note: This diagram does not reflect the actual lane configuration of the intersection 2 779 0.49 V / C pcphChannelized w/ Rcv Lane? No Conflict Type Weight Assumptions ● This worksheet uses the CLV methodology for calculaGons at signalized zones. These calculations are based on passenger cars per hour. ● This worksheet uses the HCM, 6th Edition methodology for calculations at unsignalized zones. These calculations are based on vehicles per hour.1pcph pcph Signalized Control Type (Zones 3 + 4) Control Type (Zone 2) Unsignalized Channelized w/ Rcv Lane? 177 1 EB Critical Vol 0 NB Critical Vol 779pcph pcph NB pcph --36 1-- 2 239 318 0 Zone 3 Zone 1 Zone 2 Zone 4 Zone 2 Zone 1 Zone 3 Zone 4 Back to Results VDOT JUNCTION SCREENING TOOL Ver 1.0 10 122 1 0 0 1 Roundabout Roundabout Roundabout EQUATION: A x exp(-B x Q) 0 0.33 190 pcphV/C RATIONB 0.00092 0.000851420Right2 2 Lane Capacity434 1 2 2 Left 1350 21590.50Through lane utilization factorLeft 1420 0.00091 0.000911420Right12 Lane Capacity 0.50 154 12 52721pcph0Number of Entry Lanes Number of Circulating Lanes Lane A B 1 1 -1380 0.00102 1420 0.00085-21 2 1 NB 530 Through lane utilization factorpcph1054360154578 36 pcph pcph pcph pcph530V/C RATIONo 2 1 0.500pcph527Conflicting flow 527 EBLane Capacity11591084V/C RATIO 0.49Number of Circulating LanesNo Slip Lane? 2 Through lane utilization factor3Number of Entry Lanes pcph527V/C RATIO 0.451302137410.31V/C RATIO 398pcphConflicting flow390120.12V/C RATIO 12 1 Conflicting flow0239159pcphNo Number of Circulating Lanes 2 159 0SB WB159Conflicting flow 2392 pcph pcph V/C RATIOV/C RATIODESIGN AND RESULTS DATA INPUT AND CONFIGURATION CAPACITY CALCULATIONS 0.50 Lane Capacity EW Facility:US Route 522 < 1200 1200 - 1399 1400 - 1599 ≥ 1600 10pcphThrough lane utilization factor 318pcphProject Name: NS Facility: Enter the lane configurations in the yellow cells. Date: Slip Lane? Number of Entry Lanes 2 Number of Circulating Lanes Number of Entry Lanes 239pcphpcph 0 2 0 0 pcph pcph WB2 Total 8 Slip Lane? Assumptions SB Number of Entry Lanes Weighted Total Conflict Points Merging Diverging 1 1 Diverging 4 4 Number of Circulating Lanes 2 pcph3Frederick Middle School 2025 Total Future AM Peak Critical Lane Volume Sum Gainesboro Road V/C November 1, 2022 VOLUME / CAPACITY RATIO: 0.49 N 0 0.49 W E S Predicted approach capacity Lane 1 Lane 2 V/C0.45 V/C Lane 2 Lane 1 0.31 V/C Lane 2 V/C V/C V/C Lane 1 0.33 V/C ● The number of circulaGng lanes in one quadrant is assumed to be equal to the number of exiting lanes in the next quadrant. ● The roundabout is limited to a maximum of two entry lanes and two circulating lanes. ● All leI-turning vehicles are assumed to stay in the innermost lane unGl exiting the roundabout. ● This worksheet does not use the CLV methodology. The calculaGons are based on the HCM 6th Edition . Predicted approach capacity Predicted approach capacity Slip Lane? No Predicted approach capacity Lane 2 0.12 EBSafety - Conflict Point Diagram Conflict Type Count Crossing 0 Merging 8 Conflict Type Weight Crossing Lane 1 Zone 1 Zone 3 Zone 2 Zone 4 Back to Results VDOT JUNCTION SCREENING TOOL Ver 1.0 11 123 Priority MVMT Rank 1 EBL 2 1 2 3 0 No 0.05 vc,1 289.00 tc,1 4.20 tf,1 2.25 cp,1 1248.31 cm,1 1248.31 1 1248.31 1 0.00 2 EBT 1 4 2 217 1 No 0.1 vc,4 1004.00 tc,4 4.30 tf,4 2.30 cp,4 639.19 cm,4 639.19 2 3600.00 2 0.28 3 EBR 1 7 3 34 0 Yes Yes 0.07 vc,7 1588.50 tc,7 6.94 tf,7 3.57 cp,7 93.70 cm,7 61.74 1 3 1500.00 3 0.00 4 WBL 2 8 0 0 vc,8 tc,8 tf,8 cp,8 cm,8 0 4 639.19 4 0.34 5 WBT 1 9 2 144 0 Yes Yes 0.07 vc,9 502.00 tc,9 7.04 tf,9 3.37 cp,9 501.63 cm,9 501.63 1 5 3600.00 5 0.08 6 WBR 1 10 0 0 0 vc,10 tc,10 tf,10 cp,10 cm,10 0 6 0.00 6 0.00 7 NBL 3 11 0 0 vc,11 tc,11 tf,11 cp,11 cm,11 0 -------- NBT 0 12 0 0 0 vc,12 0.00 tc,12 tf,12 cp,12 cm,12 0 7-8-9 212.48 7-8-9 0.84 9 NBR 2 -------- SBL 0 2 1 1004 2 0.05 vc,I,7 1010.00 tc,I,7 5.94 ----0.00 SBT 0 3 1 0 1 No No 0.05 vc,II,7 578.50 tc,II,7 5.94 11 11 0.00 Stops SBR 0 5 1 289 2 0.1 vc,I,8 1010.00 tc,I,8 cp,I,7 301.56 cm,I,7 300.83 cm,7 61.74 ----0.00 1 6 1 0 0 No No 0.1 vc,II,8 723.00 tc,II,8 cp,II,7 510.18 cm,II,7 336.98 cm,8 #VALUE! MAJOR MINOR vc,I,10 tc,I,10 cp,I,8 cm,I,8 cm,10 EB NB vc,II,10 tc,II,10 cp,II,8 cm,II,8 cm,11WBvc,I,11 tc,I,11 cp,I,10 cm,I,10 vc,II,11 tc,II,11 cp,II,10 cm,II,104cp,I,11 cm,I,11 FALSE cp,II,11 cm,II,11 FALSE y7 0.88 cT,7 172.55 y8 cT,8 y10 cT,10 y11 cT,11 p0,1 1.00 p0,4 0.66 a 0.91 p*0,1 0.99 p0,8 0.00 p0,9 0.71 p*0,4 0.60 p0,11 1.00 p0,12 1.00 p"7 0.659 p'7 0.74 fp,7 0.74 p"10 p'10 #VALUE!fp,10 #VALUE! x1i,1+2 0.56 x4i,1+2 0.16 Through Right f8 0.66 f11 0.66 f7 0.66 f10 0.66 fI,8 1.00 fII,8 0.66 p0,I,8 1.00 fI,11 0.66 fII,11 1.00 p0,I,11 1.00 fI,7 1.00 fII,7 0.66 fI.10 0.66 fII.10 0.71 Saturation Flow Rates 212.48 0.00 No Two-Stage Movement Capacities Single-Stage Movement Capacities V/C Not Reported for Any Movements? Two-Stage Potential Capacities Movement Capacities Movement V/C One storage space in median (nm = 1) for two-stage turns*Assumption: Rank 1800 1500 144 0 vph vph 0 0 vph 0 1 1 34 0289vph0Shared ? No217 1 Stop-controlled approachesNumber of Lanes1004No 2Number of Lanes 0 Shared ?vph00Stop-controlled approachesvph01SNumber of LanesStop-controlled approachesvph vph vph 0 0 vph1 1 0 0 Shared ?30Frederick Middle School 2025 Total Future AM Peak Critical Lane Volume Sum Yes Approach Stop Controlled? Gainesboro Road VOLUME / CAPACITY RATIO: N Date:November 1, 2022 EW Facility:US Route 522 < 1200 1200 - 1399 1400 - 1599 ≥ 1600 NS Facility: W E Conflict Type Count Crossing 16 Total 32 Diverging 1 Diverging 8 48 Conflict Type Weight Weighted Total Conflict Points Crossing 2 Merging 8 Merging 1 Safety - Conflict Point Diagram Assumptions Approach Stop Controlled? Yes Yes Yes Shared ? Note: This diagram does not reflect the actual lane configuration of the intersection Shared ?2Mvmt 1, shared left vph● This worksheet does not use the CLV methodology. The calculaGons are based on the HCM, 6th Edition. The calculations are based on vehicles per hour. HCM 6 CALCULATIONS Step 1: Identify which approaches are stop- controlled by selecting "Yes" from the drop-down Step 2: Enter the lane configurations in the yellow cells. Approach Stop Controlled? No 0.84 No Shared ? Shared ? No No One or two-stage minor street left and through movments*?10 1 0Stop-controlled approaches Mvmt 4, shared left Mvmt 7, 4-leg Mvmt 10, 4-leg No Approach Stop Controlled? One NS Major? Major street lanes M1 Shared? M4 Shared? Mvmt 1, excl left Mvmt 4, excl left FALSE Number of Lanes 000vphShared ? No Two StageOne StageTwo-Way Stop Control (TWSC)Two-Way Stop Control (TWSC)Two-Way Stop Control (TWSC) Intersection V/C 0.84 Shared Movement Capacities Movement Capacities Potential Capacities Follow-Up HeadwaysCritical HeadwaysConflicting FlowsPriority Flow Rates Lanes Shared? Stop controlled?Truck % DESIGN AND RESULTS DATA INPUT AND CONFIGURATION Project Name: Zone5 Backto Results VDOT JUNCTION SCREENING TOOL Ver 1.0 12 124 Project Title: E-W Facility: N-S Facility: Date: Through Right Eastbound 500 2 12.00% Westbound 942 6.00% Northbound 47 2.00% Southbound 0.00% Adjustment Factor 0.80 0.95 0.85 Suggested U - 0.8 L - 0.95 0.85 Through Right Approach Eastbound 560 2 569 Westbound 999 0 1172 Northbound 0 48 117 Southbound 0 0 0 November 1, 2022 Equivalent Passenger Car Volume Volume (pc/hr) Traffic Volume Demand Truck Percent (%) Truck to PCE Factor Critical Lane Volume Suggested = 2.00 Direction 1 truck = X Passenger Car Equivalents Conversion of U-turning vehicles to equivalent through vehicles Truck to PCE Factor 1600 VDOT Junction Screening Tool Input Worksheet Frederick Middle School 2025 Total Future PM Peak US Route 522 Gainesboro Road Volume (veh/hr) 2.00 U-Turn / Left Notes: U-turn Adjustment Factor Conversion of left-turning vehicles to equivalent through vehicles 6 163 68 U-Turn / Left Critical Lane Volume Sum Limit Right-turn Adjustment Factor Conversion of right-turning vehicles to equivalent through vehicles Left-turn Adjustment Factor Saturation value for critical lane volume sum at an intersection 0 7 173 69 1 125 #Intersections Information Consider?Justification 1 Conventional -Y 2 Bowtie Link N Not feasible for roadway facility type 3 Center Turn Overpass Link N Not feasible for roadway facility type 4 Continuous Green-T Link Y 5 Echelon Link N Not feasible for roadway facility type 6 Full Displaced Left Turn Link N Not feasible for roadway facility type 7 Median U-Turn Link Y 8 Partial Displaced Left Turn Link N Not feasible for roadway facility type 9 Partial Median U-Turn Link Y 10 Quadrant Roadway N-E Link N Not feasible for roadway facility type 11 Quadrant Roadway N-W Link N Not feasible for roadway facility type 12 Quadrant Roadway S-E Link N Not feasible for roadway facility type 13 Quadrant Roadway S-W Link N Not feasible for roadway facility type 14 Restricted Crossing U-Turn Link Y 15 Single Loop Link N Not feasible for roadway facility type 16 Split Intersection Link N Not feasible for roadway facility type 17 Thru-Cut Link N Not feasible for roadway facility type 18 50 Mini Roundabout Link N Not feasible for roadway facility type 19 75 Mini Roundabout Link N Not feasible for roadway facility type 20 Roundabout Link Y 21 Two-Way Stop Control -Y #Interchanges Information Consider?Justification 22 Traditional Diamond Link N Not feasible for roadway facility type 23 Contraflow Left Link N Not feasible for roadway facility type 24 Displaced Left Turn Link N Not feasible for roadway facility type 25 Diverging Diamond Link N Not feasible for roadway facility type 26 Double Roundabout Link N Not feasible for roadway facility type 27 Michigan Urban Diamond Link N Not feasible for roadway facility type 28 Partial Cloverleaf Link N Not feasible for roadway facility type 29 Single Point Link N Not feasible for roadway facility type 30 Single Roundabout Link N Not feasible for roadway facility type Indicate with a "Y" or "N" if each intersection or interchange configuration should or should not be considered. Use the information links for guidance. Then, click the "Show/Hide Configurations button" to hide the worksheets for the configurations that will not be considered. Possible Configurations VDOT Junction Screening Tool Signalized Intersections Unsignalized Intersections 2 126 Intersections Direction TwoDirList FourDirList EchelonList TwoDirList TwoDirList TwoDirList TwoDirList SingleLoopList TwoDirList TwoDirList TwoDirList Interchanges Direction TwoDirList Base Number of Through Lanes Enter a base number of through lanes for each direction. The number of through lanes entered will populate on each non-roundabout lane configuration worksheet. This tool also allows the user to enter the number of through lanes on the lane configuration worksheets directly. This base number may be overwritten on individual lane configuration worksheets. Turn lanes, shared lanes, and channelized lanes must still be entered in each lane configuration worksheet. Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound 1 1 2 2 N/A N/A N/A Question N/A N/A N/A EB-WB N/A EB-WB EB-WB N/A Select the roadway with the U-turns from the drop-down list. Select the roadway with the U-turns from the drop-down list. N/A All Bowtie Continuous Green-T Echelon Median U-Turn Partial Displaced Left Turn Thru-Cut Single Loop Split Intersection Select the roadway with the U-turns from the drop-down list. N/A Partial Median U-Turn Restricted Crossing U-Turn N/AN/A VDOT Junction Screening Tool Directional Questions and Base Lane Configurations Before entering a base number of through lanes for each direction, answer all applicable directional question for each intersection or interchange configuration selected for consideration. Navigate to the lane configuration worksheet for example diagrams, if provided. N/A NB Question N/A Select the direction associated with the "stem" of the T- intersection from the drop-down list. See example diagrams. 3 127 U-Turn / Left Through Right 6 500 2 163 942 0 68 0 47 0 0 0 Volumes (veh/hr) Eastbound Northbound Westbound Southbound VDOT Junction Screening Tool Results Worksheet Intersection Results Project Title: EW Facility: NS Facility: Date: General Information Frederick Middle School 2025 Total Future PM Peak US Route 522 Gainesboro Road November 1, 2022 General Instructions: All intersection and interchange configurations have a default assumption of one exclusive lane per movement. No results shall be interpreted until the user has verified the lane configurations on each worksheet.CongestionPedestrianSafetyNotes Type Dir Maximum V/C Accommodation Compared to Conventional Weighted Total Conflict Points Conventional -0.31 48 Continuous Green-T -0.37 - 12* Median U-Turn -0.47 + 20 Partial Median U-Turn -0.31 + 28 Restricted Crossing U-Turn -0.33 20 Roundabout -0.53 8 Two-Way Stop Control -0.60 48 *The continuous green-T is the only three-legged innovative intersection in this tool. To compare the continuous green-T to other innovative intersections, conflicts corresponding with the fourth leg must be removed. This has been done for the conventional intersection. Conflict point diagrams for three-legged and four-legged conventional intersections have been provided on the conventional intersection worksheet for reference. 4 128 Interchange ResultsCongestionPedestrianSafety Notes Type Dir Maximum V/C Accommodation Compared to Traditional Diamond Weighted Total Conflict Points Congestion Pedestrian Safety Information The maximum v/c ratio represents the worst v/c of all zones that make up an intersection. Compares the potential of each design to accommodate pedestrians based on safety, wayfinding, and delay. Potential is qualitatively defined as better (+), similar (blank cell), or worse (-) than a conventional intersection or traditional diamond interchange. Weighted Total = (2 x Crossing Conflicts) + Merging Conflicts + Diverging Conflicts 5 129 Conventional Conventional EW Split?FALSE NS Split?FALSE NS Facility:Gainesboro Road VOLUME / CAPACITY RATIO:0.31 N DESIGN AND RESULTS DATA INPUT AND CONFIGURATION Project Name:Frederick Middle School 2025 Total Future PM Peak Critical Lane Volume Sum Date:November 1, 2022 EW Facility:US Route 522 < 1200 1200 - 1399 1400 - 1599 ≥ 1600 No Shared ? Shared ? No No SB Critical Vol 0 Channelized w/ Rcv Lane? Enter the lane configurations in the yellow cells. S Channelized w/ Rcv Lane? Shared ? W E No 0.31 V / C 500 pcph pcph pcph 0 0 0 0pcphNo 0 0 0 EB Critical Vol 500 Yes Shared ?pcph00No Channelized w/ Rcv Lane?1No Shared ?pcph21pcph588999pcph0Shared ? No 0 125 02500 1730 0 0 pcph1 Merging 1 Diverging 1 Weighted Total Conflict Points 48 Safety - Conflict Point Diagram (Three Legs) Weighted Total Conflict Points 12 Diverging 3 Total 9 Conflict Type Weight Crossing 2 Merging 1 Diverging Conflict Type Total Note: This diagram does not reflect the actual lane configuration of the intersection Safety - Conflict Point Diagram Weight Crossing 2 Conflict Type Count Crossing Merging Diverging 16 8 8 32 WB Critical Vol 476 NB Critical Vol 0 Conflict Type Count Crossing 3 Merging 3 Yes Yes Channelized w/ Rcv Lane? pcph pcph pcph Shared ? Shared ? No 2Zone 5 Zone 5 Back to Results VDOT JUNCTION SCREENING TOOL Ver 1.0 6 130 NB 3 Weighted Total Conflict Points 12 Diverging 1 E S Merging 1 Crossing 2 North arrow directions will appear once the directional question has been answered on the Input Worksheet. Channelized w/ Rcv Lane? 5000.37 V / C WeightConflict Type N W Total 9 0.31 V / C 591 Note: This diagram does not reflect the actual lane configuration of the intersection Safety - Conflict Point Diagram Conflict Type Count Crossing 3 Merging 3 Diverging 0 Shared ?1Yes 0 129 0 pcph pcph pcph 591 173pcph2999pcph1NS Split? US Route 522 < 1200 TRUE WB Critical Vol 462pcph0EW Split?pcph5602DESIGN AND RESULTS DATA INPUT AND CONFIGURATION NS Facility:Gainesboro Road VOLUME / CAPACITY RATIO:0.37Date:November 1, 2022 Project Name:Frederick Middle School 2025 Total Future PM Peak Critical Lane Volume Sum EW Facility:1200 - 1399 1400 - 1599 ≥ 1600 Step 1: Enter the lane configurations in the yellow cells. Continuous Green Movement V/C WB FALSE 0.31 Continuous Green-T Intersection Continuous Green-T Intersection NB Critical Vol 129 No Channelized w/ Rcv Lane? EB Critical Vol 0 pcph0pcph2No NB EB Shared ? 0 No Zone 5 Zone 5 Back to Results Continuous Green Movement VDOT JUNCTION SCREENING TOOL Ver 1.0 7 131 EB-WB pcphDESIGN AND RESULTS DATA INPUT AND CONFIGURATION Project Name:Frederick Middle School 2025 Total Future PM Peak Critical Lane Volume Sum EW Facility:US Route 522 Enter the lane configurations in the yellow cells. SB Critical Vol 621 001 2 Control Type (Zone 1) Unsignalized pcph 175 567 pcph Median U-Turn Intersection Median U-Turn Intersection W -- 0.19 V / C S N E NS Facility: < 1200 1200 - 1399 1400 - 1599 ≥ 1600 Gainesboro Road VOLUME / CAPACITY RATIO:0.47 560 Date:November 1, 2022 North arrow directions will appear once the directional question has been answered on the Input Worksheet. -- 0.47 V / C 2 0pcph481Zone 5 must be signalized759 Note: This diagram does not reflect the actual lane configuration of the intersection pcphpcph00759 -- pcph --76 0.31 V / C 1 NB Channelized w/ Rcv Lane? Shared ? No No 2 Channelized w/ Rcv Lane?pcph999 pcphpcph pcph WB Shared ? FALSE 173 0 0FALSE 1241 7 No No pcph 20 WB EB Shared ? Channelized w/ Rcv Lane? No No SB pcph pcph 2 7 2 Channelized w/ Rcv Lane? No Shared ?EBNo pcph 1 173 pcph Diverging 1 Conflict Type Weight Safety - Conflict Point Diagram Conflict Type Count Crossing 4 Merging 6 Diverging 6 Total 16 Crossing 2 Merging 1 Weighted Total Conflict Points Assumptions ● This worksheet uses the CLV methodology for calculaHons at signalized zones. These calculations are based on passenger cars per hour. ● This worksheet uses the HCM, 6th Edition methodology for calculations at unsignalized zones. These calculations are based on vehicles per hour. Control Type (Zone 2) Unsignalized WB Critical Vol 138 NB Critical Vol 284 EB Critical Vol 0 NS Split?00pcphpcph69EW Split? Zone 5 Zone 1 Zone 2 Zone 2 Zone 1 Zone 5 Back to Results VDOT JUNCTION SCREENING TOOL Ver 1.0 8 132 EB-WB Partial Median U-Turn Intersection Patrial Median U-Turn Intersection E pcph00pcph12500.31 V / C 1 173 pcph Zone 5 must be signalized Channelized w/ Rcv Lane? No Shared ?EBNo Crossing 2 Merging 1 1172 7 pcph pcph 999 0 -- pcph --7 0.31 V / C 1 EB Critical Vol Control Type (Zone 2) Unsignalized Assumptions ● This worksheet uses the CLV methodology for calculaHons at signalized zones. These calculations are based on passenger cars per hour. Diverging 1 North arrow directions will appear once the directional question has been answered on the Input Worksheet. Weighted Total Conflict Points 28 pcphpcph Note: This diagram does not reflect the actual lane configuration of the intersection Safety - Conflict Point Diagram Conflict Type Count Crossing 6 Merging 8 Diverging 8 Total 22 Conflict Type Weight 586 0.19 V / C Control Type (Zone 1) Unsignalized -- WB 2 WB Shared ? No No Channelized w/ Rcv Lane? 284 EW Split?FALSE NS Split?FALSE NB Critical Vol 0 pcph 173 -- pcphpcph pcph 2 7 2Date:November 1, 2022 560 WB Critical Vol DESIGN AND RESULTS DATA INPUT AND CONFIGURATION Project Name:Frederick Middle School 2025 Total Future PM Peak Critical Lane Volume Sum EW Facility:US Route 522 EB Enter the lane configurations in the yellow cells.< 1200 1200 - 1399 1400 - 1599 ≥ 1600 NS Facility:Gainesboro Road VOLUME / CAPACITY RATIO:0.31 W S N pcphChannelized w/ Rcv Lane? No No SB NB Channelized w/ Rcv Lane? Shared ? No Yes pcph0000Shared ? Yes Shared ? No 0 ● This worksheet uses the HCM, 6th Edition methodology for calculations at unsignalized zones. These calculations are based on vehicles per hour. Shared ? pcph pcph 175 567 0pcph000pcph1 2 NB Critical Vol 586 586 2 0 Zone 5 Zone 1 Zone 2 Zone 2 Zone 1 Zone 5 Back to Results VDOT JUNCTION SCREENING TOOL Ver 1.0 9 133 EB-WB pcph --69 1-- 2 173 999 0 pcph pcph Signalized Control Type (Zones 3 + 4) Control Type (Zone 2) Unsignalized Channelized w/ Rcv Lane? 534 1 EB Critical Vol 0 NB Critical Vol 462pcph pcph NB 1 Crossing Note: This diagram does not reflect the actual lane configuration of the intersection 2 462 0.29 V / C pcphChannelized w/ Rcv Lane? No Conflict Type Weight Assumptions ● This worksheet uses the CLV methodology for calculaHons at signalized zones. These calculations are based on passenger cars per hour. ● This worksheet uses the HCM, 6th Edition methodology for calculations at unsignalized zones. These calculations are based on vehicles per hour.1Unsignalized 1 2 WB 0.31 V / C Safety - Conflict Point Diagram Conflict Type Count Crossing 2 Merging 8 Diverging 8 Total 18 20 Diverging 1 Weighted Total Conflict Points Merging pcph Date:November 1, 2022 2 0.33 V / C S N E North arrow directions will appear once the directional question has been answered on the Input Worksheet.Shared ? Channelized w/ Rcv Lane? EB 534 -- -- 0.14 V / C No W No Control Type (Zone 1) 0 0 DESIGN AND RESULTS DATA INPUT AND CONFIGURATION Project Name:Frederick Middle School 2025 Total Future PM Peak Critical Lane Volume Sum EW Facility:US Route 522 < 1200 1200 - 1399 1400 - 1599 ≥ 1600 Enter the lane configurations in the yellow cells. NS Facility: EB Gainesboro Road VOLUME / CAPACITY RATIO:0.33 pcph 2 560 7 0 pcph pcph pcph SB Critical Vol 534 Channelized w/ Rcv Lane?0pcphpcph Restricted Crossing U-Turn (RCUT) Intersection Restricted Crossing U-Turn (RCUT) Intersection No 00pcph0pcphpcph pcph 560 7 2 Shared ?48pcph0462 SB No WB Critical Vol 0 0 173 1068 0 pcph WB No pcph 2 69Zone 3 Zone 1 Zone 2 Zone 4 Zone 2 Zone 1 Zone 3 Zone 4 Back to Results VDOT JUNCTION SCREENING TOOL Ver 1.0 10 134 1 0 0 1 ● The number of circulaHng lanes in one quadrant is assumed to be equal to the number of exiting lanes in the next quadrant. ● The roundabout is limited to a maximum of two entry lanes and two circulating lanes. ● All leI-turning vehicles are assumed to stay in the innermost lane unHl exiting the roundabout. ● This worksheet does not use the CLV methodology. The calculaHons are based on the HCM 6th Edition . Predicted approach capacity Predicted approach capacity Slip Lane? No Predicted approach capacity Lane 2 0.38 EBSafety - Conflict Point Diagram Conflict Type Count Crossing 0 Merging 8 Conflict Type Weight Crossing Lane 1 0.25 W E S Predicted approach capacity Lane 1 Lane 2 V/C0.23 V/C Lane 2 Lane 1 0.53 V/C Lane 2 V/C V/C V/C Lane 1 0.13 V/C Frederick Middle School 2025 Total Future PM Peak Critical Lane Volume Sum Gainesboro Road V/C November 1, 2022 VOLUME / CAPACITY RATIO: 0.53 N 0 WB2 Total 8 Slip Lane? Assumptions SB Number of Entry Lanes Weighted Total Conflict Points Merging Diverging 1 1 Diverging 4 4 Number of Circulating Lanes 2 pcph7Slip Lane? Number of Entry Lanes 2 Number of Circulating Lanes Number of Entry Lanes 173pcphpcph 0 2 0 0 pcph pcph DESIGN AND RESULTS DATA INPUT AND CONFIGURATION CAPACITY CALCULATIONS 0.50 Lane Capacity EW Facility:US Route 522 < 1200 1200 - 1399 1400 - 1599 ≥ 1600 10pcphThrough lane utilization factor 999pcphProject Name: NS Facility: Enter the lane configurations in the yellow cells. Date: 2 pcph pcph V/C RATIOV/C RATIO500 0SB WB500Conflicting flow 1730173500pcphNo Number of Circulating Lanes 2 pcph282V/C RATIO 0.231259133110.53V/C RATIO 673pcphConflicting flow760120.38V/C RATIO 12 1 Conflicting flowNumber of Circulating LanesNo Slip Lane? 2 Through lane utilization factor7Number of Entry Lanes pcph287V/C RATIONo 2 1 0.502pcph280Conflicting flow 280 EBLane Capacity12261151V/C RATIO 0.25pcph56069 0 48 877 69 pcph pcph pcph pcph2Number of Entry Lanes Number of Circulating Lanes Lane A B 1 1 -1380 0.00102 1420 0.00085-21 2 1 NB 287 Through lane utilization factor 0.00091 0.000911420Right12 Lane Capacity 0.50 48 12 28021Lane Capacity742 1 2 2 Left 1350 25000.50Through lane utilization factorLeft 1420 Roundabout Roundabout Roundabout EQUATION: A x exp(-B x Q) 0 0.13 117 pcphV/C RATIONB 0.00092 0.000851420Right2 2 Zone 1 Zone 3 Zone 2 Zone 4 Back to Results VDOT JUNCTION SCREENING TOOL Ver 1.0 11 135 Priority MVMT Rank 1 EBL 2 1 2 6 0 No 0.12 vc,1 942.00 tc,1 4.34 tf,1 2.32 cp,1 664.95 cm,1 664.95 1 664.95 1 0.01 2 EBT 1 4 2 163 1 No 0.06 vc,4 502.00 tc,4 4.22 tf,4 2.26 cp,4 1031.02 cm,4 1031.02 2 3600.00 2 0.14 3 EBR 1 7 3 68 0 Yes Yes 0.02 vc,7 1309.00 tc,7 6.84 tf,7 3.52 cp,7 150.77 cm,7 125.79 1 3 1500.00 3 0.00 4 WBL 2 8 0 0 vc,8 tc,8 tf,8 cp,8 cm,8 0 4 1031.02 4 0.16 5 WBT 1 9 2 47 0 Yes Yes 0.02 vc,9 250.00 tc,9 6.94 tf,9 3.32 cp,9 749.83 cm,9 749.83 1 5 3600.00 5 0.26 6 WBR 1 10 0 0 0 vc,10 tc,10 tf,10 cp,10 cm,10 0 6 0.00 6 0.00 7 NBL 3 11 0 0 vc,11 tc,11 tf,11 cp,11 cm,11 0 -------- NBT 0 12 0 0 0 vc,12 0.00 tc,12 tf,12 cp,12 cm,12 0 7-8-9 190.62 7-8-9 0.60 9 NBR 2 -------- SBL 0 2 1 500 2 0.12 vc,I,7 512.00 tc,I,7 5.84 ----0.00 SBT 0 3 1 2 1 No No 0.12 vc,II,7 797.00 tc,II,7 5.84 11 11 0.00 Stops SBR 0 5 1 942 2 0.06 vc,I,8 512.00 tc,I,8 cp,I,7 566.54 cm,I,7 561.42 cm,7 125.79 ----0.00 1 6 1 0 0 No No 0.06 vc,II,8 1268.00 tc,II,8 cp,II,7 404.15 cm,II,7 340.26 cm,8 #VALUE! MAJOR MINOR vc,I,10 tc,I,10 cp,I,8 cm,I,8 cm,10 EB NB vc,II,10 tc,II,10 cp,II,8 cm,II,8 cm,11WBvc,I,11 tc,I,11 cp,I,10 cm,I,10 vc,II,11 tc,II,11 cp,II,10 cm,II,104cp,I,11 cm,I,11 FALSE cp,II,11 cm,II,11 FALSE y7 2.09 cT,7 243.52 y8 cT,8 y10 cT,10 y11 cT,11 p0,1 0.99 p0,4 0.84 a 0.91 p*0,1 0.99 p0,8 0.00 p0,9 0.94 p*0,4 0.67 p0,11 1.00 p0,12 1.00 p"7 0.834 p'7 0.87 fp,7 0.87 p"10 p'10 #VALUE!fp,10 #VALUE! x1i,1+2 0.28 x4i,1+2 0.52 Through Right f8 0.83 f11 0.83 f7 0.83 f10 0.83 fI,8 0.99 fII,8 0.84 p0,I,8 1.00 fI,11 0.84 fII,11 0.99 p0,I,11 1.00 fI,7 0.99 fII,7 0.84 fI.10 0.84 fII.10 0.93Two StageOne StageTwo-Way Stop Control (TWSC)Two-Way Stop Control (TWSC)Two-Way Stop Control (TWSC) Intersection V/C 0.60 Shared Movement Capacities Movement Capacities Potential Capacities Follow-Up HeadwaysCritical HeadwaysConflicting FlowsPriority Flow Rates Lanes Shared? Stop controlled?Truck % DESIGN AND RESULTS DATA INPUT AND CONFIGURATION Project Name:0Stop-controlled approaches Mvmt 4, shared left Mvmt 7, 4-leg Mvmt 10, 4-leg No Approach Stop Controlled? One NS Major? Major street lanes M1 Shared? M4 Shared? Mvmt 1, excl left Mvmt 4, excl left FALSE Number of Lanes 000vphShared ? No 2Mvmt 1, shared left vph● This worksheet does not use the CLV methodology. The calculaHons are based on the HCM, 6th Edition. The calculations are based on vehicles per hour. HCM 6 CALCULATIONS Step 1: Identify which approaches are stop- controlled by selecting "Yes" from the drop-down Step 2: Enter the lane configurations in the yellow cells. Approach Stop Controlled? No 0.60 No Shared ? Shared ? No No One or two-stage minor street left and through movments*?10 1 Safety - Conflict Point Diagram Assumptions Approach Stop Controlled? Yes Yes Yes Shared ? Note: This diagram does not reflect the actual lane configuration of the intersection Shared ? Conflict Type Count Crossing 16 Total 32 Diverging 1 Diverging 8 48 Conflict Type Weight Weighted Total Conflict Points Crossing 2 Merging 8 Merging 1 Frederick Middle School 2025 Total Future PM Peak Critical Lane Volume Sum Yes Approach Stop Controlled? Gainesboro Road VOLUME / CAPACITY RATIO: N Date:November 1, 2022 EW Facility:US Route 522 < 1200 1200 - 1399 1400 - 1599 ≥ 1600 NS Facility: W E S Number of LanesStop-controlled approachesvph vph vph 0 0 vph1 1 0 0 Shared ?600Shared ? No163 1 Stop-controlled approachesNumber of Lanes500No 2Number of Lanes 0 Shared ?vph20Stop-controlled approachesvph01 Movement Capacities Movement V/C One storage space in median (nm = 1) for two-stage turns*Assumption: Rank 1800 1500 47 0 vph vph 0 0 vph 0 1 1 68 0942vphSaturation Flow Rates 190.62 0.00 No Two-Stage Movement Capacities Single-Stage Movement Capacities V/C Not Reported for Any Movements? Two-Stage Potential Capacities Zone5 Backto Results VDOT JUNCTION SCREENING TOOL Ver 1.0 12 136 Project Title: E-W Facility: N-S Facility: Date: Through Right Eastbound 443 1 12.00% Westbound 750 10.00% Northbound 48 18.00% Southbound 0.00% Adjustment Factor 0.80 0.95 0.85 Suggested U - 0.8 L - 0.95 0.85 Through Right Approach Eastbound 496 1 505 Westbound 825 0 969 Northbound 0 57 162 Southbound 0 0 0 7 131 89 U-Turn / Left Critical Lane Volume Sum Limit Right-turn Adjustment Factor Conversion of right-turning vehicles to equivalent through vehicles Left-turn Adjustment Factor Saturation value for critical lane volume sum at an intersection 0 8 144 105 1 truck = X Passenger Car Equivalents Conversion of U-turning vehicles to equivalent through vehicles Truck to PCE Factor 1600 VDOT Junction Screening Tool Input Worksheet Frederick Middle School 2025 Total Future School PM Peak US Route 522 Gainesboro Road Volume (veh/hr) 2.00 U-Turn / Left Notes: U-turn Adjustment Factor Conversion of left-turning vehicles to equivalent through vehicles November 1, 2022 Equivalent Passenger Car Volume Volume (pc/hr) Traffic Volume Demand Truck Percent (%) Truck to PCE Factor Critical Lane Volume Suggested = 2.00 Direction 1 137 #Intersections Information Consider?Justification 1 Conventional -Y 2 Bowtie Link N Not feasible for roadway facility type 3 Center Turn Overpass Link N Not feasible for roadway facility type 4 Continuous Green-T Link Y 5 Echelon Link N Not feasible for roadway facility type 6 Full Displaced Left Turn Link N Not feasible for roadway facility type 7 Median U-Turn Link Y 8 Partial Displaced Left Turn Link N Not feasible for roadway facility type 9 Partial Median U-Turn Link Y 10 Quadrant Roadway N-E Link N Not feasible for roadway facility type 11 Quadrant Roadway N-W Link N Not feasible for roadway facility type 12 Quadrant Roadway S-E Link N Not feasible for roadway facility type 13 Quadrant Roadway S-W Link N Not feasible for roadway facility type 14 Restricted Crossing U-Turn Link Y 15 Single Loop Link N Not feasible for roadway facility type 16 Split Intersection Link N Not feasible for roadway facility type 17 Thru-Cut Link N Not feasible for roadway facility type 18 50 Mini Roundabout Link N Not feasible for roadway facility type 19 75 Mini Roundabout Link N Not feasible for roadway facility type 20 Roundabout Link Y 21 Two-Way Stop Control -Y #Interchanges Information Consider?Justification 22 Traditional Diamond Link N Not feasible for roadway facility type 23 Contraflow Left Link N Not feasible for roadway facility type 24 Displaced Left Turn Link N Not feasible for roadway facility type 25 Diverging Diamond Link N Not feasible for roadway facility type 26 Double Roundabout Link N Not feasible for roadway facility type 27 Michigan Urban Diamond Link N Not feasible for roadway facility type 28 Partial Cloverleaf Link N Not feasible for roadway facility type 29 Single Point Link N Not feasible for roadway facility type 30 Single Roundabout Link N Not feasible for roadway facility type Unsignalized Intersections Indicate with a "Y" or "N" if each intersection or interchange configuration should or should not be considered. Use the information links for guidance. Then, click the "Show/Hide Configurations button" to hide the worksheets for the configurations that will not be considered. Possible Configurations VDOT Junction Screening Tool Signalized Intersections 2 138 Intersections Direction TwoDirList FourDirList EchelonList TwoDirList TwoDirList TwoDirList TwoDirList SingleLoopList TwoDirList TwoDirList TwoDirList Interchanges Direction TwoDirList N/AN/A VDOT Junction Screening Tool Directional Questions and Base Lane Configurations Before entering a base number of through lanes for each direction, answer all applicable directional question for each intersection or interchange configuration selected for consideration. Navigate to the lane configuration worksheet for example diagrams, if provided. N/A NB Question N/A Select the direction associated with the "stem" of the T- intersection from the drop-down list. See example diagrams. Select the roadway with the U-turns from the drop-down list. Select the roadway with the U-turns from the drop-down list. N/A All Bowtie Continuous Green-T Echelon Median U-Turn Partial Displaced Left Turn Thru-Cut Single Loop Split Intersection Select the roadway with the U-turns from the drop-down list. N/A Partial Median U-Turn Restricted Crossing U-Turn EB-WB N/A EB-WB EB-WB N/A N/A N/A N/A Question N/A N/A N/A Southbound 1 1 2 2 Base Number of Through Lanes Enter a base number of through lanes for each direction. The number of through lanes entered will populate on each non-roundabout lane configuration worksheet. This tool also allows the user to enter the number of through lanes on the lane configuration worksheets directly. This base number may be overwritten on individual lane configuration worksheets. Turn lanes, shared lanes, and channelized lanes must still be entered in each lane configuration worksheet. Eastbound Westbound Northbound 3 139 U-Turn / Left Through Right 7 443 1 131 750 0 89 0 48 0 0 0 Frederick Middle School 2025 Total Future School PM Peak US Route 522 Gainesboro Road November 1, 2022 General Instructions: All intersection and interchange configurations have a default assumption of one exclusive lane per movement. No results shall be interpreted until the user has verified the lane configurations on each worksheet. VDOT Junction Screening Tool Results Worksheet Intersection Results Project Title: EW Facility: NS Facility: Date: General Information Volumes (veh/hr) Eastbound Northbound Westbound Southbound CongestionPedestrianSafetyNotes Type Dir Maximum V/C Accommodation Compared to Conventional Weighted Total Conflict Points Conventional -0.26 48 Continuous Green-T -0.36 - 12* Median U-Turn -0.46 + 20 Partial Median U-Turn -0.24 + 28 Restricted Crossing U-Turn -0.29 20 Roundabout -0.46 8 Two-Way Stop Control -0.62 48 *The continuous green-T is the only three-legged innovative intersection in this tool. To compare the continuous green-T to other innovative intersections, conflicts corresponding with the fourth leg must be removed. This has been done for the conventional intersection. Conflict point diagrams for three-legged and four-legged conventional intersections have been provided on the conventional intersection worksheet for reference. 4 140 Interchange ResultsCongestionPedestrianSafety Notes Type Dir Maximum V/C Accommodation Compared to Traditional Diamond Weighted Total Conflict Points Congestion Pedestrian Safety Information The maximum v/c ratio represents the worst v/c of all zones that make up an intersection. Compares the potential of each design to accommodate pedestrians based on safety, wayfinding, and delay. Potential is qualitatively defined as better (+), similar (blank cell), or worse (-) than a conventional intersection or traditional diamond interchange. Weighted Total = (2 x Crossing Conflicts) + Merging Conflicts + Diverging Conflicts 5 141 WB Critical Vol 416 NB Critical Vol 0 Conflict Type Count Crossing 3 Merging 3 Yes Yes Channelized w/ Rcv Lane? pcph pcph pcph Shared ? Shared ? No 2Note: This diagram does not reflect the actual lane configuration of the intersection Safety - Conflict Point Diagram Weight Crossing 2 Conflict Type Count Crossing Merging Diverging 16 8 8 32 1 Merging 1 Diverging 1 Weighted Total Conflict Points 48 Safety - Conflict Point Diagram (Three Legs) Weighted Total Conflict Points 12 Diverging 3 Total 9 Conflict Type Weight Crossing 2 Merging 1 Diverging Conflict Type Total 825pcph0Shared ? No 0 172 02416 1440 0 0 pcphYes Shared ?pcph00No Channelized w/ Rcv Lane?1No Shared ?pcph11pcph528S Channelized w/ Rcv Lane? Shared ? W E No 0.26 V / C 416 pcph pcph pcph 0 0 0 0pcphNo 0 0 0 EB Critical Vol 413 1400 - 1599 ≥ 1600 No Shared ? Shared ? No No SB Critical Vol 0 Channelized w/ Rcv Lane? Enter the lane configurations in the yellow cells. Conventional Conventional EW Split?FALSE NS Split?FALSE NS Facility:Gainesboro Road VOLUME / CAPACITY RATIO:0.26 N DESIGN AND RESULTS DATA INPUT AND CONFIGURATION Project Name:Frederick Middle School 2025 Total Future School PM Peak Critical Lane Volume Sum Date:November 1, 2022 EW Facility:US Route 522 < 1200 1200 - 1399 Zone 5 Zone 5 Back to Results VDOT JUNCTION SCREENING TOOL Ver 1.0 6 142 NB Continuous Green-T Intersection Continuous Green-T Intersection NB Critical Vol 178 No Channelized w/ Rcv Lane? EB Critical Vol 0 pcph0pcph1No NB EB Shared ? 0 Nopcph4962DESIGN AND RESULTS DATA INPUT AND CONFIGURATION NS Facility:Gainesboro Road VOLUME / CAPACITY RATIO:0.36Date:November 1, 2022 Project Name:Frederick Middle School 2025 Total Future School PM Peak Critical Lane Volume Sum EW Facility:1200 - 1399 1400 - 1599 ≥ 1600 Step 1: Enter the lane configurations in the yellow cells. Continuous Green Movement V/C WB FALSE 0.26 NS Split? US Route 522 < 1200 TRUE WB Critical Vol 400pcph0EW Split? 578 144pcph2825pcph10 Shared ?1Yes 0 178 0 pcph pcph pcph Channelized w/ Rcv Lane? 4130.36 V / C WeightConflict Type N W Total 9 0.26 V / C 578 Note: This diagram does not reflect the actual lane configuration of the intersection Safety - Conflict Point Diagram Conflict Type Count Crossing 3 Merging 3 Diverging 3 Weighted Total Conflict Points 12 Diverging 1 E S Merging 1 Crossing 2 North arrow directions will appear once the directional question has been answered on the Input Worksheet. Zone 5 Zone 5 Back to Results Continuous Green Movement VDOT JUNCTION SCREENING TOOL Ver 1.0 7 143 EB-WB Assumptions ● This worksheet uses the CLV methodology for calculaGons at signalized zones. These calculations are based on passenger cars per hour. ● This worksheet uses the HCM, 6th Edition methodology for calculations at unsignalized zones. These calculations are based on vehicles per hour. Control Type (Zone 2) Unsignalized WB Critical Vol 191 NB Critical Vol 252 EB Critical Vol 0 NS Split?00pcphpcph105EW Split? pcph Diverging 1 Conflict Type Weight Safety - Conflict Point Diagram Conflict Type Count Crossing 4 Merging 6 Diverging 6 Total 16 Crossing 2 Merging 1 Weighted Total Conflict Points 20 WB EB Shared ? Channelized w/ Rcv Lane? No No SB pcph pcph 1 8 2 Channelized w/ Rcv Lane? No Shared ?EBNo pcph 1 144 2 Channelized w/ Rcv Lane?pcph825 pcphpcph pcph WB Shared ? FALSE 144 0 0FALSE 1074 8 No No pcph Note: This diagram does not reflect the actual lane configuration of the intersection pcphpcph00728 -- pcph --113 0.24 V / C 1 NB Channelized w/ Rcv Lane? Shared ? No No 0.46 V / C 2 0pcph571Zone 5 must be signalized728 Median U-Turn Intersection Median U-Turn Intersection W -- 0.15 V / C S N E NS Facility: < 1200 1200 - 1399 1400 - 1599 ≥ 1600 Gainesboro Road VOLUME / CAPACITY RATIO:0.46 496 Date:November 1, 2022 North arrow directions will appear once the directional question has been answered on the Input Worksheet. --pcphDESIGN AND RESULTS DATA INPUT AND CONFIGURATION Project Name:Frederick Middle School 2025 Total Future School PM Peak Critical Lane Volume Sum EW Facility:US Route 522 Enter the lane configurations in the yellow cells. SB Critical Vol 537 001 2 Control Type (Zone 1) Unsignalized pcph 145 504 pcph Zone 5 Zone 1 Zone 2 Zone 2 Zone 1 Zone 5 Back to Results VDOT JUNCTION SCREENING TOOL Ver 1.0 8 144 EB-WB ● This worksheet uses the HCM, 6th Edition methodology for calculations at unsignalized zones. These calculations are based on vehicles per hour. Shared ? pcph pcph 145 504 0pcph000pcph1 2 NB Critical Vol 485 485 2 0 pcphChannelized w/ Rcv Lane? No No SB NB Channelized w/ Rcv Lane? Shared ? No Yes pcph0000Shared ? Yes Shared ? No 0 WB Critical Vol DESIGN AND RESULTS DATA INPUT AND CONFIGURATION Project Name:Frederick Middle School 2025 Total Future School PM Peak Critical Lane Volume Sum EW Facility:US Route 522 EB Enter the lane configurations in the yellow cells.< 1200 1200 - 1399 1400 - 1599 ≥ 1600 NS Facility:Gainesboro Road VOLUME / CAPACITY RATIO:0.24 W S N -- pcphpcph pcph 1 8 2Date:November 1, 2022 496 0.15 V / C Control Type (Zone 1) Unsignalized -- WB 2 WB Shared ? No No Channelized w/ Rcv Lane? 252 EW Split?FALSE NS Split?FALSE NB Critical Vol 0 pcph 144 Diverging 1 North arrow directions will appear once the directional question has been answered on the Input Worksheet. Weighted Total Conflict Points 28 pcphpcph Note: This diagram does not reflect the actual lane configuration of the intersection Safety - Conflict Point Diagram Conflict Type Count Crossing 6 Merging 8 Diverging 8 Total 22 Conflict Type Weight 485 Crossing 2 Merging 1 969 8 pcph pcph 825 0 -- pcph --8 0.24 V / C 1 EB Critical Vol Control Type (Zone 2) Unsignalized Assumptions ● This worksheet uses the CLV methodology for calculaGons at signalized zones. These calculations are based on passenger cars per hour. Partial Median U-Turn Intersection Patrial Median U-Turn Intersection E pcph00pcph17200.24 V / C 1 144 pcph Zone 5 must be signalized Channelized w/ Rcv Lane? No Shared ?EBNo Zone 5 Zone 1 Zone 2 Zone 2 Zone 1 Zone 5 Back to Results VDOT JUNCTION SCREENING TOOL Ver 1.0 9 145 EB-WB Shared ?57pcph0439 SB No WB Critical Vol 0 0 144 930 0 pcph WB No pcph 2 105Channelized w/ Rcv Lane?0pcphpcph Restricted Crossing U-Turn (RCUT) Intersection Restricted Crossing U-Turn (RCUT) Intersection No 00pcph0pcphpcph pcph 496 8 2 pcph 1 496 8 0 pcph pcph pcph SB Critical Vol 465 0 0 DESIGN AND RESULTS DATA INPUT AND CONFIGURATION Project Name:Frederick Middle School 2025 Total Future School PM Peak Critical Lane Volume Sum EW Facility:US Route 522 < 1200 1200 - 1399 1400 - 1599 ≥ 1600 Enter the lane configurations in the yellow cells. NS Facility: EB Gainesboro Road VOLUME / CAPACITY RATIO:0.29 pcph Date:November 1, 2022 1 0.29 V / C S N E North arrow directions will appear once the directional question has been answered on the Input Worksheet.Shared ? Channelized w/ Rcv Lane? EB 465 -- -- 0.13 V / C No W No Control Type (Zone 1) Unsignalized 1 2 WB 0.24 V / C Safety - Conflict Point Diagram Conflict Type Count Crossing 2 Merging 8 Diverging 8 Total 18 20 Diverging 1 Weighted Total Conflict Points Merging 1 Crossing Note: This diagram does not reflect the actual lane configuration of the intersection 2 439 0.27 V / C pcphChannelized w/ Rcv Lane? No Conflict Type Weight Assumptions ● This worksheet uses the CLV methodology for calculaGons at signalized zones. These calculations are based on passenger cars per hour. ● This worksheet uses the HCM, 6th Edition methodology for calculations at unsignalized zones. These calculations are based on vehicles per hour.1pcph pcph Signalized Control Type (Zones 3 + 4) Control Type (Zone 2) Unsignalized Channelized w/ Rcv Lane? 465 1 EB Critical Vol 39 NB Critical Vol 400pcph pcph NB pcph --105 1-- 2 144 825 0 Zone 3 Zone 1 Zone 2 Zone 4 Zone 2 Zone 1 Zone 3 Zone 4 Back to Results VDOT JUNCTION SCREENING TOOL Ver 1.0 10 146 1 0 0 1 Roundabout Roundabout Roundabout EQUATION: A x exp(-B x Q) 0 0.18 162 pcphV/C RATIONB 0.00092 0.000851420Right2 2 Lane Capacity662 1 2 2 Left 1350 24130.50Through lane utilization factorLeft 1420 0.00091 0.000911420Right12 Lane Capacity 0.50 57 12 24821pcph1Number of Entry Lanes Number of Circulating Lanes Lane A B 1 1 -1380 0.00102 1420 0.00085-21 2 1 NB 256 Through lane utilization factorpcph496105057925 105 pcph pcph pcph pcph256V/C RATIONo 2 1 0.501pcph248Conflicting flow 248 EBLane Capacity12561182V/C RATIO 0.22Number of Circulating LanesNo Slip Lane? 2 Through lane utilization factor8Number of Entry Lanes pcph249V/C RATIO 0.201217129010.46V/C RATIO 557pcphConflicting flow1130120.32V/C RATIO 12 1 Conflicting flow0144413pcphNo Number of Circulating Lanes 2 413 0SB WB413Conflicting flow 1442 pcph pcph V/C RATIOV/C RATIODESIGN AND RESULTS DATA INPUT AND CONFIGURATION CAPACITY CALCULATIONS 0.50 Lane Capacity EW Facility:US Route 522 < 1200 1200 - 1399 1400 - 1599 ≥ 1600 10pcphThrough lane utilization factor 825pcphProject Name: NS Facility: Enter the lane configurations in the yellow cells. Date: Slip Lane? Number of Entry Lanes 2 Number of Circulating Lanes Number of Entry Lanes 144pcphpcph 0 2 0 0 pcph pcph WB2 Total 8 Slip Lane? Assumptions SB Number of Entry Lanes Weighted Total Conflict Points Merging Diverging 1 1 Diverging 4 4 Number of Circulating Lanes 2 pcph8Frederick Middle School 2025 Total Future School PM Peak Critical Lane Volume Sum Gainesboro Road V/C November 1, 2022 VOLUME / CAPACITY RATIO: 0.46 N 0 0.22 W E S Predicted approach capacity Lane 1 Lane 2 V/C0.20 V/C Lane 2 Lane 1 0.46 V/C Lane 2 V/C V/C V/C Lane 1 0.18 V/C ● The number of circulaGng lanes in one quadrant is assumed to be equal to the number of exiting lanes in the next quadrant. ● The roundabout is limited to a maximum of two entry lanes and two circulating lanes. ● All leI-turning vehicles are assumed to stay in the innermost lane unGl exiting the roundabout. ● This worksheet does not use the CLV methodology. The calculaGons are based on the HCM 6th Edition . Predicted approach capacity Predicted approach capacity Slip Lane? No Predicted approach capacity Lane 2 0.32 EBSafety - Conflict Point Diagram Conflict Type Count Crossing 0 Merging 8 Conflict Type Weight Crossing Lane 1 Zone 1 Zone 3 Zone 2 Zone 4 Back to Results VDOT JUNCTION SCREENING TOOL Ver 1.0 11 147 Priority MVMT Rank 1 EBL 2 1 2 7 0 No 0.12 vc,1 750.00 tc,1 4.34 tf,1 2.32 cp,1 792.27 cm,1 792.27 1 792.27 1 0.01 2 EBT 1 4 2 131 1 No 0.1 vc,4 444.00 tc,4 4.30 tf,4 2.30 cp,4 1057.78 cm,4 1057.78 2 3600.00 2 0.12 3 EBR 1 7 3 89 0 Yes Yes 0.18 vc,7 1094.00 tc,7 7.16 tf,7 3.68 cp,7 184.47 cm,7 160.20 1 3 1500.00 3 0.00 4 WBL 2 8 0 0 vc,8 tc,8 tf,8 cp,8 cm,8 0 4 1057.78 4 0.12 5 WBT 1 9 2 48 0 Yes Yes 0.18 vc,9 221.50 tc,9 7.26 tf,9 3.48 cp,9 735.18 cm,9 735.18 1 5 3600.00 5 0.21 6 WBR 1 10 0 0 0 vc,10 tc,10 tf,10 cp,10 cm,10 0 6 0.00 6 0.00 7 NBL 3 11 0 0 vc,11 tc,11 tf,11 cp,11 cm,11 0 -------- NBT 0 12 0 0 0 vc,12 0.00 tc,12 tf,12 cp,12 cm,12 0 7-8-9 220.67 7-8-9 0.62 9 NBR 2 -------- SBL 0 2 1 443 2 0.12 vc,I,7 457.00 tc,I,7 6.16 ----0.00 SBT 0 3 1 1 1 No No 0.12 vc,II,7 637.00 tc,II,7 6.16 11 11 0.00 Stops SBR 0 5 1 750 2 0.1 vc,I,8 457.00 tc,I,8 cp,I,7 560.20 cm,I,7 555.25 cm,7 160.20 ----0.00 1 6 1 0 0 No No 0.1 vc,II,8 1012.00 tc,II,8 cp,II,7 447.54 cm,II,7 392.12 cm,8 #VALUE! MAJOR MINOR vc,I,10 tc,I,10 cp,I,8 cm,I,8 cm,10 EB NB vc,II,10 tc,II,10 cp,II,8 cm,II,8 cm,11WBvc,I,11 tc,I,11 cp,I,10 cm,I,10 vc,II,11 tc,II,11 cp,II,10 cm,II,104cp,I,11 cm,I,11 FALSE cp,II,11 cm,II,11 FALSE y7 1.76 cT,7 277.05 y8 cT,8 y10 cT,10 y11 cT,11 p0,1 0.99 p0,4 0.88 a 0.91 p*0,1 0.99 p0,8 0.00 p0,9 0.93 p*0,4 0.79 p0,11 1.00 p0,12 1.00 p"7 0.868 p'7 0.90 fp,7 0.90 p"10 p'10 #VALUE!fp,10 #VALUE! x1i,1+2 0.25 x4i,1+2 0.42 Through Right f8 0.87 f11 0.87 f7 0.87 f10 0.87 fI,8 0.99 fII,8 0.88 p0,I,8 1.00 fI,11 0.88 fII,11 0.99 p0,I,11 1.00 fI,7 0.99 fII,7 0.88 fI.10 0.88 fII.10 0.93 Saturation Flow Rates 220.67 0.00 No Two-Stage Movement Capacities Single-Stage Movement Capacities V/C Not Reported for Any Movements? Two-Stage Potential Capacities Movement Capacities Movement V/C One storage space in median (nm = 1) for two-stage turns*Assumption: Rank 1800 1500 48 0 vph vph 0 0 vph 0 1 1 89 0750vph0Shared ? No131 1 Stop-controlled approachesNumber of Lanes443No 2Number of Lanes 0 Shared ?vph10Stop-controlled approachesvph01SNumber of LanesStop-controlled approachesvph vph vph 0 0 vph1 1 0 0 Shared ?70Frederick Middle School 2025 Total Future School PM Peak Critical Lane Volume Sum Yes Approach Stop Controlled? Gainesboro Road VOLUME / CAPACITY RATIO: N Date:November 1, 2022 EW Facility:US Route 522 < 1200 1200 - 1399 1400 - 1599 ≥ 1600 NS Facility: W E Conflict Type Count Crossing 16 Total 32 Diverging 1 Diverging 8 48 Conflict Type Weight Weighted Total Conflict Points Crossing 2 Merging 8 Merging 1 Safety - Conflict Point Diagram Assumptions Approach Stop Controlled? Yes Yes Yes Shared ? Note: This diagram does not reflect the actual lane configuration of the intersection Shared ?2Mvmt 1, shared left vph● This worksheet does not use the CLV methodology. The calculaGons are based on the HCM, 6th Edition. The calculations are based on vehicles per hour. HCM 6 CALCULATIONS Step 1: Identify which approaches are stop- controlled by selecting "Yes" from the drop-down Step 2: Enter the lane configurations in the yellow cells. Approach Stop Controlled? No 0.62 No Shared ? Shared ? No No One or two-stage minor street left and through movments*?10 1 0Stop-controlled approaches Mvmt 4, shared left Mvmt 7, 4-leg Mvmt 10, 4-leg No Approach Stop Controlled? One NS Major? Major street lanes M1 Shared? M4 Shared? Mvmt 1, excl left Mvmt 4, excl left FALSE Number of Lanes 000vphShared ? No Two StageOne StageTwo-Way Stop Control (TWSC)Two-Way Stop Control (TWSC)Two-Way Stop Control (TWSC) Intersection V/C 0.62 Shared Movement Capacities Movement Capacities Potential Capacities Follow-Up HeadwaysCritical HeadwaysConflicting FlowsPriority Flow Rates Lanes Shared? Stop controlled?Truck % DESIGN AND RESULTS DATA INPUT AND CONFIGURATION Project Name: Zone5 Backto Results VDOT JUNCTION SCREENING TOOL Ver 1.0 12 148 VDOT Signal Justification Report Template – Version 1.1 - January 25, 2021 US Route 522 at Gainesboro Road Appendix C: TWSC Analyis 149 2025 Future - 2 Way Stop 7:00-8:00 AM Peak Hour 5: Gainesboro Road & US Route 522 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2025 Total Future Conditions TWSC.syn Synchro 11 Report -11/28/2022 Page 1 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 1004 0 218 289 34 72 Future Volume (Veh/h) 1004 0 218 289 34 72 Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 1091 0 237 314 37 78 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 1091 1722 546 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 1091 1722 546 tC, single (s) 4.2 6.9 7.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s)2.2 3.5 3.4 p0 queue free % 62 25 83 cM capacity (veh/h) 629 49 464 Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 EB 3 WB 1 WB 2 WB 3 NB 1 Volume Total 546 546 0 237 157 157 115 Volume Left 0 0 0 237 0 0 37 Volume Right 0 0 0 0 0 0 78 cSH 1700 1700 1700 629 1700 1700 126 Volume to Capacity 0.32 0.32 0.00 0.38 0.09 0.09 0.92 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 0 44 0 0 148 Control Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 14.1 0.0 0.0 125.0 Lane LOS B F Approach Delay (s) 0.0 6.1 125.0 Approach LOS F Intersection Summary Average Delay 10.1 Intersection Capacity Utilization 56.1% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 150 2025 Future - 2 Way Stop 3:00-4:00 PM Peak Hour 5: Gainesboro Road & US Route 522 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2025 Total Future Conditions TWSC.syn Synchro 11 Report -11/28/2022 Page 1 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 443 1 133 750 89 19 Future Volume (Veh/h) 443 1 133 750 89 19 Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 482 1 145 815 97 21 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 483 1180 241 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 483 1180 241 tC, single (s) 4.2 6.9 7.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s)2.2 3.5 3.4 p0 queue free % 86 38 97 cM capacity (veh/h) 1069 157 739 Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 EB 3 WB 1 WB 2 WB 3 NB 1 Volume Total 241 241 1 145 408 408 118 Volume Left 0 0 0 145 0 0 97 Volume Right 0 0 1 0 0 0 21 cSH 1700 1700 1700 1069 1700 1700 183 Volume to Capacity 0.14 0.14 0.00 0.14 0.24 0.24 0.65 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 0 12 0 0 93 Control Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 8.9 0.0 0.0 54.9 Lane LOS A F Approach Delay (s) 0.0 1.3 54.9 Approach LOS F Intersection Summary Average Delay 5.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 35.7% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 151 7:00-8:00 AM Peak Hour 11/28/2022 2025 Total Future Conditions TWSC.syn SimTraffic Report - 11/28/2022 Page 1 Intersection: 5: Gainesboro Road & US Route 522 Movement EB WB WB WB NB Directions Served T L T T LR Maximum Queue (ft) 2 221 88 48 651 Average Queue (ft) 0 86 5 2 339 95th Queue (ft) 2 172 81 49 812 Link Distance (ft) 1114 680 680 1022 Upstream Blk Time (%)3 Queuing Penalty (veh)0 Storage Bay Dist (ft) 300 Storage Blk Time (%) 0 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 1 0 152 3:00-4:00 PM Peak Hour 11/28/2022 2025 Total Future Conditions TWSC.syn SimTraffic Report - 11/28/2022 Page 1 Intersection: 5: Gainesboro Road & US Route 522 Movement WB NB Directions Served L LR Maximum Queue (ft) 85 180 Average Queue (ft) 32 57 95th Queue (ft) 64 146 Link Distance (ft) 1022 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 300 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) 153 VDOT Signal Justification Report Template – Version 1.1 - January 25, 2021 US Route 522 at Gainesboro Road Appendix D: Conventional Signal Analysis 154 2025 Future - 2 Way Stop 7:00-8:00 AM Peak Hour 5: Gainesboro Road & US Route 522 Queues 2025 Total Future Conditions Conventional Signal.syn Synchro 11 Report -11/28/2022 Page 1 Lane Group EBT WBL WBT NBL Lane Group Flow (vph) 1091 237 314 115 v/c Ratio 0.73 0.63 0.13 0.42 Control Delay 21.1 35.9 3.2 19.6 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 21.1 35.9 3.2 19.6 Queue Length 50th (ft) 203 95 16 15 Queue Length 95th (ft) 340 196 35 67 Internal Link Dist (ft) 1092 632 1019 Turn Bay Length (ft) 300 Base Capacity (vph) 2053 555 2755 412 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.53 0.43 0.11 0.28 Intersection Summary 155 2025 Future - 2 Way Stop 7:00-8:00 AM Peak Hour 5: Gainesboro Road & US Route 522 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2025 Total Future Conditions Conventional Signal.syn Synchro 11 Report -11/28/2022 Page 2 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 1004 0 218 289 34 72 Future Volume (vph) 1004 0 218 289 34 72 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.91 Flt Protected 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.98 Satd. Flow (prot) 3406 1752 3139 1587 Flt Permitted 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.98 Satd. Flow (perm) 3406 1752 3139 1587 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 1091 0 237 314 37 78 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 71 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 1091 0 237 314 44 0 Heavy Vehicles (%) 6% 0% 3% 15% 3% 9% Turn Type NA Perm Prot NA Prot Protected Phases 6 5 2 4 Permitted Phases 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 30.6 14.9 51.5 6.4 Effective Green, g (s) 30.6 14.9 51.5 6.4 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.44 0.21 0.74 0.09 Clearance Time (s) 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1491 373 2312 145 v/s Ratio Prot c0.32 c0.14 0.10 c0.03 v/s Ratio Perm v/c Ratio 0.73 0.64 0.14 0.30 Uniform Delay, d1 16.3 25.0 2.7 29.7 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 1.9 3.5 0.0 1.2 Delay (s) 18.1 28.6 2.7 30.9 Level of Service B C A C Approach Delay (s) 18.1 13.8 30.9 Approach LOS B B C Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 17.6 HCM 2000 Level of Service B HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.65 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 69.9 Sum of lost time (s) 18.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 61.1% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 156 7:00-8:00 AM Peak Hour 11/28/2022 2025 Total Future Conditions Conventional Signal.syn SimTraffic Report - 11/28/2022 Page 1 Intersection: 5: Gainesboro Road & US Route 522 Movement EB EB WB WB WB NB Directions Served T T L T T LR Maximum Queue (ft) 256 245 196 77 82 109 Average Queue (ft) 135 116 101 15 19 41 95th Queue (ft) 214 202 172 49 56 87 Link Distance (ft) 1114 1114 680 680 1022 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 300 Storage Blk Time (%) 3 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 157 2025 Future - 2 Way Stop 3:00-4:00 PM Peak Hour 5: Gainesboro Road & US Route 522 Queues 2025 Total Future Conditions Conventional Signal.syn Synchro 11 Report -11/28/2022 Page 1 Lane Group EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL Lane Group Flow (vph) 482 1 145 815 118 v/c Ratio 0.52 0.00 0.38 0.39 0.34 Control Delay 18.5 13.0 22.7 6.2 21.5 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 18.5 13.0 22.7 6.2 21.5 Queue Length 50th (ft) 62 0 37 58 27 Queue Length 95th (ft) 122 3 95 109 78 Internal Link Dist (ft) 1092 632 1019 Turn Bay Length (ft) 150 300 Base Capacity (vph) 2298 1090 880 3084 749 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.21 0.00 0.16 0.26 0.16 Intersection Summary 158 2025 Future - 2 Way Stop 3:00-4:00 PM Peak Hour 5: Gainesboro Road & US Route 522 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2025 Total Future Conditions Conventional Signal.syn Synchro 11 Report -11/28/2022 Page 2 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 443 1 133 750 89 19 Future Volume (vph) 443 1 133 750 89 19 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.98 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.96 Satd. Flow (prot) 3406 1615 1752 3139 1712 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.96 Satd. Flow (perm) 3406 1615 1752 3139 1712 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 482 1 145 815 97 21 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 1 0 0 9 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 482 0 145 815 109 0 Heavy Vehicles (%) 6% 0% 3% 15% 3% 9% Turn Type NA Perm Prot NA Prot Protected Phases 6 5 2 4 Permitted Phases 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 13.6 13.6 10.3 29.9 7.0 Effective Green, g (s) 13.6 13.6 10.3 29.9 7.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.28 0.28 0.21 0.61 0.14 Clearance Time (s) 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 947 449 369 1919 245 v/s Ratio Prot c0.14 0.08 c0.26 c0.06 v/s Ratio Perm 0.00 v/c Ratio 0.51 0.00 0.39 0.42 0.44 Uniform Delay, d1 14.8 12.7 16.6 5.0 19.2 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.4 0.0 0.7 0.2 1.3 Delay (s) 15.3 12.7 17.3 5.1 20.4 Level of Service B B B A C Approach Delay (s) 15.3 7.0 20.4 Approach LOS B A C Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 10.6 HCM 2000 Level of Service B HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.51 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 48.9 Sum of lost time (s) 18.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 40.7% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 159 3:00-4:00 PM Peak Hour 11/28/2022 2025 Total Future Conditions Conventional Signal.syn SimTraffic Report - 11/28/2022 Page 1 Intersection: 5: Gainesboro Road & US Route 522 Movement EB EB EB WB WB WB NB Directions Served T T R L T T LR Maximum Queue (ft) 154 119 19 127 107 121 98 Average Queue (ft) 77 46 1 57 41 54 41 95th Queue (ft) 125 96 9 103 88 105 81 Link Distance (ft) 1114 1114 680 680 1022 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 150 300 Storage Blk Time (%) 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 160 VDOT Signal Justification Report Template – Version 1.1 - January 25, 2021 US Route 522 at Gainesboro Road Appendix E: Unsignalized RCUT Analysis 161 2025 Future - Unsignalized R-CUT 7:00-8:00 AM Peak Hour 3: School Access & US Route 522 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2025 Total Future Conditions RCUT Unsignalized.syn Synchro 11 Report -11/28/2022 Page 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 34 948 195 0 502 0 0 0 74 0 0 0 Future Volume (Veh/h) 34 948 195 0 502 0 0 0 74 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 37 1030 212 0 546 0 0 0 80 0 0 0 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 546 1242 1377 1650 515 1215 1862 273 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 546 1242 1377 1650 515 1215 1862 273 tC, single (s) *6.6 4.1 7.5 6.5 7.2 7.5 6.5 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) *3.3 2.2 3.5 4.0 3.4 3.5 4.0 3.3 p0 queue free % 93 100 100 100 83 100 100 100 cM capacity (veh/h) 510 556 98 91 472 108 67 725 Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 EB 3 EB 4 WB 1 WB 2 NB 1 Volume Total 37 515 515 212 273 273 80 Volume Left 37 0 0 0 0 0 0 Volume Right 0 0 0 212 0 0 80 cSH 510 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 472 Volume to Capacity 0.07 0.30 0.30 0.12 0.16 0.16 0.17 Queue Length 95th (ft) 6 0 0 0 0 0 15 Control Delay (s) 12.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 14.2 Lane LOS B B Approach Delay (s) 0.4 0.0 14.2 Approach LOS B Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.8 Intersection Capacity Utilization 37.5% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 * User Entered Value 162 2025 Future - Unsignalized R-CUT 7:00-8:00 AM Peak Hour 5: Gainesboro Road & US Route 522 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2025 Total Future Conditions RCUT Unsignalized.syn Synchro 11 Report -11/28/2022 Page 2 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 1004 0 218 323 0 106 Future Volume (Veh/h) 1004 0 218 323 0 106 Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 1091 0 237 351 0 115 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 1091 1740 546 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 1091 1740 546 tC, single (s) 4.2 6.9 7.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s)2.2 3.5 3.4 p0 queue free % 62 100 75 cM capacity (veh/h) 629 48 464 Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 EB 3 WB 1 WB 2 WB 3 NB 1 Volume Total 546 546 0 237 176 176 115 Volume Left 0 0 0 237 0 0 0 Volume Right 0 0 0 0 0 0 115 cSH 1700 1700 1700 629 1700 1700 464 Volume to Capacity 0.32 0.32 0.00 0.38 0.10 0.10 0.25 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 0 44 0 0 24 Control Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 14.1 0.0 0.0 15.3 Lane LOS B C Approach Delay (s) 0.0 5.7 15.3 Approach LOS C Intersection Summary Average Delay 2.8 Intersection Capacity Utilization 46.5% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 163 7:00-8:00 AM Peak Hour 11/28/2022 2025 Total Future Conditions RCUT Unsignalized.syn SimTraffic Report - 11/28/2022 Page 1 Intersection: 3: School Access & US Route 522 Movement EB NB Directions Served UL R Maximum Queue (ft) 33 80 Average Queue (ft) 10 35 95th Queue (ft) 31 68 Link Distance (ft) 426 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 300 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 5: Gainesboro Road & US Route 522 Movement EB EB WB WB NB Directions Served T T L T R Maximum Queue (ft) 6 2 232 108 85 Average Queue (ft) 0 0 86 5 31 95th Queue (ft) 6 2 176 71 65 Link Distance (ft) 1121 1121 669 1024 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 300 Storage Blk Time (%) 0 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 1 0 Network Summary Network wide Queuing Penalty: 1 164 2025 Future - unsignlized R-CUT 3:00-4:00 PM Peak Hour 3: School Access & US Route 522 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2025 Total Future Conditions RCUT Unsignalized.syn Synchro 11 Report -11/28/2022 Page 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 89 433 49 0 899 0 0 0 36 0 0 0 Future Volume (Veh/h) 89 433 49 0 899 0 0 0 36 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 97 471 53 0 977 0 0 0 39 0 0 0 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 977 524 1154 1642 236 1446 1695 488 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 977 524 1154 1642 236 1446 1695 488 tC, single (s) *6.6 4.1 7.5 6.5 7.2 7.5 6.5 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) *3.3 2.2 3.5 4.0 3.4 3.5 4.0 3.3 p0 queue free % 65 100 100 100 95 100 100 100 cM capacity (veh/h) 275 1039 111 64 728 64 59 525 Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 EB 3 EB 4 WB 1 WB 2 NB 1 Volume Total 97 236 236 53 488 488 39 Volume Left 97 0 0 0 0 0 0 Volume Right 0 0 0 53 0 0 39 cSH 275 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 728 Volume to Capacity 0.35 0.14 0.14 0.03 0.29 0.29 0.05 Queue Length 95th (ft) 38 0 0 0 0 0 4 Control Delay (s) 25.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.2 Lane LOS D B Approach Delay (s) 3.9 0.0 10.2 Approach LOS B Intersection Summary Average Delay 1.7 Intersection Capacity Utilization 36.4% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 * User Entered Value 165 2025 Future - unsignlized R-CUT 3:00-4:00 PM Peak Hour 5: Gainesboro Road & US Route 522 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2025 Total Future Conditions RCUT Unsignalized.syn Synchro 11 Report -11/28/2022 Page 2 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 443 1 133 839 0 108 Future Volume (Veh/h) 443 1 133 839 0 108 Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 482 1 145 912 0 117 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 483 1228 241 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 483 1228 241 tC, single (s) 4.2 6.9 7.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s)2.2 3.5 3.4 p0 queue free % 86 100 84 cM capacity (veh/h) 1069 146 739 Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 EB 3 WB 1 WB 2 WB 3 NB 1 Volume Total 241 241 1 145 456 456 117 Volume Left 0 0 0 145 0 0 0 Volume Right 0 0 1 0 0 0 117 cSH 1700 1700 1700 1069 1700 1700 739 Volume to Capacity 0.14 0.14 0.00 0.14 0.27 0.27 0.16 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 0 12 0 0 14 Control Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 8.9 0.0 0.0 10.8 Lane LOS A B Approach Delay (s) 0.0 1.2 10.8 Approach LOS B Intersection Summary Average Delay 1.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 26.5% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 166 3:00-4:00 PM Peak Hour 11/28/2022 2025 Total Future Conditions RCUT Unsignalized.syn SimTraffic Report - 11/28/2022 Page 1 Intersection: 3: School Access & US Route 522 Movement EB WB WB NB Directions Served UL T T R Maximum Queue (ft) 67 2 1 66 Average Queue (ft) 27 0 0 25 95th Queue (ft) 51 2 1 57 Link Distance (ft) 2086 2086 426 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 300 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 5: Gainesboro Road & US Route 522 Movement WB NB Directions Served L R Maximum Queue (ft) 79 62 Average Queue (ft) 32 24 95th Queue (ft) 64 48 Link Distance (ft) 1024 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 300 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Network Summary Network wide Queuing Penalty: 0 167 VDOT Signal Justification Report Template – Version 1.1 - January 25, 2021 US Route 522 at Gainesboro Road Appendix F: Signalized RCUT Analysis 168 2025 Future - signalized R-CUT 7:00-8:00 AM Peak Hour 3: School Access & US Route 522 Queues 2025 Total Future Conditions RCUT Signalized.syn Synchro 11 Report -11/28/2022 Page 1 Lane Group EBU EBT EBR WBT NBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 37 1030 212 546 80 v/c Ratio 0.10 0.30 0.14 0.21 0.06 Control Delay 16.4 0.2 0.2 3.0 0.1 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 16.4 0.2 0.2 3.0 0.1 Queue Length 50th (ft) 4 0 0 0 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) 28 0 0 54 0 Internal Link Dist (ft) 632 2041 Turn Bay Length (ft) 300 245 Base Capacity (vph) 728 3406 1482 2753 1297 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.05 0.30 0.14 0.20 0.06 Intersection Summary 169 2025 Future - signalized R-CUT 7:00-8:00 AM Peak Hour 3: School Access & US Route 522 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2025 Total Future Conditions RCUT Signalized.syn Synchro 11 Report -11/28/2022 Page 2 Movement EBU EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 34 0 948 195 0 502 0 0 0 74 0 0 Future Volume (vph) 34 0 948 195 0 502 0 0 0 74 0 0 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 6.0 4.0 4.0 6.0 6.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.86 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 3406 1482 3112 1429 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1770 3406 1482 3112 1429 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 37 0 1030 212 0 546 0 0 0 80 0 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 29 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 37 0 1030 212 0 546 0 0 0 51 0 0 Heavy Vehicles (%) 2% 2% 6% 9% 2% 16% 2% 2% 2% 15% 2% 2% Turn Type Prot NA Perm NA Perm Protected Phases 1 Free 2 Permitted Phases Free 2 Actuated Green, G (s) 2.3 40.0 40.0 25.7 25.7 Effective Green, g (s) 2.3 40.0 40.0 25.7 25.7 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.06 1.00 1.00 0.64 0.64 Clearance Time (s) 6.0 6.0 6.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 101 3406 1482 1999 918 v/s Ratio Prot 0.02 0.30 0.18 v/s Ratio Perm 0.14 0.04 v/c Ratio 0.37 0.30 0.14 0.27 0.06 Uniform Delay, d1 18.1 0.0 0.0 3.1 2.7 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 2.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.0 Delay (s) 20.4 0.2 0.2 3.2 2.7 Level of Service C A A A A Approach Delay (s) 0.8 3.2 2.7 0.0 Approach LOS A A A A Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 1.6 HCM 2000 Level of Service A HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.43 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 40.0 Sum of lost time (s) 12.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 40.4% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 170 2025 Future - signalized R-CUT 7:00-8:00 AM Peak Hour 3: School Access & US Route 522 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2025 Total Future Conditions RCUT Signalized.syn Synchro 11 Report -11/28/2022 Page 3 Movement SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 0 Future Volume (vph) 0 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 Total Lost time (s) Lane Util. Factor Frt Flt Protected Satd. Flow (prot) Flt Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 Heavy Vehicles (%) 2% Turn Type Protected Phases Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G (s) Effective Green, g (s) Actuated g/C Ratio Clearance Time (s) Vehicle Extension (s) Lane Grp Cap (vph) v/s Ratio Prot v/s Ratio Perm v/c Ratio Uniform Delay, d1 Progression Factor Incremental Delay, d2 Delay (s) Level of Service Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS Intersection Summary 171 2025 Future - signalized R-CUT 7:00-8:00 AM Peak Hour 5: Gainesboro Road & US Route 522 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2025 Total Future Conditions RCUT Signalized.syn Synchro 11 Report -11/28/2022 Page 4 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 1004 0 218 323 0 106 Future Volume (Veh/h) 1004 0 218 323 0 106 Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 1091 0 237 351 0 115 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) 712 pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 1091 1740 546 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 1091 1740 546 tC, single (s) 4.2 6.9 7.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s)2.2 3.5 3.4 p0 queue free % 62 100 75 cM capacity (veh/h) 629 48 464 Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 EB 3 WB 1 WB 2 WB 3 NB 1 Volume Total 546 546 0 237 176 176 115 Volume Left 0 0 0 237 0 0 0 Volume Right 0 0 0 0 0 0 115 cSH 1700 1700 1700 629 1700 1700 464 Volume to Capacity 0.32 0.32 0.00 0.38 0.10 0.10 0.25 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 0 44 0 0 24 Control Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 14.1 0.0 0.0 15.3 Lane LOS B C Approach Delay (s) 0.0 5.7 15.3 Approach LOS C Intersection Summary Average Delay 2.8 Intersection Capacity Utilization 46.5% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 172 7:00-8:00 AM Peak Hour 11/28/2022 2025 Total Future Conditions RCUT Signalized.syn SimTraffic Report - 11/28/2022 Page 1 Intersection: 3: School Access & US Route 522 Movement EB WB WB NB Directions Served U T T R Maximum Queue (ft) 58 107 70 56 Average Queue (ft) 19 31 11 7 95th Queue (ft) 42 80 46 33 Link Distance (ft) 2098 2098 422 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 300 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 5: Gainesboro Road & US Route 522 Movement WB NB Directions Served L R Maximum Queue (ft) 198 86 Average Queue (ft) 82 30 95th Queue (ft) 155 62 Link Distance (ft) 1024 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 300 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Network Summary Network wide Queuing Penalty: 0 173 2025 Future - Signalized R-CUT 3:00-4:00 PM Peak Hour 3: School Access & US Route 522 Queues 2025 Total Future Conditions RCUT Signalized.syn Synchro 11 Report -11/28/2022 Page 1 Lane Group EBU EBT EBR WBT NBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 97 471 53 977 39 v/c Ratio 0.30 0.14 0.04 0.47 0.03 Control Delay 20.7 0.1 0.0 6.8 0.1 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 20.7 0.1 0.0 6.8 0.1 Queue Length 50th (ft) 27 0 0 74 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) 59 0 0 132 0 Internal Link Dist (ft) 632 2041 Turn Bay Length (ft) 300 245 Base Capacity (vph) 477 3406 1482 2393 1237 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.20 0.14 0.04 0.41 0.03 Intersection Summary 174 2025 Future - Signalized R-CUT 3:00-4:00 PM Peak Hour 3: School Access & US Route 522 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2025 Total Future Conditions RCUT Signalized.syn Synchro 11 Report -11/28/2022 Page 2 Movement EBU EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 89 0 433 49 0 899 0 0 0 36 0 0 Future Volume (vph) 89 0 433 49 0 899 0 0 0 36 0 0 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 6.0 4.0 4.0 6.0 6.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.86 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 3406 1482 3112 1429 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1770 3406 1482 3112 1429 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 97 0 471 53 0 977 0 0 0 39 0 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 97 0 471 53 0 977 0 0 0 24 0 0 Heavy Vehicles (%) 2% 2% 6% 9% 2% 16% 2% 2% 2% 15% 2% 2% Turn Type Prot NA Perm NA Perm Protected Phases 1 Free 2 Permitted Phases Free 2 Actuated Green, G (s) 6.5 47.9 47.9 29.4 29.4 Effective Green, g (s) 6.5 47.9 47.9 29.4 29.4 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.14 1.00 1.00 0.61 0.61 Clearance Time (s) 6.0 6.0 6.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 240 3406 1482 1910 877 v/s Ratio Prot c0.05 0.14 c0.31 v/s Ratio Perm 0.04 0.02 v/c Ratio 0.40 0.14 0.04 0.51 0.03 Uniform Delay, d1 18.9 0.0 0.0 5.2 3.6 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 1.1 0.1 0.0 0.2 0.0 Delay (s) 20.0 0.1 0.0 5.4 3.6 Level of Service C A A A A Approach Delay (s) 3.2 5.4 3.6 0.0 Approach LOS A A A A Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 4.5 HCM 2000 Level of Service A HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.49 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 47.9 Sum of lost time (s) 12.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 40.7% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 175 2025 Future - Signalized R-CUT 3:00-4:00 PM Peak Hour 3: School Access & US Route 522 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2025 Total Future Conditions RCUT Signalized.syn Synchro 11 Report -11/28/2022 Page 3 Movement SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 0 Future Volume (vph) 0 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 Total Lost time (s) Lane Util. Factor Frt Flt Protected Satd. Flow (prot) Flt Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 Heavy Vehicles (%) 2% Turn Type Protected Phases Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G (s) Effective Green, g (s) Actuated g/C Ratio Clearance Time (s) Vehicle Extension (s) Lane Grp Cap (vph) v/s Ratio Prot v/s Ratio Perm v/c Ratio Uniform Delay, d1 Progression Factor Incremental Delay, d2 Delay (s) Level of Service Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS Intersection Summary 176 2025 Future - Signalized R-CUT 3:00-4:00 PM Peak Hour 5: Gainesboro Road & US Route 522 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2025 Total Future Conditions RCUT Signalized.syn Synchro 11 Report -11/28/2022 Page 4 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 443 1 133 839 0 108 Future Volume (Veh/h) 443 1 133 839 0 108 Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 482 1 145 912 0 117 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) 712 pX, platoon unblocked 0.90 vC, conflicting volume 483 1228 241 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 483 1027 241 tC, single (s) 4.2 6.9 7.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s)2.2 3.5 3.4 p0 queue free % 86 100 84 cM capacity (veh/h) 1069 178 739 Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 EB 3 WB 1 WB 2 WB 3 NB 1 Volume Total 241 241 1 145 456 456 117 Volume Left 0 0 0 145 0 0 0 Volume Right 0 0 1 0 0 0 117 cSH 1700 1700 1700 1069 1700 1700 739 Volume to Capacity 0.14 0.14 0.00 0.14 0.27 0.27 0.16 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 0 12 0 0 14 Control Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 8.9 0.0 0.0 10.8 Lane LOS A B Approach Delay (s) 0.0 1.2 10.8 Approach LOS B Intersection Summary Average Delay 1.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 26.5% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 177 3:00-4:00 PM Peak Hour 11/28/2022 2025 Total Future Conditions RCUT Signalized.syn SimTraffic Report - 11/28/2022 Page 1 Intersection: 3: School Access & US Route 522 Movement EB WB WB NB Directions Served U T T R Maximum Queue (ft) 78 143 122 40 Average Queue (ft) 34 68 43 2 95th Queue (ft) 65 126 96 16 Link Distance (ft) 2098 2098 422 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 300 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 5: Gainesboro Road & US Route 522 Movement WB NB Directions Served L R Maximum Queue (ft) 79 65 Average Queue (ft) 32 24 95th Queue (ft) 63 48 Link Distance (ft) 1024 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 300 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Network Summary Network wide Queuing Penalty: 0 178 VDOT Signal Justification Report Template – Version 1.1 - January 25, 2021 US Route 522 at Gainesboro Road Appendix G: Unsignalized Green T Analysis 179 2025 Future - Unsignalized Green T 7:00-8:00 AM Peak Hour 5: Gainesboro Road & US Route 522 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2025 Total Future Conditions Unsignalized Green T.syn Synchro 11 Report -11/28/2022 Page 1 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 1004 0 218 289 34 72 Future Volume (Veh/h) 1004 0 218 289 34 72 Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 1091 0 237 314 37 78 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh)8 Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 1091 1722 546 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 1091 1722 546 tC, single (s) 4.2 6.9 7.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s)2.2 3.5 3.4 p0 queue free % 62 25 83 cM capacity (veh/h) 629 49 464 Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 EB 3 WB 1 WB 2 WB 3 NB 1 Volume Total 546 546 0 237 157 157 115 Volume Left 0 0 0 237 0 0 37 Volume Right 0 0 0 0 0 0 78 cSH 1700 1700 1700 629 1700 1700 154 Volume to Capacity 0.32 0.32 0.00 0.38 0.09 0.09 0.75 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 0 44 0 0 114 Control Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 14.1 0.0 0.0 70.0 Lane LOS B F Approach Delay (s) 0.0 6.1 70.0 Approach LOS F Intersection Summary Average Delay 6.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 53.2% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 180 7:00-8:00 AM Peak Hour 11/28/2022 2025 Total Future Conditions Unsignalized Green T.syn SimTraffic Report - 11/28/2022 Page 1 Intersection: 5: Gainesboro Road & US Route 522 Movement EB WB NB NB Directions Served T L L R Maximum Queue (ft) 2 162 77 39 Average Queue (ft) 0 64 22 2 95th Queue (ft) 2 123 57 18 Link Distance (ft) 422 1037 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 300 200 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Zone Summary Zone wide Queuing Penalty: 0 181 2025 Future - Unsignalized Green T 3:00-4:00 PM Peak Hour 5: Gainesboro Road & US Route 522 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2025 Total Future Conditions Unsignalized Green T.syn Synchro 11 Report -11/28/2022 Page 1 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 443 1 133 750 89 19 Future Volume (Veh/h) 443 1 133 750 89 19 Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 482 1 145 815 97 21 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh)8 Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 483 1180 241 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 483 1180 241 tC, single (s) 4.2 6.9 7.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s)2.2 3.5 3.4 p0 queue free % 86 38 97 cM capacity (veh/h) 1069 157 739 Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 EB 3 WB 1 WB 2 WB 3 NB 1 Volume Total 241 241 1 145 408 408 118 Volume Left 0 0 0 145 0 0 97 Volume Right 0 0 1 0 0 0 21 cSH 1700 1700 1700 1069 1700 1700 191 Volume to Capacity 0.14 0.14 0.00 0.14 0.24 0.24 0.62 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 0 12 0 0 87 Control Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 8.9 0.0 0.0 50.4 Lane LOS A F Approach Delay (s) 0.0 1.3 50.4 Approach LOS F Intersection Summary Average Delay 4.6 Intersection Capacity Utilization 34.5% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 182 3:00-4:00 PM Peak Hour 11/28/2022 2025 Total Future Conditions Unsignalized Green T.syn SimTraffic Report - 11/28/2022 Page 1 Intersection: 5: Gainesboro Road & US Route 522 Movement WB NB NB Directions Served L L R Maximum Queue (ft) 63 82 3 Average Queue (ft) 26 30 0 95th Queue (ft) 54 61 3 Link Distance (ft) 1037 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 300 200 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Zone Summary Zone wide Queuing Penalty: 0 183 VDOT Signal Justification Report Template – Version 1.1 - January 25, 2021 US Route 522 at Gainesboro Road Appendix H: Signalized Green-T Analysis 184 2025 Future - signalized Green T 7:00-8:00 AM Peak Hour 5: Gainesboro Road & US Route 522 Queues 2025 Total Future Conditions Signalized Green T.syn Synchro 11 Report -11/28/2022 Page 1 Lane Group EBT WBL WBT NBL Lane Group Flow (vph) 1091 237 314 115 v/c Ratio 0.75 0.62 0.10 0.41 Control Delay 21.4 35.5 0.1 19.4 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 21.4 35.5 0.1 19.4 Queue Length 50th (ft) 203 95 0 15 Queue Length 95th (ft) 340 196 0 67 Internal Link Dist (ft) 415 632 1019 Turn Bay Length (ft) 300 Base Capacity (vph) 2060 570 3139 421 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.53 0.42 0.10 0.27 Intersection Summary 185 2025 Future - signalized Green T 7:00-8:00 AM Peak Hour 5: Gainesboro Road & US Route 522 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2025 Total Future Conditions Signalized Green T.syn Synchro 11 Report -11/28/2022 Page 2 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 1004 0 218 289 34 72 Future Volume (vph) 1004 0 218 289 34 72 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 6.0 6.0 4.0 6.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.91 Flt Protected 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.98 Satd. Flow (prot) 3406 1752 3139 1587 Flt Permitted 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.98 Satd. Flow (perm) 3406 1752 3139 1587 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 1091 0 237 314 37 78 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 71 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 1091 0 237 314 44 0 Heavy Vehicles (%) 6% 0% 3% 15% 3% 9% Turn Type NA Perm Prot NA Prot Protected Phases 6 5 Free! 4! Permitted Phases 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 29.3 14.9 68.6 6.4 Effective Green, g (s) 29.3 14.9 68.6 6.4 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.43 0.22 1.00 0.09 Clearance Time (s) 6.0 6.0 6.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1454 380 3139 148 v/s Ratio Prot c0.32 c0.14 0.10 c0.03 v/s Ratio Perm v/c Ratio 0.75 0.62 0.10 0.30 Uniform Delay, d1 16.6 24.3 0.0 29.0 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 2.2 3.2 0.1 1.1 Delay (s) 18.8 27.5 0.1 30.1 Level of Service B C A C Approach Delay (s) 18.8 11.9 30.1 Approach LOS B B C Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 17.4 HCM 2000 Level of Service B HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.66 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 68.6 Sum of lost time (s) 18.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 59.5% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 ! Phase conflict between lane groups. c Critical Lane Group 186 7:00-8:00 AM Peak Hour 11/28/2022 2025 Total Future Conditions Signalized Green T.syn SimTraffic Report - 11/28/2022 Page 1 Intersection: 5: Gainesboro Road & US Route 522 Movement EB EB WB NB Directions Served T T L LR Maximum Queue (ft) 266 268 197 112 Average Queue (ft) 134 128 99 44 95th Queue (ft) 225 221 164 86 Link Distance (ft) 422 422 1039 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 300 Storage Blk Time (%) 3 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 187 2025 Future - Signalized Green T 3:00-4:00 PM Peak Hour 5: Gainesboro Road & US Route 522 Queues 2025 Total Future Conditions Signalized Green T.syn Synchro 11 Report -11/28/2022 Page 1 Lane Group EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL Lane Group Flow (vph) 482 1 145 815 118 v/c Ratio 0.52 0.00 0.38 0.26 0.34 Control Delay 18.5 13.0 22.7 0.2 21.5 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 18.5 13.0 22.7 0.2 21.5 Queue Length 50th (ft) 62 0 37 0 27 Queue Length 95th (ft) 122 3 95 0 78 Internal Link Dist (ft) 415 632 1019 Turn Bay Length (ft) 150 300 Base Capacity (vph) 2298 1090 880 3139 749 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.21 0.00 0.16 0.26 0.16 Intersection Summary 188 2025 Future - Signalized Green T 3:00-4:00 PM Peak Hour 5: Gainesboro Road & US Route 522 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2025 Total Future Conditions Signalized Green T.syn Synchro 11 Report -11/28/2022 Page 2 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 443 1 133 750 89 19 Future Volume (vph) 443 1 133 750 89 19 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 6.0 6.0 6.0 4.0 6.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.98 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.96 Satd. Flow (prot) 3406 1615 1752 3139 1712 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.96 Satd. Flow (perm) 3406 1615 1752 3139 1712 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 482 1 145 815 97 21 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 1 0 0 9 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 482 0 145 815 109 0 Heavy Vehicles (%) 6% 0% 3% 15% 3% 9% Turn Type NA Perm Prot NA Prot Protected Phases 6 5 Free! 4! Permitted Phases 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 13.0 13.0 10.3 48.3 7.0 Effective Green, g (s) 13.0 13.0 10.3 48.3 7.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.27 0.27 0.21 1.00 0.14 Clearance Time (s) 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 916 434 373 3139 248 v/s Ratio Prot c0.14 0.08 0.26 0.06 v/s Ratio Perm 0.00 v/c Ratio 0.53 0.00 0.39 0.26 0.44 Uniform Delay, d1 15.0 12.9 16.3 0.0 18.9 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.5 0.0 0.7 0.2 1.2 Delay (s) 15.6 12.9 17.0 0.2 20.1 Level of Service B B B A C Approach Delay (s) 15.6 2.7 20.1 Approach LOS B A C Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 8.0 HCM 2000 Level of Service A HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.48 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 48.3 Sum of lost time (s) 18.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 40.7% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 ! Phase conflict between lane groups. c Critical Lane Group 189 3:00-4:00 PM Peak Hour 11/28/2022 2025 Total Future Conditions Signalized Green T.syn SimTraffic Report - 11/28/2022 Page 1 Intersection: 5: Gainesboro Road & US Route 522 Movement EB EB EB WB NB Directions Served T T R L LR Maximum Queue (ft) 131 105 16 101 115 Average Queue (ft) 76 48 1 53 48 95th Queue (ft) 117 93 8 91 93 Link Distance (ft) 422 422 1039 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 150 300 Storage Blk Time (%) 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 190 VDOT Signal Justification Report Template – Version 1.1 - January 25, 2021 US Route 522 at Gainesboro Road 191 VDOT Signal Justification Report Template – Version 1.1 - January 25, 2021 US Route 522 at Gainesboro Road 192 Transportation Committee Agenda Item Detail Meeting Date: January 23, 2023 Agenda Section: Frederick County Middle School/Gainesboro Elementary School Access Title: Review of Draft Access/Circulation Plan Attachments: TC01-23-23FrederickCountyMSGainesboroESAccess.pdf 193 Item 3: Frederick County Middle/Gainesboro Elementary Access Topic Synopsis The school division has prepared a draft access plan and would like to go over it with the Committee for review and comment. Draft is attached. Recommended Action NA 194 cby ZMM, INC.200 Country Club Drive SWPlaza One, Building EBlacksburg, VA 24060Phone: 540.552.2151CHECKEDDATECOMM. NO.DRAWNARCHITECTSENGINEERS222 Lee Street, WestCharleston, WV 25302Phone: 304.342.0159Fax: 304.345.81445550 Winchester AvenueBerkeley Business Park, Suite 5Martinsburg, WV 25405Phone: 304.342.0159www.zmm.comO:\Frederick County Public Schools - FCMS GES Traffic Improvement Study 2022097\Civil\03 Drawings\2022097 Civil Base.dwg REVISIONS NO.DESCRIPTION DATE FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIAOVERALL SITEPLANWASSCHEMATIC DESIGN FREDERICK COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOLS FCMS/GES CAMPUS ROAD IMPROVEMENTS WAS01.13.20232022097C10140'080'160'1" = 80'-0"FREDERICK COUNTYMIDDLE SCHOOLGAINESBOROELEMENTARYSCHOOLGAINESBORO ROADNORTH FREDERICK PIKEROUTE 522NEW ENTRANCE ANDACCESS ROADSWMAREAWETLANDAREAFCMSMAINPARKINGFCMSBUS LOOPFCMSATHLETICAREAGESBUS LOOPELIMINATE CROSSOVEREXTEND TURN LANEMODIFY ENTRANCERIGHT TURN ONLY(ENTER AND EXIT)NEW ENTRANCE ANDACCESS ROADOVERFLOW PARKINGFOR BOTH SCHOOLSFCMS PARENTENTRANCE / EXITFCMS BUSFCMS / GES SERVICEENTRANCE / EXITGES PARENT / BUSENTRANCE / EXITFCMSPRACTICEFIELDACCESS GATESOPEN FOR ATHLETICSOR SPECIAL EVENTSBUS PARKINGAND FUELING195 cby ZMM, INC.200 Country Club Drive SWPlaza One, Building EBlacksburg, VA 24060Phone: 540.552.2151CHECKEDDATECOMM. NO.DRAWNARCHITECTSENGINEERS222 Lee Street, WestCharleston, WV 25302Phone: 304.342.0159Fax: 304.345.81445550 Winchester AvenueBerkeley Business Park, Suite 5Martinsburg, WV 25405Phone: 304.342.0159www.zmm.comO:\Frederick County Public Schools - FCMS GES Traffic Improvement Study 2022097\Civil\03 Drawings\2022097 Civil Base.dwg REVISIONS NO.DESCRIPTION DATE FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIASITE PLANAREA AWASSCHEMATIC DESIGN FREDERICK COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOLS FCMS/GES CAMPUS ROAD IMPROVEMENTS WAS01.13.20232022097C10250'25'050'100'1" = 50'-0"GAINESBORO ROADNORTH FREDERICK PIKENEW ENTRANCE ANDACCESS ROADSWMAREAWETLANDAREAEXTEND TURN LANEFCMSPRACTICEFIELDBUS PARKING AND FUELING24 BUS PARKING SPACES24 CAR PARKING SPACES10,000 GALLON FUEL TANK196 cby ZMM, INC.200 Country Club Drive SWPlaza One, Building EBlacksburg, VA 24060Phone: 540.552.2151CHECKEDDATECOMM. NO.DRAWNARCHITECTSENGINEERS222 Lee Street, WestCharleston, WV 25302Phone: 304.342.0159Fax: 304.345.81445550 Winchester AvenueBerkeley Business Park, Suite 5Martinsburg, WV 25405Phone: 304.342.0159www.zmm.comO:\Frederick County Public Schools - FCMS GES Traffic Improvement Study 2022097\Civil\03 Drawings\2022097 Civil Base.dwg REVISIONS NO.DESCRIPTION DATE FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIASITE PLANAREA BWASSCHEMATIC DESIGN FREDERICK COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOLS FCMS/GES CAMPUS ROAD IMPROVEMENTS WAS01.13.20232022097C10350'25'050'100'1" = 50'-0"FREDERICK COUNTYMIDDLE SCHOOLGAINESBOROELEMENTARYSCHOOLNORTH FREDERICK PIKEROUTE 522SWMAREAWETLANDAREAFCMSMAINPARKINGFCMSBUS LOOPFCMSATHLETICAREAGESBUS LOOPELIMINATE CROSSOVEREXTEND TURN LANEMODIFY ENTRANCERIGHT TURN ONLY(ENTER AND EXIT)NEW ENTRANCE ANDACCESS ROADOVERFLOW PARKINGFOR BOTH SCHOOLSFCMS PARENTENTRANCE / EXITBUS / SERVICE ONLYENTRANCE / EXITACCESS GATESOPEN FOR ATHLETICSOR SPECIAL EVENTSPEDESTRIAN ACCESS TOOVERFLOW PARKINGGES PARENTDROP OFFAREAGES FACULTYENTRANCE / EXITGES BUS LOOPENTRANCE / EXITGES PARENTENTRANCE / EXIT197 Transportation Committee Agenda Item Detail Meeting Date: January 23, 2023 Agenda Section: County Project Updates Title: County Project Updates Attachments: TC01-23-23CountyProjectUpdates.pdf 198 Item 4: County Project Updates Renaissance Drive: Project was put out for advertisement on November 15th and staff is awaiting bids. The decision was recently made to extent the bid window through the end of the month. Gainesboro Road/Route 522 Intersection Project: Covered elsewhere on the agenda 199 Transportation Committee Agenda Item Detail Meeting Date: January 23, 2023 Agenda Section: Other Title: Other Attachments: TC01-23-23Other.pdf 200 Item 5: Other 201