TCAgenda2024June31.Adoption of Agenda
2.Welcome and Introductions
3.Route 37 (Eastern Frederick Transportation) Study Update
3.A.Route 37 Eastern Frederick Transportation Study Update
4.Interstate, Primary, and Secondary Road Plan Updates
4.A.Interstate, Primary, and Secondary Road Plan Updates
5.SmartScale Applications; Leveraged Funding and Support Resolution
5.A.SmartScale Applications; Leveraged Funding and Support Resolution
6.Exit 317 Diverging Diamond and Exit 317 Ramp Realignment Projects Updates
6.A.Exit 317 Diverging Diamond and Exit 317 Ramp Realignment Projects
Updates
7.Route 50/Victory Road Crossover Closure Update
7.A.Route 50/Victory Road Crossover Closure Update
8.County Project Updates
8.A.County Project Updates
AGENDA
TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE
MONDAY, JUNE 3, 2024
8:30 AM
FIRST-FLOOR CONFERENCE ROOM
FREDERICK COUNTY ADMINISTRATION BUILDING
WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA
TC06-03-24Route37EasternFrederickTransportationStudyUpdate.pdf
TC06-03-24InterstatePrimarySecondaryRoadPlanUpdates.pdf
TC06-03-24SmartScaleApplications_LeveragedFundingSupportResolution.pdf
TC06-03-24Exit317DivergingDiamond_RampRealignmentProjectsUpdates.pdf
TC06-03-24Route50VictoryRoadCrossoverClosureUpdate.pdf
1
9.Other
9.A.Other
TC06-03-24CountyProjectUpdates.pdf
TC06-03-24Other.pdf
2
Transportation Committee
Agenda Item Detail
Meeting Date: June 3, 2024
Agenda Section: Route 37 (Eastern Frederick Transportation) Study Update
Title: Route 37 Eastern Frederick Transportation Study Update
Attachments:
TC06-03-24Route37EasternFrederickTransportationStudyUpdate.pdf
3
4
5
1
Table of Contents
Introduction .................................................................................................................................................4
Study Overview.........................................................................................................................................4
Past & Current Studies .................................................................................................................................6
Existing Conditions .....................................................................................................................................11
Environmental Overview........................................................................................................................11
Traffic Analyses.......................................................................................................................................21
Project Purpose & Need ............................................................................................................................45
Project Purpose ......................................................................................................................................45
Project Needs .........................................................................................................................................45
Agency & Public Engagement ....................................................................................................................49
Public Engagement Plan Overview.........................................................................................................49
Stakeholder Identification......................................................................................................................53
Public Meetings......................................................................................................................................53
Community Context Audit......................................................................................................................57
Logical Termini, Independent Utility, & Concept Development ...............................................................60
Logical Termini........................................................................................................................................60
Independent Utility.................................................................................................................................60
Concept Development............................................................................................................................60
Grant Opportunities...................................................................................................................................72
6
2
7
3
Introduction
Study Overview
Frederick County, Virginia is pursuing this study of transportation issues (needs) and possible solutions
for the area to the east of the City of Winchester. The study area will generally include Interstate 81 (I-
81) in the west to the Frederick County / Clarke County line in the east; and will extend from Route 761
on the north side of the city to the Tasker Road area east of the I-81 Exit 310.
The study identified and documented specific transportation needs then developed potential solutions
as concepts. The public had opportunities to provide input on both the needs and conceptual solutions.
Conceptual solutions were refined for public comment and an implementation plan was developed to
include a prioritized list of improvements with estimates of probable costs. This plan will be used by the
County for implementation of funding for transportation improvements in the study area.
The study team was aware of previous efforts to pursue a Route 37 east bypass around Winchester. A
bypass was considered, along with other possible transportation improvements, during the conceptual
solution development and analysis process. The goal of the study is to develop a well-defined and
documented set of transportation needs to be addressed by a prioritized and fiscally implementable set
of transportation improvements. Additional recommendations, in addition to transportation
improvements, such as land use or access management controls, will also be included in the final plan.
8
4
9
5
Past & Current Studies
Route 37 Bypass, Final Environmental Impact Statement and Section 4(f)
Evaluation
The EIS for the Route 37 east bypass and existing Record of
Decision was completed in 2001 left the County,
stakeholders, and the permitting agencies at a crossroads in
the course of action to move forward. Several options and
traffic forecasts were created as part of this activity and a
final alignment with detailed environmental impacts and
mitigations identified for this project. The final solution was a
four-lane limited access alternative with several interchanges
with key roadways along the corridor. However, traffic
volumes have not materialized to date and the five-year
validity of those forecasts have rendered the EIS and ROD
unusable.
Route 7 (Berryville Avenue/Berryville Pike) Corridor Study
This study of Route 7 from Pleasant Valley Road to Greenwood Drive/First Woods Drive was completed
by Michael Baker and finalized in September 2021. Several improvements at intersections along this
corridor were included in that study. Certain of those improvements have advanced through other
funding means and traffic problems along this corridor will certainly continue to be a struggle.
I-81 Corridor Improvement Program
The I-81 Corridor Improvement Program consists of innovative, targeted improvements that will have a
substantial effect on the safety and reliability of a critical portion of our nation’s infrastructure. Within
Virginia, I-81 connects 30 colleges and universities, 21 cities and towns and 13 counties, and parallels
the Blue Ridge Parkway, making this program critical to supporting job growth and economic vitality
while reducing congestion, enhancing safety and reliability, and improving quality of life for everyone in
our region. The 325-mile corridor spans three VDOT districts and also acts as a critical north-south
backbone of the East Coast’s freight network. Nearly 50% of the state’s value of goods are transported
along the corridor, which has the highest per capita truck volume in Virginia (source:
https://improve81.vdot.virginia.gov/). This study was used as information only and reference for
problems identified during the course of the EFCTS project. The I-81 program is advancing
independently and will address several problems identified by the public during the EFCTS project.
Frederick County Comprehensive Plan
The Current 2035 Frederick County Comprehensive Plan was used as input for this study as well. The
latest version of the comprehensive plan was formerly adopted in January 2017 by the Frederick County
Board of Supervisors. Included in that comprehensive plan was the Eastern Frederick County Road plan
which was also used as input into this study.
10
6
Potential Sites Identified by Other Studies
The list of studies and other references we reviewed are shown in Table 1. Table 2 shows the sites in the
study area that showed up in prior studies as locations with potential improvement scopes or known
transportation issues. It also shows whether they were noted by the stakeholders, the road
classification, and whether they were identified as a Potentially Safety Improvement (PSI) intersection or
segment according to VDOT based on crash data from 2018 to 2022.
Of the top roads in Table 2, US 11/Martinsburg Pike has been discussed for both operational and safety
improvements via widening and I-81 interchange reconfiguration. The second one in the list has been
studied for installing partial Median U-turn intersections and US 17/US 50 widening. Notable plans
tested or considered for the remaining roads include Redbud Road Realignment, creating a direct
connection for Redbud Road between Snowden Bridge and Millburn Road, realigning US 522 near US 50
to mitigate congestion, and adding turn lanes at the intersection of Senseny Road and Crestleigh Drive.
11
7
12
8
13
9
14
10
Existing Conditions
Environmental Overview
Demographics & Socioeconomics
The Study Area is primarily located within the Urban Development Area (UDA) of Frederick County.
UDAs are anticipated for higher intensity development. Suburban development within the UDAs
continues to be the predominant land use pattern for residential use, with an average residential
density between two to four units per acre.
Due to the suburban-style of development within the Study Area, the transportation network of the
study area is primarily auto-centric. Public transit is currently unavailable within Frederick County;
however, the County has recently participated in the WinFred MPO Transit Feasibility Study. Dedicated
bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure are limited within the study area. The County has expressed
interest in the construction of multi-use/shared paths to facilitate bicycle and pedestrian access.
According to the Frederick County Comprehensive Plan 2035, Frederick County has grown significantly in
the past two decades in both population and economic development. One of the contributors to the
County’s population growth was the migration of people from inside of the Washington Metropolitan
Statistical Area (WMSA) to Frederick County for a higher quality of life including lower housing costs and
a lower tax rate. Frederick County, because of its location and excellent access to Northern Virginia and
Washington, DC, has become a desirable place to live for those commuters. Frederick County has also
become an attractive place to live for retirees.
While the Frederick County Comprehensive Plan does not state projected numbers for the total
population or jobs in 20235, the Winchester/Frederick County Metropolitan Planning Organization
(WinFred MPO) shared combined projections for the City of Winchester and Frederick County in their
Transportation Plan 2040 (see Figure 1). Growth in population and employment will continue to place
significant demands on the transportation system.
According to studies performed by the Economic Development Authority (EDA), Frederick County
remains primarily an in-commute location. Frederick County is also home to a large population of
residents that commute out of the County for employment.
The average commute time for County workers aged 16 years and over is 33 minutes. The average
commute time for a Virginian worker aged 16 years and over is 25 minutes.
Using the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Environmental Justice Screen (EJScreen), low-
income populations (see Figure 5) and populations over the age of 64 (see Figure 6) were analyzed.
EJScreen uses ACS 2021 5-year estimate data. The low-income populations and over the age of 64
populations of Frederick County were compared to Virginia (state). The state percentile signifies what
percent of the state population has an equal or lower value, meaning a lower percent low-income or
over age of 64 population.
15
11
It is estimated that owning and maintaining a car costs about $10,000 annually. That means it would
make up nearly a third of the household budget for a family of four living right at the poverty line.
Populations over the age of 65 include individuals with a wide range of needs and abilities and many
older residents find their transportation needs and challenges shifting at this time in their lives. Many
seniors experience physical or financial limitations that prevent them from owning and operating a
vehicle while also experiencing an increased need for medical services. Seniors are significant users of
human service transportation.
In Frederick County’s Comprehensive Plan, a strategy to increase cost-effective alternatives to vehicles
includes coordinating with existing agencies such as the Shenandoah Area Agency on Aging (SAAA) and
Access Independence.
16
12
17
13
18
14
19
15
20
16
21
17
Natural Resources
The United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) and the Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA)
are the federal agencies which regulate watercourses (steams) as governed by Section 404 of the Clean
Water Act. The Virginia Department of Environmental Quality (VADEQ) administers the Virginia Water
Protection (VWP) permit program to regulate impacts to surface waters. To protect water quality, DEQ
is also tasked with protecting wetlands and steams to preserve their beneficial uses. The VWP permit
program follows Section 62 of the Code of Virginia and federal guidelines under the Clean Water Act
Section 401.
The identification of watercourses/streams identified in the study area are depicted in Table 4. Streams
in the study area include Opequon Creek, Lick Run, Ash Hollow Run, Redbud Run, Abrams Creek, Hoge
Run, Buffalo Lick Run, Sulphur Spring Run, Wrights Run, and their tributaries. Many of these streams
would be impacted by the construction of the Route 37 bypass or the alternatives included in this
report. To avoid impacts to streams and floodplains, almost one mile of bridges would be required for
the proposed projects (5,736 linear feet). Most of the impacts from bridges are on the northern and
southern sections of the Route 37 bypass alignment. Measures can be researched during the
preliminary engineering phase of these projects to mitigate these effects. Examples of such mitigation
are retaining walls, using box or pipe culverts where possible, steepening of bank slopes, usage of
certain types of wingwalls or abutments to decrease the footprint, and other best management
practices.
Wetland delineation occurs as a part of the preliminary engineering process for each project. If
temporary wetland impacts occur, they would be restored to pre-construction conditions at the end of
construction to the maximum extent possible. This would include re-seeding with wetland seed mix,
soil segregation, wetland mapping and use of sediment/silt rocks. If permanent impacts are
unavoidable, mitigation will include the replacement of the wetland within the applicable watershed.
Additional natural resources were considered during our analysis as shown in Table 4 and Figure 7 in the
following pages.
22
18
23
19
24
20
Land Use and Planning
The study utilized the WinFred current travel demand model (2015 base year) and updated
demographic forecasts for the ongoing VDOT model update (To 2020 base year) to get the most
accurate available information for the timeframe of the study. The network and TAZ structure was also
modified to include roadway improvements to and including 2019. Updated future year demographics
were also used to create a 2050 future year for this analysis. All results should be validated once the
travel demand model update is complete from VDOT.
Traffic Analyses
Data collection and analysis efforts focused on using existing available traffic data, including current and
future projections (generally a 20-year horizon). No additional traffic counts were completed as part of
the study. Traffic generated by new and pending development within, or that influence the
transportation network in the study area, was included in the updated demographic forecasts used in
the model.
Existing Traffic
Existing problem areas and challenges were evaluated based on V/C ratios from the calibrated 2019
travel demand model and updated with anecdotal information and information from VDOT and
Streetlight validation.
Future Traffic Projections
Updating 2015 Model
The regional travel demand model, as provided by VDOT for this study, was modified to include a 2019
and 2050 set of model years. To create the 2019 and 2050 zonal demographics, data developed by the
MPO to support future model efforts was adapted to the provided model structure. This included
aggregation of zonal data based on new zone splits the MPO has developed (see Table 5). The new zonal
splits are shown in Figure 7. The external station volumes for 2019 were set to be equal to available
count data from VDOT. 2050 external station forecasts were developed by applying the 2015 to 2040
MPO annual growth rates to the 2019 count data.
The EFCTS Traffic Study area encompasses the eastern half of the WinFred Regional Travel Demand
Model. The model zones that are part of the study area are shown in Figure 8.
The 2015 roadway network was used to create the 2019 network. The primary change included
updating the network to reflect recent projects that have been completed in the region. The only
project added was Crossover Boulevard.
Validating 2019 Model
The 2019 model results were evaluated against 2019 counts from VDOT’s database. The percentage
error by roadway type and percent RMSE by volume group were calculated and compared against the
documented 2015 model validation results. Table 6 reports the percent error by Roadway Type. The
Target or Criterion is based on the VDOT Travel Model Policy Guidelines. Table 7 reports the Percent
RMSE calculated by volume group with the assigned Target or Criterion as established by VDOT.
25
21
The 2019 model meets the validation targets by volume group and by percent error by roadway type for
freeways and major arterials. Because the 2019 zonal data has changed significantly from the past
model inputs, the change in validation results is anticipated. Given the ability to meet several of the
criteria as established by VDOT for the region and on higher level facilities, the model is considered
suitable for the evaluation included in this study.
Model Results
Overall growth in Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) between 2019 and 2050 is 1.7% using a linear growth
rate. This growth aligns with the growth in households (1.2% per year) and external traffic (1.8% per
year). Table 8 provides a summary of the VMT by facility type for the two model years.
26
22
27
23
28
24
29
25
30
26
31
27
Origin-Destination Trip Volumes
Figure 9 shows the district map used for the traffic analyses and estimating the origin-destination matrix
within and bordering Frederick County. Districts 15 through 19 are the five external districts. Tables 9
through 12 show the district-to-district trip volumes and the ranking of the origin-destination pairs for
2022 and 2050. The highest zone to zone totals were used to establish needs within the study area.
Table 9 displays the model outcomes for origin-destination trip volumes in 2022, while Table 10 ranks
the matrix cells based on those volumes. The top two highest origin-destination pairs are between CBD
zones 7 and 8. Following closely, between 15 and 16, are the next two highest pairs, located outside the
north and south boundaries of the county, largely due to through traffic on I-81. Additionally, residential
districts 2 and 4 show high trip volumes to and from CBD zones 7 and 8.
Tables 11 and 12 serve as companions to Tables 9 and 10, focusing on data for 2050. Interestingly, there
are few changes in the ranking matrix, as all the district pairs that were top ranked in 2022 remain at the
top in 2050. Among the other district pairs, the traffic growth (not shown in the tables) between
districts 3 and 7 and 9 and 8 are notable.
Comparison with Streetlight Data
We compared the model results of district-to-district trip distribution with that obtained from
Streetlight data. Streetlight uses big data analytics to estimate travel patterns between geometric zones.
To illustrate with an example, Figure 10 shows the percentages of trips from District 3 to all the districts
according to the Streetlight data and the WinFred model. It shows that, with some exceptions, the
percentages are not too far according to the model and Streetlight data for most districts.
32
28
33
29
34
30
35
31
36
32
37
33
38
34
Capacity / Level of Service Analysis
The maximum flow rate at Level of Service D and E for different road types are estimated based on the
Highway Capacity Manual. The model converts daily productions and attractions into trips from origins
to destinations by four time periods: AM (6:00 a.m. – 8:59 a.m.), Midday, PM (3:00 p.m. – 5:59 p.m.),
and Night. The time-of-day factors are applied by period, and simultaneously convert production-
attraction flows to origin-destination flows by time of day. The peak hour volume-to-capacity (V/C) ratio
is then estimated to highlight the segments and intersections that are critical in terms of traffic
operations. Figure 12 shows the locations where the volume-to-capacity (LOS D) ratio would exceed
0.85 in 2050.
Possible Applications of Alternative Intersections
The road segments highlighted in Figure 12 (for future predicted V/C greater than 0.85) should be
investigated for various operational treatments. Recently, the application of alternative intersections to
improve mobility and safety issues has gained popularity. A list of such intersections can be found on the
Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) website on Intersection and Interchange Control
Assessment Program (iCAP). One of their downsides is that they often require larger footprints
compared to an equivalent traditional intersection, additional intersections, and detour of traffic. Of the
critical intersections shown, we picked two where retrofitting an alternative intersection is possible. To
estimate the performance of different options, we used VDOT’s Junction Screening Tool (VJuST). This
tool aids transportation engineers and planners in determining which innovative intersection and
interchange configurations might be appropriate at a specific location. Applying the tool is usually the
first step of iCAP, which, in turn is an important part of the SMART SCALE application.
VJuST estimates the capacity of an intersection using the critical lane volume (CLV) method with the
assumption that the maximum capacity of the intersection is fixed. VJuST utilizes turning movement
counts and lane configuration data to estimate V/C for different alternatives. It does not consider signal
timing, geometric considerations, or driver behavior parameters. The tool also ranks the alternatives by
their safety performance based on built-in values of the number of conflict points. The tool also has
built-in information on pedestrian accommodation level and planning level costs for each option.
The two intersections selected for this purpose are Front Royal Pike-Airport Rd and Greenwood Rd-
Valley Mill Rd. Both have one approach with 0.85 or higher V/C in 2050. The highest peak hour volumes
were utilized from the modeling exercise described earlier for each leg. Reasonable assumptions were
made for turning movement percentages based on the number of lanes and anticipated traffic patterns.
Table 14 shows the volume tables input in VJuST.
Table 14 shows the V/C for different options as well as the built-in pedestrian accommodation level,
weighted conflict points, and planning level cost category. The tool suggests that having a Partial Median
U-turn for the first Greenwood Rd-Valley Mill Rd and a Full Median U-turn for Front Royal Pike-Airport
Rd would be beneficial to both traffic operation, pedestrian accommodation, and number of conflict
points. At a Median U-turn intersection, left-turn movements are removed from the main intersection
and diverted to a median opening on the major road downstream of the main intersection. Removing
the left-turns reduces the number of phases in each cycle, thus reducing delays. It also eliminates the
crossing conflicts involving the left-turns.
39
35
Some options for alternative intersections have been excluded from the analysis described above due to
geometric constraints. For example, the partial displaced left-turn intersection was not considered for
Greenwood Rd-Valley Mill Rd. Note that the results of this analysis are very high-level and limited by
the assumptions on traffic volumes. This exercise could be applied to other critical intersections in the
study area, but turning movement counts and additional analysis of alternative intersection
improvements are needed for a more detailed analysis.
40
36
41
37
42
38
43
39
Safety Analysis
The road safety aspect of this project was analyzed from three perspectives. The first one identified
locations that are predicted to experience high traffic demand in 2050 which may have potential safety
issues. The second focused on safety issues for vulnerable road users such as pedestrians and bicyclists.
The third perspective looked at freight-related accidents on I-81 to determine the potential impact of
diversion of truck traffic to other routes. We used archived crash data from VDOT for the analysis.
Sites with Potential Safety Issues and High Future Traffic Demand
The capacity analysis previously discussed identified areas with a high future volume-to-capacity (V/C)
ratio. This information was then combined with data from VDOT on Potential for Safety Improvement
(PSI) locations. These PSI locations are determined by VDOT through network screening using safety
performance functions (SPFs) that consider crash history, roadway factors, and traffic characteristics to
prioritize areas for safety investments.
Figure 13 maps out the top 100 PSI segments and intersections for the years 2018-2022 highlighting
segments with V/C ratios above 0.85 predicted for 2050. The map highlights six locations where both
top PSI intersections or segments and V/C values greater than 0.85 intersect. These locations are listed
below in sequence corresponding to the numerals on the map.
i.SR 7 near I-81: There are several top PSI intersections, a top PSI segment, and the
predicted V/C is between 0.85 and 1.0.
ii.SR 7 near the border with Clarke County: There is a top PSI intersection and the
predicted V/C is between 1.0 and 1.5.
iii.Greenwood Road south of Valley Mill Road: There is a top PSI intersection the
predicted V/C is between 1.0 and 1.5.
iv.Senseny Road between Meade Drive and Williamson Road: There are a pair of top PSI
intersections that overlap with the predicted V/C on Senseny Road between 1.0 and 1.5.
v.US 17 (Millwood Pike) and US 522 (Front Royal Pike): The intersection is associated
with and close to several top PSI segments and intersections. The V/C of Millwood Pike
and the I-81 northbound ramp is between 1.0 and 1.5.
vi.Greenwood Road north of Sulphur Spring Road: The long segment is a top PSI with the
predicted V/C between 0.85 and 1.0.
vii.Airport Road and US 522 (Front Royal Pike): This intersection is a top PSI and the
predicted V/C of the east approach is between 0.85 and 1.0.
Earlier, we discussed some of these six locations for potential capacity improvements. The above
observations highlight that they need to be considered for safety improvements alongside operational
treatments.
Vulnerable Road User Safety
Pedestrian and bicycle crashes are less common than crashes involving only motorized vehicles, but they
tend to be more severe. A total of six bicycle and eight pedestrian-involved crashes occurred within the
study area between 2017 and 2021. Regarding bicycle crashes, SR 7 and Senseny Road each had a
cluster of crash pairs located within 1,200 feet, although there was no apparent pattern or significant
clustering.
44
40
Pedestrian-involved crashes show more clustering. Six of the eight crashes occurred within a half-mile
radius from the intersection of US 522 (Front Royal Pike), US 17, and the I-81 ramps at Exit 313A, as
shown in Figure 13. As is common for pedestrian crashes, most of them resulted in serious injuries.
The land use pattern of the portion of US 17 and US 522 shown in Figure 13 is noteworthy in that the
north side of US 17 has seven hotels and university housing, while the south side has approximately 10
convenience stores and restaurants. The land use on the two sides of US 522 is somewhat similar.
Additionally, these road sections coincide with top PSI segments and intersections identified for the
2018-2022 period. Significant pedestrian exposure to traffic is expected on both roads, however, there
are very limited pedestrian amenities (sidewalks or crosswalks) present on either road within the extent
of the map. These conditions make this area a candidate for further investigations regarding pedestrian
safety.
Freight Accident Analysis
The purpose of this analysis was to identify any time-based patterns of freight accidents on the
interstate route that may suggest the diversion of truck traffic to local roads. The analysis was motivated
by the public’s concern about truck traffic on I-81 being diverted to local roads due to congestion on I-
81. The portion of I-81 within the study area is a major freight route, with more than 20% of daily traffic
consisting of trucks. Accident data for trucks and other vehicles by time of day were used for this
analysis. As such, a preliminary analysis was completed to see if there was any indication of increased
truck exposure on the local roads during peak hours.
Analysis of accident data by time of day showed that the percentage of truck accidents occurring during
peak hours is higher on I-81 than on other major local routes like Route 37. According to recent crash
data, 24% of truck accidents on I-81 occurred during peak hours. On Route 37, the distribution is more
uniform, with 16% of truck accidents occurring during peak hours. For the overall city of Winchester, this
percentage is 20%. The pattern suggests that there is no indication of increased truck diversion from I-81
to local roads during peak hours. Additional analysis could be completed later if public concerns
continue to be voiced.
45
41
46
42
47
43
48
44
Project Purpose & Need
Given the nature of the study area, a specific point was made to identify problems throughout the study
area and not just focus on the original Route 37 Bypass study and EIS statements. It was also desired to
determine if any of the original segments of the Route 37 Bypass had logical termini and independent
utility and would effectively address any of the problems now and in the future that were found in the
problem assessment phase of the study.
To create the purpose and needs statements, an evaluation of the most recent studies and existing
comprehensive plan was completed. Additionally, conversations with staff at Frederick County and
VDOT helped to provide context and frame these statements. A review of the PSI segments and
intersections was also conducted, and the needs statements reflect improvements proposed in that list.
A thorough region wide travel demand model analysis was completed to determine areas of traffic
growth in 2050 and origin and destination of these trip pairs as noted earlier in the report.
Project Purpose
The purpose of this study is to develop and evaluate a range of alternatives to improve mobility and
safety for all road users, reduce congestion, and enhance system continuity while meeting the needs of
interstate, regional, and local traffic passing through and moving within the study area, including the
evaluation of the proposed Route 37 bypass.
Project Needs
Bicycle/Pedestrian
As indicated in the 2014 Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan Update, the existing bicycle network lacks
infrastructure and 62% of roadways have Level of Service (LOS) D (adequate for advanced riders) or
worse. The pedestrian results showed that 60% of the network was either deemed adequate or
adequate, but not likely used for choice users. With land development since 2014, it is likely that bicycle
and pedestrian needs have only increased since this time and linkages are desired to regional parks,
schools, and commercial development.
Congestion
Virginia State Route 7 between the Frederick/Clarke County line and the City of Winchester is the major
link between Frederick County and destinations in Northern Virginia. Volumes from the STARS study in
2017 indicate that the ADT on this corridor is projected to reach 40,800 vehicles per day (vpd) by 2047.
There is a current SMART Scale project aimed at improving safety and traffic flow on Route 7 between
Route 815/Millbrook Drive/Blossom Drive and Route 656/First Woods Drive/Greenwood Drive;
however, additional segments have been identified in the PSI.
•The intersection of I-81 Exit 317 and Route 11 is the most congested intersection in the Staunton
District and is currently being redesigned as a diverging diamond interchange. Additionally,
improved connectivity is needed between Route 7 and Route 11 to alleviate congestion.
•Development in the area near the airport along both the Route 50 and Route 522 corridors has the
potential to create congestion issues in the future, both at Exit 313 and at intersections along both
corridors and the intersection with Crossover Boulevard. This important connection has been
49
45
identified in the 2035 Frederick County Comprehensive Plan and will offer improved access to the
Virginia Inland Port.
•Large scale residential land development on the southern end of the study area is utilizing Warrior
Drive and Tasker Road to access I-81 and Route 37. Additional interstate or state route connectivity
from Warrior Drive is desired to continue residential development in this area and relieve
congestion on Tasker Road.
Safety
•Since 2017, there have been 206 reportable crashes in the 3.76-mile stretch of roadway on Route 7
between the City of Winchester and the Frederick/Clarke County line. The 1.28-mile segment
between Greenwood Road and Valley Mill Road has been identified as the #7 top Potential Safety
Improvement (PSI) priority by VDOT. A SMART Scale project is currently in the design phase to add
capacity and reduce conflict points to a 0.52-mile segment of roadway in this crash cluster area,
however this project only addresses a portion of the study area.
•The VA 7 and US 11 corridors have two of the more prominent crash histories, including significant
numbers of fatal and injury crashes.
o ADT on Route 7 EB: 14,000 vpd; Route 7 WB: 14,000 vpd; Total Crashes = 735;
Fatal/Injury (FI) Crashes = 176
o ADT on Route 11 NB: 14,000 vpd; Route 11 SB: 14,000 vpd; Total Crashes = 347; FI = 71
•Eastern Frederick County includes 24 intersections and 15 segments in VDOT’s 2017-2021 Top 100
Potential Safety Improvement (PSI) list.
o Six of the 15 segments are located on Route 7:
▪Begin MP 1.75, end MP 2.00: Total Crashes = 23; Fatal/Injury (FI) Crashes = 8
(VDOT District Rank 26)
▪Begin MP 2.10, end MP 2.26: Total Crashes = 52; FI = 10 (VDOT District Rank 2)
▪Begin MP 2.26, end MP 2.51: Total Crashes = 16; FI = 3 (VDOT District Rank 60)
▪Begin MP 2.51, end MP 2.82: Total Crashes = 21; FI = 6 (VDOT District Rank 13)
▪Begin MP 2.82, end MP 3.26: Total Crashes = 17; FI = 3 (VDOT District Rank 94)
▪Begin MP 3.48, end MP 4.76: Total Crashes = 59; FI = 14 (VDOT District Rank 7) –
improvements to this segment have been committed in the SYIP, with
construction completed in 2026.
Interstate 81 Needs – Identified in the I-81 Corridor Improvement Plan:
•Improvements are needed at the intersection of I-81 Exit 307 to address safety and congestion;
however, this is outside of the study area for this project.
•Recent improvements were completed at the I-81 and Route 37 interchange at Exit 310. The
installation of a changeable message sign (CMS) is proposed as a safety measure.
•Safety and congestion are an issue at the I-81 and Route 50 interchange at Exit 313. CMS’s are
proposed at this interchange, however that does not address the existing congestion issue.
•Widening I-81 to three lanes between Exits 313 and 317 (both Northbound and Southbound)
was recommended for funding.
•The addition of an auxiliary lane is a recommended improvement between Exits 313 and 315.
•The addition of traffic cameras was recommended at Exit 317.
50
46
•A design concept was created for a diverging diamond interchange (DDI) at Exit 317 to address
congestion and safety.
51
47
52
48
Agency & Public Engagement
The McCormick Taylor project team collaborated with the Virginia Department of Transportation
(VDOT), Frederick County, the City of Winchester, the Northern Shenandoah Valley Regional
Commission (NSVRC) and the WinFred Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) over the course of
this project. Bi-weekly project status meetings were conducted with Frederick County, and project
status reports including PowerPoint presentations were regularly delivered to the Frederick County
Transportation Committee by the McCormick Taylor consultant team Project Managers, Brian St. John,
P.E., PTOE, and Alexandra Castrechini, P.E.
The communications protocols and public outreach practices utilized for this project were developed to
align with VDOT’s Governance Document Public Involvement Manual (Rev November 2021), and the
draft Public Engagement Plan was shared with the public for review and comment and presented to
Frederick County for approval for implementation.
Public Engagement Plan Overview
The Public Engagement Plan (PEP) for the EFCTS Project outlines the comprehensive, proactive outreach
strategy implemented during the project. As part of the project development process, the goal of
Frederick County was to have clear, accurate and regular communications with the public, project
stakeholders, public officials, and the media, as appropriate, and with effectively planned and
implemented engagement opportunities to engage in dialogue with stakeholders and for the collection
of project-related public input and feedback. The overall goal of the PEP was to:
•Heighten public awareness and understanding of the project
•Identify and purposefully engage key stakeholders in the project development process
•Provide public access to current and accurate project information
•Deliver timely responses to public inquiries; and
•Assimilate public views, preferences, and support for project outcomes that enhance mobility,
safety, and efficiency
The PEP was updated over the course of the project to reflect the actual strategies and activities
implemented and includes documentation of modifications made to be responsive to public needs.
A primary first step in the implementation of the PEP was to identify the demographics of the
population in the vicinity of the project area, and this step included the use of the Climate and Economic
Justice Screening Tool. For the varying perspectives to be considered, it was important to identify the
disadvantaged communities, populations of color and low-income communities at the earliest possible
time in project development (Figures 14 and 15). Additional Information on low-income communities
identified can be found in the Appendix in the section entitled Existing Conditions. Historically, these
groups have been unintentionally left out of the planning and project development process for
transportation projects. Early identification and specific strategies to reach and be inclusive of
53
49
disadvantaged communities can help improve transportation project outcomes that will benefit the
broader community, while also minimizing potential harm from a project.
54
50
55
51
56
52
Stakeholder Identification
McCormick Taylor and Frederick County worked together to develop a stakeholder database that could
be expanded with the continued progress of the project development process. The database created for
this phase of the project included property and business owners, educational institutions, and local,
state, and federal elected officials within the project area. The stakeholder database was used primarily
for the Community Context Audit which is discussed in more detail as part of this section on Page (XX).
Public Meetings
There were three public meetings held in the Frederick County Board of Supervisors’ Room to engage,
educate, and inform the public. The timeline of public engagement activities is shown in Figure 16. The
McCormick Taylor project team received an advance Notice to Proceed (NTP) so that support could be
provided for the Transportation Forum conducted on Thursday, November 10, 2022, which is not shown
on the schedule. The schedule reflects the official start of the outreach process following the issuance of
the full NTP for the study beginning in the second quarter of 2023.
As noted previously, an introductory public meeting for the EFCTS project was held on Nov. 10, 2022,
and provided for a brief introduction to the planned project, and an opportunity for the public to
express their thoughts, provide feedback and ask questions about the previous “East Route 37 Bypass”
project. A survey was conducted at this meeting, and participants had the opportunity to complete the
forms and return them before leaving. The survey generated a total of 11 responses and out of those
responses it was clear the Route 37 East bypass was still on the minds of the respondents at the
meeting. Copies of the completed surveys are provided in the Appendix.
A second public meeting was held on November 16, 2023, again as part of the regularly scheduled
Fredrick County Transportation Forum. County Planner John Bishop, AICP moderated the meeting, and
Alex Castrechini, P.E., the McCormick Taylor Project Manager, provided an update on the project status
and next steps. Meeting attendees were also advised of the availability of the Draft Public Engagement
Plan for public review and comment, which provided a preview of the planned public outreach
strategies for the project. Ms. Castrechini’s PowerPoint presentation also included a web map
developed to visually convey projected traffic volume data. She explained what the roadway network
would look like in 2050 if no improvements were made. Ms. Castrechini shared the results of the
Community Context Audit, and invited the public to review a copy of the report which was available at
the project display station in the rear of the meeting room. A copy of the Public Engagement Plan, and
the Community Context Audit summary are included in the Appendix. Of equal importance, Ms.
Castrechini reviewed the draft Purpose and Needs statements as part of the presentation. She explained
that these statements were developed based on the consultant team analyses. A survey form specific to
the Purpose and Needs statements was provided to the meeting attendees so that they could review
each of the statements individually, and then provide feedback. Since the survey was pretty extensive
and no responses were received the evening of the meeting, an online version of the survey was created
and released for public use in early December 2023 and it remained available to the public until mid-
January
57
53
2024. The same comment form was also posted on the county website for easy access. A total of 148
surveys were received during the public comment period. The draft Purpose and Needs statements
were overwhelmingly accepted as depicted in Figure 17. A copy of the Purpose and Needs Statement
Survey and a more detailed summary of the survey results are provided in the Appendix.
A third and final public meeting was held on March 14, 2024, at the Frederick County Board of
Supervisors Room. This meeting included a presentation of numerous proposed transportation solutions
in the form of conceptual designs to be evaluated by the County for more detailed evaluation, analysis,
and design.
Mr. Brian St. John, P.E., PTOE, presented on behalf of the McCormick Taylor team providing a
comprehensive review of the project development process leading up to the proposed transportation
solutions, and then reviewed each proposed solution individually. He also revisited the results of the
public feedback received on the Purpose and Needs statements survey noting that 95% of the responses
received were in agreement with the Purpose and Needs Statements as presented. Displays of the
proposed conceptual designs of the transportation solutions were available for the public to review
upon the completion of the presentation. Members of the County, the Virginia Department of
Transportation (VDOT), and the McCormick Taylor project team were present to interact with the
meeting attendees and respond to questions.
A meeting summary for the public meetings conducted by the McCormick Taylor project team was
prepared for each session held in 2023 and 2024, and copies of the meeting summaries, meeting plans,
proposed meeting publicity is included in the Appendix.
58
54
59
55
60
56
Community Context Audit
McCormick Taylor worked with the County to identify fifteen key stakeholders to be invited to take part
in the Community Context Audit. The purpose of the Community Context Audit was to solicit a sampling
of local interests, concerns, and perceptions about transportation within the project area during the
early stages of the project development process. The audit was accomplished through an interview
process that could be completed using a method of their choice: 1) an in-person interview; 2) a
telephone interview; or 3) via a Teams Conference Call. The interviews allowed the project team to
proactively cultivate relationships with key stakeholders, establish points of contact with local
organizations and within the business communities, and establish reliable lines of communication to
share project updates. The method for the interview was selected by each individual stakeholder and
was conducted on a date and at a time set by the interviewee. The interview questions and methods
were prepared by the McCormick Taylor project team and reviewed and approved by the County in
advance of implementation.
Interviews of the key stakeholders began on July 14, 2023, with the initial goal to reach all 15 key
stakeholders. Stakeholders who were reached were given the option to take the interview at the time
of the phone call or to schedule a future date for the interview using the method of their choice as
noted previously. Four stakeholders who were contacted did not respond to the invitation to participate
in the interview; two interviewees opted for a phone interview; and a total of eight interviewees opted
for an MS Teams video interview. All interviews were recorded for accuracy and with advance
permission from each interviewee. No one requested an in-person interview.
By July 18, 2023, the initial outreach to the stakeholders was completed. With 14 contacts successfully
initiated and 10 of the interviews successfully completed, it was determined that the effort made was
sufficient. The following information is a summary of the feedback received from the interviewees in
total. It is worthy of note that the identified themes below represent the collective opinions of the
interviewees.
Stakeholders who completed the interview process:
•Larry Oliver, Frederick County Fire and Rescue
•Whit Wagner, Fort Collier
•Chris Durant, Navy Federal Credit Union
•Cynthia Schnieder, Top of VA Chamber
•Jeff Buettner, City of Winchester Economic Development Authority
•Gray Farland, Shockey Companies
•JP Carr, Glaize Development
•Nick Sabo, Winchester Regional Airport
•Barry Schnoor, Shenandoah University
•Patrick Barker, Frederick County Economic Development Authority
61
57
Stakeholders who were contacted, but opted out of the interview process:
•Lenny Millholland, Frederick County Sheriff’s Office
•Seth Levy, Shenandoah Agency on Aging
•Abbey Rembold, Valley Health System
•Justin Kerns, Winchester Frederick County Convention & Visitors Bureau
Collective Themes
•Alleviating traffic congestion and reducing crashes on I-81 is key to improving mobility in
Frederick County.
•Traffic congestion and tractor trailers on local roads are caused by drivers avoiding traffic
congestion on I-81.
•Traffic congestion on I-81 causes challenges for emergency services to reach emergencies.
•There is concern that the roads where development is planned or underway, like in northern
Frederick County, are not sufficiently sized for future traffic and that the development will
worsen traffic congestion.
•Alternative forms of transportation are valued and need to be improved and expanded: walking,
biking, public transit.
•Frederick County’s location (proximity to I-81, Virginia Inland Port, Frederick County Regional
Airport) is ideal for the warehouse/manufacturing/freight industry, which is resulting in
increased truck/tractor trailer traffic.
•Roadway infrastructure capacities at present are not enough for the scale and volume of
planned developments.
•Frederick County is becoming a less affordable place to live, causing people to live further away
from their jobs in Frederick County.
•Proximity to congested commuter routes has a detrimental impact on housing purchase choices.
•Frederick County is becoming a suburb of Washington, D.C. As a result, morning and evening
rush hour has worsened, despite an increase in remote work since the COVID-19 pandemic.
A copy of the stakeholders list, the interview script, and the Community Context Audit Interview
Summary which includes additional detail is provided in the Appendix.
62
58
63
59
Logical Termini, Independent Utility, & Concept Development
Logical Termini
Logical termini for project development are defined as rational end points for a transportation
improvement and for a review of the environmental impacts from such improvement. Typically, the
most common termini are points of major traffic generation, especially intersecting roadways. This is
because in most cases, traffic generators determine the size and type of facility being proposed.
However, there are also cases where the project improvement is not primarily related to congestion due
to traffic generators, and the choice of termini based on these generators may not be appropriate.
For projects involving safety improvements, almost any termini (e.g., political jurisdictions, geographical
features) can be chosen to correspond to those sections where safety improvements are most needed.
The first criterion, that the project connects logical termini and be of sufficient length to address matters
on a broad scope, is largely irrelevant due to the limited scope of most safety improvements.
Furthermore, even if other safety improvements are needed, the project termini need not be expanded
to include these other improvements. The other two criteria still need to be met to choose logical
termini: the safety improvements must have independent utility (i.e., they can function as stand-alone
improvements without forcing other improvements that may have impacts), and these improvements
must not restrict consideration of other reasonably foreseeable transportation improvements (such as
major safety improvements in an adjoining section). In addition, environmental requirements must still
be met.
For this project, improvements were evaluated in the entire study area for the EFCTS project and
attempted to consider all additional studies that had been or were in process in the development of
logical transportation improvements listed in the matrix of potential projects.
Independent Utility
As stated in the previous section, projects must have independent utility meaning they must be usable
and be a reasonable expenditure even if no additional transportation improvements are made. We have
summarized a list of potential projects in the table below. Many of these were vetted at the public
outreach meetings to facilitate movement forward for grant and funding consideration. Others are ideas
for inclusion in future efforts and in comprehensive plan and other planning updates.
Original Route 37 Bypass Assessment
Each segment of the original bypass was considered and an evaluation completed. Detailed cost
estimates were not developed for the original proposed four lane limited access configuration but
engineering judgement and comparable facilities were used to develop costs referenced in this section
of the report. Detailed work was completed to develop potential solutions to address the needs noted
earlier in the document.
Segment from Route 37 on the west side of Interstate 81 to Route 11 including a system interchange
with Route 37 on the west and a cloverleaf interchange with Interstate 81. This segment had the least
traffic volume in the updated travel demand model and it is the most expensive segment of the original
64
60
bypass. Engineering judgement would lead to a cost of over half a billion dollars for that segment of the
original bypass including the interchange with Interstate 81 and Route 37.
Segment from Route 11/Snowden Bridge Boulevard Interchange (As originally proposed) to Route 7
(Berryville Pike) attracts a large amount of traffic and is in an area of the study area that is rapidly
growing from both a residential and employment perspective. It would also allow some relief to
Berryville Pike which is one of the corridors with high V/C ratios in 2050. This segment in the four-lane
limited access configuration would like be over $250 million dollars given the interchanges, ROW and
structures required.
Segment from Route 7, Berryville Pike to US 50/US17 (Millwood Pike) is a link through relatively
undeveloped land and may increase sprawl and encourage development that is not desirable. This
segment of the original bypass attracts some traffic compared to the other segments but has less
independent value as it relates to the needs identified in this study. The segment from Berryville Pike to
Senseny Road has more value and could reduce traffic on Senseny road and provide an alternative to
Route 7 Berryville Pike. The segment south of Senseny to Millwood Pike traverses significant topography
and would need to be relocated around the landfill to be feasible.
Segment from US 50/US 17 (Millwood Pike) to US 522 (Front Royal Pike) is another link through
relatively undeveloped land but would provide access to appropriately zoned land and areas targeted
for development in and around the airport and along both Millwood Pike and Front Royal Pike. It would
also provide for alternate connections to Papermill and Airport Road/Crossover Blvd for future relief.
This segment would also likely cost over $200 million in the prior configuration.
Segment from US 522 (Front Royal Pike) to Interstate 81/Tasker Road is the most southern section of
the original Route 37 bypass and attracts a significant amount of traffic both in the total bypass
configuration and independently by itself in the 2050 travel demand model. It is a costly segment in the
original configuration and also in the new alternate configuration due to number of structures and
wetland/floodplain impact. It does, however, provide for addressing congestion needs in this area and a
future connection to Warrior Drive.
Given the traffic volumes expected and the cost of the original four lane limited access configuration,
the Route 37 bypass in its original configuration does not seem feasible based on this analysis. We have
evaluated certain logical segments of the original bypass based on current needs and those segments
are included below as well as proposed new cross section and configuration ideas.
Concept Development
Formulation of different concepts and solutions were centered around the needs identified and
presented to the public. Potential solutions and concepts are summarized in Table 15 and details
provided in subsequent tables and graphics in this section. Additional detail of the travel demand model
analysis is included in a memorandum completed by WRA as part of this project and included as
APPENDIX A.
To gain perspective and perform analyses, a webmap using ArcGIS Pro was developed which included
layers from multiple sources such as Frederick County planning, VDOT planning, and layers from the
65
61
traffic forecast by WRA. The needs statements are centered around VDOT’s PSI (Potential Safety
Improvements) Segments and Intersections, review of the projected volume to capacity (V/C) ratios in
2050, origin/destination (O-D) review, and VDOT/County/citizen comments throughout the project.
While reviewing these datasets, the apparent first area of concern was Route 7. There are projects in
the top 100 PSI listing in this area and many crashes on Route 7 between Route 81 and the
Frederick/Clark County line. This segment of Route 7 is also included in the Safe Streets for All (SS4A)
Action Plan as a potential improvement project. One remediation to the congestion and safety issues on
Route 7 is to construct the portion of the Route 37 bypass between Route 7 and Route 11. The traffic
model shows that the construction of the bypass in this area would reduce the projected volume in
2050.
On the southern end of the study area, the intersection of I-81 and Tasker Road was also identified as a
problematic area by County staff and VDOT. As of 2019, Tasker Road at the interchange with I-81 and
Route 37 is over capacity with a V/C Ratio between 1 and 1.5. One logical solution to this problem is to
continue the Route 37 bypass and create a connection with Warrior Drive to serve the large residential
developments in the area.
A recurring theme during the public input process was citizen discussion of Senseny Road. This roadway
was cited as problematic for this study and for the SS4A project. Lack of shoulders creates an unsafe
condition for pedestrians and bicyclists, and the lack of a consistent center turn lane from I-81 to
Greenwood Road causes queues to form. The V/C ratio on this segment is greater than 1 and less than
1.5 in 2050. To relieve some of the congestion on Senseny Road and Greenwood Road (also V/C greater
than 1 and less than 1.5 in 2050) construction of a segment along the current bypass alignment that
continues from Haggerty Boulevard (currently in construction) was evaluated.
Preliminary Assessment
The following discussion relates to findings from the analysis of the existing alignments and design
considerations that were taken into account or warrant further analysis.
Segment from Route 11/Snowden Bridge Boulevard Interchange (As originally proposed) to Route 7
(Berryville Pike)
There is a large commercial property at the northern end of this alignment that would be bisected by
the current alignment. It would be debatable if the two-lane roadway currently proposed could weave
between the commercial buildings, however it is known that the County may want to widen the
roadway when volumes support, which would be challenging. At grade intersections with Woods Mill
Road, Burnt Factory Road, and Pine Road are geometrically challenging due to the topography. Where
the alignment connects with Route 7, a long span structure would be required due to floodplain
impacts. Approximately ~2700 ft of bridge is required to construct this on alignment. See Table 16 for a
preliminary cost estimate based on the existing alignment and additional design criteria.
Segment from US 522 (Front Royal Pike) to Interstate 81/Tasker Road and Warrior Drive
An at-grade connection of the existing alignment with US 522 is located ~350 ft from two driveway
connections on U2 522. It would be desirable to find an alternative location in the vicinity to create an
at-grade connection with US 522. The existing alignment for Warrior Drive crosses Opequon Creek at
66
62
one of the wider locations of the floodplain which would result in a long span structure. Between these
two roadway segments, there is over ~2,000 ft of bridge required to span floodplains in this area. It
would be advisable to revisit these alignments in order to reduce these stream impacts and decrease
structure lengths. See Table 18 for a preliminary cost estimate based on the existing alignment and
additional design criteria.
Segment from Route 7, Berryville Pike to Senseny Road (Haggerty Boulevard Extension)
The recent development “The Retreat at Winding Creek” is likely bisected by this alignment. An effort
can be made to tie into the existing roadway network; however, it is not advisable to introduce a 60-
mph roadway into a subdivision. An alternative could be to build a structure to span this area, but it
would be costly and a potential point of opposition for these residents. The Clark County line is close to
this area, so there are limitations to moving the alignment further east without a cooperative effort.
Additional thought and further analysis are required to actualize this project. See Table 19 for a
preliminary cost estimate based on the existing alignment and additional design criteria.
The typical section graphic was developed and presented at the March 14, 2024 meeting as shown
below:
The segment and project described above between I-81 and US 522 would likely need to be four-lanes
between I-81 and Warrior Drive. The projected volumes in 2050 exceed the range shown in the typical
section above.
Planning Level Cost Estimates
The cost estimate summary can be found in Table 15 on the following page. Breakdowns by project can
be found in Tables 16 to 20.
These planning level estimates included the following assumptions:
•Drainage/SWM/ESC is 25% of the subtotal of major roadway quantities
•Utilities is 3% of the subtotal of major roadway quantities
•SPM/MOT is 8% of the subtotal of major roadway quantities
•Preliminary Engineering is 10% of the construction subtotal
•Final Design is 7% of the construction subtotal
•Right of Way is 5% of the construction subtotal
67
63
•CEI is 17.5% of the construction subtotal
68
64
69
65
70
66
71
67
72
68
73
69
74
70
75
71
76
72
77
73
Grant Opportunities
There are multiple grant opportunities available to fund any project or combination of these projects.
At the time of this report, the Safe Streets for All (SS4A) Action Plan has been completed and adopted by
the WinFred MPO. This report included street, intersection, and sidewalk improvements. Projects
identified in this Action Plan are eligible for an Implementation Grant by USDOT. USDOT has a grant
round that opens annually in the early spring. The local match required is 20% and the federal match is
80%. A project on Route 7 has been identified in the Action Plan that could be eligible for a
supplemental planning grant or implementation grant, depending on the wishes of Frederick County.
SMART SCALE is a bi-annual funding opportunity offered by VDOT. In the 6th round offered this year,
VDOT has institutes the “Gating Process” whereby the project readiness requirements are increased
from prior grant rounds. Roadways on new alignments, adding managed lanes (HOV, etc.), and major
widening now require an alternatives analysis. As such, the pieces of the Route 37 bypass proposed as
projects in this study would have to be further studied to be eligible. Early coordination with VDOT is
key to a successful application and working relationship throughout the project, and it is a critical “gate”
for the SMART SCALE pre-application. The project which includes the addition of a center-turn lane on
Senseny Road may be eligible for SMART SCALE using these criteria, but discussion with VDOT is
encouraged to accurately ensure eligibility.
There are many more grant opportunities available in the Commonwealth. The Virginia Highway Safety
Improvement Program (VHSIP) uses state and federal safety funding to implement safety
improvements. Localities can submit applications between August 1 and Oct 31 annually for these
funds. Examples of improvements eligible for grant funding are flashing yellow arrows, pedestrian
crossings, road diets, unsignalized intersection improvements and curve delineation. Some of these
creative solutions could be utilized throughout the project area to enhance safety at a lower cost to the
residents.
Revenue Sharing provides a matching allocation up to $5 million for projects designated by the locality
for improvement, construction, maintenance, or reconstruction of highway systems. The projects
proposed in this study far exceed the $5 million mark, but utilizing these funds for other projects can
help the County re-allocate funds to be able to support these larger scale projects in the future.
78
Transportation Committee
Agenda Item Detail
Meeting Date: June 3, 2024
Agenda Section: Interstate, Primary, and Secondary Road Plan Updates
Title: Interstate, Primary, and Secondary Road Plan Updates
Attachments:
TC06-03-24InterstatePrimarySecondaryRoadPlanUpdates.pdf
79
80
2024/25-2029/30
INTERSTATE ROAD IMPROVEMENT PLAN
for
FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA
Frederick County Transportation Committee:
Frederick County Planning Commission:
Frederick County Board of Supervisors:
81
I-81 Improvements:
Provide additional travel lanes on the main line, evaluate collector-distributor lanes
adjacent to the main line, modifications to existing interchange areas, and develop new
interchange areas and bridge crossings of the main line as recommended by the WinFred
MPO Long Range Plan.
In addition, as the State continues to work toward an ultimate plan for the I-81 widening,
the County of Frederick continues to support the study of Eastern Route 37 as a potential
corridor on new location as an alternative for that effort.
All projects in the vicinity of future I-81 connections for Route 37 should be scoped to
consider that project to prevent conflicting improvements and make sure to accommodate
that future connection.
Moreover, the County of Frederick supports exploration of the potential for rail
transportation as a component of the Interstate 81 Corridor improvements.
Interchange Priorities
1. Exit 317 – Interchange Upgrade and Redbud Road realignment to accommodate
interchange upgrade. Improvements to bridges and the north end of the
interchange should work to accommodate the future Route 37 north connection.
2. Exit 307 – Safety and capacity improvements to the existing facility while
continuing to promote the future relocation further south to the South Frederick
Parkway.
3. Exit 313 - Bridge reconstruction, safety improvements, and capacity expansion.
4. Exit 323 – Interchange Upgrade.
5. Exit 310 - Phase 2 of the FHWA approved interchange modifications.
6. Exit 307 – Interchange Relocation.
7. Exit 321 – Upgrade to split interchange between Hopewell Rd and Cedar Hill
Rd.
Interstate Widening Priorities
1. Widen I-81 from Route 50/17 Exit 313 to .5 miles North of Route 11 Exit 317.
Note: This project is partially funded via the I-81 fund, however the final .5
miles north of Exit 318 remains unfunded.
2. Widen I-81 from Route 277 Exit 307 to Route 50/17 Exit 313. This should
include the relocation of Exit 307.
3. Widen I-81 in Frederick County from .5 Miles north of Route 11 Exit 317 to
82
the West Virginia State line.
4. Widen I-81 in Frederick County from Route 277 Exit 307 to the Warren County
Line in the South.
Intelligent Transportation Systems and Incident Management
1. Increase of VDOT safety patrols.
2. Implement more variable message signs along the I-81 corridor and approaches.
83
¬«7
¬«277
¬«37
§¨¦81
§¨¦81
§¨¦66 §¨¦81
£¤11
£¤50
£¤522
£¤11
£¤522
£¤50
£¤11
£¤522
£¤522
£¤522
£¤50
£¤11
Winchester
StephensCity
Middletown
0 2.5 51.25 Miles
2024 - 2025InterstateRoadImprovementPlan
µ
InterchangeImprovement Priorities
Priority 4
!(Exit 323 Interchange Upgrade
Exit 310 Phase II of theInterchange Upgrade
Priority 5
!(
Exit 321 Upgrade to SplitInterchange
Priority 7
!(
Exit 307 Ramp Relocation
Priority 6
!(
Priority 1
!(Exit 317 Interchange Upgradeand Redbud Rd Realignment toAccomodate InterchangeUpgradePriority 2
!(Exit 307 Safety and CapacityImprovements to Existing Locationand Promote Future Realignment
Exit 313 Bridge Reconstruction,Safety Improvements, andCapacity Expansion
Priority 3
!(
Widening Priorities
Priority 2Widen I-81 fromExit 307 to Exit 313
Widen Remainder of I-81 SouthPriority 4Widen Remainder of I-81 NorthPriority 3
Priority 1Widen I-81 from Exit 313to 0.5 Miles North of Exit 317
84
2024/25-2029/30
PRIMARY ROAD IMPROVEMENT PLAN
for
FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA
Frederick County Transportation Committee:
Frederick County Planning Commission:
Frederick County Board of Supervisors:
85
All upgrades to primary system roadways that are not limited access should include
implementation of access management principles to improve safety and efficiency wherever
possible.
1) Route 37 Bypass
A. Route 37 – Phase 1
Initiate final engineering and design, acquire right-of-way, and establish a construction
phase schedule for the southern segment of the Route 37 Eastern Bypass from Interstate I-
81 to Front Royal Pike (Route 522 South). Per the Eastern Frederick County
Transportation Study (EFCTS) an initial development of this project would be a limited
access parkway concept with 4 lanes from existing 37 at Exit 310 to future Warrior Drive
and 2 lanes of the ultimate 4 lanes from future Warrior Drive and Route 522.
B. Route 37 - Phase 2
Initiate final engineering and design, acquire right-of-way, and establish a construction
phase schedule for the preferred alternative between existing Route 11 North and Route 7.
Per the EFCTS an initial development of this project would be a limited access parkway
concept starting with 2 lanes of the ultimate 4 lanes from Route 11 North to Route 7.
2) Route 11 (North and South of Winchester)
A) Upgrade to Six Through Lane System:
From: Northern limits of the City of Winchester
To: Intersection of Cedar Hill Road
B) Upgrade to Four Through Lane System:
From: Southern limits of the City of Winchester
To: Renaissance Drive
C) Upgrade to Four Through Lane System:
From: Intersection of Cedar Hill Road
To: West Virginia line
86
3)Route 277 (East of Stephens City)
Upgrade of the overall corridor to a 4-lane system with improved access management and
bicycle and pedestrian facilities.
A)Establish an Urban Divided Four Lane System:
From: Double Church Road
To: Warrior Drive
B)Upgrade to a Four Through Lane System:
From: Warrior Drive
To: White Oak Road
C)Upgrade to a Four Through Lane System:
From: White Oak Road
To: Route 522
4)Route 7 – Establish a 6 Through Lane Cross Section:
From: Exit 315 Interchange
To: Future Route 37 Interchange
5)Route 50 East and West
A)Upgrade Interchange at Route 50 and Route 37 to a Diverging Diamond
Interchange (DDI)
B)Safety Upgrades to Intersections at Back Mountain Road, Hayfield Road,
Wardensville Grade, Stony Hill Road, and Dicks Hollow Road
C)Establish a 6 Through Lane Cross Section:
From: The Interchange at Exit 313
To: The Future Route 37 Interchange
D) Establish a 6 Through Lane Cross Section:
From: The Interchange with Route 37
To: Poorhouse Road
87
6) South Frederick County Parkway:
From: Relocated Exit 307
To: Intersection with Route 277 approximately 1 mile west of the intersection of
Route 277 and Route 522
This is a new planned roadway with limited access points serving a mixture of
predominantly commercial and industrial development.
There is a need to study this project in conjunction with the Exit 307 relocation and
planning for Route 277 improvements noted in item 3.
Phasing of this project is not yet clearly defined; however general phasing would be from
West to East with the clear first phase being from relocated Exit 307 to Warrior Drive.
7) Route 522 and Costello Drive
Add additional left turn lane capacity on Route 522 southbound for turns onto Costello
Drive.
8) Gateway Drive Extension and Intersection with Valley Mill Road
This project will establish an intersection on Valley Mill Road and connection to
Gateway Drive approximately 150 to the south of the new intersection with the remainder
of the Gateway Drive extension to be constructed by development via proffer.
9) Route 37 Slip Ramps to Lenoir Drive
Construct ramps to allow traffic to enter and exit the southbound side of Route 37 from
Lenoir Drive.
10) Commuter Park and Ride Lots
Determine appropriate locations for park and ride facilities at other strategic locations
within the County’s Urban Development Area. For Park and Ride locations in Frederick
County, the primary goal should be that they are situated in such a manner that they reduce
traffic in Frederick County in addition to adjacent localities and ideally strengthen
SmartScale applications.
88
§¨¦81
§¨¦81
§¨¦81
§¨¦66
¬«277
¬«277
¬«127
¬«7
¬«7
¬«37
£¤50
£¤522
£¤522
£¤50
£¤522
£¤11
£¤50
£¤50
£¤11
£¤11
£¤522
£¤522
£¤11
Winchester
Stephens City
Middletown
2024 - 2025Primary RoadImprovementPlan
0 1 20.5 Miles
Route 37 Bypass Phases
Priority 1A
Priority 1B
Route 11 North & South
Priority 2A
Priority 2B
Priority 2C
Route 277 East of Stephens City
Priority 3A
Priority 3B
Priority 3C
Route 7
Priority 4
Route 50
!(Priority 5A
!(Priority 5B
Priority 5C
Priority 5D
South Frederick County Parkway
Priority 6
Route 522 & Costello Dr
!(Priority 7
Gateway Drive Extension
Priority 8
Lenoir Drive/Route 37 Slip Ramps
Priority 9
Commuter - Park & Ride Lots
!(Priority 10µ
1A
1B
2A
2C
2B
3A 3B 3C
4
5C
5D
6
8
9
89
2024/25-2029/30
SECONDARY ROAD IMPROVEMENT PLAN
for
FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA
Frederick County Transportation Committee:
Frederick County Planning Commission:
Frederick County Board of Supervisors:
90
MAJOR ROAD IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS
2024/2025 through 2029/2030
Major road improvement projects command the reconstruction of hardsurfaced roads to enhance
public safety. Improvements required for road width, road alignment, road strength, and road
gradient are considered major road improvements projects.
ROUTE ROAD NAME FROM TO AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC COUNT DISTANCE MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT ESTIMATED COST ADVERTISEMENT DATE COMMENTS
661
Red Bud Road
.47 Mi
South
Route 11
Int.
Snowden
Bridge
Blvd.
2000
0.5 miles
ST
$5,998,146
2025
R/S
Funds
91
¬«37
¬«7
¬«7
¬«277
¬«7
¬«37
§¨¦81
§¨¦81
§¨¦81
§¨¦81
£¤11
£¤50
£¤11
£¤11
£¤50
£¤522
£¤522
Winche ster
Stephens City Frederick CountyMajor RoadImprovement Projects2024/2025 thru 2029/2030
0 1 20.5 Milesµ
1
1. Redbud Rd Realignment
92
NON-HARDSURFACE ROAD IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS
2024/2025 through 2029/2030
Non-Hardsurface road improvement projects provide impervious resurfacing and reconstruction of
non-hardsurfaced secondary roads. Non-Hardsurface improvement projects are prioritized by an
objective rating system, which considers average daily traffic volumes; occupied structures;
physical road conditions including geometrics, drainage, and accident reports; school bus routing;
and the time that project requests have been on the Secondary Road Improvement Plan.
RANK ROUTE ROAD NAME FROM TO AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC COUNT DISTANCE MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT ESTIMATED COST ADVERTISEMENT DATE COMMENTS 1
733
Fletcher Road 50 707
170
1.3 miles
GA
$487,500
2024
District Grant
Unpaved
Road
2
638
Clark Road 625 759
140
.8 Miles
BC
$331,000
2025 District Grant
Unpaved
Road
3
612
Fishel Road 600 600
60
1.6 miles
BC
$630,000
2026 District Grant
Unpaved
Road
4
636
Canterburg Road 640 641
140
1.5 mile
OP
$590,000
2026 District Grant
Unpaved
Road
5
696
S. Timber Ridge Road 522 694
220
1.3 Miles
GA
$600,000
2027
District Grant
Unpaved
Road
6
607
Heishman Road 600 End of
Maint.
60
0.78
BC
$350,000
2028
District Grant
Unpaved
Road
7
682
Glaize Orchard Road 608 654
240
1.54
GA
$700,000
2029
District Grant
Unpaved
Road
8
670
Ruebuck Lane 669 End of
Maint.
160
0.35
ST
$192,000
2029
District Grant
Unpaved
Road
9
608
Hunting Ridge Road
Phase I 682 End of
Paving
90
1.00
GA
$485,963
2030
District Grant
Unpaved
Road
10
608
Hunting Ridge Road
Phase II
End of
Paving 681
90
1.44
GA
$689,000
2030
District Grant
Unpaved
Road
*NOTE: Projects are placed on the scheduled list based upon VDOT revenue projections. Changes to those projections can lead to
projects being delayed or removed from the scheduled list.
93
§¨¦81
§¨¦81
§¨¦81
§¨¦66
¬«55
¬«259
¬«277
¬«127
¬«7
¬«37
£¤50
£¤522
£¤522
£¤522
£¤11
£¤50
£¤50
£¤11
£¤522
£¤11
£¤522
Winchester
Stephens City
Middletown
Frederick CountyNon-Hardsurfaced RoadImprovement Projects2024/2025 thru 2029/2030
µ0 4 82 Mil es
1. Fletcher Rd
2. Clark R d
3. Fishel Rd
4. Canterburg Rd
5. South Timber Ridge Rd
6. Heishman Ln
7. Glaize Orchard Rd
8. Ruebuck R d
9. Hunting Ridge Rd Phase I
10. Hunting Ridge Rd Phase II
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
94
UNSCHEDULED
NON-HARDSURFACE ROAD IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS
2023/2024 through 2028/2029
RANK ROAD NAME ROUTE FROM TO AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC COUNT DISTANCE (MILES) MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT RATING COMMENTS 1 Grace Church Rd 668 667 671 210 1.35 ST 61.20
2 Cougill Rd 634 635 11 120 0.25 BC 61.00
3 Huttle Rd 636 709 735 160 1.1 OP 60.05
4 Light Rd 685 600 681 40 1.3 GA 58.46
5 Cattail Rd 731 608 654 100 1.7 GA 58.24
6 McDonald Rd 616 608 .44 N. of 608 90 0.45 BC 54.33
7 Shockeysville Rd 671 690 .90 miles west of 690 80 0.9 GA 53.67
8 Mount Olive Rd 615 50 Hammack Lane 120 0.37 BC 52.00
9 Gardners Rd 700 127 701 80 1 GA 51.50
10 Mt. Williams Ln 612 608 End of maintenance 60 1.0 BC 44.00
11 Knob Rd 752 Route 50 705 60 2.7 BC 43.40
12 New Hope Rd 699 522 Timber Ridge School 40 2.35 GA 42.44
13 Mount Olive Rd 615 Hammack Lane 600 120 0.4 BC 41.00
14 Passage Ln 648 631 649 192 1.35 BC TBD
15 Germany Rd 625 631 628 136 2.15 BC TBD
Note: Project ratings are updated only when funding is available to promote projects to the scheduled
list.
*Indicated that a roadway doesn’t currently have sufficient traffic count to qualify for state funds. Trips
will have to increase to 50 per day prior to state funds being allocated.
95
§¨¦81
§¨¦81
§¨¦81
§¨¦66
¬«55
¬«259
¬«277
¬«127
¬«7
¬«37
£¤50
£¤522
£¤522
£¤522
£¤11
£¤50
£¤50
£¤522
£¤11
£¤522
Winchester
Stephens City
Frederick CountyUnscheduledNon-Hardsurfaced RoadImprovement Projects2024/2025 thru 2029/2030
µ0 4 82 Miles
1. Grace Chu rch Rd
2. Coug ill Rd
3. Huttle Rd
4. Lig ht Rd
5. Catta il Rd
6. McDonald R d
7. Shockeysville Rd
8. Mount O live Rd
9. Ga rd ners R d
10. Moun t Williams Ln
11. Knob Rd
12. New Ho pe Rd
13. Moun t Olive R d
14. Passage Ln
15. G erma ny Rd
15 14
1
2 3
5
6
7
8
9
11
13
10
12
4
Middletown
96
Transportation Committee
Agenda Item Detail
Meeting Date: June 3, 2024
Agenda Section: SmartScale Applications; Leveraged Funding and
Support Resolution
Title: SmartScale Applications; Leveraged Funding and Support Resolution
Attachments:
TC06-03-24SmartScaleApplications_LeveragedFundingSupportResolution.pdf
97
98
PDRes #XX-24
Action:
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS: July 10th, 2024
RESOLUTION
RESOLUTION OF SUPPORT BY THE FREDERICK COUNTY
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS FOR 2024 FREDERICK COUNTY AND
REGIONAL SMARTSCALE APPLICATIONS
WHEREAS, THIS RESOLUTION SUPPORTS THE FOLLOWING Frederick County and Regional
SmartScale Applications within Frederick County for the following projects:
Frederick County Applications
1. US 50 and Hayfield Road R-Cut Intersection
2. US 50 and Back Mountain Road R-Cut Intersection
3. US 50 W – Wardensville Grade, Stony Hill Road, and Dicks Hollow Road Upgrades
4. Gateway Drive Extension and Intersection with Valley Mill Road
WinFred MPO Applications within Frederick County
1. Exit 307/Route 277 Improvements
2. US 50 Diverging Diamond Interchange and Access Management
3. US50/17/522 Partial Median U-Turn
WHEREAS, the Virginia Department of Transportation (hereafter referred to as the DEPARTMENT)
has adopted procedures for evaluating and scoring projects consistent with SmartScale requirements;
and
WHEREAS, the DEPARTMENT has requested applications to be submitted by localities to be
considered for inclusion in the DEPARTMENT’S Six-Year Improvement Program for Fiscal Years
2026-2031; and
WHEREAS, the projects will be evaluation for inclusion in the Six-Year Improvement Program
through a screening and scoring process to be undertaken by the DEPARTMENT; and
WHEREAS, each of the listed projects play important roles in the County’s Long Range Transportation
Plan and near tern traffic safety concerns; and
WHEREAS, the County of Frederick and WinFred MPO are eligible entities to apply for transportation
funding under House Bill 2; and
99
PDRes #XX-24
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors that the
Board of Supervisors is supportive of each of these applications for inclusion into the Six-Year
Improvement Program Fiscal years 2026 through 2031.
Passed this 10th day of July 2024 by the following recorded vote:
Josh Ludwig, Chairman John F. Jewell
Robert W. Wells Blaine P. Dunn
Robert T. Liero Judith McCann-Slaughter
Heather H. Lockridge
A COPY ATTEST
______________________________
Michael L. Bollhoefer
Frederick County Administrator
100
Transportation Committee
Agenda Item Detail
Meeting Date: June 3, 2024
Agenda Section: Exit 317 Diverging Diamond and Exit 317 Ramp Realignment
Projects Updates
Title: Exit 317 Diverging Diamond and Exit 317 Ramp Realignment Projects Updates
Attachments:
TC06-03-24Exit317DivergingDiamond_RampRealignmentProjectsUpdates.pdf
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
Transportation Committee
Agenda Item Detail
Meeting Date: June 3, 2024
Agenda Section: Route 50/Victory Road Crossover Closure Update
Title: Route 50/Victory Road Crossover Closure Update
Attachments:
TC06-03-24Route50VictoryRoadCrossoverClosureUpdate.pdf
109
110
Transportation Committee
Agenda Item Detail
Meeting Date: June 3, 2024
Agenda Section: County Project Updates
Title: County Project Updates
Attachments:
TC06-03-24CountyProjectUpdates.pdf
111
112
Transportation Committee
Agenda Item Detail
Meeting Date: June 3, 2024
Agenda Section: Other
Title: Other
Attachments:
TC06-03-24Other.pdf
113
114